1. Apostolic Address and Greeting 2 Corinthians 1:1-21 Paul, an Apostle of Jesus Christ [Christ Jesus] by the will of God, and Timothy our [the] brother unto the church of God which is at Corinth, with all the saints 2which are in all Achaia. Grace be to you and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ. AND Comp. on 1 Corinthians 1:1 ff. The salutation in 2 Corinthians 1:2 is precisely like that in the former Epistle. The address in 2 Corinthians 1:1 is briefer: ἀπόστολος is without κλητός, and ἐκκλεσία with only a local definition. Timothy has the same position which Sosthenes had there, and it is evident that he must have returned to the Apostle from his mission to Corinth (1 Corinthians 4:17; 1 Corinthians 16:10 f. Comp. Introd.). The persons addressed are designated with more particularity than in 1 Corinthians 1:2, as “all the saints which are in all Achaia.” From their being addressed as τοῖςἁγίοις, and not as ἐκκλησίαι (as in Galatians 2:2, comp. Ephesians 1:1) it does not necessarily follow that they were only isolated individuals, or small companies without a distinct ecclesiastical organization. And yet we should have no greater certainty in maintaining the contrary. [Alford suggests that the word “saints” is used rather than “churches” as in Galatians 1:2, because the matters principally to be discussed in the Epistle concerned only the Corinthians as a church, and those living in the province generally merely as individual saints]. In either case they were all connected with the Church of Corinth as the mother-church. With respect to the name Achaia, the common usage of the time as it is seen in Acts 19:21, and especially the phrase ἐνὅλῃτῇἈχαϊα, abundantly warrants us in assuming that it is here used in its most extensive meaning.—Moreover, this expression does not justify us in concluding (with Neander) that our Epistle was encyclical in its object, for the entire scope of its contents would be opposed to such a view, and we should be obliged to infer that all Christians throughout the province [including those at Athens, Cenchreζ, and perhaps Sicyon, Argos, etc.] were involved in the censures directed against the mother-church (comp. Osiander, Introd. § 3). AND AND (See below) ________ 2. Thanks for Divine consolations under his tribulations; the blessings conferred upon him thereby for the better discharge of his official duties, and the fellowship between him and his readers (2 Corinthians 1:3-11) 3Blessed be God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies, and the God of all comfort; 4Who comforteth us in all our tribulation, that we may be able to comfort them which are in any trouble by the comfort wherewith we ourselves are comforted of God. 5For as the sufferings of Christ abound in us, so our consolation 6[comfort] also aboundeth by Christ. And whether we be afflicted, it is for your consolation [comfort] and salvation, [or whether we be comforted, it is for your comfort] which is effectual in the enduring of the same sufferings which we also suffer: [om. or whether we be comforted, it is for your consolation and salvation]: and our hope 7of you is steadfast, knowing that as ye are partakers of the sufferings, so shall ye be 8[are ye] also of the consolation [comfort]. For we would not, brethren, have you ignorant of our trouble which came to us in Asia, that we were pressed out of measure, 9above strength, insomuch that we despaired even of life. But we [ourselves] had the sentence of death in ourselves, that we should not trust in ourselves, but in God which raiseth the dead: 10Who delivered us from so great a death, and doth deliver: in whom we trust that he will yet deliver us: 11ye also helping together by prayer for us, that for the gift bestowed upon us by the means of many persons thanks may be given by many on our behalf. AND This ascription of praise and thanksgiving differs from others of a different character (Ephesians 1:3 ff.; 1 Peter 1:3 ff.), in those respects in which our Epistle is peculiar. It gives special prominence to what was personal to the writer, and what pertained to his individual fellowship with his readers. We are not, however, to seek in it for a direct and studied design to gain the esteem of his opponents, by excusing his delay in coming to Corinth by way of captatio benevolentiζ, or to bring his readers to see that the love which formerly burned in his heart was still glowing there. It was rather the spontaneous effusion of a father’s love toward a church which he had been compelled so severely to reprove, and which he still felt bound to address with some severity; and an earnest effort to awaken in them a hearty reciprocation of his affection. It is, however, possible that it contains an incidental and indirect parrying of the insinuation that his sufferings might be an indication of the divine displeasure (Osiander). 2 Corinthians 1:3 a. Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.—The meaning of the word Blessed (εὐλογητός) is not: God is worthy of praise, with ἐστίν understood, but: Blessed or Praised be God, with εἵη understood. The word is not unfrequently used in the Sept. as a rendering for αָּ ?ψεּ ?κְ. The God and Father signifies, He who is both God and Father (1 Corinthians 15:24). Το͂υκυρίουἡμῶν, etc., is governed by πατῆρ alone, although in other passages the dependence of Christ the Lord upon ὁθεός is obviously expressed (Comp. Ephesians 1:17; John 20:17).—In addition to the more general idea in ὁθεός (the God), the Apostle wished to remind them, as in Ephesians 1:3, and Romans 15:6, of the more special source of that fellowship which exists between God and believers (2 Corinthians 5:2). Neander: “It is quite in accordance with Paul’s usual manner to express, first God’s general relation to the religious spirit by the name of ὁθεός, and then the special relation in which God stands to the Christian by the phrase, The Father of our Lord.” This is followed by a more detailed specification of what God had done, and what he had himself experienced: the Father of mercies, and the God of all comfort (2 Corinthians 1:3 b). These genitives (τῶνοἰκτ. and πάσηςπαρακ.) intimate that God was the source from which both the mercies and every comfort must proceed, or, more probably, we have in οἰκτιρμῶν (as in Romans 12:1, where the word is equivalent to ψַ ?δֲ ?ξιν) the genitive of the attribute, as in κύριοςτῆςδόξης (1 Corinthians 2:8), equivalent to ὁπατὴροἰκτίρμων, and in πάσηςπαρακλήσεως the genitive of the effect. From the mercies proceeds the comfort, inasmuch as he becomes, of course, the God of all comfort by being the Father of mercies.—In such a connection (comp. 2 Corinthians 5:4) παράκλησις signifies that kind, tranquilizing, animating encouragement one needs in the midst of sufferings (comp. the use of παρακαλε͂ιν in Isaiah 40:1, as the rendering of πִ ?δַ ?ν, and also in 2 Corinthians 7:6).—This consolation was procured by the Holy Spirit’s influence upon the heart by means of the word of God, special providences (deliverances, etc.) and human ministrations (comp. 2 Corinthians 7:6).—[We here meet with an application to God in general of the idea of the παράκλησις, which in John’s writings is commonly ascribed to Christ and to the Holy Spirit. The whole work of the Paraclete or Comforter (Consoler) is accomplished by an application of the entire work and consequences of redemption to the believer. Comp. Stanley; also Wordsworth on Jno. xiv. 16; and Braun on 1 Jno. ii. 1; Hare on the Comforter]. Its extent and copiousness is expressed by πάσης all), since it is thus related to all kinds and degrees of trouble (2 Corinthians 5:4). What he here ascribes to God in general he asserts in 2 Corinthians 5:4, that he and his fellow-laborers had enjoyed not only at special seasons, but at all times. Who is comforting us in all our afflictions (2 Corinthians 1:4 a). The present who is comforting implies especially that these consolations were repeated and continued without interruption. In ἡμᾶς he referred more particularly to himself, but not to the exclusion of his companions in labor and suffering, and certainly he meant more than would have been implied by the use of the first person singular (comp. Meyer and de Wette). The preposition ἐπί introduces either the things by means of which (=ἐν), or (better), those with respect to which he was consoled [Jelf. Gr. Gram. § 634, 1 a]. Afflictions of every kind, and as a whole (comp. θλῖψς in 1 Corinthians 7:28), are included under the phrase, in all our afflictions. He thus recognizes what had been the divine aim in conducting him through such an experience. As he had been made to feel his need of divine consolations, so the enjoyment of those consolations was of great benefit to him; that we may be able to comfort those who are in any affliction by the comfort wherewith we ourselves are comforted by God (2 Corinthians 1:4 b).—The idea is not merely that others would be encouraged by the example of patience and constancy which those divine consolations had enabled him to present, but rather that his experience had qualified him to assist those who were in any kind of trouble, by imparting to them the same consolations. He could now point them to the answers which his own prayers had received, to the rational foundation of a Christian’s confidence and hopes, and to the promises and tender assurances God had given to His people. Neander: “There was, in fact, no way of making a deeper impression upon others than by testifying to them in this manner what he had realized in his actual experience.” In ἡς we have a remarkable instance of relative attraction, the irregularity of which can be obviated only by referring to the construction of παρακαλεῖνπαράκλῃσιν (see Winer’s Idioms, §14, 1, p. 136). We have a similar instance in Ephesians 4:1 (and 2 Corinthians 1:7, according to the readings of Lachm. and Griesb.). 2 Corinthians 1:5. For as the sufferings of Christ abound toward us, even so through Christ our consolation also abounds.—A reason is here assigned for what had been asserted in the preceding verse (οτι being equivalent to γάρ). But to what part of 2 Corinthians 5:4 does this reason refer? Osiander regards it as an explanation of the way in which it is said in the final sentence that he had been qualified to console others in their sufferings. But no reference is made to this until the sixth verse. The true answer probably is, that the Apostle is here endeavoring to place in a clearer light the main thought which he had brought out in 2 Corinthians 5:4 with respect to his experience of divine consolation, and which he had expressed in the two phrases, who is comforting, and where with we are comforted by God, and that thus he was naturally led back to the thanksgiving he had offered in the third verse. He describes the degree of consolation as commensurate with the distress. The distress itself he proceeds more particularly to characterize as the sufferings of Christ. This expression may mean sufferings endured either for Christ’s sake, or by Christ Himself, or by Christ in His members. The words themselves will hardly bear the first of these interpretations: the idea conveyed in the third is not very clearly consistent with the doctrine of the New Testament; and we may regard the second as essentially correct. Those sufferings of Christ which are shared by His servants, and in which they may have fellowship with Him (Philippians 3:10; Colossians 1:24, etc.; Matthew 20:22; Hebrews 13:13; 1 Peter 4:13), are such as they endure while struggling with the world and its rulers, and such as are inflicted on them for the cause of God (for righteousness’ sake). “Whoever suffers such things endures the same kind of evils with those which Christ underwent” (Meyer). The idea of these sufferings of Christ is further extended by Neander: “We must concede that all those sufferings which the believer endures in the spirit of Christ, of whatever nature they may be, may very properly be looked upon as a part of his following of Christ.”—To these sufferings the consolation through Christ is said to correspond. Those who enter into the fellowship of Christ’s sufferings will experience His sympathy, and through this a degree of consolation proportioned to their sufferings. Such as suffer with Christ (Romans 8:17), will receive divine consolation through Christ. Both are said to overflow (περισσεύει), to be always realized in abundance. This, however, does not imply that the measure of these sufferings was greater than that which Christ endured (analogous to the “greater works” mentioned in John 14:12). The depth and delicacy of the Apostle’s piety are admirably exhibited in his mention of divine consolations, at the same time and with an equal degree of prominence. Comp. Bengel: [“The words and their order are sweetly interchanged: παθήματα· παράκλησις, sufferings; consolation—the former are numerous; the latter is but one, and yet exceeds the former. In this very Epistle, as compared with the former, is shed forth a far greater amount of consolation for the Corinthians, and of course the whole inner man was more perfectly renewed, and increased more and more”]. 2 Corinthians 1:6 a. But whether we are afflicted, it is for your comfort and salvation, or whether we are comforted it is for your comfort;—The Apostle now proceeds to apply what he had just said to those whom he was addressing. His afflictions and his consolations would be alike productive of good in their behalf. In the two inferential or minor propositions of the sixth verse, the verb of the preceding sentence must be supplied, or briefly: “this was,” etc. Υπέρ, has here the sense of: for the advantage, for the interest, in behalf of, of any one—which is effectual in the enduring of the same sufferings which we also suffer (2 Corinthians 1:6 b.).—Irrespective of the different readings of this passage, we may at once mention as settled points: 1. That τῆςἐνεργουμένης (which are effectual) is to be construed, as in every other part of Paul’s writings, as an active and not a passive participle (comp. Romans 7:5; Galatians 5:6; Ephesians 3:20; Colossians 1:29; 1 Thessalonians 2:13; 2 Thessalonians 2:7). 2. That εἰδότες (knowing) refers to the knowledge which Paul, not the Corinthians, possessed. 3. That τῶναὐτων (the same) does not imply that their sufferings were literally the same, as if he were speaking merely of their sympathy; for καὶἡμεῖς (we also) would be directly opposed to such an interpretation, and ἐνὑπομονῇ (in the enduring) would hardly seem appropriate to it. The words imply simply that their sufferings were of a kind similar to the sufferings of Christ (2 Corinthians 5:5). If we receive the strongly attested reading which Lachmann and Tischendorf have preferred, and especially if we construe τῆςἐνεργουμένης with a passive signification, the participial sentence will present us with the explanatory definition of the minor term of the previous proposition which is so much needed, and without which that proposition seems rather strange and indeterminate with respect to the part of 2 Corinthians 5:4 to which it should be applied. In this case also εἰδότες is connected very appropriately, and without an anacoluthon with the παρακαλούμεθα of 2 Corinthians 5:4 which is to be supplied before εἰδότες here; and finally, the several members of the sentence appear to possess a more perfect congruity, inasmuch as the first acquires a more extensive definition by means of τῆςἐνεργουμένης, etc., and the second by means of εἰδότες, etc. These advantages, however, are to some extent only apparent; since the connection of εἰδότες with παρακαλουμεθα cannot be logically justified (since it could be followed only by ὅτι). On the other hand, its connection with καὶἡἐλπίςἡμῶνβεβαία would be grammatically natural (comp. Meyer) and logically correct. For the ἐλπίς refers here not to its ultimate object, i. e., the eternal glory, but to the more immediate consolation which he anticipated, when they should enter upon the same kind of sufferings with those he was enduring, and which he was assured they would endure with ὑπομονῇ, i. e., with steadfastness and perseverance (comp. Romans 5:3).—By accepting the reading which Bengel, Griesbach and Meyer have defended, and which is sustained by equally strong documentary and more probable internal evidence, we should have in τῆςὑπὲρτῆςὑμῶνπαρακλήσεωςκαὶσωτηρίας, a resumption of the subject of the design of his afflictions in 2 Corinthians 5:4 (εἰςτὸδίωασθ., etc., i. e.), “that we may be instrumental in promoting your consolation and salvation.” The reference here would therefore be to the Apostle’s instrumentality in this respect, and to his qualification therefor by an experience of suffering. Certainly such a view has more in its favor than that which maintains that Paul’s afflictions were beneficial only to the degree in which they promoted the cause of that Gospel on which their whole consolation and salvation depended. The meaning might possibly be that the Apostle’s afflictions were of advantage to the Corinthians, on the ground that they made a profitable use of them, inasmuch as they might be encouraged and strengthened, by his example of faith and steadfastness, to persevere like him unto final salvation. Or, with still greater simplicity, we may suppose that the Corinthians would be sustained under their afflictions, for the Gospel’s sake, by seeing that their spiritual father had endured similar afflictions; and hence by seeing that these were so far from indicating that God was displeased with them, they rather implied that they were truly the Lord’s servants, and belonged to Him whom the world hated. This last, we believe, will be found the most correct interpretation of this passage. That which was so effectual for their consolation was equally effectual for their salvation, inasmuch as it strengthened them for that endurance to which the promise of salvation was annexed (Matthew 24:18; comp. James 1:12). In the second member of the sentence καὶσωτηρίας does not probably belong to the original text. Were it genuine we should be thereby informed that this salvation also was, when the Apostle wrote, working in the endurance of sufferings, because the hope of salvation gave them power to persevere under them. We may explain it is for your comfort—either by a reference to 2 Corinthians 1:4, and making it allude to the consoling influence of the Apostle, or by giving it a meaning like that of the first member of the sentence, viz., that the Corinthians were sustained and encouraged, in the midst of their sufferings, by seeing how the Apostle was comforted under similar sufferings.—In the sentence: And our hope of you is steadfast, the words, of you belong not exclusively either to the subject or to the predicate, but to both of them. In 2 Corinthians 1:7 the word partakers must imply not merely a sympathy with, but an actual participation in, the outward (objective) sufferings. It relates however not to Christ (as in Philippians 3:10) nor to believers in general, but as the connection shows, to the Apostle himself. They were his companions, not only in suffering, but in consolation. Neander: “If the Apostle is here speaking of what is essential to Christian fellowship, he could hardly have presumed, that the great body of the congregation were in the exercise of it; but he must have spoken of what ought to be, and of what he would fain hope was, the fact, rather than of what he knew to be a reality.” 2 Corinthians 1:8-11. Particular peril through which he had passed.—The Apostle had spoken in the previous verses of his trials and consolations only in general terms; he now proceeds to give them some details (γὰρ) with reference to his most recent, experience. [Stanley: “The moment he begins to address the Corinthians (directly), two feelings arise in his mind, and cross each other in almost equal proportions. The first is an overwhelming sense of gratitude for his deliverance from his distress; and the second is the keen sense which breathes through both the Epistles, but especially through the Second, of his unity of heart and soul with his Corinthian converts. This identity of feeling between the Apostle and them, must be borne in mind throughout. It accounts for a large portion of the peculiarities of the Apostle’s style; the double self which creates as it wore a double current of feeling and thought, now taking the form of passionate sympathy, now of anxiety, now of caution and prudence; the plural number which he employs in this Epistle even more frequently than elsewhere for himself, as if including his readers also.”] For we would not have you ignorant: comp. on 1 Corinthians 10:1; as in 2 Thessalonians 2:1, ὑπέρ has here the sense of: concerning, or with respect to. The more fluent περί was substituted as a correction at an early period and is found even in A. C. D. [Sinait.] et al. The particular affliction which the Apostle had in view, cannot now be determined. The context (2 Corinthians 1:4 f.) is decidedly against any reference of these words to some severe sickness (Ruckert, Bisping, [Alford, Stanley]). The tumult raised by Demetrius at Ephesus produced no immediate danger to his person, inasmuch as he was persuaded by his friends not to appear in public (Acts 19:30). We are informed of no serious disturbances before or after that event. The general expression, in Asia (1 Corinthians 16:19), seems to favor a reference to some incident in another place. The most probable suggestion is that he was alluding to the efforts of his many adversaries to lay wait for and ensnare him (1 Corinthians 16:9). The details had probably been made known to the Corinthians by oral accounts (through Titus). The point on which he here insists, and which he presents in strong terms, is the greatness of his affliction. The essential idea is contained in the phrase, we were pressed out of measure beyond strength. The word βαρεῖσθαι includes within its meaning the feeling of oppression and distress produced by any kind of affliction and persecution (comp. 2 Corinthians 11:26). The specifications contained in the expressions, out of measure, and beyond strength, may either be coφrdinated so that the first of them shall present the objective side of the affair, i. e., the exceedingly great load which weighs one down out of all measure; and the latter the subjective side, i. e., that which surpasses all his power of endurance; or the first of these may be taken as a more particular definition either of ὑπὲρδύναμιν, as is intimated by the position of the phrase before ἐβαρήθημεν in some copies (according to Lachmann’s reading, sustained by A. B. C. [Sinait] et al.), or of ἐβαρήθημενὑπὲρδὐναμιν, as certainly deserves the preference if the words be arranged according to the well sustained ordinary reading. The omission of the conjunction (asyndeton) is no argument against the coφrdination of the phrases, for we may (with Osiander) regard the second as a climactic expression, q. d., “an exceedingly great burden, yea, surpassing all my power of endurance.” Such an expression would not necessarily be in conflict with 1 Corinthians 10:13 (comp. 2 Corinthians 12:9). In saying: despaired of life, the Apostle meant that he was completely at his wits’ end, and that he saw no way by which his life could be saved. It is only in another and an absolute sense that he denies, in 2 Corinthians 4:8, that he was ever in despair. He intensifies the same idea in 2 Corinthians 1:9, in a positive form and in an independent sentence. Ἀλλὰ indicates a negative: not only saw we no method by which our lives could be saved, but we had in our own hearts the conviction that we had been condemned to death; i. e., we were satisfied that the time had come when we were to die. Ἀπόκριμα is not precisely equivalent to κατάκριμα (a sentence of death), but it signifies an authoritative sentence, a decree, or an answer [the substance of the decision, the ψῆφον (Chrys.) the vote or judgment which our affairs spoke forth]. To the question whether we should escape death, we could ourselves return nothing but a negative answer. The idea expressed in αὐτοὶἐνἑαυτο͂ις is: no way of escape seemed open to us with our lives, for we had adjudged our own selves to death, and we were sure that nothing but death awaited us. Τοῦθανάτου denotes the object of the ἀπόκριμα. [The historical perfect ἑσχήκαμεν instead of the aorist ἔσχομεν, indicates, the continuance of the feeling: “We have had” this consciousness, and have it still, as a permanent state of mind comp. Wordsworth.] It is not precisely said in any part of the context, that this was a divine sentence; and yet the whole state of mind and the distinct expectation of death is probably so far to be referred to God, that it was the special design of God to produce the confidence mentioned in the next clause:—that we should not trust in men, &c.—The consciousness of perfect helplessness, and of an entire surrender to the power of death, took away every motive or trace of confidence in himself, in his own power or skill, and prepared him to throw himself exclusively upon the God who raiseth the dead.—The raising of the dead is here spoken of, because it is one of the highest exhibitions of divine power, and because it was something perpetually accomplished and characteristic of God, and not merely something to be done in future (comp. Romans 4:17). And yet the literal and general resurrection may have been indefinitely before the Apostle’s mind, as the model and pledge of a temporal deliverance from certain death (Osiander, Meyer). Such an epithet also very well corresponds with the subject on which he was about to discourse.—Who delivered us from so great a death (2 Corinthians 1:10).—The Apostle appeals to his own actual experience to prove that such a confidence was well grounded, and that God had been such a deliverer to him. Τηλικούτος primarily signifies: so old or so young, and then: so great. [By its lengthened form it seems, as it were, to picture forth the continuity and accumulation of the extreme perils. Osiander.]. He conceived of himself as in such danger, that he was completely embraced by a deadly power, whose violence and terror is indicated by such a word. The reference is back to 2 Corinthians 1:9. In ῥύεσθαιἐκ he describes his forcible rescue from this power as if from the wrath of death. Καὶῥύεται implies by its present form that the machinations of his enemies had not. yet ceased, and he implies that he expected similar perils in his future course; but from them all he was firmly convinced that God would continue to deliver him:—in whom also we trust (ἠλπίκαμεν 1 Corinthians 15:19; John 5:45), that He will yet deliver us.—The perils here alluded to were similar to those recorded in Acts 20:3. The enemies who thus pursued him with their wiles were the Asiatic Jews, [whose influence and hatred against him as the greatest enemy of their national customs, extended even to Macedonia (comp. Meyer)], and never ceased until they had nearly accomplished their purpose at Jerusalem (Acts 21:27 ff).—For the sake of the great work he had been sent to accomplish, he was anxious to be delivered from these evils; and though he never shrunk from any peril he considered necessary to be encountered, he made use of every possible precaution to secure his safety (Acts 20:3; Acts 21:13). As in another Epistle he earnestly pleads with the Roman Christians that they would intercede in his behalf, with reference probably to these same perils; so in this place he exhibits his confidence in the intercessions of his Corinthian brethren (2 Corinthians 1:11).—Ye also helping together by prayer for us.—His hope of future deliverance was intimately connected with the assurance that they would coφperate with him and with others in prayer for that object. This may not have been precisely the sole condition on which he expected divine assistance, and yet he seems to have regarded it as the medium through which a real assistance might be expected (comp. Philippians 1:19; Romans 15:30 ff). He had no doubt that God would be pleased with, and answer those intercessions, which were offered under a divine influence with faith and love. The σύν has reference to an association in prayer, either with himself or with others in his behalf. The latter view is favored by the καὶ, (also) and is probably the correct one, since the relation to the Apostle is pointed out rather by ὑπὲρἡμῶν, which cannot be drawn into connection with δεήσει by a hyperbaton without a needless harshness of construction. [Chrysostom: “He neither ascribes the whole of the good work to them, lest he should lift them up, nor yet deprives them of all share in it, that he might encourage them and animate their zeal, and bring them together one to another.”] Having thus given prominence to this aspect of the fellowship between him and the Corinthians, he now directs their attention to the ultimate design of God in delivering him by such means:—that thanks may be given, &c.—The χάρισμα, the deliverance so graciously bestowed by God, ought to be followed by thanksgiving. Εὐχαριστηθῇ may indeed be translated: to get thanks (comp. Passow and de Wette). With τὸεἰςἡμᾶς, (in the sense of: what is for our part), corresponds ὑπὲρἡμῶν. for our sake, or for our good, inasmuch as the payment of a debt of gratitude will result in further benefits. But what would then be the sense of ἐκπολλῶνπροσώπων and διὰπολλῶν? Do both of them refer to persons, or is the second to be taken as a neuter in the sense of: prolixe, with many words? This last would seem very feeble and unsuitable to the intimate relation of the one phrase to the other. But neither can ἐκπολλῶνπροσώπων signify: from many considerations, nor in many respects. There remain, however, several ways in which the words may be connected: 1.Ἐκπολλῶνπροσώπων may be joined with τὸ ?—χάρισμα, under the supposition of a hyperbaton equivalent toτὸἐκ, and διὰπολλῶν may be joined withεὐχαριστηθῇ [q. d. that for the gift bestowed upon us by many persons, thanks may be rendered through many on our behalf]. In this case, διὰ would not have precisely the same meaning as ὑπό, but those rendering thanks would be looked upon as representatives or organs of the Apostle.—Osiander. 2. Ἐκπολλῶνπροσώπων may be joined with εὐχαριστηθῇ and διὰπολλῶν with χάρισμὰ ?[q. d. that for the gift bestowed upon us through many, thanks may be rendered by many persons on our behalf]. In this case the want of the article (τὸδιὰ) would certainly be remarkable, but would not be inconsistent with the analogy of other places. 3. Both may be connected with εὐρχαριστηθῇ, but in different relations. The same persons may be understood as referred to in both phrases, but in ἐκπολλῶνπροσώπῶν they are regarded as the persons from whom the thanksgiving proceeds, and in διἁπολλῶν they are spoken of as the medium or occasion for the thanksgiving, because the deliverance had been effected through their intercessions (Meyer), [q. d. that for the gift bestowed upon us, thanks may be rendered through many, by many persons on our behalf]. If we adopt this last interpretation, it cannot but seem desirable, that at least a καὶ had been thrown in before διὰπολλῶν, for without it the whole expression appears too elliptical and unmeaning. On the whole we prefer the second method, which connects διὰπολλῶν with τὸχάρισμα even without the article, to the always harsh hyperbaton which the first method renders necessary. According to later usage, πρόσωπον had the sense of: person; properly, the man, quatenus aliquam personam obtinet. Here it means: qui partes τωνεὐχαριστούντων agunt (Meyer). [The delicacy and beauty of the prominent and related phrases: ἐκπολλῶν, and διἁπολλῶν, εἰςἡμᾶς, and ὑπὲρἡμῶν, χάρισμα and εὐχαριστηθῇ, should not be overlooked (Osiander). On all these deliverances and thanksgivings the Apostle says he had set and was setting his hope (ἠλπίκαμεν, the perfect expressing the continuance and permanence of the ἐλπίς, and εἰς marking the direction of the hope, with perhaps some faint (locative) notion of union or communion with the object of it). Ellicott on 1 Timothy 4:10. AND ETHICALChristians enjoy a threefold fellowship, in suffering, in consolation and in prayer; but this only proves that their life of faith and love is essentially one in Christ. Their life is derived from what Christ has suffered for them. This is the source of all their peace and strength, and this brings them into affectionate communion with him, so that his cause becomes their own. Just as he took on himself the load of their guilt, they appropriate to themselves the cause of righteousness, of God and of his kingdom for which he contended and suffered, and share in all his struggles and sufferings. It is their highest joy and glory to endure reproach and persecution for his name’s sake. And as this fellowship and unity with him is common to them all, the suffering of any one of them for the common cause is shared also by each: they all wrestle in prayer for him, and they all become sharers in his consolation and joy. They will look upon the assistance vouchsafed to him as a gracious answer to their united intercessions, and of course they will unite with him in thankful ascriptions of praise. There is a wonderful power in this fellowship. It is not merely the highest realization and brightest exhibition of God’s great scheme of mercy, but it glorifies his power by binding heaven and earth in one great communion. Whatever sufferings are encountered within the Christian fold, they must necessarily tend to the common welfare. Mighty results, too, will be accomplished in answer to their united prayers, yea, these do for them “exceeding abundantly, above all that they can ask or think.” They may, while in the flesh, be not unfrequently weighed down by infirmities, be misunderstood by one another, and have grounds for mutual offence, but as long as this threefold chain maintains its power, all real discord must finally be removed and all things must work together for their good. AND Luther, 2 Corinthians 1:8 : Paul sometimes exhibits a courage which fears nothing, and despises all danger and agony. But, again, we find this same man, so full of the Holy Ghost, speaking and acting as if he had no spirit at all. The same faith which at one time is great and strong, and full of confidence and joy, is at another small and feeble.—Such are the changes which occur in the life of all the saints, that all may learn to trust not in themselves, but in God alone. Melancthon, 2 Corinthians 1:3-4 : Three things make a theologian: oratio, meditatio, tentatio. Starke, 2 Corinthians 1:3, (Spener): The holiest part of divine worship is praise; and every Christian should have his heart so pervaded by recollections of God’s merciful dealings, that his mouth shall be always pouring forth ascriptions of praise. Our heavenly Father has shown himself the God of all consolation by making all consolation possible through his Son, and by sending forth the Holy Spirit as a Comforter, to offer us and bestow upon us Christ’s infinite righteousness.—God is not only merciful, but “the Father of mercies,” yea, mercy itself. Where, then, but in him can we find the best consolation when we are disappointed and in trouble? Never, then, should we be at a loss where to find true rest and all-sufficient consolations.—He has a comfort for every one of our numerous afflictions, and he only demands that we should appreciate the riches of his mercy, and freely use it for our consolation. 2 Corinthians 1:4 : It has always been a part of the mystery of the cross to which man’s reason never gets reconciled, that God’s people should be harmless, and yet suffer persecution; and that they should do good, and yet suffer evil. But true light from above enables us to see that from the nature of things it could not be otherwise, and that the members must inevitably share the lot of the great Head.—We should never be satisfied with a personal experience of support under trials. The cross was laid upon us, that we might learn also to sympathize with others, and show others by our example where to find the surest support in seasons of calamity. We should, therefore, observe what affords us consolation under our varied crosses, and carefully preserve it as we would a thoroughly tried medicine; for a time may come when we shall need it not only for ourselves, but for others (Luke 22:32).—Though God is the original and proper Source of consolation, and tenderly sympathizes with his people, as a mother with her child (Isaiah 66:13), he frequently makes use of human instruments, especially faithful preachers and experienced Christians, for the comfort of such as are in distress.—A good shepherd can receive nothing which he will not turn to the advantage of his flock.—The truest kind of consolation is that which not only sustains, but sanctifies the sufferer, and fills his heart and mouth with praise (Psalms 119:32). 2 Corinthians 1:5 : It is in itself a great consolation to know that our sufferings, are Christ’s sufferings, and that he regards as his own whatever befalls his members.—Our cup of anguish is never more overflowing than our cup of consolation; for by a proper use of the means of grace our sufferings become proportionally tokens of our adoption and of our everlasting life (Romans 8:16 f. Philippians 1:19). 2 Corinthians 1:6-7 : When called to suffer severely, be comforted; for if you will look at those godly men who in ancient times were thrown into the furnace of tribulation, you will find that they were abundantly refreshed from above. Doubt not that the Lord will, in like manner, comfort and relieve you! If He counts us worthy to suffer for Christ’s sake, and enables us to obey Him and to be patient, we may be sure that He will sustain us and keep us unto the end. When we feel the burden pressing, relief is surely coming. 2 Corinthians 1:8-9 : Hedinger: God often allows his people to suffer, but only to inflame and stimulate their faith and prayers. He lets them sink where no human arm can reach them, that when they are delivered they may praise Him and not themselves.—He who gives a great blessing may reasonably be relied upon for a smaller: if God has promised to raise the dead, we may surely trust Him in any temporal calamity (Isaiah 59:1). 2 Corinthians 1:10-11 : If we have twice and thrice been in trouble and found deliverance, let us take heart and courage for the future; for the same God yet lives, and will not leave us (1 Samuel 17:37; Deuteronomy 7:18 f.; Job 5:19). He has, however, determined that his help shall be given in answer to prayer and intercession; not merely that we may learn our helplessness and dependence upon Him, but that our faith and love may be exercised, and we may be constrained to praise Him (Psalms 50:15).—If we have known and sympathized with those who are in danger and distress, and have heartily interceded with God for them, we shall more heartily render thanks for their deliverance when our intercessions have been graciously answered. Berl. Bible, 2 Corinthians 1:3 : To know God as the God of the afflicted is called knowing him truly. Such a name is appropriate to him in relation to such beings as ourselves, and he must bear it unless he is ashamed to be called our God. Great will be the joy of those who know Him in this character. Whoever has learned to praise Him has an all-sufficient treasure, and no one knows Him as he is revealed in his word, who has not learned to receive Him in the midst of distresses and temptations. These are the best laboratories in which God can dispense his grace, and even those who are without will soon experience the benefit of the new power with which we shall address them. 2 Corinthians 1:5 : Who would shrink from suffering, if he knew the proportionate comfort with which it is accompanied, and which he must lose, if he should be excused from bearing the cross? Alas! no wonder that so few ever taste the sweetness of the cross when so few know what it is to have the mind of Christ! If we have no consolation, we naturally struggle against our afflictions, but, until we are quiet and poor in spirit, how can we hear the inward voice of the Comforter ? 2 Corinthians 1:6-7. It is no small consolation to know that we share in the sufferings which come upon even the most approved of Christ’s members (1 Peter 5:9; Revelation 1:9).—Heavenly consolations abound to those whose consciences are thoroughly awakened, who hunger and thirst after them, and who have been emptied of the world. 2 Corinthians 1:8-9 : The Lord sometimes allows his people to be so overwhelmed with sorrows, that created strength is completely overcome, and even those who have borne their burdens with vigor despair even of life; and yet so great are divine consolations that the cross loses all its heaviness, and divine strength is manifested in their weakness. Even the best of them are allowed to experience such trials inasmuch as these spring not from defect in purpose, but from infirmity of nature, that they may learn to build their hopes on God alone. When they have made shipwreck of all things, they are compelled to cling to Him as their last anchor, and to fix their thoughts upon no less a power, even in Him, than that which raises the dead. 2 Corinthians 1:10-11 : As we successively enter upon our seasons of trial, we may say to one another, “It is my turn to-day; tomorrow it will be yours.” We should therefore pray one for another.—“Here is the faith and patience of the saints.” In such a community of loving fellowship, when any member receives a blessing, there are many to lift up their faces in thanksgiving; for every gift is common to them all.—Unbelief beholds only the divine curse upon every one who bears a cross, but true faith says of them, “It is well; it is well!” Rieger, 2 Corinthians 1:3 ff.: The names of God, as they are revealed in the Scriptures, are each an impregnable fortress, where we may always reverently and confidently find refuge. The highest glories of the Deity become a comfort to us when they are brought down to our lowliness.—Our great High Priest was tempted in all points as we are, that he might have a true sympathy with his people. We need not think it strange, therefore, that every one ordained to the evangelical priesthood should be conducted through every variety of condition, that he may have a fellow feeling for every class of his fellow men. Those only can impart comfort who are experienced in the ways of God, are familiar with the word of God, and are zealous for the honor of God. All others are sure to miss those very consolations which are most sustaining to those whom God’s sword has pierced. 2 Corinthians 1:5 : Troubles for Christ’s sake and for the gospel’s sake are Christ’s own sufferings. Our Lord looks upon them as inflicted upon his own person, and as likening us to Himself. 2 Corinthians 1:6-7 : To share in a brother’s suffering, brings us nearer to his heart, than any external intercourse. 2 Corinthians 1:8-9 : We often flatter ourselves that we or others are of importance, and we promise ourselves and undertake much in reliance upon our strength, but when we begin to despair of life, all such flowerets and blossoms will fall away, and nothing will remain for us but the main trunk of a solid confidence in the living God. This will at such times only grow stronger, and we shall feel that it is all we need. 2 Corinthians 1:10-11 : Many a path which begins in suffering and weeping terminates in thanksgivings and praises. The Lord grant us many such experiences, and if our way has already been darkened by sorrows, may its end be brightened with praises and everlasting life! Heubner, 2 Corinthians 1:3 : The God of the Bible is one who sympathizes as a father with his children, especially with those who are struggling with difficulties; and never will he allow them to want ample resources for consolation and strength. He will, however, convince them that he is the source of their truest life, and that every thing else is an illusion, and will leave us in a deeper night. 2 Corinthians 1:4 : Of all persons in the world, the minister of Christ should know what true consolation and a cheerful spirit is. Only those who have comfort can impart it. A theologus non tentatus, a minister without an experience of personal trials in religion, lacks an important qualification for his work. The more affliction, the more power he has; and the moment he enters the furnace of affliction, he has a virtual announcement from the Lord, that some great work is before him, and that God is preparing him for higher usefulness. The soldier who is allowed to remain continually around the camp-fire will never learn true bravery. 2 Corinthians 1:6-7 : A minister’s afflictions deepen the impression of his discourses. The admonitions of a veteran general have a power which no young captain can ever have. W. F. Besser, 2 Corinthians 1:3-4 : The fruit of praise which is borne by our troubles is always sweet. Then, when the Redeemed of the Lord are comforted, they praise the Lord for his goodness, etc. Psalms 107:8; Psalms 107:15; Psalms 107:21; Psalms 107:31. Our merciful God and Father in Christ reserves his choicest comforts for his afflicted children, that with the tenderness of a mother (Isaiah 66:13) he may cause them to persevere under every sorrow and conflict with sin and Satan, and, finally, that he may redeem them from the affliction itself. 2 Corinthians 1:5 : The unity between Christ and his members is so perfect that the Apostle gives the name of Christ to the whole Church (1 Corinthians 12:12). The Church’s sufferings, then, are Christ’s in a double sense; for not only does it actually suffer as its Lord’s bride and companion, in opposition to a Christ-hating world (Romans 8:17; Galatians 6:17; Philippians 3:10), but Christ accepts of those sufferings as if they were literally his own. Many, indeed, experience distress and calamity who know nothing of Christian suffering, and of course nothing of Christian consolation, but the truly believing heart knows how to rejoice in the Lord when all human consolation and joy are impossible (Philippians 4:4). 2 Corinthians 1:6 : The fires of persecution which the devil kindles can never consume the church, but only confirm its faith and patience. God’s people have a common partnership both in consolations and sufferings, and in the Scriptures, as Hunnius says, they have a great storehouse of comfort, as they read how apostles and prophets found comfort for themselves, and learned how to comfort their companions in tribulation. 2 Corinthians 1:9 : The true end of faith is unwavering confidence in God, and when she has her own way all self-confidence must be renounced.—God’s almighty power and cordial love of life is shown in his raising even the dead to life (Romans 4:17; Hebrews 11:17). He will of course deliver his people when he pleases from death. 2 Corinthians 1:11 : The Spirit freely helpeth our infirmities when we pray, and especially when in the spirit of our common priesthood (Matthew 18:19) we intercede unitedly for those who particularly entreat us to plead for them.—So precious a thing is thanksgiving, and especially united thanksgiving, that the Apostle makes the ultimate object of God in granting our prayers to be the obtaining of our thanks. [In this whole passage we have, I. A Christian’s afflictions.—These may be 1. very severe, “above measure” (2 Corinthians 1:8), a “sentence of death” (2 Corinthians 1:9), and “so great a death” (2 Corinthians 1:10). 2. They are always under divine allotment, (“that we should not trust, ” etc., 2 Corinthians 1:9). II. Their beneficial uses, as a school of experience, for promoting, 1. Comfort. This is, from God as their proper source (2 Corinthians 1:3), proportioned to the affliction (2 Corinthians 1:5) and to increase our usefulness (2 Corinthians 1:4; 2 Corinthians 1:6); 2. Confidence, by throwing us upon our consciences (2 Corinthians 1:12), by driving us from ourselves to the living God (2 Corinthians 1:9), by imparting hope for the future (2 Corinthians 1:10), and by strengthening our hopes for others (2 Corinthians 1:7); 3. Sympathy inasmuch as they open our hearts to our brethren (2 Corinthians 1:8), lead all to prayer and thanksgiving for one another (2 Corinthians 1:11) and to mutual joy in the day of the Lord Jesus. Comp. F. W. Robertson’s Lectt. on Corr. Lect. xxxiv.] Footnotes: 2 Corinthians 1:1.—The collocation of the words: Ἰησοῦχριστοῦ has better authority in its favor here than it has in 1 Corinthians 1:1 but Paul appears uniformly to have put Χριστοῦ before Ἰησοῦ immediately after ἀπόστολος or δοῦλος, in accordance with the natural train of thought: the messenger of the Messiah, the divinely commissioned King. [At some time between the conquest of Greece by the Romans and the reign of Augustus (B. C. 169–147), the whole region south of Thessaly and Epirus, nearly co-extensive with the modern kingdom of Greece, became a single province of the Empire under the name of Achaia. After the strong expression of the pro-consul’s, and the Gentiles’ disapprobation of the accusations made against Paul (Acts 18), he appears to have labored freely and with such success in the whole province of Achaia, that a number of churches were established in it (comp. 1 Thessalonians 1:8; 2 Thessalonians 1:4). Smith’s Dict. art. Achaia, Conyb. and Howson, vol. 1, p. 416, chap, 12. A. R. Fausset in Port. Com., vol. 2, p. 316. If, however, we recollect the general contents and aim of this Epistle, we may well doubt (with Osiander) whether we ought not here to take the word Achaia in the narrower sense which it sometimes even then bore and which is almost certain in 1 Corinthians 16:15 (comp. Acts 18:1.)] 2 Corinthians 1:7.—The Rec. altogether without authority makes καὶἡἐλπιςὑπὲρὑμῶν follow immediately the second παρακλ. καἰσωτηρίας. Bengel, Griesbach and Meyer let τῆςἐνεργ.—ὐπὲρὑπμῶν follow immediately after the second παρακλἡσεως. Lachmann and Tischendorf, (whom Osiander follows) place τῆςἐνεργουμένης—ὑπὲρὑμῶν directly after the first παρακλ. καίσωτηρίας, though Lachmann includes [καὶσωτηρίας] in brackets as suspected. See exeget. notes. [The reading of the Rec. has generally been ascribed to Erasmus who, in his 2nd edit, of the Greek Test., must have obtained it by combining several Latin versions with some Greek MSS., since no single Greek MS. has been found which gives exactly his reading. Having been received from him by Beza (in his 3rd, 4th and 5th editions), and by the Elzevir, it passed into our early German and English versions. Of course, it has no documentary authority. The reading of Bengel and Griesbach was that which Erasmus and Beza had adopted in their first editions, and it is sustained by A. C. M. Sinait., and other less important uncial MSS. together with the Syr., Copt., Aeth., Arm., and a number of the Vulg. and Old Italic versions. The reading of Lachmann and Tischendorf (7th ed.) has been adopted by de Wette, Olshausen, Bloomfield, Alford, Osiander, Conybeare, Wordsworth, Stanley and Hodge, and is sustained by B. D. E. F. G. K. and L., by numerous cursives, the Syro-Phylox., and the Gothic versions, and by Chrysost., Theodt., Damasc., Theophyl., �cum. (though some of these insert καὶσωτηείας before τῆςἐνεργουμένς, etc.). Meyer thinks that Griesbach’s was the original form of the text, but that the copyist easily passed from the first to the second παρακλῆσεως, omitting all between them, and that an emendation was then attempted by introducing the omitted words later in the sentence. Bloomfield’s conjecture is much more natural and scientific, viz., that Lachmann’s reading being more difficult was more likely to have been amended, to avoid the interruption of the antithesis between ἔιτεθλιβομεθα, etc. and ἔιτεπαρακαλούμεθα, etc., by the clause καὶὴἐλπῖς—ὑμῶν, and that those who transposed the clause τῆςἐνεργ.—πἀσχομεν, make the Apostle absurdly assert that his readers would be consoled by enduring the same sufferings with himself, instead of saying that his affliction and consolation were calculated to profit them. Stanley suggests, that in this whole section the force of the thoughts depends on rendering παρακαλεῖν, and its derivatives, by the same corresponding words in English. We, therefore, use the word “comfort” throughout]. 2 Corinthians 1:7.—The ὥσπερ of the Rec. is not as well sustained [as ὡς, which has in its favor A. B. C. D. E. Sinait., et al., and as Tisch. observes: “ὥσπερ substitutum videtur ut planius esset cum ἕστε, etc., non arctius cum κοινωνοὶ conjungendum esse.”]. 2 Corinthians 1:8.—For the first ὑπὲρ Lachm. reads περὶ. and he is sustained by A. C. D. E. F. G. Sinait., et al., and followed by Meyer and Stanley, but Tischendorf, Bloomfield, Wordsworth and Alford retain ὑπἐρ as the more difficult reading. [See Webster’s Synt. and Synn. of the Gr. Test., p. 172]. 2 Corinthians 1:8.—Lachm., following the preponderance of authorities, throws out ἡμῖν from the text. [It is rejected as a superfluous gloss to γενομἐνης by Meyer and Alford, Wordsworth and Stanley according to A. B. C. D. F. G. and Sinait., but it is retained by Tischendorf and Bloomfield, and is suspected by Griesbach]. 2 Corinthians 1:8.—On the authority of A. B. C. [Sinait.], et al., Lachmann puts ὑπὲρ (some put παρὰ) δύναμιν before ἐβαρήθημεν. [Alford and Stanley (as usual) agree with Lachm., but Tischendorf, Bloomfield and Wordsworth, sustained by a few uncials and a number of the best versions and fathers, agree with the Receptus]. 2 Corinthians 1:10.—B. C. [and Sinait.] have καὶῥύσεται. Others omit it. It is probably a change of the ῥύεται by a mistake for the form in the following clause, and then it would naturally be thrown out as superfluous, or be left out through oversight. [Tisch., Meyer, Bloomf. and Words, have καὶῥύεται, Lachm. and Stanley have καὶῥύσεται, but in brackets; and Alford contends that these last words would not be superfluous, since they would look “to the immediate future, while καίἔτιῥύσεται would look to the continuance of help in distant and uncertain time”]. 2 Corinthians 1:11.—The Var. ὑμῶν is not sufficiently sustained, [and yet it is adopted by Tischendorf (7th ed.) and Reiche, and it has the authority of the revised Vat., the Sinait., Clarom (2d cor.), et al., and no small support of versions and Fathers]. III.—THE OF HIS CONDUCT IN GENERAL, AND OF HIS AND IN (2 Corinthians 1:12-24) 2 Corinthians 1:12-2412 For our rejoicing [glorying] is this, the testimony of our conscience, that in simplicity [holiness] and godly sincerity, not with fleshly wisdom, but by the grace of God, we have had our conversation in the world, and more abundantly to you-ward. 13For we write none other things unto you, than what ye read or acknowledge; and I trust ye shall acknowledge even to the end; 14as also ye have acknowledged us in part, that we are your rejoicing [glorying], even as ye also are ours in the day of the Lord Jesus. 15And in this confidence I was minded to come unto you before [before unto you], that ye might have a second benefit; 16and to pass by you into Macedonia, and to come again out of Macedonia unto you, and of you to be brought on my way toward Judea. 17When I therefore was thus minded, did I use lightness? or the things that I purpose, do I purpose according to the flesh, that with me there should be 18yea, yea, and nay, nay? But as God is true [faithful], our word toward you was [is] not yea and nay.7 19For the Son of God, Jesus Christ, who was preached among you by us, even by me and Silvanus and Timotheus, was not yea and nay, but in him was yea. 20For all the promises of God in him are yea, and in him Amen [For how many soever may be the promises of God, in Him is the yea; wherefore also through him is the Amen], unto the glory of God by us. 21Now he which stablisheth us with you in Christ, and hath anointed us, is God; 22who hath also sealed us, and given the earnest 23of the Spirit in our hearts. Moreover [But] I call God for a record [witness] upon my soul, that [it was] to spare you [that] I came not as yet [no more] unto Corinth. 24Not for that we have dominion over your faith, but are helpers of your joy: for by faith ye stand. AND In that which the Apostle has thus far said we may notice an apologetical element. He had spoken of those troubles which his Judaizing opponents represented as a token of the divine displeasure. He had implied that these were so far from being such a token and a reason for the withdrawal of confidence from him, that they were rather an indication of his fellowship with Christ and a reasonable ground for an affectionate communion between him and the church. But in whatever way we regard the preceding verses, the Apostle’s vindication of himself evidently commences with this section, though it is in intimate connection with what he had just taken for granted, viz., that they were sufficiently interested in him to assist him by their intercessions. He now gives them to understand that he was justified in such an assumption, for he was not unworthy of their sympathies and their prayers. Such is the connection which we infer from the γάρ. 2 Corinthians 1:12. For Our rejoicing is this.—The word καύχησις, as it is used in 1 Corinthians 15:31, and frequently in this Epistle, is not equivalent to καύχημα: that of which one makes his boast, for it signifies rather the act of boasting, the external expression of joyful confidence. It here relates to the whole moral conduct of the Apostle, as Bengel has it: even in seasons of adversity and in his conduct towards his opponents. The inward feeling of which it is the outward expression is the testimony of our conscience, to which it is emphatically directed by αὕτη. The word συνείδησις (here rendered conscience) is found also in 1 Corinthians 8:7; 1 Corinthians 10:25 et al. It is here closely connected with the objective sentence:—that in holiness and godly sincerity, we have had our conversation in the world.—Ἀναστρεφέσθαι occurs here and in Ephesians 2:3; 1 Timothy 3:16; Hebrews 12:18; 1 Peter 1:17; 2 Peter 2:18. In the Sept. of Proverbs 20:7, it is used as a rendering for δִ ?ϊְ ?δַ ?μֵּ ?κְ, and signifies the conduct, the way in which one acts. By ἐν is indicated the path in which the movement takes place, and which determines and directs the mode of action referred to. If we accept of ἁγιότης as the true reading, the idea will be that of a religious purity, arising from an unreserved surrender of the heart to God. On account of the numerous and independent critical authorities in its favor, and because ἁγιότης has too general a meaning in connection with εἰλικρίνεία, and might have been suggested by τοῦθεοῦ etc., Osiander gives the preference to ἁπλότης signifying a freedom from all irrelevant and private views, i. e., a plain single mind. Εἰλικρίνείατοῦθεοῦ, godly sincerity, is either a purity like that which is in God, or one which comes from him or is wrought by him in those who submit themselves to him. Τοῦθεοῦ designates the source and the consequent resemblance. The idea of being acceptable to God necessarily follows from this, but it is not strictly contained in the expression. Still less does it signify what is demanded by God, and least of all what is superior, as if it were merely a superlative. The subjoined antithetic definition of the same idea:—not in carnal wisdom, but in the grace of God,—more precisely explains what is meant by ἐνἁγιότης. The σοφίασαρκικὴ (1 Corinthians 1:20 σοφ. τοῦκόσμου; 1 Corinthians 2:5 σοφ. ἀνθρώπων 1 Corinthians 2:6 τοῦαἰῶνοςτούτου) forms in this passage a contrast on the one hand, to the holiness and godly sincerity, and the εἰλικρίνειατοῦθεοῦ, and on the other, to the grace of God. This last phrase signifies God’s free grace; in which, however, is included a surrender and communication of his own infinite self with all the blessings of salvation; just as the holiness and the sincerity had involved a power which moved and directed the Apostle from within himself.—In contrast with this divine disposition, is presented that impure fleshly wisdom which belongs to our sensuous and selfish nature, and which inclines us to pursue our own enjoyment, profit, honor or applause, and hence leads us off into inconsistent courses of conduct. Osiander thinks that here is also an allusion to that theoretical kind of σοφία (1 Corinthians 1:3) which made use of the various artificial methods supplied by the Rhetoric and Logic of that period to gain influence over the minds of men. Theophylact: “words of stirring eloquence, and twistings of sophistries.”] But evidently a more practical kind of worldly wisdom was then uppermost in the Apostle’s mind.—The sphere of the conversation is the world, which, according to Meyer, is the profane portion of men, inasmuch as the Apostle’s object was to make his holy walk more prominent by the contrast. We may certainly regard the non-christian element in society as intended, in distinction from the churches, which were represented here by the Corinthians (πρὸςὑμᾶς). Περισσοτέρως (more abundantly) has reference to a higher degree, and not to a higher quality. Πρὀςὑμᾶς has the sense of: in intercourse with you, and it is therefore equivalent to, with you; Neander: “with reference to you. We may conclude from this verse that his opponents had charged him with practising a spurious kind of worldly wisdom, which indicated a lack of uprightness of heart.”—W. F. Besser: “Not as if his Christian intercourse with them had been characterized by any thing extraordinary, or beyond what he had shown in other places. He intended simply to say: “If there are any to whom I have not been manifest as a single-hearted and sincere minister of Christ, surely it cannot be you (1 Corinthians 9:2), for where in all the world have I been more completely known than among you?” 2 Corinthians 1:13-14. For we write none other things unto you—He now confirms his avowal that he had been sincere in his treatment of them, so far as relates to his Epistles. He probably has reference to the suspicions which his opponents had awakened, that his language meant something very different from that which they seemed to mean to an unsuspicious reader.—The full and well at tested reading ἀλλ̓ἡἁ, equivalent to ἡἅ or ἀλλ’ ἄ, is a blending together of two constructions: οὐκάλλ̓ ?—ή and οὐκἀλλα—ἀλλὰ (comp. Meyer) [Jelf. Gram. § 773. Obs. 1–3].—But we are writing;—He here refers (as in 1 Corinthians 5:11) to that which he was then writing, and to the meaning which it properly conveyed: we have no other meaning in what we have written than what you yourselves read, and what is the literal signification of the language before the eye of the reader.—No other things unto you than what ye read, or indeed acknowledge.—The words or acknowledge, refer to what they had known, in other ways, of what he then meant. There is no need of an artificial distinction between ἀναγινώσκειν in the sense of recognoscere, and ἑπιγινώσκειν in the sense of agnoscere (Calvin), a distinction which is, moreover, opposed to the uniform usage of ἀναγινώσκειν in the New Testament.—In the succeeding clause another object of discussion is introduced. It is to be derived not from the preceding ἅ, as if it were equivalent to all that the Apostle in his sincerity had performed and suffered among them (Osiander), but it comes before us in the form of a distinct proposition, viz.: that we are your rejoicing. This sentence grammatically depends upon ἐπιγνώσεσθε [as that which they should continue to acknowledge unto the end], and not upon the intervening clause with which it might be connected according to the sense. The words might indeed be taken as a causal sentence, giving a reason for what is said in the previous clause (comp. Osiander), but the logical connection would certainly be less forcible.—The phrase, unto the end, means, as in 1 Corinthians 1:8, and Hebrews 3:6, the absolute end of all things, and not merely the Apostle’s close of life. In part, in the intermediate clause, expresses a limitation, not in opposition to unto the end, nor with respect to the recognition itself, as if equivalent to in some degree; but with respect to the persons recognizing, implying that only a part of the Church recognized him in his true character. This is the only view which accords with the facts. A reproach would not have been here appropriate. Καύχημα occurs in 1 Corinthians 5:6; 1 Corinthians 9:15 f. In the day of the Lord Jesus, belongs to the principal proposition, but requires also to be joined to the incidental clause. He meant to express his confidence that they would steadfastly acknowledge that he was indeed the object of their glorying, and would continue to be so even to the last day, when teachers and churches shall stand before the great Chief Shepherd, and when all events and the way in which they have been brought about shall be open to inspection. He had no doubt that they would point with joyful triumph to him as the one through whom they and so many others had been brought to Christ, and to all the enjoyments and honors which have been derived from him, as the one to whom they owed their spiritual life with all its benefits and dignities; just as he on his side even then pointed to them as the honorable fruit of his labors (Comp. 1 Corinthians 9:1 s; 2 Corinthians 1:8; Philippians 2:16; 1 Thessalonians 2:19). 2 Corinthians 1:15-20. Having thus drawn their hearts to a firmer confidence in him and to withstand more successfully the influence of his opponents, the Apostle now proceeds to repel the charge of inconsistency and fickleness which had been made against him because he had changed the plan of his journey in coming to them.—And in this confidence I was minded before to come unto you.—Most recent commentators refer the πεποίθησις (confidence, trust) to what has been expressed in ἐλπίζω, &c.; as if he was intending to say that under the influence of this confidence in their steadfast recognition of his true relation to them, he had at first formed the design to pay them a visit, &c.—Some would draw the πρότερον into immediate connection with ἐβουλόμην [q. d. I was before minded], but not only would this be incoherent in itself, since he was yet desirous of this thing, but it would also be unsuitable to δευτέρανχάριν.—The position of the words πρὸςὑμᾶςἐλθεῖν, by which ὑμας is more properly contrasted with Macedonia, is attested by good authorities.—This had been the Apostle’s original intention, but it had been given up as early as when he wrote his first Epistle. Comp. 1 Corinthians 16:5. This alteration of his plan had become known to the Corinthians either by letter or by personal conversation, and it had been represented to them as an evidence of his general fickleness of character. Hence the propriety of this defence of himself. That ye might have a second benefit.—He here refers to what had been the object of his original plan.—Every visit he might make to them would be the occasion of many blessings, and would manifest the divine favor toward them. Had he visited them a second time, his presence with them would have been a second grace. Such had been his aim when he formed that earlier plan, the only motive of which they might see in the confidence he had just expressed. And now when he declares that that confidence always animated him and had prompted such a friendly purpose, he implies that no thought of a misconstruction of his motives could have crossed his mind when he changed his plan. Χάρις (grace or favor) has not the same meaning with χαρά, (as some would have the original read, signifying joy, or a new delight which his visit would give), nor does it signify an exhibition of human favor, but it is equivalent to χάρισμαπνευματικόν (a spiritual gift) in Romans 1:11 (comp. Romans 15:29). The meaning δευτέραν is not the same here as that of διπλῆν would have been. We need not suppose that his first residence in Corinth, or his first Epistle is referred to as the first grace, for the context (2 Corinthians 1:16) shows evidently what he had in view, and this seems inconsistent with the otherwise probable hypothesis that πρότερον implies that the Apostle had been at Corinth since his first residence there. In 2 Corinthians 1:16 we have more definite information regarding this earlier plan, and light is thrown also upon what is meant by their receiving a second benefit, but we are not therefore to conclude that this latter expression stands out of its proper place.—With respect to his being sent on his way, consult 1 Corinthians 16:6.—Τοῦτο, in 2 Corinthians 1:17, has reference to the earlier plan which had been spoken of in 2 Corinthians 1:15 f. He is meeting the objection which had been raised against him on account of his change of purpose. The amount of this objection was, that he could not have reflected sufficiently upon his plan and the way in which he was to accomplish it,, and so that he became guilty of light-mindedness; or that if he had really intended to visit them, he either could not have been very strenuous in carrying out his purpose, and so had changed his mind without sufficient reasons, or he had not much regard to his promiss. That such an objection had been made to him, in fact, is not to be inferred, perhaps, from the article τῇ, as if this referred to the particular lightness which had been imputed to him, for this may also be pointed to the levity which would generally be suspected in such cases.—Did I use lightness.—Ἐλαφρία (lightness) is found nowhere else in the New Testament, although the adjective occurs twice (2 Corinthians 4:17 and Matthew 11:30), but not with an ethical signification. Χρῆσθαι, when used with reference to moral states or qualities, means to have a hand in, to be occupied with, to enter upon, some business, and is equivalent to: behaving or conducting one’s self in a certain manner. Ἄρα, in an interrogative sentence, implies that the inquirer will wait for an answer (well, really! indeed! comp. [Jelf. Gr. Gram., § 873, 2. Passow I., 377), and hence indicates necessarily no logical deduction (a consequence from this state of thing.). The second question,—or the things which I purpose, do I purpose according to the flesh?—is either coordinated with the first (in which case ἤ is equivalent to aut), or subordinated to it (ἤ having the force of an), and implying that the contrary would lead to an absurdity: “if, then, you would not charge me with levity, you must suppose that I form my purposes according to the flesh” (Meyer). This subordination would agree very well with the explanation which refers ἐχρησάμην to the purpose itself; but the coφrdination would suit best the interpretation which refers that word rather to the carrying out of the purpose, and introduces here the additional point respecting the improper spirit shown in the formation of the purpose. And yet this last is probably the more correct meaning. Κατὰσάρκα however, refers to that which determines the mind when it is coming to a decision, or it is the same as to say that the conclusion was reached in the way in which the σάρξ usually determines us, i. e., in a carnal manner. The real meaning would be essentially the same on either interpretation. The opposite of this is: κατὰπνε͂υμα. Where the spirit controls a man in all his conduct, the sole object of his consultations and conclusions is the honor, the kingdom and the will of God, but where the σάρξ (i. e., the nature of man, when it is confined to the pursuit of external and selfish objects), controls his decisions, nothing will be regarded but outward relations, selfish inclinations, personal interests, or something to accommodate, please, profit, or flatter himself.—A spiritual mind always makes a man decided, consistent, true to himself, and uniform in all his conduct; but a carnal mind makes him uncertain in all his ways, and involves him in many contradictory courses. This necessary result, the Apostle presents as if it were the object of the person’s design or aim, ἵναᾗ &c. If we follow the correct reading ναὶναὶ ?—ὄυὄυ (the Vulgate and some other verss. have simply ναι—ὄυ), the second ναὶ and ὄυ might belong to the predicate: that the yea with me should be yea, and the nay should be nay (comp. James 5:12); and the whole might refer to an obstinate and presumptuous course of conduct, in which a man adheres to his determination, and resolves that his yea shall remain yea, and his nay shall continue nay. The idea would thus be that he will never change his mind, whether he had resolved upon a yea or a nay, a promise or a refusal, a doing or a declining to do something. But, according to the context, the objection the Apostle was here meeting was not so much to his consistent obstinacy as to his inconsistent fickleness. The double form of ναί, ναί and οὔ, οὔ is merely to give additional force to the simple form in 2 Corinthians 1:18, as in Matthew 5:37. The predicate is either, should be with us also, nay, nay; i. e. the yea, yea, may become with us nay, nay; that is, the purpose or the promise may change about into just the opposite according to convenience; or (better) merely should be with us; in which case καὶ has the ordinary sense of, and:—that there should be with me the yea, yea, and the nay, nay.—[Chrysostom forcibly gives the objection which is met by the Apostle in this passage (2 Corinthians 1:18-22) thus: “If when you promised to come to us, you failed to do so, and your yea is not yea, nor your nay nay; but what you say now you change afterwards, as you have done in regard to your coming to us, woe to us lest this also should be the case with your preaching! In order, therefore, that they might not think thus, he assures them that God was faithful, and that His word to them was not yea and nay; for in his preaching such changes could not happen, but only in his travels and journeyings.] Their objection must then have been that the Apostle had both these intentions together and at the same time, and hence that he could not be depended upon, was equivocal, self-contradictory, and took back at one time what he had just before promised (not as Olshausen arbitrarily assumes, that truth and falsehood were blended together). Very different from all this was the actual conduct of the Apostle toward them, based as it was upon motives of the highest love and wisdom, 2 Corinthians 1:23.—As God is faithful, our word towards you is not yea and nay.—He here proceeds in the first place to meet the objection in a very solemn but lively manner (2 Corinthians 1:18), introducing his assertion with a δέ (which, however, has not the force of μᾶλλονδέ, as if he would give a still further denial to the question). Πιστὸςδὲὁθεός, ὅτι, &c., may here be taken either as saying that God’s fidelity was the reason he ventured to assert such a consistency for himself, i. e. he asserted such things of himself because God was faithful—God is faithful in this (εἰςτοῦτο), and this fact makes it impossible that we should speak in this uncertain manner among you (Meyer)—or, as a solemn protestation: as surely as God is true, our word toward you, etc. de Wette, Osiander). The former seems harsh, and is not grammatically confirmed by a reference to John 9:17, where ὅτι has the force of: because, since. Πιστὸςὁθεός may be a form of solemn affirmation as well as ἔστινἀλήθειαχριστο͂υἐνἐμοί in 2 Corinthians 9:10, and it goes probably on the assumption that God was a witness. Comp. Romans 1:9; Philippians 1:8; 1 Thessalonians 2:5. He thus brings forward the fidelity (reliableness) of God as a security for the reliableness of his own λόγος. But what does he mean by this λόγος? Does it refer to his promise to visit them, or to his discourses generally, i. e. to everything he had said to them in any way? or finally does it refer to his doctrines and public instructions (κήρυγμα)? We are decidedly in favor of the last for the reason assigned in the next verse, in which the Apostle maintains that his instructions must be perfectly reliable because they consisted of truths which were incontrovertible and irresistible. Neander: “Every way in which he held intercourse with the Corinthians, his instructions as a whole.” But such an assertion of the credibility of his teaching should have an influence also to ward off those accusations which had been made against those decisions which related to his official work (such as his apostolical journeys), just as these latter had created a prejudice against his teachings. For the Son of God, Jesus Christ, who was preached among you by us (2 Corinthians 1:19).—[“In place of the preaching he here puts Him who was preached (metonomy); and says that the doctrine concerning the Son of God which he and Silvanus and Timotheus had preached contained no discrepancies, nor did they at one time preach this and at another time that, but they brought forward always the same doctrine.” Theodoret]. Τοῦθεοῦ, according to the true reading, precedes γὰρ, and thus becomes emphatic, in order to give prominence to the Divine part of the subject of their preaching. It evidently has reference to what had been said in 2 Corinthians 1:18, respecting ὁθεός. Κηρυχθείς relates to the preaching by which they had been at first brought to believe in Christ. He describes this as the common testimony of the three organs of Divine revelation who had been associated at that time (Acts 18:5). It should not, however, be supposed that the Christ thus preached signifies the same thing as the preaching of Christ, for then γὰρ would serve only to introduce an explanation or further exposition of what had been said in 2 Corinthians 1:18. Comp. 2 Corinthians 1:20. [In describing “the Son of God, Jesus Christ,” the epithets are accumulated “to express the greatness of Him whom they preached, and so to aggravate the impossibility of His connection with any littleness or levity.” Stanley]. Of Him, as he had been preached among the Corinthians, the Apostle says: he was not made yea and nay, but has been made yea in him; i. e., He has proved Himself among you as among others, not an untruthful, untrustworthy and ambiguous personage, saying yea and nay at the same time; but one in whom an everlasting yea, a pure, steadfast affirmation might always be found (comp. Hebrews 13:8; Revelation 3:14). “The whole Old Testament revelation has proved to be true by means of the Christ who has been preached among you. And yet, what is thus true of the objective Christ, must be applied with equal truth to the word preached respecting him.” Neander. [The verb here used, γέγονεν, signifies not mere existence, but a transition from one state, or character, or condition, to another (Webster’s Synn. of the Gr. Test., p. 199). Being in the perfect tense, it implies that the change spoken of is not only completed, but that the result of it is conceived of as permanent (Winer, § 41, 4). It hath become yea, and it remains yea in Him forever. My plans and purposes may change, but the subject of my preaching remains the same under every mutation of its preachers]. The more particular declaration and reason assigned in the next verse shows that what had just been asserted had reference to the experience, not merely of the Corinthians, (who had been spoken of in the phrase, preached among you), but of Christians in general; For however numerous may be the promises of God (in the Old Testament), in Him is the yea, (i. e., the affirmation of them, 2 Corinthians 1:20); inasmuch as they are actually fulfilled in Him or He secures their fulfilment in the future. By means of His person and work, the certainty of all God’s promises has been practically confirmed (comp. Romans 15:8; John 1:17; Acts 3:21). To this external confirmation in Christ, corresponds the Amen, which is not added merely to strengthen the yea (as the Rec. would make it), but it expresses the unanimous assent which believers yield to the objective truth, the confession they make with respect to the actual fulfilment everywhere taking place at the time, with an allusion also to the Amen which the primitive Christians were in the habit of responding in their public assemblies. Even this confession is by means of Christ, for inasmuch as the fulfilment itself takes place in Him, the confession must be drawn from believers by Him through our means to the glory of God. Or: all God’s promises are yea in Christ’s person and work, i. e., in His name, as it is proclaimed in the Gospel, and are Amen in the Church which confesses His name (Besser).—The words δἰἡμῶν [through or by means of us] might possibly be referred to believers in general, but the context more naturally connects them with those only, who are Christ’s ministers; and the Amen is either the joyful and believing testimony of such ministers, or (more correctly and more strictly conformed to the usage with respect to ἀμήν), the public expression of confidence which all believers gave. The phrase to the glory of God by us is in apposition with that which precedes it, and signifies, that which glorifies God by our means, i. e., when we who proclaim the Gospel are the instruments of producing the confidence thus expressed (Meyer).—The article is placed before ναί and ἀμὴν in 2 Corinthians 1:20, because the yea has here acquired a definite position with respect to the ἐπαγγελίαι. There is no necessity of supplying a subject for the affirmation in this yea (as e. g. in ἀλλὰναὶἐναὐτῷγέγονεν), nor of understanding by it that which He (i. e., Christ) has affirmed (the preceding yea), but it is itself the subject. [Bengel: Christ preached, i. e., our preaching of Christ became yea in Christ Himself]. [Obviously, then, the Apostle would argue, there could be no variableness in the subject (λόγος) of His preaching, since God who gave it was faithful, and Christ who is its substance is the same in all ages, however the promises respecting Him might vary. The whole revelation of Christ, whether in Old Testament writing or in the preaching of the Apostle and his companions, had been one everlasting affirmation from God to men like a mighty yea poured forth from heaven through all generations. He was then, had been, and ever would be the same (Exodus 3:14; John 8:58). Even in the experience of those to whom the Apostle was writing, this was manifest, for they were accustomed in all their assemblies to join with believers of every age and country in responding their hearty Amen to the instructions and worship of the Church. Thus the earth’s Amen responded to heaven’s yea in Christ]. In 2 Corinthians 1:20, ἐπαγγελίαι refers to the promises not of the New, but of the Old Testament, such as the Apostle speaks of in Galatians 3:16 ff. and Romans 4:13; to the promise of salvation in all its clear details, and not merely to that of the Holy Spirit.—Even with the reading given in the Recep.: καὶἐναὐτῷτὸἀμήν (retained by Osiander, with Tischendorf and Reiche), we need no other explanation than that we have just given. We shall not need to refer the yea to the God who promises and the Amen to the Christ in whom the promises are fulfilled (Beza); nor to regard the Amen as an expression of what is complete truth, i. e., an idea expressed in two languages (as in the case of Abba, Father), with reference to both Jewish and Gentile Christians; nor yet to make the Amen God’s seal to man’s Amen, i. e., to the confidence they thus expressed (?) (Osiander). Even on the supposition that the Amen refers to the subjective confidence of believers, it would not be inconsistent with the Apostle’s aim to set forth the complete objective certainty of the Divine promises, secured as they were in all their strength through Christ, and so forming a basis on which he could claim confidence for himself. That internal confidence which the Corinthians had yielded to his preaching, and which they had openly confessed, was a sufficient proof of his trustworthiness as an Apostle. Neander: “In this way he met in the most effectual manner the suspicions which his opponents had cast upon his instructions, by appealing to the experience which the Corinthians had received of the power of Divine grace through Christ upon their hearts.” But after all the arguments which have been urged against the reading, διὸκαὶδἰαὐτοῦ we do not regard them as of sufficient weight to induce us to set it aside, or to give us entire confidence in that of the Recepta. [The sense of the two readings is somewhat different. By Lachmann’s reading (preferred by Calvin and most of the ancient expositors), it is asserted, that, however various God’s promises might be, their yea was in Christ, and hence that the Amen which expresses human experience must be in Him also. According to this, not only do the promises receive their confirmation in Christ, but we experience and assent to their truth. By the common reading the Apostle simply asserts, that the promises had received their verification, (their yea and Amen), in Christ. Certainly the tenor of the Apostle’s argument is most strengthened by the former reading]. 2 Corinthians 1:21-22. [One thought still lingers in the Apostle’s mind, which he must express before he returns to his personal defence (comp. Stanley)]. The firm faith which Christ had effected, and which had brought such glory to God by means of the preaching of the Gospel, he now traces back to its ultimate author (2 Corinthians 1:20).—Now he which stablisheth us with you in Christ, and hath anointed us, is God.—In the first place he represents God as firmly establishing, so far as related to Christ (1 Corinthians 1:6), not only those who preached the Gospel, but those who had been brought by them to the Christian faith. The former he had enabled to preach Christ in such a way as to deserve and to secure the confidence of their fellow-men; and the latter he had induced to exercise a steadfast faith, and to hold forth an unshaken confession of the truth. In the next place he presents God as anointing the Apostle and his assistants; that is, as bestowing upon them that spiritual inspiration which was needful for their duties. [There is certainly nothing in the mere language or grammatical construction which intimates that he associated all Christians with these inspired teachers in the enjoyment of these blessings. In the confirmation (βεβαιῶν), indeed, he expressly includes the Corinthians to whom he was writing, and this is spoken of as an event which was then (present participle) taking place. But with an almost evident design he extends this participation to none of the remaining facts (the anointing, the sealing and the earnest of the Spirit), which are represented as having taken place (aorist participles) once for all at an earlier period (probably when the Apostles and the other teachers were consecrated to their public offices, and when, of course, the Corinthians were unconverted). As we know that miraculous gifts had been conferred upon the Corinthians, a special reason may have existed for applying the confirmation alone to them (σὺνὑμῖν). And yet it must be conceded, that nothing in the nature of either of these benefits, so far as they are known to us, would necessarily limit their application to any class of believers. Even if the unction in 1 John 2:20; 1 John 2:27 be explained of a miraculous endowment, it would be difficult to give such an interpretation to Ephesians 1:13 f. Dr. Hodge also calls attention to the fact, that when an official anointing is spoken of in the New Testament, it is only in relation to Christ and never with reference to the Apostles or other preachers, whereas all believers are said to receive the more ordinary unction of the Holy Spirit. The ancient expositors (Chrysostom, Theodoret and Ambrosiaster) attached much importance to this passage as a special description of the privileges of all believers as the anointed prophets, priests and kings of God. On the whole, although we must grant that the Apostle has expressly limited the anointing, the sealing and the earnest of the Spirit to himself and his fellow-laborers in their official capacity, and the confirmation to them and the Corinthians, we see nothing in the endowments themselves or in the analogy of similar passages, which should prevent us from giving these expressions a much more extensive application, since they refer to those spiritual benefits which are promised to all Christians as well as their public teachers.] With respect to the anointing (κρίσας), comp. John 2:20-25, where the unction of believers (κρῖσμα) is spoken of; and Luke 4:18; Acts 4:27; Acts 10:38; Hebrews 1:9. Preachers of the Gospel should be imitators of Christ, and this they can be only as they partake of the Divine Spirit (official grace).—The δὲ indicates that an additional subject is introduced, for it is here metabatic (or transitional), and not adversative. The phrase εἰςΧριστόν has in this place the sense of: in respect to Christ, or, in the direction of Christ, and not of: within or in Christ. The former signification is undoubtedly the simplest, but the representation of the Apostle requires that we should conceive of the union with Christ as a continuous and progressive one, and it may be doubted whether εἰς will bear such an interpretation. Σὺνὑμῖν (with you) is used here, not merely to conciliate the good will of the readers (Meyer, Osiander), but it enters much more essentially into the course of the argument. W. F. Besser:—“He takes the Corinthians themselves for his witnesses, from their own experience, that the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ makes the course of His people sure by the Holy Spirit.”—It would be altogether inappropriate and even contradictory to the spirit of the text to suppose that the Apostle had here a collateral reference to those who affected to regard him as a reed shaken, by the wind (Rόckert).—In the second and in the next succeeding ἡμᾶς the Apostle does not include his readers with himself, for in the previous part of the sentence he had expressly distinguished ἡμᾶς from them, and had made it refer exclusively to himself and his fellow laborers.—The anointing refers not merely to the original vocation but to the subsequent spiritual endowment of the persons spoken of. The expression [paronomasia] intimates that there was a resemblance between the anointed ones and Him who was in a preeminent sense the Anointed One. Neander: “As it was customary to transfer every predicate of the Old Testament Theocracy, in a spiritual sense, to Christianity, we have the chrism which was used in the consecration of priests and kings applied to the spiritual consecration of the Christian by the presence of the Holy Spirit in his heart. The reference is to the consecration of all believers to the general priesthood.”—It is rather an overstraining of the word when it is made (Bengel) to imply a communication both of strength and of fragrancy (2 Corinthians 2:15); or, in addition to this, the clear and accurate discernment of truth, which was sometimes given from above, and which made its recipients inaccessible to all forms of error and falsehood (comp. 1 John 2:27); or some character indelibilis in the evangelical sense, a permanent Divine endowment by which one became holier and more inviolable, on account of some special prerogative or dignity which he acquired as the Lord’s anointed (Osiander; comp. Psalms 105:15); or, finally, the quality imparted in the three-fold office, i. e., the refreshing and cheering influence (Psalms 40:15), which all Christians receive when they are made prophets, priests and kings unto God, and are strengthened for their conflicts with the world, sin and Satan (anointing of the athletae). 2 Corinthians 1:21 can be correctly construed only as an independent sentence, of which 2 Corinthians 1:22 was designed to give an additional explanation. If we take 2 Corinthians 1:21 as the subject and 2 Corinthians 1:22 as the predicate, so that the idea should be: God who stablishes and hath anointed us hath also sealed us, the βεβαιῶν, which now forms the connecting link with the preceding passage, ceases to be the principal and becomes a merely incidental thought.—In 2 Corinthians 1:22 the phrase—Who also hath sealed us—has reference to the Christian character of all those who had been ordained to the office of teaching, and points out the true source of those peculiar endowments which qualified them for their work. The sealing (σφραγίζεσθαι) signifies in general the act by which a man designates something as his property. Here, as in Ephesians 1:13; Ephesians 4:30, it signifies that Divine assurance of adoption which is effected by the communication and inward witness of the Holy Spirit. Osiander describes it as the complete consecration of one to the service and fellowship of the Lord and his uninterrupted continuance therein (comp. Revelation 7:2; 2 Timothy 2:10). The phrase—and hath given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts—is here added epexegetically, for in this communication of the Spirit lies the true power of the sealing. The whole phrase is a brachylogy [a concise expression] in which the act and its result are taken together; for it is implied that the Spirit is in such a way given that he abides in the heart.—Ἀῤῥαβών is properly the earnest-money, e. g., in a bargain, when some part of the price agreed upon is paid beforehand, in token that the contract is ratified and that the purchaser is bound for the payment of the whole. It is therefore a pledge or security. If we take the genitive (τοῦπνεύματος) partitively, the sense will be, that a communication of the Spirit is begun, and that the portion given is a pledge that the communication will be completed hereafter. If we follow the analogy of 2 Corinthians 5:5, we must regard the communication of the Spirit as the proper warrant for expecting a complete salvation, the actual inheritance (the κληρονομία). The Spirit therefore should be looked upon as the earnest of the whole salvation; properly speaking, the earnest is, or consists of, the Holy Spirit, and the genitive hero is one of apposition [Winer, Gr. d. N. T. § 48, 2]. Comp. on this subject Romans 8:2; Romans 8:10-11; Romans 8:15-17. It seems altogether too contracted a view of this passage to make all that is here said refer exclusively to the testimony which the Spirit bore in the hearts of the original preachers of the Gospel to the truth of their official character. [The expressions more properly relate to the complete assurance which they possessed that they were, both as believers and as preachers of the truth, under the direction of an infallible Divine Spirit.] 2 Corinthians 1:23-24. In the two preceding verses, the Apostle had set forth the firm basis God had given for the confidence his hearers might repose in him, and in consequence of which he had been so abundantly authenticated both as an Apostle and a Christian. This had prepared the way for the appeal to God which he now makes with an irresistible power:—Moreover I call God for a witness against my soul.—This is a solemn affirmation respecting his failure to visit Corinth according to his previous intention and the reasons which kept him from going. Instead of the general us, he now uses the singular I, because he is about to speak of personal matters in which no one but himself was involved. The prominence of the ἐγὠ is increased by its close connection with δὲ (comp. Osiander: [“As God had placed a divine seal upon him and his word, according to 2 Corinthians 1:22, so he now seals his own word with the name of God.”]) Επί has its peculiar sense of against, Meyer makes it mean for (comp. 2 Macc. 2:37), but here it means in respect to; Neander: over my soul. The former sense is more appropriate to the nature of a solemn affirmation or oath (comp. Joshua 24:22), The sense is: “If what I now say is untrue, may God appear as a witness against my soul, and may I fall under his condemnation.”—The condition was necessarily implied and hence was not expressed. The phrase, my soul (τὴνἐμὴνψυχήν) does not apply to the inmost spirit, that which the Apostle always regarded as especially akin to, and conscious of, God, and which he therefore places here in this sacred relation to the Omniscient God (Osiander). According to Beck (Seelenl. § 2) the soul is that in which the life is found, and hence is always named as the subject when a preservation, deliverance, peril or loss of life is spoken of.—This solemn asseveration was justifiable on moral grounds, because his credit as an Apostle had been called in question, and with this was essentially connected the honor of Christ, who had sent him, and the cause of God which he represented at Corinth. In like manner, Galatians 1:20; Romans 9:1 f, and other places. W. F. Besser: Even Augustine, in his day, refers to this solemn oath of the Apostle, to prove that our Lord could not have intended in his Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5:34) to prohibit every kind of swearing, but only those oaths which were useless and were an unhallowed profanation of God’s name, and hence were arbitrary and uncalled for. In this place Paul made use of an oath, as Christ did (Matthew 26:64), when the honor of God called for it.—Οὐκέτι implies that he had been in Corinth before he wrote his First Epistle (comp. Meyer). [Our A. V. translates οὐκέτι as if it were=οὔπω; Tyndale, more correctly: “not eny moare;” Conybeare: “I gave up my purpose;” Alford: “No more, i. e., after the first time.” Paul does not deny that he had as yet been at Corinth, but only explains why he had not gone there at the time, and on the journey, of which he was speaking. It seems probable from this whole passage (2 Corinthians 1:15-23) that Paul had paid no visit to Corinth between the sending of the First and Second Epistles. See Introd. § 6.. The reason he had not gone directly to Corinth, according to his earlier intention, but had visited the Macedonian churches first and had contented himself with writing to the Corinthians, is expressed in φειδόμενοςὑμῶν—that I came not to Corinth any more, in order that I might spare you.—He had hoped that they would be induced by that Epistle to return to their right mind and would be so completely restored to their proper relation to him, that he would not be obliged to treat them with a rod of severity (1 Corinthians 4:21). He was not, however, even then without anxiety on this point (2 Corinthians 12:20 f; 2 Corinthians 13:1 ff.)—Not that we have dominion over your faith (2 Corinthians 1:24).—He here anticipates and meets any misconstruction which might be put upon what he had just said about sparing them (φειδόμενος), and he obviates the appearance of domineering which some might find in it.—Οὐχὁτι is equivalent to saying: I say not that etc. (a common brachylogy), i. e., “the words φειδόμενοςὑμῶν are not intended to imply,” etc.—Κυριεύομεν is not here to be so connected with ὑμῶν as to make ἔνεκα necessary to be understood before τῆςπίστεως [as if he had meant: over you with respect to your faith]; nor is τῆςπίστεως to be considered as equivalent to τῶνπιστευόντων: them that believe. His object was to say that when he spoke of sparing them, he meant not to use his apostolic authority in a lordly way to control their faith, their inward religious life, and their spiritual action with respect to Christian truth. All this he knew must be the result of a free surrender, and a voluntary determination, of their own minds, not merely at first, but ever afterwards, on each renewed act of faith. A positive expression of his meaning is given in the words:—but are helpers of your joy.—‘Your joy, your “rejoicing in the Lord,” can thrive and maintain its existence only by your putting forth all the energies of your faith in the work of progressive sanctification, in abstaining from all selfish and fleshly desires, and in the perfecting yourselves in love and a positive likeness to Christ.’ In this way not only would their faith be proved, but their hearts would be filled with Christian cheerfulness, and they would become conscious of a genuine and established spiritual life. In all this he had endeavored to assist them by the exercise of discipline, by earnest admonitions, by a strict adherence to the upright course which a genuine love demanded, and by strenuously persevering in the path of duty, whatever censures he might find it needful to inflict on them for their remaining inconsistencies. [As inspired men the Apostles had power to prescribe what ought to be believed, the objective truth on which all right faith is grounded, but they claimed no other authority over men’s subjective faith. “He claimed no right to control their spiritual convictions, but only their outward conduct, and hence he might speak of having spared them only in respect of external discipline” (Erasmus’ Paraphrase). Thus careful was he to recognize the right of private judgment even under the spiritual jurisdiction of inspired men. The reason he gives is, that Christians were steadfast only when they exercise a free faith in God alone, without the attempted constraint of human authority.] The σύν in συνεργοί refers neither to God nor to Christ, nor to his companions in office, as if he had said that he worked in common with them, but to his readers for whose welfare he was concerned, and whose activity in their own behalf was presupposed. That he was here speaking of nothing but a cooperation with them in promoting their joy (in this sense) and not directly of faith, is confirmed by the final clause:—for by faith ye stand,—or rather, in respect to faith ye are steadfast. The Dative here shows wherein or in what respect they were steadfast (comp. Galatians 5:3), and does not point out [as our English A. V. makes it] the reason, or the efficient cause of their stead-fastness. [See, however, Winer, Gr. d. N. T., § 31, 3]. AND ETHICAL1. How pure the relationship between ministers and their congregations, when the eye of the former is kept steadfastly upon the day of Jesus Christ, and when the latter attend strictly to the doctrine preached to them. The thought that we are both to appear together before the great Shepherd to whom we all belong, who has united us together, and who perfectly knows all that we do to one another, will have the effect, 1) to repress in those who have been intrusted with the pastoral office all motives unworthy of fellowship with God, to render them indifferent to the empty honors of the world and to fleshly indulgences, and to make them long with purer and more intense desire for the salvation of souls, to whom they might be able in the last day to point with satisfaction as those whom they had been instrumental in leading to, and confirming in, the way of life; and 2) to induce the people to make such a profitable use of their instructions and admonitions, to grow in grace, to free themselves from every thing which will not bear the light of the last day, and to abound in the fruits of righteousness, that their ministers may perform their duties with joy and not with grief, and finally be able to point to them as to a thriving and fruitful field which will not dishonor either the great Master or the under shepherds.—But the formation and continuance of this relation must depend very much upon the character of the instruction which is given. When a people are supplied only with opinions derived from the preacher’s own heart or the teachings of men, they can never know with confidence where they stand or the true foundation of their hopes. But when they are supplied with the pure Gospel of Jesus Christ in the ever consistent words of the Apostles and prophets, and with those promises of God which, however ancient, are perpetually fulfilled and confirmed before their eyes and in their own experience, they will always know where to look for direction, will be established in the truth, and will acquire a confidence which no insinuations or calumnies can shake. As his course will never be ambiguous, they will not be obliged to be on their guard against every thing which proceeds from him, his words will be received in their natural signification, and if at any time suspicions are raised against him, they will confidently anticipate from him a satisfactory explanation. 2. The proper relation of a pastor to his people is not that of a lord over his subjects. It is no part of his business to interfere directly with their external social relations, to lord it over their private judgments in respect to God and the Divine word, or to hold them in a state of slavish dependence upon himself. A hierarchy is an apostasy from the mind and spirit of the Apostles. These felt that their office was most honored when they became helpers of their people’s joy, extended a helping hand to such as were weak and struggling, and enabled these to walk securely along the way of righeousness. Their object was to render believers more and more capable of using God’s word and grace for themselves, and to become increasingly skilful and zealous in good works. Their official power depended not upon external accompaniments, but upon the amount of assistance and coφperation they could afford to those around them. It was the power of love and a participation in the sufficiency of God. Of such a hierarchy, those who love to have dominion over men’s faith present only a miserable caricature, and an apish device of Satan, who endeavors thus haughtily and violently to recover what our Lord and those who have our Lord’s Spirit have gained by works of humanity and love. Such ministers boast themselves only in that God who establishes them with all true believers in one great fellowship with Christ, calls them and qualifies them for their office, and bestows on them the Spirit which witnesses to their adoption and is an inward pledge of their eternal glory. [3. “The joys of a Christian on earth are of the same nature with the joys of heaven. They are an earnest, a part of that which he is to enjoy forever. There will be no other heaven than that which would be constituted by the expanded joys of a Christian. Of course, he who has not such a character, such principles, and such joys, as, if fairly developed, would constitute heaven, is not a Christian.” Barnes.] [4. “If the inspired Apostles recognized not only their subjection to the word of God, but also the right of the people to judge whether their teachings were in accordance with the supreme standard, it is most evident that no Church authority can make any thing contrary to Scripture obligatory on believers, and that the ultimate right to decide whether ecclesiastical decisions are in accordance with the word of God, rests with the people. In other words, Paul recognizes even in reference to himself the right of private judgment. He allowed any man to pronounce him anathema if he did not preach the Gospel as it had been revealed and authenticated to the Church.” Hodge.] AND Starke, 2 Corinthians 1:12 : Hedinger:—What an excellent pillow for the soul is a good conscience! Well may we seek for it, purify it, and keep it! An indispensable means to this, is never to neglect the duties of our stations.—With a good conscience, simplicity and sincerity are cardinal virtues by which, no less than by faith, all virtuous conduct is ennobled.—He who has the witness of a good conscience, thereby lives continually at the bar of that omniscient Judge, who tries the reins and the heart. (Romans 9:1). Nothing tranquilizes a man under manifold sufferings, like the consciousness that he brought not his troubles on himself; but even when he is conscious of some defects, the grace of God will sustain him if he is engaged in a good cause; and is suffering, not on account of those defects, but for Christ’s sake. 2 Corinthians 1:13. A Christian’s speech should never be ambiguous or distorted (Psalms 25:21; John 1:47).—The great matter is, to be faithful even to the end; but it is a sad thing to be perhaps faithful to-day, and to-morrow to be like salt which has lost its savor (Matthew 5:13), relapsing into entire worldliness (Hebrews 10:38 f.). 2 Corinthians 1:14. Many despise and hate the preacher who is faithful, and yet fancy that they love God, but the time is coming when the preacher will be honored, and they will be put to shame (Luke 19:10)!—Happy is it when the minister and his people have reason for mutual glorying, but alas! when he is obliged to labor in the midst of perpetual sighings (Hebrews 13:17)! 2 Corinthians 1:16. Even when we have the sincerest and best intentions, our whole conduct may be misinterpreted and ascribed to base motives. But go thy way, perverse world; thou shalt yet see and confess the truth, though perhaps too late! 2 Corinthians 1:19. The Church has now many builders; oh, if all would build on the same plan and would hold up the Lord Jesus Christ in the same way! But with some it is yea, and with others it is nay; some pull down what others build up. 2 Corinthians 1:20. Jesus Christ is the seal and the realization of all God’s promises and predictions. In him we have the manifestation of God. 2 Corinthians 1:21. To be called the Lord’s anointed, and yet not have the Lord’s anointing, is to have a name to live while we are dead.—A genuine Christian stands upon a firm footing, and has no reason to doubt, much less to despair, that God will enable him to hold out faithful to the end; for the Holy Spirit which dwells within him, is the pledge of his establishment, anointing and sealing by the Father.—The Holy Spirit is the precious love token which God gives his people that Christ may be glorified in them, and to shed abroad the love of God in their hearts, diffusing in them a peace (Romans 5:5) which assures them of an inheritance of similar blessedness in the world to come. 2 Corinthians 1:23. On important occasions, when the honor of God and the welfare of our neighbor is concerned, we are warranted in taking a solemn oath (Deuteronomy 6:13). 2 Corinthians 1:24. Faith cannot be forced. Fetters and chains are the instruments which antichrist uses for instructing his followers and for ensuring his decisions in the hall of judgment.—Nothing can exceed the joy which true Christians derive from the pledge God gives them of their glorious inheritance by sealing them for it. All true servants of the gospel are helpers of this joy, and never will imagine themselves the people’s lords (1 Peter 3:3).—Those who truly stand in the faith will also withstand the enemy (1 Peter 5:8 f.). But let him that thinketh he standeth, take heed lest he fall (1 Corinthians 10:12; Romans 11:20). Berlenburg Bible, 2 Corinthians 1:12 :—A minister of Christ must look mainly to the approbation of his own conscience, for he will be obliged to live as if he cared nothing for the opinions of worldly men.—All things in this case have a mutual dependence; the simplicity of the dove is united with the prudence of the righteous, and with an understanding so purified from above that it will receive or endure nothing corrupt or incongruous in its nature. The eyes are turned always toward God as He is in Christ, and the whole conduct is regulated by the Divine will. This is walking by faith. In it the believer will not be disposed to get up intrigues, and will have no occasion for doubt or fear. Like charity (1 Corinthians 13:4) he has none of the serpent’s spirit, and he keeps constant hold on God. He walks in the light, and he has no corrupt by ends, for his eye is single. Did we all walk thus we might traverse the world without injury. 2 Corinthians 1:13 ff. No reproof is so severe as the words and the example of consistent Christians. The faithful minister will, therefore, be always in conflict with men. We need never expect to be without some root of bitterness and suspicion. 2 Corinthians 1:17. The distinction between those whom God leads, and those who walk according to their own counsel, may be seen in the steadfastness with which the former keep, and the fickleness with which the latter change, their resolutions. The stability of the Christian depends upon the immutability of that Divine Spirit who leads him, and who will allow of no Yea and Nay in Him. Those who have not that Spirit will be subject continually to change, resolving sometimes upon one thing and sometimes upon another, but constant to nothing. 2 Corinthians 1:19. In Christ and His gospel there are no contradictions. What He is in himself, He will manifest himself to be in us, ever the same. Such will he prove himself to be in all those temptations which we sinners must endure with patience. 2 Corinthians 1:20. God’s promises are all connected with Christ. Those then who heartily lay hold of Christ can easily overcome and make their way through all possible offences. 2 Corinthians 1:21. Our eye should be fixed not so much upon the instruments God uses, as upon the work He accomplishes by them. 2 Corinthians 1:22. By the sealing which God gives us, we become so assured of His promises and of the salvation effected by Christ and revealed in the gospel, that no creature can separate us from Him. 2 Corinthians 1:24. Whoever imposes burdens upon the necks and endeavors to have dominion over the faith and consciences of God’s people, thereby puts himself in the place of Christ and becomes an antichrist. Rieger, 2 Corinthians 1:12-16 :—The reproach of the cross has always something oppressive and crushing to a man. Then those who see him will write upon his cross all manner of superscriptions. But then it is that we may make our boast and stand erect with a right royal and divine spirit. This is not self-exaltation, but in our troubles glorying in the Lord. Such a faith which glories in fellowship with Christ and in His righteousness alone, arms us against the accusations of conscience, and yet so purifies conscience itself that it will allow of nothing which would interrupt our fellowship with a God of light. It will make us diligent to maintain a good conscience along with our faith, that its friendly testimony may be our rejoicing under the unfriendly judgments of men.—The man who faithfully performs the work assigned him by Providence, and never corrupts himself with sinister and selfish views, may be said to act with simplicity and sincerity. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ IV.—MORE OF HIS REASONS FOR NOT THEM; THAT HE MIGHT SPARE THEM AND HIMSELF PAIN. WITH RESPECT TO THOSE WHO HAD CAUSED TROUBLE 2 Corinthians 2:1-111 But I determined this with [for] myself, that I would not come again to you in heaviness [in sorrow come again to you]. 2For if I make you sorry, who is he then that maketh me glad, but the same which is made sorry by me? 3And I wrote this same [om. unto you], lest when I came I should have sorrow from them of whom I ought to rejoice; having confidence in you all, that my joy is the joy of you all. 4For out of much affliction and anguish of heart I wrote unto you with many tears; not that ye should be grieved [have sorrow], but that ye might know the love which I have more abundantly unto you. 5But if any have caused grief [sorrow], he hath not grieved [caused sorrow to] me, but in part, (that I may not overcharge [him]) you all. 6Sufficient to such a man is this punishment, which was inflicted of many. 7So that contrariwise ye ought rather [om. rather] to forgive him and comfort him, 8lest perhaps such a one should be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow. Wherefore I beseech you that ye would confirm your love toward him. 9For to this end also did I 10write, that I might know the proof of you, whether ye be obedient in all things. To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also: for if I forgave any thing, to whom [whatever] I forgave it [om. it], for your sakes forgave I it, in the person [presence] of Christ; 11lest Satan should get an advantage of us: for we are not ignorant of his devices. AND 2 Corinthians 2:1-4. Having given the reason which had prevented his visit to the Corinthians (viz.: that he might spare them, φειδόμενοςὑμῶν, 2 Corinthians 1:23), the Apostle now proceeds to inform them that one reason for thus sparing them was for his own sake.—But I determined this for my own sake.—The δέ indicates simply an advance in the course of the argument. Κρίνειν is here used as it is in 1 Corinthians 2:2; 1 Corinthians 7:37 [in the sense of: to determine, to form a decision]. The meaning of ἐμαυτῷ is not here [as in the Luth. and all the Eng. versions]: with myself, for then the words should have been παῤἐμαυτῷ; but it is rather the dat. commodi: for my own sake; “a thoughtful, affectionate turn of expression” Meyer. Τοῦτο is emphatic and anticipates that which immediately follows, and which is epexegetical or explanatory of it (comp. Romans 14:13 et. al.—That I would not again come to you in sorrow).—The πάλιν belongs to the whole phrase: in sorrow come to you, and not merely to the verb to come independently of the words in sorrow. Critics have been led to this violent removal of the word from its natural connection by their unwillingness to concede that the Apostle had made a second journey to Corinth before writing this Epistle (comp. 2 Corinthians 1:15). Neander: “Paul intended to say that he would not a second time in sorrow come to them. But when had he been with them the first time in sorrow? Such a phrase could hardly be applicable to his first residence at Corinth. We must therefore believe that Paul had been a second time in that city, and that many sad things had then taken place there. We shall be obliged to accept of Bleek’s explanation, that Paul had made one journey to Corinth not only before the Epistle to the Corinthians, which stands first in our canon, but another before writing our Epistle, which must have been actually first written, but which has been lost.” [Comp. what is said of this second visit in the Introd., § 6]. We must also conclude from what follows, in the second verse, “for if I make you sorrowful”—that the sorrow here referred to must have been a sorrow of the Corinthians and not of the Apostle himself nor one shared by both parties. To come in sorrow, then, was to bring with him that which should cause sorrow (comp. Romans 15:29, and ἐνῥάβδωἐλθεῖν, 1 Corinthians 4:21).—Who is he then that maketh me glad but the same who is made sorry by me?—The καί in the beginning of the apodosis or the concluding clause of 2 Corinthians 2:2, is remarkable; and the connection of this sentence with the protasis which precedes it is not easy to be determined. Many have therefore concluded that we have here an aposiopesis, and that the Apostle, led off by his strong emotion, suddenly breaks off from his previous sentence and commences here a new interrogative sentence. The sense then would be: he could not think of giving them pain, for that would be ungrateful and unkind, since he would thus give pain to those who were giving him joy. In such a case, however, the expression ought to have been: καὶτίςὁλυπούμενοςἐξἐμοῦ, εἰμὴὁεὐφραίνωνμε: who is he then that is made sorrowful by me, but the one who makes me glad? We not unfrequently meet with καί before the concluding clause (apodosis) of a conditional proposition in the works of the epic poets, in order to indicate that both transactions mentioned take place at precisely the same time (comp. Passow, sub voce καί, p. 1539 a. [Jelf, § 759, 2]). It might be translated [as in our Eng. vers.], then, and the sense would be: there would be then no one to make me glad, etc. He intends to say that both things could not be at the same time, that he could not be making them sad while they were making him glad. The absurdity of expecting that they would then make him joyful is made still more evident by the phrase, εἰμὴὁλυπούμενοςἐξἐμοῦ: “he must be the very one who is made sad by me.” If I, your spiritual father, make you sorrowful, I thus deprive myself of the joy which you, my children, afford me; and I must be destitute of it entirely, for I cannot expect joy from one who has been saddened by me, The singular ὁλυπόυμενος is rendered necessary not only by the τίς, but by the abstract form in which the matter is put. The reference is not to the case of the incestuous person (1 Corinthians 5:1). Ἐγώ is contrasted with ὑμᾶς, but it is not otherwise emphatic, and contains no allusion to some other persons who might be occasioning them sorrow. The ἐκ in ἐξἐμοῦ indicates the person who was to be the source of sorrow, and the phrase is equivalent to υπ’ ἐμοῦ.—I put in writing this same thing, etc.—In this verse ἕγραψα refers to the first Epistle, and not to the one he was writing (comp. 2 Corinthians 2:4-9). It stands at the commencement of the sentence that it might be emphatic, and it is contrasted with ἐλθών. But is τοῦτοαὐτό equivalent to εἰςτοῦτοαὐτό, as in 2 Peter 1:5, and frequently in the classical authors; or is it the objective accusative to ἕγραψα? The first would be the easier interpretation, but such a construction occurs nowhere else in Paul’s writings (in 2 Corinthians 2:9 it is εἰςτοῦτο). The τοῦτοαὐτο refers to that which forms the theme and object of this section, μὴἐνλύπῃἐλθεῖν (2 Corinthians 2:7), and respecting which he had already written in 1 Corinthians 4:21. (Osiander). The reference to what had been said in 1 Corinthians 4:21 does not seem very properly indicated, even if we suppose that the following censures have reference to the incestuous person. On the other hand it seems very natural for him to make this reference to the censures contained in his first Epistle (especially those in chap. 5), as matters in which they had a painful interest and which might grieve them, and to assure them that he now wished to avoid a repetition of this unpleasant experience when he should be present with them, and that his course in that matter had sprung from the confidence he had in them all. He therefore goes on to remind them of the frame of mind in which, and the object with which, he had then written (2 Corinthians 2:4). Meyer thus explains it: “This matter (so well known to you that I need not particularize it) I have written and not deferred to speak of until I should be present with you, in order that I might not,” etc.—That when I came I should not receive (suffer) sorrow from those who ought to give me joy.—Ἀφὦν is not exactly as if he had written ἀπότούτωνοἶς or ἐφ̓οἶς, but—from those who ought to be the source of my joy. Ἐδει has reference to the relation of a spiritual father which he sustained toward them.—For I had confidence in you all, that my joy was the joy of you all.—In most other places πεποιθώς is followed by an ἐπί with a dative, but here, as in Matthew 27:43, and 2 Thessalonians 3:4, it is followed by an ἐπί with an accusative, indicating that the confidence extended to them and beyond them. The Apostle would thus make them see that he had written the sharp reproofs contained in his first Epistle not from a disposition distrustfully to draw back from them, but with an assured confidence that they were really and in heart so attached to him that his joy would be the joy of them all. He felt assured that they would, after his written admonition, arrange every difficulty which had troubled him, so that there would be no necessity for any oral reproofs which would be as painful to him as to them. His hove rose entirely above those parties which had apparently become so prominent in the Church, and especially above that portion which had turned away from him; and in the spirit “which believeth all things” (1 Corinthians 12:7), he had fastened upon the then latent power of filial affection, which he was satisfied would soon be strong enough to overcome every hinderance in their hearts (comp. Meyer and the admirable remarks of Osiander). Hence the phrases ἐπιπάνταςὑμᾶς and πάντωνὑμῶν [the first expressing his confidence in them, and the latter their confidence in him]. In 2 Corinthians 2:4 he mentions first of all the spirit which had actuated him when he wrote to them:—For I wrote unto you under great tribulation and oppression of heart, with many tears.—Καρδίας is dependent upon both the preceding nouns. Ευνοχή is stronger than θλῖψις, and signifies restriction, oppression, anguish, as in Luke 21:25; and συνέχομαι in Luke 12:50. The greatness of the inward suffering is made still more evident in διὰπολλῶνδακρύων, from which it appears to have broken forth “with many tears.” Neander:—The διά designates the accompanying circumstances (comp. Acts 20:19; Acts 20:31). Stanley:—Ἐκ and δια, “out of the heart, through tears.” The connection with 2 Corinthians 2:3, indicated by the γἀρ, is explained by Meyer and Osiander to be, that the Apostle might present the evidence of the confidence he had reposed in them: for if, in writing that Epistle, I had not had this confidence, the Epistle itself would not have been to me the occasion of so much anxiety and so many tears. It was precisely because he had had this confidence, and yet was under the necessity of writing, that the whole thing was so exceedingly painful; and yet it would probably be simpler to refer the remark primarily to the main sentence in 2 Corinthians 2:3. His object in writing to them was, ἵναμὴἐλθὼνλύπηνἔχω (σχῶ), etc. His great anxiety when he wrote was to be spared this affliction when he should visit them. Among the things which had influenced him when writing thus with so much solicitude, he now proceeds more expressly to mention the love which had already been hinted at in πεποίθώς, etc.—Not that ye might be made sorrowful, but that ye might know, etc.—His object had then been not to make them sorrowful, but rather by writing to them to let them see how deep was his affection for them. There is nothing in this οὑχἴναλυπηθῆτε inconsistent with what is said in 2 Corinthians 7:8 ff., for even there the λυπεῖν is not presented as the final aim of the Apostle, but simply as a means indispensable to their recovery.—The love which I have more abundantly toward you.—Τηνἀγάπην is put at the commencement of the clause that it may be emphatic. Περισσοτέρως is certainly comparative, and yet his love was not compared with his sorrow, as if in consequence of this, or in connection with this, it became proportionably intense, or with his zeal, as if that zeal became more glowing as his love was greater; but his love to the Corinthians was compared with his love to other churches. It was analogous to the special love which parents bear to those children who are objects of peculiar hope and therefore of peculiar care, or who for any reason stand in need of special attention. What he here says of the spirit which had induced him to write to them, does not seem quite applicable to our present Epistle, in which great calmness and perspicuity are predominant. Some have therefore contended that another Epistle must have been meant. Rόckert, however, supposes that “the Apostle had deliberately and prudently put such restraints upon his spirit at that time that his style of writing was no true exhibition of his feelings.” We see no necessity for such an expedient, which seems so inconsistent with the Apostle’s general character, for it is the very spirit of holy love to put restraint upon its own action that the object of its affection may receive no detriment. (Comp. Meyer and Osiander). 2 Corinthians 2:5-11. Digression with respect to the incestuous person. The expressions he had used respecting the λύπῃ, the λυπεῖν and λυπεῖσθαι, naturally led him to speak of the difficulty which had been the occasion of most of his sorrow, and of the severe censures he had been obliged to inflict, i.e., of the incestuous scandal. Neander, on the other hand, asks: “Why was Paul under any necessity of vindicating himself for his anxiety respecting the incestuous person? The matter wears a very different aspect, if we suppose that in the meantime another case had come up, and that some one had made his appearance, who insolently defied Paul’s Apostolical authority, and was likely in this way to produce a division in the Church. Every thing may be naturally explained if we assume that another Epistle had been sent by Titus, in which such a state of affairs had been the topic of discussion.” Ewald concludes from 2 Corinthians 2:5-11; 2 Corinthians 7:2; 2 Corinthians 7:12; 2 Corinthians 3:1; 2 Corinthians 1:13; 2 Corinthians 1:23, that after a brief and unexpected visit of the Apostle at Corinth, some distinguished individual had made use of every circumstance which could be turned to his disadvantage, and that this calumniator had charged him especially with duplicity in his public discourses and with an attempt to acquire notoriety, power and pecuniary profit among the people. [Comp. Introd. § 6]. The spirit of his address is gentle, in consistency with all the previous proceedings in the case, and the conciliatory strain in which he was writing. As a revocation of the extreme penalty was not excluded by what he had said in 1 Corinthians 5:5; 1 Corinthians 5:13, provided the offender should be brought to repentance, the Apostolical authority would not be endangered by his restoration. The fifth verse is connected, not with the third (Olshausen), but with the fourth verse, where he had said that it was not his design to grieve them.—But if any (among you) have caused grief, he hath not grieved me (2 Corinthians 2:5).—Not only is the offence not specifically named, but the terms used to describe it are of the mildest signification, and the εἴτις is purposely made indefinite, though without necessarily implying that the persons were unknown. There is no contradiction with 2 Corinthians 2:4 when he says: he hath not caused sorrow in me, for by those words he means to say, that it had not been merely a personal (ἐμὲ) grief. He wishes it to be regarded as a calamity to the whole congregation. (οὐκ-αλλά therefore is not equivalent to οὐμόνον—ἀλλὰκαί). Hence πάνταςὑμᾶς stands in contrast with ἐμέ. The idea of λελύπηκενπάνταςὑμᾶς is softened still more by the addition of ἀπὸμέρους: partially, to some extent; an allusion to what he afterwards expresses in 2 Corinthians 2:6 by ὑπὸτῶνπλειόνων, viz.: that although some of them had taken part in the public condemnation of the criminals with too little seriousness, they could not, after all, be unaffected by its unhappy results. The clause: that I may not overcharge, has reference only to the having caused grief; and the relative αὐτον (him) must be understood as its object [i.e., but in part (that I may not overcharge him) you all].—This is a fine turn, for he thus says: in so saying I would impose no intolerable burden upon him, as if he were one who had injured you more than ἀπὸμέρονς, in full measure. The word ἐπιβαρεῖν has the sense of: to load, to overburden, as in 1 Thessalonians 2:9; 2 Thessalonians 3:8; Bengel: ne addam onus gravato; not exactly in the sense of: to say too much, or to express himself harshly. Not only because it violently separates the words you all, but on account of the tone of irony or even of keen reproach implied in it, we regard as altogether unsuitable the interpretation which makes the Apostle say: but partially, that I may not throw the burden on all [i.e., may not accuse or grieve you]. Finally, the interpretation which makes the Apostle say: he hath not grieved me (properly speaking, or alone), only in part (for he has grieved you also), that I may not lay upon you all the burden or reproach, as if you were all equally indifferent to the offence; has against it the fact that the ἐμέ which is there so emphatic has no suitable contrast, and it would have been necessary to say: εἰμὴἀπὸμέρους. This last objection would also lie against making the words mean: but by way of general participation, ut membrum ecclesiζ, etc. Neander completes the object of this final sentence thus: “that I may not make the matter too important.” In accordance with the mild expression in 2 Corinthians 2:5, the Apostle explains his views still further in 2 Corinthians 2:6 regarding the proceedings against the offending person.—Sufficient unto such a one [one who has such a spirit as this offender now shows] is this very punishment which has been inflicted by the many (2 Corinthians 2:6).—The ἱκανόν stands at the head of the sentence for the sake of emphasis, and is designed to say that nothing farther was needed by way of punishment. It is used substantively like ἀρκετόν in Matthew 6:34, and means that which is satisfactory. The Catholic interpretation makes it refer to the sufficiently long continuance of the excommunication. Both the context (2 Corinthians 2:5, ἀπὸμέρους, ἵναμὴἐπιβαρῶ and 2 Corinthians 2:7 ff.), and the ἱκανόν lead us to suppose that unlike the same words in 1 Corinthians 5:5, τῷτοιούτῳ is designed to intimate that the offender had begun to exhibit some signs of penitence. Ἐπιτιμία signifies, not threatening, but punishment, and in this place at least it implies that this consisted in very decided censures (Sir 2:10, where it means punishment generally). Αὕτη has reference to something well known to the Corinthians. The πλείονες by whom the punishment had been inflicted could not have been the eldership, but the majority of the Church at Corinth. Probably the action had been the more severe, possibly amounting to a withdrawal of fellowship with the offender, in consideration of the fact that an antipauline minority refused to take part in his punishment. The πλείονων shows that the excommunication could not have been complete (1 Corinthians 5:3 ff.), and so that ἰκανόν could not have referred merely to the time in which that had continued. But it would be utterly inconsistent with the honesty of Paul’s character to suppose with Rόckert and Baur that he was here arresting the proceedings, after they had been commenced, from mere policy, to avoid a rupture with his opponents; and that he was now therefore affecting to be satisfied with the measures which the majority had adopted. The only motive he had for the milder proceeding which he now advises, was simply that which he himself afterwards avowed, viz., that the thorough repentance of the offender had rendered severer measures unnecessary. It would have been altogether unapostolic, not to say unchristian, to drive such a one to despair. The whole object of discipline—that which had been aimed at in the punishment inflicted by the majority—had been attained. (comp. on 1 Corinthians 5 and Osiander and Meyer on our passage). As the result of these proceedings, on the one hand, the large majority had shown their cordial disapproval of the offence, the honor of the Church had been vindicated, and their non-participation in the sin and so their purity had been made evident; and on the other, a penitent spirit had been called forth in the bosom of the sinner himself (comp. 2 Corinthians 2:7). These things constitute a sufficient reason for an entire change of proceeding, viz., for his forgiveness.—So that on the contrary ye ought rather to be kind to him and to comfort him (2 Corinthians 2:7).—The ὤστε here implies that what he was about to say, was the essential and necessary result of the ἵκανόν, and it includes the idea of an obligation on their part. Still there is no necessity of supplying a δεῖν, as if the Apostle would say: it is sufficient to show on the contrary your favor (to him); or: so that ye may show, on the contrary, kindness. [Winer’s Gr. N. T., § 45, 2d note]. Τοὐναντίον refers to ἐπιτιμία, but χαρίσασθαι does not imply exactly to give up or to remit the punishment, for it means properly to show favor or kindness. In the present case, however, this must, by its own nature, have involved a forgiveness of the injury done to the congregation, as the word is often used by Paul sometimes with (ἀδικίαν, 2 Corinthians 12:13; παραπτώματα Colossians 2:13), and sometimes without (Ephesians 4:32 and Colossians 3:13) the mention of the object. Παρακαλέσαι denotes here the friendly intercourse and consolation which would correspond with χαρίσασθαι. This is still further enforced by the Apostle when he points out what would be the consequence if this kind treatment were neglected: lest, perhaps, such a one should be swallowed up with an excess of sorrow.—The περισσοτέραλύπη expresses the greatly increased sorrow which would be the effect of a continuance or an aggravation of the punishment. Of course it is here presumed that a high degree of punishment had already been inflicted, for otherwise all increase of it would not drive the sufferer to despair. It is to this, the renunciation of all hope of salvation and of all efforts to attain eternal life, and so the utter ruin of the man himself, that the swallowing up has reference, and not directly to his apostacy from the faith (being devoured by the Prince of this world), nor to death by his own hands, and still less to his sickness or death. The sorrow is compared to a wild beast (comp. 1 Peter 5:8). By the words: such a one, (ὁτοιοῦτος), he designates the man as an object of sympathy. As the result of the ἱκανὸν—ὥστεχαρίσασσθαιὑμᾶς, and the apprehension he had given as a reason for it, the Apostle now urges his exhortation.—Wherefore I exhort you to make good [substantiate by action] your love toward him (2 Corinthians 2:8).—Κυροῦν (as in Galatians 3:15) signifies to establish in a valid manner and by a formal decision, so that the man might be solemnly restored to the communion of the Church. To suppose that the Apostle was here merely going through the form of approving of a decision which the Church had already made, and which would have been valid without his authority (Rόckert); is not necessarily implied in the language, and would imply a worldly policy, of which we have no reason to think him capable. In 2 Corinthians 2:9 he probably meets a possible or actual objection against the directions contained in his former Epistle, for he there informs his readers what had been his object in writing so severely.—For to this end I also wrote, that I might know the proof of you.—He means to say that his present request or admonition (2 Corinthians 2:8) was not only reasonable, but entirely consistent with what he had before written. In his earlier Epistle his purpose had been to ascertain their δοκιμή, i.e., whether ye are obedient in all things.—It was not, therefore, a main point with him in what he then had aid, to carry his apostolical authority to its utmost limits. Or more simply: inasmuch as the punishment which the majority had imposed was not very severe, I propose that ye should now bring your love to bear upon him, for the whole object of my former Epistle, which was to find out whether you would be true and obedient, has been attained by the punishment which the majority have inflicted. [In these words it is not meant that the direct object of his writing had been simply to put the matter to the test whether they would obey him, any more than when God sends afflictions on men that the entire object is to prove them and to know all that is in their hearts, but simply that his great and final aim was thus virtually accomplished (Billroth)]. The καί belongs not to εἰςτοῦτο (as if he had written καὶγάρ); its object is not to indicate that his aim in his former Epistle was the same with that of his present request, but to suggest a contrast between his writing (ἔγραψα), and what he had arranged (orally) by deputies. The effect of the καὶ is thus to give prominence to ἕγραψα. The whole context also shows that ἕγραψα must have reference to the former and not to the present Epistle. His object was to say that he was anxious to prove whether they would cheerfully comply with his directions in all things, the present mild, as well as the former severer requirements. Εἰςπάντα: in relation to all things, even those rigorous measures which might be somewhat difficult of execution. Δοκιμή here as in Romans 5:4, and Philippians 2:22, means the goodness, or approved quality; i.e. whether they would turn out to be upright Christians, his genuine children in Christ, and obedient to their father in all things (comp. 1 Corinthians 11:2; and Colossians 3:20). [Trench, Synn., 2d Ser. § 24, Ellicott on Philippians 1:10; Philippians 2:22].—Having made this reference to his earlier Epistle, the object of which had now been attained in the course of the recent disciplinary proceedings, the Apostle proceeds (δέ of progress) to a further recommendation of the course implied in κυρῶσαιἀγάπην, by assuring them that he was willing to be united with them in their public act of forgiveness (2 Corinthians 2:10). This idea he expresses at first thus briefly.—Now to whom ye forgive anything, I forgive it also.—κἀγώ (sc. χαρίζομαι). He afterwards, however, strengthens the thought in the causal sentence—for if I have forgiven anything, whatever I forgave for your sakes I forgive it in the presence of Christ, lest, etc.—According to the common interpretation, he confirms the Κἀγώ (χαρίζομαι) by saying that whatever he had forgiven, he had forgiven it entirely on their account. Κεχάρισμαι is, on any interpretation, to be supplied in connection with δἰὑμᾶς. It is not, however, precisely implied that he was induced to do this at their request, for nothing is said of their actual intercession. He wishes in this way to show them that his love was directed to the highest good of the whole congregation. For after every thing necessary to maintain holy order, and the injured honor of the Church had been accomplished, and all necessity for further severity had been removed by the cordial repentance of the offender, his affection for them prompted him to heal the breach which had troubled them by forgiving the sinner, and to recover a member who had been temporarily sundered from them. Thus the confidence of the Church would be raised, and their former love would be revived etc. By the phrase: If I have forgiven anything: he intimates, that in the present instance he leaves it rather doubtful to what extent he had received any injury (2 Corinthians 2:5). He does not say, “if I have anything to forgive,” but simply, “if anything ought to be said in general of my having forgiven any one.” There was no need of repeating the ἐγώ here, for it has been already made sufficiently prominent in the καὶγὰρἐγώ. The addition of ἐνπροσώπῳ suggests a still deeper reason why he had delayed his journey. He had been induced to do so in the presence of Christ; from regard to Him who was the Author of all reconciliation to God, to whom he owed his own forgiveness as a sinner, and who had intrusted to him the duty of preaching reconciliation to men (the διακονίαδικαιοσύνης opp. κατακρίσεως, comp. 2 Corinthians 5:18 ff; 2 Corinthians 3:9; Ephesians 4:32; 1 Timothy 1:15). This is not a solemn affirmation or oath (for Paul nowhere else swore by Christ), but simply a strong assertion of his uprightness. It merely showed how he had either had Christ and Christ’s cause before his mind in this affair, had acted tanquam inspectore Christo or had virtually done all in the name or in the commission of Christ; though if this had been strictly intended he would probably have used the phrase ἐνὀνόματι. In the Sept. the phrase here used is employed as a rendering for μִ ?τְ ?πֵ ?ι, Proverbs 8:30. If we take the words in the sense first given, we have conveyed to some extent, the idea which Meyer and Rόckert find in ὅκεχάρισμαι. They take the words in a passive sense: that which has been forgiven to me (a construction analagous to ὅπεπίστευμαι). We meet with the word in this sense in the classical writers, but in the New Testament, at least in Paul’s writings (Galatians 3:18) and in the Acts (Acts 27:24) it is always used in the active sense. Δἰὑμᾶς would then signify that the pardon which had been bestowed upon him had been for the advantage of the Gentile, and especially the Corinthian Christians, inasmuch as his forgiveness had been the occasion of bringing them to salvation. In this case, when Paul introduced the words ἔνπροσώπῳΧριστοῦ, he wished to remind them not only that Christ was a witness of his forbearance, but that he was himself nothing but a pardoned sinner before God. Εἵτικεχάρισμαι would then be an expression of his humble recollection of the great guilt which continually oppressed him and made him a perpetual suitor for pardon (Meyer). In favor of this general interpretation may be urged the καὶγὰρἐγώ, which certainly creates a difficulty in the way of the ordinary explanation, inasmuch as it seems to lay a special emphasis upon the perf: κεχάρισμαι, rather than upon the ἐγώ, which otherwise seems so prominent. Osiander endeavors to remove this difficulty by suggesting that Paul aims to represent his own act of forgiveness (ἐγώ) as something quite distinct from and independent of that which they were to exercise, and that he here passes from their forgiveness, as one which was then in process and incomplete, to his own, which was complete and already certain (ἐνπροσώπῳΧριστοῦ). But is not this rather a concealment than a removal of the difficulty? Having previously taken it for granted that they were disposed to forgive, and having conceded to them the initiative in the affair, in the full confidence that they continued of the same mind, and in order that their act might be complete having given to them his own authorization and consent (κᾁγώ), what call was there for the following sentence as a reason and confirmation of the same thing (καὶγὰρἐγώ)? Then if we take the clause passively, how can we explain the doubt implied in εἴτικεχάρισμαι, when everywhere else we find Paul expressing himself so confidently as to his own forgiveness? But if Meyer’s interpretation must therefore be regarded as unsatisfactory, we are still less prepared to regard Paul as here referring to some opponents who had denied his forgiveness through Christ. Even if we allow of his explanation of δἰὑμᾶς, and urge nothing further in opposition to ἐνπροσώπῳ on the ground that it is a mode of expression altogether unusual with Paul on such a subject (everywhere else the phrase is ἐνΧριστῷ, or διὰχριστοῦ), we must certainly regard the way in which Meyer endeavors to connect it with ἴναμὴπλεονεκτηθῶμεν (2 Corinthians 2:11) as altogether too artificial. The idea would then be that it had been God’s will that Paul should be pardoned in the presence of Christ [—“God is said to forgive for Christ’s sake, and Christ is said to forgive, but Christ is never represented as the mere witness or spectator of our forgiveness”—Hodge], simply for the sake of the Corinthians, that they might be aroused to resist the wiles of Satan, i.e., that they might not be tempted to act inconsistently with the design of God and of Christ by refusing to pardon the offender, and so overwhelming him with an excess of sorrow (2 Corinthians 2:7). The way in which Rόckert connects this clause (ἵναμὴπλεονεκτ.) with the first half of 2 Corinthians 2:10, i.e., by passing over the whole last part of 2 Corinthians 2:10, is even yet more violent. Osiander has probably hit upon the correct explanation, although the train of thought needs to be more particularly developed, when a slight modification of his view will become indispensable. The Corinthians had no reason to doubt that he would unite with them in their act of forgiveness, for he had already forgiven the man for their sake (the remainder as above). But that he might present in a clearer light the importance of their granting, or of the man’s possessing, this forgiveness, the Apostle adds (2 Corinthians 2:11), lest Satan should get an advantage of us (of you and me)—i.e. lest the great adversary of God’s Church should get an advantage at our expense. Should any person be driven to despair by our long continued severity, not only would they themselves be lost to us and be gained by Satan, but in the Church itself we should be exposed to increased bitterness and alienation on the part of the members, and many would become estranged from an Apostle who seemed inclined to such extreme measures. Neander:—“If the utmost severity should be exercised, it would be used for an occasion for all kinds of evil in the congregation.”—Inasmuch as Paul here speaks throughout not of Divine forgiveness, but only of his own and the Church’s forgiveness; and inasmuch as neither Paul nor the Church could have pardoned an offence like that of incest, Neander has here found an argument for his opinion that some member of the Church had risen up against the Apostle personally (and of course against the whole Church). On this interpretation also the objections which Rόckert and Baur have derived from 2 Corinthians 2:5-10 against the character of Paul and against a belief in miracles sink into insignificance. The necessity of being on their guard against such overreaching arts is pointed out in the brief causal or final sentence—for we are not ignorant of his devices (thoughts, schemes).—The νοήματα of Satan are those thoughts or plots which he directs to the injury of Christ’s cause, to the recovery of those who had been wrested by grace from his grasp (1 Peter 5:8), to the creation of dissensions, etc. [“The personality and agency of the adversary can hardly be recognized in plainer terms than in both these passages.”—Alford.] AND ETHICALIt is a mark of admirable wisdom in one who exercises authority in the Church to be able to distinguish clearly between God’s purposes and Satan’s devices, that he may so proceed as to promote the one and give no advantage to the other. God’s thoughts are thoughts of peace, and their aim is to deliver and to cure the souls of men. But the means by which he seeks to accomplish His benevolent designs seem not unfrequently severe, for His medicines are sometimes very bitter. It is often necessary to be harsh, and to decline all ordinary considerations of delicacy. And yet the severity should not be allowed to exceed the proper limits which love prescribes. If the demands of justice are satisfied, if the honor of God and of His Church have been vindicated, if a sense of sin and true repentance have been awakened, if guilt has been openly confessed, and a desire for forgiveness and restoration has been decidedly expressed, it is time to exercise gentleness and to restore the offender, and to open to him a heart of love and to extend toward him the hand of support. In this way the government and discipline of a congregation is directed to the same end with Christ’s own purposes, and are the means of fulfilling His designs. Satan’s arts, on the other hand, are all with a view to thwart God’s plans of mercy, to unsettle the peace of a Church, to destroy faith, hope and love in the hearts of its members, to turn away as many as possible from the Lord and from His grace, and, in a word, to produce general corruption. Every one gives his aid to these arts, who for any reason, from defective zeal, from selfish convenience, the fear of men, or party spirit, takes so little notice of sins and offences, or resists them with so little earnestness, that full opportunity is given to the diffusion of the corrupting leaven. But quite as great advantage is given to Satan’s schemes, when the proper limit of severity is exceeded, when discipline is carried to an extreme, when no forgiveness is exercised, and in order to maintain apparent firmness and consistency, every offence is rigidly dealt with, without regard to consequences. It is always bad policy to allow any occasion for suspecting that we are selfishly maintaining our own authority by recklessly pressing forward to an extreme. By such means the hearts of many will be embittered or driven to despair, and increased division and irritation will be sure to ensue. Satan, too, will thus accomplish what he most wishes. That which had the semblance of prudence and holy earnestness, turns out to be foolishness and a severity very unlike that of heaven. The result is that God’s plans of mercy are dishonored, and the character and influence of those who pursued such a mistaken policy is seriously impaired. AND Luther, 2 Corinthians 2:7 :—It is much harder to comfort a troubled conscience than to raise the dead.—While, therefore, ministers ought doubtless to reprove and punish with some severity those who have fallen into sin, they ought by all means to comfort and restore those whom they discover to be penitent and anxious to reform; especially when we remember that God spared not His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all, and that His mercy had been made to exceed all our sins, that those who have fallen may not be swallowed up by too much sorrow. Starke, 2 Corinthians 2:1 :—A pastor who has the salvation of his people supremely at heart will be careful to show great indulgence to the weak, to avoid every needless occasion for punishment, and to do nothing likely to produce ill-will or injury to any one, without the prospect of a greater ultimate benefit. Eccles. 20:1; 22:6. 2 Corinthians 2:3. A true minister of Christ rejoices over nothing so much as the spiritual prosperity of his people, and nothing will trouble him more than their spiritual declension. In like manner, an honest and upright hearer may be known, by the joy which his minister feels and the praises which his minister renders to God, on his account, and by the readiness with which he removes by a speedy amendment all occasion of disquietude which he may have given to the heart of his pastor (Hebrews 13:17; Romans 16:19). The real motive for carnal zeal in the infliction of punishment is hatred, and we need not be surprised to find those who possess it, restless in disposition and followed by continual opposition. True spiritual zeal, on the other hand, may be equally earnest, but it will be moved and pervaded by love, it will be always calm, and it will remain loving and beloved unto the end.—Hedinger:—How much sorrow and how many tears Paul gave to the case of one offender! how many hast thou bestowed upon the many wandering and lost ones of thy flock? The Lord have mercy on the poor sheep of such a shepherd! 2 Corinthians 2:7. Unseasonable comfort is like a new piece of cloth upon an old garment (Matthew 9:16), but excessive severity will probably throw the sinner into despair and drive him farther away. Much wisdom is needed to apply both law and Gospel in an appropriate manner.—God alone can forgive sin (Psalms 130:4); the Church can only point out the conditions on which God forgives, administer consolation to the penitent, and absolve those who confess their faults in the presence of such as have been scandalized by their offences. 2 Corinthians 2:8. Hedinger:—The penitent should be received to full public favor, and never afterward upbraided for his offence. Our Lord Himself never broke a bruised reed nor quenched the smoking flax (Isaiah 42:3). 2 Corinthians 2:11. Satan is exceedingly crafty, and watches every opportunity to do an injury (Ephesians 6:11). We should therefore be always forecasting how we may deprive him of every such opportunity (Acts 20:28). Berlenb. Bible, 2 Corinthians 2:1 :—Our absence on certain occasions may be as important as our presence on others. 2 Corinthians 2:4. It ought to touch our hearts to be told: I wrote this unto you with many tears; and we should instantly inquire: Have I really given occasion for this?—We should never hesitate to lay hold of and deliver those who have fallen into error before it is too late, and yet we must not expect that they will readily regard our reproofs as kind and loving acts. 2 Corinthians 2:7. Our love to our neighbor should be like our Lord’s, whose long suffering is our salvation. He can hold the balance so accurately that the sinner is allowed to sink neither into despair nor into false security, 2 Corinthians 2:8. How seldom do we meet with that loving spirit which shrinks not from the fallen, but goes to them, and seeks to save even the lost. Such a one, however, knows how to lay the iron so gently on the wound that the patient bears even a deep incision. Rieger, 2 Corinthians 2:1-2. Suspicion can sometimes enter the heart so deeply, that it can give off a web of dark thoughts for many years. It is better to crush the heads of such serpents as soon as possible.—Many are too tenacious of their own freedom. They follow simply their own convenience and advantage without reference to the consciences or the suspicions of their brethren; while others freely exercise their right of judgment upon everything they see, and when they find nothing to censure in the outward conduct, they fasten upon some trifling thing to be impeached in the inward spirit. Thus the hearts of men are thrown continually further and further apart, and there can be no such thing in life or death as mutual confidence or assistance. Those who are grieved for the affliction of Joseph (Amos 6:6), will feel disposed to save as much as possible the reputation of a servant of Christ whose character is suffering.—Nothing can more cheer us under the trials of our work, than to find that those afflictions which spring from a man’s own or others’ faults, have become the seed of a saving repentance. 2 Corinthians 2:3-4. It is never well when those who watch for souls are compelled to labor in the midst of perpetual sighs and discouragements. On the other hand, when they are cheerful, their joy will be the joy of all, and every plant of grace will be revived.—In the kingdom of Christ truth should never be spoken with a simpering and trifling manner, but an imperious and a lordly style of address is quite as inappropriate. Those discourses, whose object is to reprove others and to bring offenders to repentance, should be the offspring of the preacher’s own sorrow, and be brought forth with much anguish of soul. He must himself know what it is to confess his sins before the Lord with many tears.—Love makes us zealous, and zeal will admonish and reprove our best friends and brethren 2 Corinthians 2:5 ff. Precious fruit of the righteousness revealed in the Gospel! While we justify the condemnation of the sin, we sympathize with, and long to save the sinner! When the conscience of a child of God has been awakened, and his heart has been softened by discipline, he should have not only a gradual restoration of individual love, but an assurance of the common fellowship he once enjoyed.—What a difference there is between dealing with a sin which is concealed, justified or praised, and one which is recognized, confessed, and already put away with godly sorrow. 2 Corinthians 2:11. Satan has always further trials and temptations for those who have no meekness or tenderness of heart. Ministers must continually take precautions against these.—Lord, how many things are done on our account by our enemies, and by Thee as our Advocate, of which we have no conception! Thy faithfulness alone can save us! Heubner, 2 Corinthians 2:1-4 :—Painful as it may be, we are often bound to grieve others, that we may do them good. We must not always be giving sweet meats.—The highest enjoyments of a minister are those which he feels with reference to his people. Between him and them there should be the most intimate communion.—A faithful pastor should have a very tender heart, and he must know what it is to weep in solitude over his people. Such tears have their source in the spirit of God. None but faithful shepherds know what such distress is; for those corruptions which allow him no peace, make the hireling indifferent and cold. 2 Corinthians 2:5. Public scandals are a disgrace which the whole congregation should deeply feel. And yet how little of this public spirit is there in most of our communities. 2 Corinthians 2:6. There is great power when many are united to remove offences. The discipline which needs no outward force is the most effective. 2 Corinthians 2:7. The moment we perceive that an offender has submitted to his punishment, and become penitent, we should change our conduct toward him.—The discipline of the Church should always be directed to the reformation, and not to the mere punishment of the offender. Whatever makes him worse, is opposed to its true object. 2 Corinthians 2:8. The same spirit which once caused sorrow, now comforts. 2 Corinthians 2:9. A genuine Christian spirit may always be known from its readiness to comply with Apostolic direction. 2 Corinthians 2:10. Ministers should never disregard the united voice of their people. Its utterances are a great consolation when they speak forgiveness to those who have fallen. 2 Corinthians 2:11. It is the business of the Wicked One to injure, and, if possible, break up the spiritual association of God’s people (the Church). He therefore tempts them, sometimes, to be slack, but sometimes to be excessively severe in discipline, and thus to drive souls into despair. Force, intolerance and persecution, have been his favorite arts by which to rend and destroy the Church; and unfortunately ecclesiastical history is principally occupied with accounts of them.—The Christian should never forget that this evil spirit knows of no rest, and he should ever be on his guard against Satanic wiles. Those who have been enlightened from above, are not ignorant of these devices, and know well how to thwart such schemes. Only those who are short-sighted and simple will look upon warnings against them as vain fancies, and hence be taken by surprise. W. F. Besser, 2 Corinthians 2:4. A mother’s love will be seen in the most delicate attentions to her invalid child, and no better test of a shepherd’s love can be given than when he hastens with especial earnestness after the sheep which has gone astray. 2 Corinthians 2:10. The rock on which all true comfort is founded, when we are absolved from our offences, is the great truth, that whoever the public minister may be, the absolution is not man’s but God’s. [Here is an example of the difficult duty and right of blame, or of correcting our fellowmen. I. Every one has something of this kind to do. A more than common share of it falls upon ministers and those in public stations, but there are occasions when every one is called to it. Society should not be turned into an arena of distrust, where each one is zealously watching over others’ conduct, nor yet should it be one of cold indifference towards each others’ sufferings and welfare. Where another’s faults are forced upon our attention, it may be our duty to attempt their correction, 1. for the offender’s own sake (2 Corinthians 2:6-8); 2. for society’s sake (2 Corinthians 2:4); and 3. even for our own sake (2 Corinthians 2:1), since we may be misunderstood if we show no interest in the case. II. But much depends upon the way in which it is performed; as, 1. by the right person; 2. at the right time (Paul declined even to be present at one time); 3. by the right means (by a visit or by Epistle); 4. in the right spirit (not from love of censuring, love of dominion, personal pique or jealousy, but from love to the offender and to Christ’s cause.—We have here (2 Corinthians 2:6-11): I. The Christian idea of punishment; When it should be inflicted? 1, when the good of the offender demands it, for even if he has forfeited all rights, he has claims upon our benevolence; 2, when society is threatened with injury, and 3, when a righteous indignation at crime calls for an expression. When it should be dispensed with or remitted? When the ends of punishment are secured, 1, by the private sufferings or repentance of the offender, 2, by his partial punishment, which corrects the offender and vindicates public sentiment. II. The Christian idea of absolution: Man’s declaration of God’s forgiveness—man speaking in God’s stead; 1, its use to save from remorse and despair; 2, its representative character (2 Corinthians 2:10). After Robertson and Lisco]. Footnotes: 2 Corinthians 2:1.—The arrangement of the words, should be, according to the best MSS.: ἐνλύπῃἐλθεῖν. The Rec. on less [Meyer: “almost no”] authority has ἐλθεῖνἐνλύπῃ. The best authorities also put πρὸςὑμᾶς before ἐλθεῖν. Tisch. still adheres to: ἐνλύπῃἐλθεῖνπρὸςὑμᾶς, and he is sustained by D. E. F. G. the Ital. Vulg. Syr. and Goth. vss., Chrys. and Theophyl. and most of the Lat. fathers. Nearly every recent critic has adopted the order: ἐνλύπηἐλθεῖνπρὸςὑμᾶς. [There appears to be no sufficient reason why λύπη and λυπεῖν should not be rendered into English uniformly by the same generic words, as is contended for by Stanley (p. XXI.) and the editors of the Bible Union. In the eight times in which those words occur in our section, our A. V. has the different English words “in heaviness,” “sorrow,” grief, etc.] 2 Corinthians 2:2.—The best authorities have no ἐστιν after τίς. It was added by a later hand. [Only Bloomfield, among later critics defends it both on documentary and internal evidence. He contends that the idiom and the interrogative use of καὶ demands a verb or its equivalent.] 2 Corinthians 2:3.—The best authorities have also cancelled ὑμῖν after ἔγραψα [but Bloomfield defends it as less likely to have been interpolated where it is found, than to have fallen out where it is wanting.] 2 Corinthians 2:7.—In the best MSS. μᾶλλον is wanting, and in others it stands after ὑμᾶς. It is a gloss upon τοὐναντίον. [And yet it is found in C. K. L. and Sinait. the Vulg. the Peschito Syr. Chrys. Theodt. Damasc. Theophyl. Oecum. and other MSS.; and it is inserted by Tisch., Stanley, and Meyer. The latter thinks it was omitted on account of its apparent superfluity.] 2 Corinthians 2:9.—Lachmann following A. B. has ἧ instead of εἰ. The εἰ might easily have fallen out before εἰς (both are wanting in one MS. [of the 11th cent.]) and was then supplied in various ways. (One MS. [also of the 11th cent.] has ὡς.) 2 Corinthians 2:10.—The best authorities have ὁκεχάρισμαι, εἴτικεχάρισμαι. Rec. has εἴτικεχάρισμαι, ᾧκεχάρισμαι. Meyer thinks that εἴτικεχάρ. was left out on account of the occurrence of κεχάρ. twice (in several MSS. it is found wanting), and then that it was reinserted in different positions. [Although our author’s construction of λύπη actively (:causing grief) is sanctioned by a number of ancient (especially Chrysostom) and modern critics, it is certainly not the natural meaning of the word, and is utterly inappropriate in the remainder of this section, and in other parts of Paul’s writings. We much prefer that of the majority of interpreters, which makes the sense of 2 Corinthians 2:2-3 to be: “I determined not to come to you again in sorrow; and therefore I refrained from visiting you at a time in which I should have been obliged to inflict on you a chastisement which would have been painful to me. I therefore then wrote an admonition to you. that ye might correct the evil, and that when I should actually come to you I might have joy in you. In this way, though my letter caused some sorrow, it was like the process of healing which finally gives joy to both patient and physician, and did not subject me to a personal intercourse of sorrow. For ye are the only sources of my joy when I come in person to Corinth, and if ye are thrown into permanent sorrow, who will there be to give me any satisfaction ? See our interpretation further defended in Hodge’s Com.]. [To understand the author’s criticisms we need to have the several ways in which this passage has been punctuated and rendered distinctly before us. All that are important may be reduced to three: 1. That of Chrysostom, and advocated generally, especially by de Wette, Meyer, Osiander, Bloomfield, Neander, Alford, Stanley and Hodge, viz.: Είδέτιςλελύπ., οὐκἐμἐλελύπ., ἀλλὰἀπὸμέρους (ἵναμὴἐπιβαρῶ) πάνταςὑμᾶς, i.e., If any have caused grief, he hath grieved not me, but more or less (that I be not too heavy on him) all of you. Theophylact says: the Apostle skilfully brings them all in as partakers of the injury, that he may have them partakers in the absolution.” 2. That of Theodoret, the Vulgate, Luther’s translation, and the A. V., and advocated by Bengel and Wordsworth, viz.: ἀλλ’ ἀπὸμέρους, (ἵναμὴἐπιβαρῶπάνταςὑμᾶς), i.e., He hath not grieved me, (i. e., not so much me personally), but in part, (i.e., only as a part of the whole Church, and hence on account of the share I have in your griefs), that I may not lay the load of guilt on all of you. 3. That of Mosheim, Olshausen, Billroth and Conybeare, viz.: ἀλλ’ ἀπὸμέρους (ἵναμὴἐπιβαρῶπάντας) ὑμᾶς, i.e., he hath not grieved me, but in part (that I may not accuse all) you. Billroth: “Whether he has caused grief to me is not a matter for present consideration: it is not I that must suffer for him, but you, at least a part of you, for I will not be unjust and charge you all with having been indifferent concerning his offence.”] [Paul, in this case, assumes that man had been sinned against by this offender, and so man might forgive for this offence. He denies that he alone would either feel aggrieved (ἀπὸμέρόυς) or grant pardon. He refuses to absolve the man until the Church nad acted. He was ready, however, to forgive any one (ᾦ) or any thing (ὅ the better reading), when the Church had forgiven. If they had forgiven (and he speaks of this as if it were past, χαρίζεσθε, open perf.), he had done so (and for their sakes), if they had not forgiven, he had not (he makes his action hypothetical on theirs, εἴτικεχάρισμαι, Hodge), and yet he seems to regard his action as equally indispensable to the completeness of theirs. If ἐνπροζώπῳχριςτοῦ be translated “in the name,” or “by the authority of Christ,” the Apostle acted as Christ’s representative; but if, as is more likely, it means “in Christ’s presence, as if Christ were looking on” (Stanley). Paul assumes that he was acting for the Church and himself, so far as each had been sinned against. From this we get the Apostle’s true idea of absolution. First, there was repentance and Divine forgiveness, then confession in some way so as to satisfy the congregation, and finally, the forgiveness and formal announcement (absolution) on the part of the Church or its representatives. Nothing is said of “ecclesiastical satisfactions” in the Roman sense. Comp. W. F. Besser, Bibelstunden; and F. W. Robertson, Ser. V., 3d series, Lect. 37th, 4th series.] V. AN OF HIS FORMER ANXIETY THEM (2 Corinthians 2:12 f.), BUT OF HIS JOYFUL OF MIND WHEN HE HEARD FROM THEM BY TITUS, 2 Corinthians 2:14 ff. 2 Corinthians 2:12-1712 Furthermore when I came to Troas [the Troad] to preach Christ’s gospel, and a door was opened to me of [in] the Lord, 13I had no rest in my spirit because I found not Titus my brother; but taking my leave of them, I went from them into Macedonia. 14Now [But] thanks be unto God, which always causeth us to triumph in Christ, and maketh manifest the savour of his knowledge by us in every place. 15For we are unto God a sweet savour of Christ, in them that are saved and in them that perish: 16To the one we are the savour of death unto death; and to the other the savour of3 life unto life. And who is sufficient for these things? 17For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God; but as of sincerity, but as of God, as in the sight of God speak we in Christ. AND 2 Corinthians 2:12-13. The Apostle’s anxiety for intelligence from Corinth.—But having come to the Troad to preach Christ’s Gospel.—The δέ implies that the former subject is here resumed after the digression. (2 Corinthians 2:5-11). That which follows is not to be connected with 2 Corinthians 2:11 (οὐγάρ—ἀγνοοῦμεν) so as to make δὲ equivalent to ἀλλά, for that would not correspond with the tenor of the discourse. Nor is it to be referred back to 2 Corinthians 1:16, nor to 2 Corinthians 1:23, but to 2 Corinthians 2:4. In this latter passage he had spoken of the anguish with which he had written his first Epistle, and he here says that when he was going from Ephesus to Macedonia he could not throw off his anxiety for the Corinthians. [He had not intended to make a direct journey to Corinth, but to make a missionary tour in the interest of Christ’s Gospel (εἰςτὸεὐαγ.τ. Χριστοῦ), Tyndale: for Christ’s Gospel’s sake]. Though he had doubtless intended to preach the Gospel at Troas, he now lost the opportunity on account of his solicitude for the Corinthians.—[The Troad was the region of the country, of which Troas was the principal city. The article, which was generally used in the New Testament with names of countries (Jelf. § 450 5), Stanley thinks may possibly indicate that only the country of the Troad was meant here. It can hardly be possible that Paul did not visit the city. The same expression (εἰςτὴνΤρωάδα) is used in Acts 20:6. Paul had been there once before (Acts 16:8), and he was there a longer time on his return from Greece to Jerusalem (Acts 20:6-13), and once after the close of the Apostolic history, (2 Timothy 4:13). It was the usual port at which those passing from Greece to Asia landed. A church must have been established there at least on Paul’s second visit, [comp. the word ἀποταξάμενος with Acts 20:6 ff.)]. He had tarried there with the express design of preaching the Gospel of salvation. Τοῦχριστοῦ is the genitive of the object: Neander: “the Gospel which proceeded from Christ.” He intends to say that with such a design he would have felt bound to remain for some time, inasmuch as he found there a fair prospect of an unusual success in his work.—And a door was opened to me in the Lord.—(comp. 1 Corinthians 16:9). The καί also is equivalent to καίπερ. Ἐνκυρίῳ has the same meaning as Χριστῷ, and it is added to define more particularly, the sphere or element of activity for which an occasion had then been presented; the department in which a door had been opened for him, and not the Agent by whose power the door had been opened.—I had no rest in my spirit when I found not Titus my brother.—Ἔσχηκα is used here, as in 2 Corinthians 1:9, and frequently in an aoristic sense (Meyer: as was the frequent practice of the Greek orators in order to bring the past before the mind with greater vividness). Ἄνεσις (used also in 2 Corinthians 7:5; 2 Corinthians 8:13) means properly relaxation or relief, and it is here contrasted with the intense strain which had been put upon his feelings, by his solicitude on their account. He could not perform his ordinary duties as in other places, until this anxiety should be removed. The meaning of to τῷπνεύματι in this connection is: for my mind. (dat. comm.). The expression is more suggestive than τῇψυχῇμου would have been. (comp. Beck, Seelenl. p. 45). The Apostle means to say that it was “one of those violent assaults upon his vital energies which come upon us in certain states of the mind and body when we have been acted upon for a long time by terrors and a want of rest, etc.—those powerful agitations which affect the very seat of life.” In τῷμὴεὑρεῖνκ. τ. λ. he gives the reason for οὑκἕσχηκαἄνεσιν. [Winer, Gr. § 45, 5. He had expected to meet at Troas, or at least in Macedonia, his assistant Titus, to let him know what effect his first Epistle had produced at Corinth. Not finding Titus, his anxiety was so great that he could remain there no longer, but he hastened to Macedonia, where we know Titus soon met him (2 Corinthians 7:6 ff.)—But taking leave of them I went forth into Macedonia.—Ἀποτάσσεσθαιτινι is an Alexandrian form of expression for ἀσπάζεσθαι, and occurs also in Luke 9:61, and Acts 17:18-21. It signifies to separate one’s self, to take leave of some one. [The expression is peculiar, however, since it is taken from the effort usually made by those taking their departure, to put every thing in order, and to give their last directions. (Osiander)]. Αὐτοῖς has reference to the people, and especially to believers in Troas.Vers.14–17. [“All that follows, until the writer returns to his historical statement in 2 Corinthians 7:5, is on the subject of the Christian or rather Apostolical ministry as exemplified in Paul’s special relations to the Corinthian Church. This apparent digression is really the main topic of the Epistle. It was the Apostle’s object to set forth and maintain the importance of his office and work and his personal claim to spiritual authority. This object is kept in view throughout, and after the instructions in matters of business which follow the recurrence of the mention of Titus (2 Corinthians 7:5), it is continuously and openly pursued to the end of the Epistle.” Webster and Wilkinson.].—But thanks be unto God, who always causes us to triumph in Christ.—By a sudden transition the Apostle now turns aside to render thanks to God, not for the results of his visit at Troas, where he could not have remained long enough to accomplish any thing worthy of being thus mentioned; but either for the accounts brought from Corinth by Titus, of which he makes no express mention until 2 Corinthians 7:6; or for the blessing upon his Apostolic labors during his journey, especially in Macedonia (Osiander). The context rather favors the first of these, since thanks seem quite appropriate after his liberation from the distress and uneasiness of which he had given such a picture (Meyer). That he makes no direct mention of this, and expresses himself only in general terms, is accounted for by the fact that he was anxious to make no unpleasant impression by a more obvious allusion to the state of things at Corinth at this point of his discourse. The view which seems best to correspond with both the context and the form of expression, would seem to be, that he had been much delighted with the good account from Corinth, to which he had slightly alluded in 2 Corinthians 2:6 (ἐπιτιμίαἡὑπὸτῶνπλειόνων), and he now pours forth his thanks for the triumph of which he always and everywhere was a partaker. The favorable turn of affairs at Corinth and the accomplishment of his main objects there were of course involved in the πάντοτε and the ἐνπαντὶτόπῳ, but they are so concealed in the general expression that nothing offensive would be noticed in his triumphal exultation. It is questionable whether θριαμβεύοντι is to be taken according to the usage of the word in other places (also in Colossians 2:15), in the sense of triumphat (de nobis), or according to the analogy of βασιλεύειν, 1 Samuel 8:22; μαθητεύειν, Matthew 28:19, and some other words, in the transitive sense of triumphare facit. As the result of the first method, Meyer presents the idea of the passage thus: who never ceases to exhibit us (the Apostolic teachers) in all the world as those whom He has overcome. God had overcome them in their conversion, and He was continually triumphing in the results which they as His servants were accomplishing in His kingdom, and especially in the happy results of his first Epistle at Corinth. With Paul, such an idea would naturally be expressed when he remembered with sorrow his earlier persecution of the Church, and it would accord with his humble desire to give God the honor of all that he had done. Although this explanation is rather artificial, it has better ground for itself than others, which represent this leading about in triumph as fulfilled when they journeyed from place to place according to the good pleasure and will of God (Wetstein); or as a triumphal exhibition of them, not as conquered persons, but as servants taking part in God’s triumph; or as a Divine triumph over Paul by showing the folly of all his cares and anxieties when all things came to a fortunate result; or as a leading him about in triumph in the persecutions he was made to endure. On the whole we feel compelled to decide in favor of the transitive signification of the word, which makes Paul a leader appointed by God to struggle in the spiritual conflict, and by the success of his preaching and the confusion of all his opponents making him a uniform conqueror before the world. (Comp. Osiander). ἘντῷΧριστῷ defines the sphere in which the victory and the triumph takes place. This is Christ, in whose service they are employed and whose Gospel they preached with such triumphant success. What is here intended by θριαμβεύειν will be made more evident under the figure of the succeeding metaphor:—and maketh manifest the savour of His knowledge by us in every place.—In this sentence αὐτοῦ has reference, not to God, as has sometimes been concluded on account of 2 Corinthians 5:5, but to Christ on account of ἐντῷΧριστῷ and ἐυωδίαΧριστοῦ in 2 Corinthians 2:15. This knowledge of Christ is set forth under the figure of an odor which God diffused in every place by the ministry of the Apostles. Such a figure well illustrates the pungent nature of this knowledge, the facility with which it is usually diffused, and perhaps also the refreshment it affords. Neander: “ὀσμή signifies any thing which has a pungent odor, an essence; it may correspond with the later Jewish ρַ ?ν which is just as applicable to a refreshing aromatic essence as to a fatal poison.” It is hardly probable that the Apostle was led to use this figure by the idea of a triumph in which the air was filled sometimes with the fragrance of incense (Meyer, comp. Osiander). Still less did he intend to remind us of the custom of anointing with oil. Even the idea of the fragrance given forth in the sacrifices seems inappropriate, since God himself is represented as active in diffusing it (φανεροῦντι). As an illustration of an internal experience the figure of an odor would seem no more appropriate than something presented to the sight. Τῆςγνώσεως is in apposition with τῆςὀσμῆς. Ἔνπαντὶτόπῳ corresponds with πάντοτε. God is evidently the one who “always caused him and his fellow-laborers to triumph in Christ, and made manifest the savor of his knowledge by them in every place,” for Paul represents them as the instruments by which God acted (δἰἡμῶν), and the promulgators of this knowledge. He also describes them as acceptable to God, and so not to be depreciated, though the result of their labors was sometimes the reverse of what they aimed at. This acceptableness in God’s sight is expressed in the words—For we are unto God a sweet savour of Christ—in which the figure of a sacrifice (Ephesians 5:2; Philippians 4:18; Leviticus 1:9-17) probably begins to be discernible. Those who possess and diffuse the knowledge of Christ are a sweet savor unto God, not because they are properly prepared or offered to God, but because they are themselves filled by Him and made to diffuse the savor of Christ. For the sake of emphasis Christ is mentioned first, and is represented as the substance of the sacrifice, i. e., a service consecrated to God and pleasing in His sight. Bengel says: “The savor of Christ is made to pervade us as that of aromatics pervade garments.”—In them that are saved and in them that perish, introduces the sphere in which they were moving or the object of their preaching. The correlatives of σωζόμενοι and ἀπολλύμενοι (comp. on 1 Corinthians 1:18) are πιστεύοντες and ἄπιστοι. The whole idea became more impressive by this reference to the final destiny of each, when the redeemed shall be saved and the lost shall be cast away. He speaks further of the effect of this ὀσμή upon both these classes in 2 Corinthians 2:16. He there commences with those last mentioned.—To the one indeed we are an odour arising from death and tending to death.—(οἶςμὲν—οἶςσὲ, are equivalent to what was in the later usage τοῖςμὲν—τοῖςδέ). The point at which the influence commences, or the source from which it springs, is indicated by ἐκ, and the end toward which it tends, or the effect produced by it, is pointed out by εἰς. It begins in death and must lead to and terminate in death. In like manner the expression—to the other we are the odor arising from life and tending to life.—In the words from death and from life, we have death (θάνατος) and life (ζωή) set forth as the principle or power in which corruption or salvation has its origin, and in the words unto death and unto life (εἰςθάνατον, εἰςζωήν) we have the corresponding result which each of these powers produces. But neither in ἐκθανάτου nor in ἐκζωὴς is it exactly intended that Christ is in such a sense the efficient agent, that in ἐκθανάτου He is the direct source of death (Meyer). The idea rather is, that those who presented Christ, or made known His Gospel to their fellow-men, are to one class like those who convey an odor which is deadly in its origin and deadly in its result. The meaning is thus the same with that conveyed by the words, the savor of death and the savor of life (ὀσμῆθανάτου—ζωής), in the Rec., where both genitives should be taken as genitives of quality. This contrast between the fatal and quickening effects of preaching has an analogy in the physical world. So far as relates to the lost, the result is accidental, i. e., it is not caused by anything in the Gospel itself, but must be ascribed to the peculiar spirit of those who hear it. [“We convey to all the sweet odor of Christ, though all who participate in it do not attain salvation. Thus the light is noxious to diseased eyes, and yet it is not the sun which produces the injury. It is said that vultures avoid the fragrance of myrrh, and yet the myrrh is no less myrrh for being shunned by vultures. Even so the preaching of salvation tends to save those who believe, though it brings perdition to such as believe not.”—Theodoret]. Where the word is pressed upon an unsusceptible and perverse heart, it provokes opposition to the truth, just as in other cases it brings into activity whatever is susceptible of Divine life and engenders faith (comp. Matthew 21:42 ff.; Luke 2:34; Job 9:39). The same figure has been used by the Rabbins for illustrating the different effects of the law. This strong contrast between the different effects of evangelical preaching suggests to the Apostle’s mind the various dispositions of those who proclaim the Gospel. No one can produce such an influence upon these two classes of hearers and be acceptable to God whatever may be the result of his preaching, unless he proclaims the Gospel in a right manner and with a right spirit. This idea he introduces in a sudden and striking manner (και) by a question—And who is sufficient for these things?—In this sentence πρὸςταῦτα is put first because it is emphatic. He meant to say, that among those who acted as teachers, all were by no means sufficiently qualified for such a part, for he was obliged to place himself and his companions, who honestly presented God’s truth, in strong contrast with the many who presented it in an adulterated form. The answer to the Apostle’s question is in 2 Corinthians 2:17, and is presupposed in the γάρ. Such are not the ones who adulterate God’s word, but they are myself and those who are like me.—For we are not like the many who adulterate God’s word.—οἱπολλοί does not mean the majority of all teachers of the Gospel, for this would either exhibit the Apostolic Church in a very unfavorable light, or (with Rόckert) would make Paul guilty of a passionate extravagance. The article is demonstrative, and is intended to point to those who were well known. Those Judaizing teachers are meant who had set themselves up against Paul, and whose number must have been considerable at Corinth (comp. 2 Corinthians 11:13; Philippians 3:18). With respect to the reading λοιποί, comp. Osiander, who regards it as more feebly sustained by documentary evidence but as easier to explain, inasmuch as it simply designates a number of persons to whom the Apostle wished to be considered an exception; and he explains οἱπολλοί by saying that Paul had set up a very high standard for the purity of Christian doctrine. The participal sentence commencing with καπηλεύοντες should be connected, not with οἱπολλοί, although the character of these is indirectly given in it, but with ἐσμέν. The word designates the business of a κάπηλος, a huckster or a trader, but especially of a wine merchant; and it was used with an accusative to signify one who traded by retail or in small articles (more particularly to obtain a living). In accordance with the usual habits of such people, the word finally attained the meaning of practising usury or bartering with anything (as with σοφίαν, μαθήματα). It therefore signifies here—to deal dishonorably and deceitfully with the word of God, adulterating it by mingling together men’s opinions with the Divine word (Chrysostom), [probably with the additional thought of making a trade of the Gospel from mercenary and corrupt motives], as the κάπηλοι were accustomed to mingle water with their wine (com. Isaiah 1:22). It is implied that the Gospel had been vilified and adulterated by being mingled with Judaistic opinions, and that too with the sordid design of obtaining some personal profit, applause or authority (comp. Romans 16:17 f.; Philippians 3:19; Galatians 6:12 f.; 2 Peter 2:1-13). [Comp. Adam Clarke and also Bentley and Trench, Synn. 2d ser. pp. 52 ff.]. In contrast with such impure motives the Apostle says—but as of (from) sincerity, but as of (from) God we speak before God in Christ.—Our discourse is such as might be expected from men who speak from pure motives and under Divine inspiration, i.e., moved by God and inspired by His Spirit [Trench, Synn. 2d ser. p. 72 ff.]. Ὡς is here used as in John 1:14, to express conformity. The repetition of ἀλλ’ ὡς forms a powerful climax (comp. 1 Corinthians 6:11). He rises, from the hearty sincerity which is in strong contrast with all corrupt and selfish aims, to the Divine Source of Christian truth, with which no mingling of selfish or human elements was conceivable (comp. Osiander). The holy awe which those feel who act under the recollection that God judges and knows all things, and under a consciousness of the Divine presence, is pointed out in the phrase κατέναντιθεοῦ. The words ἐνΧριστῷ denote the element in which the discourse of such a one is supposed to move. Comp. 2 Corinthians 12:19. Neander:—“Probably the Apostle intended also to imply by this phrase that he held himself entirely aloof from everything which did not come from Christ.” AND ETHICALThe word of God, not only in the individual heart (Hebrews 4:12-13), but in the world, exerts a separating and judicial power. Its influence upon different individuals is not unfrequently very different—for while it enlightens and warms some, gives them a clear, tranquilizing and sanctifying knowledge of divine things, and raises them to a life of true light and love, it blinds and hardens others; just as the sun’s light warms, makes fruitful, and quickens some things, while it blinds and destroys others. This decisive influence which must always accompany the full revelation of God in Christ, may be preceded by many divine announcements and influences, whether internally through the conscience, or externally by means of natural objects, or striking providences; but among those who enjoy a special revelation, it is principally through the presentation of the law and promises of God with all those influences of the Divine Word and dealings, which are usually so administered as to aid and bless, or punish and discipline the children of men. It is by such means that men become more or less receptive of God’s word, and it is by the Gospel, by the presentation of the highest truths of revelation, that this susceptibility for good, or evil will be most rapidly brought to perfection; since Under its power they will speedily surrender themselves to the truth, or they will soon reject that truth and revile the way of salvation. This, however, can be the result only when the truth is presented properly, and in its purity. 1. It must come from a heart thoroughly pervaded by Christ himself, honestly directed to the glory of God, and regardless of personal and temporal advantages. 2. It should hold forth God’s word and nothing but God’s word, mingled with no human speculations. God will recognize as his own, only what flows from a heart which is pure and filled with Christ. But this will always and everywhere be attended with glorious results. Its preachers will soon show that they are the organs of a divine power which can penetrate through all obstacles, and that their proclamations of Christ’s truth and their spirit are acceptable to God, whether those who hear them are saved or lost. But when those who speak are not upright, if they mix up with divine revelations the doctrines and opinions of men, and if they are governed by every kind of selfish and inconsistent ends, the proper influence of the Word will be hindered and enfeebled; men will be undecided and half-hearted; there will be no evidence that God is at work and of course no Divine victories, and old things will not pass away; or, things will sink down into a stupid and lukewarm state, in which none will be disturbed in their spiritual slumbers, or learn with any distinctness the true state and wants of their souls; real peace will be unknown, and no firm support will be found for human confidence. In such a state, men will make all kinds of efforts to satisfy themselves with dead works, and will fondly seek support in the authority of their fellow men. Nothing could be more opposed than such a state of things is, to that manly maturity which is to be found in Christ (Ephesians 4:13), and that establishment of the heart which true grace affords (Hebrews 13:9); and it will not be difficult therefore to distinguish between those who are Christ’s true shepherds, and those who are miserable hirelings. [“In this statement of St. Paul, we have an inspired declaration of the freedom of the human will. As Jerome says (ad Hedib. iv. p. 183): ‘The name of Christ is ever fragrant; but men are left to their own freedom of will.’ So Christ himself was set for the fall of some and for the rising up of others in Israel. Indeed it is a solemn truth that in the Christian scheme nothing that God has done, is indifferent. Everything is as a two-edged sword. All Christian privileges, and all the means of grace are according as they are used, either blessings or banes, either physic or poison. Comp. August. Serm. 4, and Serm. 273.” Wordsworth.] AND Starke:2 Corinthians 2:12. None but those who are Christ’s, who have been anointed by Him and have fellowship with Him, know what it is to have doors opened to them in the Lord and by the Lord. 2 Corinthians 2:13. When the Church is suffering some great affliction, we should each one in our proper place, cheerfully give her our utmost aid, that Satan may not overthrow in a few days what has been built up with the toil of years. 2 Corinthians 2:14. It is the mark of a true minister to labor faithfully and with all his might and soul, and then ascribe nothing to himself but everything to God (1 Corinthians 15:10). It is one of the mysteries of the cross and of Christ’s kingdom, that those who preach the gospel may have never so much opposition, and yet may always be sure of final triumph. 2 Corinthians 2:15-16 : Hedinger: We are a sweet savor of Christ, though our preaching results only in the perdition of our hearers. True, if none are converted to Christ, they must be perverted to Satan; yet such is the natural effect of God’s word; for if the wicked are hardened and the blind become yet more blind, it is God’s righteous judgment upon their own wickedness (Isaiah 6:9-10). Spener:—When the world is displeased with the word, and those who will not become sincere Christians become worse, and become more opposed to the truth, we may be sure that the word preached is genuine, and like that which the Apostles preached: for men feel its power, and are obliged to receive a fragrance which they abhor. But when wicked men like to hear and praise our sermons, when everything is dull and no one grows in grace under our ministry, it is a sign that what-ever savor we have had has lost its power. The gospel may not convert all who hear it, but it will produce excitement—and wicked men will proportionably hate it. 2 Corinthians 2:17. Hedinger:—Take care that you do not corrupt God’s word! Even those who hear, must attend to this. How many thousand streams are daily flowing to refresh and sustain those who are secure in their own vain fancies and in the way of the world. Maxims to keep alive the old Adam are in every one’s mouth. Alas! that so many must repent only when it is too late (1 Peter 4:11). Four things at least should ever be on the heart of the true minister: that he speaks, 1, in all purity, with respect to his motives, his doctrine and his manner; 2, as from God, as if anointed and born of God; 3, as in the presence of God, with all reverence and zeal, feeling that God is always present and is the greatest of all his hearers; and 4, as in Christ. Berlenb. Bible, 2 Corinthians 2:14 :—He must be a happy man, with whom everything, even the greatest perils, work for him only a perpetual triumph. Whenever truth and falsehood are most exposed, Christianity has its greatest triumphs; and this usually takes place when she is most severely afflicted. All Christians should diffuse around them wherever they go the fragrance of divine knowledge—and if they are the Lord’s anointed, how can they fail to do so? 2 Corinthians 2:15-16. The sweetest words of the Gospel become a savor of death unto death to those who resist the Holy Ghost. Such will have it so; they lay hold on death, and cast eternal life away. If this powerful odor of divine knowledge had not been diffused around them and arrested general attention, they had not had sin; but now they have no one but themselves to blame, for they have only the due reward of their own doings. Not every one who intellectually possesses the truth and has the form of knowledge (Romans 2:20), is prepared to present it profitably to his fellowmen; but only he who has himself put on the Lord Jesus Christ, is familiar with the mysterious cross of self-subjugation, and has obeyed the form of doctrine he has received. The spirit of God alone can prepare us for doing His work. 2 Corinthians 2:17.—True repentance, death, and pure truth will seem but trifling matters to hypocritical teachers; a good conscience, repentance, and a knowledge of Jesus Christ may fare as they may, if such men can only retain a hold upon the world’s favor, and have Christ in peace without his cross and with their pleasures. Those who handle God’s word should themselves be holy. Rieger: 2 Corinthians 2:12-14. Even afflictions are sweetened when we are enabled by them to promote the cause of Christ and share in his victories. When God opens such doors for the preaching of the Gospel that all its adversaries are ashamed, and we present such evidence that we have the truth that it sets men free and awakens them to activity, reflection and admiration, it should be looked upon as a triumph to the cause of Christ. Such results commonly take place especially in the place where the word is preached, but sometimes the odor of them extends to a distance, and induces multitudes to inquire after Christ. 2 Corinthians 2:15-16.—Our Lord sometimes allows his beloved ones to know that he is about to use them, more especially as the light of the world and the salt of the earth. The Apostle therefore could say that the whole work and calling of himself and his companions, had an influence upon every department of society, and was an honor and a pleasure to God himself. But it was according to the way in which men met the proposals of the Gospel, that it became to them at every step an omen of either salvation or perdition. Those who heard that the way to glory must be through suffering, might assume such an attitude toward it that it might seem to them worse than death—and hence, they might foolishly remain under death. But where the Gospel meets with no such opposition it tends only to life. The very first inclination toward the truth is produced by this savor unto life, and from that moment the course is from life to life, and from one degree of power to another. Heubner:2 Corinthians 2:12. The Lord only has the key to the heart, and if he does not open it we may rattle around it as we please, it will remain closed against us. 2 Corinthians 2:14. The triumphs of the Gospel are unlike every other (Psalms 84:7-8), for in them both victor and vanquished rejoice together. When the Apostles preached, the whole infected atmosphere of this world was purified by a balmy fragrance, and an acceptable incense mounted up to heaven. Why is it not always so, when the same Gospel is professedly preached? 2 Corinthians 2:16. How can Christianity be a deadly poison? Only by being resisted, until the last spark of spiritual life is quenched in men’s own wickedness. To refuse all direction from the word of the cross, is to harden ourselves against everything else. The same odor or medicine may kill or cure in different cases, and Christianity shows its real power when it arouses the opposition of wicked men. W. F. Besser:2 Corinthians 2:15-16. When the sweet fragrance of Jesus’ name is shed forth upon all men, without respect of persons, and in its full power, if any are saved, it is because they inhale it by a faith which the fragrance itself produces; and if any are still lost, it is not merely because they fail of receiving it (Acts 13:46), but because the fragrance itself becomes fatal, and avenges itself upon those who despise it. The power of God’s word and the accompanying influence of God’s Spirit are demonstrated, when that word leaves no one as it found him; but when its despisers become more wicked, and the indifferent become furious and abusive. God is not responsible for men’s unbelief, but when they fatally injure themselves and sin against the word of life (Proverbs 8:36), we may regard it as a retributive judgment upon their own malicious and spiteful treatment of his mercy. Footnotes: [2 Corinthians 2:12.—Instead of είςτὸεὐαγγέλιον the two kindred codd. F. G. and Damasc. have διὰτὸεὐαγγ., and the Italic and Vulg. verss. and the Lat. fathers have propter evang. Two other affiliated codd. D. E. have διατοῦεὐαγγελὶον. Most of our Old English verss. have “for Christ’s gospel’s sake.”] 2 Corinthians 2:13.—In place of τῷμὴεὑρεῖν, Sin. has τοῦμὴεὑρ. (though the 3d cor. has τῷμὴεὑρ.). It also has Μακαιδονίαν (as throughout the New Testament, except 2 Corinthians 9:2, and 1 Thessalonians 4:10)]. 2 Corinthians 2:16.—Rec. omits ἐκ before both θανάτου and ζωῆς. And yet the word has the best authorities [A. B. C. Sin. et al.] in its favor, and was probably thrown out on account of its difficult construction. [It does not appear in D. E. F. G. K. L., and the omission is confirmed by the Vulg., Syr., Goth, and Aeth. verss., and by very many of the ancient interpreters. All the more recent critics, except Reiche and Wordsworth, insert it.] 2 Corinthians 2:17.—The reading λοιποί instead of πολλοὶ has the best authorities [A. B. C. K. Sin. et al.] against it. [Πολλοὶ was probably thought too strong an expression. But Didymus of Alex. (A. D. 370) takes much pains to justify the Apostle in the use of πολλοῖ in this passage. See note on p. 41. 2 Corinthians 2:17.—Rec. has κατενώπιον, and it is strongly sustained by authority; but Lachmann following the best MSS. gives us κατέναντι (without τοῦ). [Alford and Bloomfield think the article was left out to correspond with the previous ἐκθεοῦ, but that the Apostle’s solemn assertion here needs it. It is however omitted in A. B. C. D. Sin. and 12 cursives.] [The city was called by its original founder, Antigonia Troas, and by Lysimachus, who much improved it, Alexandria Troas, frequently simply Alexandria. It was on the great Roman road, by which it had an extensive trade into the interior and the South. It was a Roman colony, with the jus Italicum, or right of Roman citizenship, and was much favored by the Romans, from a conceit that their ancestors came from Troy, the site of which was close by. Gibbon says that Constantine once thought of making it the seat of his empire. Its modern name, Eski Stamboul (Old Constantinople), seems to commemorate this thought, Conybeare and Howson’s Life of St. Paul, Vol. I. p. 279–81, and Howson in Smith’s Dict.] [Stanley suggests a vivid picture of Paul in this anxious state of mind, “on the wooded shores of that classic region under the heights of Ida.” All associations connected with its ancient history had but “slight effect upon the mind of the Apostle,” which was either upon the open door to preach Christ’s Gospel, or “vainly expecting the white sail of the ship which was to bring back his friend from Corinth.” If the love of Christ had not dispossessed Paul’s heart of every other interest, such scenes would have had a peculiar charm for him. See also Conyb. and Howson, Introduction, Vol. I. p. 16 and p. 362. Such conflicting emotions and changes of purpose are not inconsistent with Paul’s being under the guidance of the Holy Ghost (Webster and Wilkinson), inasmuch as that divine agent works out his own guidance of wisdom by means of, and in consistency with, the purely human feelings of the subject.] [The word θριαμβεύοντι has been explained in: (1), a neuter sense, triumphare de nobis, to triumph over us: (2), a transitive sense, triumphare nos, to lead us in triumph; (3), a causative sense, triumphantes nos facere, to make us triumph. Ancient Greek usage among the classics is probably uniform in favor of the first, and the only other instance in the N. T. where the word is used (Colossians 2:15) looks in the same direction. But though it is adopted in the Vulgate, and is given as the first definition by several Latin expositors, it seems hard to make good sense with such a meaning in our passage, where the idea certainly is not that of a subdued and captive enemy led about in humiliation and finally to death. Even with this idea eliminated, and remembering that Paul sometimes speaks of himself as a subdued and willing captive to Christ, we never find him thus speaking of himself with others (plural). His object here seems rather to be, to show how he and his companions, and not merely Christ, were triumphing. If this makes us inclined to favor the second signification, with Calvin (in his comments, not in his translation), Bengel, de Wette and Wordsworth, we are met by the fact that neither early nor late Greek usage is in favor of such a construction. Some Greek fathers, indeed, whose opinions on a question of N. T. language or Roman usage is entitled to great consideration, give it this meaning. Though their definitions favor No. 1, they usually interpret it simply of a triumph over afflictions and persecutions, and leading the Apostles about the world in a triumphant victory over every kind of endurance Thus Chrysostom (and after him substantially Theophyl. and Oecum.): τῷπᾶσιποιοῦντιπεριφανεῖς, “Who maketh us conspicuous to all;” and Theodoret: σοφῶςτὰκαθ’ ἡμᾶςπρυτανεύων, τῆδεκακεῖζεπεριάγει, δήλουςἡμᾶςἅπασινἀποφαίνων, “Who manages all our affairs in wisdom, leading us about so as to make us manifest to all;” Damasc: ὁγαρθρίαμβος, τοῦτόἐστι, τὸπᾶσιγενέσθαιπεριφανή, “For evidently he has triumphed, who has been made illustrious and conspicuous to all men.” If, however, we depart from the simple No. 1, we must prefer No. 3, which has some ancient authority in its favor. Thus Jerome (comm.): Deum per Apostolos triumphare in Christo, victores illos facere in fide Christi; and Ambrose: Triumphare facit nos per Christum, vel in nobis ipse triumphat. In Alexandrian usage (Sept. and N. T.) neuter verbs often acquired a causative meaning (see Winer, Idd. § 40, n. 2, and many instances in Alford and Meyer). This gives an idea suitable to the connection. It was adopted by Luther, Beza and Grotius, and is defended by Osiander, Neander and Hodge. The majority of recent commentators (as Meyer, Alford, Conybeare, Ellicott, Stanley) favor the first meaning, but it very easily runs into the second.] [Tischendorf quotes here a remarkable passage from Didymus Alex to prove the genuineness of the reading οἱπολλοὶ, but which is equally striking as a comment: “Paul calls these deceivers many (πολλοὺς) on account of their abundance. For when instead of naming: them he designates them by this word, he intimates that they were more numerous, as when our Lord uses it instead of τινές: Many (πολλοὶ) shall say unto me in that day, etc. (Matthew 7:22). But this word informs us that they are not a few, as when our Lord says, Many (πολλοὶ) are called, but few (ὀλίγοι) are chosen. It is evident that the word sometimes even signifies all, as when the Apostle says in Romans 5:19 : “The many (οἱπολλοί) were constituted (κατεστάθησαν) sinners,” for it is evident that all men are under sin in consequence of Adam’s disobedience. Clearly then the word signifies a great number, not only in the passage before us but in another, where it is said, “Be not many masters” (James 3:1.) Damascene adds in paraphrase: “We are not like those false apostles who claim to be so numerous (τὰπολλοί). For then we should have to adulterate the Gospel, like some who corrupt or who sell for money the wine they have been employed to distribute freely.”—Migne’s Patrol. Grζc. T. xxxix. p. 1691, and xcv. p. 719. VI. HE MEETS CHARGE OF SELF- BY TO WHAT HE HAD DONE AT CORINTH. THE DIVINE SOURCE OF HIS ; OF THE NEW AND ITS TO THAT OF THE OLD 2 Corinthians 3:1-111 Do we begin again to commend ourselves? or need we, as some others [om. others], 2epistles of commendation to you, or [om. letters of commendation] from you? Ye are our epistle written in our hearts, known and read of all men: 3forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be [being manifested that ye are] the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables [or tablets] of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart [on hearts which are tablets of 4flesh]. And [But] such trust have we through Christ to God-ward: 5not that we are sufficient [om. of ourselves] to think anything [from, αφ̓ ? ourselves] as of [out of, εξ] ourselves; but our sufficiency is of God: 6who also hath made us able [sufficient as] ministers of the New Testament [Covenant]; not of the [a] letter, but of the [a] spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life. 7But if the ministration of death, written and engraven [engraven in letters] in stones was glorious [in glory ἐνδόξῃ ?], so that the children of Israel could not steadfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away [is passing away, τὴνκαταργουμένην]; 8How shall not [rather] the ministration of the spirit be [om. rather] glorious [in glory]? 9For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed [abound, περισσεύει ] in glory. 10For even that which was [has been] made glorious had [has been having, δεδόξασται] no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excelleth. 11For if that which was done [passing, τὸκαταργουμένον] away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious [abideth is in glory, τὸμένονἐνδόξῃ ?]. AND 2 Corinthians 3:1-3. What the Apostle had said in 2 Corinthians 3:15-17 was liable to misinterpretation by ill disposed persons, on the ground that it was a boasting or a commendation of himself. He guards against this by reminding the Corinthians that he felt no necessity of recommending himself to them or to others, inasmuch as the work which Christ had accomplished by him in their city was a sufficient recommendation for him in every part of the world.—Do we begin to commend ourselves.—Ἀρχόμεθα is capable of an invidious meaning, such as might be insinuated by an opponent; do we presume etc. (comp. Luke 3:8). Πάλιν qualifies the infinitive, and refers to something which might be regarded as self-commendation either in his first Epistle (1 Corinthians 2-4, 1 Corinthians 7:25; 1 Corinthians 7:40; 1 Corinthians 9:14; 1 Corinthians 9:18;1 Corinthians 15:10), or in his earlier discourses or letters.—Or need we like some, epistles of recommendation to you, or from you?—The verb συνιστάνειν (τινί) signifies: to bring together, to introduce, to commend (Romans 16:1, and frequently in our Epistle). Self-commendation in the sense of praising one’s self, is mentioned with disapprobation also in 2 Corinthians 10:18. In the following sentence, if we accept of εὶμὴ as the true reading, we must suppose that a decidedly negative and ironical answer was presupposed in it, or that the previous question goes on the presumption of an absurdity, [Jelf. Gram. § 860, 5. Obs. Webster Synt. and Synn. of N. T., chap. 8. p. 126. q. d.: “unless it be that we need,” i.e. only under such a presumption could such an idea be entertained. This reading is not really more difficult than the strongly authenticated ἥμή, although the latter is grammatically incorrect, inasmuch as nowhere else in the New Testament does μή occur in such a question after a ἤ, which must necessarily exclude all which precedes it. It makes very prominent the absurdity of the question: or do we not yet need? and it may be regarded as combining together the two constructions ἢχρήζομεν and μήχρήζομεν [Without the ἐὶμή, the previous question (which we might expect the Apostle to repel by a decided οὑδαμῶς), remains almost entirely without notice, and a new one is started which only inferentially negatives it. If ἐὶμὴ is taken (as all usage requires it to be,) in the sense of nisi, (unless) the interrogative character of the sentence it introduces (according to our English version) ceases, and it notices the previous question in the only way it deserved notice, viz: ironically or even derisively. The sense would be: “I can need no commendation either from myself, for that would be introducing myself, or boasting where I am already well known; or from others to you, for none know me better than you; or from you to others, for your conversion and present state are better known as our work than anything you can say. Surely then the mere mention of such a thing is enough to show its absurdity.”] We often read of συστατικαὶἐπιστολαί in the church after the death of the Apostles. When members of the church travelled from place to place they were usually recommended from one bishop to another, and the letters thus given became a means of maintaining fraternal intercourse between the bishops and their congregations. [Paul himself appears to have recognized the commencement of such a custom. In Galatians 2:12, he speaks of some “who came from James,” as if even then some authority was expected from the Apostolic College at Jerusalem. Two years before, Apollos passing into this very city of Corinth, did bring “letters from the brethren” of Ephesus (Acts 18:27); and as many of the Corinthians professed to be followers of Apollos, it is no impossible thing that such were here aimed at. The 13th canon of the Council of Chalcedon (A. D. 451) ordained that “clergymen coming to a city where they were unknown, should not be allowed to officiate without letters commendatory (Epistolζ Commendariζ,) from their own bishop.” Comp. Neander, Chr. Rel. vol. I, pp. 205, 360 ff. In the Clementine Homilies Peter warns his hearers against “any apostle, prophet, or teacher, who does not first compare his preaching with James, and come with witnesses;” where Paul seems especially aimed at, and we have perhaps a specimen of what Paul was contending against in our epistle.] W. F. Besser: “ Were the Corinthians inclined to reckon their own Apostle among those strangers who needed such letters?” The absurdity implied in the question lay in the supposition that the Apostle [ἐαυτοὺς] who was well known not only at Corinth but everywhere, should need any commendation from others or from himself, as if he were a stranger. By the words ὤςτινες he evidently alludes to those antipauline teachers, who, as his readers well knew, had brought letters of recommendation to Corinth, and had taken such letters from Corinth when they departed. He thus not only shows that he needed no such letters, but he shows this in a way which throws confusion upon his opponents, while it honors and encourages the Corinthians themselves—our Epistle, i.e., the Epistle of commendation (gen. possess.; not: which we have written, for he speaks not of his own part in composing it until 2 Corinthians 3:3, but which we have) is yourselves.—By placing the predicate first he makes it more emphatic and connects it more immediately with the preceding verse. The close collocation of the emphatic ὑμεῖς with ἡμῶν is also very significant. A similar arrangement of words may be seen in 1 Corinthians 9:2. The large Church which had been founded by him, and which had become so rich in spiritual gifts, was a glorious work of the Holy Ghost, and so a Divine Epistle which would commend him to all the world without any letters from men. Besser: “it was an Epistle of a peculiar kind, for Paul was at the same time its writer and its receiver.”—This metaphor he carries out in the subsequent verses in accordance with the nature of his subject, noticing first the complete certainty which he and Timothy possessed (this is the reason that καρδίαις is in the plural as in 2 Corinthians 4:6; 2 Corinthians 7:3) for the commendation of their work, and then the general notoriety of this work in all the churches:—written in our hearts.—In these words his own feelings are alluded to, inasmuch as he speaks of the writing in his own (ἡμῶν) and not their (ἱμῶν) hearts (although ὑμῶν may be found in some authorities of no great importance, comp. Meyer). “Paul meant that he carried this Epistle, not in his hand to show at any time, but continually with him, inasmuch as he bore the Church upon his heart.” It is not of his love that the Apostle is here speaking (as in 2 Corinthians 7:3, and Philippians 1:7), and it would seem altogether inappropriate to make him allude here to the official breast-plate of the high priest (olshausen). On such an interpretation we could trace no connection between it and the following sentence, [in which the Epistle is said to be known and read, not by God, but by men]. The phrase: in our hearts, is equivalent to: in us, and the meaning of the whole expression is: So inscribed upon us and so carried about with us everywhere, that it becomes known to all. This idea is yet further defined and explained in the words:—known and read by all men:—it is a work which will be universally recognized, a letter which every one will know to be his, and which all will read as his [Grotius: the handwriting is first “known” and then the Epistle is “read”] (Ewald: read within and without, thoroughly). Events which had taken place in one of the principal cities of the world would necessarily have a world-wide notoriety (comp. Romans 1:8).—In this prominent relation to all the world we must not suppose that the Corinthians were themselves included, as if the πρὸςὑμᾶς of 2 Corinthians 3:1 were here again referred to, for as the Epistle was made up of the Corinthians, they would not be likely to be included also among its readers.—Forasmuch as ye are manifested to be an Epistle of Christ, ministered by us, (2 Corinthians 3:3).—Grammatically the participle: manifested (φανερούμενοι), the object of which is to give a reason for their being known and read of all men, is to be connected with the nominative of the previous sentence (ὑμεῖςἐστέ). χριστοῦ in ἐπιστολὴχριστοῦ is the gen. of the author, and it is implied that the Epistle came from Christ, for it is of the origin and not of the contents nor of the proprietorship of the Epistle, that the Apostle is speaking. He now speaks of himself in the words: ministered by us, as Christ’s instrument in the composition of the Epistle; and he no longer thinks of it as a letter of commendation, but simply as an exhibition of the way in which their faith had been drawn forth and their Church had been founded. It had been prepared and sent by the Apostle and his companions, acting as the ministers and servants of Christ (comp. 1 Corinthians 3:5 ff.). Λιακονεῖντι is here used as it is in 2 Corinthians 8:19. The difference between this and any ordinary Epistle was evident from the materials with which and on which it was written.—written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tablets of stone, but in fleshy tablets of the heart.—The Epistle itself, the new spiritual life they had experienced, had been produced by the Holy Spirit, whose continual agency is here pointed out. This agency wrought with great power, so as to renew their hearts, but through the instrumentality of the Apostles and their testimony respecting Christ. It seems inappropriate and altogether too dogmatic to find in the ink here spoken of the figure of those lifeless and impotent means which were sometimes made use of, such as the law and those doctrines which have no quickening power, or the shadows and ceremonies of the Jewish ritual. Some representation of the Jewish law and the Sinaitic legislation must, however, have been floating before the Apostle’s mind, when he brought out the additional figure of the tablets of stone. This representation is not strictly consistent with the metaphor of an Epistle and of ink, and we can explain it only by the recollection that the Apostle was contrasting the work of the Spirit under the New Testament with the work of the law under the Old Testament, i.e., the effecting of a Divine life in the heart by the Spirit of the living God, with the outward engraving of the Divine precepts upon tables of stone. There may also have been in his mind some recollection of such passages as Jeremiah 31:31-33 (comp. Hebrews 9:4). The phrase πλάκεςκαρδίας occurs in the Sept. of Proverbs 7:3. Fleshy (σάρκίναι.) in contrast with stony (λίθιναι), designates a living susceptibility (comp. Ezekiel 36:26). [The ending—ινος refers to the substance or material of which a thing is made, in distinction from—ικος which refers to that which belongs to that thing. Our Lord was σαρκινός (fleshy, of human flesh subsisting) but not σαρκικός (fleshly, subject to fleshly lusts and passions). The word is used only in this place according to the Receptus, but it is given for σαρκικός by many MSS. in Romans 7:14, and Hebrews 7:16. Trench, Synn., Series II., p. 114; Webster, Synn., p. 232, and Web. and Wilk. Com.]. The word hearts (καρδίας) expresses also more definitely the nature of the substance made use of. In speaking of their spiritual life, he could very significantly say: ye are an Epistle (a writing) inscribed upon heart-tablets. He does not exactly say: your hearts (καρδίαςὑμῶν) but generally καρδίας, and he thus describes the peculiar nature of the Epistles of Christ, i.e., they are Christ dwelling in the heart by faith (Ephesians 3:17). 2 Corinthians 3:4-6. In 2 Corinthians 3:2 f. Paul had expressed great confidence with respect to what had been accomplished at Corinth through his instrumentality, and he had claimed it as an evidence of his Apostolic power. In what he now says he recurs to his assertions there:—Such confidence, however, we have, through Christ towards God.—The same word, πεποίθησις, occurs in 2 Corinthians 1:5; 2 Corinthians 8:22; 2 Corinthians 10:2. Τοιαύτη is stronger than αὕτη would have been. The reference here may be to 2 Corinthians 2:17, or 2 Corinthians 2:15 ff.; at least so far as 2 Corinthians 3:1 ff. may be giving the reasons for what is there said of the Corinthian Church, but not so as to make 2 Corinthians 3:1-3 either a parenthesis or a digression.—He intended to say that he owed this strong and joyful confidence of which he was speaking (Neander: a confidence that we are able to work such results) entirely to Christ; for it was Christ whom he served and under whose influence he accomplished every thing he did; and it was therefore through Christ that he had such confidence in what he could do.—But he had this confidence, he says, towards God (πρὸςτὸνδεόν), i. e., not before God, as a matter which was right in God’s sight, but in the direction of, or in respect to God (Romans 4:2) the Author of the work and the One to whom all the results were due (Osiander, Meyer).—Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think any thing of ourselves, as if from ourselves, (2 Corinthians 3:5). Here οὐχὅτι is used as in 2 Corinthians 1:24. If this sentence had been intended to be the object of πεποίθησιν, or to be simply a development, of the thought contained in πρὸςτὸνθεόν, the phrase ought to have been ὅτιοὐχ. Even if he gave God the honor of governing and guiding all the circumstances and accomplishing all the results of which he had spoken, he might still without impropriety have referred to his personal qualifications and have commended, and had confidence in, what he had done. On the other hand, he is on his guard here and he gives to God all the praise. He more particularly defines what this sufficiency orability is (ἱκανός occurs also in 2 Corinthians 2:16) by λογίσασθαί, (Lachmann: λογίζεσθαι) τι. ἀφ’. ἐαυτῶν, etc. Λογίζεσθαι signifies to consider, to reflect upon [with the notion of a result, to make out by reasoning], and refers here to that which proceeded from him and properly belonged to himself as an Apostle, in distinction from the results which depended upon the Divine blessing (1 Corinthians 3:6). It was the discernment of the best means and the best manner for the performance of his official duties, and a fixed purpose in the accomplishment of them (Meyer); or more comprehensively, the intellectual and moral qualification for his duties—the thoughts which were indispensable to the proper performance of his Apostolic work (Osiander). On no construction can we regard him as here ascribing this πεποίθησίς and his ἰκανότης for maintaining it to God, as if his object was to say that God was the source of this trust and of his confidence in his own qualifications [Rόckert]. Nor should the assertion be limited to his work of instruction, for this is required as little by the context as is the doctrine which our older dogmatists were accustomed to derive from this passage, respecting the inability of the natural man generally to think any thing right or good. The άφ̓ἐαυτῶν which makes their ability λογίσασθαίτι dependent upon themselves, is more clearly defined by ὡςἐξἑαυτῶν, which designates the original source or efficient cause; as if our sufficiency had its origin in ourselves (Meyer). [Hodge: “There is a difference in the prepositions: ἅφ’ ἐαυτῶνὡςἑξἑαυτῶν: not from ourselves, as if out of ourselves. We should express much the same idea by saying, our sufficiency is not in or of ourselves”]. The ἀφ’ ἑαυτῶν belongs not exclusively to ἱκανοίἐσμεν, nor to λογίσασθαιτι, but to both of them in conjunction. If we accept of the reading ἐξαὐτων (with B. F. G. et. al.), we should translate: as those who are sufficient of themselves (ὡςἱκανοὶὅντες etc.). The positive assertion contrasted with this is:—But our sufficiency is of God.—The word sufficiency here (ἱκανότης) refers to the same object with respect to which they were sufficient as ἱκανοί does. With this sentence must be connected the relative sentence—who also hath enabled (ἱκάνωσεν) us as ministers of a new covenant (2 Corinthians 3:6).—The object of καὶ is not to introduce a new, higher, or more general thought in contrast with λογίσασθαίτι, for then the expression would have been: ὅςκαὶδιακόνονς—ἱκαν. ἡμᾶς, but to introduce a sentence to confirm and explain what had gone before: “who has even (or truly) made us sufficient,” etc. [Conybeare: comp. ἱκανός (2 Corinthians 2:16) ἱκανοί (2 Corinthians 3:15) and ἱκάνωσεν (2 Corinthians 3:6). Ad. Clarke: a formal answer to the question: Who is sufficient for these things? God (replies the Apostle) hath made us sufficient as ministers]. Διακόνους (ministers) is a concise expression for εἰςτὸἕιναιδιακόνους, etc., (to be ministers), or εἰςδιακονιαν (for the ministry, comp. ἱκανοῦνεἰς in Colossians 1:12).—The object of the ministry [i. e., κ. διαθηκης, the new covenant] is put in the genitive, as in 2 Corinthians 11:15; Ephesians 3:7; and Colossians 1:23, and is without the article because it is the genit. of quality. [The article is wanting also before γράμματος and πνεύματος] i. e., “of a new covenant.” It was new because it was altogether different from the old covenant which Moses founded. The basis of the former covenant was the law (νόμος), whereas the later, covenant was founded wholly on grace and reconciliation in Christ; the condition of salvation in the former was obedience to the law, whereas in the latter it was faith in Christ (Romans 10:5 ff.). [Neander: Διαθήκης is not to be explained here according to its pure Greek signification (arrangement, will), but in accordance with the Heb. αְ ?ψִ ?ιϊ, which denotes a mutual transaction, an agreement (covenant) in which God promises something on condition that men fulfil what He requires of them]. This ministry of a new covenant is explained immediately by an antithetical sentence:—not of the letter, but of the Spirit.—As this expression is in explanation of and in apposition with the phrase, a new covenant, it must depend not upon διαθήκης (covenant) but upon διακόνονς (ministers). Comp. 2 Corinthians 3:7-8. We have here the same contrast as in Romans 2:29; Romans 7:6. The ministers of the Old Testament were busied principally with a letter, an inflexible, lifeless and written law; and they were bound to present and to inculcate with much zeal the duties of that covenant; whereas the ministers of the New Testament were concerned mainly with the Spirit. They had to do generally with a Divine power which wrought in the mind, renewed the heart and brought men into fellowship with God; and their work was to induce as many as possible to enter into this covenant and participate in its blessings. These two ministries gave a peculiar character respectively to the two covenants.—In the sentence—for the letter killeth, but the Spirit giveth life—we have the reason for what had just been said, viz: God has made us sufficient for a ministry which is not of the letter but of the Spirit, for the letter kills, etc. (Flatt: what was written killed, but the Spiritual quickens into life). The connection must be sought by referring to the great aim of the Apostolic work, which was, as Paul’s readers well knew, to bring men into a holy fellowship by a Divine life (comp. Romans 1:16 f. et. al.). There is no need therefore of suggesting in addition that the ministry of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit, must be higher and far preferable, for, etc. The reason which the Apostle assigns is not that the ministry of a higher economy requires higher qualifications; nor, that under this higher economy the ministers must have a capacity for higher endowments (Osiander). Neander: “These words have been commonly applied to the contrasted literal or spiritual understanding of Christian truth. But Paul says nothing here directly on this subject. His words strictly refer merely to the law as a letter which gives commands, and the spirit of faith which makes alive. But probably this relation of the letter to the spirit may be applied to every precept of a merely ethical nature, with which Christianity, as the religion of the Spirit, is contrasted.” Light is thrown upon the whole passage by recollecting that the Apostle had in his eye those Judaizing teachers whose motives were derived from the law, and who vaunted themselves over Paul because he proclaimed nothing but grace. Such teachers were in danger of leading souls astray by pretending that their influence was salutary, while his was dangerous and corrupting. In opposition to such he gives the reason why God had qualified him and his fellow-laborers to be ministers of a new covenant which was not of the letter but of the Spirit. Exactly the opposite of what they pretended was found, in fact, to be true. The letter to which they devoted their energies killed, while the Spirit to whose service he was addicted made alive. This killing refers, not merely to a negative powerlessness or inability to awaken that life in the soul through which men freely perform works pleasing to God; nor merely to the introduction of a moral death, i. e., an opposition to the Divine will, produced by the sense of guilt which the commandment excites; nor even to a killing in a spiritual sense, because sin is the death of the soul; but to the sentence of condemnation and the exclusion from all hope of life and salvation which the law pronounces. Such is the idea of death (θάνατος) in Romans 6:21; Romans 6:23; Romans 7:5 et. al. This death is indeed occasioned by those moral influences (Romans 7:7 ff.), and is in other passages pointed out under the phrases: the curse of the law (Galatians 3:10), and, the law worketh wrath (Romans 4:15). This introduces also a death of the heart which paralyzes all moral power (Bengel, Osiander). The question, however, is, whether the Apostle has reference to this in our passage. He certainly had no thought of bodily (physical) death, as the wages of sin (Romans 5:12), and produced and demanded by the law (1 Corinthians 15:56; Romans 7:9), for such a death takes place also independently of the law (Romans 5:13); nor as a penalty of the law, for such a killing (ἀποκτέινειν) would not be a proper antithesis to the giving of life (ζωοποιεῖν). But the giving life or quickening is the effect of the eternal life (ζωὴαἰώνιος) which is quickened in the soul (Romans 8:2; Romans 6:10-11), or of the introduction of the soul into that fellowship with God which is completed in the resurrection.2 Corinthians 3:7-11. The Apostle now proceeds (δὲ) to show that the ministry of the New Testament was far preferable to that of the Old, both in the effects which it produces and in the spirit which it reveals. For the sake of comparing them he brings them face to face with each other, and then from the glory of the Old Testament service which appeared with such splendor in Moses face, that the children of Israel could not look upon him (2 Corinthians 3:7), he draws a conclusion, a minori ad majus.—But if the ministration of death, engraven in letters upon stones, was in glory (2 Corinthians 3:7).—Instead of the simple designation the ministry of the letter, which he had used in 2 Corinthians 3:6, he now uses the phrase, the ministry of death—which works in favor of, or as it were, under the direction or authority of, death. He thus attributes the consequences of the letter directly to the ministry under it, and so anticipates the reason for the inferiority which is set forth in 2 Corinthians 3:9. The definition: engraven in letters upon stones, shows that we must not here think of the Levitical priestly service (Rόckert); and the express mention of Moses leads us to understand the ministry of Moses himself. We are to regard him, not as a mediator in contrast with Christ, but as a minister (διάκονος) representing all teachers under the law in contrast with the Apostles and ministers of the New Testament. By a bold turn of expression he combines the ministry itself with its object, and designates the whole as one which was engraven in letters upon stones (the only point on which we can here agree with Meyer, who regards the Decalogue as Moses’ commission or matricula officii). The ministration of Moses and of all his successors consisted in the presentation and enforcement of the law whose letters had been engraven upon stone (tablets). In this way he brings out in strong language the stiffness and externality of the ancient service. Neander: “The article before γράμμασιν was designedly left out by the Apostle, because he intended to imply that a ministration which was conveyed only by letters must have been of a very general nature.” If ἐνγράμμασιν (or γράμματι) were connected directly with τοῦθανάτου, as Luther and some others contend the words should be [the ministration of death in letters, or the ministration which produces death by means of letters], the article would have been required (τοῦἐνγράμ). The predicate ἐγενήθηἐνδόξῃ, is essentially the same as if it had been ἐγεν. ἔνδόξος. But we are here evidently directed to the divine glory (αָּ ?αεֹ ?γ) within whose radiance the ministration was performed. Of an essential dignity or eminence the Apostle was not in general speaking, for in the next sentence:—so that the children of Israel could not keep their eyes fixed on Moses’ face (2 Corinthians 3:7), there is no representation of the consequences or of the visible tokens of the glory, but of the remarkable degree in which this ministration participated in the divine radiance. In 2 Corinthians 3:8 also (ἕσταιἐνδόξῃ) it is the heavenly glory which is spoken of. [Webster and Wilkinson think that the ἐσται refers to the future, not from the time of writing merely, but to a future from past time, or rather a future of inference, as, if that were so, what will this be:] Then, amid the glories of the great day of revelation, when the kingdom of God shall be perfected, and when all external form shall correspond with essential excellence, the dignity of the New Testament ministration will be especially manifested. The narrative in Exodus 34:29 ff. is rather freely quoted, inasmuch as we are there merely informed that when Aaron and the children of Israel saw that the skin of Moses’ face shone they were afraid to come near him. But everything essential to Paul’s, and even to Philo’s account, is there. For even the ἀτενίσαι, the fixed gaze upon his face, was too much for them. The reason for this is further given when it is added—for the glory of his countenance—but with the important addition—which was to be done away.—This addition gives us a new point in the comparison, and places the inferiority of the legal ministration in a strong light (comp. 2 Corinthians 3:11; 2 Corinthians 3:13). Neander: “In this Paul discovers a symbol of the fading glory of Judaism.” But he has not yet commenced speaking of the discontinuance of the ministration and its glory, but only of that fact in which he saw a hint of this. He there makes use of no purely present participle (Luther: that which nevertheless is ceasing), but, in accordance with the history, an imperfect participle signifying—that which was passing away. The Apostle presumes that this radiance was transitory; and with great justice, since it always became visible when Moses came from the Divine presence [Estius: passing away when the occasion was over]. The inference from this is briefly and simply expressed in 2 Corinthians 3:8—how shall not the ministration of the Spirit be yet more glorious?—In τοῦπνεύματος the Apostle resumes the subject of the ministration of the Spirit in 2 Corinthians 3:6, which had been interrupted by the enlargement in 2 Corinthians 3:7 with respect to the letter: engraved in letters upon stones. But the idea is not that the Spirit rests upon this ministration (though this is silently presumed), but that the ministration was the medium through which the Spirit, and the life he bestowed were communicated and enjoyed (in opposition to τοῦθανάτου, comp. 2 Corinthians 7:6). [The verbs γίνομαι and εἰμί are here brought into striking contrast; ἐγενήθηἐνδόξῃ ?–ἕσταιἐνδόξῃ. Bengel: γίνομαι, fio, et εἰμί sum, are quite different. Stanley: ἐγενήθη, came into existence. Ellicott (on 1 Timothy 2:14): “the construction γίνεσθαιἐν occurs occasionally, but not frequently in the New Testament, to denote the entrance into, and existence in, any given state.” Webster: “ἐγενήθηἐνδόξῃ ?=was made to be in glory for a time; ἕσταιἐνδοξῃ ?=shall be in glory permanently” (Synn. sub. γίν.)]. As ἕσται leads the mind to the future (comp. “this hope” in v. 22), we-must not refer the glory (δόξα) to the miraculous endowments and works of the Apostles. ̓ ?́Εσται, however, need not be regarded as the fut. consequentiζ, or as equivalent to esse invenietur (si rem recte perpenderis), and we are hardly safe in understanding it of a progressive development. In the Apostle’s mind the second advent of Christ (Parousia) was so constantly present, that it would seem to him needless to give a more particular explanation of his language. The kind of ministration of the spirit, which he had in view, and the argument from the less to the greater, which he applies to it, will be accounted for or confirmed when he comes to explain more particularly the two ministrations, the first, as a ministration of condemnation, and the other as a ministration of righteousness.—For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more does the ministration of righteousness abound in glory (2 Corinthians 3:9).—[If Lachmann’s reading (τῇδιακονίᾳ) be adopted, the translation would be, ‘if to the ministration of condemnation be glory,’ etc., but the sense would not be essentially altered]. Here the former corresponds to the killing and the death, and the latter to the making alive, of 2 Corinthians 3:6-7. The condemnation refers to the curse of the law. The ministration which was employed in the enforcement of the letter, i. e. the Old Testament law, was compelled to denounce condemnation against transgressors (comp. Deuteronomy 27:26), and by its enforcement of a law which brought the sinful passions into active opposition to its requirements, it brought men under the curse. The righteousness, which is here contrasted with the condemnation, is the same as the being just (or righteous) before God, and is the great object of the proclamation of Divine grace under the New Testament ministration. Under that ministration, faith is awakened, and man’s relations to God are rectified, so that he can be justified, and attain everlasting life in the Divine kingdom (comp. Romans 1:17; Romans 3:22 ff, Romans 3:22; Romans 3:30 et al.) The Apostle, however, partially modifies what he had thus said of these two ministrations, by withdrawing all reference to time in the use of ἐγενήθη and ἕσται. Instead of ἐνδόξῃ we have the nominative δόξν, with έστίν understood. The meaning is the same, and the expression is more forcible than the adjective ἕνδοξος would have been (comp. Romans 8:10; τὸπνεῦμαζωή). On the other hand the expression is strengthened by the use of περισσεύει, signifying: overflows or abounds in glory.—For even that which, has been glorious, is not glorious in this respect, on account of the glory which excels (2 Corinthians 3:10).—Here the previous idea is further strengthened by saying that the glory of the contrasted ministration was abolished, although that ministration had previously been declared to have been made in glory (γενηθῆναιἐνδόξῃ), or to have been glory (δόξα, 2 Corinthians 3:7; 2 Corinthians 3:9), on account of the superabundant glory of the other. The καί (even) indicates a climax and qualifies the verb: is not glorious, or has no glory (ούδεδόξασται), which expresses a single idea (that which is deprived of glory), and goes beyond the minus of the comparison. A more particular explanation of the idea is given in ἐντούτῳτῷμέρει, which signifies: in this particular, i. e. with respect to the relation which the Old Testament ministration bore to that of the New Testament.—The phrase, that which has been glorious (τὸδεδοξασμένον), [“shows a strange use of the perfect (as does δεδόξασται), and is taken from Exodus 34:29; Exodus 34:35 of the Sept.” Stanley]. It does not stand here for the whole Old Testament economy, but simply the Mosaic ministration, or that which was surrounded by, or shared in a Divine radiance.—Having said that this was not glorious in this respect, the Apostle adds the reason for that deprivation, by saying that this was on account of the surpassing glory. He here refers to what he had said of the ministration of righteousness abounding in glory (περισσεύειἐνδόξῃ). Before the superabundant glory of the ministration of the New Testament, the glory of the Old Testament ministration entirely disappears as the moon’s splendor vanishes in the sun’s radiance. There is, therefore, no necessity of taking the phrase, that which has been glorious, in a general and abstract sense (Meyer), without an allusion to the Mosaic service in the concrete sense, until it comes up in the predicate, where ἐντούτῳ ?ͅτῷμέρει has the sense of: “in this respect (i. e. when we compare the glory of the Mosaic ministration with the Christian, 2 Corinthians 3:9) the glorified becomes unglorified.” In 2 Corinthians 3:11 the expression, the surpassing glory (τῆςὑπερβαλλούσηςδόξης) is still further justified by the introduction of a new element into the comparison, although it had been symbolically suggested in 2 Corinthians 3:7.—For if that which is transitory was with (passing through) glory, much more that which abides is in glory.—This new element is the permanent in distinction from the temporary, that which is vanishing: “on account of the super-abounding glory.” For each ministration there is presupposed an economy or dispensation, one of which is passing away, and the other is abiding. The Old Testament ministration with the law itself, is supposed to pass away with the entrance of the New Testament ministration (comp. Romans 10:4). The latter must remain until the second coming of our Lord, when it will be eternally, glorified in His heavenly kingdom. [Neander: The Apostle probably had a special design when he used the different prepositions διὰ (δὸξης) and ἐν (δόξῃ). Διὰ. designates a point of transition and hence implies that the thing spoken of, was passing and transitory, while ἐν implies that which is permanent.] Διὰδόξης signifies strictly that the glory merely accompanied the object [Winer § 51, i. p. 306. Webster (Synn. p. 166) says that it indicates particularly an object in a state of transition, while passing through a state] whereas ἐνδόξῃ implies that the object continued in glory. Sometimes, however, even διὰ is used to designate the fixed condition or state of a thing (2 Corinthians 2:4; 2 Corinthians 5:7), and hence it is possible that Paul used both expressions as nearly equivalent, for we know that he not unfrequently changed his prepositions even when he referred to the same relation. In either case διὰ ?seems appropriate to the καταργούμενον, and ἐν to the μένον. In the translation, the distinction can with difficulty be made perceptible (comp. Osiander). AND ETHICALWhen nothing but Christ, and Christ in his completeness, is preached, and when the preachers know by experience the reality of what they preach, all who have learned the deadly condemnation and inefficiency of the law to save the soul will feel the power of truth, will be rescued, forgiven and renewed by Divine grace, and will become animated by a spiritual life which will know no limit but the perfection of God. Such results will need no proof that they are from God, for all who have eyes to see will not only commend the human laborer but give honor to the God who bestowed both the success and the power to labor. Those legal task-masters who exalt themselves so much above the preachers of free grace, will never disturb the common security nor bring anything to real order; and in due time, even in this world, it will not be hard to distinguish between the preaching which saves and that which destroys the soul. But a day is coming when all things shall be made especially manifest, when those who have turned many to righteousness shall present before the Lord a great company of enlightened, justified and sanctified ones, who shall shine as the stars forever and ever; while those who preached nothing but the law shall (Daniel 12:3) be filled with unspeakable horror and confusion, as the lamentable and fatal consequences of their course shall be fully brought to light. AND Starke: 2 Corinthians 3:1. No one needs a better letter of credence than that testimony of men’s own consciences and works which are sufficient to praise him. 2 Corinthians 3:2-3. Every believer is an epistle in which the Holy Ghost reveals the knowledge of God in Christ; he is an open epistle in which all can learn something of what God can produce in the heart; and he is an epistle of Christ, for the hands and tongues of all true teachers are the instruments which the Holy Spirit uses to form him into the Divine image. If God’s writing is in the heart, the willing heart, the faithful obedience and the ready tongue will not fail to discourse of God. In such cases there will be real life, and not mere letters upon stone. Preachers should never doubt, that when they perform their parts, the appropriate fruits of their labor will infallibly follow. 2 Corinthians 3:5. No one can speak of God as he should, until he has been taught of God (John 6:45). Whatever gifts we have, and whatever praise we gain, should therefore be ascribed entirely to God (James 1:17). Oh how many make idols of themselves. 2 Corinthians 3:6. Luther:—The letter is to teach us, that while the mere law of God and our own works give us knowledge, they cannot show us that God can be gracious; but it shows us that everything we are and do is condemned and worthy of death, since without Divine grace we can do nothing. The Spirit, on the other hand, is to teach us that grace without law or personal righteousness gives us knowledge, but in such a way as to give us life and salvation. Hedinger:—The Gospel is accompanied by a penetrating life, which enlightens and gladdens those who are awakened and condemned to death; it is therefore from the Spirit and is the source of spirit and life. Every word of God, as it comes from the Divine heart and hand, has some special design and a power of its own. In some cases it is to command and in others to produce obedience; in some it is to threaten and in others it is to comfort; in some it is to chastise and wound, and in others it is to heal and revive. To every work which His wisdom has ordained He has also adjusted just that measure of power which is precisely adapted to the end he has in view. The word which created the world is not the word which creates a new heart. For this is needed a word of far greater power (Ephesians 1:19). 2 Corinthians 3:7. Hedinger:—The law also has power and light. It has a terrible thunderbolt for those who have awakened consciences, and where Christ does not comfort them and anoint them with His Spirit, they are struck down to the mouth of hell. Those who would partake of the Divine nature must mount up in spirit often to God, become familiar with Divine things, converse much with God in prayer, and listen in their most secret souls to God’s voice in His word, and it will not be long before their souls will be full of Divine light. 2 Corinthians 3:8. The Gospel is indeed a quickening and a saving power, by means of which Christ is glorified, and rises like a clear morning star (2 Peter 1:19) to shed upon His people’s hearts the full beams of His eternal glory (Revelation 21:23 ff.). 2 Corinthians 3:9. Hedinger:—When the word of the kingdom casts its clear light upon thee, look steadily upon it. Many love darkness and shun the light (John 3:19). Walk in the light lest darkness come upon thee (John 12:35). 2 Corinthians 3:10. The Gospel is the source of an indescribable glory when it is truly applied to the hearts of God’s people, for the glory of the Lord is even now shed forth upon them; but when Jesus, who is their life, shall be fully revealed, their glory will be complete (Colossians 3:4). 2 Corinthians 3:11. The spirit of life is better than death, righteousness than condemnation, and that which is permanent than that which vanishes away; how much better then is the ministration of the New Covenant than that of the letter? Berlenb. Bible, 2 Corinthians 3:2 :—Real candor and frankness of manner can spring only from a consciousness of innocence. A preacher’s success must be estimated not from the multitudes who attend upon his ministry, but from the sound conversions which take place under it. Many may, and certainly will condemn him; but this is no evidence that he is wrong. Let us only be concerned that we are begotten by the Word of truth to the glory of God, and that men may say of us: The Lord hath created and formed them for himself. 2 Corinthians 3:3. The minister who fails to point men from himself to Christ, is trying to make himself a pope. We should never stop at what is external, but press forward to the inward spirit of everything. Let men see that those hearts of ours which were once of stone, are now fleshly tablets, and that this is the Lord’s work. The heart which takes no impression from the Gospel, has no part in the New Covenant. 2 Corinthians 3:4. True confidence in God, is not of ourselves, but comes through Christ. 2 Corinthians 3:5. The spiritual man finds that a union with Christ gives him an invincible power, in proportion as he sees that he is not sufficient of himself to do anything, as of himself, i. e., to know and overcome the subtle assaults of spiritual pride and self-will. Few persons possess this power, because they never thoroughly know themselves, or understand how utterly insufficient they are even to think anything which will convince them of God’s grace and truth. This is wholly a spiritual and divine work, and can be accomplished only by divine instruments. When this fact is fully recognized, we can no longer endure in ourselves those contrivances and counterfeits which the ingenuity of man has devised; for every degree of credit we take to ourselves, only hinders the growth of grace in our hearts. Whatever benefits the renewed man attains, is in consequence of his new creation, and never will he hesitate to cast the crown at the feet of God and of the Lamb. And yet this subjugation of the vile spirit of self-love, self-sufficiency, self-flattery, etc., requires the severest struggle to which our natures are ever called. If Christians in general need to be divested of all confidence in themselves, surely those who lead them should seek to be especially free from it. 2 Corinthians 3:6. The letter which supplies nothing but intellectual knowledge, can impart no life—but inasmuch as it reveals only condemnation and death, it must actually kill the soul. The law can never be anything but a dead work to those who regard it in a Pharisaic spirit, and set it in opposition to the Gospel. Hence the great object of the Gospel (and the law itself, when properly used, shuts us up to the same result Galatians 3:24), is to reveal to men a Redeemer, in whom they may find life. The spirit of the Gospel of grace, of faith and of the Lord, gives us life, opens to us a way of righteousness and reconciliation in Christ, and makes us able to receive and use the benefits of Christ’s kingdom. This living voice of the Lord stirs the sinner’s heart, so that he must hear and obey. Those who have been slain by the law, will penitently recognize Christ, and the Holy Spirit will glorify the Father and the Son in their hearts, and make intercession there with groanings which cannot be uttered. The law alone produced disobedience, opposition, and consequently wrath; but, the Spirit works nothing but a cheerful obedience, life and love, blessings and blessedness. The more Christ requires of us, the more he does for us. Under his influence we become conscious of new movements and new motives; our whole nature is renewed, and we take delight in those divine, pure and innocent enjoyments, which we never had, and could not have before. Then we shall gradually attain an incomparable treasure of divine life in a refined and good heart, from which we can derive light and power, victory over all sin, motives to diligence in every duty, and comfort and strength for every extremity. In a word, we have the whole power of the Holy Ghost, to make us partakers of the divine nature (2 Peter 1:3-4). 2 Corinthians 3:7. Not unfrequently, rather than stand on the ground of the Gospel, men prefer going out of their way to Moses—the glory of whose face at a distance attracts them; but they soon find that that glory is too strong for them, and shows those who love darkness rather than light, as in a glass, how great is their corruption. Thus God sometimes finds a way to accomplish his own work. The old dispensation of the letter must always be forsaken, that we may attain a true evangelical state in the new dispensation of the Spirit. This requires an honest recognition and confession of the truth, and a sincere repentance. 2 Corinthians 3:8. Such is the glory of the spiritual word, that even the angels love to study it. Where once it enters the heart, it remains forever. The glory of the Lord so brightly illuminates it, that everything which speaks and acts without the Spirit will seem like utter darkness. Under such a dispensation everything begun or promised before, comes to its fulfilment; there is no abolition of the law and its various ordinances, but only an exaltation of them all into something spiritual and everlasting. And yet it often costs us much before our consciences apprehend the true distinction between the law and the Gospel, and the main power of the new covenant in the heart depends upon the clearness with which the promises are understood. 2 Corinthians 3:9. So sublime and excellent is the glory of Christ in the new covenant, that no sooner does any man apprehend it, than he will feel humbled in utter amazement, as he beholds the majesty, the holiness, the wisdom, and the goodness of God; and thus God receives back from restored and redeemed man the honor of which sin robbed Him. 2 Corinthians 3:10. From the nature and origin of the Mosaic law, it would not be hard to infer that it would necessarily come to an end. Equally evident is it, that the Gospel contains what must endure forever; and all the assaults of its enemieshaveonly served to evince its perpetuity. It is therefore called an everlasting Gospel, and the redemption it proclaims is an eternal redemption. As what is good may not be permanent, we should not be satisfied until we have found what can never be moved. As everything else is passing away, the soul can never find complete rest until it receives that word which lives and abides forever. Rieger, 2 Corinthians 3:1-2 :—Gladly would we so speak and act that no one should take offence, but no one can always be so circumspect as to be beyond suspicion. It is well, therefore, sometimes to meet those misunderstandings which we know have arisen respecting us. “The first in his cause is righteous, but his neighbor cometh and searcheth him” (Proverbs 18:17). 2 Corinthians 3:3. What God has joined together, should never be put asunder. Among these are: preaching and the word of Christ; the Spirit which glorified that word, and the ministry through which that Spirit is shed forth. Stone tablets are comparatively easy to be written upon, for only the surface needs to be changed. But only the finger of God can write His law upon the heart, since the soul itself must be softened and subdued, not only at first, but continually. We need not therefore be surprised that the dispensation under which God has promised to do this is the highest, and that every thing which preceded it was only preparatory for it (Jeremiah 31:33; Ezekiel 36:25-27). 2 Corinthians 3:4-5. When a man really holds communion with God, he will be so emptied of all confidence in himself and so united to the source of all light and power, that even when he is triumphing in a Divine sufficiency, no words can express his consciousness of utter insufficiency in himself. 2 Corinthians 3:6. Even in connection with the law and other clearer declarations of God’s will and of His claims, many promises of the Spirit were given through the prophets, so that the New Covenant was already partially developed in the Old. All who made a conscientious use of the letter of the Old Covenant found in it abundant directions to the Spirit, and through the Spirit breathed forth many sighs for the New Covenant. And yet the Spirit was not in it, for before our Lord’s return to the Father that Spirit was not fully given, and the ministration of the Old Covenant was necessarily a ministration of the letter. Such a fact, however, is no reason for despising that dispensation, but rather a ground for praising that grace which reaches its perfection by successive periods of progress.—To slay the sinner who is living without the law in a worldly course of life, is really to prepare him for life and health. Unless the process stops there, he will be brought to a state in which he is willing to renounce the law and his own righteousness, and he will seek for that Gospel through which the Spirit is imparted. 2 Corinthians 3:7-8. The more any institution or worship gives evidence that it came from God and leads to God, and the more the Lord uses it to reveal and communicate Himself to men, the more it can be called glorious. Hence that ministry which was set up at Pentecost, proclaiming peace through the blood of the cross, and imparting the Spirit, which is the only source of spiritual freedom and power, is possessed of a transcendant glory; for it has most plainly evinced its Divine origin, and its power to control the heart and bring the soul to God. 2 Corinthians 3:9. It was a terrible thing to preach nothing but condemnation; and yet under the law such preaching was glorious. May we learn to make a right use of the law; not to show us the way of salvation, but to drive us through the door of mercy which the Gospel opens for us to the righteousness in which there can be no condemnation, but peace with God, the law established, and the Spirit of life dwelling continually in the heart! 2 Corinthians 3:10-11. The law was originally designed to be only a provisional dispensation to prepare a way for the Gospel. Its fragmentary revelations of truth must unquestionably find their completion and their termination in the Gospel; and yet the law itself can never lose its place in every subsequent dispensation, and it will find its absolute perfection when God shall reveal Himself to His creatures without a veil. Heubner, 2 Corinthians 3:1; 2 Corinthians 3:3 :—However disagreeable it may be to a Christian to commend himself, if his personal interests are connected with God’s cause, he may without vanity vindicate his character before his fellow-men. When his merits are manifest, he may dispense with letters of commendation, and certainly he will never truckle or beg for them by low arts. To be really useful, especially in the work of saving souls, will be our best commendation and will generally be the best known; for what work can be more honorable than that of transforming and impressing a new character upon the very spirit of a fellow-man? 2 Corinthians 3:4. God will be the friend of all who are endeavoring to honor Christ. All such therefore have the best of reasons for confidence in God. 2 Corinthians 3:5. Our sufficiency for every spiritual act is from God; for when He withdraws His Spirit from our hearts, they are lifeless, barren, and incapable of any good thought. 2 Corinthians 3:6. Even among Christians (papists, coldly orthodox), the letter is served with slavish fear, where God’s will is known only from the written word without the Spirit’s testimony. In such cases nothing but precepts and threatenings are dispensed, and the written word is believed and obeyed from a regard only to authority and from terror without inward conviction and persuasion. In contrast with this stands the ministration of the Spirit; under which the will of God and His grace is cordially accepted; an inward witness accompanies the word, and under the leadings of the Divine Spirit, faith and obedience are delightful, sincere and earnest. 2 Corinthians 3:7. That which is external and legal has frequently more influence upon rude dispositions than that which has more intrinsic grandeur. 2 Corinthians 3:8-9. A judicial and admonitory severity has a dignity which is by no means to be despised, but unspeakably greater is that of a love which has compassion on the miserable and seeks to save them and give them spiritual life. No honor, therefore, is like that of the minister of the Gospel, under whose labors God’s Spirit is communicated, and righteousness, pardon and grace are afforded to all men. Contrast between Deuteronomy 27:15 ff; Deuteronomy 28:15 if.; and Matthew 5:3 ff. (Cursed, etc. Blessed, etc.). 2 Corinthians 3:11. If, then, God’s glory is reflected from all who proclaim His love, how glorious must be that ministration which proclaims nothing but love. W. F. Besser, 2 Corinthians 3:3 :—As the savor of Christ diffuses Christ Himself, so a congregation of real Christians are an Epistle in which Christ is Himself inscribed and communicated to men. The letters which He writes are deeds and men (Psalms 45:1, “My tongue is the pen of a ready writer”). 2 Corinthians 3:6. The whole ministration (διακονία) to which the public servants of the Church are regularly called, is simply for the purpose of presenting and applying the New Covenant or the treasures of grace which are promised through Jesus Christ to men.—Our sufficiency is not conferred by the office, but must be brought to the office itself. Those whom God calls to it are able to teach others, or are endowed with a sufficiency when they are called (2 Timothy 2:2).—The letter kills, and even ought to kill, that the Spirit may quicken those who are dead. 2 Corinthians 3:9. The glory of the ministry of the letter was terrible, because every letter of the law was emblazoned with tokens of Divine wrath (Romans 4:15). As the executioner of God’s curse against transgressors (Galatians 3:10), it can proclaim nothing but condemnation. But now, when grace abounds and is much stronger than wrath, the ministration of the Spirit is proportionably more glorious; for now even righteousness proclaims that God must absolve the guilty when they are reconciled to God through the blood of Christ (2 Corinthians 5:18-20). 2 Corinthians 3:10. The glory of the legal ministry was by itself intolerable for its brightness; but when the ministration of condemnation and the ministration of righteousness are combined together, that which was so glorious becomes unglorified, and Sinai’s radiance vanishes before that of Golgotha. 2 Corinthians 3:11. The ministry which vanished away passed “through glory,” and its glory was extinguished when the law had accomplished its end in Christ and His people; but the ministry which remains until the coming of the Lord abides in glory, that the whole world may behold its inherent excellence. 2 Corinthians 3:4-11. Lesson for the 12th Sunday after Trinity. Heubner:—I. The glory of the evangelical ministry: 1. In its origin: a. It rests upon Christ’s own institution (2 Corinthians 3:4); b. Christ alone can qualify us for it; 2. In its object: it is not of the letter, but of the Spirit; 3. In its means: it relies upon, not an external glory, which for a while blinds the eye and then vanishes away (2 Corinthians 3:7), but the coφperation of the Holy Ghost (2 Corinthians 3:8-9); 4. In its reward: a. even in this world it has more glorious rewards than any other employment (2 Corinthians 3:10); b. but finally it conducts to eternal blessedness. II. The superior glory of the Church under the New Testament above that of the Church under the Old Testament: 1. It was founded by the Son, and not merely by the servant of God; 2. It is the ascendancy of the Spirit, and not of the letter; 3. Its worship and dignities are of a spiritual nature, and are sustained not merely by worldly influences; 4. It will continue forever.—Oettinger:—The glory of spiritual instruction and the weakness of that teaching which has reference merely to morality, the law and the outward letter (Serm. on the Epist. for the 12th Sunday after Trinity).—A. F. Schmidt:—We should never separate by arbitrary and nice distinctions what God has wisely and graciously arranged together; especially: a. letter and Spirit (2 Corinthians 3:6); b. the preaching of the law and of the gospel (2 Corinthians 3:3); c. confidence in God and despair of ourselves (2 Corinthians 3:4-5); d. fidelity to our calling and an assurance of success. Footnotes: [2 Corinthians 3:1.—Two important MSS. (B. and D.) et al. have συνιστάν which is accepted by Lachman: but συνιστάνειν is better authenticated, and is now almost universally received.] 2 Corinthians 3:2.—Rec. has εἰυή according to A. B. et al. and it is preferred by Reiche, Meyer, Osiander, [Bloomfield and Wordsworth. Our author is wrong in inferring (e silentio) that the Vat. favors the Rec. Its authority (as revised,) is with C. D. E. F. G. and Sin. et al., the Ital. Syr. Vulg. (aut numquid) and Arab. Verss. Theodt. and the Lat. fathers, decidedly in favor of ἥμη, which is adopted by Alford, Stanley and Tischendorf (7th ed.) The interrogative ἤ would seem to a transcriber more natural after a question and easier of explanation than the conditional εἰ. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ VII.— RESULTS OF THE TWO KINDS OF . OF THE JEWS 2 Corinthians 3:12-1812 Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness [unreservedness] of speech: 13And not as Moses, [om. which] put a veil over his face, that the children of Israel could [might] not steadfastly look to [upon] the end of that which is abolished: 14But their minds were blinded [hardened]: for until this day remaineth the same veil untaken away in the reading of the Old Testament; which veil is done away in Christ [upon the reading of the Old Testament remains the same veil untaken away, because it is taken away (only) in Christ]. 15But even unto this day, when Moses Isaiah 16 read, the veil is [lies, κεῖται] upon their heart. Nevertheless, when it shall turn 17[turns] to the Lord, the veil shall be [is] taken away. Now the Lord is that [the] Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is [om. there] is liberty. 18But we all, with open [unveiled] face beholding as in a glass [mirror] the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, [om. even] as by the Spirit of the Lord [the Lord, the Spirit]. AND 2 Corinthians 3:12-13. Having, therefore, such hope.—The ἐλπις (hope) has reference to the future glory of the New Testament ministry as it had been alluded to in 2 Corinthians 3:8. This glory had been called permanent in 2 Corinthians 3:11, and was to be for the glorification of Christ when he should come to judgment. Some interpreters regard 2 Corinthians 3:6 ff. as a digression, and think that we have here a resumption of the subject (σὖν) there broken off, and that ἐλπίς is here equivalent to πεποίθησις there. This is, however, directly opposed to the peculiar and essential signification of ἐλπίς, and to the connection. [That trust, even if we regard it as “filled out into hope by the intervening vision of the glory of his work” (Stanley), had reference rather to the results of his work, while this hope looked forward to something future and undeveloped]. The therefore (οὖν) introduces us to the practical results which were to follow the glorious ministration of the Gospel, and τοιαὐτην (such) indicates the greatness or superiority of the hope.—We use great boldness of speech.—The whole tenor of the discourse shows us that παῤῥησία cannot mean the internal confidence or joyfulness which the Apostle felt, but the frank, open and unreserved manner which characterized his outward deportment, and the plainness or perspicuity (evidentia) which distinguished his addresses. [Chrysostom: “We speak out everywhere with all freedom, abating, concealing, mistrusting nothing; with confidence, as if we had no idea that we should injure your sight as Moses did that of the Israelites.” The Greek word παῤῥησία embraces the three ideas of openness, candor, and boldness. Moses’ address was interrupted by intervals of concealment, and was constantly reserved on account of his want of full confidence in his people. We have no reason for fears, distrust or concealment]. The connection is: The glory which is connected with the New Testament ministry, makes us unreserved in our communications with the people, and induces us to present divine truth unveiled before them. The very spirit of our religion also demands this, for God’s people could never reach the glorious privileges he has promised them without an opportunity of looking freely and without reserve upon all that our system of religion contains. (Emmerling).—The phrase χρῆσθαιπαῤῥησία occurs more than once in Plato. The idea contained in παῤῥησίαχρώμεθα (Indicative, not Subjunctive) is carried out into more detail in 2 Corinthians 3:13, though negatively by referring to an opposite kind of proceeding by Moses.—And not as Moses put a veil over his face.—This principal sentence is elliptical, because its predicate is to be found in the incidental remark made in connection with it. Such an ellipsis may be found in other Greek writings, but must here be supplied from the words used and the connection following. We may supply after καὶοὐ, simply ποιοῦμεν (we do), or more freely, τίθεμενκάλυμμαἐτὶτὸπρόσωπονἡπμῶν (we put a veil over our faces). The allusion is to a veiling process, quite different from the great boldness which had just been professed. It is said that Moses put over his face a covering (veil); that the children of Israel might not gaze at (clearly see) the end of that which is passing away. By τέλοςτοῦκαταργουμένου is meant either the end, the literal fading away of the splendor which was on Moses’ face (though such a view would not correspond with the subsequent part of the representation); the end of that splendor regarded as the symbol of the whole Old Testament ministration (office) and possibly of the Old Testament dispensation (Religion) itself; or (throwing aside the whole idea of a symbol) of the ministration or institution itself; or the end of Moses himself as the representative of that institution (in which case the masculine would not agree with the neuter τὸκαταργ. of 2 Corinthians 3:11); or the design, the purpose which that ministration or even the law itself was established to accomplish, the result to which that institution led, and for which it was prepared, viz., the divine glory to be unveiled in Christ, and of which the veiled radiance on Moses’ face was a symbol and reflection. (Comp. 2 Corinthians 3:14; 2 Corinthians 3:18, 2 Corinthians 4:4; 2 Corinthians 4:6). Well established usage will not permit us to take πρὸςτὸμὴἀτενίσαι ecbatically [implying a mere consequence of a course of action, without reference to the views of the actors] in the sense of: so that, but we are obliged to understand by them the aim or purpose which the agents had in view. In every instance in which the phrase occurs in the New Testament it probably has reference to a subjective Divine purpose (comp. Meyer), and not to a merely objective result of divine arrangements. And yet we may suppose that so great a prophet as Moses, profoundly acquainted with the general scheme of the Divine administration, may have known that he was fulfilling a divine purpose, or at least that he was promoting such a result. That he was practising an intentional deception (Fritzsche), or was guilty of an improper dissimulation, the Apostle was far from implying. Even if we make the end of that which is passing away, refer to the end of Moses’ ministry (comp. 2 Corinthians 3:11), and suppose that Moses saw that end (τέλος) typified by the disappearance of the radiance from his face, such a covert proceeding (tecte agere) must be regarded simply as a pedagogic or disciplinary course of conduct. The same may be said of an interpretation proposed by Meyer (but which need not include a reference to a Rabbinic allegory), according to which Paul recognizes in τέλος, what he afterwards brings out more fully, viz., a judicial or retributive proceeding, at least on God’s part. This implies that a sight of the Divine radiance on Moses’ face was withheld from the children of Israel, because their previous conduct had made them unworthy of such a favor. Such a concealment was a symbolical representation of the fact that in consequence of their sins, Moses, i. e., the law represented by him, or the Scriptures of the Old Testament read by them, would remain so veiled before them, that they could never perceive the Divine glory which rested especially upon those Scriptures and those rites which testified of Christ; and accordingly they would continue in unbelief and have no part in the salvation by Christ. Neander: “The mind of the Apostle was entirely taken up with the symbolical meaning of this incident. Moses is in his eye simply a symbol of the whole legal economy, and from this point of view everything in the history is regarded. The covering which Moses used to conceal his face, represents the entire veil of symbols under which divine things were represented. As long as these divine things could be seen only in the light of the Old Testament, there was no way of distinguishing eternal truth from the temporary form in which it was represented to men (essence and symbol). The contrast here implied may therefore be carried out thus: we who make known the Gospel to men need never fear that its glory may some day come to an end. We may allow our hearers the clearest and freest inspection of its mysteries, and its radiance will only shine forth the more brightly.”[“The whole subsequent section (14–18) is parenthetical. Before and after it, the ministry is the subject; in it, they to whom the ministry is directed. But it serves to show the whole spirit and condition of the two classes, and thus further to substantiate the character of openness and freedom asserted of the Christian ministry” (Alford)]. 2 Corinthians 3:14-16. But their minds (mental perceptions) were hardened (made callous).—The words distinctly announce that this was a divine judgment. Νοὴματα signifies not the already formed thoughts (2 Corinthians 2:11), but as in 2 Corinthians 4:4; 2 Corinthians 11:3, the spiritual sense, the power used in thinking and willing (Beck, Seelenl. p. 59), or the various activities of the νοῦς (Meyer). We may furthermore conceive (retaining the signification usually given: thoughts, intellectual perceptions), that these powers become petrified or hardened, i. e., are put so completely into stocks, and made immovable, that they no longer yield to pressure, and can make no progress toward that clear knowledge on which everything depends. Πωροῦν, (from Πῶρος, callus, an induration of the skin which destroys all sensibility), obdurare, to harden, to blunt (Isaiah 6:10; Mark 6:52; Mark 8:17), is sometimes used with respect to the heart (καρδία. Romans 11:25), and sometimes of the Jews (οἰλοιποί). We are left in doubt when this hardening took place, for this depends upon the relation given to ἀλλά. If this has reference to παῤῥησιαχρώμεθα, and particularly to καὶοὑ (2 Corinthians 3:13), meaning: “We act in an open manner, with no such concealment as Moses practised, and yet their νοήματα have become hardened,” we must suppose that the hardening had but recently taken place when the Apostle wrote. But if we refer it to πρὸςτὸμὴἀτενίσαι, (i. e., to their gazing, etc.), the hardening must have taken place in Moses’ time, though the subsequent remarks show that it had continued to the Apostle’s own time. It is in favor of the latter reference, that the veil is immediately afterwards the subject of discourse. In this case it is said directly that the minds of the people were hardened, that, they might not look upon the end (scope, object) of that which is abolished. He proves and illustrates his position, that the hardening was not abolished, by an appeal to the actual facts before their eyes, in the condition of the nation at the time he was speaking:—for until this day, the same veil remains on the reading of the Old Covenant.—That these facts resulted from the same causes which were in action in Moses’ day, he asserts by saying that the same veil (τὸαὐτὸκάλυμμα) remains: for as a veil was interposed between the divine radiance on Moses’ face and the eyes of the Israelites, so has the divine radiance of the Old Covenant been concealed from that people, down to the period in which he was writing. [It is not directly implied that this veil was over the heart, under the preaching of the Gospel. The reference is solely to the Israelitish nation under the hearing and reading of the Old Covenant. But the change of the medium of communication makes necessary a change of figure. After Moses oral communications ceased—it was a book which spoke to them. The reason any do not see the glory when they read, is not in the book which addresses them, but in the heart of the reader. The active influence which obstructed the proper understanding of the truth was in the other direction, and the veil had to be on the heart. Comp. Alford.] It is as if a veil had been thrown over the reading, for the great truths of the Old Covenant were not recognized even when they were plainly read, and the glory of God actually contained in that dispensation remained a mystery to them. [In opposition to Theodoret, who maintains that the power which hardens, was entirely from within the heart itself, Meyer endeavors to show that the passive επωρώθη clearly implies that the hardening was the act of another (comp. Romans 11:7). The word signifies blindness (as in our authorized English version) only by a double metaphor, i. e., by supposing that the intellect and heart lose their perceptive power. Chrysostom says the nation became “τὸπαχὺκαὶχαμαίζηλον, stupid and grovelling,” because they prided themselves on the superior glory of Moses.] ’Επι may refer either to place, i. e., over the reading, which would here correspond to the face of Moses when he spoke to the people; or (better) to time, i. e., during the reading. Comp. 2 Corinthians 3:15, ἡνίκαἀναγὶνωσκεται, etc. We meet with the phrase παλαιὰδιαθήκη (Old Covenant) nowhere else in the New Testament; and it must here designate, not the original Scriptures, the collection of books which now bear the name, but the Covenant itself; the substance of what was read in the synagogues (the writings of Moses and the Prophets), whose types and promises contained the divine glory afterwards revealed in Christ. [Such an expression shows how deep was Paul’s conviction, that that ancient covenant was now becoming antiquated, and was about to be superseded.] In the remaining part of 2 Corinthians 3:14, μὴἀνακαλυπτόμενον may be construed as if the participle were to be taken absolutely—it not being unveiled (or discovered to them) that it (the Old Covenant) is done away in Christ.—Or, inasmuch as it remained concealed from the Jews that the Old Covenant was to be abrogated in consequence of the appearance and work of Christ (Romans 10:4; Colossians 2:14). Such an expression would be a particular determination of what had been meant by saying that the same veil remains, etc. These words may, however, be joined with the previous words so as to say: “the same veil in the reading of the Old Covenant remains not taken away,” and then ὅτιἐνχριςτῷκαταργεῖται gives us the reason: “because it is taken away in Christ.” That this would actually take place only in Christ was a self-evident thing to the Apostle and his readers; and that this “only” is sufficiently indicated by the emphasis which must be laid upon ἐνχρισρῷ, cannot be doubted. It is very natural, however, from the example of 2 Corinthians 3:13, to refer καταργεῖται to the Old Covenant, and an entirely different word (περιαιρεῖται) is used with respect to the removal of the veil. On the other hand the structure of the sentence makes it natural to connect ἀνακαλυπτόμενον with κάλυμμα; and even if we have a right to use the participle in this case absolutely (since it is not common for any verbs to be used in this way except ἐξόν, εἰρημένον, and such like), it is hard to justify the use of ἀνακαλυπτε͂ιν in this absolute manner, inasmuch as everywhere else it has with it an accusative of the object. The attempt which Rόckert has made to combine the two constructions together, and to make the Apostle say: “and will not be taken away, that they (the people) might see that it (the Old Covenant) has its end in Christ,” has no claim to our acceptance. The reading ὅτι, which Luther [and our Eng. translators] followed, and which makes the nature of the covering itself the reason for its not being removed (=quippe quod, Meyer) has opposed to it all the old versions, whose testimony on such a point should have especial importance. The positive contrast to the negative μὴἀνακαλυπτ. is given in 2 Corinthians 3:15—But even until this day when Moses is read, a veil lies upon their heart.—This means, according to the previous construction, either, “it will not be disclosed that, etc., but until this day the veil is upon their hearts;” or “and will not be discovered, because it will be taken away in Christ, but until this day a covering lies,” etc. The latter interpretation would not seem to have required the repetition of κάλυμμα. The want of the article may be accounted for on both interpretations on the ground that the veil is transposed from the object looked upon to the persons looking. This change may have been in the Apostle’s mind when he wrote 2 Corinthians 3:14, if ἐπὶ (τῃἀναγν.) be taken with respect to time, and then the present clause is only a more complete definition of that idea. In no case (even if ἐπὶ has the sense of on or over) could the Apostle have spoken of two coverings in order to imply a high degree of incapacity. This would have required an additional καί before ἐπὶτήνκαρδ. αὐτῶν. This is the only time ἡνίκα is found in the New Testament, but in the Sept. it occurs frequently, and in this very passage in Exodus 34:34 it is used in the sense of a space of time =when. The name Μωῦσῆς signifies here the writings of Moses. The covering said to be extended [“ κεῖταιἐπῖ with the accusative pregnans: involving the being laid on and remaining there”—Alford] over the hearts of the people, signifies not an obstruction to their moral powers i. e., of the will, but a defect in the intellectual faculties of understanding.—But when it turns unto the Lord the veil is taken away (2 Corinthians 3:16).—Here the veil in fact is said to be removed in consequence of an act of the will. The heart (καρδία), which is the subject of ἐπιστρέψη (for as τις or ’Ισραηλ have not yet been mentioned, they cannot be made such a subject), seems to be regarded here in two aspects: first as the seat of intelligence, and then as the seat of the will or of self-determination. The ἐπιστρέφεινἐπὶτὸνκύριον, is the turning of one’s self to Christ, and this is a conversion just as far as it had been preceded by a turning away. In the rejection of the Lord the heart of the children of Israel was regarded as completely apostate, and hence its conversion to Christ would be looked upon as a return to the Lord. This conversion is supposed to have taken place before the veil is taken away, inasmuch as the latter is said to be the consequence of the former (ἡνίκαἅν). Luther’s translation: “Wenn es sich bekehrte, so wόrde,” etc., (if it shall turn, the veil will, etc.), is incorrect, and would not perhaps have been made had the author of it not been influenced, probably unconsciously, by the idea that such a conversion before the removal of the veil was impossible. But the same assertion is found manifestly in Romans 11:25 ff. The Apostle is not speaking of those individual conversions which take place in every age. But when this general conversion shall be brought about, when that aversion to Christ which springs from a carnal mind and proud self-righteousness shall be overcome, and when, consequently, they shall confidingly and with sincere acknowledgements of their guilty error and unbelief, turn to Him, they will clearly discover as they read the Old Testament that it everywhere bears testimony for Christ. The Divine glory really contained in its types and prophecies, and now more fully revealed in Christ himself, will shine so clearly that they will be able to look upon it with a steadfast gaze. The expression reminds us of Exo 34:34. In the mind of the Apostle the removal of the covering from Moses’ face when he went again into the Divine presence seemed a type of the future removal of Israel’s blindness. Περιαιρε͂ιν contains an intimation that the veil was completely around the heart. [As this is the verb used in the Sept. of Exodus 34:34, and as περιῃρε͂ιτο there and almost uniformly throughout that version can be taken only in an active sense, Stanley contends that the word here (περιαιρε͂ιται) should have an active and not a passive sense (strips off—not, is stript off). He also thinks that the only nominative which both ἐπιστρέψῃ and περιαρε͂ιται can have is Μωῦσῆς (and in this Calvin and Estius agree with him), since ’Ισραὴλ is too remote, and ἡκαρδια is not sufficiently prominent. He thinks that then each clause beginning with ἡνίκα will correspond, and that the parallel with Exodus 34:34 will be preserved. He takes Moses as the representative of not only the Old Covenant but of the nation, and makes the sense to be: “when Moses, in the person of his people, turns again to Him who is our Lord now as he went of old time to Him who was their Lord in Sinai, then he strips off the veil from his face and from their hearts, and then the perishable nature of the law will be made manifest in the full blaze of the Divine glory.” But ἡ ?̔καρδία is quite as natural a subject for ἐπιστρέψῃ, and as likely to be prominent in the Apostle’s mind as Μωῦσῆς, and the idea of ἐπιστρέψη is certainly that of a thorough conversion, and not a mere change of opinion about the law. The careful adoption by the Apostle of the words of the Sept., some of which were strange to him, shows that he was closely copying the imagery of the history; and he here intends to say, that as Moses had on a veil when his face was turned away from God, and took it off when he went in to God, so the heart of the people when turned from the Lord was veiled, and when it turned to him had the veil removed. Both ἐπιστρέψη and περιαιρ. should be rendered as an indefinite present and not in the future as in the authorized version. The turning and removing of the veil was in process of completion. The process was continually going on by the turning of individuals in every age, though the general conversion was in the distant future.] 2 Corinthians 3:17-18.—Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, is liberty—(2 Corinthians 3:17). This sentence is connected with 2 Corinthians 3:16, and explains or gives the reason for what is said there. We have in fact a syllogism, though its several members are not given in their regular order. The major premise is: Where the Spirit of the Lord is, is freedom; the minor is: as the Lord is the Spirit, whoever turns to the Lord has that Spirit; and the conclusion is: therefore such a one must be free, and will no more be enveloped by the covering which veils and checks the action of the soul (Meyer). It is evident from 2 Corinthians 3:18 that the liberty connected with the removal of the covering which obstructed the people’s open insight into the divine glory, is not a new subject of discourse foreign to what had been discussed, as e. g., a freedom from the yoke of the law (though this must be virtually communicated during such an insight). ̔Οδὲκύριος is intimately connected with 2 Corinthians 3:16 : ‘But the Lord, to whom their heart thus turns, is the Spirit.’ Many artificial explanations have been given of this verse. Without noticing those attempts which have been in direct contradiction to the meaning of the words and the scope of the context, (one of which went so far as to conjecture that the reading must have been οὐδέκύριος) we find here such an identification of Christ and the Holy Spirit, that the Lord, to whom the heart turns, is in no practical respect different from the Holy Spirit received in conversion. The fellowship of Christ into which it entered, when it turned to the Lord, was in truth the fellowship of the Holy Spirit. Christ is virtually the Spirit, inasmuch as He communicates Himself in conversion, and at other times by means of the Spirit; the Holy Spirit is His spirit: the animating principle of the Lord’s indwelling and influence in the hearts of believers is this Holy Spirit (comp. Romans 8:9 ff.; Galatians 2:20; Galatians 4:6; Philippians 1:19; Acts 10:28 comp. with Ephesians 4:11; John 14:18 et. al.). In favor of this explanation is the immediately following phrase: οὐδέτὸπνεῦμακυρίου (where the Spirit of the Lord is), in which we may notice also, that the article before πνεῦμα indicates that every thing which is certainly the work of the Spirit, must be exclusively from Christ (Neander). But such a virtual identification of Christ and the Spirit, can have reference only to Christ in His state of exaltation (comp. 1 Corinthians 15:45); for it is only in that state that He is the independent source of all divine light and power to the bodies and souls of believers. He is then no longer dependent upon any source beyond Himself, for the divine light and power which he possesses or dispenses: and the Son of man is no longer the Son of God in a state of self-renunciation, dependent upon the influences of the Spirit, but a perfect centre of divine fulness. Hence, we may say of Him: he is the Spirit, (not merely quasi) because he is glorified in the spiritual world. From this it moreover follows (for the idea is essential to that of the Spirit of God), that the new birth, (in which what is here called liberty, i. e., the free action of the mind, a free intuition of the divine glory, and a release from the impediments of a fleshly nature, is included) must have its source in Him. He it is who makes like Himself those who turn to Him, and from Him proceeds the pure free light of life (the truth which makes us free). Hence no sooner is it said that the Lord is the Spirit than He is called the Spirit of the Lord. [Paul had been speaking of a spirituality in the ancient dispensation, which had been entirely missed by the ancient Jews. This abstract spirituality he wished to connect with a concrete reality, and hence he here says that the Lord (to whom the heart of the people must turn) is that Spirit. Even this Lord, he also wishes to identify (not in his essential nature, but in his activity in this special department) with the Holy Spirit (who, the next verse shows, is here meant). Comp. Alford. The ancient fathers (especially Chrysostom and Augustine, see Wordsworth) were led by their extreme dogmatic zeal to press this verse into a proof of the Holy Spirit’s divinity. They almost universally construed τὸπνεῦμα as the subject, and ὁκύριος as the predicate of the sentence. Grammatically this is allowed to be perhaps possible, (Alford, Meyer). but it is evidently forced, and the sentiment so expressed would be entirely foreign to the course of the Apostle’s argument. It is only inferentially from the identity of our Lord’s and the Spirit’s operations, that such a doctrine here enters]. In 2 Corinthians 3:18 he refers still further to the way in which this freedom, which has its source in the Lord and his Spirit, is produced among those who believe in Christ. In illustrating this he now recurs to the figure of the glory and the free looking upon it.—But we all with open face.—The object of δὲ is, not to put what was now to be said in contrast with what had been said of the Israelites or of Moses, (as if his idea was: “this is true not only of one, but of all,”) but simply to indicate a continuance of the discourse. ̓Ημεῖς (we) includes not merely the Apostle and his fellow-laborers, or the Apostle and all who preach the Gospel (Catholics appeal to 2 Corinthians 4:1, and contrast πάντες (all) with the single individual Moses), but all believers, who, the connection shows, must be included in the πάντες. (Chap 2 Corinthians 4:3; 2 Corinthians 4:6). In correspondence with the removal of the veil and the liberty of which he had been speaking, he now speaks of an open or unveiled face (ἀνακεκαλυμμένῳπροσώπῳ). This implies that the covering which had been extended over the heart of the people might be taken off, and that the spiritual face might thus be freed from the veil which prevented its vision of the glory. In consistency with this, must be our explanation of the next clause:—beholding in a glass—κατοπτριζόμενοι). This word, which is not found at all in the Septuagint, and occurs in the New Testament only in this place, has the sense in the active voice of: to show in a mirror, or, as in a mirror, to reflect; and in the middle: to reflect one’s self, to see one’s self in a glass [Winer, § 39, 3; Jeff., § 362 ff.]. With reference to the example of Moses, we may interpret the words thus: we show to ourselves in a mirror the glory of the Lord; and in doing so we are not veiled as Moses, but we have uncovered faces. We are compelled, however, by both the preceding and the succeeding context, to think of a looking of believers, 1, in contrast with the Israelites, who were kept from looking upon the Divine glory by a covering upon their hearts; and 2, with reference to the being changed (μεταμορφῦμεθα) connected with this looking (comp. 1 John 3:2). Κατοπτριζεσθαι has therefore the meaning in this place of: to perceive as in a mirror (we meet with the word in this sense in Philo.; see Meyer). There is no imperfection, of vision necessarily implied here, as in 1 Corinthians 13:12. The glass is not the internal spirit, i. e., the heart of the believer (for the eye which looks is supposed to be there), but the Gospel.—The glory of the Lord (i. e., of Christ, not of God) is the representation which is given of Christ‘s life, greatness, power, loveliness, etc. (Beck, Christl. Lehrwiss. I., p. 67), or of His grace and truth (John 1:14), His holiness and Divine fulness (Colossians 2:9), as these were manifested among men. These are exhibited to us in the Gospel as in a mirror. And as we look into this by faith, freely and unobstructed by any covering of a fleshly mind (such as impeded the vision of the Jews)—we are changed into the same image.—The image here is the image of the Lord, and that with which it is said to be identical (αὐτὴν), is not the πάντες (as if he would thus say that all were made alike), but that which they had been said to look upon, viz., the very same image which we all behold, for we all behold the glory of the Lord as in a mirror. While thus looking we shall be changed: we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is (1 John 3:2; comp. Romans 8:29). Neander: “We have here a beautiful contrast: the Jews who looked with covered faces upon the glory in Moses’ face, did not really look into it, and so remained as they were before, unchanged. But when Christians look with unveiled faces upon the image of God in Christ, this very looking implies that they are already in communion with Christ, and necessarily reacts upon their internal and spiritual life. The more they penetrate by such a believing contemplation the Divine glory, the more will their hearts be pervaded by what they behold.” There is no direct reference therefore to the final transformation which believers will experience when Christ shall come in the Parousia, but only to the gradual assimilation to Christ which takes place in them during the present life: the becoming partakers of the Divine nature (2 Peter 1:4) and the putting on, of Christ, and of the new man (Romans 13:14; Ephesians 4:24). The accusative does not require that any word like κατά or είς should be understood; nor need the whole phrase be taken in an adverbial sense analogous to τοῦτοντὸντρόπον (in this wise); for in the very idea it is implied that the development or change is according to a particular form (Meyer). In the phrase: from glory to glory the words from glory (άπὸδόξης) may designate the causal source from which the influence proceeds, i. e.. “the glory of the Lord;” and to glory (εἰςδόξαν) the glory which is produced in us, that to which it brings us (comp. 2 Corinthians 2:16); or the whole phrase may signify the continuous development as it advances step by step. The former explanation receives support from the sentence which immediately follows:—as by the Lord the Spirit (καθάπερἀπὸκυρίουπνεύματος). And yet the other explanation harmonizes very well with μεταμορφούμεθα, and on etymological grounds may readily be conceded, inasmuch as ἀπὸδόξηςεἰςδόξαν would be quite as allowable a form of speech as ἐκδυνόνμεωςεἰςδύναμιν (Psalms 84:8). The καθάπερἀπὸκυρ. πν. may also be made to harmonize very well with this explanation: we shall be changed from one degree of glory to another just as might be expected from the Lord (or according to the nature of what comes from the Lord). The καθάπερ has a more forcible signification than ὡς, and denotes the agreement of the effect with the cause (like ὡς in 2 Corinthians 2:17). We may inquire whether πνεύματος in the phrase ἀπὸκυρὶουπνεύματος is dependent upon ἀπὸ and κυρίου upon πνεύματος [by the Spirit of the Lord], comp. 2 Corinthians 3:17, πνεῦμακυρίου; or whether πνεύματος is governed by κυπίου [by the Lord of the Spirit], in which case we may also inquire whether the words πνεύμ. and κυρ. are in the relation of dependence (by the Spirit which is from the Lord), or in that of apposition (by the Spirit who is the Lord). To govern πνεύματος directly by ἀπὸ is not allowable evidently on account of the position of the words. We must certainly concede also that the relation of apposition is not as natural as that which is commonly given to the genitive. The relation of dependence which has commonly been acquiesced in for our passage gives us likewise a very good sense: “very much as we might expect from one who is the Lord of the Spirit” (comp. κύριοςτῆςδόξης in 1 Corinthians 2:8). Κυριος (Lord) furthermore implies that the Lord not only has or possesses the Spirit, but that He has complete power in this matter to direct in the dispensation and communication of the Spirit according to His pleasure in ever growing fulness. If we so construe it as to make this Spirit the same as the Holy Spirit, even that Divine agent is His Spirit (Romans 8:9 f.; Galatians 4:6), for the Spirit is shed forth or sent, by and through Him (Titus 3:6; Acts 2:33; John 15:26); so that the Spirit’s agency among men is dependent upon Him. If, however, the words are taken in a qualitative sense: “by one who is the Lord of the Spirit,” i. e., of the Divine light of life, this Divine light of life is no other than the πνεῦμαἅγιον which He communicates from the infinite fulness of His own Divine life. The want of the article before. both κυρίου and πνεύματος makes this qualitative signification most probable. [As Meyer well remarks, however, this qualitative meaning is entirely inadmissible here, since throughout our passage the word τνεῦμα must mean the Holy Spirit (the Divine Spirit) in His personal subsistence]. Both interpretations, however, terminate in the same general sense. Neander: “Paul has before his mind in this passage the whole course of the Christian’s progress, commencing here on earth and attaining its perfection in the heavenly world.” [Each prominent word in this passage has been made the object of special attention and difficulty. 1. The object beheld, was the glory of the Lord. Paul had shown this to be Christ (2 Corinthians 3:17), but He is here contemplated as an image (εἰκόνα) in a mirror (not “a glass,” but κατόπτρον). An image is usually an imperfect likeness (1 Corinthians 13:12), and the Gospel must imperfectly represent Him. It is not the objective and glorified Christ Himself that we see. 2. The act of beholding, is here (not ἀτενιζω, as with Moses, but) κατοπτρίζω. The rays are reflected and not directly received (see Chrysostom’s beautiful comparisons in the Hom. notes). The ancient expositors usually interpreted this word in the sense of: reflecting as in a mirror, meaning that believers reflect the glory of the Lord, and they are followed by Luther, Olshausen, Billroth and Stanley. But most modern commentators have felt compelled to disregard their authority, high as it is on such a question, and to take the word in the sense of beholding as in a mirror. Though they have been able to appeal to but one well established quotation (Philo) to sustain them in such a usage, one instance especially in Alexandrian Greek is sufficient, with the obvious necessities of the context, to warrant us in adopting such a meaning. Certainly no instance has been found in which the word has the meaning: to reflect, and we can see no connection between reflecting the Divine image and being changed into the same. 3. The persons beholding, are many, “all (πάντες in contrast with one Moses), with open face.” Both Christ and the heart are ἀνακεκαλυμμένοι. 4. The effect of the beholding is, “we are metamorphosed into the same image” (accusative without a preposition to show the immediateness of the transition, and the present indic, to show the beginning but not the completion of the change, Webster, Syn., pp. 81 ff.). All become like their Lord, and of course like one another. 5. The reason for the change, “as by the Lord the Spirit.” Suitably, as might be expected from the Lord (καθάπερ), and efficiently (ἀπὸ) from Him as the source of influence. We cannot but sympathize with Alford when he says of the rendering: the Lord of the Spirit, that it “seems to convey very little meaning, besides being altogether unprecedented.” We add that Paul had been preparing us for the expression: the Lord the Spirit (apposition, the Lord who is the Spirit) by expressly showing that Christ was both the Lord and the Spirit of the Old Covenant (2 Corinthians 3:16-18). Such an expression seems as grammatical and suitable as “from God the Father” (ἀπὸθεοῦπατρὸς) in Romans 1:7; Ephesians 1:2; Philippians 1:2, et alic. comp. 2 Corinthians 1:2]. AND ETHICAL1. Even in the understanding of revealed truth, there is a clear distinction between legal bondage and evangelical freedom. Until the mind gets extricated from that bondage it is concerned only with a multiplicity of special details; the living unity formed by the general truths, in which all these concentrate, is covered by a veil—and no proper conception of the divine system as a whole, is possible. The glory of Christ which constitutes the true aim of every part of God’s word can never be appreciated or discovered by a heart thus confined and lowered, for such occupations will be like a veil over the internal eye. But no sooner does one attain the position of evangelical freedom than his eye is opened upon the general system and principles of truth. And such a position is gained when the heart is turned toward Christ, in whom the fulness of the Godhead substantially dwells, all particular rays of truth concentrate, and each truth acquires a self-evidencing power. The moment we thus recognize and surrender our hearts to Christ, we renounce all idea of satisfaction in ourselves or our doings, and we lay hold on Christ as the only source of peace or life. The veil immediately drops from our spiritual face, the divine glory in the Scriptures acquires a wonderful lustre, our souls become thoroughly enamored of God in Christ, and we begin to grow into the image of holy love as it beams from the Gospel. A living likeness of Christ is formed within, old things pass away, and all things are created anew. A quickening light brightens up within us, from glory to glory unto the perfect day of the celestial life. 2. This legal position may be illustrated in all those who turn from the more perfect revelation God has given us in the Gospel, but especially in the Jewish people still clinging to a dispensation which was intended to be only provisional and shadowy. In religious matters, their intellectual faculties have always been torpid and inflexible; and they seem unable to leave the schoolmaster, whose only business was to direct them to Christ himself (Galatians 3:24). They know only the law as given by Moses, and nothing of grace and truth by Jesus Christ (John 1:17). By minute acts of obedience to many particular precepts they hope to merit the divine favor, and they fail of recognizing that righteousness of faith which renounces all merit and trusts to mere grace, though it was often illustrated in the lives of their own saints, and in all the dealings of God under the ancient covenant. In like manner when they contemplated their prophetic Scriptures, their minds were occupied only with such particular expressions as best accorded with their carnal notions, and they failed to comprehend that general kingdom in which all such specifications find their right position and unity. But a time is coming when not only a few individuals, as in past and present times, but the whole nation shall become tired of such things, and with humble hearts and broken spirits shall turn to Him who was promised and offered first, and who still offers Himself, to them as their Messiah. In His own time He will so present Himself to them, that they will confess with shame, that He, and He alone, is their Messiah; with a free and clear insight they will read that Word which has so long been a sealed book (Isaiah 29:10 ff); the covering shall be taken away from their hearts; and they will look with unveiled faces upon that Christ who is not only their true Lord, but the Spirit, and communicates the Spirit and spiritual liberty to all who turn to Him. [3. The Old Testament should be studied under the New Testament light. Not only should we throw ourselves back among the persons and scenes there portrayed, so as to understand what was real and necessary for them, but as much as possible look on them in their relation to the whole future of God’s kingdom. As a part of a preparatory system, directed by a Ruler who sees the end from the beginning, all persons and events have quite as much significance with reference to something in the future, as with reference to the age and circumstances in which they were. A Grotius therefore, who found a Christ nowhere in the Old Testament, fails of reaching its true significance, quite as much as a Cocceius, who found Him in everything. 4. The Lord Jesus was as fundamental a reality under the Old Covenant as under the New. He “was that Spirit” which was truly under the letter, and “the Lord” from whom the people then turned. The Incarnation was not the first and abrupt entrance of a divine Person into our humanity. Christ was not only “the body” to every “shadow” (Colossians 2:17) but the agent in every event and institution of the ancient covenant. Every redeemed sinner of every age must owe not only his redemption to “the blood of the cross,” but his recovery and conduct unto actual salvation, to him as the “Captain of the Lord’s host.” He is the only Mediator between God and man; and whatever falsehood we discover under the Rabbinic fables of the “Angel Jehovah,” we must recognize “the Lord the Spirit” under the “Jehovah” of the ancient covenant. 5. And yet there is an essential distinction between the Old and the New Dispensation. If we refuse to go with many who would totally divorce Christianity from Judaism, we equally shrink from those who look upon it simply as a developed Judaism. Though every dispensation of the true religion must be built upon the same fundamental principles, their outward forms may be radically different. The patriarchal and Mosaic ministrations were predominantly and characteristically legal. The latter especially, was a system of minute rules, and but few principles. Little was left to discretion or free affection. Pardon was shadowed forth as well as human guilt under the sacrifices, but these were a veil which concealed a mystery not to be trusted to men’s weakness. An esoteric reserve was in every rite and symbol. The New Covenant abolishes all this. God’s people are entrusted with the highest mysteries. The disciplina of Hellenism, of Rabbinism, and of Sacerdotalism generally, is entirely abjured. All idea of a pedagogic system, preparatory to something hereafter, is renounced. God’s people are no longer in pupilage, but in their full majority. Christianity is an everlasting Gospel, and the last of all conceivable dispensations of the true religion among men. See a Sermon of Dr. Emmons, on “The Mosaic Dispensation abolished by the Christian Dispensation.” Works, Vol. VI. Ser. 13. 6. Congeniality of mind is indispensable to a perception of the truth. No one is prepared to study theological truth until he has “turned to the Lord.” When he yearns after the Lord and salvation, then the veil which confined the view to what is selfish and individual, drops off from the heart, and a full system of truth and an everlasting kingdom beams upon an “open face.” John 7:17. 7. The Jewish people are yet to be converted to Christ. It is a wonderful prophecy which the ancient Prophets and Apostles have given us, that amid the wreck of all ancient nations, the Jewish, the most unlikely to do so of them all, should survive; and that the heart (the collective national heart) would turn to Christ. This is a separate matter from the assertion, that as the “Covenant people,” they are to have special privileges and honors among other nations in the kingdom of Christ.] AND Chrysostom: 2 Corinthians 3:18. “As soon as we are baptized, our souls being cleansed by the Spirit are illuminated so as to shine brighter than the sun; we not only look into the divine glory, but we receive a degree of lustre from it, as a piece of pure silver receives the rays of the sun when it is placed within its beams and reflects them—not merely because of its own nature, but because of the sun’s luminousness. In like manner the soul which has been purified and made brighter than silver, receives a beam of the Spirit’s glory, and reflects it.” [Theodoret:—As clear water presents an image of those who look upon it, of the sun itself and of the vaulted sky, so the pure heart is converted into a kind of copy and mirror of the divine glory.] Starke: 2 Corinthians 3:12. Whoever would cheerfully speak of divine truth, must first receive Christ freely and joyfully to his own heart, and believe that salvation is freely offered to all men (1 Timothy 2:4). Hedinger: 2 Corinthians 3:13. Israel’s blindness was more than common; they had much preaching and but slight impression; Moses’ face shone brightly upon them, and why could they not behold him? A brutish habit, a dull intellect, inveterate wickedness, and an irreconcilable antipathy to God and His Word, had formed a thick covering around their hearts (2 Corinthians 4:3). 2 Corinthians 3:14 :—Hedinger. Israel’s blindness was not a mere natural effect, but a judgment of God that they might henceforth be ever reading but learning nothing. What multitudes seem in haste to harden their hearts by their abuse of hearing and reading! Why do they read at all, if they have no desire to be healed (Mark 4:25)? If we would derive any profit from reading the Old Testament, or get rid of Moses’ covering, we must become acquainted with Jesus Christ and seek for Him there. Then shall we perceive that the law was never given us to justify us, and that the only justification which will avail before God, is not in ourselves, but in Christ by faith. 2 Corinthians 3:15. It is a terrible thing to be blind, but to be blind with no desire to see in the midst of clear light, is far worse (John 9:39; Revelation 3:17). 2 Corinthians 3:16. We can never have a true practical knowledge of God except by turning to the Lord. 2 Corinthians 3:17. To have Jesus alone, is to have the Gospel comfort and the sweetest pleasure. The surest refreshment is found in the way of godly sorrow. Glorious triumph of faith! The curse is abolished, Satan is vanquished, and sin is taken away; every cord is cut, and we are free! 2 Corinthians 3:18 : A knowledge of God’s love, holiness and goodness as they are presented in the Gospel, is like a clear reflection of the sun, it produces a copy of those divine perfections in the soul, which receives the impression as naturally as the eye does an image from the mirror. The more we receive of such knowledge, the more perfectly are those attributes reproduced in our faith and life.—Hedinger: Imprint, O Jesus, thine image on our souls, and make us more entirely like thyself! Berlenb. Bible, 2 Corinthians 3:12 :—A spiritual mind knows in whom it has believed, and the Spirit of the Son will lead it directly to the Father, that it may know and make known to others, both the Father and the Son. This is the perpetual well-spring of an ingenuous spirit. 2 Corinthians 3:13. Why should any now be kept back by a slavish, timid and hesitating spirit, when they have a right to claim all the blessings of divine grace? 2 Corinthians 3:14. “They have eyes, and yet they see not.” It is all the same as if they could not read. This is a righteous judgment upon them for shutting themselves from the light, and refusing to be drawn by the Father. “Ye search the Scriptures, and ye do well; but ye will not come to me”—(John 5:39-40). Thus it is among many at the present day; indeed a double covering is now in their way, for it rests not only upon the Old, but upon the New Testament. They have never been anointed with the Spirit; they will not humbly bow before the Lord, and their own righteousness always stands before them as an idolatrous pillar. 2 Corinthians 3:15. Let us by all means get out of that old Judaism which receives nothing but what pleases us—for it is under the influence of such a spirit that the hearts of many are hardened, and hypocritically indulge in a thousand prejudices against the truth and its proper spirit. “Are we not Lutherans,” they exclaim, “have we not been baptized, etc.” Those who resist the truth, tell us much of certain intellectual powers with which man is endowed (reason). We would not despise these, but we dare not appeal to them as the final arbitrators and sources of religious truth. And yet this is what has bewitched multitudes of our learned men. 2 Corinthians 3:16. Let men cease to prescribe barren rules and institutions for the Lord, and let them turn to Him prayerfully and with all their hearts, and they will soon find that their light will brighten, a host of prejudices will vanish, and darkness and error will be cleared away—(Isaiah 25:7). Though the covering may have wrapped itself completely around our spirits, if wo will but turn to the light and seek wisdom from God in sincere faith, it will be torn away. (Ephesians 5:14; Acts 9:11; Acts 9:18).—Oftentimes when an intelligent man imagines that he has attained a permanent and lively conception of sacred mysteries, he receives the Divine anointing, and finds that a number of coverings had been formed upon his heart; he is surprised to gain entirely new views of God’s word, and as the salve of God’s Spirit gradually extends over his mental eye, one film of legal and figurative forms after another falls off. 2 Corinthians 3:17. The Lord the Spirit who gives us spiritual life, and delivers us from all constraint of external authority, all unwillingness, indolence and feebleness, etc., in the performance of our duties. (John 8:36). The glory of the Lord then sheds its beams upon an open face.—Whoever truly looks into the ministry and law of liberty, can never be out of harmony with the Divine will, for the Spirit directs him and supplies him with all he needs. He can have no fellowship with any thing which is impure, for the Spirit is always directing his mind to those higher and better things which satisfy him. Such is the spiritual freedom which withdraws us from the slavery of sense, and not only subjects the body to the spirit but the spirit itself to God’s Spirit.—The way by which we reach it is very likely by a painful experience of what a legal bondage is. Under such sorrows faith in Christ puts forth its power and finds deliverance in Him. Then the humbled heart knows how to appreciate the freedom of a pure service, and yields a cheerful obedience. Without making a sinful conscience of any thing, it will indulge in no sin, and will rather renounce its own freedom on account of another’s weakness.—What before seemed a severe discipline and torment, is now a light which drives away all darkness. The soul is in the light and walks in the light.—Where the Lord is, He has a sanctuary in which He and His Spirit dwells; a glorious ministration of the Spirit is carried on; God is worshipped in the beauty of holiness; and a new life, and a new freedom, and a blessedness never known before, is enjoyed. 2 Corinthians 3:18. As sunbeams produce an image of the sun, so the beams of Divine glory produce a Divine likeness.—If we will but stand before the mirror of our crucified Lord, His lovely image will so impress itself upon our hearts that we shall partake of His peculiar Spirit. Loving Him with all our hearts we must become like Him. We shall thus in our measure see God as we walk, and possess a more than ordinary enjoyment of God and of His glory.—And yet such a transformation must not be expected at once, but gradually, from one degree of glory and Divine blessedness to another (comp. 2 Corinthians 4:16); and always in a way which makes us feel our dependence upon grace (as by the Spirit of the Lord). The moment we take our eyes from Him we shall fall back into stiff and legal forms.—All true Christians, in proportion to their susceptibility, must even in this life have a part in Christ’s glory. Obstinate sinners, on the other hand, will be overshadowed by the image of Satan, from one degree of darkness to another as by the Spirit of the pit. Rieger, 2 Corinthians 3:12 :—We must often think of the permanent results of our preaching in another world. (1 Thessalonians 2:19). “If we make it our constant and all absorbing aim to please the Lord Jesus and to stand approved at His coming, we cannot but be more earnest in our work and more untiring in our diligence and patience. If I would not lose my own soul and be rejected as an unprofitable servant, I must be sure of finding some souls who have been benefited by my ministrations. The Lord grant it for Christ’s sake. ”(Seitz)!—A sincere and honest preacher will not hesitate to speak boldly from the fulness of his heart whatever he thinks may be useful to his fellow men. 2 Corinthians 3:13-16. It is not uncommon for those to become hardened in heart (and this is nothing but one kind of blindness, or at least of unsusceptibilty) who are ignorantly familiar with God’s Word, but are obstinately set upon their own way and make use of that word only for a pretext. 2 Corinthians 3:17-18. Turning to the Lord is turning to Him who gives the Spirit. He secures to us the righteousness which the law demands, and enables us to serve God under a free dispensation of the Spirit. This is spiritual freedom, seeing every thing without a covering, and coming boldly to a throne of grace. We look with an uncovered face upon the glory of the Lord in the Gospel as in a mirror, and we convey the image which thus falls upon our hearts to our fellow men, that their eyes also may be opened, and their hearts may be won for Him.—The lustre of Moses’ face was liable to fade away and cease forever, but our glory advances from one degree to another, until that shall appear which we shall be, when we see our Lord as He is. Heubner, 2 Corinthians 3:15 : A perusal of the Scriptures without intellectual energy or susceptible hearts can do no one any good. And yet even many nominal Christians may unhappily fancy that they are models of virtue; and from that moment the true Christ, who is our only available righteousness, is under a veil. The very law which should teach them their poverty and drive them to Christ and His righteousness, serves only to make them fancy themselves rich and able to get along without Christ. 2 Corinthians 3:16 : Believe in Christ, and then the soul and the whole Bible will be full of light. 2 Corinthians 3:17 : The same Christ, in whom the Spirit dwells, must bestow that Spirit, upon men. There can be no Spirit without Him. He alone can free us from the fetters of error and delusion, and then we shall know what a free faith, a free will and a free enjoyment and love are. True freedom is wherever a man is not hampered by selfishness, i. e., by his own opinions and purposes, and when Christ has the supreme control of his whole being. 2 Corinthians 3:18 : Has thy soul the features of Christ: truth, love, meekness, fidelity (Matthew 11:29)? The looking upon Christ has this power, because the image which the Gospel presents of Him is spiritual and quickening. The Spirit comes from Christ. W. F. Besser, 2 Corinthians 3:12 : The evangelical minister’s joy is the dawn of an eternal day begun in time. It is the joy of our Lord, the faithful Witness from the bosom of the Father, showing us plainly of the Father (John 16:25). 2 Corinthians 3:14 : God often gives up (Romans 9:18) those who are obstinate and disobedient to be hardened and blinded by the preaching of the same word whose softening and enlightening influence they had resisted. The law will be a school-master to bring those to Christ (Galatians 3:24) who commit themselves to its discipline, and never think of blunting the point of its deadly letter by their self-righteous performances; but it will only harden those whose perverted and carnal minds fancy that they are righteous before God, because they externally keep His commandments and go through certain forms of worship. It depends not so much upon the kind of Scripture which we read, as upon the manner in which we read it, whether it shall be unmeaning and sealed to us. 2 Corinthians 3:15 : Even to the present hour God is punishing the sins of the wicked children of wicked ancestors with the veil which Moses put upon his face. The heart’s covering is woven out of those delusions into which the natural man so often falls with respect to the merit of free will and the goodness of merely outward works. 2 Corinthians 3:16 : It is only “in Thy light that we see light” (Psalms 36:10); for the glory of Moses and the prophets has not been uncovered even by the appearance of the true Light Himself. It is not in the light of common sense nor the light of philosophical schools, says Hamann, that we see light, but only in the light of the Lord who is the Spirit. 2 Corinthians 3:17 : The Lord is wherever the Spirit converts, enlightens and quickens the hearts of men. This is in the Church of the New Testament, where He Himself dwells by His word and Spirit, and where He has declared that He is to be found, And yet where the Spirit of the Lord is, is freedom (John 8:36; Romans 8:15) from every legal letter which kills and condemns, or obliges and compels any one. 2 Corinthians 3:18 : We look upon the Lord’s glory with uncovered faces: the covering upon our hearts has been removed, for we see ourselves, sinful and condemned as we are in the flesh; and then the covering has been removed from before the Divine heart, for we now see Him, our gracious God and merciful Father, as He is in Christ. However many of us there may be who with uncovered faces behold the glory of the Lord, we shall all be changed into the single image of our common Lord, although its manifold glories are shed forth in separate features from the various members of His general Church; and its collected radiance, like the seven-fold colors of the rainbow, are given forth, not from any single Christian, but from the whole collected body of Christ. [Whitby has given us six particulars in which the Apostle presents the superiority of the Gospel to the law (in substance) as follows: “1. Sinai’s glory only made the people afraid, the Gospel’s gives confidence and joy; 2. Moses gave only a letter which killed, the Gospel gives spirit and life; 3. Moses’ glory diminished and finally vanished forever, but the glory of the Gospel increases and has no end; 4. The law sought reserves under many shadows and ceremonies, the Gospel has but few fixed forms and seeks only a complete display of its truths and spirit; 5. The law could not remove the veil from men’s hearts, the Gospel gives us all open faces; 6. Israel looked only upon Moses’ radiance, Christians look directly upon a glorified God-Man, whose lustres transform them into His own likeness. Stanley’s beautiful summary of the Apostle’s imagery in this chapter, though slightly affected by his peculiar interpretation of 2 Corinthians 3:16, is yet worth transcribing (much abridged). We have: 1. The commendatory epistle, written on the Apostle’s heart; and, 2. the same written on the hearts of the Corinthians. 3. The contrast between this Epistle of the Spirit on the heart, and the lifeless engraving upon the Sinaitic stones. 4. The grand figure of Moses with his face irradiated by Divine glories. 5. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ VIII.—GLORY OF THE , WHOSE DUTIES WERE OPENLY AND , THE OF ITS ENEMIES 2 Corinthians 4:1-61 Therefore, seeing we have this ministry, as we have received mercy, we faint not; 2But [we] have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty [shame, τῆςαἰσχὐνης, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully [falsifying (δολοῦντες) the word of God]; but by manifestation of the truth, commending ourselves to every 3man’s conscience [conscience of men] in the sight of God. But if [and even if] our Gospel be hid [veiled, κεκαλυμμένον it is hid [veiled] to them that are lost [perishing]: 4In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious Gospel [gospel of the glory] of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them [should shine forth]. 5For we preach not ourselves, but 6Christ Jesus [as] the Lord; and ourselves your servants for Jesus’ sake. For [that same] God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, [said out of darkness light should shine] hath shined in our hearts, to give the light [in order to the shining forth, πρὸςφωτισμὸν ?] of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus [om. Jesus] Christ. AND 2 Corinthians 4:1-2. [Paul “now resumes the thread of the general argument, which he had twice before taken up (2 Corinthians 3:4; 2 Corinthians 3:12); but with the difference that from the confidence which he possesses in the greatness of his task, he now draws a new conclusion; not ‘we use great plainness of speech,’ as in 2 Corinthians 3:12, but ‘we faint not;’ a conclusion which, as it is more directly an answer to the original question, ‘who is sufficient for these things?’ in 2 Corinthians 2:16, so is it the basis of the ensuing chapters 2 Corinthians 4:7; 2 Corinthians 5:10. But with one of the inversions peculiar to this Epistle, he has hardly entered on this new topic before he drops it again. The charge of insincerity which had occasioned the digression in 2 Corinthians 3:1-18, still lingers in his recollection, and accordingly he turns round upon it, as if to give it one parting blow before he finally dismisses it from his mind. Hence 2 Corinthians 4:2-6 are still closely connected with 2 Corinthians 3:1-18, while the new subject begun in this first verse is not resumed till 2 Corinthians 4:7, where it is expanded in all its parts, so that the true apodosis or close of the sentence commenced here does not occur till 2 Corinthians 4:16, where the same words are repeated: for this cause we faint not.” Stanley]. Returning from his digression respecting the hardening of the Jews, he now resumes his account (2 Corinthians 3:12; 2 Corinthians 3:15) of that course of action which he was now pursuing, and which he thought suitable to the glory of the evangelical ministry (and to the Apostolic office).—Therefore having, through the mercy of God, received this ministration, we faint not.—What he means by διὰτοῦτο is more distinctly expressed in what follows: having received this ministration. This ministration (διακονία) he had spoken of as a ministration of the Spirit (2 Corinthians 3:8), of righteousness (2 Corinthians 4:9), that which remaineth (2 Corinthians 4:11), and that which produced the results described in 2 Corinthians 3:18. Διὰτοῦτο therefore finds its original reference as far back as 2 Corinthians 3:7. The boasting (καύχησις) which seems implied in this, is reduced immediately to a glorying in the Lord, and made to involve an actual humiliation of himself, when he adds the words, as we have received mercy; implying that he had been personally unworthy of such a ministry, and owed it entirely to Divine grace that he had been called and ordained to it (comp. 1 Corinthians 7:25; 1 Corinthians 15:9-10; 1 Timothy 1:12-16; Galatians 1:15-16). The course of conduct which he had suggested in 2 Corinthians 3:12, and which was suitable to a ministry thus graciously bestowed upon him, he describes first negatively: οὐκἐκκακοῦμεν we are not faint-hearted or cowardly. The reading ἐγκακοῦμεν would have substantially the same significance. [The former word can hardly have in this place a strictly moral signification (κακός, bad, wicked) as Rόckert contends it should have, contrary to its usage and the connection; but it seems to signify here that the consciousness of such a high calling would not allow him to turn out bad, to prove recreant, or to act inconsistent with it (Luke 18:1; Galatians 6:9). Osiander notices that the word has two distinct meanings: the one to slacken or flag, and the other to be discouraged or dispirited. The former agrees very well with the explanation in the next clause; but perhaps the latter agrees equally well, since the discouragement is evidently one which springs from an anxiety about difficulties and opponents, and so leads to deceit and an adulteration of the word of truth. The etymology of the word also confirms this meaning, since the word κακός signifies bad not only in a moral sense, but especially with respect to war. Accordingly the Greek expositors and the more modern strict philologists (Billroth, Meyer, de Wette), embrace both meanings in the rendering: segnescere, to become slow and dull. The connection with the subsequent negative may be regarded as a litotes in which he modestly expresses a high degree of courage by denying the contrary. Thus Theodoret (and Chrysostom, see below): Οὗδὴχάριν, φησὶ; φέρομενγεννάιωςτὰπροσπίπτονταλυπηρά “On which account, he says, we endure what befalls us with a noble spirit.” ̓Εγκακοῦμεν signifies the opposite of παῤῥησιάζω i. e. to shrink from plainness of speech or action (Alford), to behave in a cowardly manner]. The positive contrast to what is here claimed, is not dulness or indolence in the performance of his duties (and above all, Rόckert’s interpretation, which makes it involve something generally and morally base, is entirely inadmissible, or at least not proven), but from what we find is repelled in 2 Corinthians 4:2, we are led to believe that it is discouragement or faint-heartedness under difficulties. Chrysostom: We are so far from being without heart, that we are rather full of joy, and bold in speaking and in labors].—But we have renounced the secret things of shame (2 Corinthians 4:2).—These secret or hidden things of shame (τὰκρυπτὰτῆςαἰσχύνης) were either, in accordance with the original meaning of αἰσχύνη a feeling of shame, or that sense of honor which hides its own shame, and will not let that come to the light which may cause dishonor (Meyer after Chrysostom); or better and more in accordance with predominant usage in the New Testament (Philippians 3:19; Hebrews 12:2; Jude 1:19; Revelation 3:18; Luke 14:9), a dishonor, the concealment of a disgrace, i. e. of a dishonor done; or, still better (inasmuch as the emphasis lies upon τὰκρυπτὰ) disgraceful secrets, hidden things which would produce or bring dishonor if they were known (comp. Romans 1:26). There is no need of supposing that the Apostle had his eye directly as yet upon particular acts, such as plots, intrigues, suppressions or perversions of the truth, or even obscenas voluptates; but he probably alludes simply to those general matters which are mentioned in the participial sentence, those secret things which would infallibly cause shame if they were brought to the light. Neander: “those disgraceful and secret arts of carnal wisdom which had been falsely attributed to him.” ̓Απειπάμεθα is an ἅπαξλεγόμενον so far as it relates to the New Testament. [On the reflexive force of the middle voice, implying that “the act belonged to the inner mental world of the agent rather than the actual world without.” See Jelf’s Gram. § 363, 6; and Winer, Id. § 39, 3, and on the aorist, “as denoting what is done at all times alike, and is habitual,” see Bloomfield]. The word by no means implies that he had acted in this manner at an earlier period of his life, but it simply means that he declined or refused such things (ἱποῤῥίπτεσθαι, παραιτεῖσθαι).—Not walking in craftiness, nor adulterating the word of God.—(Comp. 2 Corinthians 1:12; 2 Corinthians 10:2). He refers here to his own official course, but he unquestionably alludes very significantly to a very different kind of conduct in his more sordid opponents. Πανουργία here rendered craftiness [from πᾶς and ἕργω ?] (1 Corinthians 3:19), signifies adroitness, dexterity; but it is used generally in a bad sense to signify a cunning craftiness, a shrewd use of those intrigues and schemes by which a man makes a way for himself and acquires and maintains influence [“a πανοῦργος is one who can do every thing and is willing to do any thing to accomplish his ends.” Hodge]. A second point in which his conduct differed from that of his opponents, was, that he did not adulterate the word of God (μηδὲδολοῦντεςτὸνλόγοντοῦθεοῦ), a kind of dealing essentially the same as the καπηλεύειν repudiated in 2 Corinthians 2:17. Men were in the habit of saying: a man adulterates his wine (δολοῦντὸνοἷνον). In contrast with such deceit, he says of himself and his companions:—but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man’s conscience.—The truth here spoken of is the word of God, the Gospel in its unadulterated purity; and the way in which he had preached it was the reverse of such adulterations of the word of God. Συνιστάναιἑαυτόν signifies to gain confidence and esteem in this regular way, as opposed to the self-commendation imputed to him by his opponents (2 Corinthians 3:1). The way he pursued was directed to every man’s conscience (πρὸςπᾶσανσυνείδησινἀνθρώπων; comp. Romans 2:9 : ἐπὶπᾶσηνψυχὴνἀνθρώπου). In this way of interpretation, συνείδησις becomes more prominent. The word is used to signify that mental power which makes us conscious of, and certifies to us those thoughts and emotions which pass through our minds, shows us what is truth and duty, and enforces its assertions and claims only on the ground that every thing it approves must be true and right, and that our spirit and motives must be conformed to our conceptions of truth and duty (Beck, Bibl. Seelenl., p. 75; comp, 73 and 77). The Apostle intended to say, therefore, that the way in which he preached was such that every man’s conscience approved of him, and hence that all who attended to the verdicts of conscience, and were not led by corrupt inclinations to reject such decisions, would be obliged to confess that his conduct sprung from a true and honest heart. Such an explanation seems to us more conformed to the context than that of Osiander, who defines the συνείδησις here to be the “essential organ for the recognition of truth, and which must assent to the Gospel as the truth and power of God, because it corresponds to man’s necessities and is effectual to awaken and tranquilize his moral nature.” The phrase: in the sight of God (ἐνώπιοντοῦθεοῦ comp. 2 Corinthians 2:17; 2 Corinthians 7:12) is not a solemn oath, but simply implies that the assertion he had made respecting his commendation of himself to every man’s conscience, was eminently pure, inasmuch as he made it under a full sense of God’s presence to hear him. Neander: “There is indeed a moral intelligence in every man to which we may appeal as to the impression he receives from us; and yet as every thing human is fallacious, Paul made his final appeal to God himself as the infallible witness of his upright motives and his honest deportment.” [It was not the truth directly which the Apostle says he and his associates commended to the συνείδ. but ἑαυτοὺς themselves, their whole persons, conduct and preaching and this by means of the ἀληθεία which they preached. By recognizing the truth and the honesty of the preaching, men were obliged to commend them. Συνέιδ then is more than “consciousness,” for it recognized the morality and truth of things not only in ourselves, but in others. (See note on 2 Corinthians 1:12). The only condition of the recognition was that truth and its relations should be correctly apprehended, i. e., that each case should be truly presented at the bar of conscience. (See Serm. of Chalmers and J. Howe on this passage). Πᾶσανσυνέιδ. ἀνθ. is every conscience of man, the universal, or the public conscience. Chrysostom: “not only to believers, but to unbelievers, are we manifested, since we are presented before all, that every thing belonging to us may be scrutinized according to their pleasure.” Nor was it merely “to every good conscience (Grotius), for the Apostle expressly implies that it was even to them that are lost?”]. 2 Corinthians 4:3-6. The Apostle now meets (2 Corinthians 4:3) the objection, that what he had just said would hardly harmonize with the fact that his preaching was not successful with a large portion of his hearers, and was not recognized and received by some as the truth. He does not deny this, and he now recurs to the figure of the covering (2 Corinthians 3:14).—But if our Gospel be veiled, it is veiled to them that are perishing (2 Corinthians 4:3).—He concedes no contradiction in this to what he was saying, since those who failed of receiving him were among those who were perishing on account of their blindness by Satan. There was no defect in the requisite clearness of his preaching, but only in the mental perceptions of his hearers (2 Corinthians 4:3-4). The fact objected against him is made emphatic by putting ἕστιν at the very head of the major proposition (the protasis). “Our Gospel” has here the same signification as the manifestation of the truth (2 Corinthians 4:2). The word ἡμῶν tells us who were engaged in proclaiming the Gospel, as in Romans 2:16; Romans 16:25; 1 Thessalonians 1:5; 2 Thessalonians 2:14; and it is equivalent to the Gospel which I preached (ὅεὐηγγελισάμην) in 1 Corinthians 15:1 (comp. Galatians 1:11). In the conclusion the emphasis should rest upon ἐντοῖςἀπολλυμένοις (among them who are perishing), and hence these words are placed at the beginning. Comp. 3:25; 1 Corinthians 1:18. [’Απολλυμένοις does not necessarily mean the finally lost, those who deserve to be lost (Grotius), but those who are perishing (Alford), those who were then lost. In Matthew 10:6; Matthew 15:24; Matthew 18:11; and Luke 15:4; Luke 15:6; Luke 15:24; Luke 15:32, the lost were such as were at that time lost to the Church, to God and to goodness, but might afterwards in some cases be recovered. Henry: “The hiding of the Gospel was both an evidence and a cause of their ruin, and if the Gospel did not find and save them, they were lost forever]. ̓Εν is equivalent neither to the dative, nor to in respect to, but to, with, coram; since the persons spoken of did not recognize the Gospel on account of inward darkness, a covering on their own hearts, it has the force of in; or, since the ἀπολλυμένοι expresses the sphere or the department within which the Gospel is veiled or not recognized, of, among (inter). Indeed, all these significations come to the same general result. The fact alluded to is still further developed when he goes back (2 Corinthians 4:4) to its original cause.—Among whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of the unbelieving (2 Corinthians 4:4),—i. e., the blinding of the mental perceptions (νοήματα) and the author of the blindness, the god of this world (θεὸςτοῦαἰώνοςτούτου). The blinding of the νοήματα implies that the mental perceptions of these persons had been impaired and so blinded that their understandings were deluded with sophistries until all original inclination to truth was gone (comp. Matthew 6:22), and their minds (νοῦς) had no correct intellectual views (Beck, p. 53, 54). Τὰνοήματα (comp. 2 Corinthians 3:14) may here very appropriately be translated, “the perceptive powers, the understanding.” The blinding is the work of the god of this world (όθεὸςτοῦαἰώνοςτοῦτου), by which phrase is meant not the spirit of the age, or anything of that kind, but Satan (as in 2 Corinthians 2:11), the prince of this world (Jno. 12:31; 14:30). Similar expressions occur in Ephesians 2:2; Ephesians 4:12. Neander: “It was with a direct purpose that Paul gives Satan this appellation, for he intended to imply that the selfish principle, here represented by Satan, was to such men all that God should have been.” The word θεός in other places signifies the principle which absolutely determines things (comp. Philippians 3:19). Bengel: Grandis et horribilis descriptio Satanζ, grandi ejus, at horribili operi respondents. Quis alias putaret, illum posse in hominibus tantae luci officere? [Augustine tells us that nearly all ancient commentators were of the opinion that the word θεός was too exalted to be applied to any created being, and hence, that it must here have meant the Supreme Jehovah. Chrysostom, in opposition to Marcion and Manichees, says: “We assert of this passage that this is spoken neither of the devil nor of another creator (in distinction from the just and good), but of the God of the universe, and that it is to be read thus: God hath blinded the minds of the unbelievers of this world; for the world to come hath no unbelievers, but the present only. He blinds them, not by working unto this end (away with the thought)! but by suffering and allowing it.” As the Arians argued from this passage that a created being might be called God, even Augustine and others would not concede to them the natural construction of our passage; on which Calvin remarks: “we see how far the spirit of controversy can lead men in perverting Scripture.” Among moderns, Dr. Adam Clarke was of a similar opinion, and he refers to 1 Timothy 1:17, as a similar phrase, reminding us also that αἰῶν does not necessarily mean a wicked age or generation (Matthew 12:32; Luke 20:34). Even on the common rendering, however, it is not implied that God had surrendered to Satan the rightful or actual sovereignty of any one age, but only that men have yielded him such a sovereignty. Archbishop Trench (Synn. 2d ser. p. 40) regrets that the difference between αἰών and κόσμος has not been preserved in the English version. He assigns to the former in all cases a reference to time, but in a secondary and ethical sense; he thinks it embraces all which exists in the world under the conditions of time, the course and current of this world’s affairs, often with an evil significance (Ephesians 2:2). It includes all that floating mass of thoughts, opinions, maxims, speculations, hopes, impulses, aims, at any time current in the world, which it is impossible to seize and accurately to define, but which constitute a most real and effective power, being the moral or immoral atmosphere which at every moment of our lives we inhale, again inevitably to exhale; what we often speak of as “the times,” attaching to the word an ethical signification; or still more to the point, “the age,” the spirit or genius of the age].” Comp. further upon this τοῦαἰώνοςτούτου what is said on 1 Corinthians 1:20; 1 Corinthians 2:6. The sphere in which this alienation from God takes place is one which originally was completely dependent (ethically) upon this power. But the expression has a peculiar sharpness in application to the Jews who thought they knew and appropriated to themselves the true God in some special sense, but who were here in their unbelief consigned with the heathen to this mock deity (the simia Dei of Tertullian), as if they belonged to his special department (comp. Jno. 8:44). Instead of ὧντὰνιήματαἐτύφλωσεν (in whose minds) the Apostle writes: among these lost ones, Satan hath blinded the minds of them that believe not (ἐνὀ ?͂ιςἐτύφλωσετὰνοήματατῶνἀπίστων). By them that believe not, we are not to understand those whose unbelief was the direct consequence of the blinding, as if the expression were εἰςτὸεἷναιαὐτοὺςἀπίστους. According to the analogy of other places, the word in this case would have been ἄπιστα (comp. 1 Thessalonians 3:13; Philippians 3:2). We may remark also that such an idea does not accord with that which follows εἰςτὸμὴαὐγ. etc.). Nor is it precisely a designation of the cause of this blinding, as if the expression had been διὰτὸεἶναιαὐτοὺςἀπίστους. Τῶνἀπίστων implies a self-determination toward falsehood, and a turning away from the truth, the reason of which must be traced finally to a perverted will. In these words is brought forward another aspect of the case, viz., that in this blinding process Satan was not alone active and guilty, but that the subjects of it coφperated with him, and were guilty during the process and before it. (comp. Jno. 3:18; 2 Thessalonians 2:10). [Dr. Hodge, while conceding that the doctrine is Scriptural, that unbelief provokes judicial blindness, contends that the connection here demands a different interpretation, inasmuch as Paul accounts for the hiding of the Gospel to them that are lost, by saying that Satan had blinded their minds. The blindness, therefore, precedes the unbelief, and is the cause of it]. The ἐνοἷς is perhaps equivalent to ὁτιἐντούτοις (for, because, etc.), and indicates either the object of the blinding, the persons who could be blinded (Satan’s great work, the blinding of the νοήμ. of unbelievers has to be carried on in the hearts of the lost, for such a work cannot be performed in the hearts of the saved ones, with respect to whom the Gospel is not veiled, Meyer); or, is equivalent to among whom, and so points out the sphere or department in which Satan thus acts. The meaning, however, would be essentially the same on both interpretations. There is no carelessness or tautology in this language. Paul means to give special prominence to the idea that Satan carries on such a work among those who are in απώλεια (perdition). The clause might be translated: in the department of lost souls, where the understandings of unbelievers are blinded by the god of this world.—In order that the shining light of the Gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, might not shine forth. (2 Corinthians 4:4 b.). Here we are informed what Satan’s design is in all this; but inasmuch as what he accomplished was the infliction of a Divine judgment (Jno. 12:40; 2 Thessalonians 2:11-12), it may also be looked upon as an announcement of God’s purpose. According to the reading of the Rec. αὐγάσαιαὐτοῖς must be rendered: might not irradiate or shine upon them, etc. But αὐτοῖς is very feebly authenticated, and betrays evidence that it is only a gloss. In like manner the compound verbs διαυγάσαι and καταυγάσαι seem at first more appropriate: (to shine through, to beam upon), inasmuch as the simple verb appears never to have been used intransitively among the Greek authors. Others, therefore, take the simple form as equivalent to, to see (properly: to beam upon something with the eyes, to cast the light of the eyes upon an object, sometimes with an accusative and sometimes with πρὸςτι). But as we never meet with it in this sense except among the poets, the intransitive meaning (which is favored by the attempt to make it out by the insertion of the compound forms) is to be preferred, especially as it then gives a more suitable predicate to τὸνφωτίσμόν. The αὐτοίς, which we are sorry to be obliged to throw out, is nevertheless implied by the context. In the later Greek, and frequently in the Septuagint, φωτισμός has the sense of: the imparting of light, an enlightening, light (a translation of ΰεψ in Psalms 27:1; Job 3. et al.), i.e., light when in movement and in communication. (Osiander). The words τῆςδόξης do not here express merely a quality of the Gospel itself (the glorious Gospel), but rather an attribute of Christ, and hence the object or substance of the Gospel (χριστοῦ). The glory of Christ is the same as the glory of God in the face of Christ (2 Corinthians 4:6), and the glory of the Lord (2 Corinthians 3:18). We are to understand it not exclusively of Christ in his glorified state, for the glory of the only Begotten Son of God is exhibited during his whole manifestation of Himself among men, full of grace and truth (Jno 2 Corinthians 1:14); and it was shed forth even in His earthly life, and especially in His death on the cross, which is set forth as the very essence of the Gospel (1 Corinthians 1:18). Hence Christ in His glory signifies what the Gospel sets forth as the entire revelation of God through Him in His various conditions. The whole salvation revealed in the Gospel depended on this state of humiliation, including His obedience unto death, and His subsequent exaltation (Philippians 2:6-11; Romans 5:10; Romans 4:25; Romans 8:34; Luke 24:26). Comp. Meyer, Osiander. This Christ, whose glory is revealed in the Gospel, is yet further said to be the image of God. On εἰκών comp. 1 Corinthians 11:7. [“The article is idiomatically omitted after ἕστιν.” Ellicott]. The same expression is used respecting Christ in Colossians 1:15 (from which some manuscripts have borrowed the adjective ἀοράτου), and Hebrews 1:3. We are not necessarily required by what is said in Philippians 2:6; Philippians 3:21; and Jno. 17:5, to refer this with Meyer exclusively to Christ in His exaltation for the glory of God beamed from Him even during His earthly life (Jno. 2:11; 14:9). Although Christ in His exaltedstate is more perfectly the image of God, yet this expression must be looked upon as a particular representation of Christ in every condition. To justify the Apostle’s language in calling his Gospel (2 Corinthians 4:3, τὸεὐαγγ. ἡμῶν) a proclamation of the Divine glory, and to show how inappropriate were the insinuations referred to in 2 Corinthians 3:1, he now proceeds to say (2 Corinthians 4:5):—For we preach not ourselves but Christ Jesus the Lord.—From the context, we conclude that κυρίους ought to be understood after ἐαυτοὺςκηρύσσομεν, i. e., we do not preach ourselves as your lords (in contrast with δούλουςὑμῶν, your servants). Had he in his preaching set forth himself as a lord (κύριον), and made his authority, his power, and his lordship over them (2 Corinthians 1:24, comp. 2 Corinthians 11:20) his main object, instead of commending Christ in his glory as the only Lord over them, he would have adulterated God’s Word (2 Corinthians 4:2; 2 Corinthians 2:17). If we prefer not to supply κύριους, we may explain the sentence with Osiander thus: “The substance of our preaching is not our own light, or wisdom, or merits, and hence we do not commend ourselves, nor seek our own interests.” Both explanations come to the same thing in the end. Κύριον is here used in the sense of Lord, because in consequence of Christ’s redemption the Church belongs exclusively to Him (comp. Acts 20:28). The positive side in relation to ἑαυτούς (ourselves) is expressed in the phrase—and ourselves your servants (δούλουςὑμῶν) for Jesus’ sake—where there is an allusion to a very different position which some opposing teachers had arrogated to themselves (2 Corinthians 11:20). He thus gives expression to the deep humility which he felt, and shows how entire was the surrender he had made of himself to his work; comp. 1 Corinthians 9:19. The phrase διὰ̓Ιησοῦν (through Jesus) gives us the reason he was willing to sustain this servile relation to them; it was because the love of Christ constrained him to be their servant. It is possible that he meant thus to say that it was by the authority of Jesus that, he had been invested with this official dignity (by, on account of); or we may even regard the expression as equivalent to beneficio Jesu (this blessing was due to Jesus). The first of these meanings suits our connection the best, and according to it the sense would be: that the Apostle gave himself to be their servant, for Jesus’ sake, and to retain possession of the property he had already won for the Lord, or to bring them to a better acquaintance and more intimate fellowship with Jesus. The reason assigned in 2 Corinthians 4:6 seems to point to this last interpretation, for it is there implied that this was the Divine purpose regarding him when he was first enlightened:—Because God who called forth the light to shine out of darkness—(2 Corinthians 4:6). It seems quite needless and arbitrary to make this refer back to 2 Corinthians 4:4, and regard 2 Corinthians 4:5 as a parenthesis. But perhaps we may more completely bring in the contents of 2 Corinthians 4:5 in another way. The reason that we preach Christ as our only Lord, and are willing to be your servants for Jesus’ sake, is, that God has enlightened us:—hath shined in our hearts for the shining forth of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ.—[Our explanation of this verse will depend on the answer we give to the question, for what purpose the Apostle introduced it. If his object was to assign the reason for his being the servant of the Corinthians (2 Corinthians 4:5, b), then he intended to say here that God, who commanded, etc., had shined into his heart that he might diffuse it to others. But if his object was to give his reason for preaching Christ (2 Corinthians 4:5 a), it was because (ὄτι) God, who commanded; etc., had shined in men’s hearts (as our version has it) to give us the light, etc. On either interpretation the sense is good. The first accords with Galatians 1:16, and is generally adopted. But surely the main idea of the passage is that Paul preached Christ, and the mention of his being a servant to the Corinthians was only incidental; the phrase “our hearts” (plural) can hardly mean here merely Paul’s own heart; and φωτισμόςτῆςγνώσεως seems naturally to mean the objective light which came from Christ and would be obstructed by blindness. (Comp. Hodge and Billroth)]. There are also considerable difficulties in the grammatical structure of the sentence, especially on account of the ὂς before ἔλαμψεν. This is probably the reason that this relative has been left out in a number of manuscripts, though for external as well as internal reasons, it must be regarded as unquestionably genuine. The easiest way would seem to be to supply ἐστιν before ὁεἰπών: q. d. it is God who commanded, etc., who shined, etc. And yet in this way, that which was designed to be merely a type of something higher becomes the principal object of the statement. Certainly the phrase: who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, should be looked upon as describing neither a mental illumination nor a breaking forth of the light of the Gospel from the obscurity of the law, but what took place in the first act of creation (Genesis 1:3); and even then it must be taken in such a way that ἐκ will express not a special, but a causal relation.—The idea then expressed would be that he who was the Creator of physical light, and caused it to break forth out of darkness, is the same Being who has caused a light of a higher nature to rise in the heart of the Apostle. Or, if we take ἔλαμψεν, like λάμψαι in a preceding passage, and every where else in the New Testament, intransitively (for the transitive use of the word is confined to the poets, and even among them is infrequent), the idea will, be: He hath shined into our hearts (dwelling in us by His Spirit; comp. 1 Corinthians 3:16; 1 Corinthians 14:25; Jno. 14:23). There will then be no need either of an αν ?̓τός or of an ὅς, and the preceding ὁεἰπὼνλάμψαι, which gives a transitive sense, will not stand in the way. That we may gain this sense, we must either supply an ἔστιν or an οὗτοςἔστιν before ὅςἔλαμψεν: the God who commanded, etc., is the one who has shined, etc. (de Wette); or the ὅςἕλαμψεν, etc., must be taken from this and repeated in the principal sentence before πρὸςφωτισμὸν, i.e., the God who commanded, etc., and who hath shined in our hearts, hath shined with the light, etc., (or: hath done this with the light, etc., supplying τοῦτοἐποίησεν). But will not this, after all, be more difficult than to complete the sentence by supplying ἐστιν before ὅςἕλαμψεν (is the one who hath shined)? The analogy of 2 Corinthians 3:13 would not perhaps be decisive in favor of this, since the completion of the sentence is much easier there. The easiest way would be, to take ὅς as equivalent to ὁ ?͂υτς or αὐτός: he has shined. But this is only a poetic, and particularly a Homeric usage, and only in special cases is ὅς ever met with as a demonstrative pronoun (comp. Passow s. v. ὅς 1). The logical objection, however, to the completion of the sentence by ἐστιν before ὅςἕλαμψεν, viz., that this sentence would then have an emphasis which does not belong to it, inasmuch as the principal stress must be laid upon πρὸςφωτισμόν (Meyer), is not very convincing; for we must certainly lay an emphasis also upon the Divine agency which is here so solemnly introduced, and by means of which Paul had been directed to, and fitted for, the φωτισμός. This shining of God into his heart is the same thing which he describes in Galatians 1:15-16, thus: it pleased God to discover (or reveal) His Son in me; for it is his own experience which he probably has uppermost in his mind. What he there says in plain words: that I might preach Him among the Gentiles (comp. Acts 26:16-18), he here expresses by a figure of the light moving itself, thus: by the shining forth of the knowledge, etc. By these words he certainly intended to say that he was the medium through which such a knowledge was communicated to others. But may φωτισμός be regarded as meaning: to make light, to show, or intransitively to shine? The latter is the only meaning which accords with its use in 2 Corinthians 4:4, and the uniform usage, at least, of the Hellenistic writers.—The question may still be raised, whether in the face of Christ (ἐνπροσώπῳΧριστοῦ) ought to be connected immediately with πρὸςφωτισμόν or with τῆςδόξης (i. e., so as to mean the shining in the face of Christ, or the glory which was in the face of Christ)? In the first case, γνῶσις must be taken objectively (not as the subjective knowledge of the Apostle or the Apostolic teachers, but) as the knowledge of the glory of God, irradiated from the face of Christ, the image of God (2 Corinthians 4:4). The sense then would be: if any one converts others to Christ, he makes the knowledge of the Divine glory beam from the face of Jesus Christ (Meyer after Fritzsche). But this explanation of the γνῶσις (knowledge), as if it were entirely objective, is not indispensable, inasmuch as the words: the glory of God in the face of Christ, so naturally follow: who is the image of God (2 Corinthians 4:4), and so precisely correspond with these, that the article was not necessary before ἐνπροσώπῳ, especially as the idea of the glory of God in the face (ἐνπροσώπω, τοῦπροσώπου) in the Mosaic type (2 Corinthians 3:7) was yet present to the Apostle’s mind. The knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ (love, power, wisdom) was therefore subjective to the mind of the Apostle by a Divine revelation to his heart (ἔλαμψενἐνταῖςκαρδίαιςἡμῶν), and then it shone around him so as to lead others to know Christ as their Lord, and to have fellowship also with Him. [“Christ is called the image of God in two respects: first (as in Colossians 1:15) with reference to the λόγος which is in him the perfect representation of God; and secondly with reference to that human manifestation in which the λόγος itself was revealed (comp. 2 Corinthians 3:18). We have in this place to think of the latter relation, although the other is included in the idea of the historical Christ. The glory of God is manifested in the absolute image which the historical Christ sets forth.” [Neander.] AND ETHICALThe only persons who can so preach that the Divine glory in the Person and life of Christ, shall shine into the hearts of men, and cause them to recognize Him as their Redeemer and Lord, are those who have had their own hearts illuminated by that glory, and have mercifully been delivered from condemnation. But a personal experience of that, grace was never designed to be the limit of this revelation. When once the stream of Divine love has flowed into a single heart, from its very nature, it cannot be confined there, but it must struggle for communication. If I have myself been delivered from destruction, I shall long to commend the mercy which has saved me, to all who need the same experience. For the sake of Him who has saved me, and who has purchased those precious souls which are perishing around me, I shall strive to make men acquainted with Him in whom all fulness dwells, and who can satisfy all their wants. I shall cheerfully give myself to the work of winning souls to Him, and not esteem life itself too dear, if thereby I can bring them to salvation, or confirm them in its possession. In such circumstances the servant of Christ will have no room for preaching himself, that he may take the place of Christ by making His people dependent upon Him, and usurping a lordship over them. He will never wish to impose his opinions upon others, so as to impair the authority of God’s word; and he will never be guilty of those tricks and intrigues which gain esteem at the expense of those who have a better right to confidence and honor. He will have no heart for those hypocritical arts by which others seek to become all things to all men (1 Corinthians 9:19-23), and under the guise of disinterested benevolence, flatter men’s sinful passions, and accommodate themselves to the weak sides of their followers. Never will he think of evading by such arts the real difficulties of the Christian life, and shunning all earnest labor and self-denial in the pastoral work. Those who have a holy calling to bring their fellowmen to behold the Divine glory, and thus to transform them into Christ’s image, will rather encounter all cares, and reproaches, and afflictions with cheerfulness. They will renounce those impure motives which cannot bear the light, and they will so act and speak as to commend themselves to every man’s conscience. All things will be done as in the presence of that God who sees and judges the secrets of the heart.—And yet even when they are most faithful, their words may not get access to every heart. Some love darkness rather than light, and will, therefore, turn away from their testimony. Satan takes advantage of their aversion to truth, to bewitch them and to blind their understanding, so that the light of Christ, the image of God, cannot reach their hearts. God then gives them up to this blindness for their abuse of His testimony. As they would not yield to the attractions of grace, they are cast out of the sphere of gracious influences, and given up to those arts of the father of lies, for which they have such a predisposition. As they had no pleasure in the truth, and would not believe it, they become more and more unsusceptible to its influence, they willingly yield themselves to every kind of delusion, and fall into superstitions in which nothing but lies can be received (comp. 2 Thessalonians 2:10-12). [“The Gospel may be said to be hidden when it is never preached to a people at all, when it is not understood, when it does not take hold of the conscience, and when the heart doth not entertain or give reception to it. Hence this hiding may be either sinful or penal—sinful, when men hear the Gospel but will not set themselves to understand it, or will not receive conviction or a suitable impression from it; and penal, when God gives up such sinners to their chosen way. Such a hiding is a sad token that they are lost, for it is evident that they are not recovered and saved, and hence that they are in a state which both excludes what is necessary to their salvation, and includes what promotes their destruction. There can therefore be no hope that their state will be safe at last who live in the neglect of those methods which the Gospel prescribes for their salvation; and there can be no ground for them to fear that they shall be finally lost, who, with dependence on grace, are using these methods to their uttermost.” Condensed from Howe’s Six Sermons on the Hidden Gospel and Lost souls]. AND Starke: 2 Corinthians 4:1. The most faithful servant of Christ may become tired in his work but not of it. But he has only to strengthen himself in God and perform his part to the best of his ability. It is upon the end, upon the glorious crown that he should fix his eye. 2 Corinthians 4:2. Luther:—False Apostles sometimes make a fine show, but look within and they are full of filthiness (Matthew 18:27 f.)!—Hedinger:—Many vain talkers cover up their pride, avarice, envy, malice and bitterness, under a pretence of good intentions, and by this very thing show that they are ashamed of their own dishonesty. They therefore paint it up in false colors, and they twist and pervert the word of God so as to please men and sanction their carnal objects (Titus 1:9 ff.; Philippians 2:21). 2 Corinthians 4:3. Alas! that even in the Church the glorious Gospel should be so covered up! How few have so truly turned to the Lord that the glory of the Gospel has dawned upon their spirits!—Luther: 2 Corinthians 4:4. The devil is this world’s prince and god, and therefore God in righteous judgment has given it up to serve and to be ruled by him.—Hedinger:—Dost thou feel, O man, no touch of God’s word? Know then that the enemy is covering up thine eyes and thy heart (Hebrews 3:13). In the voluntary blinding and hardening of the unbeliever’s heart, there is a concurrence of his own guilt and the malignity of Satan; for if he were not guilty Satan could do nothing. Above all things, then, beware of unbelief.—Spener:—Satan can hardly keep men from knowing God simply as God, for all nature proclaims that it has a Creator and a Governor. But the point on which he has a special desire to blind them is the knowledge of Christ the Son of God, and the work of salvation by Christ. 2 Corinthians 4:5. The sum of all true preaching is Jesus Christ. Everything must run into Him (Colossians 1:27). 2 Corinthians 4:6. The best eye can see nothing without light. “In Thy light, O God, shall we see light” (Psalms 36:10).—If we would lead others to Christ, we must ourselves turn to Him, and receive the clear beams of faith into our own hearts. If we would know the mind of our heavenly Father, and specially how he feels toward men, we must direct our eyes to the face , (i.e., to the words and life) of Christ, for there we have the best expression of His heart (Jno. 14:9). Berlenb. Bible: 2 Corinthians 4:1. It is a great mercy when God calls a man to such a work. We should not, therefore, make much account of what we have to endure in it. 2 Corinthians 4:2. Ministers should never attempt to draw the people by going around the cross and flattering them. God’s servants have no need of intrigues and impure arts.—God’s word is always the same, but it is very easy to add to it something of our own. It can be corrupted either by addition or by subtraction, especially when one has some evil design, and wishes to accommodate it to a corrupt world. The truth is our own best evidence, but it is effectual only when we coφperate with our consciences and open our hearts to it. The truth and we must meet face to face. No true minister will be without this test of himself: that when he merely manifests the truth, he can appeal to every man’s conscience. If he cannot do this, he can do nothing. 2 Corinthians 4:3. The Gospel is covered to those who spend their lives to no profit and seek for life in the enjoyments of the flesh and in the evil suggestions of a carnal reason. 2 Corinthians 4:4. The god of this world is sure to blind those who believe not and who will not listen candidly to God’s kind invitations. He will suggest to them: “If you choose that way you will never get along in the world.” Such a god they will serve, and we need not wonder that their thoughts and hearts should be so occupied that they can receive no light. Even if the light shines upon them and they feel it, they turn away from it. Though God may penetrate through every obstacle till he reaches the conscience, he never works absolutely, i.e., irresistibly, and the result is not, necessarily saving. Light may shine clearly and yet a man may not perceive it: 1, If the windows of his house are closed and all around him is darkened (false principles and erroneous views); 2, If his eyes (the windows of his body) are so closed that no light can enter them (misunderstandings and perversions of revealed truth). The first obstacle is removed when the armor of light is put on; and when with the help of a Stronger, the strongholds of reason are demolished. The other is removed without violating the established laws of moral and intellectual freedom, when the preventing grace of God destroys Satan’s work in the heart and prepares it to welcome and entertain the light of revealed truth. God therefore first makes an assault upon our wills. When the sun is admitted the darkness flies of course. God does not arbitrarily force us to receive the light, but we must receive it by a free faith. The only reason that many have no light, is, they love the world more than God. The spirit of the world holds possession of them. The arch-deceiver makes the poor soul think: “Surely it is not necessary to give up everything; we may retain this thing and that, and still be Christians; others do so, and are nevertheless very good people; God does not require us to be so very strict.” These are the lies which many admit with greater readiness than they do the truth and the glory of the Gospel. God is resisted by them as if He were an enemy, and was preparing to inflict on them some great calamity and injustice. When the love of self is the reigning principle in the heart, there can be no interest in the glory of Christ, and the image of the sinful Adam will be inscribed over the whole man. 2 Corinthians 4:5. Where shall we find those who preach nothing but Jesus Christ? We meet with many who are eager to obtain honor and personal comfort; but so absorbing is their interest in themselves, that they have very little time or heart to give to Christ. 2 Corinthians 4:6. God’s works are all in harmony. The illumination of a soul like that of the natural world is a Divine work, a new creation, and can be effected only by the fiat of the Almighty. Our hearts are at first in chaotic darkness, and the type of the process by which they become temples of God must be sought in what took place at the beginning. As the first day’s work was the separation of the light from the darkness, so the first work of grace in the heart is to give it light. We must allow Christ to break through the darkness of our hearts and discover it to us, or we shall never see the light. But the mere admission of the light is not enough; it must be received into the most secret recess of the heart. Then, when the light of a true knowledge is received, how clearly do we see our poverty, but how clearly also the wonders of grace! The darkness is past and the true light shines (1 Jno. 2:8). But this light of Jesus Christ must necessarily shine beyond ourselves. Others also will see it and be enkindled and won to Christ. One great object of the vocation wherewith we are called is to make us God’s witnesses.—God is to be known only as we look upon the face of the only begotten Son (Jno. 1:18). God never presents Himself to us in an absolute manner, but only through this face. Such is the old but sublime theology which was always so precious to His humble ones. There we may look upon God and our lives be preserved (Genesis 32:30). But such a sight can often be gained only by a wrestling like Jacob’s, and with a painful discovery of our poverty. But no sooner is this sight gained than we are drawn toward God. We can bear to look upon the Deity Himself, even in His glory, when we behold Him in the face of a Mediator (Psalms 89:16; Exodus 29:10 f.; Exodus 33:14). Rieger, 2 Corinthians 4:1-2 :—The unjust treatment which the word of faith sometimes receives, and the unhappy results which sometimes follow its dispensation, are no reason why those who are called to preach it should renounce their hope or their enjoyment of it; nor should they thus be tempted to use means which are unsuitable to their work. Never should they keep back doctrines or precepts which belong to the mind of Christ, from a fear that they might injure His cause. Let them never show punctiliousness in matters which are known and judged of by their fellowmen, while they tolerate great imperfections in those which none but the eye of God can discern. Let them use no means to please men which would not be commended by God and approved of in the consciences of all who see them, and which would not tend to bring out the truth in still clearer terms. 2 Corinthians 4:3-4. The god of this world has a great variety of instruments conspiring together to promote his wicked purpose of covering up the Gospel from the eyes of men.—The unbelieving world is always inclined to throw out the suspicion that ministers are seeking only their private interests. But those who have accepted Jesus as their Lord, will cheerfully confide in His servants, and in the arrangements He has made respecting them. 2 Corinthians 4:6. In one of His first, acts God acquired a peculiar name: “He who called the light out of darkness.” That ancient name He still maintains by similar manifestations of His power on a larger or smaller scale; but especially by the revelation of His Son in the hearts of men through the Gospel. In the life of Christ we have concentrated as in a single person, and everything given which we need to reveal God to us, and to make us trust in Him as our Father. The Apostles have given us so complete and so credible a testimony of what they saw of Christ, that we may have from their preaching and writings the same impressions which they had from His personal presence. Truly blessed is every reader whose faith looks steadily and with an unveiled face upon Jesus! Heubner, 2 Corinthians 4:1 :—Keep your eye upon the greatness and sanctity of your calling, and you will be in no danger of falling. 2 Corinthians 4:2. The only way for a preacher, is always to be open and honest.—God’s word should be preached in its purity as it was preached at first, with no recent improvements or disfigurements; for not only must it be a great sin, in the Lord’s sight, to present in His name what is not His, but we shall thus deprive His word of its real power.—Luther: Counterfeiters of money are burned, but falsifiers of God’s word are canonized. 2 Corinthians 4:3. Though the truth and power of the Gospel are hidden from the eyes of many, it is only to them that are lost, and because they would not believe. 2 Corinthians 4:4. A good or an evil spirit rules all men. Why it is by the one rather than by the other, must ever remain one of the mysteries of human freedom, for the result is not always according to the power of the outward influence. The corrupt mind may truly be said to be blinded, when the world is regarded as the only thing real or glorious, when the world’s vanities appear to be all that is substantial, and when the Gospel and Christ’s glories are counted as nothing. Christ, His glory, His love, His holiness, His power, His government, and His Divine excellence, are the substance of the Gospel. He is the image of God, so that as the Son is, the Father must be. 2 Corinthians 4:5. The Gospel has an enlightening power, for it is not a system of human inventions; and those who preach it are not founding systems of philosophy, nor leading off new sects or schools of religious belief; but they present Christ as the Master of every other master, and the only Rock of all wisdom, righteousness and salvation. 2 Corinthians 4:6. When Christ enlightens a soul, it is as great a miracle as the creation of a world. As the physical light enables us to discern God’s power and glory in the natural universe, so the light of faith enables us to recognize His glory in the spiritual universe.—The highest grace is that look of grace God gives us when we experience His grace.—Every thing which belongs to Christ’s manifestation to men, is a reflection of the Deity, What then was the lustre upon Moses’ face compared with the light in which God manifests Himself? W. F. Besser, 2 Corinthians 4:2 :—An ingenuous deportment is the glory, and an artful concealment is the shame of a minister of Christ. Every man’s conscience recognizes with more or less distinctness what God commands or forbids; and hence when the Gospel is manifested to it, a ready witness there gives an affirmation to the truth; and when this affirmation is withheld, the conscience of the lover of lies feels the penal brand (1 Timothy 4:2). The consciousness of his guilt is indelibly fixed in his soul. The conscience of believers is good; it is polluted with no corruptions, and it is restrained by no fears; while that of unbelievers is vicious, defiled and burdened; it perpetually accuses them that are lost because they obey not the truth. 2 Corinthians 4:3. It may do us no harm to remain ignorant of some truths, but we are lost forever if we know not the Gospel. 2 Corinthians 4:4. The special work of the great Corrupter is to corrupt still more them that are lost. In this work, however, he is only God’s executioner. This blinding is nothing but a punishment for the sin of unbelief (Ephesians 2:2), for loving darkness so much that the light was necessarily hated (John 3:19-20), and for being so much devoted to earthly things, that all the blessings of heaven offered in the Gospel, are rejected with scorn. The blindness itself is effected by covering up the Gospel, by mystifying God’s clear word, by misconstruing the obvious meaning of what God has done, and by closing the eyes against the truth as it is dispensed in the Church. 2 Corinthians 4:6. The very central point of man’s nature, his heart’s treasure (Matthew 12:35), has been darkened ever since he became a sinner; the Spirit of God, the light of his life has been put out. It is indeed true that the heart (where the conscience has its laboratory) is always aware to some extent, that its life and rest should be in God, but this light of conscience cannot give life; it is rather a deadly lightning (Romans 1:32) to those who have fallen from Divine fellowship. If in our hearts there ever springs up a spiritual light by which we recognize spiritual things, just as we behold the works of creation by the natural light, it must be by the act of that same God who in the beginning commanded the light to shine out of darkness (Psalms 18:29). This work of the Almighty Creator, in which He irradiates man’s darkened heart, is just the counterpart of that work of this world’s god in which the mind of the unbeliever is blinded. [“The Christian ministry: I. As a ministry of Light. It does not make the objects of faith; it only unveils or manifests them as they are. To live in sin is to live a false life—a life of lies—in which a man is untrue to his own nature. The Gospel does not make God our Father; it only reveals Him as He had ever been, is, and ever shall be; not a tyrant but a Father; not a chance or a necessary thing but a Person; and in the life of Christ the love of God has become intelligible to us. So it throws light on man’s nature; shows him with God-like aspirations and animal cravings; a glorious temple in ruins, to be re-built into a habitation of God through the Spirit. It throws light upon the grave and the things of that undiscovered land beyond. Hence our life is to be a perpetual manifestation of the Gospel, and a diffusion of the light of the Gospel; while the evil and worldly heart is ever hiding the truth. This light is the true evidence of Christianity. II. As a reflection, in word, and experience of the life of Christ.” F. W. Robertson, Lect. XL.]. Footnotes: 2 Corinthians 4:1.—The Recep. has ἐκκακοῦμεν, but Lachmann and Tischendorf have ἐγκακοῦμεν. Meyer thinks the latter an emendation to make the text accord with general usage among all Greek writers, with the exception of some doubtful passages of the New Testament, and some writings of the Fathers. [A similar, though not quite the same variety of readings is found for the same word in Luke 18:1; Galatians 6:9; Ephesians 3:13; and 2 Thessalonians 3:13. Meyer thinks that ἐκκακ, was probably more used in oral speech in Paul’s time, though it appears in no Greek writer before him: and that Paul and Luke introduced it into ecclesiastical usage, where it sometimes occurs, but still less frequently than ἐγκακ. The Codd. A. B. D (1st Cor.) F. G. (the three last have it written ἐνκακ). Sinait. and some cursives favor ἐγκακ. but C. D. (3d Cor.) E. K. L. et al. with Chrys., Theodt., Damasc., et al. have ἐκκακ. Among the versions some of the old Ital. have non defecimus, and others with Tertul. and the Vulg. have non deficimus, still others with one copy of the Vulg. and Ambrosiast, have non deficiamus; August, has non infirmemur, the Gothic non fiamus segnes, the Syriac non est nobis tζdium, Erasmus non degeneramus. Wycliffe and the Rhemish have we fail not; Tyndale and Geneva with our A. V. and Bib. Union, we faint not; and Cranmer, we go not out of kynde. The difference of meaning between the two readings is not very serious; for which see Exeg. notes] [2 Corinthians 4:2.—The Rec. has συνιστῶντες with D. (3d Cor.), E. K. L. Chrys., Theodt., et al., A. and B. seem uncertain whether the reading should be -ῶντες or -άνοντες, but C. D. (1st Cor.) F. G. and Sinait. and three cursives, have συνιστάντες, which is edited by Lachm., Tisch. and Alford. Comp. 2 Corinthians 6:5; and 2 Corinthians 10:18]. 2 Corinthians 4:4.—Διαυγάσαι and καταυγάσαι are both glosses to define more precisely the simple verb. [The principal authorrity for the former is A., four cursives, and some copies of some Greek fathers of the Antiochian school: and for the latter, C. D. et al. The Recep. αύγάσαι is sustained by B. F. K. L. Sinait. and the best MSS. of the Greek Fathers]. The Recep, has αὐτοῖς after αὐγάσαι, but without much MSS. authority. It is evidently an interpolation. 2 Corinthians 4:6.—Lachmann has λάμψει instead of λάμψαι, on the authority of A. B. [D. (1st Cor.) Sinait (1st Cor.) et al.] It is probably a suggestion from Genesis 1:3. [Bloomfield, Meyer, Wordsworth, Tischendorf, agree with the Recep. and most of the versions and fathers in preferring λάμψαι, but Alford and Stanley agree with Kling in thinking this a quotation of the creative fiat. Some respectable MSS. omit ὅς ?]. 2 Corinthians 4:6.—Lachmann has αὑτοῦ in place of τοῦθεοῦ. but the MSS. evidence for it is not satisfactory, and the internal evidence is against it, since no one could have been uncertain of the antecedent of αὐτοῦ, [and hence would have had no motive to put τοῦθεοῦ in its place for an explanation. Its only uncial authorities are F. G. and the 1st Corr. of C. and D]. 2 Corinthians 4:6.—Ἰησοῦ before Χριστοῦ is not genuine. [And yet it is inserted before χριστοῦ by C. K. L. and Sinait., and after χριστοῦ by D. E. F. G., the Italic and Vulgate versions, and the Latin Fathers; A. B. and some Greek writers have only χριστοῦ ?]. [In Colossians 1:15, and Hebrews 1:3, the reference is to the λόγος, and hence ἀοράτου was appropriate. The word in the latter passage (χαράκτηρ) is different, but the idea is nearly the same. An image is more than a likeness (ὁμοίωσις, Trench, Synn. 1st Ser. p. 77): things may be alike, but not images of one another. An image must have a prototype after which it was drawn, and which it must more than resemble. Greg. Naz.: αν ?̓ ?́τηγὰρεἰκόνοςφύσις, μίμημαεἶναιτοῦἀρχετύπον. The present ἔστιν signifies that the thing spoken of was always present]. IX.—THE AND FEEBLE OF . IN VIEW OF THE RESULT OF THEIR 2 Corinthians 4:7 to 2 Corinthians 5:107 But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency [exceeding greatness] 8of the power may be of God, and not of us. We are troubled on every side [In every way we are hard pressed], yet not distressed [inextricably straitened]; we are perplexed, but not in despair; 9persecuted, but not forsaken; cast down, but not destroyed; 10always bearing about in the body the dying of the Lord [om. the Lord] Jesus, that the life also of Jesus might be made manifest in our body. 11For we which live are alway delivered unto death for Jesus’ sake, that the life also of Jesus might be 12made manifest in our mortal flesh. So then [that] death worketh in us, but life in you. 13We [But] having the same Spirit of faith, according as it is written, “I believe, and 14[om. and] therefore have I spoken;” we also believe, and therefore speak; knowing that he which raised up the Lord Jesus shall raise up us also by [with] Jesus, and shall present us with you. 15For all things are for your sakes, that the abundant grace might through the thanksgiving of many redound [that the grace, becoming more abundant in consequence of the greater number, might multiply (περισσεύσῃ) the thanksgiving] to the glory of God. 16For which cause we faint not; but though our outward man perish [is wasting away, διαφθείρεται], yet the [our] inward man is renewed day by day. 17For our light affliction, which is but for a moment, worketh for us a far more exceeding and [om. and] eternal weight of glory; 18while we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal [temporary, πρόσκαιρα], but the things which are not seen are eternal. 2 Corinthians 5:1. For we know that, if our earthly house of this tabernacle [tent-dwelling] were dissolved, we have [in the heavens] a building of [from, ἐκ] God, a house not made with hands, eternal [,] in the heavens [om. in the heavens]. 2For in this [also] we groan, earnestly 3desiringto be clothed upon with [to put on over this] our house which is from 4heaven: if so be that [since indeed, εἵγεκαὶ ?] being clothed we shall not be found naked. For [even] we that are in this [the] tabernacle do groan, being burdened: not for that we would be unclothed, [because we are not willing to be unclothed], but clothed upon, 5that mortality [our mortal part] might be swallowed up of [by] life. Now [But] he that hath wrought us [out] for the self-same thing is God, who also [om. also] hath6given unto us the earnest of the Spirit. Therefore we are [Being] always confident, 7knowing that, whilst we are at [in our] home in the body, we are absent from [our home in] the Lord: for we walk by faith, not by sight [appearance]: 8we are confident, 9I say, and willing [well pleased] rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord. Wherefore [also] we labour, that, whether present or absent, we may be accepted of [acceptable to] him. 10For we must all appear [be made manifest] before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in [through] his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be [were] good or bad. AND 2 Corinthians 4:7. [This glorious ministry was intrusted to weak and decaying vessels. “As the Apostle had spoken many and great things of the indescribable glory, there was danger that some would say, ‘How can those who have such glory continue in these mortal bodies?’ He, therefore, says that this is indeed a matter of chief surprise, and a remarkable instance of Divine power, that an earthen vessel should be able to endure such extreme splendor, and to hold in custody so great a treasure.” Chrysostom. He insensibly passes to the Divine supports which he experienced under the weaknesses of his body and the difficulties of his work].—But we have this treasure in earthen vessels.—The δέ leads us on to the exhibition of the contrast between the glory of which he had just been speaking, and the infirmity and afflicted state of those who were its possessors. We can hardly suppose that he is here directly defending himself against objections which had been formally arrayed against him (see Meyer); and yet he doubtless had his eye on those opponents who had endured much less for Christ’s cause. (comp. 2 Corinthians 11:23 ff.).—The word treasure indicates the great value of the Divine illumination (2 Corinthians 4:6), and of course implies the importance of the office which is directed to the diffusion of the light of the knowledge, etc. In contrast with this is the ὀστράκινασκεύη, clayey vessel, which is of a cheap and fragile nature. We naturally expect that a valuable possession will be deposited in precious and valuable vessels. In this he has no reference to some special insignificance or weakness of his person, or to some peculiar sickliness of his bodily frame, nor indeed to himself exclusively (σκεύεσιν, καρδίαις, 2 Corinthians 4:6), but according to his usage, to the general state of the human body, perishable as it always is, and destined to dissolution. (comp. 2 Corinthians 4:16; 2 Corinthians 5:1 ff.).—[The word σκεῦος, as applied to the human body, had almost lost its metaphorical character among the Greeks. (comp. Romans 9:22-23; 1 Peter 3:7; 2 Timothy 2:21). The Platonists spoke of two bodies; one (ὅχημαψυχῆς) was the external chariot or vehicle of the soul, and the other (ὅστράκινονσκεῦος) was the frail body which the soul inhabits as the testacea do their shell. The substantive ὅστρακον signifies either burnt clay, with any thing made of it, a piece of tile, and especially the tablet used in voting (hence ostracise), or the hard shell of the testacea. The latter seems to have been the most ancient meaning, and the two significations are connected, perhaps because shells were at first used as vessels, or were the material from which vessels were made. Chrysostom: “Our mortal nature is nothing better constituted than earthen ware; for it is soon damaged, and by death and disease, and variations of temperature and ten thousand other things, easily dissolved.” Dr. Hodge, Neander and Billroth think that earthen vessels here signify not the frail bodies merely, but the whole human nature of ministers since it is not solely on account of their corporeal frailty that they are incompetent to produce the effects which flow from their ministrations. But though the fact here assumed is true, the mind of the Apostle was evidently here fixed upon the body alone; as is clear from the usage of ὀστράκινονσκεῦος, and from the equivalent phrases (our outward man, and our earthly tent in which we dwell) in 2 Corinthians 4:16 and 2 Corinthians 5:1.. In the apparent unsuitableness of such an arrangement, he discovered a Divine purpose of an exalted character.—That the exceeding greatness of the power may be seen to be God’s and not ours.—[On the telic and not ecbatic signification of ἵνα consult Winer § 57, p. 355]. The exceeding greatness of the power (ὑπερβολὴ (found also in 2 Corinthians 12:7) τῆςδυνάμεως) signifies the power which was so triumphant in the whole sphere of the Apostolic ministry to convert and enlighten men, notwithstanding the afflictions, persecutions, difficulties and conflicts which had to be endured. (comp. 2 Corinthians 4:8 ff.). It was in these very circumstances that its superiority to every other agency had been shown (δύναμις 1 Corinthians 4:20).—The ῇ like γένηται in Romans 7:13, and εἷναι in Romans 3:26, has the logical import of φανῇ or εὑρηθῇοὗσα [i. e., may appear to be.]. The genitive θεοῦ has the force of, belonging to God; and it is contrasted with ἐξἡμων: going out from us. 2 Corinthians 4:8-10. [All the sentences in this passage are participial, and yet they are not inappropriately rendered in our A. V. in the first person of the present Indicative. “In each of these pairs of antitheses the signification of the second is cognate to that of the first; in those in 2 Corinthians 6:9-10, contrary: each second is also here the extreme of the first.” Webster &Wilkinson]. They are connected in signification with the preceding verse, in which had been announced the design or end God had in view. He thus asserts that the superabundant power which was exhibited in his Apostolical work belonged entirely to that God who helped him and carried him through all his distresses and infirmities.—We are pressed in every way but not straitened.—̓Ενπαντὶ signifies here, not in all places, but in every way and on every occasion, as in 2 Corinthians 7:5. [Dr. Hodge also suggests that the words belong to all the following clauses, and not merely to the first]. Στενοχωρεῖσθαι signifies to be hemmed in a narrow space from which there is no exit. [Stanley: pressed for room, but still having room]. The noun occurs in 2 Corinthians 6:4; 2 Corinthians 12:10. As οὐστενοχωρούμενοι, in which God’s power is displayed, is related to θλιβόμενοι, so is οὐκἐξαπορούμενοι to ἀπορούμενοι:—perplexed but not despairing.—The word ἀπορούμενοι signifies, to come into perplexities and ἐξαπορ. to come into such extreme despair, that one knows not what to do or where to look for help. [Stanley: losing our way, but not entirely; bewildered, but not benighted]. There is probably in this antithesis an allusion, not merely to his external, but to his internal state; for under distressing and straitened circumstances, under fatigue and hostile assaults, the mind becomes oppressed, and hence perplexed and in despair. In such a condition God’s power had been revealed, so that in the midst of his human infirmities, he had not been reduced to extremity, nor been without counsel or hope.—Persecuted, but not forsaken (2 Corinthians 4:9).—He here begins to speak of outward circumstances. In διωκόμενοι and ἐγκαταλειπόμενοι the metaphor is not that of a foot-race [pursued, but not left behind, (Olshausen, Stanley,) for the Apostle is speaking, not of rivalry from those who as runners had the same end in view, but of troubles and persecutions” Alford]; for διώκεσθαι, as in 1 Corinthians 4:12, signifies to be persecuted (so διωγμοί in 2 Corinthians 12:10), and ἐγκαταλείπεσθαι, to be left under persecutions, to be abandoned without help (see Meyer). The word occurs also in 2 Timothy 4:16. The figure of a conflict runs through both clauses of the verse:—cast down, but not destroyed; καταβαλλόμενοι is an advance beyond the meaning of διωκόμενοι, for it asserts that he was not only chased, but pulled or stricken down to the ground. Neander: “We have here the comparison of a combatant who is indeed thrown down by his antagonist in the conflict, and is awaiting his death blow, but who, after all, succeeds in rising again.” The Catholic interpretation is: “one who is seized in his flight, and is prostrated, but not slain.” Not being destroyed was the consequence of not being forsaken. In 2 Corinthians 4:10 the apostolic sufferings are set forth in their highest degree of intensity, as an extreme peril of life itself, a perpetual hanging in suspense:—always bearing about in our body the dying of Jesus.(comp. 1 Corinthians 15:31; Romans 8:36).—Νέκρωσις is a killing, or putting to death, but it has also an intransitive signification, a dying; here in a physical and not an ethical sense. (comp. 2 Corinthians 4:11). The dying of Jesus is represented as permanently connected with his body in such a way that he was never without it, and always carried it with him. [It was a perpetual νέκρωσις, a dying, but never a θάνατος, death]. It was something which attached to him in consequence of his common fellowship with Jesus in his mode of life and his office, and accompanied him wherever he was. [Chrysostom: we are shown every day dying, that we may also be seen every day rising again]. Those explanations miss the true sense of the Apostle, which describe it as a violent death from wounds (Galatians 6:17), or a sickness which contained the seeds of death (Rόckert). The antithesis is introduced in the following final sentence—that the life also of Jesus may be manifested in our body—where we are told the purpose or design which God had in view when He permitted such sufferings (comp. 2 Corinthians 4:7). The life of Jesus. the ζωὴ, contrasted with the νέκρωσις, signifies that life which is the triumphant result of the death of Jesus, viz: the life which He had in His resurrection. Its manifestation in the body of the Apostle was probably nothing but the fact that although he was always in danger of death, he always came forth alive out of his deadly perils. The idea is that of unity with Christ or resemblance to Christ in His life, as before in His dying. The context and the contrast suggest this. Though Jesus or the life of Jesus may have been the source of this life, such is not the assertion of the text, and such an assertion would not be suitable to the context. If we attempt to unite the two ideas in one explanation, we only mingle together two distinct representations (life in its unity and resemblance, and life in its energy). In a subsequent part of the Apostle’s discourse (2 Corinthians 4:14 ff.) the glorification of the body in the resurrection is perhaps a topic of consideration, but no allusion is made to it here. Still less is there any reference to a spiritual or moral influence, as though the Apostle would assert that the same living power through which Christ was raised and now lives, might be seen in the invincible energy of soul which he exhibited in the midst of all his adversities (de Wette). It is inconsistent with such a view that he uses the phrase, in our body (ἐντῷσώματιἡμῶν), and the corresponding expression, in our mortal flesh (ἐντῇθνῃτῇσαρκίἡμῶν, 2 Corinthians 4:11, comp. also 2 Corinthians 6:9); and it is not a sufficient explanation of this idea to say, that his official influence is conceived of in its outward manifestation, in connection with and acting through the feeble members of his body (Osiander). [It is, however, against this wholly natural view of the life of Jesus acting in Paul’s body that, in 2 Corinthians 4:12, he speaks of it as acting through him upon the Corinthians, and in them producing spiritual effects (comp. Alford. But see notes on that ver.). “Perhaps Paul does not refer to any single thing in the life of the Lord Jesus, but means that he did this in order that in all things the same life, the same kind of living which characterized the Lord Jesus might be manifested in him; so that he resembled Him in his sufferings and trials, in order that in all things he might have the same life in his body.”—Barnes]. 2 Corinthians 4:11. For we which live are ever delivered unto death.—This is an explanation and a confirmation of what had been said in 2 Corinthians 4:10. Corresponding with the bearing about the dying of Jesus in the body, we have here a being delivered unto death for Jesus’ sake. And yet it does not follow that the dying of Jesus was precisely the same as the dying for Jesus’ sake. The thought (2 Corinthians 4:10) of the identity of the dying (in behalf of the same cause) is modified in 2 Corinthians 4:11 by becoming a deliverance unto death for Jesus’ sake. Both ideas, however, are fundamentally the same, so far as the cause of God’s kingdom, for which both Jesus and His Apostle endured such deadly sufferings, and the person and name of Jesus himself, were essentially connected. In διὰἸησοῦν, here rendered, for Jesus’ sake, διά indicates the true reason but not the object had in view (to glorify Jesus), although the cause and the design are closely united. Much less does this preposition mean the same thing as: auctoritate Jesu, for it cannot have reference to the motive of the action, inasmuch as the deliverance (παραδιδόμεθα) is passive, and can have no allusion to the voluntariness of the subject of the action. The being delivered to death (εἰςθάν. παδιδ.) is intensified by the contrast implied in, we who are alive (ἡμεῖςοἱζῶντες.), as if they were delivered up to death in full life. Neander: “Now we seem in the midst of life and a moment afterwards we are given up to death.” This is neither an anticipation of what is said in the succeeding final sentence (as if the Apostle had intended to say: we who are kept alive), nor is it the same as to say: “as long as we live;” nor is it a feeble expression by which he would inform us: we who are still alive while so many of our fellow-Christians are dead; nor, moreover, is it to be taken as an emphatic description of the spiritual life (Osiander, Bisping); those in whom Jesus’ life acts to make them His organs of communication with men must have life through the spirit and power of faith (John 3:36; John 11:25; Galatians 2:20). Such a view as is contained in this last mode of interpretation could derive support only from the final sentence in 2 Corinthians 4:10, as it is explained by de Wette. The deliverance to death was accomplished through the agency of men, but it must be referred ultimately to God (ὑπὸτοῦθεοῦ), inasmuch as the final sentence indicates that there was a Divine purpose in the case.—that the life also of Jesus may be manifested in our mortal flesh.—In the inference which is drawn in this final sentence, the words, in our mortal flesh (ἐντῆθνητῇσαρκῖἡμῶν), are emphatic, and are an augmentation of the thought expressed in 2 Corinthians 4:10 respecting the manifestation in our body (ἐντῷσώματι); or perhaps they are a stronger expression to bring into more striking contrast the revelation of Jesus’ life, inasmuch as this life must become more manifest in the midst of this weakness and frailty of the body. 2 Corinthians 4:12. So then death worketh in as but life in you.—We have here the result of what he had just described, and its relation to the Corinthian Church. We should naturally have expected in such an expression ὁμὲνθάνατος (lect. rec.), but the particle was probably left out by the Apostle intentionally, that the contrast might be the more striking. Death and life were both active powers (as in every other part of the New Testament ἐνεργεῖται must be taken in an active and not in a passive signification.) Death was working in the Apostle, inasmuch as he was always exposed to death (2 Corinthians 4:10-11), but life was working in the Corinthians. But in what sense was this true of the Corinthians? Not directly but mediately, in the degree in which Jesus’ life was revealed in the Apostle’s body. The connection with 2 Corinthians 4:10-11 seems to demand this. It was by the Apostle’s dangers that he came into just the position to exert his apostolic powers for their good. While, therefore, he felt the continual influence of death, they were receiving a perpetual stream of quickening energies from his death. We are neither compelled to understand (with de Wette and Osiander) the life (ζωή) here spoken of as meaning the higher spiritual life, the Divine power which was glorified in the Apostle’s sufferings and its working (ἐνεργεῖται), as expressing the beneficial influence of his ministry in implanting and strengthening their faith, nor would we be justified in giving such a turn to the thought. [On the other hand Alford contends that the idea of Christ’s natural life acting upon the Corinthians through Paul, is much forced. “In Romans 8:10 f., the vivifying influence of His Spirit, who raised Jesus from the dead is spoken of as extending to the body also; here the upholding influence of Him who delivers and preserves the body is spoken of as vivifying the whole man: life, in both places, being the higher and spiritual life, including the lower and natural. ‘And in our relative positions—ye are examples of this life since ye are a church of believers, alive to God through Christ in your various vocations, and not called upon to be θεατριζόμενοι as we are, who are (not indeed excluded from that life—nay, it flows from us to you—but are) more especially examples of conformity to the death of our common Lord, in whom death works.” “Death and life are personified, and the one is operative in Paul and the other in the Corinthians.”—Hodge]. Entirely unsuitable to the whole tenor of the Epistle and of this particular section would be the supposition of an irony in which the Apostle contrasts his own extreme perils with the peace and prosperity of the Corinthians. Comp. 1 Corinthians 4:8 (Chrysostom, Calvin). 2 Corinthians 4:13-14.—But having the same spirit of faith (as it is written, I believed, therefore I spoke).—The Apostle now passes on to the spiritual side of the description he was giving of the Divine power in him (2 Corinthians 4:7). [But though you might think this working of death discouraging to us, it is not so in fact; for we are animated by two great principles: first, an assured faith that we shall participate with you in the benefits of the Gospel (2 Corinthians 4:13-16), and secondly, a confident hope of a glorious renovation (2 Corinthians 4:16-18). Our version omits the connecting particle δέ which expresses the contrast between what follows and what precedes: death worketh indeed in us, but] the same spirit of faith impels us to speak to our fellow-men and to make known the Gospel, which had been expressed in that passage of Scripture, in which it is said: I believed, therefore I spoke. The δέ also introduces an additional point in the discourse. The Spirit of faith denotes, not the spirit or disposition of faith, but the Spirit of God, which produced faith in the heart, the Spirit which he had received, which dwelt in him, and whose organ he was in the ministration of the Spirit. 2 Corinthians 3:8; comp. the spirit of meekness in 1 Corinthians 4:21; Galatians 6:1, et al. Neander: “the Apostle is here speaking of that peculiar influence of the Holy Spirit by which he acquired a confirmed confidence in God that he would come forth triumphant over all death, and that every thing would promote the welfare of himself and of the whole Church.” Τὸαὐτό refers not to the faith of the Corinthians (the same which ye have), for the context suggests nothing of this kind, and the Apostle is speaking of the Corinthians only as the receivers or objects of his beneficial agency, but to the τὸγεγραμμένον with its contents: the same spirit of confidence in God which is expressed in the following passage of the Scriptures. The passage is found in Psalms 116:10, though it is taken from the LXX., and does not give us the precise translation of the original Heb. ϊֶ ?ΰֱ ?ξַ ?πְ ?ϊִ ?ιλִ ?ιΰֲ ?γַ ?αֵּ ?ψ,” believed, for I spoke.” [Comp. Hengstenberg on the Psalms.]. This, however, conducts us essentially to the same idea, for the speech, the discourse of the psalmist, expressive of prayerful submission, thankfulness and hope (2 Corinthians 4:1-9), is something in which faith is shown, and must have proceeded from faith. Bengel says: “No sooner does faith exist than she begins to speak to others, and while speaking recognizes herself and grows in power.”—Like the Psalmist, we also believe and therefore speak.—The believing of the Apostle, like that of the Psalmist, was a firm assurance that the quickening power of the Lord would help him through, and deliver him out of all his distresses. From this proceeds a spirit of praise for the deliverance given him; for in his preaching and in his testimony before the Church, his great object was to glorify God.—But the faith which moved him to speak involved also a confident hope that the power of God would ever afterwards be manifested in him, 2 Corinthians 4:14 :—Knowing that He who raised up the Lord Jesus.—We have εἰδότες in like manner in 1 Corinthians 15:58. The basis of this hope was the Divine fact on which all his faith and his salvation rested, 1 Corinthians 15:13 ff.; Romans 8:11, et al. The substance of this confidence was, that he who had raised up the Lord Jesus, will raise up us also with Jesus.—The most natural and probably the correct view of this passage leads our thoughts to the general resurrection. The fact that in other passages Paul holds before himself and his fellow-believers of that period the possibility that they might be changed without dying (1 Corinthians 15:52; 1 Thessalonians 4:15 f.), does not militate against such a view, for he also intimates (2 Corinthians 5:8) that they miht possibly be called to die, and we may include under the general idea of being raised up, the more special one of a simple change (comp. on 1 Corinthians 6:14). Instead of σύν one would more naturally have expected διὰ or ἐν, 1 Corinthians 15:21-22. But just as in ἅξεισὺναὐτῷ 1 Thessalonians 4:14, the fellowship with him into which they were to be introduced, was pointed out, so the resurrection with Jesus in this place is a pattern which, in like manner, is founded upon a fellowship with Him, and is its highest realization and glorification, Ephesians 2:6; Colossians 2:12; Colossians 3:1. Of a resurrection with Jesus, in some other sense than that of a bodily resurrection, the Apostle never speaks, except in the past tense. No intimation is given of a deliverance from the peril of death (Meyer), and the words, with Jesus, are at least no more fitted to such an idea than they are to ἐγείρειν in the sense of a literal resurrection of the dead. If the former is a common fellowship in the lot of the risen Jesus, the latter is still more so. It is for this reason that he immediately adds:—and will present us with you.—This must refer to a presentation before the judgment seat of Christ for the reception of the great prize (2 Corinthians 1:14; 2 Corinthians 5:10; comp. 2 Timothy 4:8; 2 Thess. 2:19), or, which comes to the same result, a presentation of them as the companions of Christ in His kingdom. [This presentation by Christ is not the same with standing before His bar for judgment. The Apostle has here no allusion to the more awful scenes of the last judgment (2 Corinthians 5:10) but only to the more animating presentation with Christ and by Christ for final acceptance by the Father]. 2 Corinthians 4:15. For all things are for your sakes.—This is immediately connected with the preceding phrase, in which he had declared that he would have fellowship with them in the future glory. The all things has reference to what he had said of his afflictions and his deliverances, of his faith and its fruits, and of his speaking and witnessing for the truth in the power of faith. In 2 Corinthians 4:12 he had said that life was energizing in them, and he now declares that all things he had mentioned (τὰπάντα), would turn out for their good. (comp. 2 Corinthians 1:6; Philippians 1:25; 2 Timothy 2:10). He will present us with you, for all these things take place for your sakes. In the final sentence he tells them of the ultimate result to which all things would be conducted:—in order that the grace which abounds through many, might multiply thanksgivings to the glory of God.—The grace (χάρις) is here not the whole salvation sealed by the resurrection of Christ, for such an idea would not be expressed by a phrase like τὰπάντα, but the gracious assistance of which he had just spoken. (2 Corinthians 4:10 ff.). Πλεονάσασαδιὰτῶνπλειόνων signifies that the grace was increased or enlarged by the greater number of those who participate in it, or to whom it is extended. The persons here spoken of are not those who would become interested in the blessing in consequence of the Corinthians’ intercessions in his behalf, for his subject did not call for such an allusion (as in 2 Corinthians 1:11). The same general sense of the passage would be gained if we should connect διὰτῶνπλειόνων with the following περισσεύσῃ):—that the abounding grace might multiply the thanksgivings by means of many.—In this case the increased number, who participated in the blessing, were those through whom the grace, extended or enlarged by their participation, would be the means of a more abundant thanksgiving. This is certainly better than passing over the intervening τῶνπλειόνων, to govern τήνἐυχαριστίαν by διά(in which case the genitive would have been more grammatical; comp. 2 Corinthians 9:12), and to take περισσεύσῃ in an intransitive sense. The word, however, is frequently used in either a transitive or an intransitive signification; comp. 2 Corinthians 9:8; 2 Corinthians 9:12. On the phrase, to the glory of God, comp. 1 Corinthians 10:31. [Alford presents us with four ways of translating this clause: 1.“that grace having abounded by means of the greater number (who have received it), may multiply the thanksgiving to the glory of God;” 2. “that grace having abounded, may, on account of the thanksgiving of the greater number, be multiplied to the glory of God.” (Luther, Bengel, etc.); 3. “that grace having abounded, may, by means of the greater number, multiply the thanksgiving to the glory of God.” (De Wette); 4. “that grace having multiplied by means of the greater number, the thanksgiving may abound to the glory of God.” (Proposed as possible, but not adopted by himself). He prefers the first as “most agreeable to the position of the words and to the emphasis.”] 2 Corinthians 4:16-18. For which cause we faint not.—Διό refers back to 2 Corinthians 4:14. (2 Corinthians 4:15 was only an explanation of 2 Corinthians 4:14). We faint not (οὐκἐκκακοῦμεν) occurs here in the same sense as in 2 Corinthians 4:1. In positive contrast with this, he says:—but even if our outward man is wasted away, our inward (man) is nevertheless renewed day by day.—The outward man (‘οἕξωἅνθρωπος), is an expression found only in this place, and it denotes the whole personal existence, so far as it is embodied in nature and the laws of the external common life. On the other hand, ὁἕσωθενἅνθρ denotes the same personal existence, so far as it is determined by the Divine law, and participates in the fulness of the Divine life. Comp. Romans 7:22; comp. 23 (where νοῦς is an equivalent word): Ephesians 3:16 comp. 19. (Beck, Seelenl., 68 f. comp. 42, 37). Meyer thinks the former expression denotes that which is visible in us, i.e., our corporeal nature, and the latter, our intellectual, rational and moral selves. Osiander understands by the latter term, the essential nature of man, kindred with God and capable of regeneration. [Hodge: “man’s higher nature—his soul as the subject of the Divine life.”] Comp. Delitzsch, Bibl. Psychol., pp. 145 f. 331, 333. [Alford, Stanley, Barnes and Bloomfield understand by it simply the soul in distinction from the body]. The doctrine of Collenbusch and Menken, that the inner man is an invisible body, existing in some concealed form within us, cannot be sustained by any natural exegesis, or by the plain meaning of these words. The attempt which Osiander has made to devise an intermediate doctrine according to which the inner man is the sphere of the higher spiritual life, which, however, communicates itself to the whole man by perpetually acting in an outward direction, and which, therefore, contains the germ of a higher bodily life and of a corporeal resurrection, is certainly problematical. The wasting away (διαφθείρεσθαι) of our outer man, i. e., the destruction of the outer man by the consuming, fretting, and disintegrating conflicts which his sufferings involved, is here alluded to as an actual process in the εἰκαί (which cannot mean: even supposing that. Rόckert), and was an actual fact of the Apostle’s experience, notwithstanding the salvation asserted in 2 Corinthians 4:10 f. In contrast with this perishing of the outer, he now places the renewal (ἀνακαινοῦσθαι) of the inner man. Neander: “the ἀνά presupposes an original image of God in man.” Both processes are represented as perpetually going on, but the inward man is said to be continually endued with new power, i. e., to be renewed, and sustained by the quickening Spirit (πνεῦμαζωοποιοῦν) which came to him from Christ. (2 Corinthians 3:17 f. and 2 Corinthians 4:6). ̔Ημέρᾳκαὶἡμέρᾳ is like the Hebr. ιεֹ ?νιεֹ ?ν, Psalms 68:20; Genesis 39:10; Esther 3:4). The second ἀλλά is equivalent to: yet, nevertheless, as is frequently the case in hypothetical conclusions in which the apodosis contains a contrast to the protasis. (comp. 2 Corinthians 5:16; 2 Corinthians 9:6; 2 Corinthians 13:4; 1 Corinthians 4:15; 1 Corinthians 9:2).—For our light affliction which is but for a moment, worketh for us exceeding abundantly, an eternal weight of glory. (2 Corinthians 4:17).—He here notices what it was which gave such continual refreshment to his inward man, under the exhausting influence of his sufferings. It was the hope of glory with which the Spirit of Christ had inspired him, and which showed him that these suffering were only the momentary and slight inconveniences of a transition state, and the necessary means of attaining a state of glory. (Comp. 2 Corinthians 4:14; Romans 5:6; Romans 8:17 ff.). Inasmuch as this view of his sufferings contained the reason for the renewal of which he had spoken (ἀνακαίνωσις), he introduces it with a γάρ The verse contains a sharp antithesis. There is on the one hand τὸπαραυταίκαἐλαφρὸντῆςθλίψεως,the momentary (coming and going in a moment) lightness (in respect to weight and therefore easily to be borne) of the affliction (an oxymoron, since θλῖψις, oppression, implies something heavy), and on the other, the eternal weight of glory (τὸαἰώνιονβάροςδόξης). Βάρος signifies weight, and therefore pressure, and would seem more appropriately connected with the affliction (θλῖψις), but is here applied to the glory (δόξα) on account of the great extent or high degree of the glory. The meaning is: the affliction is soon over and light, while the glory is everlasting and weighty. Possibly the affliction was called momentary on account of the nearness of Christ’s second coming, i. e. the Parousia (Meyer). Certainly the everlasting duration and the magnitude of the glory, when contemplated by a steady eye of faith, would make afflictions seem but momentary and light.—But we must understand the Apostle as implying that the afflictions are the actual cause of the glory. The θλῖψις is the means of producing and bringing to pass the δόξα, i. e. the glory of the heavenly kingdom. This is a consequence of that. What is represented in other passages as a reward (com. Matthew 5:10; Luke 16:25; Romans 8:27; 2 Timothy 2:12; Romans 5:2-5), is here represented as a natural result. The affliction so exercises and purifies the believer, that he is qualified to enjoy the glory, or, it promotes the sanctification of both soul and body. Nothing is said, however, to imply that the sufferings have any merit in themselves, or have any intrinsic value in the matter of our justification.—The qualification καθ̓ὐπερβολήνεἰςὑπερβολήν does not seem applicable to αἰώνιον, and it must therefore be connected with κατεργάζεται; they work in a superabundant manner, even to a superfluity. Meyer explains it as: the measureless energy and the measureless results of the working (κατεργάζεται, comp. 2 Corinthians 1:8; 2 Corinthians 10:15; 1 Corinthians 12:31; Galatians 1:13; Romans 7:13, et al.). It may then be indirectly connected with the δόξα (Osiander). A separation of the words so as to make the first καθ̓ὑπερβ, have reference to τῆςθλίψεως (the exceedingly intense affliction), and the second εἰςὑπερβ. to the δόξαν (Bengel) is not sustained by grammatical usage.—Such an accumulation of epithets indicates the highest possible degree, but not a development of the glory from one super-eminent position of glory to another still higher. In 2 Corinthians 4:18 he notices still further the subjective reason for such a result: while we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen. To take this in the sense of something which must be presupposed is a condition to what had just been said, is not called for, since the Apostle in the context is not exhorting his readers, but is simply describing a fact, and ἡμῶν can be taken only by way of application to a more extensive class (to believers generally). Σκοπεῖν is: to take in sight, particularly to look upon the object of our exertion, as in Philippians 2:4. The things which are seen (τὰβλεπόμενα) are the blessings of the αἰὼνον̓ ?͂τος, the things we perceive by our senses; the things not seen (τὰμὴβλεπόμενα) are those of the άιυνμέλλων, things which are beyond the perception of our senses, and yet not precisely the same as the ἀόρατα (invisible things). Bengel says: “many things which are at present unseen, will be visible when faith’s journey is accomplished.” The μὴ in connection with μὴσκοπούντωνἡμῶν describes the subjective position in which believers are supposed to be .—For the things which are seen are temporary, but the things which are not seen are eternal (2 Corinthians 4:18).—He here gives the reason for the not looking at, etc., πρόςκαιρα (temporary), is applicable to a definite period of time, that which continues only for a limited season, and hence means not so much temporal as transitory. It occurs also in Matthew 13:21; Mark 4:17; Hebrews 9:25. 52 Corinthians 5:1. For we know that if the earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved.—We have here the reasons assigned for what had been said in 2 Corinthians 4:17 : “We have said that our temporal afflictions worked for us an eternal weight of glory, and the reason is, we know,” etc. Or, it will come to the same end, if we take the idea thus: Our afflictions accomplish the result we have mentioned; for we have, as we know, etc. Οἵδαμεν, “we,” i. e., the Apostle and his companions “know,” for there is no appeal here to the general consciousness of men, as in some other places. ̓Εάν expresses the possible occurrence of an event, the actual occurrence of which he leaves to the future to determine. This event is his not living until the Parousia, the second coming of Christ. It was the death of his present body, here figuratively called the destruction of his earthly tabernacle. Τοῦσκήνους is here the genitive of apposition, for the house was the same as the (well-known) tabernacle. The body is thus described as a dwelling of the spirit which is easily broken up. There is no allusion, however, to the tent habitations of the Israelites in the wilderness, or the tabernacle of witness there. In the same way we have σκήνωμα in 2 Peter 1:13 f. The word σκῆνος (tent) was frequently used among the Greeks for the earthly habitation or covering of the soul, but invariably with reference to the earthly body, and always with some allusion to the fundamental notion of a temporary tent. (Meyer). ̓Επιγέιος, as in 1 Corinthians 15:40, means that which is on earth. [Stanley: “ἐπὶ not of but upon the earth (comp. 1 Corinthians 15:40), opposed to ἐντοῖςοὐρανοῖς and εξοὐρανοῦ ?”]. In case this earthly habitation, which was given him only for a time, should be destroyed, he expresses his certain assurance that we have a building (which is) from God—a dwelling not made by hands, eternal, in the heavens.—The words ἐκθεοῦ are not to be joined with ἔχομεν, as if we received it from God, and yet the dwelling was said to be of a directly Divine origin. This is said in the highest sense, as if it were the result of an immediate Divine agency ( 1 Corinthians 15:38); and was not like the present body, merely of a general Divine origin (1 Corinthians 12:18-24). In this respect it was like the heavenly city of which it is said that its builder and maker is God. Hebrews 11:10. But this building (οἰκοδομή) is not the city of God nor the house of the Father, John 14:3 (in which case the phrase: our earthly dwelling of this tabernacle, would imply that the earth itself is a transient place of residence), but the resurrection body, the result of a new Divine creation. This is still further defined as an house not made by hands (οἰκίαἀχειροποίητος). In this expression, the lower human origin is denied, but in a way corresponding to the figure and not to the thing spoken of. It is not needful here to recur to the original formation of the body in Genesis 2:7-21. Neander: “He is here speaking of a higher heavenly organ to contain the soul, instead of the earthly body.” [“The use of αἰώνιος (comp. 2 Corinthians 4:1 ff.) forbids us to understand by the οἰκία, a temporary lodgment of the soul, to be succeeded by the glorified body at the resurrection. It must mean a permanent spiritual corporeity (so to speak) capable of coexisting with the body of the resurrection. It is something which is not the soul, but essential to its perfect consciousness of personality and identity. The human being, it is probable, cannot exist as pure spirit. A vehicle or form, perhaps an organization, may be necessary to its action. (See Taylor’s Physical Theory of Another Life, chap. 1.). Hence the use of the varied terms οἰκοδομὴ, οἰκία, οἰκητήριον, also the expressions ἐπενδύσ. ἐνδυσάμ. and the deprecatory language of 2 Corinthians 5:3, and ἐπειδὴ ?—ἐπενδ. 2 Corinthians 5:4.”—Webster and Wilkinson]. But this dwelling is said to be eternal in contrast with the dwelling of this tabernacle. [In our English version a comma should separate “eternal” and “in the heavens.” Fausset]. The last qualification, ἐντοῖςοὐρανοῖς (opp. ἐπίγειος) should be joined with ἕχομεν so as to say that we have this dwelling in the heavens. But how is this to be understood? The present tense would seem to refer to some period immediately after death. But if the soul is to have a body corresponding to its condition at that time (of which, to say the least, the Scriptures distinctly say nothing), then the dwelling here mentioned cannot be eternal. Nor would what is said in 2 Corinthians 5:2 of our house which is from heaven, agree very well with such an assertion. Comp. Delitzsch, Psychol. p. 374 ff. It is possible indeed that ἕχομεν refers to a mere reversion or expectancy, i. e., to an ideal possession like that which is spoken of when it is said: Thou shalt have treasure in heaven (Luke 18:22). In such a case the dwelling would merely be secured for believers, just as the life mentioned in Colossians 3:3 (comp. 2 Corinthians 1:5, and the crown of righteousness in 2 Timothy 4:8) is said to be. Or it may be alleged that the intermediate state between death and the resurrection is entirely lost sight of in the Apostle’s mind, inasmuch as we know that he looked upon it as altogether temporary, and hence that the perfection to be attained after the resurrection was the absorbing object of his attention in this passage (Osiander). It is hardly probable that such a man would have changed his mind so soon after writing the fifteenth chapter of his former Epistle to the Corinthians, and so should now have believed that he was to pass immediately at death into the blessedness of the resurrection body. And yet how can we reconcile what is here said with what is said in that chapter respecting the development of the resurrection body out of the earthly? It was doubtless his deliberate conviction that in the Parousia, when our Lord shall return, the heavenly bodies prepared for all who belong to Christ, shall be brought down to this earth, and a power shall be imparted to those then alive of changing, and to those then deceased of uniting with, the essential germs of their bodies, and that these shall thus attain their proper fulness and form. Neander: “There is certainly a marked distinction between what Paul here says and what he had taught in his earlier Epistles. During that earlier period his most ardent thoughts had been directed to the second coming of Christ. Now, however, when he was oppressed by apprehensions of death (2 Corinthians 4:10-12), his mind was more impressed with the feeling that he might not live to see this second coming of Christ. In this state of mind he had new and additional discoveries of Divine truth on this subject, either by means of his own reflections under the direction of the Holy Ghost, or by means of direct revelations from heaven. from the promises of Christ, and from the very nature of fellowship with Christ, he was now satisfied that death would be only a progress toward a higher state of existence, and this thought had been developed into a conviction that the soul must come into possession of an organ adapted to the active conscious life immediately after death.”2 Corinthians 5:2-4.—For in this also we groan—earnestly desiring to put on over it our house which is from heaven:—We have here one proof or sign that what he had asserted in 2 Corinthians 5:1 was a reality. This proof was the fact that even while we remain in our earthly bodies we have an intense longing for a house from heaven. ̓Εντούτῷ has here not the sense of therefore, on this account, as in John 16:30, as if the succeeding participial sentence were merely an exposition of the previous verse; nor is its object simply to explain what was meant in 2 Corinthians 5:1 by the dissolution of the earthly habitation. It rather refers (comp. 2 Corinthians 5:4, we who are in this tabernacle) to the tabernacle (σκῆνος) of 2 Corinthians 5:1, and presents a contrast to the supposition there made that it might be dissolved. The accent, therefore, should be placed upon ἐν; and καὶ should be looked upon as belonging to it. The sense would then be: we know this to be so, and the proof of it is in the fact, that even now in these bodies also we show our longings after the object of that confidence by our sighs.—A similar style of argument may be found in Romans 8:22 f. The earnest desire here spoken of gives us the true reason for the sighing. That which he had called in 2 Corinthians 5:1 a building from God, a house which we have in heaven, he here calls a habitation from heaven (οἰκητήριονἐξοὐρανοῦ) not merely on account of its origin, but because it was actually to come down from heaven to earth. Οἰκία is somewhat more absolute, whereas οἰκητήριον, a domicile, expresses its proper relation to the inhabitant (Bengel).—̓Επενδύσασθαι (to superimpose, to put on over, in which he passes to the figure of a garment) is not a putting on of one garment after another has been laid aside, but a putting on of one garment over another, comp. 2 Corinthians 5:4. The longing is for a transformation in which the earthly body will not be laid aside (in death), but the heavenly will be thrown over it. The idea is that of a new embodiment without a destruction of the corporeal system which had been possessed on earth. [“ The expression τὸἐξοὐρ. compared with ἐκθεοῦἕχομεν and ἐντοῖςοὐρ. sufficiently distinguishes the οἰκητήριον spoken of from the resuscitated body.” Web. and Wilk.]—Since, in fact being clothed, we shall not be found naked. (2 Corinthians 5:3). We have here a crux interpretum. If we adopt the two readings, εἵπερ—ἐκδυσαμενοι, we shall have a natural meaning by giving to εἴπερ the sense of: although, albeit; in which case the idea would be: although we may be unclothed, (dead), we shall not be found naked, i. e., without a body; for we shall be clothed with a resurrection body. With the reading ἐνδυσάμενοι we obtain the same general idea, if we contrast that word with ἐπενδύσασθαι, and regard it as the putting on of the resurrection body: If indeed we shall be found clothed and not naked (Flatt). Such a method, however, would be of very doubtful propriety. But it would be quite unallowable to interpret ἔιγε as a concessive particle, or to concede no force to the γε, as if the word were equivalent to εἰκαί. Fritzsche regards ἐνδυσάμενοι as having the same force as ἐπενδυσ., and εἵγε the sense of quandoquidem, and he then looks upon this verse as giving a reason for the longing mentioned in 2 Corinthians 5:2 : since we shall attain the possession of our imperishable bodies just as well by putting on our immortal bodies when we shall be alive, as by putting them on after we have laid aside our earthly bodies (i. e., in consequence of death and the resurrection, 1 Corinthians 15:52). Such an announcement would be grammatically appropriate, but 1, such a use of ἐνθυσάμενοι in connection with ἐπενδύσασθαι before and after it, 2 Corinthians 5:2; 2 Corinthians 5:4, is not very probable; and 2, the remark itself seems so self-evident and trivial, that it would be unworthy of the Apostle. But Rόckert’s interpretation. “as it is certain that we shall not be without a body (ἐκδυσάμενοι) after death,” breaks up the logical train of thought, and with many the assertion thus made would not be looked upon as quite certain from the Scriptures. Meyer (who adopts the readings of the Rec. ἕιγε—ἐνδυς.) thinks that the Apostle has reference occasionally in this argument to those who denied a future resurrection (1 Corinthians 15.), for otherwise he cannot account for the insertion of 2 Corinthians 5:3. He thinks the Apostle intends to assert here his belief, his absolute certainty (εἴγε) that not only those Christians who shall finally be changed, but those who shall then be raised from the dead, shall meet the Lord at His second coming not destitute of bodies (γυμνοί), but provided with corporeal coverings: “we have these longings (i. e., for the ἐπενδυσασθαι, 2 Corinthians 5:2) on the presumption that, being clothed, we shall not be found naked (ἔιγε has the sense of: if indeed, or if so be, implying a certainty, not by the force of the particle itself, but in consequence of the connection of the idea and the tenor of Paul’s discourse). Και would also have in this case the sense of: “truly.” Ἐνδυσάμενοι would denote an act which had taken place before the εὑρεθησόμεθα and it is therefore an aorist participle. Such an interpretation has nothing grammatically against it. But a reference to the deniers of the doctrine of the resurrection cannot be presupposed without a high degree of improbability, and as the whole interpretation becomes feeble and forced without such a reference, it must therefore be considered very doubtful. It is still more difficult to agree with de Wette, who thinks the idea of the passage is: as we confidently expect that our heavenly house will also be a body. For it is evident from the words themselves that those who are ἐνδυσάμενοι are not γυμνοί; but if the idea of the body had been prominent, γυμνοί would have been followed by σώματος. Neander: “We take these words in connection with those which precede them as merely an incidental expression: we are passing on with believing confidence to a higher state of being, for we shall in no event be destitute of a higher organ when we lay aside our earthly body; and it is only to this necessity of laying aside our earthly body that our natures now feel such a repugnance.”—As the participle is really in the aorist and yet must in such a case have the sense of the perfect ἐνδεδυμένοι there are strong reasons against referring ἐνδυσάμενοι and οὐγυμνοί exclusively to those who shall be alive and clothed in earthly bodies when Christ shall appear in the Parousia (Grotius: if we shall be found among the changed, and not among the dead). Finding all these interpretations unsatisfactory, Osiander gives in his adherence to the figurative meaning which had been proposed by many ancient and some modern commentators. Thus Chrysostom et al. have γυμνοίδόξης: Usteri: “under the presumption that we are clothed, we shall not be found naked in a different sense, i. e., without the crown for which we have struggled.” Ewald: “criminally naked, as Adam and Eve were” (Genesis 3:11). Others make out a similar meaning by taking οὐγυμνοί as explanatory or epexegetical of ἐνδυσάμενοι and referring both words to Christ or the garment of his righteousness—an idea which Hoffmann (Schriftbeweis), following Anselm, understands of an ethical application of Christ. But neither the authorities which have been adduced for this, nor the arguments by which it has been supported (as e.g. that it is an allusion to the secret Divine reasons or conditions in 2 Corinthians 4:14 ff., and an introduction to the mysteries of faith in 2 Corinthians 5:14 ff.) are sufficient to warrant such an explanation of ἐνδυσάμενοι and οὐγυμνοί in this connection (where the figure of a garment is used in application to a new heavenly body), without the express addition of some such word as Χριστοῦ or δόξης. We would prefer either to accede to Meyer’s interpretation, or to adopt the very well sustained and ancient reading εἴπερ—ἐκδυσάμευοι, giving ἕιπερ the sense of: although [ i.e.., we earnestly desire to be clothed with our house from heaven, even if (or although) being unclothed we shall not be found naked], (comp. 1 Corinthians 8:5). Here, if anywhere in the explanation of the Scriptures, we may be allowed to say: Non liquet.—In 2 Corinthians 5:4 the assertion in 2 Corinthians 5:2 is again taken up, and is more particularly defined, and confirmed by reasons:—For we that are in this tabernacle do groan, being burdened.—The words οἱὅντες, being put at the head of the sentence for the sake of emphasis, have the meaning of: we who are in earthly bodies, i. e., while we are yet in them. The word βαρούμενοι, oppressed, feeling ourselves burdened, gives a reason for the groaning. Bengel: “a burden forces out sighs and groans.” This is to be referred partly to the oppressions caused by our earthly bodies (comp. Sir 9:15), and probably also partly to the sufferings which we have to endure while we are in them (but of which no mention is made in the context). ̓Εφ̓ᾧ would then have to bear the meaning of: wherefore (quare), and perhaps be equivalent to ἐπὶτούτῳὅ ?—we sigh over that which, etc. This, however, could hardly be allowed, inasmuch as the earthly body would not then be the object which was to be clothed upon (ἐπενδύσασθαι).—Since we do not desire to be unclothed, but (we desire) to be clothed upon.—We may find a partial interpretation of this expression in what follows, which would incline us to make ἐφ̓ᾧ equivalent to because that (propterea quod), as in Romans 5:12 (not: in which, or although), and to refer it to the oppression which produces sighs on account of the dread of death. And yet this natural horror which all men feel in prospect of being unclothed, must be carefully distinguished from an unmanly fear of death, which would be unbecoming to the Apostle. The phrase οὐθέλεινἐκδύσασθαι in the sense of: not wishing to die, is the more intelligible, since the Apostle, perhaps, supposed that he might live till the time of Christ’s coming, and hence he might easily think of being spared the pains of death. (The word ἐκδύεσθαι occurs in profane authors as a figurative expression for death. Comp. Wetstein on the passage). The reason why the Apostle wished to be clothed upon, is given in the final sentence:—that what is mortal might be swallowed up by life.—That which in 1 Corinthians 15:54 is expressed by a putting on of immortality and a swallowing up of death, is here called a swallowing up of all that is mortal in us in the life, i. e., in the new imperishable life which becomes manifest when the body is changed, and its mortality is forever abolished. The earnest desire expressed in 2 Corinthians 5:2 is again alluded to when it is said that they did not desire to be unclothed; but when it is said that they were burdened (βαρούμενοι), the Apostle shows that a feeling of oppression is connected with it, inasmuch as they might be called to encounter the dreaded process of being unclothed (ἐκδύσασθαι). And yet another way of construing it in which ἐφ̓ᾧ is taken in the sense of since, deserves the preference, inasmuch as it is not easy to see how the oppression caused by our present bodies, so much disturbed by sin and the many evils of our present lot, should make us long not to die, but to be changed. If it be said that it is precisely in death that the oppression of the tabernacle is the greatest, inasmuch as it is then as it were breaking down over the head of the inhabitant (Osiander), we reply that the expression: we that are in this tabernacle, seems to refer rather to troubles to be encountered in the midst of our present earthly life. 2 Corinthians 5:5. Now he who has completely wrought us out for this self same thing is God.—[The δέ here is transitional. The exalted expressions he had used were not made because of any thing in himself, or without a deep foundation being laid in his renewed nature]. He traces all those things of which he had been speaking to a Divine origin. The self same thing (αὐτὸτοῦτο) of which he speaks, was not the groaning of the previous verse (comp. Romans 8:23), as Bengel and Hoffmann contend it was, for this would compel us to distort the signification of κατεργάζεσθαι so as to make it mean to impair by severe labor (to wear down), to break down the spirits and so to make one sigh over his bodily state and its troubles; the words rather refer to what he had just said about being clothed upon, that our mortal part might be swallowed up by the life. The meaning of the Apostle is: this longing to be clothed upon is not exclusively from an internal source, for it has a profound Divine origin. Κατεργάζεσθαι means to work out, to finish, and so to make ready. [The preposition κατὰ in composition often introduces the idea of completeness, as in καταρτίζω in 1 Peter 5:10. Our word also implies a powerful effort as if against opposition]. In no other place in the New Testament is it used with a personal object. It has reference not to the first or natural creation, but as the further qualifying expression (who hath given us the Spirit) teaches us, to the Divine agency in man’s redemption; and it comprehends that whole process of renovation and sanctification through which we attain and enjoy everlasting glory. But the actual entrance into this everlasting glory, the glorification itself, is accomplished, as the context informs us, by means of a transformation.—Who also hath given unto us the earnest of the Spirit.—If we adopt the reading of ὁκαὶδόυς in the following clause, the καὶ will introduce another qualification, i. e. the warrant on which we expect a state of glorious perfection in the future world. But if we accept the reading ὁδόυς merely, the sentence becomes an additional point, in the description of Him who had wrought them; i. e. “who has given us the Spirit as an earnest.” The condition for which God had wrought them out, had already been described as one which was not in fact permanent. This temporary character is more distinctly brought forward in the word earnest (ἀῤῥαβῶνα comp. on 2 Corinthians 1:22). But the Spirit itself is the Divine principle by which they were thus wrought and prepared—the Divine Spirit who by the word and all means of grace enables us to attain everlasting glory (comp. 2 Corinthians 4:6; 2 Corinthians 4:17-18; Ephesians 1:13-14; Ephesians 4:30-31). 2 Corinthians 5:6-8. Therefore being always confident, and knowing whilst in our home in the body we are absent from our home in the Lord.—We have here an inference (οὗν) from what has been said in 2 Corinthians 5:5, in reference especially to his disposition or frame of mind. He was always confident (2 Corinthians 5:6), and he was willing to be absent from the body (2 Corinthians 5:8). In consequence of this well-founded expectation that we shall be so gloriously perfected, we are willing, in spite of our reluctance to be unclothed, to be absent from the body and to be present with the Lord (2 Corinthians 5:8). This desire or willingness, however, is founded not merely upon the cheerful confidence in such a prospect, but also upon the knowledge which is expressed in 2 Corinthians 5:6, viz., that while we are in our home, etc.). But as this knowledge was itself founded upon a peculiar faith, the Apostle leaves the construction which he had commenced, that he might give the reason for this knowledge in an independent sentence (2 Corinthians 5:7). The assertion of his confidence (θαῤῥεῖν) is. repeated in a new sentence, but not in a participial form, but in the first person of the Indicative. Originally he was ready to write: being therefore confident and knowing, etc., we are willing to be absent from the body, etc., but he was diverted from his train of thought by his desire to give a reason for this knowledge (2 Corinthians 5:7), so that the original sentence was left unfinished. The passage is therefore anacoluthic; and 2 Corinthians 5:7 is not a parenthesis (still less are 2 Corinthians 5:7-8), but indispensable to the argument. [Being therefore (in consequence of having the earnest of the Spirit) always confident, and knowing by our walk of faith and not of sight, that while we are here in the body we must be absent from the Lord, we are well content to be absent from the body that we may be present with the Lord]. The word θαῤῥεῖν in its various forms occurs frequently in our Epistle, and is used also in Hebrews 13:6; but the older form which predominates in the Gospels and the Acts is θαρσεῖν. It has the sense of, to be full of confidence and courage, to be cheerful and undismayed under disheartening circumstances (comp. 2 Corinthians 4:8 ff; 2 Corinthians 6:9-10; 2 Corinthians 12:10). [Tyndale translates it: we are always of good cheere]. The word always (πάντοτε) does not exclude a variety of feelings in the frame of our minds, but only signifies that confidence is always predominant in our hearts (comp. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ X.—FURTHER OF THE PURITY OF HIS CONDUCT AND OF ITS REASONS. THESE DEPEND UPON HIS TO CHRIST AND HIS SPECIAL WORK TO MAKE KNOWN GOD’S METHOD OF BY CHRIST 2 Corinthians 5:11-2111 Knowing therefore the terror [fear] of the Lord, we persuade men; but we are made manifest unto God; and I trust also are made manifest in four consciences. 12For [om. For] we commend not ourselves again unto you, but [we say this to] give you occasion to glory on our behalf, that ye may have somewhat to answer them which glory in appearance [in face, ἐνπροσώπῳ ?], and not in heart. 13For whether we be beside ourselves, it is to [for] God: or whether we be sober [of sound mind], it is for your cause. 14For the love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge [judged], 15that if [om. if] one died for all, then [therefore] were all dead [all died]: And that [om. that] he died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them [om. for them] and rose again [for them]. 16Wherefore henceforth know we no man after [according to] the flesh: yea [om. yea] though [and if] we have known Christ after [according to] the flesh, yet now hence-forth 17know we him no more [so no longer]. Therefore [so that, ὥστε] if any man be in Christ he is new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things [they] are become new. 18And all things are of God, who has reconciled us to himself by Jesus [om. Jesus] Christ, and hath given [gave] to us the ministry of reconciliation;19To wit, that [because, ὡςὅτι] God was in Christ, reconciling the [a] world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation. 20Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you [om. you] by us: we pray you [om. you] in Christ’s stead, be ye [om. ye] 21reconciled to God. For [om. For] he hath made him to be sin for us who knew no sin; that we might be made [become] the righteousness of God in him. AND 2 Corinthians 5:11-12. Knowing therefore the fear of the Lord.—This is probably an inference from vv.9 and 10, but doubts have been raised respecting not only that inference but the interpretation of the individual sentences and their relation to one another. Some take τοῦκυρίου as the genitive of the subject, i. e. since we know the terror of the Lord, and are acquainted with the fear which it inspires, or since we are not ignorant of the fearful things we must meet when we stand before Christ’s judgment seat, and behold His awful majesty. In this case our minds are turned to the fearful judgment which is to reveal all things and to arraign all who have done evil (2 Corinthians 5:10). It must be conceded that the expression never has such a meaning any where else in the New Testament and especially in Paul’s writings, where it evidently signifies the fear we have for God. And yet with this latter meaning εἰδότες—[which always refers to beholding (or knowing in consequence of beholding) what is visible to the external sense]—does not seem to correspond; we should rather have had ἕχοντες. Rόckert’s explanation, knowing the true fear of the Lord, i. e. in what it consists, introduces something new, for in the context we have had no reference to any false fear to which this would be opposed. But the interpretation proposed by Meyer et al. viz. ‘since we are no strangers to the feeling of a holy reverence for Christ as our Judge;’ has no grammatical objection to it, for the perf. εἰδέναι may have the sense of not only a practical (to understand something), but a theoretical knowledge (comp. Philippians 4:12) [especially when it is derived from an intercourse with the things known]. Neander paraphrases the sentence thus: “we know what the fear of the Lord (Christ) requires of a man; for it will make him act under a sense of his responsibility.”—we convince men.—The same words in Galatians 1:10, have the sense of: to win over to our side by arguments (comp. Acts 12:20). The idea of something immoral is connected with it there, on account of the context; and hence some regard it here, either as a question, (do we persuade men?) which is hardly allowable, or as an indicative sentence expressing a bare possibility: “even if I could deceive men (craftily persuade, or draw over by talking) I should nevertheless be manifest to God.” The mere indicative, however, could not be made to express this, and an arbitrary interpolation of some clause like: “as our opponents say,” would become necessary. But even if the word is taken in the sense of: to convince, we are led to inquire, of what? Some reply: ‘that we know the fear of the Lord,’ or, ‘that we fear the Lord.’ But this is not very agreeable to the relations of the sentence. Others say: ‘that we are earnestly endeavoring to be acceptable to God’ (2 Corinthians 5:9), and hence “that we are sincere in our work.” This seems to us most natural; and Neander thus paraphrases it: ‘we are called upon to prove what our disposition is;’ this can be manifest only to God, for man can take cognizance of no such matter. We therefore endeavor to convince men that they do us injustice (by their objections), and that we are actuated by a true Christian spirit. Certainly the subject of discussion in the connection was the person and the ministry of the Apostle; and nothing leads us to think of a persuasion of the general truth of Christianity, as if a motive for the better performance of his work was to be drawn from what is mentioned in 2 Corinthians 5:10. Such a construction would essentially destroy the idea of any thing to be gained for Christianity.—We now come to the contrast:—but to God we have been already manifested,—and the sentence connected with it:—and I hope also we have been manifested in your consciences,—in which we have an obvious reference to 2 Corinthians 4:2 where he had spoken of commending themselves to the conscience of every man (συνιστάντεςἑαυτοὺςπρὸςπᾶσανσυνείδησινἀνθρώπ). Even this, however, refers probably to the manner in which he had discharged his Apostolic duties, and to the honest and sincere efforts he had made to please only God. He knew he was without concealment in the presence of the Omniscient, whose perfect light will reveal not him alone, but all things before the judgment seat of Christ (2 Corinthians 5:10). He also hoped that he was made manifest in the consciousness, or the conscience of the Corinthians among whom the Divine light had shone so brightly, and among whom he had given so many impressive proofs of his spirit. Ἐλπίζειν is here expressive of an opinion that something was true, and the confident expectation that it would turn out to be so. Observe the transition to the first pers. sing. on the introduction of a matter so purely personal. From a point which God had so distinctly revealed that it needed no more attention to secure a favorable judgment, the Apostle turns to convince those who could not see his heart and who were too easily influenced by false appearances and the unfavorable remarks of others, that he was not actuated in what he was saying by an idle vanity of which God would disapprove, but by a pious regard for the great day of final revelation. In this conviction is involved also the consequences to himself after all the gain, the confidence and the esteem he might acquire, and of course the opposite prejudices he might have to meet, should be set aside. The object of the sentence, however, is not precisely to assign the motive of his conduct (ἐιδότες), as if he had said: “Since we know” (a form which would best suit Luther’s translation: “So fahren wir schφn mit den Leuten,” [also Tyndale’s and Cranmer’s English version: “we fare fayre wyth men], i. e., we do not tyrannize over and drive the people by excommunications, etc., but we teach them by gentle means, etc.; a translation and an interpretation which is opposed to the grammatical sense); but it is to define more particularly the πείθομεν, and to show that it was done in a pious spirit. So far as relates to the essential meaning, it comes to the same result whether τοῦκυρίου be taken as the genitive of the object or the genitive of the subject. In either case the Apostle intended to assure them in the participial sentence (2 Corinthians 5:11) that he acted under a reverential sense of the Divine presence and with reference to that tribunal before which all things were to be revealed. We may, perhaps, explain it thus: we act in full view of the awful things connected with the Judge, or under the reverential fear which the thought of him, i. e., the terror of the Lord the Judge, awakens. The common usage of the language would probably decide us in favor of the former view.—We are not again commending ourselves unto you.—The γὰρ, which some important manuscripts insert after οὐ, has induced some commentators to look for an intimate connection with 2 Corinthians 5:11. The Apostle has been made to say: ‘we hope we have been manifest in your consciences, for we are not commending ourselves, etc. He did not commend himself, for he presupposed that he had already been made manifest to their consciences. I am already assured of your confidence, for I am not thus commending myself in order to recommend myself to you, but it is to give you, etc. But as the best critical authorities are not in favor of the γάρ, a very good connection is made out, by supposing that he is here meeting a possible misconstruction of the confidence he had expressed, or rather of the whole vindication he had made of himself in 2 Corinthians 5:11, comp. on 2 Corinthians 3:1.—But we say these things to give you an occasion for boasting on our behalf.—From the words ἑαυτοὺςσυνιστάνομεν, we conclude that λέγομενταῦτα (not ἐσμέν) must be supplied before ἀλλὰ ?—διδόντες. The word ἀφορμή occurs also in 2 Corinthians 11:12; Galatians 5:13; Romans 7:8; Romans 7:11; 1 Timothy 5:14. It properly signifies the point from which an undertaking takes its start, a point of support, a holding point; hence the necessary means for doing or attaining any thing, the materials or means which give occasion for it. In connection with this, καύχημα must mean, not the matter respecting which one glories, but only the honor or glory which is the result of the glorying. The words ὑπὲρἡμῶν signify, in our favor, for our advantage, as in 2 Corinthians 7:4; 2 Corinthians 7:14; 2 Corinthians 8:24; 2 Corinthians 9:2-3; 2 Corinthians 12:5 (giving him the honor due for his faithful and sincere labors in planting and sustaining the Church). This idea is carried out in the final sentence:—that ye may have an answer against those who boast in appearance (face) and not in heart.—After ἵναἔχητε, either τί or λέγειντί must be understood. The sense of ἔχειν here is: to have in readiness (1 Corinthians 14:26), and πρός must signify: against. They should have something with which they might meet the Apostle’s opponents, with whom they had become so captivated that they needed to have such an occasion given them by him. We have here a delicate reference to the way in which they had been turned against him by the influence of such men. Those against, whom the Corinthians ought to have boasted in his behalf, he calls in an antithetical sentence, men who boasted ἐνπροσώπῳκαὶοὐκαρδίᾳ. By ἐνπροσώπω he must have meant either: in the sight of men, in contrast with those who had a true approbation of their own consciences before God, or (in better correspondence with usage in other places 1 Corinthians 3:21, et al.): what was visible in the sight of men. In the latter case, πρόσωπῳ and καρδίᾳ would stand in contrast with one another, as the external and the internal. Πρόσωπον would be equivalent to the face or countenance, and the object of their boasting would be the holiness, the zeal, the love, etc., which might be seen in a man’s presence, not what existed in the heart. The hearts of those to whom he here alluded, he implies were destitute of all that of which they boasted. He designates their act not according to its intention, but according to the fact. (Meyer). Or πρόσωπον may be taken as equivalent to the person (whether it were a man’s own or other people’s person), personal relations, connections, leaders, ancestors, and particularly his external relations to Christ (2 Corinthians 5:16; 2 Corinthians 11:18 f.; 1 Corinthians 1:12); and καρδία, in this case, would signify that which is internal and noblest in man, that which God looks upon (1 Samuel 16:7) as the seat of faith, the proper ground of all true boasting. (Osiander). As πρόσωπον almost uniformly bears in other places the sense of the face, the first interpretation is probably to be preferred. The sense will then be: those who boast not so much of the heart as of the face, and whose piety, therefore, is seen entirely in the countenance, etc. The reference, therefore, is to hypocrites. [Chrysostom: “He does not bid them glory on his account absolutely, i.e., when no cause existed, and they had no occasion, but when his adversaries began to extol themselves. In all things he looks out for a fitting occasion. His object was not to induce them to make him illustrious, but to silence those who improperly commended themselves to the injury of others. Such gloried in what is seen for display. They did all things out of a love of honor, and they wore an aspect of piety and venerability, while they were empty inwardly and destitute of good works.”] 2 Corinthians 5:13-15. For whether we have been beside ourselves it is for God.—He now shows them that they had good reason for boasting of him rather than of those who depreciated him, for if he was to be judged by what he had done among them, they could not doubt his sincerity. Two different judgments might be passed upon him, and are pointed out in εἴτεἐξέστημεν and εἴτεσωφρονοῦμεν. [They referred to his former (ἐξέστημεν) and to his present (σωφρονοῦμεν) state of mind. In his former course (either when ho was at Corinth, or when in some part of his epistles he had commended himself), he might have seemed to some beside himself with zeal and earnestness, but more recently he might have seemed to the same persons unduly reserved and sober. In both cases he may have been charged with acting an interested and artful part; whereas he maintains that he was governed by higher motives, which prompted him to adapt himself to varying circumstances]. The first, however, may have been more especially the judgment of his opponents, and showed the low estimate they had formed of him. It was not that he had overacted his part (Luther: done too much, dealt sharply with the people), nor merely that he had been foolish or had acted foolishly. Nor do we understand by the word here used that he was charged with going beyond the limits either of ordinary intelligence (mysterious contemplations), or of intelligent consciousness (ecstasy); for neither of these things are hinted at in the context. Nor does the extravagance alluded to seem to have been a transgression of propriety by an excessive self-glorification (Schott), nor an immodesty of deportment (R. Cath.). The idea intended is rather that of losing one’s senses, an insanity in contrast with being of good mind, reasonable (σωφρονεῖν). In like manner ἐξέστη is used in Mark 3:21, and μαίνεσθαι in Acts 26:25. The objection to him was not that he had commended himself, as in 2 Corinthians 11:17 f.), in which case σωφρονεῖν would signify, to be diffident in this respect; to God would then signify, for the honor of God; and for your sake would mean simply as a salutary example or as an instance of condescension for you. Such a sentiment would not have been needful after what he had said in 2 Corinthians 5:12. He probably had before his mind the whole course of his action, for this had probably seemed to his opponents as madness. In contrast with the Judaizers especially, he had shown a burning zeal for the advancement of the pure Gospel, for the conversion of souls and for the perseverance and progress of those who had been converted. Did he then have reference to his personal experiences, such as his sudden conversion or his ecstatic state? The contrast as well as the following sentence seem to favor the allusion rather to his whole conduct, his general activity. But even on the supposition that his opponents were right, he suggests that the madness they imputed to him was an extreme devotion to God, in the service of his Lord, and therefore worthy of esteem. But he adds—whether we are now sober minded, it is for you.—If any one saw his conduct in an opposite light, or thought he acted in a reasonable and wise manner, he assured them it was all for their welfare. This explanation, according to which the Apostle speaks of his conduct as it appeared to others and was judged by them, seems to us much more simple and more eligible than that which Osiander defends; according to which he speaks on the one hand of his actual deportment, of his transcendant style of doctrine and practice, and of his highly exalted spiritual life, which he however contends actually redounded to the glory of God; and on the other hand of his more tranquil and judicious manner of action, which was better understood and more generally useful. Had such been the Apostle’s meaning he makes use in the first clause of an ambiguous expression, an amphiboly, in which he refers ironically to his opponents’ insinuation, that he had been enthusiastically extravagant. The signification of ἐξέστη, adopted by Hofmann (Schrigtbew, II. p. 323): “to be in an exalted state of inspiration” is not favored by the common usage of the words.—For the love of Christ constraineth us (2 Corinthians 5:14).—He here gives a reason not for what he had said in the first half of 2 Corinthians 5:13, but for his assertion that his course of action had been sincere, and that whatever might be its appearance before men, it was for the service of God and for the welfare of his brethren. In this sentence the words τοῦΧριστοῦ are in the genitive of the subject according to the prevalent usage of Paul with respect to this phrase; comp. 2 Corinthians 8:24; 2 Corinthians 13:13; Romans 5:5; Romans 5:8; Romans 8:35; Romans 8:39; Ephesians 2:4; Ephesians 3:19; Philippians 1:9 et al. (The personal object of the ἀγάπη is introduced by εἰς in Colossians 1:4 and 1 Thessalonians 3:12). In what follows also it is evident that the object is to point out the highest manifestation of Christ’s love. Although this love of Christ is a power which produces love to Christ, we are not to suppose both points embraced in the expression here. The verb συνέχει means either, it presses, it drives, or, it holds together. The pronoun ἡμᾶς, however, cannot mean here, you and me (to hold us together in friendship), but, as the context shows, only me. This holding together must be the opposite of those separations which selfishness is apt to produce or occasion. Calvin says: constrains our hearts or affections; Meyer: holds us that we may not pass beyond the limits which are required by a regard for God’s honor and your welfare (θεῷ and ὑμῖν). The former interpretation seems indeed contrary to usage, since everywhere else the word has the meaning of, to press hard, or to afflict; but never, to urge or to impel; only in the passive is it used of the affections by which one is ruled. But why can not the active be used according to the analogy of the passive, of an affection which directly and thoroughly controls a man? With such a meaning the idea becomes more expressive. When the Apostle adds—we having formed this judgment—he introduces the subjective cause of that influence which the love of Christ had over him. That love had led him to form this judgment, i. e., had brought him to this conclusion, to this conviction. Whether this judgment was reached at the time of his conversion (Meyer), or whether the whole meaning of the death of Christ became thus clear to his apprehension at some later period of his life (Osiander), may be left undetermined. Neander remarks that “the aorist was here used because Paul intended to speak of something which happened once upon a time. He means, that ever since he became conscious of the saving love of Christ, a new principle of conduct had entered his heart.” The substance of this conviction, or rather of the judgment then formed was:—that one died for all, and so all died.—If we accept of the reading of the Receptus, which gives us εἰ after ὅτι, we must regard ὅτιἄρα—ἀπέθανον as belonging together: that (if one died for all) then all died. The hypothetical sentence, however, could have been only formally problematical, since what is there expressed must have been really certain to the Apostle. But if εἰ be left out, ὅτι is either equivalent to: because, and so introduces the antecedent of a proposition (Meyer); or, it is in this instance equivalent to: that, and both clauses depend upon it, i. e., we have judged that one died for all and that all died. (Osiander). Τοῦτο appears to favor this latter supposition (we judged this that, etc.). One thing, however, which would go far to determine us in favor of the causal signification is, that it brings out more prominently the οἱπάντεςἀπέθανον as the proper substance of the judgment to which the Apostle says in the context he had come (we judged this, that one died for all and so all died). And yet the whole force of the sentence seems to require that ὅτι in the sense of that should be made to govern both clauses of it. This logical relation, however, would be destroyed if we thus bring in an independent conclusion by means of ἄρα. The inference which the Apostle makes from the proposition that one died for all, argues strongly in favor of its judicially vicarious signification. One was in the place of all, therefore all must be looked upon as dead; one has made expiation, for the offence of all, therefore all are to be looked upon as having suffered punishment. This usage, by which ὑπέρ indicates that something was done or suffered in the name of some one, in consequence of which the latter is regarded as doing or suffering the same thing, prevailed even among classic writers; but among later authors the usage was extended until the word was introduced in connections in which a purer style would have required ἀντί. (Passow s. v. ὑπέρ, A. II. 1. p. 2064 a. b.), [Stanley contends that although ὑπὲρπάντων has the same ambiguity as the English “for,” ‘in behalf of,’ the idea of service and protection always predominates. Wherever, in speaking of the death of Christ, the idea of substitution is intended, it is under the figure of a ransom, in which case it is expressed by ἀντί. (Matthew 20:28; Mark 10:45). Wherever the idea of covering or forgiving sins is intended, it is under the figure of a sin-offering, in which case the word used is περὶἁμαρτίας or ἁμαρτιῶν, as in Romans 8:3; 1 Peter 3:18; 1 John 2:2; 1 John 4:10. The preposition περί, as thus used, has partly the sense of “on account of,” but chiefly the sense of “covering,” as if it were, he threw his death “over” or “around our sins.” Such generalizations contain a truth deserving notice, but we may doubt whether the usage was so strictly conformed to the etymological law. In the actual interpretation of our passage Stanley is compelled to confess that there would be no force to the Apostle’s inference that all were dead because Christ died, except on the idea of Christ’s representing or standing in the place of those who died with Him. See some excellent remarks of Trench (Synn. 2 Series, pp. 163–166) and Tischendorf, Doctr. Pauli de vi mor. Chr.]. But as in the final sentence (2 Corinthians 5:15) ὑπὲρπάντων would belong also to ἐγερθέντι, such a meaning would not seem appropriate to the connection, for we should be compelled to understand the resurrection for all in a sense like that which is expressed in Ephesians 2:5 (comp. Colossians 2:11; Colossians 3:1), i. e., Christ’s resurrection would be regarded as the resurrection of all. Not only the final sentence (2 Corinthians 5:15) but that from which the whole reflection is derived (“the love of Christ constrains us”) would probably bring us to the conclusion that the main idea of the passage is, Love is for love, i. e., corresponding to the love which sacrifices itself for the salvation of all, is a love which renounces all selfish motives and devotes itself to the great purpose of the other love. In such a connection the phrase all died would denote a moral death. The Apostle implies that an essential object aimed at in the sacrifice of one for the redemption of all, was that the latter might forsake the fleshly life of sin which was opposed to this work of love, and which by its very nature was a life of selfishness, having self for its central aim, and in direct contradiction to this self-sacrificing and diffusive love. Olshausen says: that death of Christ for all is the principle or reason for the death of all for Him. But when any have fellowship with Christ this is effected by a faith in which His death for their sakes becomes actually beneficial to them, and they cease to live for themselves. This is what the Apostle means in other places, when he says, we are crucified with Christ, Galatians 2:19; comp. Colossians 3:3; Colossians 2:12; Romans 6:4. The Apostle speaks of believers who in the very act of faith have entered into the fellowship of Christ’s death, and hence are dead with Him, and are in the sphere of His death, because they have the essential principle of that death in a love which surrenders its personal life of selfishness. (comp. Meyer). We would not be understood as defending that interpretation, which combines and mingles together the subjective ethical and the objective judicial signification of Christ’s atoning death, or which makes out that all are both morally and legally dead by virtue and in consequence of Christ’s death. (Osiander). The only explanation which seems to us correct, and to which the whole connection (2 Corinthians 5:13-15) conducts us, is that which represents the death of Christ, which brings salvation to all, as set forth in this passage, according to its ethical meaning, but as a result of love in Him and as a reason for love in men. Neander says: The article before πάντες implies that precisely the all for whom Christ died must have died in Him. That which had been assumed as a principle in 2 Corinthians 5:14 (the all died), is presented in 2 Corinthians 5:15 as a purpose or aim. [It should, however, be remarked that the purpose is limited to those who live (οἱζῶντες), whereas no limitation is put to the all (οἱπάντες) for whom Christ died, and who died in Him. See below]. The Apostle speaks of this living of some as a moral result flowing from the death of Christ for all:—that they who live should no longer live for themselves.—He here resumes the thought involved in the being dead. In that dying the fleshly life of sin had ceased, the man no more lived to himself, the object of all his action was no longer a life of sense in the service of self alone. The positive side in contrast with this is given when the Apostle adds—but to him who died and rose again for them—i. e., Christ who had died and risen again for their salvation (Romans 4:25) should now become the object of all their efforts. But the subjects of what is here spoken of are said to be οίζῶντες. These are such as have entered into the fellowship of Christ’s death; but, as the invariable consequence, are also in the fellowship of his new life: ἐκνεκρῶνζῶντες. Comp. Romans 6:4 ff. Romans 6:13. We regard as defective not only the interpretation which renders ὁιζῶντες as long as they live (for the article forbids such a rendering), but also that which regards it as meaning those who are alive i. e., those who are conceived of as a part of the same general multitude who had been redeemed and were dead. [It is precisely on account of the article before ζῶντες that we think the Apostle intended to emphasize and distinguish the living here from the more general mass for whom Christ died. Those who make the living in Christ as extensive and the same as those for whom He died, are obliged to take the word died (ἀποθανεῖν) in 2 Corinthians 5:15 in two different significations, one judicial or literal, and the other moral. If on the other hand we make the death in 2 Corinthians 5:15 in each case to mean a legal death, then the living signifies the opposite justification; or if we make it signify a physical death, then the living must be such as partake in His resurrection and are alive in Him who rose again (ἀποθαν. κ. ἐγερθέντι). We may also ask, how it follows from Christ’s dying in any sense, that all or any would die in a moral sense ? Is not this making the Apostle assert a mere assumption? Our English A. V. makes the Apostle to have judged, that if one died for all, then all must have been dead. This is contrary to the aorist tense of ἀπέθανον which signifies literally they died. Even with the sense that His death proved that all were dying creatures, we cannot see how such an argument was pertinent to the Apostle’s line of thought. His object was not to refer to the original state of man without redemption, but to the obligations which that redemption imposed on him. Even those who deny that the dying of all men in consequence of Christ’s death was merely by imputation (Webster and Wilkinson), acknowledge that His death indicated what was due to them, and condemned them unto death; and that the interest of the ὁιζῶντες extended to the resurrection, as well as to the death of Christ. Comp. Stanley]. 2 Corinthians 5:16-17.—So that we from this time know no man according to the flesh.—An inference is here drawn from what had just been said. Inasmuch as Christ has died for all, and so their selfish life of sense, with its exclusiveness, narrowness, etc., has been abolished; and inasmuch as believers are dead with Him who has died for them, and their new life should be entirely devoted to Him and His cause; henceforth we must be expected to know no one, whoever he may be, according to the flesh (κατὰσάρκα). The σάρξ is precisely that in relation to which believers were said in 2 Corinthians 5:14 to be dead. To know according to the flesh, may be taken either subjectively, as defining the knowledge of those here spoken of (as a knowledge merely human without spiritual enlightenment, comp. 2 Corinthians 1:17; 1 Corinthians 1:26, as things appear to the sinful natural man); or objectively (as in 2 Corinthians 11:18; Philippians 3:4; John 8:15), the object itself supplying the rule for the knowledge; in this case the merely human, the natural in all its narrowness and exclusiveness as it is found in those who are known; hence any natural qualities which have no connection with Christ, such as advantages of Jewish birth, wealth, refinement or outward circumstances, comp. Galatians 3:28. Neander says: “If we confine our thoughts to those things which Paul had in his mind, and was opposing, we shall probably find that he meant to say: it is nothing henceforth to me whether a man is by birth a Jew or a Gentile; whether he observes the Mosaic law or not; whether he is connected externally with those Apostles who were appointed by Christ during His life on earth or not.” The knowing (εἰδέναι) here spoken of must, however, include a critical discernment. Before deciding how much it thus involves, we must refer to what the Apostle further says respecting the knowing of Christ—even if we have known Christ according to the flesh, nevertheless now know we Him (according to the flesh) no longer.—In the protasis εἰκαί is used by way of concession, and in the apodosisἀλλά has the sense of nevertheless, as in 2 Corinthians 4:16. He acknowledges he had once had a knowledge of Christ according to the flesh (the emphasis should be placed upon the praeterite ἐγνώκαμεν, which on this account is placed first in the sentence); but he asserts that for the present, now νῦν, comp. ἀπὸτοῦνῦν in the preceding clause), he knew Christ thus (i.e., κατὰσάρκα) no longer. The emphasis cannot be laid upon Χριστόν on account of its position and the relation between the protasis and the apodosis in the sentence. [In such a case χριστόν should have stood before κατὰσάρκα]. But κατὰσάρκα, taken objectively, refers to the merely human personality, that which made its appearance on earth. This defines what kind of knowledge he referred to, and consequently also the judgment regarding Christ which was included in it, viz., that which had preceded his conversion and enlightenment when he first learned to recognize Christ (Χριστόν here used as a proper noun, and not as an appellative) as the risen Messiah and the Son of God (Galatians 1:16; Romans 1:4). Gerlach: “That he might say the more forcibly that he knew no man after the flesh, he applies what he had said to Christ Himself. He says that he had known Christ after the flesh, i. e., as a natural earthly man, just as the inhabitants of Nazareth (Matthew 13:55) knew him only too well, viz., as his enemies and judges.” To the same result would also the subjective acceptation of κατὰσάρκα bring us. [Although the word ἐγνωκέναι signifies to know by a personal experience] it does not necessarily imply that Paul had seen Christ with his bodily eyes. [It may simply mean here a personal acquaintance with the outward relations of Christ, or that Paul had contemplated Christ only in his outward condition. A different word and one much more comprehensive of all kinds of knowing (οἴδαμεν) had been used when he spoke of knowing no man after the flesh. It is, however, difficult to see any important difference in the moaning of the two words here]. Νῦν describes his present position as a Christian, commencing with his conversion: ἀπὸτοῦνῦν signifies from that time onwards. With respect to the objective or subjective acceptation of κατὰσάρκα, the want of the article (2 Corinthians 11:18) is by no means decisive against the former. Though both agree together very well in sense, or come essentially to the same thing, they cannot be made to harmonize exegetically. If in the second half we should suppose a reference to a false apprehension of Christ, it could be only in a low Ebionite sense. Comp. the Introd. to the Epp. to the Corr. § 2. With that which he had inferred in 2 Corinthians 5:16 from the preceding argument principally with respect to himself and his way of viewing and judging, the Apostle now connects in 2 Corinthians 5:17 another general conclusion: So that if any man be in Christ he is a new creature (ἕιτιςἐνΧριστῷ, καινὴκτίσις). Since the flesh is no more to determine the nature of a believer’s knowledge or judgments, it follows that if any man is in Christ, i.e., is in the sphere of Christ’s life, a new creation must have taken place; or such a man must be a new creature (for the sense of these expressions is the same). In other words, the man is altogether a different person from what he was before, and we need have no reference to what he was before he became a Christian (subjectively or objectively). The phrase, a new creature, occurs again in Galatians 6:15. In relation to the thing itself comp. Ephesians 2:10; Ephesians 4:21; Colossians 3:9 f.; Romans 6:6. The new birth is spoken of in Titus 3:5; John 3:3; James 1:18. Kτίσις designates not only a Divine act (creation), but also the product of such an act (creature). The latter is the ordinary meaning in the New Testament (comp. Romans 1:25; Romans 8:19 ff Romans 8:39 et al). The expression was also used by the Rabbins with respect to a conversion to Judaism. The idea of a new creature is carried out in an antithetic form in the following sentence—Old things have passed away—that is, with respect to those who are in Christ. The old things refer to the disposition and (theoretically) the way of thinking which one had before he became a Christian. Both constitute the whole mental state of the man, and are comprised in all things, [τὰἀρχαῖα are the things which belonged to us from the beginning. Trench, Synn., 2d Ser., pp. 81 ff.]. Osiander comprehensively observes: “All that the man had and purposed before he knew Christ, while he was out of Christ, and when he was not born of the Spirit, all that seemed valuable to him in his natural state completely lost its influence and authority over him as soon as he believed on Christ, and gave way to the overpowering energy of a new, better and permanent spirit.” Bengel expresses this passing away by likening it to the vanishing of the snow in the early spring; a comparison like that used in Isaiah 43:18. [The Vulgate and some ancient expositors include καινὴκτίσις in the antecedent portion of this sentence (si qua ergo in Christo nova creatura, i.e., if any man be a new creature in Christ), but such a construction makes the whole sentence tautological [inasmuch as the second or concluding member (vetera transierunt, i. e., old things have passed away) assert the same thing with the first]. The interjection (ἰδού) gives great animation to the discourse as in 1 Corinthians 15:51; Revelation 21:5. [“It transfers the reader as into the sudden sight of a picture. The moment a man is a Christian, a new creation rises up; the ancient world passes away as in the final dissolution of all things, and behold! a new scene is discovered, the whole world has in that instant become new.” Stanley]. If τὰπάντα should be left out of the text, γέγονενκαινά must have its subject in τὰἀρχᾶια (old things have passed away, they have become new); unless we translate it: a new thing has taken place. The expression: it (the old) has become new, implying a complete change of the previous state, is certainly a bold one. [The aorist (παρῆλθεν) indicates that the old things passed away at a particular time, while the perfect γέγονε describes the state which succeeded and still continues. Calvin has attempted to render the first member of the verse with a verb supplied in the imperative mood: if any man would be in Christ, let him become a new creature. He supposes that the Apostle is rebuking the ambition of false teachers and telling them that if they would be what they aspire to be, they must be much changed. The context, which has nothing of an ironical or hortatory character, is entirely opposed to this view. Comp. Hodge]. This great change the Apostle now proceeds to refer to its original principle. [Osiander: “he mounts from this idea of the new creation to God the source of all life, and traces the mental change of which he had been speaking to the great fundamental improvement of all human relations by the atonement of Christ”]. 2 Corinthians 5:18-19. And all things [are] of God.—The “all things” of which he had just spoken, the whole state in which the old nature and life had passed away and every thing had become new, comes to us from God. The way, however, in which this occurs, is immediately described more definitely by directing our minds to the manner in which God effects such a change—who reconciled us to Himself by Christ—Καταλλάσσειν, according to one class of interpreters is simply the accomplishment in man’s disposition toward God, of a change in which he gives up his dislike and his distrust of God; but according to another class, it is a change in God’s treatment of men, in which He no longer regards them with disfavor, and causes His wrath (ὀργή) towards them to cease, and they become His beloved ones instead of enemies (comp. Romans 5:10; Colossians 1:20 f.). According to this latter view, it includes what is meant by showing favor to them (χαρίζεσθαι) and forgiveness of sins ; and the result is that man on his side returns to a state of friendship with God (comp. Romans 5:1 ff; Romans 6:1 ff; Romans 8:3 f.). Both of these views might, however, be embraced in the καταλλάξαι, so that the idea should be: the restoration of a state of friendship between God and men, but with the understanding that the manifestation of grace is first on the part of God. Thus Neander remarks: “Paul never speaks of God as man’s enemy, but only of man as God’s enemy. God is everlasting love and from Him can proceed nothing like enmity. That which separates man from God has its root entirely within himself, and must be taken away before he can receive the communications of Divine love in his heart. And yet this reconciliation of man to God is by no means confined to a subjective alteration of man’s disposition, for even this must be the result of an objective change in his relations to God. When Paul uses the word reconciliation he includes a reference to every thing which has taken place objectively in consequence of Christ’s work of redemption. The wrath of God (ὀργήθεοῦ) the check which has been given to man’s moral development in consequence of sin, cannot cease until it is removed by the redemption through Christ’s death.” [It may perhaps be conceded that in this whole passage (2 Corinthians 5:18-21) “not a word is given about God reconciling Himself to us, appeasing His anger, satisfying His justice, or expiating our sins.” (J. Young). And yet 2 Corinthians 5:21 involves an idea very similar, and implies that the ground on which this whole passage is based (for whether γὰρ is genuine or not, the verse itself is unquestionably a reason for the preceding argument) is that Christ has been made sin for us. The original meaning of καταλλάσσω was doubtless that of a mutual exchange, and hence a mutual reconciliation of hostile parties. Some passages in the New Testament (Romans 5:11, and all those which speak of this reconciliation as effected by the death of Christ) seem to hint also at this idea. And yet we see no injury but rather a great benefit to theological exegesis if καταλλαγή) could be uniformly distinguished from ἱλασμός and its kindred words, and confined to that part of the redeeming work by which man is reconciled (whatever may be the means, objective or subjective) to God. Olshausen on Romans 3:24; Stanley’s Obss. on the result of our passage; C. F. Schmid’s Bibl. Theol. Vol. II. p. 316 ff. Ebrard’s Chr. Dogm. § 406]. But the phrase by Christ refers to something which becomes more distinctly prominent in 2 Corinthians 5:21 (not by means of his doctrine or his example. Pelag). The pronoun us (ἡμᾶς) signifies not the Apostles exclusively, but believers generally; for there is no limitation implied until the nature of the subject calls for a limitation in the next sentence—and hath given to us the ministration of the reconciliation.—This ministration of the reconciliation is analogous to the ministration of righteousness, in 2 Corinthians 3:9. It is a ministry entirely devoted to the work of reconciliation, whose business it is to make known that reconciliation, and in consequence of which men believe in Christ. To define this ministry so as to make it include all believers (Olshausen) is contrary to the whole analogy of Paul’s representation. One might much rather take ἡμᾶς in a yet more limited sense (comp. 1 Corinthians 15:10; 1 Timothy 1:12 ff.); but such a construction is not necessary, nor would it be consistent with 2 Corinthians 5:19.—Because God was reconciling a world unto himself in Christ (2 Corinthians 5:19).—We have here an explanation and a reason for what had just been said. The word God (θεός) stands so emphatically at the head of the sentence as to indicate a Divine agency in all this preparatory work, and a special prominence of it. Shall we now take the words God was in Christ, as if they constituted a sentence by itself, and regard the whole verse as asserting that the work of atonement was accomplished by the Divine being in Christ, or by the Godhead of Christ (comp. Colossians 1:19 ff.) in opposition to a lower Christological view? In this case God would signify the Father (others make it mean the λόγος, and still others the Triune God), and εῖ ?̓ναιἐν would designate an habitual and substantial presence, and not merely a transient dynamic fellowship (Osiander). Or is ἦνκαταλλάσσωνan emphatic periphrastic imperfect (as in Galatians 1:23), by which Paul wished to imform us in what things God was acting; viz., that God was when Christ died, reconciling the world unto Himself; i. e. God was in the work of Christ, in that series of acts by which the world was reconciled to God, and especially in that great event in which Christ died to atone for the world (the καταλλάξαι of 2 Corinthians 5:18, Meyer)? Our decision upon these questions must depend very much upon what we find in the succeeding context. According to Meyer, Paul is in that context assigning the reasons which had induced him to say that God was reconciling the world. These are given when it is said that God was not imputing to men their trespasses, and had committed to him and his fellow laborers the word of reconciliation; from both which it was evident that God was in Christ’s work engaged in a scheme to reconcile the whole world unto Himself. The words μὴλογιζόμενος have the force of a verb in the present tense, for they assert that God is not reckoning unto men their trespasses. On the other hand the committing to us the work of reconciliation was what God did in applying that work to men, after it had been accomplished by Christ. Even Osiander concedes that these sentences are not to be coφrdinated with but subordinated to καταλλάσσων, etc., and that μἡλογιζόμενος describes a result which is intimately connected and nearly coincident with the reconciliation. This is the remission of guilt, a benefit which individuals may receive through faith, and to communicate which is the object of the Divine institution of the ministry (καὶθέμενος, etc.); and yet this result of the reconciling act, and the organ so indispensable to its realization in individuals, is not, according to him, an elementary part of it. It must, however, be conceded, that the way in which Meyer connects the participial sentence with ῆ ?̔νκαταλλάσσ. (“it is evident that God is reconciling the world unto Himself, inasmuch as He does not impute,” etc.), has something rather artificial about it. Such a connection of the words would have been proper only if the Apostle had said, God is reconciling the world, or if he had continued by saying, God did not impute (imperfect) to men their trespasses. On the whole we think it best with Meyer to take ῆ ?̓ν—καταλλάσσων together, but to regard the participial sentence as a more particular description of the way in which God was reconciling the world to Himself in Christ, “God was in Christ, (a phrase equivalent to by (διὰ) Jesus Christ in 2 Corinthians 5:18, but with the understanding that Christ and what He has done are the only basis on which the reconciliation is founded), bringing back the world to a state of friendship with Himself; for He imputed not men’s sins to them, and He has committed unto us the word of reconciliation.” Not imputing men’s trespasses to them is equivalent to the bestowal of forgiveness upon men, and implies that God was applying the benefits of salvation by Christ to individuals (αὐτοῖς). This is set forth by means of a present participle (imperf. Winer, § 46), because the act was continuously to be repeated, while the word describing the institution of the ministerial office (θέμενος), is an aorist participle, because the act was accomplished at a certain time. But the reconciliation, or the restoration of the happy relation, which was the consequence of this proceeding, is mentioned as a process commenced in Christ but not as yet concluded (ῆ ?̓ν—καταλλάσσων). As we do not think that this refers exclusively to the objective facts of the redeeming work, the objection which de Wette urges, that καὶθέμενος, etc., is not an expression quite suitable to those facts [inasmuch as it implies that they were put into the mouth or heart (see below)] will not apply to us. Κόσμος, as in John 3:25 et al., signifies the human race; and as it is here without the article, it means perhaps “a whole world.” The word trespasses (παραπτώματα), as in Romans 3:25, signifies faults, sins, aberrations from the right way, from the truth, from rectitude, etc. [Trench, Synn. 2d ser. p. 76]. Hath committed to us the word of reconciliation signifies, according to some, that God had established and arranged the doctrines of the Christian faith in the Church, i. e., had promulgated the doctrine of reconciliation. But the unmistakable reference of this expression to what had been said in 2 Corinthians 5:18, respecting the giving of the ministry of reconciliation to the Apostle, induces us to understand the Apostles by ἡμῖν. [The use of the aorist participle δέμενος, here, is remarkable. We should have expected καὶἔθετο, and a slight anacoluthon cannot be denied (Olshausen). The word cannot be connected back with θεὸςῆ ?̓ν, since such a connection of an aorist part, without an article and an imperfect verb, would be not only without an example but without an appropriate sense (God hath committed to us, or deposited in us, etc.). Our English version assumes that this phrase (θέμενοςἐνἡμῖν) signifies, hath committed or intrusted to us, or laid upon us, the work of preaching the outward word of reconciliation. And yet the phrase is so peculiar that we cannot but look for an additional and a deeper meaning. Beza long ago finely remarked, that “among the Hebrews one was said to put words in the mouth of another who used his agency in making something known to others. But when this formula is applied to God it has a special emphasis, and signifies that the heart is impelled and the tongue is directed by the Lord to speak in a particular way, and that the person is chosen by God and authorized to speak in the name of God.” From the force of the middle voice, we infer that the Apostle speaks of the mental act or purpose of God, rather than of the external ordination of the Apostles (Jelf’s Gram. § 363, Winer, 39, 2); or as Wordsworth prefers to take it, in a more special sense reflexively: “having deposited for Himself the treasures of His grace in us, as in vessels chosen for that purpose, earthen and fragile though we be”]. The words δὲσθαι would then mean, to put into the mouth (Exodus 4:15), or to put within us, to inspire us that we may communicate it to others [not, however to the entire exclusion of the idea of a more external intrusting of the Gospel to us]. With respect to the impropriety, for grammatical reasons, of connecting θέμενος with ῆ ?̔ν, comp. Meyer. The word (λόγος) of reconciliation in this passage is similar to ὁλὄγοςτοῦσταυροῦ (the word of the cross) in 1 Corinthians 1:18, and it signifies here the word, the substance of which is the reconciliation. The particles ὡςὄτι are equivalent here to utpote quod (seeing that, because, for, in a very different connection from the same words in 2 Corinthians 11:21), and connect our passage with 2 Corinthians 1:18. Everything is represented as proceeding from God, “who has reconciled us to Himself by Christ.” For God in Christ has truly entered upon a process by which He is reconciling the world. He makes believers perceive in their own experience that God has reconciled them to Himself by Jesus Christ; He brings them into the state of reconciliation which He has established with the world.” The Apostle now proceeds to describe further the method in which this was effected, so far as relates to its general principles. Or, rather, he gives the reason for the assertion, that the change mentioned in 2 Corinthians 5:17 b, in which old things had passed away and all things had become new, was to be ascribed to God, who had reconciled believers to Himself through Christ. In this way he brings before us the vast extent of the Divine agency in saving men. Inasmuch as God in Christ exercised such a comprehensive agency, that great change must be referred to the same God who was reconciling us to Himself by Christ. 2 Corinthians 5:20-21.—In behalf of Christ then we are ambassadors, as though God were exhorting by us.—[“It is indeed doubtful whether γὰρ, for, belongs to the text, as it is omitted in many of the oldest manuscripts. Its omission only renders the transition more abrupt, for the relation of the passage remains the same.” Hodge]. The particle οῦ ?̔ν (then, therefore) refers to that which had been said in the preceding verse. [As God is reconciling men and hath committed to us the work of reconciling men, I turn to you Corinthians as a part of the community to whom I am sent, and as partially unrecovered or strayed from the right way, and I commence my work with you]. The words, we are ambassadors for Christ, imply as their logical antecedent that the ministry of reconciliation had been committed to them (2 Corinthians 5:18). The reconciliation (καταλλ.) was in fact communicated to men through Christ, and had its origin in Him (2 Corinthians 5:18 f.); and of course it was Christ’s cause which the Apostles represented among men. The verb πρεσβεύειν signifies to be a messenger (“sometimes merely to deliver a message to another without being empowered to do any thing more than to explain or enforce it.” Bloomfield). It is found also in Ephesians 6:20. The preposition ὑπερ signifies here, not instead of (Luther), but in the interest of another, and especially in behalf of Him who is the Mediator and Author of the reconciliation. It refers to those to whom the ministry of this reconciliation had been committed, and through whose agency this reconciliation was to be effected and Christ was to be glorified. From the same fact that it was God who had committed unto the Apostles the word of reconciliation, it followed further that when those Apostles fulfilled their commission, it was as though God exhorted by means of them. [Chrysostom: “The Father sent the Son to beseech and be His Ambassador unto mankind. When then He was. slain and gone, we succeeded to the embassy, and in His stead and the Father’s we beseech you”]. It is implied here that in our work as messengers we stand in the place of God; our exhortation should be looked upon as given by God through us; or we perform the duties of our office with the feeling that it is God who addresses or admonishes men through us. This participial sentence, however, may be easily connected with what follows: as though God did beseech you by us, we pray you, etc. But as the complete sense of this participial expression can be understood only by means of ὑπεπ̔χριστοῦ, it seems more appropriate to connect it with that which precedes it. But even then the idea of substitution is not the only one which is suitable. The prayer which the Apostle utters is presented in behalf of Christ in the sense just explained. We pray on Christ’s behalf: Be reconciled to God.—We pray (δεόμεθα) is the language of the most condescending love (Osiander). The tenor of the prayer is that they would be reconciled to God. This is a most urgent appeal to those who had not yet believed in Christ, or participated in the blessings of salvation (not to those who had already believed, and for the purpose of exciting them to continued advances in repentance and faith). [Dr. Hodge remarks that the word καταλλάγητε is in the passive voice, and cannot mean, ‘Reconcile yourselves; but, ‘Be reconciled, embrace the offer of the reconciliation.’ C. F. Schmid (Bibl. Theol. Vol. II., p. 318) notices that the word has here not a medial but a passive signification, implying that we have merely to accept an influence or act of God, under which we were originally passive. We were at first ἐχθροί and objects of the Divine ὀργή), and in ceasing to be these we become reconciled to God]. According to the way in which we translate the words, ‘Reconcile yourselves, or be ye reconciled (comp Romans 5:10), or, allow yourselves to be reconciled,’ the meaning must be, ‘Accept the reconciliation God has extended to you by Christ, accept what He presents to you, take the hand of reconciliation He reaches forth to you.’ The Apostle in this passage evidently had no thought of a reconciliation of themselves by laying aside the minding of the flesh and putting on the minding of the Spirit (Rόckert). Such a process was looked upon by him as merely the necessary result of the reconciliation; or the application of the reconciliation by means of faith (comp. Meyer, Osiander). Him who knew not sin He made to be sin for us (2 Corinthians 5:21). According to the true reading of the text, the Apostle here introduces without a connecting particle γάρ (asyndeton), a motive which should induce his readers to comply with his prayer or exhortation. This was the work which God’s holy love had accomplished in Christ for effecting reconciliation. Now enters the notion of the ἱλασμός, the propitiation. Comp. Romans 3:25; Romans 8:3; 1 John 2:2; 1 John 4:10; Hebrews 2:17. By τὸνμὴγνόνταἁμαρτίαν he means Christ in His perfect sinlessness (what Chrysostom calls in the positive sense τὸναὐτοδικαιοσύνηνὄντα), He who knows no sin, to whose internal nature or outward action all contradiction to God or departure from the Divine will was a complete stranger, altogether beyond His personal experience or consciousness. The μή is here required [instead of οὐ ?] not by the participle with the article (comp. 1 Peter 2:10; Ephesians 5:4), but it expresses the denial of the thing as it appears to the mind, i. e., in the representation of the mind itself. [Winer’s Gram., § 59, 3 b.]. This may be in the mind of men (i. e., in the minds of Christians); in which case it says of Christ that we Christians regard Him as One who knew no sin, or it may refer to the mind of God, and so it tells us how Christ appeared before the Divine mind. As God is here the subject of the Apostle’s remarks, the latter is undoubtedly the correct interpretation. Hofmann in his Schriftbeweis, Vol. II., 36, says: “God has made Him in His sinlessness to be sin. It is from this denial of sin in Christ according to the Divine judgment that we must explain the use of the relative negative particle.” When it is said that this sinless Being was made sin for us (ὑπὲρἡμῶνἁμαρτίανἐποιήσεν), ὑπὲρἡμῶν stands first to give it more force; and it seems very natural to take the phrase in the sense of a substitution. And yet this is not absolutely necessary, nor does it seem quite appropriate in both instances in which the word is here used, since God could not make us sin at first, inasmuch as we were in our own selves sinners. The ύπὲρ is here therefore to be taken as equivalent to: for our good, and finds its explanation in the final sentence beginning with ἵνα. The idea expressed in making Him to be sin must be that God made Him the bearer of sin when He suffered, inasmuch as by His sufferings and death as a malefactor He was treated as a sinner (ἁμαρτωλὸς), or was given up to the fate of those who were sinners. The interpretation of ἁμαρτίαν as a sin offering is consistent neither with usage, with the context ( τὸνμὴγνόνταἁμαρτίαν) ), nor with the contrast (δικαιοσύνη). Comp. Hofmann, Schriftbew., II., p. 329. Sin becomes actualized in one in whom there is no sin, when he becomes a sinner in outward appearance, though he is not so in reality. God allows sin to become an actual experience to him who has never committed it in fact. So was it with Christ when God determined He should experience what befel Him. In like manner, Galatians 3:13. If Paul had intended to say that God designed to set forth Christ as one in whom sin is concentrated and represented in its completeness, and with whom it is in certain respects identified (Osiander), he could do no better than to say, “He made our sins to be His.” The idea expressed in ὑπὲρἡμῶν is further carried out when it is added: that we might become God’s righteousness in Him.—The righteousness of God is probably equivalent to being righteous with God (δίκαιοιπαρὰθεῷ); or, provided we take θεοῦ in the sense of ἐκθεοῦ as in Philippians 3:9, it would have the meaning of being made righteous by God (δικαιωθέντεςὑπὸτοῦθεοῦ). Ewald: “we thus become in Christ (to use the old sacrificial language) a legal offering before God and well pleasing in His sight; an expression much like what is used in 2 Corinthians 2:15.” From the nature of the case, a righteousness which came from God must be sufficient in His sight. Neander: “A perfect righteousness, the ideal of a holy life, like the sufferings in which this holy life was perfected, is given to our humanity. For all, and in the place of all, He has borne the burden of human guilt, and made this ideal a reality. All who enter into communion with Him appear in God’s sight δίκαιοιἐνΧριστῷ; for their surrender into His hands is a pledge that this ideal of holiness will be actualized in them also.” [Chrysostom thinks that there was a profound reason for using the abstract for the concrete form here: “the word δικαιοσύνη expresses the unspeakable bounty of the gift; that God hath not given us only the operation or effect of His righteousness, but His very righteousness, His very self unto us. Paul does not say that God treated Christ as a sinner, but as sin, the quality itself; in order that we might become not merely righteous men, but the righteousness of God in Him. “TheReceptus which our English A. V. follows uses here the present (γινώμεθα) instead of the aorist (γενώμεθα)]. But as there is no reference to time in this place, and the object is to express the simple occurrence once for all time without regard to the instant of its accomplishment, the aorist was preferable. There were also internal reasons for using a tense applicable to all time. In ἐναὐτῷ is expressed the fellowship with Christ which takes place by means of a faith which is by its nature a putting on of Christ. In fellowship with Him we become a righteousness of God, for whoever is in Christ is looked upon by God as righteous, or as possessed of a just title to life. Comp. on 1 Corinthians 1:30. The necessary fruit of this is holiness, but the two things are not to be confounded. (Hofmann, p. 230, says: “We become in Christ the righteousness of God, because we have it in His person. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ XI.—THE APOSTLE’S APPEAL IN AN ETHICAL POINT OF VIEW. HIS CONDUCT IN TO IT 2 Corinthians 6:1-101 We then, [om. We then] as workers together with him, [then, we also] beseech you also that ye receive not the grace of God in vain. 2(For he saith, I have heard thee in a time accepted, and in the day of salvation have I succoured thee: behold, now is the accepted [well accepted, εὐπρόσδεκτος] time; behold, now is the day of salvation). 3Giving no offence [occasion for stumbling, προσκοπή] in any thing, that the ministry be not blamed: 4But in all things approving ourselves as the ministers of God, [as the ministers of God, commending ourselves] in much patience, in afflictions, in necessities, in distresses [in straits, στενοχωρίαις], 5in stripes, in imprisonments, in tumults 6[tossings to and fro, ἀκαταστασίαις], in labours, in watchings, in fastings; by [in] pureness, by [in] knowledge, by [in] long suffering, by [in] kindness, by [in] the Holy 7Ghost, by [in] love unfeigned, by [in] the word of truth, by [in] the power of God, 8by the armour of righteousness on the right hand and on the left, by honour [glory, δόξης] and dishonour, by evil report and good report: as deceivers, and yet [om. yet] true; 9as unknown, and yet [om. yet] well known; as dying, and, behold, we live; as chastened, and not killed; 10as sorrowful, yet always rejoicing; as poor, yet making many rich; as having nothing, and yet [om. yet] possessing all things. AND 2 Corinthians 6:1-2.—We then, as workers together with Him, also exhort you that ye receive not the grace of God in vain.—Connected with the exhortation and entreaty (2 Corinthians 5:20) in which he had spoken of an interest in God’s work of reconciliation by Christ, was another consideration with respect to their continuance in the grace thus attained. There is no indication that σύν in συνεργοῦντες has reference to the church of Corinth (comp. 2 Corinthians 1:24); for had such been the Apostle’s idea, ὑμῖν would have been inserted; still less can it be referred to the Apostle’s associates in the ministry; and least of all can the whole word be made equivalent to ἕργω̣συμπράττοντες with reference to 2 Corinthians 6:3 ff. in contrast with the λόγος in 2 Corinthians 5:20. The only doubt is whether it implies a coφperation with God or with Christ. If ὑπὲρΧριστοῦ in 2 Corinthians 6:20 signifies in behalf of Christ, and not in the place of Christ; then the preceding passage in which all things had been traced to the hand of God, and especially the phrase, as though God were beseeching by us (2 Corinthians 5:20), would be in favor of referring it to God, comp. also 1 Corinthians 3:9. In the admonition itself, the whole stress must be laid upon the words, not in vain, inasmuch as these stand at the commencement of the sentence. They here signify to be without fruits, as in Galatians 2:2; Philippians 2:16;1 Thessalonians 3:5. The word receive (δέξασθαι) is to be taken not in a preterite (as if it meant that ye will not have received), but in a present signification, in accordance with the uniform usage. We have here the moral side of the exhortation, which he had said (2 Corinthians 5:20) the ministry were urging, viz., Be reconciled to God. God’s work of reconciliation would be in vain to them, if in receiving it they did not become new men. The grace of God is the grace which had been shown in the work of reconciliation, for God had exhibited in that work special love to sinners. He gives a reason also for his admonition in a parenthetical form in 2 Corinthians 6:2 (for 2 Corinthians 6:3 is grammatically connected with παρακαλοῦμεν), by introducing a prophetical expression (Isaiah 49:8, in the words of the LXX.), which he implies had a fulfilment while he was writing—for he says: In an accepted time I heard thee, and in a day of salvation I succored thee: behold, now is the well accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation.—God must be regarded as the speaker in this quotation. In the original passage God was addressing the servant of the Lord, and through him as their head the whole people of God. Bengel: The Father speaks to the Messiah, in whom are included all believers. The hearing which was indicated by the succor, the prophet implies was to be shown in the deliverance of the people from the calamities into which they had fallen (Isaiah 49:7); but it is here made to refer to the salvation which God gives by Christ, and which the Apostle exhorts the Corinthians not to receive in vain. The accepted time (καιρὸςδεκτός, Heb. ςֵ ?ϊψָ ?φεֹ ?ο), is a time of favor, (the grace); the same as the “day of salvation” (the time for the communication of salvation to Israel (Mark 1:15; Galatians 4:4). It becomes accepted, in consideration of the impression it made upon the people. The same idea is intended, only more forcibly expressed, in the words, well accepted (εὐπρόσδεκτος, used in 2 Corinthians 8:12; Romans 15:16; Romans 15:31). The phrases, I heard thee and I succored thee, imply that when God was making this promise, He looked upon the future as already past. In Paul’s application of the passage, the words, Behold, now, (ἰδοὺνῦν), present the reason for the admonition in 2 Corinthians 6:1, q. d.: let not the opportunity pass unimproved; for if ye allow the grace now given you to be in vain, there are no other means of salvation for you (comp. Hebrews 3:13 ff.; Luke 19:42). The word, now, embraced the brief period until the second coming of Christ (Meyer). A paronomasia is perceptible in the use of δέξασθαι and δεκτός [Hodge: “The Scriptures contain abundant evidence that inspiration did not interfere with the natural play of the powers of the sacred writers. Although they spoke as they were moved by the Holy Ghost, yet they were probably in most cases unconscious of His influence, and acted as spontaneously as the believer does under the power of the Spirit in all His holy exercises. Hence we find that the sacred writings are constructed according to the ordinary laws of mind, and that the writers pass from subject to subject by the usual process of suggestion and association. So here the use of the word δέξασθαι brought up to the Apostle’s mind the word δεκτῷ, as it occurs in the Greek version of the beautiful passage in Isaiah 49:8.” Stanley: “Let not your receiving of the favor of God be in vain; for the language of God in the prophet is true: ‘In a time which I receive I heard thee.’ This view is confirmed by the stress the Apostle lays on the word δεκτός, carrying it out and amplifying it in his own comment which follows: God has so spoken, and look! (ἰδοὺ) the present is the time which He so receives. You ought to receive Him, for He has received you. Εὐπρόσδεκτος is a favorite word of the Apostle; and as such, and also as being more emphatic, is substituted for the less familiar and less expressive term of the Sept.”]. With reference to ἰδοὺ, consult the notes on 2 Corinthians 5:17. [Trench remarks (Synn. P. II. § 7) that “καιρός signifies time (χρόνος) bringing forth its several births, the critical epoch-making periods when all that has been slowly ripening through long ages is mature and comes to the birth in grand decisive events, which constitute at once the close of one period and the commencement of another. It is the nick of time; but whether, as such, to make or to mar, effectually to help or to hinder, the word by itself does not determine.” According to this, the καιρός of which both the prophet and the Apostle spoke was an epoch of great importance in consequence of the great events transpiring, but rendered favorable and acceptable (δεκτός) by the turning of the people to the Lord. (See also Webster’s Synonymns, p. 215)]. 2 Corinthians 6:3-10. Giving no occasion for stumbling in any thing, that the ministration have not a reproach cast upon it.—Luther incorrectly regards this participial sentence as a part of the Apostle’s admonition or entreaty to the Corinthians; as if he was exhorting them not to receive the grace in vain, and to give no offence lest, etc. But had such been the Apostle’s mind he would have written διδόντας instead of διδόντες. This word is rather to be connected directly with παρακαλοῦμενbefore the parenthesis, and it shows how the conduct of the admonishers corresponded with and gave force to the admonition. In this verse he resumes his apology for himself. The words ἐνμηδενί (in nothing) are neuter like ἐνπαντί in 2 Corinthians 6:4. Μή is not here in the place of οὐ [for it implies the intention and desire of the writer]. Comp. 1 Corinthians 10:33. Προσκοπή is used only here in the New Testament, but it is equivalent to πρόσκομμα 1 Corinthians 8:8. It implies that Paul and his companions would do nothing to lead others into error, or to impair the proper effect of their work or of their admonition, and so they would give no occasion for unbelief and unchristian conduct. (Meyer). In saying that the ministration have not a reproach cast upon it, he intended to say that they subjected themselves to so much pains, in order that their efforts as Apostles to reconcile men to God, might be saved from bitter reproaches (for μωμηθῆ implies that he had in his mind no common or slight reproaches). Probably he had reference to those opponents who were inclined to make, or perhaps had already indulged in such reproaches.—But in all things, as the ministers of God, commending ourselves in much patience, (2 Corinthians 6:4). In συνιστάντες (2 Corinthians 3:1), we have the positive side in contrast with the negative side, which had been given in 2 Corinthians 6:3, and it is placed before ἐαυτοὺς because it contains the emphatic point (Meyer). The idea is not that they were commending themselves as ministers [as our English A. V. may be understood and is usually punctuated] for then the expression would have been ὡςθεοῦδιακόνους, but we commend ourselves as the ministers of God commend themselves; or, as is appropriate for such ministers. [Alford: “When these words signify to recommend ourselves in a bad sense (2 Corinthians 3:1; 2 Corinthians 5:12), ἐαυτοὺς precedes the verb; but here and in 2 Corinthians 4:2, where used in a good sense and without any stress on ἐαυτοὺς, it follows the verb. This is only one of many continually occurring instances of the importance of the collocation of words with regard to the emphasis.”] The points on which they commended themselves, are introduced by ἐν. They are, in the first place, Christian virtues, such as patient endurance (ὑπομονή, 2 Corinthians 6:4)—pureness (ἁγνότηςκ. τ. λ., 2 Corinthians 6:6). In connection with patience (perseverance, steadfastness, in contrast with despondency and reluctance) he mentions a variety of states in which he had exhibited much patience, such as in affliction, etc. Augustine quotes 2 Corinthians 10:4-12, to show that Paul possessed those qualities which Cicero makes necessary to an orator, viz., magna granditer et ornate loquendi. In proof of what he had said he now adduces principally the trichotomy contained in 2 Corinthians 6:4-5, in which he specifies how he had exhibited patience in three triplets of conditions. Bengel says the first triplet of trials, afflictions, necessities and distresses (straits) were general; the second, stripes, imprisonments, and tumults were specific; the third, the labors, watchings, and fastings were voluntary. These evils consist of oppressive, hampering circumstances in general, such as drove him into straits; and they are probably mentioned in the order of a climax. [Stanley divides the Apostle’s enumeration into four clauses, all amplifying ἐνπαντι. The first is an expansion of ἐνὑπομ. πολλῇ. The second enumerates the virtues which accompanied these outward hardships, arranged in two divisions, not so much by the meaning as by the form of the words, the first consisting of one, the latter of two words. In the third the words are held together merely by the word διά, and by their antithetical form. The fourth expands the words, through evil report into a long list of the contrasts between his alleged and his real character, at once showing his difficulties and his triumphs. The first section gives three triplets of evils, each growing out of the last word of the other. The first describes his hardships generally. In crushing afflictions (θλίψεσιν) in pressure of difficulties (ἀνάγκαις), in narrow straits (στενοχωρίαις). The prevailing idea is of pressure and confinement: each stage narrower than the one before, so that no room is left for movement or escape].—In afflictions, in necessities, in straits. —Στενοχωρίαι are mentioned also in 2 Corinthians 12:10, and are the highest degree of θλίψεις. Comp. 2 Corinthians 4:8. Ἀνάγκαι are necessities, calamities of various kinds, and also mentioned in 2 Corinthians 12:10 and in 1 Corinthians 7:26. (Some interpret the word as referring to want, poverty). [“The three words here used are cognate in derivation, θλίβω to press, squeeze; ἄγχω to press tight; στένος strait, angustus. The θλίψ. is the tribulation itself of whatever kind it may be, ἀνάγκ. is the result in circumstances, and στενοχ. (as used by Paul in 2 Corinthians 6:12; 2 Corinthians 4:8; and Romans 2:9) the result in feeling or apprehension.” Webster and Wilkinson.—“The idea of ‘narrow straits’ suggests the thought of actual persecutions, of which he gives the three to which he was most frequently exposed.” (Stanley), viz.].—in stripes, in imprisonments, in tumults.—On the word πληγᾶις (stripes) comp. 2 Corinthians 11:23; Acts 16:23 f. Ἀκαταστασία according to the prevailing usage in the New Testament (2 Corinthians 12:20; 1 Corinthians 14:32; James 3:16), has the sense of disorder, or in particular, tumults, insurrections. (Luke 21:9). With respect to such things in Paul’s life, comp. Acts 13:50; Acts 14:19; Acts 16:19 f.; Acts 19:23 ff. Others interpret the word of expulsions from society, restless wanderings from place to place, comp. ἀστατεῖν in 1 Corinthians 4:11.—In labors, in watchings, in fastings.—The labors here mentioned relate, not at least exclusively, to labors for his own support (1 Corinthians 4:12), but to the cares and toils of his Apostleship, 2 Corinthians 11:23; 2 Corinthians 11:27; 1 Corinthians 3:8; 1 Corinthians 15:58. In like manner on watchings, comp. chap, 2 Corinthians 11:27; Acts 20:31. Others, however, think that this word has reference to his sleepless cares and anxieties for the churches. More particularly it refers to his public teachings, journeyings, meditations and prayers (the whole frame of his mind). Fastings also include not those which his circumstances rendered unavoidable (1 Corinthians 4:11; Philippians 4:12), and which he especially distinguishes from fastings under the name of hunger and thirst in 2 Corinthians 11:27, but those fastings which were voluntarily endured and connected with prayer, (comp. Acts 14:23; Acts 13:2 f. 2 Corinthians 9:9). There is no reason, however, to regard these as ascetic acts of self-righteousness. In 2 Corinthians 6:6 additional items of moral qualifications for his office are given, viz.—in pureness, in knowledge, in long suffering, in kindness, in the Holy Ghost, in love unfeigned, in the word of truth, in the power of God.—[“There is no reason for exchanging the in, in, etc., before each of these expressions for by, by, etc., as is done in our English A. V., inasmuch as the same preposition is used from ἐνὑπομ to ἐνδυνάμει implying not the instrument but the sphere or element in which his ministry moved.” Fausset. It is rendered by the English word in in Wiclif’s, Tyndale’s, Cranmer’s, and the Rhemish versions, and in the translation of the American Bible Union]. At the head of the series in this second section stands ἁγνότης, moral purity (comp. Philippians 4:8; 1 Timothy 5:22; 1 John 3:3), or chastity in a more special sense. It would, however, be too confined a signification to restrict the word to the sexual passion, and above all to the opposite of avarice or a love of gain. W. F. Besser says: “As patience had been shown in the nine proofs which had already been mentioned, so purity (in heart and intention, as a cardinal virtue) runs through the eight virtues and gifts which are now to be specified.” Γνῶσι‍ ?ς is either that practical knowledge which quickly recognizes the Divine will, i. e., true Christian wisdom (comp. 1 Peter 3:7), or evangelical knowledge, i. e., a vivid perception of Divine truth. The latter corresponds best with the prevailing usage in Paul’s writings. Besser: “Not intellectual learning is here meant, but that sagacity of the heart with respect to Divine truth, which enables a minister in all cases to bring out that mind of the Spirit which is best suited to the wants of his hearers (Philippians 1:9); and especially that casuistic wisdom which is so indispensable to the cure of souls.” This knowledge has also an ethical aspect, and includes that faith which surrenders entirely to the truth of God. Μακροθυμία and χρηστότης are virtues which belong to the sphere of love (comp. 1 Corinthians 13:4). The former signifies that long endurance or perseverance which is exercised under griefs or mortifications; the latter is the same as gentleness or kindness in social life and the pastoral work. Trench (Synn. P. II. § 3) makes μακροθ, a long holding out of the mind before it gives room to action or passion (generally anger) against persons ὑπομόνη, 2 Corinthians 6:4, being the same self-restraint with respect to things. The Rhemish renders μακρ. by longanimity, a word which even Taylor’s and Archbishop Whately’s authority has not been sufficient to naturalize in our language. Χρηστότης is rendered by Wycliffe, in Galatians 5:22, benignity, and by the Rhemish in our passage, “sweetness.” Trench, P. II. § 13]. Before the Apostle speaks of the original grace of love itself, he refers to the source of all moral excellence, the Holy Ghost, with Which this fundamental virtue is appropriately connected as its source. This πν. ἅγιον should be regarded, not merely as a charism, but as a power always dwelling and acting in the Christian, and manifesting itself in all his conduct. Ἀνυπόκριτη (unfeigned) occurs also in Romans 12:9, as an attribute of love. In 2 Corinthians 6:7 he passes on to notice his work as a minister, and that which commended him to his hearers. As in the words, love unfeigned, he probably had some reference to his insincere opponents who affected the appearance of much love, so in the word of truth he had a similar reference to impurity of doctrine, (comp. 2 Corinthians 2:17; 2 Corinthians 4:2). The want of the article shows that he must have meant, not as in Colossians 1:5. and other places, the Gospel objectively considered, but subjectively that which was spoken or proposed to men, the substance of which was truth. The power of God in like manner is not to be limited here to the working of miracles, but referred to the Divine power which was seen in all his discourses, and proved that God was with him. (comp. 2 Corinthians 4:7; 1 Corinthians 2:4 f.; 2 Corinthians 1:18; 2 Corinthians 1:24).—By the armor of righteousness on the right hand and on the left, by glory and dishonor, by evil report and good report—We have here a change in the preposition (διὰ) in conformity with the ὅπλα with which it is connected. The Apostle now takes up the figure of a conflict, and hence ὅπλα must mean not any instruments in general by which one is aided or protected, but, strictly speaking, weapons. Αιὰτῶνὅπλων here stands independently, like all the other clauses introduced by διά, and is not subordinate to ἐνδυν. θεοῦ, as if it implied that the power of God was furnishing all these weapons (“Dei virtute nobis arma subministrante.” Grotius). The armor of righteousness means not merely such weapons as are lawful for a righteous man to use, or still less, good works (in the Roman Catholic sense); but such weapons as are given a man by his righteousness. Neander: “’weapons which would bo useful to a good man.” Among these we may understand either moral blamelessness (Billroth), or the righteousness of faith which makes a man strong and triumphant against all opposition in attack or defence, comp. Romans 8:31-39 (Meyer); or that righteousness of our daily life which proceeds from faith. Its weapons are, the spirit of confidence, a joyful consciousness that our prayers are heard, the strength of a pacified and assured conscience, the unanswerable testimony of a holy life, a delightful enjoyment and power in every work, etc. (Osiander). Or, as the Apostle had just been speaking of the power of God, perhaps he was here thinking of God’s righteousness operating through him, giving him weapons for every conflict, and directed especially to the establishment and development of good order in the world. The object of this Divine power was, on the one hand, to preserve in action all that was originally beneficial, and on the other to destroy all that was injurious; and especially in the department of redemption to preserve and develop all that new life which corresponded to the Divine will, and to remove all which was in opposition to it. (comp. Beck Chr. Lehrw. pp. 551 ff.). In this way probably δικαιοσύνη is used in Romans 6:13; Romans 6:18 ff. In respect to ὅπλα comp. Ephesians 6:11 ff.; 1 Thessalonians 5:8. The Apostle, however, speaks of two kinds of these weapons: those on the right hand and those on the left. The former were for assault (sword, lance) and the latter for defence and protection (shield). [Alford thinks this would have required τῶνδεξ. καὶτῶνἀριστ.: whereas now no article being inserted before ἀριστ., it is implied that the panoply (τὰὅπλα) is on both sides of the person. But even without such a specification by the article the complete armor for the whole person might yet imply that he had the sword and spear (ξὶφοςκαὶδόρυ) in the right, and the shield (ἀσπὶς) on the left hand, so that he was called ἀμφιδέξιος]. Both imposed upon the Apostle as the organ through which God’s righteousness acted among men the duty of contending against all forms of error and immorality which were so injurious to good order, and of repelling every kind of assault which might be made upon such order and upon himself as its representative, (comp. 2 Corinthians 10:4). As he commended himself to men by his use of these weapons, and of all the means supplied by God’s righteousness for the advancement of God’s cause in the world, the result was of course that he had to pass through glory and dishonor. (2 Corinthians 6:8, διὰδόξηςκαὶἀτιμίας, etc.). At this point he proceeds to mention the opposite judgments which were passed upon his conduct in these struggles. Δόξα is the glory or honor which was awarded him by the friends, and ἀτιμία the dishonor awarded him by the enemies, of God’s cause. The latter as well as the former, and not merely his conduct under both, were naturally the means of commending him to those who had spiritual discernment. (comp. Matthew 5:11; Luke 6:22; 1 Peter 4:14). Διά stands here in a different position from that in which it stood before τῶνὅπλων, and means passing through honor and dishonor, i. e., in the midst of honor and disgrace. (comp. Meyer; the remarks of Osiander in opposition to this do not seem appropriate). The same is true with respect to διὰ before δυσφημίαςκαὶεὐφημίας (through evil report and good report). [Alford: “Once adopted by the Apostle the διὰ was kept for the sake of the parallelism, though with various shades of meaning. I would understand it in ὅιὰδοξ., etc., as in διὰπολλῶνδακρύων (2 Corinthians 2:4) as pointing out the medium through which. Thus understood these two pairs in 2 Corinthians 6:8 will form an easy transition from the instrumental, through the medial to the passive characteristics which follow.”]—As deceivers and true, as unknown and well known,.—These two clauses are connected with the two immediately preceding, and not with συνιστάν. ἐαυτοὺςὡςθεοῦδιάκονοι [i. e., the author means, it was as deceivers and true, that they went through evil report and good report (2 Corinthians 6:8), and not that they commended themselves (2 Corinthians 6:4)]. We may notice, however, that what is detrimental is mentioned in the first part of each couplet, as it had been in some of the preceding clauses (δυσφημίας, εὐφημίας). As deceivers (ὡςπλάνοι) expresses what was the nature of the dishonorable reports respecting him, the false estimate placed upon him (comp. Matthew 27:63; John 7:12; 1 Timothy 4:1). And true (καὶἀληθεῖς), on the other hand, expresses what was the tenor of the good reports respecting him, and at the same time what was the actual state of the case. But καὶ has not, therefore, the meaning of, and yet [as in the English A. V.], for ὡς qualifies both words in each clause, and the two have reference to εὐφημία (and δόξα).—In 2 Corinthians 6:9 ἀγνοούμενοι has the sense of, obscure people, persons whom no one knows [Bloomfield: “obscure nobodies”], and not those who are misunderstood. or for whom no one cares. In contrast with it stands ἐπιγινωσκόμενοι: those who are well known, those who have the good report. It refers, therefore, to the knowledge of men, and not of God (as in 1 Corinthians 13:12), to the knowledge which true believers had of him in opposition the judgment of opponents who undervalued him.—As dying and behold we live, as chastened and not killed.—In the first members of the several antitheses which he is about to enumerate, he properly refers still to the evil report and dishonor of which he had just spoken; and in the second he brings forward the actual state of the case, having reference to the glory and good report of the earlier clauses. It is for this reason that he indulges in a greater freedom of expression, as when he says, and behold, we live. His opponents had passed a contemptuous judgment upon him, and upon the constant danger of death in which he was said to stand; they say we are dying, and that we are near our last (ὡςἀποθνήσκοντες, but he describes the case very differently when he gives his own view of it, 2 Corinthians 4:10 f.; 1 Corinthians 15:31), “and behold we live.” This last is said in a tone of triumph in opposition to the depreciation of his opponents. Contrary to all their expectations God’s wondrously saving power brings us out of our most imminent perils, not only uninjured, but with ever renewed powers of life (2 Corinthians 1:10; 2 Corinthians 4:10 f.). The phrase as chastened (ὡςπαιδευόμενοι) does not mean that he was actually purified by this discipline. On the other hand, as Neander says: Paul confesses that he was always needing a chastening discipline. The putative meaning of ὡς is still to be retained. It was one part of the evil report through which the afflicted Apostle passed, that he was always looked upon as one punished or chastened of God (comp. Isaiah 53:4). As to the mode in which this was accomplished, we need not imagine that it was by a literal scourging. And not hilled (καὶμὴθανατούμενοι) means that he was not so severely chastened as to be slain.” The discipline was never carried to an extreme (comp. Psalms 118:18).—As sorrowful yet always rejoicing, as poor yet making many rich, as having nothing, and possessing all things (2 Corinthians 6:10). In this verse ὡςλνπούμενοι signifies, we are looked upon as afflicted and sorrowful, and hence as men of a melancholy temperament; but in contrast with this distorted judgment, he declares that they were in reality always rejoicing and happy (comp. Philippians 4:4; Romans 5:3; Romans 12:12; 1 Thessalonians 1:6). The last sentence refers to the contrast between their poverty and their wealth. In the wealthy city of Corinth, it was a very uncommon thing to find a Christian possessed of riches (1 Corinthians 11:21). We are commonly looked upon as poor, and yet we make many rich; as men who have nothing, and yet we have all things. When he says that they were rich and had all things, we need not suppose he had reference to the collections by means of which he had at his disposal all the wealth of the Christian community, but we must understand it of those spiritual blessings to which he had already referred when he said that they were always rejoicing (comp. 2 Corinthians 8:7; 2 Corinthians 8:9; 1 Corinthians 1:5; Romans 1:11; Romans 15:29). Having nothing (comp. Matthew 8:20) indicates a high degree of the previously mentioned poverty (πτωχοί), and it alludes to the fact that Paul was sustained by the labor of his own hands. [Wordsworth: “κατὰ in κατέχοντες adds strength to the meaning of the latter.” See 1 Corinthians 7:31. Though we have nothing, we have firm possession of an eternal inheritance, yea, of “all things.” Stanley: “ἔχοντες” is simply “having,” κατέχοντες is “having to the full”]. This having all things and being rich must also be understood of spiritual possessions, and not of earthly property in addition, nor probably of the everlasting inheritance (κληρονομία). He speaks in a similar, though not in precisely the same, manner in 1 Corinthians 3:22. Neander says: “The whole world belongs to the Christian, because the principle which now governs him is one day to control everything on earth. What the Stoics once said of their wise men, was never completely true except of the Christian; for they alone have that true greatness which is founded upon humility, and they can never be overcome, for they are always in harmony with the will of God.” AND ETHICAL1. The more exalted the benefits of the atonement, the more important is it that we should not receive them merely as something brought to us by force to pacify our conscience; but without a sincere repentance and a thorough renovation of our own hearts. Such a participation in God’s greatest gift throws upon us a tremendous responsibility; for if we abuse it we bring upon ourselves an irreparable injury, since we not merely lose the opportunity of a great salvation, but we can hope for no other means of deliverance. Hence those who commend the atonement should earnestly invite those who hear them, not only to accept of it, but to bring forth all the appropriate fruits of such amazing grace. They should be exceedingly active in offering God’s mercy to men, and as fellow-laborers with God, earnestly beseech men not to receive the grace of God in vain, but diligently to bring forth and present to God the fruits of righteousness. 2. But to this word of exhortation, all that we are and do should correspond and give power. God’s ministers should not only give no such offence, that those who hate their work, may take occasion to insult and reproach it; but conduct themselves so as to gain the approbation of all well disposed persons. They should never become weary, hesitating, indolent, or desponding in their work; but under every discouragement and opposition, even under personal abuse, tumults, and loss of liberty, they should remain patient and undismayed. For the sake of such a work they should be willing to renounce with cheerfulness those conveniences and enjoyments which would otherwise be lawful to them. But whatever may be their exertions or endurances, they should maintain that purity of heart which longs for and thinks of nothing but the honor and glory of God: that familiarity with the economy of grace which readily and clearly discerns the Divine purposes and ways for saving men; and that forbearance and kindness, which can be learned and enjoyed only in the school of the Friend of Sinners. In all their course they should be controlled by the Holy Spirit shedding continually into their hearts that love of God, which produces and maintains a sincere love to men. Whatever they propose to their fellowmen will then bear the stamp of truth; and whatever they do will be accompanied by tokens of Divine power. In this manner they will prove themselves true champions of the Lord, boldly using the weapons of righteousness, now fearlessly assailing whatever opposes Christ’s cause, and now rigorously defending the truth and laws of God against every form of sin and error. Everything will then also become subservient to their cause, and will more and more compel men to confess that they are from God. Honor and dishonor, good and evil report, will be equally in their favor. If they are sometimes represented as deceivers, it will not be hard to prove themselves true men. If their adversaries disparage them as unknown, (obscure) they will soon prove themselves well known. If they are vilified as sinking, and devoted to death and ruin, they will ere long show themselves living monuments of saving and glorious grace. If they are pointed at as guilty objects of God’s frowns, they will soon prove that their chastisement was not unto death. If they are sometimes looked upon with pretended sympathy, as men overwhelmed with sorrow, poor wretches, who can only starve for want of the necessities of life, they will soon show that they are not merely joyful in themselves, and rich in spiritual blessings, but able also to enrich all their fellow men. AND Starke:2 Corinthians 6:1. Since God has chosen ministers to be his helpers in the work of the Gosepl, let no one think himself too well taught and holy to need the services of those who seem to be inferior in endowments, for he can never know what instrument, or slight occasion God may have chosen for a work of grace in his heart.—Hedinger:—Make use of the time you have, for the brief hour will soon be past. Whoever thrusts aside God’s grace, or loses it to secure some worldly advantage, draws down upon himself the severest judgments of God (Hebrews 2:3; Hebrews 12:15).—Spener:2 Corinthians 6:2. God sometimes plentifully dispenses to men a grace, which will soon give place to wrath, if they fail to recognize and improve the time of their gracious visitation (Luke 19:42; Luke 19:44.) Thoughtless persons say: “We shall have time enough to-morrow, and we can turn to God even in death;” but are they sure that God will then give them true repentance; that He will accept of the forced repentance of a dying hour; or that he will ever permit them to see another day? 2 Corinthians 6:4. A minister’s whole life should be a practical illustration of what he enjoins upon others. (Titus 2:7 f.) He who preaches to others that they must enter the kingdom of heaven only through much tribulation, must not expect to go before them upon roses. An effeminate weakling who can bear no trouble is not fit to serve Christ. In Christ’s service we shall be called upon to endure hardness and to stand by Christ and His word, under all the assaults of the devil and the world. But although such things are sometimes hard to bear, with Divine grace they become light. (2 Corinthians 4:8). 2 Corinthians 6:5. Blessed are the peacemakers; cursed all rebels. Every hour has its work: God’s word is to be searched; our own house is to be built, the sick are to be visited, and earnest prayer is to be offered for ourselves, and for all the world! Think you this will disturb your peace ? Never fear. For God the Lord will be thy rest and thy strength. 2 Corinthians 6:6. A minister must cleanse himself from all filthiness of the flesh and of the spirit (2 Corinthians 6:1.) or he will pull down rather than build up. He who would teach others must know God, and be well acquainted with himself and his people (John 10:3; John 10:14.)—A patient spirit is the inward light, and kindliness the outward beams of this sun. 2 Corinthians 6:7. Behold, the true way to have the power, and the near presence of God: It is to be so familiar with His word, that it shall become thoroughly implanted in our hearts, and engrafted into our spiritual life (James 1:21.) As a well-armed warrior carries weapons in both hands, is watchful on every side, and uses his weapons against every assault, we should bring our spiritual weapons to bear against every kind of temptation (from Satan or the world; from the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eye and the pride of life; from fears, tribulations, persecution). Where Christ is, God’s power is; and with this we can triumph over all things. Through God we shall do valiantly (Psalms 60:12; Psalms 108:13). 2 Corinthians 6:8. Stand firmly in God’s grace when men revile and seek to injure thee, and they will soon find that they dishonor themselves more than thee. 2 Corinthians 6:9. In severe sickness men will say, “He is dying,” but with God’s help we cry, “Behold I live!” Look well, that you may be able to say, “Christ liveth in me,” etc. (Galatians 2:20.)—Hedinger, 2 Corinthians 6:10. God’s people have reason to mourn over their sins, their sufferings, the buffetings of their deadly enemy, their fellowmen, the abominable crimes of their day, the perdition of thousands, and the general blindness and hardness of men’s hearts. But they can always rejoice in the Spirit, in God and in Christ, in a blessed hope, in foretastes of future glory, and that their names are written in heaven (Luke 10:10.) While we continue in God’s grace, we always truly participate in, though we may not always be equally conscious of, its consolations. These, however, may always be increased by constant prayer. They are spiritual, pure, uninterrupted, and the offspring of the spirit of God through spiritual graces. If they are sometimes connected with visible things, they are never dependent upon these, but are intended to lead us directly to God. It is for this reason that the enjoyment of them is so sanctifying. God’s true ministers, as spiritual fathers, enrich their people by their instructions, their example, their prayers, and their admonitions to good works and liberality (comp. 1 Timothy 6:17 f.). He who has God has everything, for God will provide every needful temporal blessing. Berlenb. Bible:2 Corinthians 6:1. A man must make a holy use of that grace by means of which he is first anointed with the Holy Spirit, justified, sanctified and turned to God: for if he makes it subservient to his fleshly lusts, or to his security in sin, and perverts it to his own pride and self-righteousness, instead of using it for his growth in grace and especially for being born into the kingdom of God, even that which he has already received will be withdrawn. 2 Corinthians 6:2. The only proper result of grace already received is the hearing of our prayers, the healing of our back-slidings and the salvation of our souls. When Satan is most aroused, then is the time for plucking souls from his grasp.—There are times in which God sees fit to give us more than common manifestations of His grace. Great will be our blessedness if we make a wise improvement of such seasons.—The deeper our impressions are, the greater the injury, if they are despised and resisted, and so our hearts are hardened against God. Every one should observe whether, and in what way Divine grace is acting upon his heart. If we walk not in the light while it is yet day, darkness will come upon us, and our perverted hearts will lead us to ruin.—When Satan can find an occasion for reproaching God’s children, and especially those who have the care of souls, he will be sure to make a mountain of it, and will corrupt the work of God. But never is he more insulting than when he finds them feeble and dispirited. Then he points to them and cries: “These are the Lord’s heroes!” An occasion for offence is thus given, not merely when we commit some great crime, but when we make no advances, when we are slothful, cold-hearted, and indolent, and when the people do not see us in earnest. 2 Corinthians 6:4 f. Where Christians are really zealous, they must expect to suffer. They must then beseech God for patience, and their prayers will keep them from falling.—God’s true messengers, and even Christians in general, may be distinguished from the world by their sufferings, and by their being looked upon by those who are esteemed in society, as the offscouring of all things and as a curse. There is no way in which they will not be assailed, in mind and body, in reputation or in property. They will be perplexed, crushed and beaten (afflictions).—Circumstances will arise when the servant of God will be in extreme distress, that as a good soldier of Jesus Christ, he may be an example to others of a firm trust in God.—Whoever is preparing for the pastoral office, must make it his first object to attain a degree of patience, which nothing but Divine power can give him.—Many have found evangelical fasting, when entered upon voluntarily at suitable times, and without affectation, very profitable, but any other will be found quite useless.—To abstain from an improper use of even those things which belong to us, will be an excellent means of purifying and disciplining us. 2 Corinthians 6:6. The best protection against impure thoughts and desires, is to give ourselves thoroughly up to our ordinary employments. Those who have once known how pleasant a holy life is, must have an insatiable hungering after purity of heart. The best way to know and properly appreciate all things around us, is to gain such a familiarity with them as God gives us in the midst of Christian activity, and the trials and temptations to which it subjects us.—He is truly kind who is willing to give up himself when occasion calls for it, and to renounce his own enjoyments at the call of distress and love. This can be done, in a pure and blameless manner, when the heart has been thoroughly awakened and renewed so as to be holy before God, angels and men (by the Holy Ghost).—Many a thing comes to us under the semblance of love. But the Apostolic spirit was in truth also. The very nature of love is such that it makes brethren speak the truth. 2 Corinthians 6:7. Truth must be defective if love is wanting. Where a man is actuated by love, he will honestly speak the truth, and of course will neither flatter nor needlessly offend or injure any one.—If a man faithfully pursues his calling, thoroughly renounces the world, and by the aid of the Holy Spirit gives no offence, is sincere, pure, chaste, kind and true, he will possess power, (“by the power of God”) which no one can resist, and his faith will be the victory which overcomes the world. No one can do this who does not make good use of the weapons of righteousness. With these he can defend himself against all mischief from within or from without. God is wonderful in His resources! 2 Corinthians 6:8. In itself it is a matter of indifference to a Christian, whether men receive or reject him, if he only has the testimony of a good conscience, and has grace always to own his Lord. 2 Corinthians 6:9. The dealings of God with His people are so fatherly, that, with all the humiliations and chastisements to which He subjects them, they are never given over to death. 2 Corinthians 6:10. Christians are not without tender feelings when they are in affliction, but they are so refreshed by supplies of grace that they can endure with cheerfulness.—None can understand how wonderful God’s goodness is but those who seek for and love Him; but so abundant will be the riches of knowledge which He gives, that many besides their possessors will be enriched. To have nothing, neither gold, nor possessions, etc., and yet to have all things so as to be unwilling to exchange conditions with the wealthiest of this world, are things so hard to be united, that nothing but Divine power can combine them together. Rieger:2 Corinthians 6:1 f. If thou hast besought men to be reconciled to God, fail not to admonish them also, for even those who have been brought nigh to God by the word of reconciliation are still in danger. How often is grace obstructed, and the heart hardened rather than benefited.—“I have heard thee,” etc. Such a promise was not for our great High Priest alone during the single hour of His soul’s travail (Isaiah 49:8), but for those of every age and condition in whose behalf he then acted. His prayer for His disciples and for all who should afterwards believe on Him through their word, has been heard. The present, therefore, is an acceptable time, etc.2 Corinthians 6:3. Men are ingenious in contriving pretexts for receiving the grace of God in vain, especially if they can detect something in those who preach the Gospel inconsistent with their messages.—The minister of Christ must not expect entirely to escape scandal; but when the conscience of a hearer has been offended, so that the Gospel has no power over him, the cause is not unfrequently one which could and ought to have been avoided. The minister’s work should be to him as the very apple of his eye, to be kept most delicately from every contact with vice. Many of the judicial proceedings of the present day fail of success on both sides on account of the contempt and reproach which rests upon the ministerial character (Malachi 2:7-9). The salt which has lost its savor will be sure to be crushed under the feet of men. But even those who thus tread upon it must one day answer for being so easily deprived of that which might and ought to have been salt to them, and for being so speedily reduced to a carcass of corruption in God’s sight. 2 Corinthians 6:4 The best eye for judging all we do is acquired by having a desire in all things to act worthy of a servant of God.—A stupid, hesitating and timid spirit knows nothing of real patience. None but those who fear no terrors can maintain such a spirit under severe trials. Heubner:2 Corinthians 6:1. To receive the grace of God (i. e., all that could save us) in vain, is the surest way to injure ourselves and to lose what we have. What an honor and blessedness to be God’s helpers, and to give Him back the tongues and powers he gave us! 2 Corinthians 6:2. The acceptable time is the whole period of the Christian dispensation, for salvation is now free to all, especially all who hear the Gospel in its clearness and power. For every one it is now a day of salvation. Luther:—“The word of God moves along like a passing shower; wherever it comes it must be received at once, or it will be gone.”—How soon a man’s “not now” becomes a “never. How many are lost because they put off the day of their conversion! 2 Corinthians 6:3. Christianity has always been much dishonored by the unfaithfulness and faults of some ministers whose scandalous walk pulls down faster than their preaching builds up. Most carefully, therefore, should they guard their conduct, for every defect in this will surely be noticed. No wonder, therefore, that the world is full of objections to those who preach the Gospel. 2 Corinthians 6:4-5. In performing the duties of your office, seek not to please yourself or the world, but God. Faithfulness to Him will be seen principally in the patient and persevering performance of the difficult duties you have to do. Nothing is more indispensable to a minister of God, driven as he often must be into straits and with none to counsel him, than patience. 2 Corinthians 6:6. The severer the opposition, the more honorable the virtues which are shown in encountering it: such as purity of heart, the ready tact and familiarity with Divine things which always hits upon the right thing; the good will and courage which perseveres even when the results do not correspond to our expectations; the unwearied earnestness to benefit those who make no returns of gratitude and continually thwart our pains; the kindness (the outward form of love) which endeavors to win all to Christ; the holy zeal which remains at all times equally constant, and has a heart for God’s work and man’s salvation; and the sincere love to all men which is the soul of all our graces. 2 Corinthians 6:8. The equanimity of the Christian under the ever varying judgments of the world.—Honors do not dazzle him, dishonors do not trouble him. 2 Corinthians 6:9. To be known by a few faithful friends, is better than to have a name with the multitude. 2 Corinthians 6:10. The Christian, though poor in the eye of the world, has an inexhaustible treasure to dispense. With no earthly house or grounds, or possessions, he has a rich inheritance in heaven. With rapture he can cry: “My heart leaps!” etc. (Luke 4:23). W. F. Besser:2 Corinthians 6:1. God has seen fit to communicate to men the blessing of reconciliation through the medium of His word and the preaching of the Gospel. Though He alone can impart the spirit of faith, and so work upon the heart that we shall come to Christ and find justification and salvation, He dispenses His gifts and influences in connection with the outward word, and calls those who preach it His helpers or fellow-laborers (1 Corinthians 3:9). 2 Corinthians 6:2. When Paul exclaims: “Behold, now,” etc., he must be understood as saying: “Open your eyes and behold that Gospel which has filled the world with the precious assurance that God is no more angry or punishing men, but is gracious and ready to save them; for our Lord Jesus, who has conquered all our enemies, and now intercedes for us, has purchased us for Himself, and entreats us to be reconciled to God.” The whole period of the New Testament is an acceptable time (Luke 4:19); when the buds of promise are bursting, and every day is a day of salvation. We are continually receiving and appropriating the results of our Saviour’s sufferings and victories. Every Christian may therefore apply to himself the prophetic word, “I have heard thee;” for if one is heard for all, then all are heard; and if one is succored for all, then all are succored. 2 Corinthians 6:6. Among the virtues and gifts which distinguish God’s servants, we ought especially to remark the Holy Spirit. From this Source flow the streams of life, of virtues and of gifts both backward and forward in our text. He it is who washes the soul from every defilement, and then it begins to shine with intelligence, long suffering and kindness, and He it is who crowns these virtues with martial glories and entwines them together in a bond of peace. 2 Corinthians 6:7. One part of the work to be accomplished by the armour of righteousness on the right hand and on the left, is to strip from us the motley garment of our own righteousness, and triumphantly to maintain the genuineness and everlasting suitableness of the beautiful and glorious garment of Christ’s righteousness. 2 Corinthians 6:9. When it is objected against the servants of Christ that they are obscure and insignificant, that they have no place among the wise, and no reputation or power in the world (1 Corinthians 1:26-28), they are more than compensated by being well known in heaven (Luke 10:20; Philippians 4:3; Hebrews 12:23) and in the Church below by all whom they have served with patience and with the humble graces of the Holy Spirit. 2 Corinthians 6:10. Every thing on earth is subservient to the welfare of God’s servants; and the future dignities of the meek who inherit the earth (Matthew 5:5) may be traced even in this life, when heaven and earth are nothing but a vast storehouse, the key to whose treasures is continually given to faith by prayer. Away with pride and vanity! Let us dread poison when pious people praise us, and learn to find honey among the nettles of calumny and lies; for we have the assurance (Matthew 5:11-12). 2 Corinthians 6:1-10 (Pericope on Invocavit Sunday):—The Lord glorified by His Apostles: 1, by their blameless deportment (2 Corinthians 6:1-4); 2, by their patience in sufferings (2 Corinthians 6:4-5); 3, by their holy walk (2 Corinthians 6:6-7); 4, by the benefits they confer.—The Apostles are like their Lord: 1, in their work as preachers and their holy walk: 2, in sufferings, not only under positive inflictions, but under privations; 3, in their excellent influence, inasmuch as they make use of none but honorable means.—A season of Fasting a time of salvation: 1. For we should regard it as a time: a. to awake to the reception of God’s grace, as we contemplate the story of Christ’s sufferings (2 Corinthians 6:1-2); b. to become more holy in our daily lives (2 Corinthians 6:3-4); c. to make use of the trials of life, for the exercise of every Christian virtue (2 Corinthians 6:4-6); d. to receive the spiritual aids which are offered us. 2. Beneficial influence of the truths then contemplated: a. for our amendment of life and our confirmation in holiness; b. for our real comfort and peace; c. for the increase of our influence among our fellow-men.—Our whole life on earth is a season of fasting; for it is a time: 1, of suffering; 2, of many privations; 3, of discipline in holiness; 4, of preparation for the great Easter, when we shall be raised from the dead and saved forever (Heubner). L. Hofacker (pp. 80 ff.):—In the midst of all their outward afflictions, their insignificance and their vileness in the eye of the world, those who follow Christ and labor in His vineyard must expect to be reviled; but in spite of all their sufferings and shame, a Divine greatness and majesty will break forth from them, amply sufficient to prove the reality of the kingdom for which they are contending.—The hidden glories of God’s kingdom: 1. That kingdom has a glory. 2. But it is now concealed: a. in Christ Himself; b. in His Church. Footnotes: [1 2 Corinthians 6:1.—D. (1st cor.) omits ὐμᾶς, and C. and Sinait. (1st cor.) substitute for it ἡμᾶς. 2 Corinthians 6:2.—F. and G. have δεκτός instead of εὐπρόσδεκτος. Their authority, however, is not great. 2 Corinthians 6:3.—After ἡδιακονία, D. E. F. G. and two other MSS., the Ital., some copies of the Vulgate, the Gothic and Syriac versions, many Greek and the Latin Fathers insert ἡμῶν. 2 Corinthians 6:4.—Rec. has συνιστῶντες on the authority of D. (3d cor.). E. K. L. Sin. (3d cor.), with Chrys. Theodt. Damasc. and others, Lachm. Tisch. and Alford (with C. D. (1st Cor.) F. G. and Sin.), have συνιστάντες. B. with two cursives and one MS. of Damasc. have συνιστανόντες. This text is in nearly the same state as 2 Corinthians 3:1, which see.] 12.—AN EARNEST APPEAL TO THE ; OF THE IN VER. 1 2 Corinthians 6:11-17, 2 Corinthians 7:111O ye Corinthians, our mouth is open unto you, our heart is [has become] enlarged. 12Ye are not straitened in us, but ye are straitened in your own bowels. 13Now for a recompense in the same [by way of recompense in the same kind, τὴνδὲαὐτήνἀντιμισθίαν] (I speak as unto my children), be ye also enlarged. 14Be ye not unequally yoked together [become not united as in a strange yoke, μὴγίνεσθεἑτεροζυγοῦντες] with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? 15and [or] what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christwith Belial [Beliar]? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel 16[unbeliever]? And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye [we] are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in [among] them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.17Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate [separated] saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing [anything unclean]; and I will receive you, and will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my [to me for, μοιεἰς] sons and daughters saith the Lord Almighty. 2 Corinthians 7:1 Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness [every defilement] of the [om. the] flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God. AND 2 Corinthians 6:11-13. Our mouth is open toward you, O Corinthians, our hearts are enlarged.—Before particularly applying to the Corinthians in their various relations (2 Corinthians 6:14 ff) the admonition he had given them in ver. I f., the Apostle pauses to pour forth to them the feelings which had been rising in his heart. We have first a continued expression of the emotions called forth by the preceding representation, and then the earnest exhortation which commences with 2 Corinthians 6:14. The words to open the mouth, signify properly, to begin to speak, but they are here especially emphatic (in consequence of their connection with what had been said in 2 Corinthians 6:3 ff. and what follows regarding the enlargement of his heart). The idea thus becomes, to speak openly and without reserve (comp. Ephesians 6:19 and Sir 22:22). [Chrysostom: “we cannot be silent; we long to be continually speaking and conversing with you”]. By such language, he shows how confiding was his love towards them. A similar thought is expressed when he adds, our heart is enlarged. [Chrysostom: “As that which warms is wont to dilate, so also to enlarge the heart is the work of love. It opens the mouth and enlarges the heart, for he loved not with the heart only, but with the heart in unison. He says with great emphasis, we have not only room for you all, but with such largeness of room, as he that is beloved walketh with great unrestraint within the heart of him that loveth”]. As Paul had been opening his inmost soul to his brethren in the free and confiding manner of the last few sentences he had himself become conscious of the extent of his affection for them (Meyer, comp. Osiander). This is the reason that, no γάρ was needed in the second sentence. The words should not be understood to mean simply (comp. 2 Corinthians 6:12 f.) that he felt happy and comfortable, or that he had now disclosed his whole heart and unbosomed himself to them.—The special address to them (κορίνθιοι), without either article or adjective, is a mode of speaking which occurs only in one passage beside (Philippians 4:15), and indicates the profound sincerity of the speaker.—The same idea is presented in a negative form in 2 Corinthians 6:12, and so makes the contrast on the part of the Corinthians more striking—ye are not straitened in us but ye are straitened in your own bowels (2 Corinthians 6:12).—The οὐ shows that the verb cannot be taken as an imperative even in the first clause. [Webster (p. 138): “οὐ conveys a direct and absolute, μὴ a subjective and conditional, denial.” Winer, § 59, 1]. It is not of anxiety or sadness, the reason of which is in themselves, that he is speaking. The meaning of ‘straitened’ is determined by its connection with the subsequent idea of enlargement: ye are not straitened, i. e. ye have no contracted space in our hearts; but in your hearts it is not so with respect to us; i. e. ye have no small room in us, but ye have very small room for us in yourselves. While our hearts are enlarged in love for you, it is very different with you, in respect to us. [Chrysostom: “This reproof is administered with forbearance, as is the manner of very great love. He does not say, ‘ye do not love us,’ but ‘not in the same measure,’ for he does not wish to touch them too sensibly. He implies that they have some affection for him, that he may win them to more. Ye are straitened while I am enlarged. Ye barely receive one and even him with small space, but I a whole city, and with abundance of freedom.”] Σπλὰγχνα (bowels) is here used, as in 2 Corinthians 7:15; Philippians 1:8; Philippians 2:1, and even in classical writers, in the sense of καρδία (heart), for the seat of the emotions, such as love, sympathy, etc. [The Apostle in this passage uses both words, καρδία and σπλάγχνα for the affections. In modern languages the latter word has been entirely superseded by the former. Among ancient nations, however, it expressed the whole interior structure of man, including especially the heart and liver as opposed to what are now technically called the bowels (ἔντερα, Stanley). In classical Greek the word is used for the feelings generally, and in Hebrew the corresponding ψָ ?ηֲ ?ρִ ?ιν was used to designate the seat of the gentler emotions and affections. The name itself in Hebrew was derived from a root which signifies to love. Comp. Stanley].—Now by way of recompense in the same (I speak as unto my children), be ye also enlarged (2 Corinthians 6:13).—In close connection with what he had just said, he now proceeds to demand of them that their hearts should also be enlarged, that they should “open widely their hearts in love and confidence for him as he had opened his for them. The motive for this he derives from the nature of children, when he adds, I speak as unto children (comp. 1 Corinthians 4:14); inasmuch as children are bound to make a return of love for a father’s love (comp. 1 Timothy 5:4). This idea is more distinctly brought out when he directly calls upon them for their love as an appropriate recompense (ἀντιμισθία, comp. Romans 1:27; but in our passage the word is strengthened by the use of τὴναὐτήν). The construction is here abrupt (Meyer calls it a rhetorical anacoluthon [Kόhner § 347, 5, Winer § 64, II. note]). In order to fill out the expression, however, we must supply neither ἔχοντεζ, nor εἰσενέγκατε; nor must we connect the words together by λέγω (q. d. I am speaking for an adequate recompense), but we must regard it as an Accus. absol., an anacoluthon, occasioned by the parenthesis in which he had paused to say he was speaking as to children. Others regard it as the Accusative of the remote effect: that by which ye should make recompense. In τὴναὐτὴνἀντιμισθίαν the two ideas of the same thing (τὸαὐτὸ) and of remuneration (ἀντιμισθία) are blended together by way of attraction. They may be separated thus: τὸαὐτὸ (ὡσαύτως), ὅἐστινἀντιμισθία[Fritzsche: “With his accustomed celerity of thought Paul says, τὴνδὲαὐτὴνἀντιμισθίαν instead of τὸδὲαὐτὸ, ὄἐστινἀντιμισθία, πλατύνθητε, enlarge your minds to the same remuneration, instead of, to the same thing (love) in which a remuneration might be found.” Comp. Jelf, Gram. § 581, 1, § 700, Obs. 1 and 2]. 2 Corinthians 6:14-18. [An admonition to separate themselves from unbelievers. Stanley calls this passage a remarkable dislocation of the train of argument. On the one hand, the passionate appeal begun in 2 Corinthians 6:11-13 is continued without even the appearance of an interruption in 2 Corinthians 7:2, where the words χωρήσατεἡμᾶς (make room for us) are evidently the prolongation of the metaphor expressed in 2 Corinthians 6:12-13, by στενοχ. and πλατύνθητε. On the other hand, the intervening passage (2 Corinthians 6:14 to 2 Corinthians 7:1), while it coheres perfectly with itself, has no connection with the immediate context either before or after. Such an introduction of an earnest warning in the midst of an affectionate entreaty, need not, however, suggest the idea of an interpolation of some passage from one of Paul’s lost Epistles, or by some other hand; for it is the very nature of a love so ardent, so aroused at the moment, and now touched with some jealousy, to make sudden transitions, and to draw towards itself by warnings of danger as well as by expressions of endearment,]. Probably not without reference to his demand that they should be enlarged toward him (2 Corinthians 6:13), the Apostle now proceeds earnestly to warn them against a kind of false enlargement of heart which had been shown in an improper fellowship with Gentiles, and in consenting to heathenish customs.—Become not united heterogeneously with unbelievers.—It is possible that he had reference especially to sacrificial festivals and to mixed marriages. Ἑτεροζυγεῖνἀπίστοις implies unquestionably a communion (it is joined therefore with the dative); but it involves also the idea of an unequal union. It is taken from the figure, not of a balance, where there is an inclination toward one side, representing a disposition favorable to unbelievers (Theophylact, et al.), nor of oars which are not paired or properly mated, but of a yoke in which animals are intended to draw together. Comp. ἑτερόζυγα in the Sept. of Leviticus 19:19; Deuteronomy 22:10. Two animals of a different nature, harnessed together in the same yoke, are a type of Christians having fellowship with heathen. W. F. Besser says that Paul here derives a spiritual lesson from the legal precept which prohibits the putting of clean and unclean animals in the same team, to the effect that Christians should not be joined with others. The ἕτερον however, should not be made to refer to the yoke itself, as if it meant “put not on a foreign yoke, one which unbelievers have put on, and therefore one which does not belong to Christians” (Meyer). The admonition evidently points to something habitual, and probably was intended to imply that their conduct had tendencies in that direction. Neander says that “Paul evidently would not have spoken in this way of that unavoidable intercourse with the heathen which only served to make Christianity better known to them; but he referred merely to a participation with them in social usages and excesses. Nothing in this text confines the application of it to marriages with the heathen.”—The Apostle now proceeds to justify his admonition by a series of five questions, in which he endeavors to convince his brethren of the incompatibility of the Christian and heathenish systems. Such an accumulation of questions is very emphatic and impressive. In the first place, he inquires—For what participation hath righteousness with unrighteousness?—He thus characterizes these systems by the opposite words, righteousness and unrighteousness (δικαιοσύνη and ἀνομία). The former signifies, not the righteousness of faith in the theological sense of the expression, but the active disposition to a Divine life which springs from a vital union by faith with Christ; and the latter signifies that complete want of such a righteousness which is seen in the heathen world, where the living God is unknown, and where there is no Divine life. The same idea is expressed figuratively in the second question—What communication hath light with darkness?—in which φῶζ and σκότοζ are contrasted. Comp. Ephesians 5:8. W. F. Besser: “These five casuistic questions are so arranged that the two first relate to the separation between salvation and destruction, the third to the separation between the Saviour and the destroyer, and the two last to the separation between the saved and the destroyed.” Light is the figurative expression for truth and purity (the intellectual and the moral element united); and darkness, is the common metaphor for error and wrong conduct (Greg. Naz. makes φῶς=γνῶσιςκαὶβίοςἔνθεος, σκότοζ=ἄγνοιακαὶἁμαρτία). Μετοχή has the same meaning as κοινωνία (Luther translates it Geniess=Genossenschaft, i. e., enjoyment in the sense of fellowship. [Stanley: “Of the five words used to express the idea of union, μετοχὴ, κοινωνία, σνμφώνησις, μερὶς, συγκατάθεσις,only the third and fifth have any special appropriateness, and those chiefly by their etymology; συμφώνησις, ‘harmony of voice,’ is appropriate to persons, and συγκατάθεσις, ‘unity of composition,’ to buildings. The multiplication of synonyms implies a greater copiousness of Greek than we should expect from the Apostle’s usual language. Webster and Wilkinson: “Believers are here spoken of, first in the abstract (light, righteousness, Ephesians 5:8), then in their Head, then individually, then as a community (ναός). The use of καὶ represents the act of communication as mutual, of πρὸς as offering a connection, of μετὰ as accepting it”]. For the meaning of κοινωνία by classical writers and by Philo, consult Meyer.—And what concord hath Christ with Beliar? (2 Corinthians 6:15). This question, which follows the first pair, is introduced by a δέ, which shows that it is an emphatic continuance of what had gone before it. [Alford: “After a question beginning with πῶς, τίς, and the like, a second question is regularly introduced by a δέ”]. We here rise to the two great chiefs of the opposing departments (comp. 1 Corinthians 10:20; Ephesians 2:2).—Βελίαρ is the same as Satan, by which word the Peschito translates it; the same also as πονηρόζ Heb. αְּ ?μִ ?ιַּ ?ςַ ?μ, worthlesness, wickedness. Even in the Sibylline books and in the Apocryphal writings of the Old Testament it was used as one of Satan’s names. In the common Hellenistic dialect, in the “Test. of the Twelve Patriarchs,” and in the writings of the Eccles. Fathers the letters λ and ρ were frequently interchanged. [Jerome derives the word from “αְּ ?μִ ?ι=non, and ςεֹ ?μ=jugum, i. e., absque jugo, quod de collo suo Dei abjecerit servitutem.” It is, however, more generally derived from the former word, and ιַ ?ςַ ?μ= usefulness, i. e., without usefulness, and hence, wickedness. Jerome’s derivation of the word may account for Paul’s use of it in connection with ἑτεροζυγοῦντες. But with the other derivation we have a still better connection. On the stand-point of the Jews and the N. T., idolatry was a worship of demons (1 Corinthians 10:20), and the name Beliar, both on its negative and positive side, fits this view, inasmuch as an idol was a dead and useless thing, and the system of idolatry was the concentrated effect of the devil’s art and power. Bengel thinks that Paul here calls Satan Beliar, but that Satan, as opposed to Christ, denotes all kinds of antichristian uncleanness (omnem colluviem antichristianam)]. Συμφώνησις occurs only here in the N. T., and never in the Septuagint. In the classical authors it has the form of συμφωνίαπρός. It has the meaning here of, agreement together, accordance of sentiment and feeling, harmony in opinions and efforts.—Or what part hath he that believeth with an unbeliever, and what agreement hath the temple of God with idols?—In this last pair of questions the Apostle comes down from the heads of these two great departments to those connected respectively with them, and assumes that one who has faith in Christ can have no part (μερίς) with such as have no such faith. Μερίς here, as in Acts 8:21, has the sense of share, portion or property. The two parties have no common advantages; one has nothing in common with the other, and their possessions are entirely different, the one from the other. In 2 Corinthians 6:16, however, a question is asked which sets in the clearest possible light the holiness of Christianity in contrast with the impurities of heathenism. The Christian community is there represented as a temple of God, and surely there could be no agreement between it and idols! Such a contradiction was there between them, that all fellowship would seem impossible and all contact a desecration. Συγκατάθεσις has generally the meaning of assent, acquiescence, but here it has the more particular signification of agreement. Comp. συγκατατίθεσθαιμετά in Exodus 23:1; Luke 23:51. With respect to the temple of God, comp. 1 Corinthians 3:16. It is certainly most natural to make this passage refer to such participations in idolatrous customs as are censured in 1 Corinthians 8:10. Christians should as soon think of allowing idols to be set up in the sanctuary of God, as to permit such things among those who had been consecrated to the Lord. These should be looked upon as profanations like some which took place during the most corrupt periods of the Old Testament.—For we are the temple of the living God.—From the figures he had employed, and from the language used in the Scriptures, it was evident that believers were a temple of God. Neander remarks that “The particular, external relations of the Old Testament are here applied in a spiritual manner to each Christian.” The γάρ implies that the admonition involved in this question (τίςδὲσυγκατάθεσις etc.) is applicable to us; for we are indeed the temples, etc. Φεοῦζῶντος is a designation of the true God who will in contrast with dead and powerless idols be always truly active to vindicate the honor of His sanctuary and to communicate living power to all His people (comp. 1 Thessalonians 1:9.) The same expression occurs also in 2 Corinthians 3:3; Hebrews 3:12; Hebrews 9:14; Hebrews 10:31, et al.—As God said, I will dwell in them, and walk among them; and I will be their God, and they shall be to me a people.—The Apostle here shows that his representation of the Church as a temple of God was justified by a passage in Levit. 36:11 f. (comp. Ezekiel 37:27), which is here cited freely from memory. He uses the word ἡμεῖς very naturally in the most enlarged sense, and we find nothing strange in the fact that he should address them in the parenthetic clause before he communicates the instruction). The Apostle considers the idea of a temple involved in the expression, I will dwell (have a habitation, ἐνοικήσωἐναὐτοῖς) in them. In the Sept. the passage reads: θήσωτὴνσκηνήνμουἐνὑμῖν Although ἐν has primarily the sense of: among, in the midst of, as it afterwards has in ἐμπεριπατήσω, the Apostle probably had reference to the presence of God in the individual believer (comp. John 14:23), inasmuch as the idea of ναὸςθεοῦ was in his mind, and the word ἕνοικεῖν most naturally implies this. The word ἐμπεριπατεῖν which was at first used to describe the movements of God’s residence (the sacred tabernacle) among the Israelites, is here probably applied to the presence of God Himself in His Church in all parts of the world (comp. Revelation 2:1). The promise contained in this quotation contains the sum of God’s covenant with His people, comp. Exodus 6:7; Jeremiah 24:7; Jeremiah 30:22; Jeremiah 31:1; Jeremiah 31:33; Hebrews 8:10; Revelation 21:3; Revelation 21:7. On God’s part there is the communication of Himself and the benefits of His salvation; and on the part of the people there is fellowship with God and the enjoyment of His blessing. W. F. Besser remarks that “God dwells in His Church when He fills it with His Spirit, through the instrumentality of His word and Sacraments; and as He thus finds an acceptable rest among them (Psalms 132:14), their spiritual influence proves that He is present in their midst and acknowledges as His own all who are reconciled to Him by Christ’s blood. God walks in His Church when He acts there as its God through the gifts, offices and powers which He bestows upon it; and when he receives His people into living fellowship and applies to them all the benefits of His gracious covenant.” In Leviticus 26 this promise is conditional and even here the admonition is itself a hint that their safety depended upon their fidelity, and especially upon their separation from ungodly persons and all impure practices; 2 Corinthians 6:17, comp. 2 Corinthians 6:14. This admonition He expresses in a free quotation of a passage in Isaiah 52:11, in which the people were commanded to leave Babylon.—Wherefore come out from among them, and be separated, saith the Lord, and touch not any thing unclean.—W. F. Besser says that “The departure of the Israelites from Babylon was a redemption, a type (like that of the departure out of Egypt) of the great redemption of which the Apostle speaks (Galatians 1:4), when he says that Christ gave Himself for our sins, that He might deliver us from this present evil world.” The admonition here is that they should come out in the most decided manner from the whole sphere of heathenish worldly life, should separate themselves in spirit from their heathen neighbors, should avoid all heathenish practices which might defile men consecrated to God, and especially should abstain from all idolatrous festivals.—And I will receive you.—This is an obvious reminiscence of Eze 20:34; Zechariah 10:8 (not a free quotation of καὶὁἑπισυνάγωνὑμᾶςκύριος Isaiah 52:12), and has reference to the adoption, of which he is about to speak further in 2 Corinthians 6:18. Bengel makes it a correlative to εξέλθετε those who should come out would be received as if into a new family or home.—And I will be for a Father unto you, and ye shall be sons and daughters unto me saith the Lord Almighty (2 Corinthians 6:18).—This is probably a free and amplified quotation of 2 Samuel 7:14 (hardly of Jer 31:9, and still less of Isa 43:6). The words sons and daughters are a hint at the religious equality of the sexes under the reign of Christianity. Grotius thinks that these words (2 Corinthians 6:16-18) are taken from some hymn. The whole citation is solemnly closed with the affirmation, saith the Lord Almighty (λέγεικύριοςὁπαντοκράτωρ), taken from the Sept of 2 Samuel 7:8. The expression occurs frequently in the Apocalypse, but only here in the writings of Paul; and it corresponds in the Septuagint to the Heb. ιְ ?ϊεָֹ ?δφִ ?αַ ?ΰεֹ ?ϊ, the Lord of Hosts. [“The concluding verses of this chapter are an instructive illustration of the way in which the New Testament writers quote the Old. 1. They often quote a translation which does not strictly adhere to the original. 2. They often quote according to the sense, and not according to the letter. 3. They often blend together different passages of Scripture, so as to give the sense, not of any one passage, but the combined sense of several. 4. They sometimes give the sense, not of any particular passage or passages, but, so to speak, the general sense of Scripture. There is no such passage in the Old Testament, for example, as that contained in this last verse, but the sentiment is often and clearly expressed. 5. They never quote as of authority any but the canonical books of the Old Testament” Hodge]. 2 Corinthians 7:1.—Having therefore these promises, let us purify ourselves from every defilement of flesh and spirit.—In this passage the Apostle, in a more conciliatory tone (and with the Corinthians associated with himself as brethren in the first person plural) connects with the promises he had quoted in 2 Corinthians 6:16-18, an earnest exhortation that they would aim at a course of conduct worthy of such exalted promises. [The inference he thus makes is applicable not merely to some part of God’s people which had become involved in unhallowed associations, but to all; and hence he includes even himself in the exhortation. He introduces also a word of endearment (ἀγαπητοί), which perceptibly indicates that he was subsiding into his usual calmness of spirit]. The promises to which he had been speaking had been given to the whole body of the Church; and as members of that Church they already possessed them (present ἔχοντες) by faith, inasmuch as even those which referred to the future were really as certain as those which were already realized. The main substance of them related to a personal communion with a God of absolute purity. A full realization of them would require on man’s part a complete renunciation of every thing inconsistent with the Divine nature, and an earnest pursuit after perfect holiness. Καθαρίζειν signifies, not, to remain free from contamination after having once been purified (Olshausen), but, as the uniform usage of the N. T. shows, to purify. [For the original idea involved in καθαρὸς comp. Trench. Synn. p. 175]. The object of this purification, which could never be accomplished without the aid of an indwelling Divine Spirit (comp. Romans 8:13; comp. 2 Corinthians 7:9; Galatians 5:16; Philippians 2:13), was, every defilement of the outer and inner man. The former includes every kind of voluptuousness, intemperance, etc., by means of which the body would be corrupted; and the latter includes thoughts, desires, affections (anger, pride, etc.) by means of which the human spirit (πνεῦμα) is defiled. In actual life these, two classes of defilements are never separated, for as the mental very easily become the fleshly, the seeds of the fleshly are found originally in the mental. He uses the word σαρκός, and not σώματος, because it is only as σάρξ that the body is the sedes et fomes, the seat and the igniter of sin, and hence the flesh (σάρξ) is that to which every bodily defilement ethically adheres (Meyer). The spirit (πνεῦμα) as we have often seen in 1Cor., denotes that spiritual nature which is kindred with God, and which in Christians is under the influence of, and is more or less directed by, the Holy Ghost. But as the action of this spirit may be much impeded or arrested by the defilements here spoken of, the work of purification was rendered continually necessary by the perpetual presence of the flesh, and any want of earnestness in the work of purification was an urgent reason for admonition (Osiander). Ancient as well as modern commentators (even Osiander) assume that the Apostle had a particular reference to crimes of which the Corinthians had been actually guilty (comp. 2 Corinthians 6:14 f.; 2 Corinthians 12:20 f.; 1 Corinthians 5:6). In this case the pollutions of the flesh would refer to unchastity, and those of the spirit to connections with idolatry. Both of these were intimately related (comp. Acts 15:29), and in fact may be referred to idolatry, which is so often named in the Old Testament spiritual harlotry. But not only the addition of παντός but the positive contrast implied, induces us to adopt the more general application; though we do not deny that the Apostle may have had some reference to the particular sins to which this interpretation alludes. The positive part of the exhortation is—perfecting holiness in the fear of God.—Ἁγιωσύνη (holiness) is here, as in Romans 1:4; 1 Thessalonians 3:13, and in the Sept. of Psalms 96:6; Psalms 97:12, the same as ἁγιασμός (comp. on 1 Corinthians 1:30); with the sense of the quality, and not merely the action, of holiness. [Webster: “ἁγιοσύνη differs but little from ἁγιότης (2 Corinthians 1:12; Hebrews 12:10), except perhaps it represents more the condition than the abstract quality; while ἁγιαςμός (1 Thessalonians 4:3-4; 1 Peter 1:2) points primarily to the process and thence, with the gradual approach of the termination in–μός to that–σύνη which is so characteristic of the N. T., the state, frame of mind, or holy disposition, in which the action of the verb is evinced or exemplified”]. The great moral business of the Christian (comp. Romans 6:22) is to complete (ἐπιτελεῖν 2 Corinthians 8:6) the work of holiness or consecration to God which was begun in faith as its principle, and must be actualized, developed and perfected during the whole life. The correlative of this is the Divine perfection which is referred to in Philippians 1:6. This perfecting of holiness is the attainment of complete holiness, and is a work of the whole life which we live in the flesh (Galatians 2:20); and can never reach an absolute completion until the close of life. It must, however, be accomplished in the fear of God. The spiritual ground of all this moral activity, this earnest pursuit of holiness on which depends all fellowship with God, is a profound veneration or reverence for that Holy One who is continually present with us, and from whom nothing is concealed. “This,” as Meyer says, “is the ethical and holy sphere within which righteousness is perfected.” AND ETHICALThe absolute purity of that God who enters into such intimate relationships with his people that he completely belongs to them, walks among them, is a Father to each one of them, and will regard them all as his sons and daughters, requires that they should be unreservedly consecrated to Him. By their very connection with Him they must continually receive a stream of influences by which the grossest or the slightest impurities whether of the flesh or Spirit must be washed away. Those who have entered into the great scheme of God’s mercy, should therefore have no part with those who entirely reject or practically abjure it. They have covenanted to walk with a God who is nothing but light, and they should have no fellowship with darkness, i. e. with the corrupt practices of men estranged from the life of God. They belong to Christ, and they should abhor and renounce every thing which looks like partnership with the Belial who is the very ideal of all worthlessness and vileness. They in whom God condescends to dwell should have no semblance of harmony with the world’s idolatry. Every attempt to unite together what is so unlike is an abomination to God and hurtful to souls. Under no circumstances can it really promote the cause of God, for it tends always to obliterate the distinction which God has taken pains to make prominent, and to make the requirement of a renovation of heart seem needless. How could those who are in the broad road be alarmed, if they were to see that believers had the same spirit with themselves. The work of God would thus be hindered by a false liberality. Let any one on the other hand consider what God is doing for the welfare of His people, and what an exalted thing it is to have fellowship with God, and he will have such a sense of God’s holy presence and of the gracious privileges of adoption, that he will carefully abstain from everything inconsistent with this sacred relationship. If he should at any time contract external or internal defilement, he will strive by every means to purify himself from it, and to bring his entire heart and life into conformity with his true dignity as a follower of Christ. Never will such a one remit his efforts to attain perfect holiness until he shall become a complete man after the likeness of Him who could say, “I do always those things which please the Father” (John 8:29). [Nothing in this section should be used, as it often is, to justify or require a separation from those portions of the visible church in which some degree of corruption is found to prevail. The Apostle had reference only to communities which were essentially unchristian, yea, as opposite to Christianity as light is to darkness, idolatry to the true religion. He would never have sanctioned any separation from the visible church (1 Corinthians 1:10; 1 Corinthians 3:3; 1 Corinthians 12:25), but that which was involuntary as e. g. when one had no access to her pale, or when she exacted as a term of membership something in faith or practice which a Christian could not yield with a good and enlightened conscience. In this latter case, whatever guilt there is belongs to the portion of the church which made such a term of communion (3 John 1:10). In such a way Rome is responsible for much of the present division in the ecclesiastical world. But we find nothing in our section or in other portions of the Scriptures to justify any increase of this division by a state of voluntary isolation or withdrawal from any established branch of the church on account of minor imperfections. “It only justifieth our withdrawing our communion from idolaters, and from notorious scandalous sinners in such duties and actions, or in such degrees, as we are under no obligation to have fellowship and communion with them in.” Poole’s Annotations]. AND Starke: 2 Corinthians 7:11. We here see the source and nature of a true and ready eloquence: a living faith and a friendly confidence in those whom we address. 2 Corinthians 7:12. Comp. 2 Corinthians 12:15. Alas! we have many ministers with hearts open and enlarged enough to embrace all their hearers, but their hearers have hearts which are too generally closed and too narrow to admit them and their messages (Isaiah 51:1; Psalms 109:4). 2 Corinthians 7:14. Hedinger:—Who can love a society which costs him the love of God?—Let us have God, our God, God in us and with us, and all else may go! Little then, O world, do we care for your company or your friendship (James 4:4)! 2 Corinthians 7:15. In Christianity we have the mind and the likeness of Christ; can we think of having these along with our carnal lusts? There can be no agreement between Christ and Belial, for the great, object of this unclean spirit is to ruin men, but Christ’s object is to destroy the works of the devil and to raise men to heaven. 2 Corinthians 7:16. God’s holy and good spirit, and the spirit of uncleanness and wickedness, can never dwell at once in the same heart (Matthew 6:24). No one can be a temple of the living God, until the living God gives him spiritual life. 2 Corinthians 7:17. Sins and vices of all kinds are impurities in God’s sight, and all Christians, as God’s spiritual priests, should be without blemish. 2 Corinthians 7:18. What can be more comforting than to have God for a Father, and to be in Christ His beloved sons and daughters? Not only will such be filled with joy and peace, but they will endeavor to walk worthy of their high vocation and to be truly devout in all their intercourse with God (Genesis 17:1). 2 Corinthians 7:1. We become pure only as we exercise true repentance and are renewed day by day; and this can be only as we allow the Holy Spirit to accomplish in our hearts without obstruction his proper work of purification (John 15:2), and as we use every possible means for putting off old corruptions (Ephesians 4:22; Galatians 5:24), and to exercise ourselves unto godliness (1 Timothy 4:7; Colossians 3:10-12).—From the garment of the old man, one piece after another has to be gradually taken or rather torn off (Spener). The renewed man must therefore: 1. Examine himself in every way to find what sins most easily beset him, and when they are most dangerous; 2. Guard against them us much as possible; 3. Observe carefully what states of mind usually precede his besetting sins, that he may in due time suppress the evil desire before it has acquired ascendancy; 4. Resist every evil passion and overcome it with the weapons of faith, prayer, and clear representations of his duty and of his baptismal vows; 5. Continue to smite the enemy even when he seems slain, etc.—The fear of God should make us diligent in the pursuit of holiness, for we should remember that only thus can we please Him whose eye is never off from us.—Hedinger:—The Gospel should make us never inactive but always vigorous and lively to advance in godliness. The pure and thriving are the only ones who persevere. And why should anyone stand still?—Are these our thanks for such precious promises? Berlenb. Bible: 2 Corinthians 7:11. The love of God and of our neighbor, mercy, hope and joy, wonderfully enlarge our hearts; and since the Lord, who makes a man His habitation, fills immensity, and knows no limits, He must of course expand the contracted heart and give it some degree of susceptibility. 2 Corinthians 7:14. Animals of a different nature were not allowed to draw in the same yoke; and Christians should abstain from all companions who will not work in Christ’s yoke. No heart can be at the same time darkened, ensnared and polluted by sin, and enlightened, emancipated and purified by Christ. Darkness hates the light and flees before it. 2 Corinthians 7:16. Whoever is not a temple of God must be a temple of idols and of Satan. Surely no one can be a temple of God who makes an idol of the world, and seeks his profit, honor and pleasure in the world. To be the Lord’s and to be His sanctuary involves the possession of a divine life and a direct fellowship with God. God is willing to rest, rule and walk in the heart. Turn to Him with all thine heart and thou shalt know what this is by experience. 2 Corinthians 7:17, 18. No self-denial can be acceptable to God, if it is merely external and not in the heart. And yet by these external acts we give practical evidence to the world that its own works are evil, and that we have no communion with the works of darkness but rather reprove them. The separations which have always taken place under the preaching of the Gospel have been produced, not from a factious spirit on the part of God’s people, not because they despised their fellow-men, not because they fancied they were better than others, but simply because they were anxious to avoid what is wrong. God is willing to dwell in His people, and if they would dwell in Him, they must continue steadfast and touch no unclean thing. If we desire to be children of God, we must completely separate ourselves from everything opposed Him. And yet, unless we intend that the world shall have equal power over us, we must cast ourselves wholly upon the help of the Almighty. 2 Corinthians 7:1. The power by which our hearts are renewed is principally derived from God’s own precious promises. These are an essential part of God’s covenant with us, but He demands that we also should heartily observe the conditions of the covenant (Jeremiah 7:3-10). We are continually assailed by evil, and yet we are required at all times to be pure. This we ought to be and have power to be, but not by any strength of our own, but by the aid of our risen Saviour. It is important to bo freed not merely from gross vices, but from those spiritual wickednesses with which the foul spirit sometimes besmears the soul (covetousness, arrogance, envy, anger, etc.); and the more spiritual these are the more abominable are they in God’s sight. Indeed, unless the work of purification extends to the most secret thought (Hebrews 4:12), we shall cherish something which will be false, selfish and impure in His eyes. It is the great business of the new life to be continually becoming pearls of the purest lustre. If we follow as God leads us, and as he gives us power to walk; if we submit cheerfully to His discipline, we shall doubtless reach at least the complete maturity of Christ (Ephesians 4:13). Rieger: 2 Corinthians 7:11 ff. No minister should hope to win the hearts of men by the esteem and the respect which he commands in society, if he does not also freely open his heart to them in love. 2 Corinthians 7:14 ff. Whatever may be the consequences to ourselves, we should never think lightly of the separation from a world lying in wickedness and the superiority to it which faith in Christ and the possession of God’s Spirit gives us. Unless we receive in vain the grace of our high calling, we shall find connected with it the largest promises. Compared with these, what has the world to offer?—2 Corinthians 7:1. Why is it that some times it takes a long time to fix and tranquilize our hearts, or to become calm after the excitement which some arrogant treatment or some offence has awakened in our bosom? How much prayer has thus been hindered? How many hours, which might have been spent in a Divine peace, have been spoiled by the torment of our own thoughts? All this comes from that filthiness of the flesh and spirit which we still allow to remain in us. Sanctification begins by forsaking the promiscuous multitude, by drawing near to God and by giving ourselves to His service. But it must be continued and completed. The fear of God is our strong fortress and security; let us see to it that we do not presumptuously venture away from it! Heubner: 2 Corinthians 7:11. It is not like a Christian to maintain a perpetual reserve toward those around him, for by his renewed nature he must long to open his heart to those he loves. Between friends there must necessarily be a freedom of expression, and one of the benefits of those associations into which only a few are admitted is, that the heart may be more freely exposed there. 2 Corinthians 7:12. The enlarged and full heart of a Christian must not unfrequently experience much sorrow when it is misunderstood and not appreciated by those in whom it confides. 2 Corinthians 7:13. The love which never gives by halves demands the whole heart in return. 2 Corinthians 7:14-15. Christianity claims that our hearts should be shared by nothing else, and that not only the desires but the whole mind and heart should be pure. It calls for the expulsion of all foreign elements from our natures, and insists upon an absolute intolerance of everything inconsistent with its principles and the word of God. Distinguish here between that disposition to live peaceably with others, which springs from benevolence, and that which accommodates itself to them, approves of their course and imitates their conduct from fear. Whoever joins with others in what is sinful, from a love of their society, accepts the yoke which they received from a love of sin. See the diametrical opposition between truth and error, goodness and wickedness. Impure and weak men would gladly unite these together, but Christianity says to them: Either receive the good as a whole, or decline it altogether: there must be no mingling of them together. Christ is determined to be our only Master; He calls for the whole heart or none of it. To receive the maxims and customs of the unbelieving world is the same thing as to pay court to Satan. The Christian is always at open war with everything not of God, and there must be no temporizing, no yielding. Keep thyself pure! 2 Corinthians 7:16. When a man yields up his heart to sin, he sets up an idol there. But God can have possession only where nothing else is tolerated.—If God dwells in us, it is by the continual influence of His Spirit producing an inward life which is entirely Divine. If God walks among us there will be a common form of life in which the mind of the Spirit will be clearly expressed, and an impression will be made upon others that God is in the midst of us. Whoever enters such a community will feel the animation of a Divine breath, and will be moved to spiritual activity. 2 Corinthians 7:17. Though we were born and grew up in the world, and though we have caught much of its spirit, the moment we forsake it we forsake it entirely, and henceforth feel a contempt for everything in it, in which God has no part. This is a separation of which all must approve. In such a world we may be looked upon as exiled from God, but in leaving it we find in Him our Father. 2 Corinthians 7:18. The whole Christian world ought to be one holy, divine family. Oh, how far is it from being so now!—2 Corinthians 7:1. The sanctifying power of God’s promises (1 John 3:3). Great promises, great demands; great expectations, great warnings! Every sin is a vile spot upon a Christian, whose whole body and soul ought to be a pure temple of God. Sanctification begins with conversion, but it continues through the whole life. God is determined to make something of us, but not all at once. To the accomplishment of His purpose it is indispensable that we should cherish for Him a holy reverence (1 Peter 1:17). W. F. Besser: 2 Corinthians 7:13. Christians have the warmest love and regard for us when they admonish us not to receive the grace of God in vain by a careless association with those who despise religion. 2 Corinthians 7:14. The yoke in which unbelievers toil is that of carnal will, carnal reason, carnal inclinations; in a word, everything dear to the natural heart. But to the believer this is a foreign yoke (Matthew 11:29). Righteousness is the Christian’s royal badge (Matthew 6:33), the richest of all his possessions (Matthew 6:21); but unrighteousness is the greatest reproach, the greatest injury and the greatest guilt of the ungodly man, however splendid may be his worldly virtues. To be truly righteous is to be truly saved, for life and bliss must be where forgiveness of sin is. On the other hand, to be truly unrighteous is to be really lost, for he is condemned already on whom lies the imputation of sin. Righteousness must therefore be forever separate from unrighteousness, in doctrine as well as in practice! 2 Corinthians 7:15. It would keep us from intermingling our thoughts and efforts with those of unbelievers if we would think much of the mighty chasm which there is between heaven and hell. Labor not in the same yoke with men, unless you would be willing to remain with them forever. The very heart of all idola try is a disposition to glorify man, and the prime article of the unbeliever’s creed is to make a god of the creature, and to exalt the flesh to honor. 2 Corinthians 7:16. The temple of the living God is a Church of living saints, a spiritual house pervaded by the life of the Triune God, and composed of living stones (1 Peter 2:5). This inscription: “The Temple of the living God,” should call us away from the disorders of an idolatry which conceals a real death under the appearance of life, and from the discord of a heathenism which is cut up into a thousand forms of worship, to a Christian unity whose best representation is that of a spiritual temple (Ephesians 2:21). 2 Corinthians 7:17, 18. Christians are no longer the mere bearers of the Lord’s vessels, as were the priests and Levites of an earlier day, but they are themselves the Lord’s vessels; their bodies and souls belong to Him, and they are sanctified by the Holy Spirit as members of the body of Christ. Of course, then, it would be unbecoming for such vessels to remain in a world lying in wickedness. The union of pure and impure doctrine is the very worst kind of desecration. Our Father, the Lord Almighty, has assured us that we shall always possess abundant satisfaction all along the way of self-denial and suffering; but he has also wisely provided that we should be pervaded by a holy fear of offending Him (1 Peter 1:17; comp. 1 Corinthians 10:22).—2 Corinthians 7:1. Even though we have been partially cleansed from sin, the grace will not continue with us unless we remain united with Christ by a true faith, and separate ourselves from sin. The Christian, is called continually to aim at perfect sanctification, though he daily finds that he comes short of it (Philippians 3:12). He must, therefore, persevere in this effort until he shall reach the rest which God has prepared for them that love Him. That fear of God which urges him forward is not one which is cast out by love and has torment (1 John 4:18), but one which love itself inspires, because it dreads the torment of a defiled conscience. [F. W. Robertson, on the whole section:—We have here—1. The exuberance of the Apostle’s affection (2 Corinthians 7:11). He had received a multitude of provocations from the Corinthians, and yet his love was deep; our heart is enlarged. It was partly compassion for them as his children, for whom he had suffered; and it was partly from a regard to them as immortal beings, who should be, and who might become, exceedingly eminent. Then he was eloquent, his mouth was open to them. He might have shut his lips and in dignified pride have refused to plead his cause. But he speaks freely, not even cautiously, but like a man who has nothing to conceal or to fear. 2. The recompense he desired. This was, first, unworldliness, or separation from the world. Independent of the impossibility of agreeing in the deepest sympathies, and of there being no identity of tastes or antipathies, the first ground was immorality, unrighteousness, profligacy, and the second was irreligion, unbelief. This separateness, however is not merely outward, but in spirit. It was, secondly, Personal purification (2 Corinthians 7:1). The ground on which this request was made was “these promises (the indwelling of God, his free reception of us, and His Fatherhood and our sonship, 2 Corinthians 6:16-18); the request itself was for personal purity; and the means were, the “fear of God,” realizing the promises and perfecting holiness.—Lectt. XLIX. and L., abridged]. Footnotes:[1 2 Corinthians 6:11.—For the second ἡμῶν B. has ὑμῶν. Tisch. in his Cod. sin. gives ἠμῶν in the text, but ν̔μῶν as a var. lect.]. 2 Corinthians 6:14—Rec. has τίςδὲ, but ἤτίς has stronger support [B. C. D. E. F. G. L. Sin. with the majority of versions and Fathers]. The δέ being more usual was probably a correction. 2 Corinthians 6:15.—Rec. has χριστῷ, but it was probably a correction to conform to φωτὶ and the other datives in the connection. B. C. et al [Sinait. D. L. the Vulg., and Copt. the Latin fathers] have χριστοῦ. [Lachm., Tisch., Meyer, and Alford also adopt it; but Bloomfield inclines to χριστῷ under an impression that the other was suggested by the Latin copies or to facilitate construction]. 2 Corinthians 6:15.—The best authenticated form of this word is βελίαρ; but some copies have βελίαν and βελίαβ. The βελ̓ίαλ of the Rec. is feebly sustained. [It has no MSS. and little more than the Vulgate, which adopted it from the original Hebrew form. All Greek MSS. of importance have βελίαρ. Sept. treated the word as a common noun and translated it. The Vulgate and our English version sometimes give it as a proper noun, but they often translate it by the word wicked, or some equivalent term. The Hellenistic Jews often changed λ into ρ as in the Doric φαῦρος for φαῦλος The fromβελίαρoften occurs in the Test. of the 12 Patriarchs, in the interpolated Ignatius, in the Apost. Canons, and in the Greek Fathers generally. As the Greeks never ended their proper names in ρ, they were not likely to change βελίαl into βελίαρ, while the Latins were quite likely to conform the βελίαρ to their Vulgate]. 2 Corinthians 6:16.—The Rec. has ὑμεῖς—ἐστε instead of ἡμεῖς—ἐσμεν. It was probably a reminiscence of 1 Corinthians 3:16, and an attempt to conform to 2 Corinthians 6:14; 2 Corinthians 6:17. The authorities, however, are about equally balanced. [B. D. L. Sin. and some versions and Fathers have the Rec. but C. D. (3d Cor.) E. F. G. K. the Vulg. Syr. Goth, verss. and most of the Greek Fathers have the other. No reason can be imagined for changing the ν̔μεις into ἡμεῖς equally strong with that which has above been suggested for the opposite course]. 2 Corinthians 6:16.—Rec. has μοι, Lachm. has μου. The testimony for the latter is not strong, and it is probably an attempt to conform the text to the preceding αὐτῶν. [And yet B. C. and Sin. have μου, while D. F. K. L. with the verss. and most Fathers have μοι]. 2 Corinthians 6:17—Rec. has ἐξέλθετε but εξελθατε is better suited to the sense and is more strongly sustained. [The former is better conformed to linguistic usage, but the latter was for this very reason less likely to be altered to it. it is better sustained by the best MSS. of the Sept., has B. C. F. G. Sin. and Damasc. in its favor, and has the sanction of Lachm., Tisch. and Alford]. XIII.— AS TO THE EFFECT OF HIS FIRST EPISTLE, A CORDIAL APPEAL TO THEM, AND THE REPORT TITUS HAD BROUGHT HIM OF THE BY THAT EPISTLE 2 Corinthians 7:2-162 Receive us; we have [om. have, ὴδικήσαμεν] wronged no man, we have [om. have] corrupted no man, we have [om. have] defrauded no man. 3I speak not this to condemn you, for I have said before, that ye are in our hearts to die and live with you. 4Great is my boldness of speech [om. of speech, παῤῥησία] toward you, great is my glorying of you: I am filled with [the] comfort, I am exceeding joyful [made exceedingly to abound with the joy] in all our tribulation. 5For, when we were come into Macedonia, our flesh had no rest, but we were troubled on every side [in every way];without were fightings, within were fears. 6Nevertheless God, that comforteth those that are cast down, comforted us by the coming of Titus; 7And not by his coming only, but by the consolation [comfort] wherewith he was comforted in you, when he told us your earnest desire, your mourning, your fervent mind [zeal, ζῆλον] toward me; so that I rejoiced the more. 8For though I made you sorry with a [the] letter, I do not repent though I did repent: for I perceive that the same epistle hath made you 9sorry, though it were but for a season. Now [I do not regret it: although I did regret it (for I perceive that that epistle made you sorry though but for a season), yet now] I rejoice, not that ye were made sorry, but that ye sorrowed to repentance: for ye were made sorry after a godly manner, that ye might receive damage by us in nothing.10For godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of: but thesorrow of the world worketh death. 11For behold this selfsame thing, that ye sorrowed after a godly sort, what carefulness [diligence, σπουδή] it wrought in you, yea, what clearing of yourselves, yea, what indignation, yea, what fear, yea, what vehement desire, [longing, ἐπιπόθησιν] yea, what zeal, yea, what revenge [infliction of punishment]! In all things ye have approved yourselves to be clear in this matter.12Wherefore, though I wrote unto you, I did it not for his cause that had done the wrong, nor for his cause that suffered wrong, but that our care for you [your earnest care for us] in the sight of God might appear unto [with, πρὸς] you. 13Therefore we were comforted in your comfort; yea, and exceedingly the more joyed we [comforted. But in our comfort, we joyed the more exceedingly] for the joy of Thus, because his spirit was [has been] refreshed by you all. 14For if I have boasted any thing to him of you, I am not ashamed; [was not made ashamed, οὐκατῃσχύνθην] but as we spake all things to you in truth, even so our boasting which I made [om. which I made] before Titus, is [was, ἐγενήθη] found a truth. And his inward affection is more abundant toward you, whilst he remembereth the obedience of you all, how with fear and trembling ye received him. 16I rejoice therefore [om. therefore] that I have confidence in you in all things. AND 2 Corinthians 7:2-4.—Receive us.—[In this passage we have Paul’s feelings toward his fellow-Christians presented with more liveliness than in almost any other passage. His restless anxiety to possess their love, his solicitude at having grieved them, and his delight on being reassured of their affection, show the warm friendliness of his nature. The same cause makes this one of the most rhetorical of all his writings; as may be seen in his repeated anaphorζ (2 Corinthians 7:2; 2 Corinthians 7:4; 2 Corinthians 7:11-12), the extreme delicacy of many of his allusions, the overflowing and struggling energy of his expressions (2 Corinthians 7:4; 2 Corinthians 7:7; 2 Corinthians 7:13; 2 Corinthians 7:15), his periphrastic designation of God (2 Corinthians 7:6), and the freedom (παῤῥησία) with which he runs from one suggestion to another. See Stanley’s note on Paul’s delight in human intercourse, and freedom from the ascetic spirit, p. 461]. The demand, Receive us, is probably a resumption of the idea thrown out in the similar demand, be ye also enlarged, in 2 Corinthians 6:13, and in it the Apostle intended to call on the Corinthians for their affectionate confidence. The original word (χωρήσατε) signifies, give us room in your hearts; like χωρεῖντι in John 2:6, and χωρεῖν, so far as it referred to personal objects in Mark 2:2. Others would render it: understand us rightly: [Tyndale and Cranmer: “Understand us”]; comp. χωρεῖν, Matthew 19:11-12. This certainly could refer to nothing in the preceding admonitions, for these had contained nothing likely to be misunderstood; but sufficient attention has not been given to the possible relation of this passage to the severity shown in 1 Corinthians 5 Nothing but love and confidence would be needful to insure their acceptance of what he then said and did.—We wronged no one, we corrupted no one, we defrauded no one (2 Corinthians 7:2 b).—In these brief sentences he presents in an animated style, without a γάρ, the reason for this demand. That he had an exclusive reference to the incestuous person, is as improbable as it is that he had no such reference whatever (comp. 2 Corinthians 7:8 ff.). Even if such a denial of doing injustice, or of having corrupted any one, could be made to fit such a reference (the former by signifying to inflict injustice through extreme severity (1 Corinthians 5:5), and the latter by signifying to ruin one, through the deliverance of him over to Satan), certainly the idea of fraud contained in ἐπλεονεκτήσαμεν could not be understood (as Rόckert suggests) to refer to an improper assumption of spiritual powers, and therefore would not admit of such an interpretation. It is, however, very likely that in the first denial (ἠδικήσαμεν) he had his eye principally upon that case, and that he intended to repel the imputation of his having violated any one’s rights by a needless severity of discipline; that in the second (ἐφθείραμεν) he had some reference to the charges made by the Judaizing teachers, of his having seduced the people by false doctrines, and especially by his doctrine of Christian liberty (comp. ὡςπλάνοι, 2 Corinthians 6:8; also 2 Corinthians 2:17; 2 Corinthians 4:2 et al.); and finally that when he said he took advantage (πλεονεκτεῖν) of no one, he was repelling the insinuation noticed afterwards in 2 Corinthians 11:14; 2 Corinthians 11:16 ff., with respect to his management of the collections and other matters (comp. Meyer and Osiander).—I say not this to condemn you (2 Corinthians 7:3 a).—He here turns aside for a moment to notice a possible misapprehension of what he had just said, as if he had denied that they had any affection for him, and so had utterly condemned and cast them off for their ingratitude, their suspicions and their outrageous offences against him. It would not have been very difficult to give an offensive turn to his emphatic demand that they would receive him into their hearts. And yet it would by no means come up to the Apostle’s aim if the only condemnation which he wished to deny was supposed to be involved in his denial of such a defrauding as would be implied in accusing them of covetousness because they had contributed nothing to his support. After κατάκρισιν we must, understand ὑμῶν (not ἐκείνον as Rόckert suggests with reference to the incestuous person).—For I have said before that ye are in our hearts to die and live with you (2 Corinthians 7:3 b).—The Apostle here proceeds to show that he could not have intended to condemn them, inasmuch as such a design would have been inconsistent with what he had said. The place in which he had said what he here speaks of must have been in the present Epistle (comp. Ephesians 3:3), and especially in 2 Corinthians 6:11 f. The substance of this he now repeats, when he says that they were in his heart (ἐνταῖςκαρδίαιςἡμῶνἐστε); comp. Philippians 1:7, [He uses the perfect instead of the aorist, because what he had said was still said and remained true up to the time of speaking]. The sincerity of the affection and fellowship here professed he further shows by adding: to die and to live with us εἰςτὸσυναποθανεῖνκαὶσυζῇν). The subject of this infinitive sentence must be supplied. It must be either με, in which case, he intended to say: so that I would desire to die and live with you (though we could not then understand why συναπ. is placed before συζῇν); or ὑμᾶς, in which case he intended to say: in order that ye may die and live with us. The ἐστέ of the previous sentence is in favor of the latter, but we must remember that he is not here speaking of their sympathy with him in his extreme perils, his deliverances and his welfare. The main proposition had reference to the love which he had toward them, not to that which they had toward him. The expression refers either to the inseparable fellowship which he felt with respect to them (subjectively) in his own heart, in consequence of which they would never be absent from his heart, whatever might be his lot, whether to live or to die (just as we bear within our hearts those whom we love in life or in death) (Meyer), or (objectively), to such an intimate connection with him, that their life and death would be necessarily involved in his, i. e., that they would share in his death and his life, and in all his sufferings for Christ and his deliverances from them (possibly also in his eternal blessedness). Comp. 2 Corinthians 1:7. With this latter interpretation, the idea would be that the love which made him bear them on his heart would make every thing common between him and them, and hence that they would be brought into complete fellowship with him in life or in death. [Meyer: How natural it was for Paul, in continual danger of dying, to put the συναπ. emphatically before the συζῆν. There is therefore no necessity of supposing that συζῆν must refer to the future life because it comes after συναπ. Paul may or may not have known of the “sacred band” who had agreed to live and die with each other, or of Roman proverbs of a like nature with what he here says; but he was doubtless uttering simply the extreme devotion of every good shepherd to the welfare of his flock (John 10:11). Grotius: “egregius χαρακτὴρ boni pastoris]. The εἰς would imply that such would be the object he would have in view, and not merely that such would be the result. This explanation probably deserves the preference, not only to the former, but also to another, which makes συν imply a reciprocity of fellowship, and thus combines the subjective and the objective interpretation together.—Great is my boldness toward you, great is my glorying of you (2 Corinthians 7:4). In this verse the Apostle goes on to show that his disposition and conduct toward them were such that there ought to be no such misconstruction of his language. Παῤῥησία here signifies not liberty or plainness of speech (Luther [the English version] et al.), but inward confidence [Vulgate: mihi, fiducia est apud vos] (Ephesians 3:12; 1 John 2:28; 1 John 3:21; 1 John 4:17; 1 John 5:14; comp. Bleek on Hebrews 3:6). The outward expression of this inward disposition was the καύχησις. Neander: “When Paul was with others he boasted much of the ample and thorough results which the grace of God had produced among them.” To regard (with Osiander) this boasting as something entirely within the Apostle’s own heart is not indispensable to the symmetry of the discourse, nor accordant with the Apostle’s usual style. It was more probably the exulting way in which the confident spirit of Paul usually expressed itself when his heart was elevated. The object of this boasting was the Corinthians themselves (comp. 2 Corinthians 7:14; 2 Corinthians 9:2), the results of his labors among them, and their subsequent spiritual progress. We may remark here a climax with reference to the preceding clause. So with respect to the following sentences—I am filled with comfort, I am exceeding joyful in all our tribulations (2 Corinthians 7:4 b).—we have παράκλησις—χαρὰ, πεπλήρωμαι—ὑπερπερισσεύομαι. [Hodge: “So far from having any disposition to upbraid or to recriminate, his heart was overflowing with different feelings. He had not only confidence in them, he was proud of them; he was not only comforted, he was filled with exceeding joy.” Instead of the third member of the anaphora, the Apostle has, by way of a stronger and climactic expression, πεπλήρωμαι]. Πεπλήρωμαι here, as also in Romans 1:29, and sometimes in the classic writers, is used with the dative. Υπερπερισσεύομαι signifies: I am made rich, overflowing with, etc. Περισσεύειν is used transitively also in 2 Corinthians 4:15; 2 Corinthians 9:8, and passively in Matthew 13:12. The article implies that the Corinthians were the source of both emotions (as in 2 Corinthians 7:7): the special consolation which is from you and the joy which is in you (Osiander); or it indicates the particular consolation and joy which he needed (Meyer). The ἑπὶ here signifies, not as in 2 Corinthians 1:4, concerning (so as to express the relation or object of χαρά), but in, in the midst (simultaneously), and it expresses the relation of both the preceding clauses. The frequent change of the singular to the plural, and of the plural to the singular in this section, shows that the Apostle’s own feelings were predominant in all that he was saying of himself in common with his fellow-laborers. [In this verse the change was to indicate that he bore the suffering in common with them, but that the joy was wholly a matter of his own experience. Alford also notices that “the present tense indicates the abiding of the effect”]. 2 Corinthians 7:5-7. For even as we went into Macedonia, our flesh had no rest, but we were troubled in every way. (2 Corinthians 7:5).—The Apostle now enters into some details; and, in the first place, with respect to the tribulation. καί has reference to what he had said in 2 Corinthians 2:12 f. He had there informed them that on his arrival at Troas he could not rest, but that he had gone immediately to Macedonia. He now adds that even when he came to Macedonia he was unable to find rest. Ἔσχηκεν is here the same as in 2 Corinthians 2:12, and its accordance with the verb in that passage suggests the suspicion that ἔσχεν may have been the original reading. The reason that our flesh (ἡσάρξἡμῶν) is substituted for my spirit (τῷπνεύματίμου) as in 2 Corinthians 2:12, may be found in the difference of circumstances on the two occasions. At Troas the unrest had its source and seat within, and consisted of anxious thoughts, etc.; but in Macedonia it was one which affected the flesh. And yet we must not suppose it exactly confined to the body (as Rόckert supposes, e. g., a sickness), nor that it means his whole person, and so the same as we; but it means the whole natural life in its infirmities, its susceptibilities and its sensibility to suffering; in a word, the whole sensuous nature, internal and external (comp. Matthew 26:41), every thing which can be influenced not only by the conflicts of the world around him, but by those cares and temptations of the inward spirit of which he was about to speak. In positive contrast with this he now says we were troubled in every way (ἀλλ̓ἐνπαντὶθλιβόμενοι). He uses the participle, as if he had written οὐκἤμεθαἄνεσινἐχοντεςτῇσαρκί (comp. Meyer). What he means by ἐνπαντί (in every condition, in all possible circumstances) is more fully developed when he says,—without were fightings, and within were fears. (ἔξωθενμάχαι, ἔσωθενφόβοι). The latter phrase is more forcible without ἦσαν). Ἐξωθεν and ἔσωθεν have reference not to those who were Christians (weak brethren and erroneous teachers), and those who were not; but in the one case to those opponents with whom he came in conflict, whether in the Church or out of it, and in the other to various difficulties within the Christian community, some of which, especially those which pertained to the Corinthian Church, occasionally became quite formidable. [It seems more natural to understand these particles with reference to the Apostle himself, since he was narrating his personal restlessness and troubles].—Nevertheless He who comforteth the downcast, comforted us. even God comforted us, by the coming of Titus—(2 Corinthians 7:6). Having considered the trouble to which he had been subjected, he now turns to notice the Divine consolation he had received under it. This had been sufficient to allay the storm in his soul. He mentions God in this connection [not at first under any of the ordinary names of the Deity, for at the moment he was so full of this peculiar aspect of God, that he deems it sufficient to designate him] as the One whose peculiar office it is to comfort them who are cast down (ὁπαρακαλῶντοὺςταπεινούς, comp. 2 Corinthians 1:3). [The present indicates that this is what is always taking place. In classical and Hellenistic usage ταπεινοί means not only those who are humble, but. those who are humbled, stricken down; and it refers not merely to the outer condition, but to the feelings of the heart, the disposition, and probably to both united (cast down). In the present case it should probably be taken in the most extensive sense. In the conclusion of this part of the sentence God must be regarded as especially emphatic. ̓Εν signifies, as usual, in, the sphere in which the comfort took place, but it also means in consequence of. The arrival of Titus was the reason for his consolation. With great delicacy he speaks of himself as bowed down on account of the misconstruction of his brethren, and as if nothing could relieve his mind but the personal return of his beloved associate. He intimates also that one essential element in the comfort he experienced, sprung from the delightful frame of mind which Titus exhibited on their account.—And not by His coming only, but also by the comfort wherewith He was comforted concerning you (2 Corinthians 7:7 a).—Ἐπί has here, as in 1 Thessalonians 3:7, the sense of: on account of, in relation to. We conclude, therefore, that Titus also had been much disturbed and anxious on account of the state of things at Corinth, and that he had been reassured by what he had seen during his visit there. The close connection between the participial sentence and παρεκλήθη, suggests that the Apostle was here speaking of the tranquilizing effect which the visit at Corinth had had upon Titus’ own mind. This was so perceptible, that during the recital of what Titus had witnessed, the load of care was removed also from the heart of the Apostle himself. Of course this implies that Titus had previously had all his anxieties allayed by what he had seen of the disposition of the Corinthian Church. (Osiander thinks that the Apostle in the tumult of his joy had completely amalgamated into a single thought the consolation of Titus, his own perception of that consolation, and the account of the whole which he was then writing). [It is implied that Titus was comforted while he was reciting the story in the ears of Paul himself, for the participle sἀναγγ. is given to explain how Titus was comforted. The Apostle was comforted while hearing, and Titus while telling such news]. The comforting things which Titus announced respecting the Corinthians, are given in the succeeding sentence,—when he told us your longing, your mourning, your zeal respecting me, so that I rejoiced the more. (2 Corinthians 7:7 b).—This implies: 1, their longing to see the Apostle once more, increased, as it doubtless was, by his delay in coming to them; 2, their ὀδυρμός. i. e., the extreme sorrow which they had expressed in bitter lamentations, when they became aware of the anxiety their sad state had caused him, and when they had received the severe reproof contained in his first Epistle; 3, their zeal in behalf of the Apostle, the interest awakened in the Church (as a whole, though not without some important exceptions), in behalf of his person and his authority (others say: affectionate zeal to repair the injury they had done him, to allay all his apprehensions, and to give him joy by their amendment). The phrase ὑπὲρἐμοῦ (your zeal for, or in behalf of me), is so essentially and immediately connected with ζῆλον, that it seemed needless to repeat the article in order to define it more perfectly. The power of the impression made upon him by the account is shown in the sentence: ὥστεμεμᾶλλονχαρῆναι. If we regard μᾶλλον here as equivalent to: potius, we must place the emphasis upon χαρῆναι, and the sense then would be: ‘so that instead of being troubled, I rather rejoiced,’ But from the order of the words we are induced to place the emphasis rather upon μᾶλλον, or at least upon παρεκάλεσεν, which, indeed, contains essentially the idea of joy, and may be regarded as the climax of this joy [so that the sense would be, so that I rejoiced or was comforted more than before]. Others suggest in addition that the increased joy was in consequence of the arrival of Titus [i. e., my usual joy was much increased]. Such a meaning would be much the same in its essential result. [In the old Oxford Paraphrase, the expression here is: so that I rejoiced now the more exceedingly from the occasion of my former grief. Chrysostom: “On these (before mentioned) he abounds in joy, and was filled with consolation, because he had made them feel. These things seem to me to be said, not only to soften what has gone before, but to encourage those who had acted well. For although we doubt not that some among the Corinthians were obnoxious to his former accusations, and unworthy of these praises, he did not wish to distinguish them, but makes both the praises and the accusations common, leaving it to the consciences of his hearers, to select what respectively belonged to them.”] 2 Corinthians 7:8-11. Because even though I made you sorry in the Epistle, I do not regret it: although I did regret it (for I perceive that that Epistle made you sorry, though but for a season), yet now I rejoice.—[The word ὅτι compels us to treat this sentence as a reason for the rejoicing of which he had just spoken. The phrase εἰκαὶ occurs three times in this single verse, and in each instance admits a fact without encouraging a doubt respecting it: ‘I admit I made you sorry, that I regretted it, and that the sorrow was but for a season.’ And yet it is implied that notwithstanding those facts, there were qualifying circumstances: ‘Even though such things were true, he did not then regret the sorrow, etc.’]. The painful impression his former Epistle had produced, did not prevent his present rejoicing. He refers, when he speaks of making them sorrowful, to the effect of the severe reproofs he had administered in his first Epistle, especially in the fifth chapter. [And yet many cannot discover anything in the first Epistle answering to such representations. The severity there refers mainly to a private wrong of an individual. They think, therefore, that an Epistle which had been so severe that the Apostle shrinks from reminding the Corinthians that it was his own (τῇἐπιστολῇ), must have been a brief and lost one which was confined to public censures, see Introd., § 6.. There is some dispute regarding the way in which the following sentences should be taken. If we adopt the reading, εἰκαὶμετεμελόμην (without the δὲ, which is contained only in Cod. B.), two different constructions are possible. In the first place, we may connect this expression with what precedes, as if he had intended to say: ‘I do not regret it, though I did regret it;’ in which case βλέπωγὰρ, ὅτιἐλύπησαὑμᾶς is simply a practical confirmation of the preceding ἐλύπησα: I see, from what Titus has told me, that the Epistle made you sorrowful, though only for a season; or we may regard it as giving the reason for his regretting that he had written (μετεμελόμην). When he says: although for a brief season, he informs them of a circumstance which had diminished his regrets, and he probably implies also that his own regret had been only a transient feeling (and yet it is in the imperfect). Meyer, however, correctly remarks that βλέπωγάρ, etc., could not be construed as the reason for any but the οὐμετεμελόμην of the preceding clause (with which, however, on this construction it could have no suitable meaning [for why should he give what he now sees as a reason for his former regrets])? In the second place, we may commence a new sentence with εἰκαὶμετεμελόμην, as we may also, and even must do, if we accept of the reading εἰδὲκαὶ. Those also who leave out γάρ after βλέπω, find in the clause beginning with βλεπω the apodosis of the whole sentence beginning with εἰκαὶμεταμ.: q. d. “though I did regret it, I now perceive that the Epistle made you sorry only for a season.” Even this construction gives no better specimen of reasoning than the other. It remains that we should make the clause commencing with νῦνχαίρω (2 Corinthians 7:9) the apodosis of the whole sentence in which εἰκὰιμεταμ., etc., is the protasis. [The Vulgate renders it: Quoniam etsi contristavi vos in epistola, non me p�nitet: et si p�niteret, videns quod epistola illa, etsi ad horam, vos coniristavit, Nunc gaudeo, etc. This is translated by the Rhemish, “ For, although I made you sorry in an Epistle, it repenteth me not: albeit it repented me, seeing that the same Epistle (although but for a time) did make you sorry. Now I am glad,” etc.] If we adopt the reading which the Vulgate must have used [i. e., βλέπωγὰρ,] the participial sentence will very conveniently connect with, and form a part of, the protasis, to which the apodosis is, ‘now I rejoice.’ The reading βλέπωγὰρ is, however, so well established that we are compelled to receive it into our text. We may then regard the sentence commencing with these words as a logical parenthesis, thus: “Though I did at one time regret it—(and not without reason) for I perceive (from the account of you by Titus) that that Epistle made you sorry—now I rejoice” (Meyer.) The regret of which he spoke had been experienced sometime before that in which his feelings changed and he became joyful. On this construction, we are struck with the difficulty, that the Apostle used the present βλέπω, rather than the past ἕβλεπον to correspond with μεταμελόμην; but the reason probably is that what the Apostle perceived on a former occasion continued still before his mind, and the peculiar nature of the parenthesis had introduced some confusion into the strict logical connection. The actual course of thought was probably something like the following: From the first account brought by Titus he had perceived that the Corinthians were much troubled by the contents of this first Epistle, and for a while he had been sorry that he had reproved them so severely. But when Titus had brought further information [on a second return from Corinth] he perceived not only that the disturbance had been essentially only temporary (πρὸςὥραν, Galatians 2:5, for a season), but that it soon gave way to a feeling of joy, and was productive of many important benefits. Their sorrow was therefore so far from being a source of regret to him, that he never recollected the effects which that Epistle had produced without joyful emotions. [The word βλέπω is more expressive than ὁρῶ. It refers to the mental contemplation which his paternal spirit had of them while he was absent from the scene. The abrupt and disconnected form which the Apostle’s language here assumes gives us a vivid picture of the inner workings of his heart. Wordsworth remarks: “that the language is beyond the rigid rules of ordinary grammar, and belongs to a higher science, the grammar of nature and even of inspiration; and impart an indescribable grace of tenderness and truth to these impassioned outpourings of his full heart. If they so touch the soul when read now, what must have been their effect when they sounded forth in all their original freshness, with the living voice, in the public recitations of these Epistles in the churches of Corinth and Achaia.” It is not implied that the Apostle’s regret involved any moral self-reproach. Dr. Campbell says it denotes simply “that uneasiness which a good man feels, not from the consciousness of having done wrong, but from a tenderness for others, and a fear lest that which, prompted by duty he had said, should have too strong an effect upon them.”] Accordingly the hesitation which some writers have felt in admitting that an inspired writer would be the subject of such regrets, springs from a mistake with regard to the human element in inspiration, i. e., the variable disposition of the inspired person. As the nobler human feelings are still supposed to be in exercise, notwithstanding the essential divinity of the power which moves them, there is no call for those arbitrary attempts, which some have made to interpret our passage (com. Meyer and Osiander). From what we have already said, it is evident that υῦν in 2 Corinthians 7:9, should be taken in a temporal and not in a logical sense. Not because ye were made sorry, but because ye were made sorry unto repentance. (2 Corinthians 7:9 b). In οὐχὅτιἐλυπῄθῃτε: (not because ye were, etc.) his design was to prevent, the misconstruction which might be put upon what he had said, as if it were a pleasure to him to remember that he had given them pain, (cold severity, com. Lamentations 3:33). The matter which gave occasion to his joy was that they had been troubled in such a way as to produce a change of their feelings, especially with respect to the sad case mentioned in the former Epistle (1 Corinthians 5.). The result of such a change was that they had made a great advance in Christian morality and seriousness, and that they had been deeply humbled. He proceeds to speak still further on this point when he adds: For ye were made sorry according to God, that ye might receive damage from us in no respect (2 Corinthians 7:9 c). In accordance with Paul’s usage κατὰθεόν must be designed to direct our minds to the efficient author of the sorrow. (Deo efficiente.) It means: according to God, i. e., according to the mind or will of God. Thus in Romans 8:27. Bengel says: “The sorrow of penitents renders their minds conformable to God,” and “κατά signifies the feeling of the mind which has regard to and follows after God.” Such a one “is grieved because he has done what God abhors.” (Ambrosius). “Iva is here expressive of the divine intention, with, respect to their sorrow according to God; and it implies, even if it had not been implied in κατὰθεόν, that God had had a hand in producing their sorrow. The object God had in view was, that they might in no way suffer injury from their teachers, not even by their sorrow. Neander: “It is agreeable to the theological view every where predominant in Paul’s writings to say that what he had written with an upright intention should not result in injury to them.” Osiander: ἐνμηδενί has the sense of, in no part, i. e., neither in your joyful confidence nor in the purity of the Church.” But is such a meaning quite appropriate or consistent with the context? Ζημιοῦσθαι occurs in 1 Corinthians 3:15, in the sense of, he shall suffer loss. The preposition ἐκ shows the source of the injury which is denied (2 Corinthians 2:2). He does not mean that they would thus be saved from punishment. He merely implies that they might have been injured if they had experienced no change of mind, especially if their feelings had become alienated from him and embittered toward him. On the contrary he rejoiced to find that the result had been salutary.—This idea is further carried out in 2 Corinthians 7:10, where a reason is assigned for what had been said in the preceding final sentence: “Ye have been troubled by God that ye might receive injury from us in nothing.—For the sorrow which is according to God worketh out repentance unto salvation not to be repented of, (2 Corinthians 7:10 a),—i. e., a change of heart which leads to salvation.” The apostle here refers back to εῖςμετάνοια, (unto repentance) in 2 Corinthians 7:9, and he describes this as the effect of a right kind of sorrow. When a man is conformed to the mind of God, or is troubled by a regard to God on account of his sins, he will turn from those sins with all his heart; and he will become totally opposed to all that once was pleasant or seemed indifferent to him (μετάνοια). But this change of heart which was the result of the sorrow spoken of, and which in the actual experience of believers always included faith, was especially the fruit of the sorrow according to God and conducted to salvation. If we connect ἀμεταμέλητον with σωτηρίαν, the idea will be that when a man is delivered from his sinful corruption he thereby attains everlasting life and must of course be forever satisfied. It would be absurd to suppose that such a one would ever regret his course or have the slightest wish that he had never come into this state or into the way which leads to it. It must be conceded therefore that this epithet is quite suitable to σωτηρίαν, and the order of the words favors such an application. But Luther and others connect it with μετάνοιαν, and p�nitentiam non p�nitendam is an expression which makes good sense. [Calvin also with fine critical discernment remarks: The play here upon the word penitence, when he says not to be repented of, is elegant, for however unpleasant at first taste a thing may be, it renders itself desirable by its usefulness. For though the epithet (ἀμεταμέλ.) may refer as much to the salvation as to the penitence, it appears to me to agree better with the latter word: q. d.: We are taught by the very event that no sorrow ought to be grievous or troublesome to us; so that though repentance have something bitter in it of itself, it is described as not to be repented of because of the sweet and precious fruit which it produces.” The Vulgate renders the phrase thus: p�nitentiam in salutem stabilem operatur, which the Rhemish translates: worketh penance unto salvation that is stable. This use of ἀμεταμέλητος in the sense of unchangeable is perhaps sanctioned by its use in Romans 11:29. It is commonly supposed that our English Version favors the reference of the word to repentance. This however does not seem quite clear.] It is true we should more naturally have expected that ἀμετανόητον would have been used in application to μετάνοιαν, but ἀμεταμέλητος brings out better that part of the sorrow which is painful, and no one can justly say that it creates any halting or feebleness in the course of thought. We may therefore, with Osiander give the preference to such a connection. There is an evident reference to the οὐμεταμέλομαι in 2 Corinthians 7:8. As this epistle had drawn forth their sorrow and this had produced a change of heart which could never be regretted, it had been followed by such fruits and had led to salvation (σωτηρία), he could of course have no regrets on account of the effect of his epistle, and he could only rejoice in the recollection of it.—But the sorrow of the world worketh death. (2 Corinthians 7:10 b).—He here brings up as an illustration of what he had said, a striking contrast. To the divine sorrow of which he had spoken he now opposes the sorrow of the world, i. e., the sorrow which the ungodly multitude sometimes experience. As Thomas says: “as is the love so is the sorrow.” Τοῦκόσμου is the genitive, not of the object, i. e., a sorrow on account of worldly things or possessions, but of the subject, and it must be interpreted with reference to the contrast. It here signifies such a trouble about the apostle’s reproofs as would have produced no change of mind, but rather an irritability and a depression of spirit on account of wounded pride. As this could only harden the heart, it would lead to the death which was equivalent to perdition, and of course the reverse of salvation. Death is here not merely moral corruption, nor a fretting of one’s self to death, and above all not a mortal sickness or suicide. Comp. Elwert. Stud. der Wόrt. Geistl. IX. 1 135ff.—For behold this very thing, that ye were made sorry according to God, what great diligence it wrought in you (2 Corinthians 7:11).—The apostle here points out the way in which the good results of the sorrow had been exhibited among the Corinthians themselves. He shows by actual facts the proof (introduced by γάρ) of what he had been saying. Behold! (ἰδού) is here the utterance of a lively emotion. (Osiander). Τοῦτο indicates in advance and in a very emphatic manner, the matter on which he is about to speak, and the particulars of which he immediately proceeds to specify; and by αὐτό he designed to say that it was that precise thing, and that alone which had had such an influence. The simple dative ὑμῖν (in you) is more forcible than ε̇νὑμῖν would have been, and it must here be regarded as the Dative of relation, but closely approximating the dat. commodi. The substantive σπουδή signifies originally haste, then diligence, activity, and it is here applied to the case of discipline then in hand, in contrast with the previous inactivity (Starke: diligence in recognizing your defects, in complying with my exhortations, in removing offences, and in making up for past neglects).—Yea, clearing of yourselves; yea, indignation; The ἀλλά which is so many times repeated and with so much emphasis (comp. 1 Corinthians 6:11), is not only climactic, but corrective; equivalent to: yea, rather. He intended to say that σπουδή was perhaps too feeble a word to express the change which took place in their minds in consequence of their godly sorrow. Ἀπολογία here means, not their defence of the Apostle against his opponents, but in accordance with the context, their own justification before Titus and so before the Apostle. It signifies their answer to the charge of having apparently given countenance to sin, and their solemn disavowal of all fellowship with crime. It was not, however, their practical justification of themselves by the actual punishment of the offender, for this would have anticipated the idea expressed afterwards by ἐκδίκησις. The ἀγανάκτησις (indignation) was more than the ἀπολογία; for it implies that they were indignant that such a thing should have taken place among them, and perhaps at themselves that they had so long tolerated it and had been so careless of the honor of the church.—yea, fear; yea, longing desire.—The φόβος was in this case a fear not of Divine judgment and still less of apostasy, but of the Apostle lest he should come to them with a rod (1 Corinthians 4:21). (Heubner thinks incorrectly that it was an apprehension that new offences might arise, and hence that it signifies an increased watchfulness and jealousy of themselves). To this reference of the fear of the Apostle corresponds the succeeding word, in which he passes suddenly to the very opposite; for ἐπιπόθησις signifies not a joyful longing for their own improvement, but as in 2 Corinthians 7:7, an earnest desire to see the Apostle himself, whose love for them they felt even while he reproved them so severely, but to whom they turned with confidence as soon as they had removed the offence.—yea, zeal; yea, infliction of punishment.—If (with Bengel and Meyer) we divide the series of six things here mentioned into three pairs, in which ἀπολογία and ἀγανάκτησις relate to the Corinthians themselves; [φόβος and ἐπιπόθησις to Paul], and ζῆλος and ἐκδίκησις to the offender, we must regard ζῆλος as signifying something different from what it means in 2 Corinthians 7:7. It must signify in such a case a zeal to punish the offender, which attains its end in the ἐκδίκησις, but which is essentially a zeal in behalf of God, the Apostle’s authority, and the church’s reputation. Bengel makes both of these refer to the incestuous person, and with a rather excessive refinement he explains ζῆλο̇ς as pro bono animζ ejus, and ἐκδίκησις as contra malum ejus. Ἐκδίκησις is the infliction of punishment in consequence of which the law (in this case the Divine) is carried out, maintained and satisfied in its demands upon the holiness of God’s people. (The attempt to find in this place the Romish doctrine of satisfaction is purely arbitrary). If (with Osiander) we regard the members in the several pairs as contrasted with one another and rising in each case towards a climax, ζῆλος would be zeal for the Lord, etc., that the Divine law might be maintained through the ἐκδίκησις, i. e., the punishment of the guilty one. [Doddridge: “Some divines have taken it for granted that this verse contains seven distinct marks of true repentance, to be found in every sincere penitent, whereas these are not the characters of the temper of each, but of different persons in different circumstances, according to the part they respectively acted in the affair in question.”] The result of all this was—In every respect ye have commended yourselves as clear in this affair. (2 Corinthians 7:11 b).—In accordance with the lively and emphatic style in which the Apostle was here writing, this is introduced without an οὖν or anything of the kind. Ἐνπαντὶ signifies here in every respect. Συνεστήσατε is equivalent to ἀπεδείξατε (Osiander makes it a collateral idea in connection with what he had said of their conciliatory and just course). With this meaning the word has sometimes an accusative of the object in connection with it (Romans 5:8), sometimes ὅτι, and sometimes as in the present case an accus. cum infin. Ἁγνος signifies pure, innocent. In other places it is used with a genitive of the offence, but here it is with a dative signifying with reference to, like ἐλεύθεροςτῇδικαιοσύνῃ (free from righteousness) in Romans 6:20. Τῷπραγματι is a lenient general phrase to avoid anything more specific. Bengel: “He speaks indefinitely because the thing was unpleasant.” Neander uses this passage to confirm his view, that Paul has reference in this epistle nowhere to the case of the incestuous person, but to some individual in personal hostility to himself. [“If the case alluded to here had been that of the incestuous person, the Corinthians would have had no need of showing their innocence in the matter, for no one could have supposed them to be sharers in such a crime; but if we suppose that it was the case of some individual in personal opposition to the Apostle, we can easily see how they might have shared in this offence, and how they might have shown themselves clear in this matter.”] 2 Corinthians 7:12-16. Accordingly, though I wrote unto you, I did it not for his sake who had done the wrong, nor for his sake who had suffered wrong. (2 Corinthians 7:12 a).—We have here an inference [ἄρα, consequently] from the effects which his first Epistle had produced, with reference to his object in writing it. [The same phrase (εἰκαὶ) occurs here which had occurred thrice a few sentences before (2 Corinthians 7:8), and in the same sense: “Even though I wrote unto you; conceding, as I do, that I did so”]. His first inference, as to what must have been his motive in writing, is stated negatively as to what was not his object. From the results which he had recounted in their own experience, he wished them to infer what must have been his true design, and to give up all unfounded surmises with respect to his motives. He doubtless had reference to his design in writing that portion of the Epistle (1 Corinthians 5.) which treated of the matter in hand, and its contents; not to the severity or sternness of its spirit. The latter could not be alluded to without some more specific designation of his object. Meyer expresses it thus: “Though I have not been silent, but have opened my heart to you by letter on this matter.” From ἔγραψα we may readily conclude what verb must be supplied in the final sentence It must be, of course, “I wrote.” Neander thinks that ἔγραψα refers not to the first Epistle to the Corinthians, but to one which has been lost, and which, being confined to a single object, may have contained some severe expressions. Οὐκ—ἀλλά in this place also should not be enfeebled in its meaning, for the Apostle intended to say that his object in writing had not been to do justice to either of these persons, but one far higher. Meyer: “He must, indeed, have written in opposition to the wrong doer (ἀδικήσας), and to the same extent in favor of the injured one (ἀδίκηθείς), and yet the determining cause which had prevailed upon him and had induced him to write, was not the case of either of these persons, but the interest of the Church in general.” Most expositors understand ἀδικήσας as having reference to the incestuous person. But who is the ἀδικηθείς? We are not surprised to find it in the Masculine, for this seems demanded by its contrast with ἀδικήσας. The neuter=ἀδικήματος would have been not only inconsistent with grammatical usage, but without a consistent meaning, for he had nowhere said any thing of the crime itself. That the Corinthians were not meant is evident from the use of the singular number. He must, therefore, have meant either himself, who, as an Apostle, had been deeply injured by such a blot upon the reputation of one of his churches, or the father of the incestuous person whose conjugal rights had been so severely violated. But not only 2 Corinthians 2:5 (οὐκἐμὲλελύπηκεν), but the entire absence of any more particular designation (as ἐμοῦ), argues very strongly against the former view, even though we leave out the improbable extension some have given it, by reminding us that the man may have become especially vindictive against the Apostle, and may have drawn others into his party. In behalf of the second view we may also suggest that in other places ἀδικεῖσθαι is employed with reference to a violation of conjugal relations. As a reason for the silence of the other passages (1 Corinthians 5:2; 1 Corinthians 5:5 ff.) with respect to the father, we may remark that there was no occasion, or at least no necessity, for a reference to him there. If we make the word apply to him, the Apostle must be understood to deny that his object was to procure satisfaction for him. Neander regards the Apostle as the one who had received a personal offence (comp. 2 Corinthians 2:5). If this were so, Paul would have been the ἀδικηθείς, and we must understand him to deny that he wrote under the irritation such an injury might be supposed to produce. His real object in mentioning the matter at all in a letter to them, is brought before us in the next clause (which, according to the best established reading of the text, is):—but that your diligence in our behalf might be made manifest among you in the sight of God (2 Corinthians 7:12 b)—i. e., that your care for us and our work, to help us in accomplishing our aims and purposes, and in attaining the great objects of our mission, might be brought into the light (comp. 2 Corinthians 7:11; 2 Corinthians 2:9). Very likely πρὸςὑμᾶς appeared inappropriate in this place, and hence the various reading: ἡμῶντὴνὑπὲρὑμῶν. But he intended to say that by their means or under their direction, in the church and in consequence of their active exertions in this matter, their zeal in his behalf had become apparent, Πρός appropriately designates what direction this manifestation had taken. The purity or uprightness with which this had been done is pointed out by the phrase, in the sight of God, which evidently was intended to show the presence in which the manifestation took place. This intimates that they ought to make trial of their zeal as in the presence of God, and see to it that it was no mere pretence or vain form.—Therefore we have been comforted: but besides (ἐπί) our comfort we have rejoiced more abundantly in the joy of Titus (2 Corinthians 7:13).—He means here to say: On this account, i. e., since this was our object, and inasmuch as this object has been attained (2 Corinthians 7:9 ff.), we have been comforted. [The perfect indicates a continued comfort]. If we adopt the reading of the Receptus: ἐπὶτῇπαρακλήσειὑμῶνπερισσοτέρωςδὲ , we must take ὑμῶν not in an active sense, so that the idea would be: “in consequence of the consolation afforded me by you;” but in a passive sense, according to which the meaning would be: in consequence of the comfort you enjoyed after the temporary (πρὸςὥραν, 2 Corinthians 7:8) sorrow my epistle caused you, you have found peace by means of the repentance (μετάνοια). The word παράκλησις in this connection has the sense of comfort, not as Reiche maintains, of an admonition, as if Paul was comforted on account of the favorable result of the severe admonition he had given the Corinthians. But the best established reading places the δέ immediately after ἐπί; in consequence of which a new sentence must commence with ἐπί, and the preceding three words form a beautiful, impressive and brief sentence by themselves (Osiander). We may then regard ἐπί as indicating the condition or state in which the speaker was with the sense of either, in, or still better, in addition to what had been possessed before, as in Matthew 25:20, and Luke 16:26. That which is added is thus regarded as based or resting upon that which before existed (Passow 2 Corinthians 1:2, p. 1038 b). [There is a general unity, with a particular diversity, in the meaning which ἔπὶ bears in this section. Its general signification (upon, Jelf. §633, Webster, pp. 174–6) is obviously at the basis of each instance of its use, and yet this branches out into the special meanings, with a dative; on account of (2 Corinthians 5:7; 2 Corinthians 5:13, second time), in addition to (2 Corinthians 7:13, first time), and with a genitive: before, or in the presence of (2 Corinthians 7:14). Comp. Ellicott on 1 Timothy 5:19]. By περισσοτέρωςμᾶλλον (comp. 2 Corinthians 7:7) the Apostle intended to say that this new joy which is added to the previous comfort was more abundant than that of the comfort itself. The double comparative [for even in the positive a comparison is implied, and μᾶλλον (found also in Mark 7:36) therefore doubles it] increases the force of the expression. The object or reason for this joy was the joy of Titus. The latter is more definitely described when it is added—because his spirit had been refreshed by you all. (2 Corinthians 7:13 b).—These words are not dependent upon ἐχάρημεν, as if Paul rejoiced because the spirit of Titus had been refreshed; and of course they are not parallel with ἐπὶτῇχαρᾷ to define more distinctly what the joy of Titus was; but they are added to inform us with more precision respecting the cause of Titus’ joy. The position of ἀναπἐπαυται at the commencement of the clause shows that it was intended to be emphatic. We had ἀναπαύειν (they refreshed my spirit) once before, in 1 Corinthians 16:18. The source from which the refreshment came is pointed out by ἀπο. Another reason for his great joy on account of Titus’ joy he proceeds to assign in 2 Corinthians 7:14.—For if in anything I have boasted to him of you I was not made ashamed, but as we spake all things to you in truth, so also our boasting before Titus was found to be truth.—Ἒιτι does not signify any doubt as to the fact asserted, but it is a delicate mode of expression, common also in classical writers, and equivalent to ὅτι or ὃσον . The dative αὐτῷ should be explained by means of the λαλε͂ιν implied in καυχᾶσθαι. To the negative, I was not made ashamed, he adds the positive, our boasting was found to be truth. Ἐγενήθη, in its logical signification, means here: turned out to be, proved to be in accordance with facts. Ἐπὶ has here, as 1 Corinthians 6:1, the sense of, before, in the presence of. His object was, by way of comparison, to put by the side of what he had said to them what he had boasted before Titus when he sent him to Corinth and when he was anxious to encourage him. All that he had said to them and to him was now proved to have been said uprightly. The whole passage is apologetical (comp. 2 Corinthians 1:17 ff.). Πάντα must be taken in a general sense, and not applied merely to the favorable things he had been saying to them respecting Titus. Ἐνἀληθεἰᾳ has an adverbial signification (truly), as in Colossians 1:16 and John 17:19. One result of this confirmation of the Apostle’s boastful assertions, by means of Titus’ own experience among the Corinthians, is mentioned in ver.15, where it is said—And his inward affection is more abundant toward you while he remembers the obedience of you all.—Σπλάγχνα occurred before in chap 2 Corinthians 6:12. Περισσοτέρως, signifies: even more than before. Εἰςὑμᾶςἐστιν means that he was inclined or attached to them. In the phrase ἀναμιμνησκομένου, etc. (recalling to himself. Jelf. § 363, 6; Winer, § 39, 3), he refers to that which awakened and perpetually sustained his earnest love toward them, viz: their ὑπαποή, their obedience to Titus, his deputy to them. This sprung up in his heart when he learned the spirit with which they had received Titus, and it was sustained more especially by his lively recollection of the same event.—How with fear and trembling ye received him. (2 Corinthians 7:15 b.)—With respect to fear and trembling, comp. on 1 Corinthians 2:3. The phrase here signifies that profound reverence which they entertained for one who had been delegated by Christ’s own Apostle, and which made them exceedingly zealous lest they should fail in any duty they owed him (Osiander, Meyer). He concludes this section with an expression of his joyful confidence in them.—I rejoice that I have confidence in you in all things (2 Corinthians 7:16).—[He here gives the conclusion of the whole discussion. The first seven chapters had been occupied with subjects of a personal nature between him and the Corinthians, and as he is about to leave the subject] he gives the result at which he arrives in an abrupt appendix (asyndeton, without οὑν). The proper signification of θαῤῥῶ is simply, I am of good courage, not I may or can be of good courage, as if he had meant merely, that he had ground for encouragement. As in other passages θαῤῥεῶ is never construed with ἑν, when the object of confidence is referred to. Meyer is inclined to consider ἐν as expressive of the original cause or source of the confidence. (I am of good courage through you), and yet the analogy of πιστεύειν, ἐλπίζειν and other words of a similar meaning, favors the interpretation which seems here most natural, viz: with respect to the object: I have confidence concerning, with regard to, or in you. [Dr. Hodge thinks that if θαῤῥῶ cannot, when joined with ἐν, be rendered, I have confidence, “ἐν had better be rendered before: I stand full of confidence before you, i. e, in your presence,” and he refers to 1 Corinthians 14:11. He, however, with our author, prefers the translation given in the common English version. Stanley renders the passage: “I am bold through your encouragement.”] The comprehensive ἐνπαντὶ, which must here signify, in all things, forms a suitable transition to the following section. AND ETHICAL[1. The inspiration of the sacred writers was not inconsistent with the free exercise of all human feelings (2 Corinthians 7:8). Even assuming that Paul was fully inspired when he wrote the lost Epistle, he appears afterwards to have had misgivings respecting it, whether he had acted under an infallible Divine influence. Conceding this, we may still maintain that every thing which has been actually preserved as holy Scripture is infallibly true and Divine. Men who claimed to be, and doubtless were, infallibly inspired in all that concerned their official duties, seem to have been left to doubts and infirmities at other times and in their private relations, like other men (Galatians 2:11; 2 Corinthians 12:7; 2 Corinthians 1:15 f. Philippians 2:23). “Holy men,” whose free human faculties were “moved,” informed and directed to any requisite extent “by the Holy Ghost,” appear to have been allowed, even in the moment of inspiration, to express themselves according to their individuality of character. Paul’s style and manner of expression is unmistakably unlike John’s, or David’s, or Jeremiah’s. Different instruments of music, even when played upon by the same hand, and with equal power, will give forth each its peculiar tone. The most plenary inspiration was probably consistent with the freest possible play of human thoughts and feelings. Comp. Lee. on Inspiration, Chap. 6., p. 176ff. Hodge: “Inspiration simply rendered its subject infallible in writing and speaking as the messenger of God. Paul might doubt whether he had in a given instance made a wise use of his infallibility, as he might doubt whether he had wisely exercised his power of working miracles. He never doubted as to the truth of what he had written.”] 2. Godly sorrow, or the sorrow which is conformed to the will of God, is one which directs the man wholly and only to God. He is troubled because he has violated God’s law, has injured God’s cause, has dishonored God’s name, and has made himself utterly unworthy of God’s holy love. In this mere act of renouncing sin there must be involved such a radical change of heart as must remove all hindrances on man’s part to his participation in God’s salvation. It is in itself such a thoroughly purifying fire, as necessarily implies that its subject is in the way to everlasting life. By such a change of disposition, which every one must recognize as the work of God’s Spirit, he becomes susceptible of, and prepared for, every blessing proffered to him by Divine grace, and purchased for him by Christ’s expiatory work. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ XIV.—AN TO FINISH IT. MOTIVE: THE EXAMPLE OF THE ; AS A PROOF OF THEIR LOVE IN GIVING TO CHRIST. OF . OF TITUS, AND HIS IN THIS WORK 2 Corinthians 8:1-241 Moreover, brethren, we do you to wit of [we make known to you] the grace of2God [which has been] bestowed on the churches of Macedonia; How [om. how] that in a great trial of affliction, [was] the abundance of their joy [;] and their deep poverty 3abounded unto the riches of their liberality. For to their power, I bear [them] record,yea, and beyond their power they were willing of themselves; 4praying us with much entreaty that we would receive the gift, and take upon us [with much entreaty beseeching of us the favor (τὴνχάριν) and the participation in] the fellowship of the ministering 5to the saints. And this they did, [om. this they did] not as we [had] hoped, but first gave their own selves [their own selves gave they first] to the Lord, and unto 6us by the will of God. Insomuch [so] that we [have] desired Titus, that as he had7begun, 3 so he would also finish in you the same [this] grace also. Therefore, [But] as ye abound in every thing, in faith, and utterance, and knowledge, and in all diligence,and in your love to ussee that ye abound in this grace also. 8I speak not by commandment, but by occasion of [om. occasion of] the forwardness of others, and to prove9[to prove also] the sincerity of your love. For ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though [when] he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, that ye through his poverty might be rich. 10And herein I give my advice, for this is expedient for you, who have begun before [them] not only to do, but also to be forward ayear ago [to will last year]. 11Now therefore perform the doing of it; that as there was a readiness to will, so there may be a performance also out of [according to] thatwhich ye have. 12For if there be first [om. first] a willing mind, it is accepted [acceptable] according to that a man hath [it may have]and not according to13that he [it] hath not. For I mean not that other men be eased, and ye burdened:14But by an equality, that now at [burdened, but by an equality at] this time your abundance may be a supply for their want, that their abundance also may be a supply forYour want; that there may be equality: 15as it is written, He that had gathered much had nothing over; and he that had gathered little had no lack. But thanks be to God, which put [who is putting, διδόντι] the same earnest care into the heart of Titus for you. For indeed he accepted the exhortation; but being more forward, of his own accord hewent unto you. 18And we have sent with him the brother, whose praise is in the19Gospel throughout all the churches; And not that only, but who was also chosen of the churches to travel with us with this grace, which is administered by us to the glory of the same [om. same] Lord, and declaration of your [our] ready mind:20Avoiding this, that no man should blame us in this abundance which is administered21by us: Providing [for we provide] for honest things, not only in the sight of the Lord but also in the sight of men. 22And we have sent with them our brother, whom we have oftentimes proved diligent in many things, but now much more diligent23upon the great confidence which I have [he has] in you. Whether any do inquire of [As to] Titus he is my partner and fellow helper concerning you: or [as to] our brethren be inquired of, [om. be inquired of] they are the messengers of the churches, and the glory of Christ. 24Wherefore shew ye to them, and before the churches the proof of your love, and of our boasting on your behalf. [Since ye will show toward them proof of your love and of our boasting on your behalf, ye will show it before the churches]. AND 2 Corinthians 8:1-6.—But we make known unto you, brethren, the grace which God has granted among the churches in Macedonia.—The particle δε is here, as in many other places (1 Corinthians 7:1; 1 Corinthians 8:1; 1 Corinthians 12:1; 1 Corinthians 15:1), merely transitional, as the Apostle is passing to a new section; for although the present section is introduced by the concluding sentence of the last chapter, it is not directly joined with that sentence. [We may even question whether the word has not something of an adversative signification. He had confidence in the Corinthians, he had now sufficiently discussed the subjects already brought up, and he was now of good courage in their presence, but he had another matter to introduce to their attention. He wished to present before them the important matter of the collections which were occupying the attention of the Macedonian churches. Stanley endeavors to show that γνωρίζω has always in Paul’s earlier Epistles the sense of, to remind, to call attention to (1 Corinthians 12:3; 1 Corinthians 15:1; 2 Corinthians 8:1; Galatians 1:11), but that in his later Epistles and when the word is in the passive (including Romans 16:26) it has the signification of, to discover. The evidence he adduces hardly proves this, and we see no sufficient reason for making this word an exception to verbs of this termination, which are causative and carry out the act which is proper to the noun from which they are derived. According to this, the active meaning of our verb would be‚ to make or cause to know. The word is used in Ephesians 6:21 et al. What Paul wished to make known to them for their encouragement was [not a matter of which they were already informed, and needed only to be reminded of, but] the great liberality of those Macedonian churches (Philippi, Beroea, Thessalonica) among which he was then laboring, in contributions for the impoverished Christians at Jerusalem. He says that this was altogether beyond their ordinary ability, and he gives the honor of it to the Divine Author of every grace. In calling it the grace which God had bestowed on these churches, he does not mean that the donation was extraordinarily large, nor to magnify the generosity which had been enkindled, but simply to awaken admiration for the grace which had enkindled it. Nor are we to suppose that he wished to imply that this was a grace confined to those churches, for it was the same general grace which was acting in other churches, but was especially powerful among them. We should not supply an ἐμοί after δεδομένην nor take ἐν in the sense of a dative. The idea is that Divine grace (χάριςτοῦθεοῦ) was liberally communicated in the midst of these churches. Meyer confines the expression to the influence of grace in its distinctive character; as if the Apostle’s object had been to point out how gracious God had been in bestowing upon them such a generous spirit. [The word χάρις has in this section a special application doubtless to the gifts or contributions of the people, but these are so named always with reference to the Divine favor manifested in them. Every enlargement of heart among the people of a place may properly be characterized as a putting forth of Divine grace. And yet it requires some constraint to render the word as Stanley does in every instance of its occurrence in our section by the English term grace (see especially 2 Corinthians 8:16). In some instances it refers to human kindness, and some additional words (as τοῦθεοῦ) are used to define the subject of its exercise. Chrysostom suggests that Paul here makes prominent its Divine origin to avoid all invidious human comparisons, and to stimulate the Corinthians by the hope of being sharers in the common grace. We may also remark that the use of the word ἐκκλησίαι instead of the more common ἀδέλφοι suggests that even at this early period Paul was aiming at an ecclesiastical unity. He attaches an importance to this collection in the churches quite disproportionate to its immediate relations. He evidently views it as an expression of the common fellowship of Jewish and Gentile Christianity. As such he uses it and urges it to break down the false views and exclusive prejudices which had sprung up on both sides. He here informs the Corinthians that the Macedonian Christians who had suffered much from the Jews (Acts 18:5 ff.), had surmounted these prejudices. In this way, too, he lets them see that he had not been a disappointed man or forsaken of God in his recent labors, and that he had some other work than that of correcting abuses and vindicating his Apostolic authority].—That in a great trial of tribulation they had an abundance of joy, and their deep poverty abounded to the riches of their simplicity (2 Corinthians 8:2). The Apostle here specifies in greater detail what he had only asserted in 2 Corinthians 8:1. As his object was not to prove what he had there said, we must make ὅτι equivalent not to for, but to that. Critics, however, have been at a loss whether to construe this verse as two distinct sentences (supplying ἧν after περισσείατ. χάρ. αὐτῶν [Syriac, Vulgate, fuit], so that the idea shall be that in a great trial of affliction there was an abundance of joy); or as only one [our English version]. The insertion of ἦν to complete the first of these sentences is by no means unnatural; and if we attempt to unite ἡπερισσείατ.χάρ. αὐτῶν and ἡπτωχ. αὐτων, so as to form one subject of a sentence, the whole appears harsh and stiff. We prefer the former construction. We are partially induced to do so because the two subjects harmonize so well with the two predicates which are then presented, and because the other construction requires us to combine together two such contrary things in a single subject, and to make such a word as περισσεία the nominative to a verb so cognate with itself as ἐπερισσεύσεν. But these are not our main reasons for this preference. For even if, by adopting the latter construction, we must unite such expressions as περισσείατῆςχάρας and ἐπερισσεύσεν as subject and predicate (making the χάρα either the joyful preparation for the collection, as Meyer does, or the happy enjoyment of religion after conversion, as Osiander does), it seems nevertheless more appropriate to find expressed in the double subject of a single sentence those factors which complete one another in the περισσεύειν, and which unite and cooperate to prove that the grace of God and something higher than mere human kindness was moving the actors. This will be still more apparent as we proceed to explain the individual expressions. The first thing to which the Apostle draws attention is the condition or state of the congregations in which this liberality so abounded. They were in a great trial of affliction (ἐνπολλῇδοκιυῇθλἰψεως). This word δοκιμή which Paul uses in a number of other places in his Epistles (2 Corinthians 2:9; 2 Corinthians 9:13; 2 Corinthians 13:3; Philippians 2:22; Romans 5:4), in the sense of verifying or proving a thing to be real, has here rather the sense of subjecting a thing to a trial or test. It is true, indeed, that the verification or proof might be looked upon as the moral basis of their joy (Meyer), but it is more natural here to regard the affliction as that which tended to prevent their joy, and hence as showing that their joy must have been the result of a mighty faith triumphing over such hindrances. The δοκιμή, therefore, would be properly the trial which subjected them to a test. We allow, however, that in all other passages of the Apostle’s writings, the context requires that the word should mean, a verifying or proving a thing to be true. The idea is the same as that contained in 2 Corinthians 7:4, viz.: “in all our affliction.” With respect to this affliction, comp. 1 Thessalonians 1:6; 1 Thessalonians 2:14 ff.; Acts 16:20 ff; Acts 17:5. Περισσείατῆςχαρᾶς signifies, the overflowing or abundance of their joy, i.e., of the joy they had in the fellowship of Christ and in the assurance of their salvation (2 Corinthians 7:10; Philippians 4:4). This opened their hearts to contribute liberally for the relief of their brethren (comp. Melancthon in Osiander, p. 299), and so completely raised them above all thought of their persecutions and the poverty of their own means, that they went far beyond those who possessed a greater abundance. There was energy enough in this joyful faith to make deep poverty an abundant source of benevolent action. In the following words the joy and the poverty are represented as conspiring together for this result. The plural ἡκατὰβάθουςπτωχεία signifies properly a poverty which goes down to the very depths, and it presents us the figure of a vessel which is almost empty and into which we must reach down deep. And yet this vessel is made to overflow as if it were full. [Adam Clarke: “Poverty and affliction can scarcely ever be spoken of in an absolute sense; they are only comparative. Even the poor are called to relieve those who are poorer than themselves; and the afflicted to comfort those who are more afflicted than they are.”] It abounds εἰςτὸνπλοῦτοντῆςἁπλότητοςαὐτῶν. The word ἁπλότης signifies not exactly goodness of heart, benignity generosity, but the disposition which includes true charitableness, or gives it an external form. Comp. Romans 12:8 (ὁμεταδιδοὺςἐνἁπλότητι). It is the simplicity which is superior to all selfish considerations or interests, and confines its attention entirely to the wants of our brother, gives itself completely up to the will of God, delights to be the instrument of His merciful providence, and has no fears that God will ever allow such a one to be in want [comp. Trench Synn. 2 Part, p. 23]. The simplest explanation of ἐπερίσσευσενεἰς is that which makes it assert that the riches which in their simplicity they possessed, and the liberal contribution which in their simplicity they hail made, was in reality the overflowing stream of their deep poverty transformed by a joyful faith into an abundance. In 2 Corinthians 8:3-5 we have an explanation of this περισσεύειν. [Stanley remarks that “this sentence is completely shattered in passing through the Apostle’s mind. If restored to order it would be, ‘how that to their power and beyond their power, they voluntarily gave, not as we trusted the gift (or grace, τὴνχάριν, i.e., of their possessions), but their own selves’ ” But as the Apostle wrote this, his mind glowed more and more as it proceeded, and he attached to each phrase some additional thought, until the whole completely breaks down under the weight of extraneous matter.]—For according to their power, I bear witness, and beyond their power, of their own accord, with much exhortation beseeching of us the grace and fellowship of the ministration to the saints—(2 Corinthians 8:3-4). we might, indeed, regard ὅτι for as parallel to the same word in 2 Corinthians 8:2; “that they,” etc. But we think it better to regard 2 Corinthians 8:3 ff. as an explanation (a proof) of the way in which their deep poverty had abounded. Ὅτι would then be equivalent to, for. He proves that they gave κατὰδύναμιν by inserting μαρτυρῶ in a parenthesis, thus implying that he was well acquainted with their pecuniary ability. The reason they were so reduced in circumstances probably was, that they had been the victims of persecution and had found it difficult successfully to pursue their ordinary callings on account of the hatred of unbelievers. W. F. Besser: “They were poor for Christ’s sake, because the Macedonian Christians had been obliged to renounce all dishonest arts of trade (1 Thessalonians 4:6), and had been persecuted with the loss of employment, dismissal from service and apprehensions of complete destitution (Philippians 1:28). [Dr. Arnold mentions that Macedonia was the especial theatre of three successive civil wars not far from this time, that the people were heavily taxed by their conquerors, and that the mines from which much of their wealth was derived were in the possession of the government. So desolate had their fine country become, that it was fit only for pasturage. On the petition of the people for relief, they were transferred from the senatorial to the imperial jurisdiction that they might escape taxation. In the meantime Corinth, under the special favor of the emperors, since its revival under Julius Cζsar, had been growing rapidly in wealth. Comp. Stanley and Hodge]. And yet these Macedonian Christians had gone not merely up to, but beyond the ordinary measure of their power. Παρὰδύναμιν has the same meaning as ὑπὲρδύναμιν in the Textus Recep. (comp. 2 Corinthians 1:8), i.e., beyond their power (παρά signifies first, one thing going along by the side of another, then something not in contact with another, or rather something remaining external to another, and finally in opposition to another. Passow and de Wette). The only correct construction assumes that ἔδωκαν of 2 Corinthians 8:5 is the principal verb, to which all the other clauses form only a detailed qualification (and not αὐθαίρετοι with ἦσαν understood, since with this the preceding expressions would not agree; nor δεόμενοι with ἧσαν understood; nor yet καθὼςἡλπίσαμεν with ἑγένετο or ἐποίησαν understood). After these quantitative phrases (κατὰ ?—καὶπαραδύναμιν) we have those which are qualitative, i.e., describing the way or manner in which the gift was made: αὐθαίρετοι, freely, in opposition to over-persuasion or necessity [excluding all human, but not Divine influences]. Such an assertion is not inconsistent with what is said in 2 Corinthians 9:2 ff. For he does not, in this latter passage, say precisely that he had requested them at first to contribute, but that his boasting of them the year before had been the occasion which God had used (διὰθελήμ. θεοῦ, 2 Corinthians 8:5), for exciting the churches of Macedonia of their own accord to resolve upon their action, and then that the zeal of these churches had reacted upon the Corinthians. The proof and the more full explanation of αὐθαίρετοι is given in 2 Corinthians 8:4. “We prayed not them, but they us.” Chrysostom. Δέομαι, with the genitive of the person entreated, and the accusative of the thing asked for, occurs not unfrequently in the classic writers, (among whom, however, the accusative is always a pronoun). The object of the prayer was the χάρις, by which was intended the favor or kindness. This is immediately defined more particularly by the phrase κοινωνίοντῆςδιακον.—ἁγίους, which is connected with it by καί (“even”). The Apostle might have written: χάριντῆςκοινωνίας but this would have been too great an accumulation of genitives. Διακονία has here the sense of, ministration, support (comp. Acts 6:1; Acts 11:29); and it is the same as the λογία spoken of in 1 Corinthians 16:1, where εἰςτοὺςἁγίους is subjoined, and reveals what must have been the motive of the prayer here (Meyer). But the κοινωνία indicates a participation in the service. [The main idea of κοινωνια undoubtedly is that of a commonunity in sympathy, labors and responsibilities. But the ancient Greek expositors make especially prominent the idea that in all communications of assistance there was a mutual benefit. Thus Theophylact: “as if it were a common gain for both the givers and receivers;” and Oecumenius: “he calls almsgiving a κοινωνὶαν because those who give and those who receive are joint participants in a divine blessing.”] If we govern these accusatives (τ. χάρινκ. τ. κοινωνίαν) by ἔδωκαν (Bengel) the construction becomes unnecessarily confused, and we have no definition of the object of δεόμενοι. The true object of ἔδωκαν is easily understood from its own idea.—The free self-determination of the Corinthians is brought into very clear light here when it is said that they entreated with much importunity (μετὰπολλῆςπαρακλήσεως) as if it would be a favor or kindness to them, that they might have some part in the common work of relieving the impoverished members of God’s church (αγιους).—If we receive the reading of the Receptus: δέξασθαιἡμᾶς (after ἁγίους); the meaning of χάρις (the favor) would be: the contribution; and in the subsequent sentences it will be shown to consist of collections taken up also in other congregations.—Finally, the apostle says—And not as we expected but themselves they gave first to the Lord and to us by the will of God. (ver 5).—They gave beyond his expectations. [The middle and aorist ἠλπίσαμεν refers to the feeling as “belonging to the inner world of the agent” (Winer § 39. 3. Jelf. § 363. 5, 6), and shows in a lively manner how the apostle, after granting their prayer, had been busy in forming expectations and desires respecting the manner in which they would participate in the work. The verb expresses more than an anticipation (Crosby) or expectation (B. Bible Union); and it is not incorrectly translated in the English, the German (hofften), and the Vulgate (speravimus) versions. The positive reason for this surprise was, that “they gave their own selves.” This refers not to their conversion, which must have taken place some time before; nor does it imply that they then proposed themselves as the bearers of their alms; but it simply asserts that they surrendered themselves and all that they possessed to the disposal of God and the apostles. This was a self-dedication which involved a complete renunciation of all personal interests. They gave themselves, first to the Lord and then to His apostle; for they were anxious above all things thus to show their grateful love to Christ, their Redeemer. With this was inseparably united a desire to honor the man who had brought them to Christ and had originally suggested to them this charity (καί here means simply: and, and it implies the intimate connection of the two acts; comp. Exodus 16:31, Acts 15:28). Πρῶτον (first) is not designed to say that they did this before he asked them, for this had already been said in 2 Corinthians 8:4, and would require that πρῶτον should stand before ἑαυτούς; nor does it mean [as seems implied by the position of the word “first” in our Engl. A. V.] that they gave themselves before they gave their alms, and then left it to the apostle to determine the amount they should give; for to bring out such an idea something more needed to have been said. Moreover the Apostle does not mean that they gave themselves first to the Lord and then to him, making καί equivalent to ἔπειτα for not only would this imply an unsuitable separation of the two objects of the action, but no instance can be found in which καί stands for ἔπειτα. It is to be taken as in Romans 1:16; Romans 2:9 f. in the sense of a graduation. If anything is to be supplied it must be expressive of some relation to the objects of the bounty, [Osiander: “who were unknown and of no interest to them except through the Lord and the apostle.”] Διὰθελήματοςθεοῦ is added, not merely to explain καὶἡμῖν (as if he had said: God, who made me an Apostle, required them to give themselves to me also); but as a reason for the whole transaction, to show that they had been induced thus to surrender themselves by a regard for the will of God. Such a meaning of διά implies also the sense of κατά.—So that we have besought Titus, that as he had before begun, so he would complete among you the same grace (charity) also (2 Corinthians 8:6).—In this verse the apostle passes from the Macedonian to the Corinthian church, and shows how he was induced by what he saw among the former, to request Titus, etc. Εἰςτό does not designate here a continuation of what the Macedonians were praying, for there is no probability that they had any such design in their surrender of themselves. Nor need we even suppose that the apostle intended thereby to signify what was the divine will in the case. Εἰς merely expresses the product and the result; that which proceeds from or is reached by something (Passow, Εἰς v. 1, 4); it is therefore equivalent to ὥστε and is much the same as ἵνα. The thing requested, of Titus, and which is expressed here as if it was the object intended (ἵνα) was, that Titus would complete what he had commenced when he was before in Corinth, i.e., that he would complete this grace, this charity, or demonstration of their love. The καί before τὴνχάριν refers not to ταύτην, as if there was some other χάρις which Titus had begun and now Heeded to finish, but to this among other proofs of love which he was to bring to perfection. The προ in προενήρξατο has reference not to a priority to the παρακαλεῖν, nor to a priority to the efforts made to collect funds among the Macedonians and the earlier commencement of the Corinthian collection (for the latter idea would need to have been more distinctly expressed.) [Osiander: “but it probably contrasts the present journey of Titus bearing the epistle, with the former. Osiander also calls attention to the fact that “ἐναρχ. with its simple verb and several of its other composite forms, as ἐπαρχ., καταρχ., etc., is like the corresponding words connected with ἐπιτελεῖν, familiarly in use as sacrificial language. This would be appropriate to the idea here of a complete surrender of themselves to the service of the Lord and his church.] Εἰςὑμᾶς either must mean, with respect to you, or must be equivalent to ἐνὐμῖν, a concise expression for ἐλθωνεἰςὑμᾶς. The request must therefore refer to the time when the Apostle sent Titus again to Corinth with this epistle. [In 1 Corinthians 16:1, the Apostle had spoken of making collections for the saints, and it is probable therefore that Titus had then commenced a fund for this object among the Corinthians. This work had therefore been started in Corinth some months before it had been acted upon in Macedonia (2 Corinthians 5:10.). This request of the apostle to Titus could not refer to a former but to the present visit of Titus at Corinth. Chrysostom: “When the Apostle saw the Macedonians so vehement and fervent in all things even under great temptations, he sent Titus to quicken the action of the Corinthians, that they might be made equals. He does not indeed say this, but he implies it, and thus shows the greatness and delicacy of his love, which could not allow the Corinthians to be inferior.”] 2 Corinthians 8:7-15.—But as ye abound in every thing, in faith, and utterance, and knowledge, and all diligence, and your love to us, abound also in this grace (2 Corinthians 8:7). The ἀλλ’ is not intended here to have the sense of but (Ger. sondern) which separates the following from the former part of the sentence, and negatives it (q. d., I knew, however, when I made this request that I should not be disappointed, but that you would be distinguished in this matter also); nor has it the sense of, rather (let not Titus be under the necessity of exciting you to activity, but rather, etc.), for both of these ideas are arbitrary interpolations. It is a sudden turn of expression, abruptly leaving the topic before spoken of, and it is equivalent to the Latin, at (Ger. aber). As if he had said: “But we need not assign reasons of this kind: for as ye have been remarkable in all that ye have done, so will ye be in this exhibition of your benevolence.” (The emphasis should be placed upon ταύτη; in this, as in other manifestations of your charity). There are other places in which ἀλλά makes a transition to a summons (Mark 16:7; Luke 7:7; Acts 9:6; Acts 10:20). No longer insisting upon those encouragements which the conduct of others supplied, he turns now to them, and calls upon them to show in this business also the preλminence they had exhibited in other things. Ἳναπερισσεύητε is a circumlocution for an imperative [Vulg.: videte ut], as in Ephesians 5:33; Mark 5:23. (In like manner we have in the older Greek more frequently ὅπως with a conjunction [Webster, Synt., p. 129]. To the Apostle’s thought it is necessary that we should supply here a summons to duty. It is therefore not indispensable that we should connect this expression with 2 Corinthians 8:8, for it is rather contrary to Paul’s manner to begin his corrections of others’ misapprehensions with an ον̓λέγω (2 Corinthians 7:30; 1 Corinthians 4:14). He makes his appeal to their sense of honor as Christians; though it is self-evident that such general commendation must be understood with individual exceptions. Ἐνπαντί is a general phrase, which is explained immediately afterwards (Meyer: It is the general relation in which they had been distinguished for faith, etc.). Πίστις means here, not as in 1 Corinthians 12:9, but as in 2 Corinthians 1:24, a faithful adherence to Christian truth. Their abounding in this was their animation, assurance and activity in faith. With respect to λόγος and γνῶσις see on 1 Corinthians 1:5. [Hodge: “The former is Christian truth as preached, the latter truth as apprehended or understood]. The word σπουδή occurs in 2 Corinthians 7:11 f., and signifies an ardent zeal in the work of Christ. Πάση here means not that which is complete, but, in manifold aspects (it is extensive, not intensive). Ἐξὑμῶνἐνἡμῖν signifies that which proceeds from you, fastens upon us, and is received in our hearts; ἐν is not exactly equivalent to εἰς, Comp. 2 Corinthians 7:3. In 2 Corinthians 8:8 he meets in advance an objection which might be urged against the preceding demand—I say this not by way of commandment, but by means of the forwardness of others to prove the sincerity of your love.—A similar expression (οὐκατ̓ἑπιταγήν) is used in 1 Corinthians 7:6, and it here refers primarily to what he had said in the previous verse, but the positive details, beginning with ἀλλὰ etc., refer back to 2 Corinthians 8:1-6; for he must naturally have had the Macedonians in view when he spoke of the forwardness of others. Δόκιμαζειν does not signify here comprobare (to approve, or to establish by proof), nor is it equivalent to δόκιμονποιεῖν (to make display), but, as in 1 Corinthians 11:28, it signifies, to make trial, to test, or examine. The zeal of the Macedonians ought to stimulate the Corinthians to a similar zeal, and thus it should be proved whether their love was genuine. The participle δοκιμάζων depends upon λέγων, which should be understood again after ἀλλά (but I speak as one who is making a trial of, or putting to a test your love); comp. 1 Corinthians 4:14. To show that he was justified in this δοκιμάζειν. and that he had good reasons for making such demands upon their fraternal liberality, he adduces the example of Christ, in that great act of mercy in which he gave up all things for their sakes.—For ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though He was rich, yet for your sakes He became poor (ver 9). This reference is very significant; but in this connection forms a logical parenthesis; and while it was designed to incline them also to deny themselves for their brethren, it was intended to make their most self-denying charities appear utterly insignificant. The idea of an example is certainly subordinate in this place to that of the merit of Christ’s love, through which a corresponding love might be awakened in them. But the meaning is certainly not that Christ had made them spiritually rich (in love), and thus they had become possessed of the inclination to contribute and had been prepared to contribute of their (earthly) abundance (Olshausen). For πλουτεῖν cannot here signify that they were enriched in this sense, but that they possessed an abundance of those saving benefits which Christ had acquired for His people by His becoming poor (comp. 1 Corinthians 3:22; Matthew 5:5; Matthew 19:29). [The ancient Greek expositors took γινώσκετε as an imperative, and Chrysostom makes this prominent: “For, have in mind, says Paul, ponder and consider the grace of God, and do not lightly pass it by, but aim at realizing the greatness of it,” etc. The γαρ shows that this is inappropriate. The choice of this verb, and especially of the present, instead of the customary οἴδατε or εγνώκατε, seems strange, and almost implies a direct act of recognition, but it thus signifies that their apprehension of the fact must have been especially vivid and continued, instead of being indistinct and finished]. The Apostle reminds them of the spirit which, as they well knew, Christ had shown toward them, in that free (unmerited) act of grace, in which for their sakes He had become poor. To make this grace appear in a clearer light, its subject is here designated τοῦκυρίου, in which the Divine dignity of Christ and His absolute right to His people (ἡμῶν) is expressed. The way in which this gracious, self-renouncing love was exhibited to men is presented in the epexegetical sentence: that for our sakes He became poor. The example is placed before us in a light corresponding to the object the Apostle had in view, and substantially agreeing with what is said in Philippians 2:7. When He was rich (πλούσιοςὥν, part. imperf.), must refer to His existence before He came to this world, when He was in possession of the Divine glory and had an abundance of possessions; and not to His existence on earth as the God-man, as the λόγοςἒνσαρκος; for in the latter case the ὤν and the ἔπτώχευσεν would have been in the same tense. The reference is not to the state in which He was humiliated, but as the aorist certainly makes more probable, to the act in which He divested Himself of His riches. Although the idea of “becoming poor” is not involved in the meaning of the verb itself [for it may possibly signify simply “being poor.” Jelf. (§ 330, 2, a.): “Verbs in εύω have generally an intransitive signification of being in some state, or in possession of some quality”], yet the aorist by its own nature essentially involves the idea of an intransitive action or state, like ἐπίστευσα and similar words. Πτωχεύειν in classical authors has the same sense of to beg, then to be a mendicant, and in all cases it implies a deep poverty in which one has nothing. [Webster Synn. under πένης and πτωχός, p. 227]. The word itself has reference neither to the comparative nor to the absolute poverty of Christ during His earthly life (Matthew 8:20), but to the relation which the human life He then entered upon bore to the life of glory which He was leaving. We recognize in it a κένωσις, by virtue of which He renounced His riches, not merely in the use (κατὰχρῆσιν) but in the possession (κατὰκῖησιν) of them. His incarnation was a becoming poor in the strictest sense, an entrance upon the state of a human creature, who possessed nothing in himself, but had to receive everything from God. This act was even repeated in His earthly condition when He submitted to receive the ministrations of His grateful disciples that He might live respectably with His people and yet share in their necessities. That the appellation [κυρ. Ἰης. χρ.] would not be unsuitable to the being who thus became poor, is manifest from what is said of the same exalted personage in Colossians 1:15 f. The ethical signification of such an instance is just as natural as it is in Philippians 2:6 ff.; but certainly the idea of an example is not here exclusively presented (see above). Πλουτεῖν is found in 1 Corinthians 4:8. Ἐκείνου is emphatic. Although the act here spoken of was for all men, the Apostle makes it more impressive by using the words, for your sakes (δι’ ὑμᾶς), and so giving it a special reference to those who were to read his words.—And I give an opinion in this matter; for this is expedient for you (2 Corinthians 8:10 a).—In these words he proceeds to give the detailed statement which had been interrupted by the motive presented in 2 Corinthians 8:9. In contrast with the command he here presents his opinion as in 1 Corinthians 7:25. The collocation of the words shows that the emphasis should be placed upon this word. In the causal sentence which follows it, we must therefore understand this (τοῦτο) as referring to γνώμηνδιδωμι, although ἐντούτῳ must have referred back to the collection. As it stands at the head of the sentence it must be emphatic, but next to it the emphasis must be laid upon υμῖν. By means of συμφέρει (not=decet) he intended to say that this advice was better for them than a command would have been, inasmuch as they had for some time shown themselves willing to act as he wished without a command. Such persons Could derive greater moral advantage from a word of counsel than from any injunction. If τοῦτο is referred to the act of charity proposed, then σνμφέρει would have to be understood as relating to the benefits which result from every good action, to the advantages of a good reputation, and to the moral gain which might be expected, or finally the reward which God will give at the last day (promerere Deum).—Who began before them not only to do but also to be willing the last year. (2 Corinthians 8:10. b)—With οἵτινες (here, as in Romans 1:25, equivalent to, ut qui, such as), he introduces the reasons for saying that this was more profitable to them. It is remarkable that the doing should be mentioned before the willing, for we should naturally have expected the words in the reverse order. To attempt an inversion of the terms so as to make the sentence read: not only to will but also to do, would be arbitrary and plainly inadmissible. Some have endeavored to aid us by making θέλειν have the sense of, to be inclined to do; but this would make it inconsistent with 2 Corinthians 8:11, where, in the first place, the exhortation to complete the doing must of course be not simultaneous with, but subsequent to the willing (Meyer), or even the greater and more important of the two (Fritzsche); and secondly, the willing and the practical performance (ὅπωςκαθάπερκ. τ. λ.) are so related that we must infer that the willing was an independent thing, by itself, and not equivalent merely to an inclination to do, and it must be an inherent element in the doing. Others have suggested that ποιῆσαι might refer to an actual commencement of the collection before the time of writing, and θέλειν to the disposition to give still further (the infinitive present, which on the previous explanation seemed strange, would be appropriate to this). Others still make the meaning to be, that many had then actually begun to make contributions, while some had declined to do so, and 2 Corinthians 8:11 would then be a calling upon them to carry into actual execution their further intentions, and so to complete the collections which had been commenced. But on this interpretation we are obliged to give to θέλειν a fulness of meaning which it will not bear. The true way is probably that which makes the προ in προενήρξασθε refer, not to some time before the Apostle’s writing, but to the period of the collections in Macedonia. The idea then would be, that the Corinthians were in advance of the Macedonians, not only in the accomplishment, but also in the original purpose; in the preparation of those arrangements for the collection (comp. 2 Corinthians 9:2), the continuance of which seems implied in the infinitive of the present. Thus de Wette, Meyer, et al. Neander suggests, that “the will of a person may sometimes far exceed what he does, for he may desire to do more than he is able to perform. In this case the will is greater than the doing.” In ἂπὸπέρυσι (from last year), the Apostle doubtless referred to the mode of reckoning yearly time which was customary among the Jews, and was also common and well known in the churches. This differed very little from the Macedonian method, for both commenced their year in September. The Apostle means not a year ago, but “the last year,” i.e. in the present case probably six months before.—But now complete the performance of it also; that as there was the readiness to will so there may be the performance according to what ye have (2 Corinthians 8:11).—Having thus disavowed any wish to command but only to counsel them in this matter, he here proceeds to call upon them at once to complete a work which he regarded as no less important than at first. The νυνὶδέ in contrast with ἀπὸπέρυσι, as also the aorist imperative, implies that the matter was rather pressing and urgent.—The final sentence also implies that such a course would be becoming in them, for otherwise the doing would not correspond with the willing. But for willing (θέλειν) he now substitutes the readiness to will (προθυμίατοῦθέλειν), in which he more precisely expresses the completeness of their purpose (inclination, zeal), and encourages them with an avowal of his confidence. In like manner, for ποιῆσαι he substitutes ἐπιτελέσαι, which involves the entire performance or practical completion of what had been intended. The whole is more particularly defined by the subjoined phrase out of what ye have (ἐκτοῦἔχειν), which is further explained afterwards. The ἐκ designates in this place the particular respect in which a thing is to be measured or regarded. It has the sense of: according to, or in conformity with, as in such phrases as ἐκτῶνπαρόντων, according to what a man has; according to his ability. Either ῃ or γίνηται must be understood (an ellipsis of the subjunctive of εἰμι which is very uncommon with Greek writers). The Corinthians would probably have said: we would contribute to this cause very willingly; and he now tells them that their performance should correspond with such a willingness, and that they should contribute according to their ability.—Further light is thrown upon ἐκτοῦἔχειν in 2 Corinthians 8:12, where the Apostle defines how far an act of kindness is acceptable to God, viz.—For if there be the willing mind, it is acceptable, according to what it may have and not according to what it has not,—i.e. in proportion to the degree in which the free consent which the Apostle had all along presupposed, is actually in the heart. The preposition πρό in πρόκειται has here no reference to time [as is implied in the E. V.], but it simply signifies: lies before us, is present, is in sight. In the apodosis of this sentence προθυμία is the personified subject, and there was no need of inserting a τις. In εὐπρόσδεκτος, with ἐστιν understood, God was unquestionably in the writer’s mind. [Osiander: the word shows the sacrificial nature of the act.] Καθὸἐὰνἔχῇ. κ. τ. λ. signifies: according to that it [i.e. ἠπροθυμία: the disposition] may have, and not according to that it hath not, i.e. God judges of them and has pleasure in them according to that which they had, etc., he does not call for what is beyond our power; but the small gifts of the poor man who would gladly give more, are as acceptable as the large gift of one who possessed an abundance (comp. Mark 12:44).—Ἐάν(—ἄν) signifies that certain conditions are supposed to be out of the question in the case of him who has not, which are implied in the case of him who has.—The idea expressed in 2 Corinthians 8:12 is further illustrated by what he proceeds to say in 2 Corinthians 8:13, with respect to the object of the collection proposed. In the first place he declares negatively:—For it is not that others may be eased and ye burdened but by an equality—He means that his object was not that others (here: the Christians ,of Jerusalem, not other churches, with whom he had nothing to do) should be relieved while they might be, or would be burdened (with ἦ or γίνηται understood as in 2 Corinthians 8:11) i.e. that others should not be called upon while they were burdened with such contributions. These were probably expressions made use of by those who disliked him at Corinth.—He then declares positively, that the principle from which the whole proceeding was derived, or the rule by which the whole scheme was governed (ἐκ in 2 Corinthians 8:11) was, that there might be an equality. Of course his aim was to adjust an even measure to all. These words have been variously construed and punctuated. The colon may be placed either after θλῖψις, or after ἰσότητος; and in either case the subject alluded to will be τουτο (=ἡλογία) γινεται (1 Corinthians 16:2). According to the second mode of constructing the sentence, ἵναγίνηται (that there should be) must be understood in connection with ἀλλ̓ἐξἰσότητος. Or this whole sentence may be joined with what follows, without any words understood to complete the sense thus: but according to the law of equality your superabundance at this present time may extend (i.e. γίνεται) to their deficiency (Meyer). This construction is the easiest, inasmuch as very little needs to be supplied to complete the sense. But Osiander very correctly remarks that the sentence would thereby become much extended (two sentences with ἵνα before and after the principal sentence, and yet a third would be introduced by an ὅπως in connection with ἐξισότητος) notwithstanding its occurrence in the midst of a context more than usually lively and sententious. We therefore decide in favor of placing the colon after ἰσότητος. The word ἅνεσις probably meant, especially in the mind of a murmuring contributor, release, loosening from restraint, a careless freedom of enjoyment; whereas θγῖψις, on the other hand, meant that oppression of care which was the result of giving beyond their means. Ἰσοτης has not only the sense of equality, but also of equity or righteousness. Both significations here amount to very much the same thing. The point on which the Apostle speaks is not the equality between the gift and the ability of the giver, but the equality which should prevail between the givers and the receivers. The contribution should be so adjusted, that it might promote a general equality; that each one should have what he needed, without a superfluity in one portion of the church and a deficiency in another, but a communion of Christian love.—At the present time your abundance may extend to their want, that their abundance may also extend to your want, that there may be equality. (2 Corinthians 8:14)—Ἐντῷνῦν **καιρῷ is not to be connected with what precedes, but it intimates that a time might come when the state of things would be reversed. It does not apply to an earthly in opposition to a heavenly state (comp. 2 Corinthians 8:14). The words to be understood must be derived from the leading sentence, and they should be γίνεται or ἵναγίνηται, signifying: should be; or, in this place: should become, or should amount to. According to common usage, γίνεσθαιεἴςτι would signify to become something, or to arrive at a place, and εἴςτινα would signify to fall to one’s share (thus Galatians 3:14). Here the deficiency is, as it were, local, and it is to be reached by the superfluity. The. word ἐκεῖνοι applies to the same persons as ἄλλοίς. Not only in ver 13, but also in 2 Corinthians 8:14, the περίσσευμα and ὑστέρημα must be understood of earthly possessions (the Catholics understand them of spiritual blessings). Gentile Christians had already been made partakers of the spiritual benefits of the Jews, comp. Romans 15:27. Nothing but a preconceived prejudice could have suggested the idea that Paul was here attributing to the Jewish Christians the performance of works of supererogation. With respect to the possibility of such a state of things as the Apostle here supposes, there is no necessity of referring what he says to any event immediately connected with Christ’s advent as, e.g., the restoration of Israel, for when that event shall take place we can hardly imagine that such inequalities of condition will exist; but we refer the words rather to those catastrophes which were expected on the near approach of the Parousia, when such a change of circumstances might be possible (comp. Osiander). If we adopt Meyer’s method of constructing the text, the phrase, that there may be equality (ὅπωςγἐνηταιἰσότης) must refer exclusively to the member of the sentence which immediately precedes it (ἳνα—ὐμῶνἰσότης, in order that if such an event should take place, there might be an equality between those who have much and those who have little); but if the text be arranged according to our construction, it must be referred to the two members of the sentence which precede it. This principle of equalization is illustrated in 2 Corinthians 8:15, by a quotation from the Scriptural account of the collection of the manna in Exodus 16:18.—As it is written, He that gathered much had nothing over, and he that gathered little had no lack.—The quotation is from the Sept.; only the position of the clauses in the sentence is reversed, and συλλέξας is taken from the context of the passage there for the completion of the sentence ὁτὸπολὺ ?—ὁτὸὁλίγον. The meaning is: Every one found in the collection what was proportioned to his wants; he who had collected much [who had the most] had nothing more, and he who had collected [the] little, had nothing less than what he needed. [On the ellipsis and the force of the article here, S. Winer § 66. 4, and Bengel]. God had thus given his sanction, when he supplied the wants of His people by miracle, to the law of equality, viz., that no portion of the people was to have a superfluity while another portion was destitute. [Wordsworth: “By the command of God, the manna, which the several members of the same tent (συσκήνιοι) had gathered, was to be put together (Sept.: συνηγμένον, συλλελεγμένον) into one common stock, and then be meted out with an homer. It was so ordered by Almighty God, that when the whole was measured out, each person had exactly an homer, neither more nor less.” “By ordering it to be measured out,” says Theodoret, “God provided that none should abuse his gift through selfishness,” and “by turning all superabundance into worms,” says Jerome, “He showed that what God gives, should be for the equal enjoyment of all.” Dr. A. Clarke, in his comment on Exodus 16:18, endeavors to show that each Israelite collected as much manna when he went forth to gather it as he he was able; but that on bringing it home and measuring it, if he found he had a surplus, he would send it to the supply of some larger family which had not been able, during the limited time, to collect enough, or which might be unable, through sickness or infirmity, to collect for itself. If, however, this distribution were not made, it could not be enjoyed, but it soon turned to corruption. A more striking illustration of a true Christian communism could scarcely be found; according to which, as Neander suggests, the distinction of property is abolished not by violence, but is equalized by the power of love]. 2 Corinthians 8:16-24. But thanks be to God who is putting the same zeal for you into the heart of Titus.—[Having thus spoken of the example of others and of the principle of the collection] the Apostle now comes to speak of the persons whom he had sent to Corinth on the business of the collection. He first commends (2 Corinthians 8:16-17) the zeal of Titus in their behalf, but he gratefully gives the honor of awakening this zeal in Titus’ heart, to God. The words, the same (τὴναὐτήν) cannot mean the same earnest care with that which the Corinthians had felt, since ὑπὲρὑμῶν shows that they themselves, their honor, their welfare, and the advantages which would result from such a charity (comp. 2 Corinthians 9:8 ff.) were the objects of Titus’ activity and care. Nor can it mean the same earnest care which the objects of their emulation, i.e., the Macedonian Christians, had exhibited, or the saints at Jerusalem might exhibit; for such a reference would have required a more distinct mention. It only remains therefore that we should refer it to the Apostle himself (the same earnest care which I have shown). The phrase διδόντιἐν is a concise but significant expression (comp. 2 Corinthians 8:1). The present participle implies that the Divine influence and the consequent zeal was continued [and it was “as though the Apostle had before his eyes the working of Titus’ eagerness” Stanley]. The evidence of this zeal is given in 2 Corinthians 8:17.—For he accepted indeed the exhortation; but being himself more zealous, he has gone of his own accord unto you.—The τὴνπαράκλησιν is the exhortation which had been mentioned in 2 Corinthians 8:6. Having spoken of the delicacy and discretion which Titus had shown in giving so much time and attention to the matter involved in the Apostle’s request (τὴνπαράκλησινἐδέξατο), he is careful to notice that Titus’ decision was entirely spontaneous and was not dependent upon his suggestion. These various aspects of the case are brought forward by means of such particles as μέν and δέ, which are not of the same force as οὐμόνον—ἀλλὰκαί, since no climax or gradation of the thought was intended. Σπουδαιότερος implies that Titus was too zealous of himself to need any suggestion from another. [The comparative signifies either, more zealous than the Apostle, or more than the Apostle was to prompt him, or more than he had been before the suggestion. Probably the idea was, more zealous to engage in the service than I to put him upon it (Bloomfield)]. Both here and in subsequent parts of the Epistle, ἐξῆλθεν is used in the preterite, as was common in a concise style, because it anticipated the moment when the Epistle should be in the hands of the Corinthians. The whole idea intended was the following: Titus had not indeed opened his mind to Paul, and he had modestly allowed the Apostle to present to him the request to undertake this work; and yet it was evident that he needed no such request, inasmuch as his own free will was already inclined to undertake the affair. He now passes from Titus to those deputies who accompanied him. These are not named (2 Corinthians 8:18 ff.), but they are shown to be persons well adapted to their mission. The one first spoken of is designated by a reference to some work in which he had already been employed—And we sent with him the brother whose praise is in the Gospel throughout all the churches (2 Corinthians 8:18): οὑὁἔπαινοςἐντῷεὐαγγελίῳδιὰπασῶντῶνἐκκλησιῶν, i.e., whose reputation in the promulgation of the Gospel is spread throughout all the churches. His reputation was universally recognized wherever churches had been planted. The importance of such a commendation was proportioned to the value one might attach to the opinion of all these churches; but to give force to this, the Apostle subjoins another reason for his commendation in connection with the business now in hand. This was the confidence which the (Macedonian) churches had exhibited when they chose him to accompany the Apostle in his journey to Jerusalem, with the contributions they had made (and not that only, but who was also appointed by the churches as our fellow traveller with this grace which is ministered by us (2 Corinthians 8:19). Instead of χειριοτονηθείς we should naturally have expected the accusative. It is to be construed as if the Apostle had previously written: who is praised, or, not only is he praised, but has also been chosen, etc. [οὐμόνονδεἐπαινούμενοςἐστιν, etc. ἀλλὰκαὶ ?—comp. Romans 9:10). The choice must have been made, either by the overseers of the churches on the nomination of the Apostle, or, as ὑπὸτῶνἐκκλ. rather intimates, by the general body of the members themselves when they were assembled in their churches, and (as the original meaning of the word perhaps implies) showed their choice by the uplifting of hands [Osiander suggests that the Apostle speaks of the choice of the people as though it were the only thing essential to the act. It is not an election to a permanent office, for these were only ἁπόστολοιἐκκλησιῶν for a temporary purpose, and yet the case shows how thoroughly the democratic element pervaded the ecclesiastical life, especially in Greece]. The preposition ἑν specifies the object of the proceeding (in this case of the journey), in this work of charity, in the management of this benevolent enterprise. Although σύν has considerable authority in its favor, it is probably a gloss; but if it be accepted as genuine, χάρις (the grace or charity), in connection with it, would signify the money contributed, Διακονεῖν is used here as in 2 Corinthians 3:3.—For the glory of the Lord and the manifestation of our zeal. (2 Corinthians 8:19 b).—This clause expresses the object they had in view and must not be joined with what immediately precedes it; inasmuch as καὶπροθυμίανἡμῶν (which must here be taken as equivalent to: for the showing of our earnestness) would be plain enough by itself, and it would therefore seem feeble. Its proper place seems rather to be in connection with the main sentence commencing with χειροτονηθείς. It would follow from this choice and the coφperation of these men that the honor of Christ and the inclination of the Apostle (as well as of Titus) would be enhanced, inasmuch as the burden of cares spoken of in 2 Corinthians 8:20, would be lightened and the whole business would be more easily accomplished. If we read αὐτοῦ before τοῦκυρίου, the effect will be to make κύριος more prominent, in contrast with his instruments.—The honor of God would be promoted in proportion to the degree in which his love was made known among the churches and in which he as their head inspired them with energy and a common active sympathy in this work; and because all danger of suspicion with respect to the management of the mission would thus be obviated.—Avoiding this; that no one should reproach us in this abundance which is ministered by us (2 Corinthians 8:20).—In this verse he makes a more direct reference to such suspicions. Στελλόμενοι must be connected with συνεπέμψαμεν in 2 Corinthians 8:18 (not with 2 Corinthians 8:19 instead of στελλομεθαγαρ). In this way 2 Corinthians 8:19 forms a parenthesis. Στέλλεσθαι does not signify to depart, as if τοῦτο were equivalent to ἐπὶτοῦτο, but rather, to attend to this matter especially. And yet such a meaning does not here seem quite appropriate to the context. It has also the sense of: to withdraw one’s self (2 Thessalonians 3:6), to guard against something, to shun or to avoid it, comp. Malachi 2:5 Sept. (The reading ὑποστελλόμενοι is manifestly a gloss). [The Vulg. is: “Devitantes hoc,” and Erasmus suggests that the word is taken from nautical language, and refers to the act of sailors when they take in sail and turn their course lest they should strike upon rocks. Such is the meaning in the only other passage where the word is used in the New Testament, 2 Thessalonians 3:6. Paul about this time was making several voyages by sea, and was writing to a maritime people. Comp. Acts 20:20]. Τοῦτο is an emphatic word in anticipation of what was about to be said. Μωμεῖσθαι (to reproach) has been used before in 2 Corinthians 6:3, and it signifies here, the imputation that he had embezzled the funds, or that he had been unfaithful to his trust in the transaction of his business. Ἀδρότης presents us the idea of an abundance of the charitable contributions (ἁδρός is applied to fruits, children, trees, so as to mean that they are ripe, large, big; ἁδρὸνπινεῖν is to drink in full draughts) not of the χάρις in 2 Corinthians 8:19, nor of the zeal of those who contributed (Rόckert). Ἐν has the sense of: in, and has reference to the object or reason for the reproach. Meyer: in puncto.—For we provide for what may be honorable not only in the sight of the Lord, but also in the sight of man (2 Corinthians 8:21).—He here gives us the principle by which he was guided in this matter (γάρ makes what follows a reason for στελλόμενοι). Προνοεῖν is equivalent to ἐπιμελεῖσθαι, and signifies to bear care, to be anxious about; it is generally found in the middle voice, as in Romans 12:17; Proverbs 3:4 (προνοοῦκαλὰἐνώπιονκυρίουκαὶἀνθρώπων), a passage which the Apostle evidently had before his mind when he wrote. The Receptus therefore has προνοούμενοι, a combination of this passage and the original reading. In cod. C. (Tischendorf) we have προνοούμενοιγάρ. Καλά signifies honestas, that which is morally beautiful, noble, honorable. As he took care, to appear blameless and becomingly in the sight not only of that God before whom he was always manifest (2 Corinthians 5:11), but of men, he had adopted this precautionary measure.—And we have sent with them our brother whom we have many times and in many things have proved diligent but now much more diligent for the great confidence he has in you (2 Corinthians 8:22).—He here proceeds to commend the other deputies. He says συνεπέμψαμεναὐτοῖς; and in 2 Corinthians 8:18 he had said μετ̓ἀυτοῦ; but both expressions have the same object. In 2 Corinthians 8:18 the συν in συνεπέμψαμεν cannot refer to Timothy (we have sent with another). When he says in this place τὸνἀδελφὸνἡμῶν he no more means a natural brother of his, than in 2 Corinthians 8:18, a natural brother of Titus. In both instances he implies a relationship not merely as Christians but as united in the same office. He represents him whom he had sent with Titus and the others, as one whom he had often found to be zealous in many things but whom he had now found much more zealous (than before), inasmuch as his great confidence in the Corinthians had intensified his earlier zeal.—The various opinions which have been advanced with respect to these two men are more or less unworthy of confidence. Mark, Luke, Epenetus, Trophimus, Apollos, Silas, Barnabas and others have been mentioned as each likely to have been one of them. For the last three a subordinate position, as associate deputies with Titus, would not seem appropriate. In favor of Luke is the subscription to our Epistle, but we know that this has no original authority. In behalf of Mark is sometimes quoted the expression, ἐντῷεὐαγγ. in 2 Corinthians 8:18, but a written Gospel could not have been here meant. W. F. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ XIV.— TO GIVE , AND ; THE DIVINE UPON THEM AND RESULT OF THE WHICH WOULD FOLLOW. 2 Corinthians 9:1-151 For [indeed, μὲν] as touching the ministering to the saints, it is superfluous for meto write to you: 2For I know the forwardness of your mind, for which I boast of you to them of Macedonia, that Achaia was ready a year ago [from last year, ἀπὸπέρυσι]; and your zeal [the zeal which proceedeth from you, δἐξὑμῶνζῆλος] hath provoked very many [the majority, τοὺςπλείονας]. 3Yet have I sent the brethren, lest our boasting of you should be in vain in this behalf; that, as I said, ye may be ready: 4Lest haply if they of Macedonia [any Macedonians, Μαχεδόνες] come with me, and find you unprepared, we (that we say not, ye) should be ashamed in this same confident boasting 5[with respect to this confidence]. Therefore I thought it necessary to exhort the brethren, that they would go before unto you, and make up beforehand your bounty, whereof ye had notice before, [which I have before announced, προεπηγγελμένην]4 that the same might be ready, as a matter of bounty, and not as of covetousness. 6But this I say [as to this], He which soweth sparingly shall reap also sparingly; and he which soweth bountifully [with blessings, ἐπ’ εὐλογίαις] shall reap also bountifully [with blessings]. 7Every man according as he purposeth [hath purposed, προῇρηται] in his heart, so let him give; not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful 8giver. And [But, δὲ ?] God is able to make all grace abound toward you; that ye, always having [having always] all sufficiency in all things, may abound to every good work: 9(As it is written, He hath dispersed abroad; he hath given to the poor: his righteousness 10 remaineth forever. Now [But, δὲ ?] he that ministereth seed to the sower both minister bread for your food [supplieth seed to the sower and bread to the eating, will supply], and multiply your seed sown, and increase the fruits of your righteousness:) 11Being enriched in everything to all bountifulness [simplicity, ἁπλότητα], which 12causeth through us thanksgiving to God. For [Because, ὅτι] the administration of this service not only supplieth the want of the saints, but is abundant also by many 13 thanksgivings unto God; While by the experiment of this ministration they glorify God for your professed subjection [since they glorify God on account of the proof which this ministration gives of the subjection which flows from your confession] unto the gospel of Christ and for your liberal distribution [the simplicity of your communion, ἁπλότητιτῆςχοινωνίας] unto them and unto all men; 14and by their prayer for you, which long after you for [with prayer also for you, as they long after you on account 15of] the exceeding grace of God in you. Thanks be unto God for His unspeakable gift. AND 2 Corinthians 9:1-5. For indeed concerning the ministering to the saints, it is superfluous for me to write to you.—The use of γάρ, connecting what is here said with the preceding chapter, and περὶμέν (instead of περὶδέ), shows that this chapter could not have been a distinct Epistle, and that the Apostle was not here beginning as it were a new subject (in consequence of a long interruption). It is possible indeed that he had been reviewing what he had written, and now saw that something was needed to complete his thought. However this may have been, he now introduces with most refined delicacy a number of additional particulars, with the remark that he really had no need of writing to them with respect to the collection, for he was well aware of their readiness of themselves. The connection seems to be: “I have no occasion to write to you with reference to a ministration to the necessities of your brethren, but the point to which I would draw your attention is, a kind reception of the messengers from me.” If μέν should be taken as a solitarium [i.e., without a δέ following it], its design must have been to give special prominence to the idea of the ministration (διακονία), in contrast with his commendation of the persons who were to have charge of it. But we see no reason why the δέ in 2 Corinthians 9:3 should not be construed in correspondence with this μέν. This ministration, as in 2 Corinthians 8:4 (Meyer), signifies, a service of love, including the idea of something which was, a just debt, (a debitum ministerium), Romans 13:8; Hebrews 6:10; 1 Peter 4:10, in conformity to Christ’s example, Matthew 20:28, comp. Galatians 5:13. Περισσόν means superfluous, for the object I have in view. [What does the Apostle mean was superfluous ? It was either: 1. The writing on the whole subject, notwithstanding the fact that he had written on it and was about to write more; 2. The writing, in contrast with his sending the brethren (2 Corinthians 9:5); 3. The writing on the collection itself in contrast with his having written to commend the brethren, and his being about to write of the manner and spirit of the collection]. De Wette enfeebles the expression by making it mean: “I regard it as superfluous.” Τὸγράφειν is here the subject of the sentence.—For I know your forwardness of which I am boasting concerning you to the Macedonians, that Achaia was ready from last year (2 Corinthians 9:2 a). The mention of this readiness (προθυμία) was not a mere fiction of the Apostle for present effect. The commencement of the collection the preceding year (comp. 2 Corinthians 8:10 f.) had shown that it was an actual fact, and that the Corinthians only needed encouragement to complete the work as soon as possible. The use of the present tense (καυχῶμαι) shows that the Apostle was still in Macedonia. Ἥν is an accusative with καυχῶμαι as in 2 Corinthians 11:30; Proverbs 27:1. The subject matter of his boasting was that Achaia had been ready the preceding year. The word Ἀχαΐα intimates the extent of his boast and the general prevalence of the Gospel throughout the province which was so called. It shows how confident he was that the whole province was virtually the Lord’s (comp. Osiander). The Apostle implies that they were already prepared to commit their contributions to his hands. On ἀπὸπέρυσι, comp. 2 Corinthians 8:10. He adds—and your zeal hath provoked the majority of them. (2 Corinthians 9:2 b.)—The phrase ὁἐξὑμῶνζῆλος properly signifies the zeal which proceeded from you, and is a kind of attraction [Winer’s Idioms, § 63]; as if he had said, the zeal which commenced with you, hath provoked, etc., comp. Matthew 24:17 et al. The majority (τοὺςπλείονας) indicates that only a small part of the Macedonians remained unaffected by it. In relation to this matter, comp. 2 Corinthians 8:3.—But I have sent the brethren, that what we have boasted concerning you might not be made vain in this respect; that as I said, ye may be ready (2 Corinthians 9:3). The Apostle intended here to say, that while he had no need to write any thing with reference to the collection itself, inasmuch as he well knew that the Corinthians were entirely willing to contribute, he had nevertheless sent the brethren (chap. 16ff.) that they might have every thing in actual readiness, and that he might not be ashamed of what he had been confidently boasting of them among the Macedonians. Neander: Paul had doubtless said in Macedonia that the Corinthians were prepared to contribute the year before; this had inflamed the zeal of the Macedonians, and he now felt that it was needful to exhort the Corinthians not to disappoint his hopes concerning them. The words τὸκαύχημα—ὑπὲρὑμῶν are in themselves general, and include everything of which he had boasted of them, but it is afterwards confined to the matter in hand by ἐντῷμέρειτούτῳ (in this respect). This limitation of the possibility of failure to that single point shows how confident he was that his general boast respecting them could not be broken down. Estius very properly calls this “acris cum tacita laude exhortatio.” That ye may be ready contains the positive, and lest our boasting should be in vain, the negative part of this sentence.—Lest perchance, if any Macedonians should come with me and should find you unprepared. (2 Corinthians 9:4 a)—Ἲνα is here used as in Romans 7:13, and twice in Galatians 3:14. The anxiety he had just intimated he here expresses more definitely, but in a very delicate manner, by the adverb μήπως, which is in this place equivalent to ne forte in 2 Corinthians 9:4. He means, if any Macedonians should come as his companions (2 Corinthians 1:16). [The persons here spoken of are evidently not those whom he had described in 2 Corinthians 7:16-16 and 2 Corinthians 9:3, and hence some have concluded that these last could not have been Macedonians. It was yet uncertain whether any would accompany him. But as Corinth was then a great commercial as well as religious centre, some might reasonably be expected to go]. On ἡμεῖς comp. 2 Corinthians 9:3. We, not to say you, should be put to shame in the matter of this confidence. (ver.4 b).—We are not to regard this little parenthesis (we say not ye, ἵναμηλέγωμενὑμεῖς), as a mere pleasantry, but on the other hand as a delicate attempt to stimulate their feelings of self-respect; since the shame would indeed be theirs if the Apostle’s expression of confidence in them should not be borne out in fact. W. F. Besser:—“In this little sentence we may discover the extreme delicacy of Paul’s feelings, and the affectionate civility which characterized his intercourse, but which are especially prominent in this most personal of all his Epistles.” The ὑπόστασις is simply the confidence which had been expressed in the boasting. Comp. 2 Corinthians 11:17; Hebrews 11:1, and frequently in the Sept., but the word has not here precisely the sense of, business, thing. The Corinthians would be put to shame should they not come up to what the Apostle confidently expected of them. [He had stimulated the Macedonians by saying that the Corinthians had begun the collection, and then when he found that the Corinthians had not finished their contribution according to his expectation and his boast of them, he very properly stimulated the Corinthians by telling them that the Macedonians had completed their collection. He had boasted that the Corinthians were “prepared” the last year for the collection, and yet now he found it necessary to send deputies to have them “prepared” for delivering it up]. In all this there is surely no ground for suggesting that Paul was acting a cunning part, or was conforming to the shrewd policy of the world (Rόckert); or that he here exhibits something of human infirmity (de Wette) Comp. Meyer, Osiander. And yet we may properly concede and maintain that he here shows most consummate art.—I therefore thought it necessary to exhort the brethren that they would go before to you, and make up beforehand the bounty I have already promised (2 Corinthians 9:5 a).—The Apostle here brings out with more particularity the business of the deputies he was sending. Οῦν, in accordance with what he had just said, signifies, in order to prevent our being ashamed. The πρὸ in προέλθωσιν signifies, before the arrival of myself and the Macedonians. Προεπηγγελμένην signifies, before promised by me (comp. 2 Corinthians 9:2 ff.) not announced to you [as in the Eng. vers.] or promised by you. [Dr. Hodge thinks it means what the Corinthians had promised. We are nowhere told of such a promise, though the confident expectations of the Apostle had some reasonable foundation. As we suppose this to have been his information respecting them, and as we are informed of the Apostle’s promise to the Macedonians respecting them, we prefer to refer προεπηγ. to what he had said in 2 Corinthians 9:2. The thrice repeated προ (in composition) shows the Apostle’s extreme forethought]. Ταὐτηνἐτοίμηνεὶναι designates the result aimed at in the προκαταπτίσωσιτὴνεὐλογίαν—that the same may be ready in the manner of a blessing, and not as a covetousness. (2 Corinthians 9:5 b.)—With this designation of their gift or their benificence as a εὐλογία in the sense of an act of love produced by Divine grace, after the example of God and directed to the welfare of men, in which one gives cheerfully and with full hand, according to ability, he now connects an admonitory hint, that it should be so given as to appear a blessing, and not an act of covetousness. As εὐλογία includes essentially the idea of an abundance, so does πλεουεξία that of scantiness; but of what these consist is not necessarily implied in the words themselves. Neander takes εὐλογία as if it corresponded with the Hebrew αְּ ?ψָ ?λָ ?δ (blessing) and signified, a communication of some good, and then a token of affection; and πλεονεξία as meaning covetousness, extortion, something extorted. W. F. Besser:—“This contribution to the common benefit of the Church may be called a blessing in two respects: first, as a gift from God, inasmuch as it was the result of His grace in the hearts of His people (2 Corinthians 8:1), and secondly, as an offering to God, but deposited in the hands of His poor.” [In the English version εὐλογία is translated “bounty,” but this fails of bringing out the idea of good will on the part of the giver. The Greek word signifies etymologically, a blessing by word, and to this was added, by Hellenistic usage, the idea of a blessing by action, by a present (Genesis 33:11; Judges 1:15; comp. Proverbs 11:25). Οὔτως is not redundant, but draws attention to the following εὐλογίαν, as if it were to be taken in its peculiar signification; with ὡς it signifies, so as, in the manner of]. The whole phrase, οό̓τωςὠς, etc., relates to the special character of the gift: i.e., it should be an act of real benevolence, liberally dispensing what it has, and not of covetousness, withholding as much as possible, from a regard to self alone. [The context shows that the givers and not those collecting the gifts are here alluded to (inasmuch as these collectors might be actuated by a covetous spirit and extort from the people). If we take the expression in its utmost strictness, it signifies the laying down of a small amount, because the giver wishes to reserve more than he needs for himself. [Theophyl:—“As if he were over-reached by some one, or cheated out of it.” Dr. Clarke thinks there is an allusion to the two kinds of chests which were set for alms in the Temple: the one for what the law required as necessary for every one, the other for the free-will offerings. To the one all men gave, because they were obliged to do so, but to the other those only gave who had pity on the poor]. But the Apostle explains his meaning more fully in vv.6, 7, where he traces the course of each giver to its proper result, and reminds his readers that even the costliest gift has no value in the sight of God, if it is not given with a benevolent and cheerful spirit. 2 Corinthians 9:6-7. But as to this, He that sows sparingly shall reap sparingly, and he that sows with blessings shall reap with blessings.—The τοῦτο has sometimes been referred to ὁσπείρων, as if it designated this kind of seed [he who sows this sparingly, Meyer]; but this would require an inappropriate emphasis upon τοῦτο. Others, therefore, [as our English version does] supply λέγω, or φημί; but every where else the Apostle in similar cases gives us the verb itself (1 Corinthians 7:29; 1 Corinthians 15:50; Galatians 3:17). Others supply ἐστιν in the sense of this is as if, (σὕτωςέ̓χει). But to avoid a feeble construction, it seems better to take it (with Meyer) as an accus. absol. “as to this, viz., that it ought to be ὠςεὐλογία and not ὠςπλεονεξία, he which,” etc. He connects φειδομένως in sense with καὶμὴὡςπλεονεξίαν, and places it at the beginning of the sentence. On σπείρειν—θερίζειν, comp. 1 Corinthians 9:11; Galatians 6:7 ff.; Proverbs 19:17. [In almost all recent copies of the English authorized version, the word also has twice crept into this verse as a gloss]. He who does good sparingly shall have a corresponding recompense, a participation but sparingly in the blessings of salvation, i.e., an inferior (it is not said, no) reward of grace. In contrast with this stands ἐπ̓εὐλογίαιςσπείρειν and θερίζειν, where the second ἐπ̓εὐλογίαις, for the sake of emphasis, follows immediately after the first. Ἐπ̓εὐλογίαις has the sense of, abundantly [though this misses the idea of its being a gift of love, Alford], either: with blessings (the relation being in the thing itself), the blessings which he gives and receives; or: for blessings, with a view to blessings, and the blessings which he shall receive, [Alford: “this will not suit the second ἐπ̓ευλογ”] Neander (on the ground that εὐλογία involves the collateral idea of a voluntary gift of affection), paraphrases it, “he who sows in such a way, that it is seen to be a gift of love.” [Stanley: Ἐπ’, on the condition, these are the terms on which we give, as in Luke 6:38, comp. 1 Corinthians 9:10]. The plural gives increased force to the idea of abundance. A similar contrast may be noticed in Prov. 9:24. [Beza notices a triple Hebraism in the phrase ἐπ̓εὐλογίαις: 1, in the use of ἐπὶ with a noun when the whole has an adverbial signification, as “in justitia,” for justly; 2, in calling the act of charity εὐλογία, with reference to the Heb, πְ ?γָ ?αָ ?δ free-will offerings; 3, in using the plural for emphasis. We may also notice the variety of euphemisms by which the contribution is designated in this whole section according to the side from which it is viewed. With reference to its source, it is χάρις; in its relation to the church’s life, it is κοινωνία; in its relation to public servants, it is διακονία; in its beneficial purposes, it is εὐλογία; and as a public act of piety it is a λειτουργία]. The Romish doctrine of merit is one entirely foreign to our text, and totally inconsistent with Paul’s spirit.—Let each one give as he hath before purposed in his heart, not grudgingly, nor of necessity, for God loveth a cheerful giver. (2 Corinthians 9:7.)—The verb δότω must be supplied from ὁσπείρων and δότην as the predicate of έ̓καστος. Καθὼςπροαιρεῖται, as his heart freely prompts him. The definite purpose with respect to the amount each one would give, the Apostle supposes to be already formed when he comes to give, though in 2 Corinthians 9:6 he had spoken of it as in the future (Meyer). In contrast with this cheerful, free self-determination, he places another which springs ἐκλύπη, ἐξἀνάγκης.indicates the source from which the gift proceeds: a morose, gloomy frame of mind, properly a sadness at parting with what it gives; or, from compulsion, as when a man gives from necessity, because he cannot avoid it (comp. Philem, 2 Corinthians 9:14). W. F. Besser: It is one of the secondary results of the factions which prevailed at Corinth, that Paul was thus induced to warn us against all undue compulsion in charitable collections, and to admonish us in such matters to give with sincere pleasure; for nothing more completely poisons an act of charity than a manifest spirit of rivalry or a mere love of distinction.” To encourage them in this cheerful contribution, he reminds them of a Scriptural expression which, however, is not fully quoted. By way of emphasis, and for a more striking contrast with λύπη and ἀνάγκη, the ἱλαρόν of the concluding sentence is placed at the commencement (comp. ἐνἱλαρότητι in Romans 12:8). The passage here thus freely quoted, is an addition to the original by the Septuagint in Proverbs 22:8 : Ἄνδραἱλαρὸνκαὶδότηνεὐλογεῖ (var. ἀγαπᾷ) ὁθεός. Comp. ἀγαπᾷ with εὐπρόσδεκτος in 2 Corinthians 8:12. 2 Corinthians 9:8-11.—And God is able to make all grace abound toward you, that ye having always all sufficiency in everything, may have an abundance for every good work. (2 Corinthians 9:8).—Having admonished them to be bountiful and cheerful in their contribution he here assures them, that God could and would amply bless them in it, and that they had abundant reason to be of good cheer and confide in Him. It was 2 Corinthians 9:8 which induced Francke to build the Orphan’s House at Halle. Δυνατός is emphatic at the commencement of 2 Corinthians 9:8 : He can, and of course he will do it. Δέ introduces another element in the matter viz: the power of Him who takes pleasure in a joyful giver, to provide for him abundantly. It is a question whether χάρις includes merely bodily or only spiritual benefits, or whether it may not embrace both. Πᾶσαν is in favor of the latter view, and the detailed statements which are given seem to demand some reference to bodily things. Besser: “God can bestow upon us abundantly, not only the grace which makes us rejoice in the Lord and so prepares us to give with joyful hearts (2 Corinthians 8:2), but the grace which bestows on us that abundance of earthly blessings and that prosperity which enables us to give so liberally.” ΙΙερισσεῦσαι as in 2 Corinthians 4:15 must be taken in a transitive sense. The accumulation of such words as ἐνπαντὶ, πάντοτε and πᾶσαν in this sentence is very emphatic, and is similar to another in Philippians 1:3 ff. Αὐτάρκεια must here be construed in an objective sense as meaning a sufficiency. ΙΙᾶσααὐτάπκεια signifies a condition which warrants us in being perfectly contented, a sufficient subsistence even for corporeal comfort. Meyer makes it have reference to a subjective habit of the mind, i.e., the ethical condition which prepared them to abound unto every good work; such a satisfaction with their condition as would make them always contented, comp. 1 Timothy 6:6, Philippians 4:11. The more particular definitions, however, which he proceeds to give (ἐνπαντὶ ?—πᾶσιν, as well as έ̓χουτες) seem more agreeable to the objective explanation; and the “abounding to every good work,” (which cannot mean, in an ethical sense, merely a growth in benevolence, but beneficence in an abundant degree), is that to which the full sufficiency could and should lead; indeed it was precisely that state in which notwithstanding its deep poverty a περισσεύειν was said to take place (2 Corinthians 8:2). The correct way seems to be, to take all these expressions, grace, sufficiency and good work, in a general sense, so as to include even the corporeal or earthly condition. Every good work would therefore mean any act which tends to accomplish the divine purposes, and to promote the kingdom of God; and which dispenses benefits of a corporeal nature to brethren in distress. This ought to be the outflowing of that complete sufficiency, which is secured by divine grace in every department of life, even in respect to corporeal affairs.—In 2 Corinthians 9:9 he illustrates what he had thus said by another Scriptural passage from Psalms 112:9.—As it is written, He scattered abroad, he gave to the poor, his righteousness abides forever.—The person respecting whom this had been said was the pious man. Σκορπίζειν, which occurs also in John 10:12; John 16:32, signifies to scatter, here to scatter abroad (as in sowing), and it has the sense of abundantly distributing on every side. Bengel: “Without anxious thought in what direction every grain may fall.” ΙΙένης signifies one who works for his daily bread (πέυομαι) [one not so poor as πτωχός, who lives on alms, but one who has nothing superfluous, Webster p. 227] therefore one who is poor and needy. It occurs no where else in the New Testament. Δικαιοσύνη is not the merit which is gained as the result or the reward of well doing, but the righteousness or good conduct itself. It signifies here especially that which is seen when one does good (not immediately, beneficence, at least not in the sense of that which is the cause of justification, since it is rather the result of justification; comp. Galatians 5:6; Galatians 5:22, Colossians 3:12 ff.). Beneficence is called δικαιοσύνη (comp. 2 Corinthians 9:10 and Matthew 6:1), “because it is an act of justice, not to retain for our own exclusive use, what God has given to all in common” (Ambros.). Ewald: “To the extent in which our free alms is the fruit of a higher feeling of love and righteousness, it is no doubt called φְ ?γָ ?χָ ?η in Proverbs 10:2; Proverbs 11:4.” To remain forever implies not merely a permanent reputation among men, but the everlasting continuance of righteousness, blessing us with its loving spirit not only in the present life, but glorifying us and blessing us with the same spirit as a gracious reward through eternal ages (comp. 1 John 2:17). [On εἰςτὸναἰῶνα, consult Trench, Synn. 2d Ser. pp. 35–41.—What Paul had described in 2 Corinthians 9:8 as only a possible thing on God’s part, he speaks of in 2 Corinthians 9:10 as though it were surely to be expected.—But he who supplies seed for the sower, and bread for the eating, will supply and multiply your seed sown, and increase the fruits of your righteousness;—In these words of Isaiah (in which only ἐπιχορηγεῖν, to furnish, to grant, is substituted for the διδόναι of the Sept.) he describes God as the source from which these things were to be expected. He leads us to expect in the economy of grace and in the government of the church something analogous to what God is continually doing in the economy of nature. [Wordsworth: χορηγέω was properly said of a wealthy person supplying the requisite funds for the equipment and training of a tragic χορὸς. Hence with the accus. and the dat., it came to mean to supply anything for a purpose. Ἐπὶ sometimes implies a supply of one thing after another. Comp. 2 Peter 1:5. Dr. Clarke thinks the verb here has some allusion to its early meaning: to lead a chorus, and that God is represented as leading up the grand chorus of causes and effects, and providing for the whole host of benevolent workers in His kingdom.] The participal sentence extends not merely to τῷσπείροντι but to βρῶσιν, for not only does the symmetry of our sentence demand this, but the passage in Isaiah requires it. [Our English translators have generally followed the received Greek text, which reads χορηγήσαι, πληθὐναι and αὐξήσαι in the optative instead of the futures χορηγήσει, πληθυνεῖ and αὐξήσει. They have also followed the Vulgate and joined καὶἄρτονεἰςβρῶσιν with the subsequent verb. In this way the whole becomes a prayer of the Apostle for his Corinthian brethren: “May he who ministers seed to the sower both minister bread for your food, and multiply your seed sown.” This seems unsupported not only by external but by internal evidence; for Paul was aiming to supply reasons and motives to liberality, on the ground that no one would lose or be straitened on account of large contributions. Not a prayer, but a promise was needful for this.] Corresponding with the supply of the seed to the sower is the assurance that the same Being would bestow upon them and multiply for them that which would be necessary to their sowing, i.e. to their work of beneficence. This has reference not merely to their future doings as a consequence of; or as a Divine blessing upon; their present liberality (Rόckert); but, as the context and aim of the writer evidently require, to the benefaction then in progress (comp. δἰἡμῶν in 2 Corinthians 9:11). It is not till we come to the second member of the sentence, that we find the blessing upon the future action exclusively referred to: and will increase the fruits of your righteousness. This corresponds to the bread for eating, and the whole signifies: As God makes the scattered seed grow until it brings forth fruit and so gives bread for the eating (βπῶσις signifies the act of eating), so will He bless your sowing, your work of beneficence, and cause the fruits of your good conduct to increase. The fruits of righteousness correspond to the bread before spoken of, in the enjoyment of which the reward of diligence in sowing is acquired. The expression (in the sense of καρπὸςδικ.) occurs also in Hosea 10:12. But are we here to regard it as applicable to spiritual or worldly blessings? In the latter sense it would correspond with the interpretation we have given above to 2 Corinthians 9:8. With great propriety the ancient church selected vv.6–10 for being read on the day appointed for the commemoration of St. Laurentius (Aug. 10).—Being enriched in everything unto all simplicity which works out through us thanksgiving to God.—In this verse the Apostle gives some additional particulars which may assist in determining his meaning. We have an anacoluthon, in which the participle stands as a nominative, like εἰδότες in 2 Corinthians 1:7, as if ὐμεῖς had been expressed in 2 Corinthians 9:10. A similar construction may be seen in Colossians 3:16.—There is no need of supplying ἐστέ [so that the sentence shall read: ye shall be enriched, etc.] for the connection with 2 Corinthians 9:8 would not be suitable. As vv.9 and 10 have an obvious connection with 2 Corinthians 9:8, they cannot be taken as a parenthesis. [Our English A. V. regards 2 Corinthians 9:9 f. as a parenthesis, but in serts no ἐστέ, for it regards πλουτιζ. as an independent nominative. It is better to connect it (not with 2 Corinthians 9:8 but) with the verse immediately before it: “God will increase the fruits of your righteousness (i.e. your resources), being enriched” (i.e. so that ye shall be enriched) etc. Hodge.] Ἐνπαντί shows that their being enriched was in the most comprehensive sense of the word, and it is implied that πᾶσαἁπλότης, in the sense of perfect simplicity (2 Corinthians 8:2) was to be the result (though not precisely the designed object) of the enrichment. The Divine blessing upon those who sincerely loved their brethren and cheerfully assisted them in time of trouble, would be seen in their becoming rich in all spiritual and temporal blessings. The final result would be such a perfect simplicity or singleness of heart, and such a pure benevolence as knows nothing of selfish interests or painful forebodings, and manifests itself in a free and ample supply of others wants. [The word “bountifulness” in our version hardly expresses this.] Such a simplicity is not only the fruit of an abundant spiritual life, but is an actual experience which blesses even with temporal benefits those who kindly endeavor to alleviate the distresses of their brethren. In the relative sentence which works through us, etc., the Apostle comes back to the collection which had its origin and support in this ἁπλότης, and he gives prominence to one result of this simplicity which admirably corresponded to its origin, (2 Corinthians 8:1), inasmuch as it produced a spirit of thanksgiving to God. Ἥτις is here probably not causal, in the sense of quippe quζ, but equivalent to ἥ. It is thus like ὅστις, as commonly used in the later prose; or it is equivalent to: something which was working. In δἰἡμῶν Paul refers to himself and his assistants in the work of collection, since it was through their hands that the gift would be communicated and the receivers would thus be induced to give God thanks. Τῶθεῷ is by some made dependent upon κατεργάζεται (for, or in behalf of God), but it is better to make it dependent upon εὐχαριστίαν, inasmuch as the construction of the verb will then be preserved (Meyer: a dative of appropriation).—The reason for this thanksgiving he finds (2 Corinthians 9:12) in the collection then in progress. 2 Corinthians 9:12-15.—Because the ministration of this service supplieth not only the wants of the saints, but also abounds through many thanksgivings unto God.—Neander: “The Apostle here brings forward another motive for their cheerful contribution, in the material and moral benefits which the saints at Jerusalem would derive from it.” The ministration spoken of was not the service which Paul and his associates performed when they took charge of the collection, but as in 2 Corinthians 9:13, the service of those who took part in the contribution itself, Τῆςλειτουργίαςταύτης shows more particularly that it was something done for the Christian community (comp. Romans 15:27; Philippians 2:25). The ministration, therefore, which consists in such a service must be of the same nature (Meyer: the work of distributing the alms). Whether such a word implies that this friendly service was an act of worship, or such a sacred performance as to deserve the name of an oblation (comp. Philippians 4:18; Hebrews 13:16), may be left in doubt. In this inference the Apostle intended to say that the ministration of which he was speaking would not only supply a want of the saints (προσαναπληροῦσα being strictly equivalent to: supplying by addition, 2 Corinthians 11:9), but would overflow through many thanksgivings toward God, or would cause such thanksgiving to ascend in great abundance. Here also τψ͂θεψ͂ ? is governed, not by περισσεν́ουσα, but by εὐχαριστιῶν. [See T. Lewis’ explanation and illustration of this text in The Divine and Human in the Scriptures, p. 339.—As they glorify God on account of the proof which this ministration gives of the subjection which flows from your confession of the Gospel Of Christ (2 Corinthians 9:13 a). The Apostle here does nothing more than to define with more particularity what he had just said, but with a connection of the participle similar to that which we have seen in 2 Corinthians 9:11; as if he had written in 2 Corinthians 9:12 : in consequence of the fact that many give thanks, etc. Διά points out the external medium (i.e., the occasion) of a thing; in this place of the δοξάζειν, etc. [They (the thankful recipients) glorifying God when the proof which this ministration gives, etc.]. The attempt to bring this word into immediate connection with 2 Corinthians 9:12 is arbitrary and unnatural (comp. Osiander and Meyer). By δοκιμῆς (2 Corinthians 8:2) we must understand either the evidence which this service would give that the Corinthians were approved, or the evidence which this service would give that the distribution itself was right and just, i.e., that it was such as might be expected from the Christian standard οf benevolence (Meyer after Theophylact: δοὰτῆςδοκίμουταύτηςκαὶμεμαρτνρημένηςἐπὶφιλανθρωπίαδιακονίας). In behalf of the latter view may be alleged the most natural signification of the words, and the fact that with ἐπί is introduced a reason for thanksgiving which related to the Corinthians. It may be added that the δοκιμή must have been also a test of the Corinthians. That which was the object of their thanksgiving is said to be the ὑποταγὴτῆςὁμολογίαςὑμῶν. In Hellenistic Greek, ὁμολογίαsignifies: confession (not: agreement, comp. 1 Timothy 6:12; Hebrews 3:1; Hebrews 4:14; Hebrews 10:23), and it is the word for the way in which faith is outwardly expressed or made known (comp. Romans 10:9 f.). Εὶςτὸεὐαγγέλιον may therefore be joined with it, analogously with πὶστιςεἰςχριστὸν, πιστεύειυ—εἰςτὸφῶς, and similar phrases. We should indeed have expected the article (τῆς) before εἰςτὸεὐαγ. to give it more definiteness, but we ought not to regard this as indispensable, inasmuch as we find every where great liberty in the use of it. Comp. Winer, § 19, 2. The same is true with respect to τῆςκοινωυίςεὶςαὐτούς, where the article is in like manner absent, and the same would still be true if we were to join εἰςτὸευαγγ. with ὐπακοῇ, so that the phrase should mean a complying or obedient disposition toward the Gospel; in which case τῆςὀμολογίας would appear to be the source of the ὐπακοή: on account of the obedience which results from your confession. On the other hand, by joining ὁμολογίας with εἰςτὸεὐαγγ., the ὀμολογία may be regarded also as the object of the ὐπακοή, so that the idea shall be: since ye are obedient to your confession. [Beza, whom our A. V. follows, gives to the genitive the force of a participle, and renders τῇὑποτ.τῆςὁμολ.ὑμῶν: “your professed subjection.” Doddridge, however, well remarks, that “the words express not merely a professed, but a real subjection to the Gospel which was professed”]. But the confession towards, or with reference to, the Gospe1 (=the confession directed to the Gospel), is the confession of a faith in which love completely sacrifices itself for another’s good (comp. 2 Corinthians 8:9), and it therefore essentially requires that those who make it should cherish and put forth a similar love (comp. 1 John 3:6). Correspondent with this confession is the ὑπακοή of which the Apostle here speaks. Another reason for this thanksgiving is given in the words—And for the simplicity of your communion with them and with all. (2 Corinthians 9:13 b.)—Κοιςωυία, as in 2 Corinthians 8:4, means the practical communion which is shown in the communication of aid. Εἰς shows the direction in which this proceeds. The addition of ἐιςπάντας was probably intended to suggest that it was well known generally and possibly among the Christians at Jerusalem, that the Corinthians were in the habit of sympathizing, in a practical way, and especially by a hospitable reception in their city, with Christians of every country. That those Jewish Christians should have concluded that the Corinthians were equally liberal to all simply because they were liberal to such distant brethren, does not seem equally probable. The connection of εἰςτο Ì ?εὐαγγέλιον and εἰςαὐτοὺς, etc., with δσξαζοντεζ in the sense of: they glorify God, with reference to the Gospel, to themselves and to all (Meyer), has something very feeble and forced about it. Such a connection is required neither by the want of the article (see above) nor by the εἰς, inasmuch as this preposition fits very well here as expressive of tendency or direction; and might, according to the analogy of other words, be very properly substituted for the dative after ὁμολογίας and κοινωνίας. [The sense of the whole would then be: “they who receive such a proof as this ministration gives, will give glory to God for your obedience to the confession you have made with respect to the Gospel of Christ, and for the common fellowship with them and with all Christians which your single-hearted liberality displays.”]—Since they also, with prayer for you, long after you on account of the exceeding grace of God toward [among] you (2 Corinthians 9:14). It is somewhat difficult to decide with which of the previous sentences this verse ought to be connected. Against its connection with 2 Corinthians 9:12, it may be objected, 1, the extreme length of the intervening 2 Corinthians 9:13; 2 Corinthians 2, that διά does not stand before δεήσεως as it does before εὐχαριστιῶν, etc.; 3, that αὐτῶν stands emphatically at the head of the sentence, but on this construction has no special emphasis. If we connect it with 2 Corinthians 9:13, supplying ἐπί before δεήσει as previously before ἀπλότητι, it seems strange that they should be said to give glory to God for their own prayers; and to obviate this the language can hardly be made to signify the hearing of their prayers. We should prefer to connect it with δοξάζοντες in such a way as to point out the manner in which they give glory to God: not only by their thanksgiving (vv.12, 13) but by their intercessions. It must be conceded, however, that such a construction is somewhat harsh. The best way, therefore, probably is to take αὐτῶνἐπιποθούντων together as a genitive absolute, (for we find this common enough with classical writers, where there is no distinction of subject), so that the meaning should be: “they, also, with prayers (i.e., in the midst of prayers) for you, longing after you, etc. There is nothing really forced or impertinent in this definition of ἐπιποθεῖν by δεήσει; it is rather a delicate way of hinting at the pious spirit which prompted this longing. There is an apparent inappropriateness in this word ἐπιποθεῖς, inasmuch as the churches could never be expected to come personally together. Some have, therefore, given it the meaning, cordially to love; but no example of such a meaning has been adduced. Nowhere else in the Scriptures is a meeting together of Christians in the future world (αἰὼνμέλλων) spoken of in this way as an object of Christian yearning. Neander takes ἐπιποθεῖν to be the ardent longing which is prompted by Christian love to have a better personal acquaintance with other Christians, and hence the final aim of this benevolent contribution may have been, to bring these Jewish Christians to acknowledge the Gentile Christians as their brethren in the kingdom of God. We must, however, remember that in the present case the more complete fellowship and the more animated enjoyment of common spiritual blessings in the church were actually brought about by means of personal intercourse through deputies. This is hinted at in the reason which is immediately subjoined: διὰτὴνὑπερβάλλουσανχάρινἐφὑμῖν. ̓Επί here designates them as the persons among whom Divine grace was active, and it is to be connected with ὑπερβάλλουσαν. The idea then would be: on account of the grace of God which superabounds towards you, i.e., because the grace of God is superabundant among or upon you. The charitable contribution was only one out of many streams flowing from this riches of grace (Osiander). As the Apostle contemplated this abundant result of Divine grace in the Corinthian Church, there arose from his deepest soul an outburst of holy thankfulness, to which he now gives expression.—Thanks be unto God for his unspeakable gift (2 Corinthians 9:15).—in this exclamation we need not suppose that he was endeavoring to repress some feeling of self-gratulation which he apprehended might spring up in the hearts of the. Corithians on account of what he had just said. The “unspeakable gift of God” was not strictly or exclusively the fortunate result which God had brought about by means of the collection, for the expression is rather too strong for such an application. The Apostle’s mind was evidently upon the great gift of redemption with all its rich results; (especially) in the church where was found that simple spirit of benevolence, on which depended all the good results of which he had been speaking. But the entire spiritual blessing which he expected from God’s grace included the particular effect of Divine grace or the especial blessing which God’s love had conferred on them. (The difference between Meyer’s and Osiander’s exposition on this point is not essential). [Stanley: “In these four last verses the Apostle throws himself forward into the time when at Jerusalem he should receive the thanks of the Jewish Christians for this contribution, and thereby witness the completion of the harmony between the Jewish and Gentile Churches. Hence the impassioned thanksgiving for what else seems an inadequate occasion. Compare the abrupt introduction of similar thanksgivings in Romans 9:5; Romans 11:33-36; 1 Corinthians 15:57; Galatians 1:5; Ephesians 3:20; 1 Timothy 1:17”]. AND ETHICAL1. As god looks upon the heart, the acceptableness of an act of benevolence in His sight depends upon the cheerfulness with which it is rendered, upon the degree in which those who are filled with Divine love find a real pleasure in relieving those who are in want. This inward delight will be shown in the pleasant manner with which the outward act is accompanied, and the receiver will thus be satisfied that the giver is glad to be called upon, and to be able to perform a duty which a God of goodness has committed to him. Where this spirit is wanting, and it is evident that the man gives with a painful reluctance, from a regard only to the expectations of others, from a vain ambition not to fall behind those of equal or less wealth, or from the urgent importunities of others, the gift will have no value in God’s sight, however costly it may be. But a cheerful heart will always make an open hand; whatever the man has will be freely dispensed, with no close or anxious calculations of the amount, if he can only be sure of doing good, and of relieving or removing the necessities of his fellow-men. Accordingly God has declared that everything sown in this spirit shall bring forth a corresponding harvest, that those who give from necessity, sparingly, unwillingly, or half willingly, shall have a proportionate gain, and that those who give cheerfully and liberally shall have showered upon them an abundance not only of spiritual but of temporal blessings. As the result of both these kinds of blessing, the cheerful giver will acquire that noble and perfect simplicity which more completely surrenders everything to One who never fails to supply every want, and which is more and more unwearied in works of beneficence. And not only is he himself thus prospered, but (what is far more important) many hearts which are refreshed by his bounty will overflow with thankfulness, and will give glory to God; a loving fellowship will spring up between the giver and the receiver; and the spiritual life of each will be quickened and strengthened. [2. It has sometimes been questioned whether this promise, (vv.8–10) is fully borne out by observation and experience. Not to dwell, however, upon the fact that the Apostle is in this place only laying down what might be expected from God’s power, and leaves undecided the question whether that power will always be put forth in every specific case, we may suggest that the Apostle is merely giving the general tendency and result of righteousness (Hodge). It will be, however, time enough to show that our passage will admit of exceptions, when a case of failure has been produced. 3. The power of all active beneficence in promoting the Church’s unity and common life.—Paul’s earnestness in the matter of this collection was quite disproportionate to its importance as an isolated fact. He was evidently looking far beyond it to the kind feelings and fellowship which such a work was fitted to promote. There had been, and there still was, great danger of a rupture between the Jewish and Gentile Christians. Paul evidently anticipated much from this collection, in smoothing down any asperities which had already become apparent. 4. It is evident that a community of goods (whatever it may have been) did not preserve the Church at Jerusalem from poverty and want. Clearly it had never been compulsory nor absolutely universal, and was only for the occasion on which so many strangers were in Jerusalem. As a requirement, it seems only to have been that each one should hold all that he had subject to the call of necessity. (See on Acts 4:34-37). Probably then, and certainly ever since, the apostolic rule was, “not an absolute uniformity, but a mutual coφperation and assistance.” (Stanley). 5. The community of love laid down in this section would preserve the whole Church from want. In the great body there would be “always an all-sufficiency in all things”, and with such a spirit it would be faithfully applied. 6. The Apostle clearly distinguishes between spiritual and temporal blessings.—The Corinthians might sow the one and not reap the other. We may sow much love and self-sacrifice, and reap abundantly the reward of such a sowing in kind, i.e., in their spiritual results, but reap very little of pecuniary or temporal gain. “What Paul promised these Corinthians was: 1, the love of God (2 Corinthians 9:7); 2, a spirit abounding in every good work (2 Corinthians 9:8); thanksgiving on their behalf (vv.11–13). A noble harvest! but all spiritual.” (F. W. Robertson). God might or might not give of His infinite sufficiency and ability (2 Corinthians 9:8), for their temporal wealth.] AND Starke: 2 Corinthians 9:1. Confidence and admonition may very properly exist together, the one in view of an honorable and upright character, and the other because many need a preparation for their duties. 2 Corinthians 9:2. A good beginning is not always sure of a good ending; we must therefore admonish one another and pray that we may continue diligent in every good work (1 Thessalonians 3:2).—Hedinger:—Commendable solicitude to observe accuracy in all we say; and to fulfil all we engage to do; without this, our words are only vain boasting. Away with this 2 Corinthians 9:4. We should be careful to have good reasons when we praise another, otherwise both parties may only be brought to greater shame.—Ibid: Support of the poor, and support of pastors. Plead and pray for them! Oh, if all who are in comfortable circumstances would but remember how much their doing good has to do with God’s blessing! Their ability to do good is His blessing, and they ought to be the hand by which He blesses others, only that they themselves may be more blessed (2 Corinthians 9:6; 2 Corinthians 9:9). The covetous man only betrays himself by pretending to give liberally; for he gives only a little according to his ability, and this with evident reluctance and low motives. 2 Corinthians 9:6. Every thing we have is from God; the more we have, the more readily, abundantly and joyfully should we communicate for the relief of others, with no expectation of a reward. And yet it is not wrong to have an eye to those promises which are a token of God’s great love and readiness to help us in our weakness (Hebrews 10:35; Hebrews 11:26).—Ibid: Alms given merely by commandment are a kind of forced sins, transferred and deposited to our account. Gifts bestowed with curses bring no blessings or reward. 2 Corinthians 9:7. A generous love of our neighbor is like ripe clusters of grapes, whose sweet juices flow forth by their own force. It can scarcely be appealed to before its cheerful response is ready. Without such a love men must be hard pressed before they yield any thing, and the little that comes forth is soured by complaints and murmurings. 2 Corinthians 9:8. Hedinger:—Nothing bestowed upon Christ’s members is lost; and yet look well that no sighs adhere to your gifts! If it does not properly belong to you, it cannot be acceptable. To offer what rightfully belongs to another, is very fitly called, skinning your neighbor and hanging his hide up in the temple for God.—Christian virtues are joined together like the links of a chain. He is a perfect Christian who fails in no part of his duties. 2 Corinthians 9:9. Spener:—Genuine love is careful to bestow its bounty upon such persons and in such a way that goodness shall not encourage wickedness; but the hand which freely scatters must not be fettered with too many scruples, if only the worthy are not overlooked. Blessed are the merciful whose care reaches to the soul as well as to the body, to eternity as well as to time (Matthew 5:7). 2 Corinthians 9:10. Hedinger:—The sower not unfrequently scatters on the soil what little seed he has, and with painful anxiety hopes for a plentiful harvest. Such a harvest God has promised to those who sow liberally (in well doing), and are moved by love to men and a desire to serve God. 2 Corinthians 9:11. God is the true centre from which all lines of blessing diverge, and in which all benevolent actions again converge in grateful thanksgivings. 2 Corinthians 9:12. How much good springs from love! It preserves the life of Christ’s members, and turns their hearts into altars of incense where God is adored. 2 Corinthians 9:13. The confession of a true faith and the overflowing of a genuine love are beautiful things, for which we have reason to rejoice and to praise the Lord. 2 Corinthians 9:14. Those who receive kindness should heartily thank God for the spirit bestowed upon the giver, and pray that he may receive an abundant blessing. 2 Corinthians 9:15. Let us never see or hear of a charitable work without rejoicing in it and praising God for it. Berlenb. Bible: 2 Corinthians 9:2. Whoever leaves what he must do to the last hour, will find himself confused and his good work put to shame (the foolish virgins). 2 Corinthians 9:3 f. Satan endeavors to strangle our good purposes at the birth, and we should take care faithfully to finish what we have begun well. Every one is in danger during his religious course of becoming cold in heart; it is always well, therefore, when God sends some one to stimulate our zeal. 2 Corinthians 9:5. If nothing in the heart is pleasing to God, we may be sure that the outward act will have no blessing. 2 Corinthians 9:6. God delights in what flows liberally from a loving heart. 2 Corinthians 9:7. The Christian knows no joy without faith, or which proceeds not from grace. It is by the delight which the liberal man finds in giving, that God steals his heart and forces upon him a grace far richer than what he-gave. 2 Corinthians 9:8. In proportion as we apply to the poor those gifts with which Divine love has favored us will be the grace which we shall receive in their stead; only the returning stream will be the most abundant, that goodness and faithfulness may meet together. 2 Corinthians 9:9. In scattering his blessings, the Christian must recollect that though his heart should be open and unreserved, he should also proceed as carefully as possible, for the work of love should be wise. Even righteousness demands this. But it will be like a regular growth, in which there is no decay; for as it is in harmony with the Divine nature, it must be eternal. 2 Corinthians 9:10. God gives the seed, and He must give the harvest, but not immediately, for then we could not distinguish His several footsteps. When we open our hearts to God (by our alms) the blessings always return upon us in a thirty, sixty or an hundred fold increase of Christian graces. 2 Corinthians 9:12. It is said that, “Love is the fulfilling of the law;” and we here see that obedience to the second table reacts upon the better fulfilment of the first, inasmuch as it awakens a spirit of praise. 2 Corinthians 9:15. Whoever recognizes and accepts of Christ as a gift, will be thankful and strive to live to the Divine glory. Each attribute of God has a tendency to produce in us something like itself; and as He freely gives to us, we also are led freely to give. Bengel: 2 Corinthians 9:8. God gives us what we have, not so much that we may have it, but that we may do good. Every thing in life, even the best earned rewards, are seeds sown for a future harvest. Rieger: 2 Corinthians 9:5. A gift will be a blessing, for the supply it affords, for the cheerful kindness it displays, and for the thanksgiving of which it is the occasion.—When it is a matter of covetousness, it will be done penuriously and unpleasantly, and Will be received without pleasure or satisfaction. 2 Corinthians 9:6. The figure of sowing and reaping is very appropriate to the work of charity. That which is scattered, is something which we look upon as needful for our support, but which will not be as profitable if it is hoarded up. We must not be anxious about wind and weather, but trust rather to God’s providence than to our own prudence. Much seed will doubtless fall by the wayside, but that on the good soil will abundantly reward us for all we sowed. 2 Corinthians 9:8. God can turn to our advantage not only the increase of our worldly wealth, but every blessing of His daily providence. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ XV.—DEFENCE OF HIS ENERGY, POWERS AND ACTS AGAINST THE OF HIS 2 Corinthians 10:1-181 Now I Paul myself beseech you by the meekness and gentleness of Christ, who in presence [indeed] am base [lowly] among you, but being absent am bold toward you:2But I beseech [entreat] you, that I may not be bold when I am present with that confidence, wherewith I think to be bold against some, which think of us as if wewalked according to the flesh. 3For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war afterthe flesh: 4(For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through Godto the pulling down of strong holds:) 5Casting down imaginations, [reasonings, λογισμοὺς] and every high thing that exalteth itself [is raised, ἐπαιρόμενον] against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought [every thought intocaptivity] to the obedience of Christ; 6And having in a readiness to revenge all disobedience, [every failure in obedience, παραχοήν] when your obedience is fulfilled.7Do ye look on things after the outward appearance? If any man trust to [in] himself that he is Christ’s, let him of himself think [conclude,λογιζέσθω] this again, that,8as he is Christ’s, even so are we Christ’s [om. Christ’s]. For though [even if, ἐἁντε] I should boast somewhat more [abundantly, περισσότερόν] of our authority, which the Lord hath given us for edification, and not for your destruction, Ishould not be ashamed: 9That I may not seem as if I would terrify you by letters:10For his letters, say they, are weighty and powerful; but his bodily presence is weak,11and his speech contemptible. Let such a one think this, that, such as we are in word by letters when we are absent, such will we be [are we] also in deed when we arepresent. 12For we dare not make ourselves of the number, or compare ourselves with some that commend themselves: but they, measuring themselves by [among, ἐν] themselves, 13 and comparing themselves among [with] themselves, are not wise. But we will not boast of things without our measure, [boast without measure, εἰςτὰά̓μετρα] but according to the measure of the rule which God hath distributed [apportioned] tous, a measure to reach even unto you. 14For we stretch not ourselves beyond our measure, as though we reached not unto you: for we are come [came foremost, ἐφθάσαμεν] as far as to you also in preaching the gospel of Christ. 15Not boasting of things without our measure [boasting without measure], that is, of other men’s labors; but having hope, when your faith is increased, [that as your faith increases, αὐξανομέης] having hope, when your faith is increased, that [as your faith increases, αὐξανομένης that] we shall be enlarged by you [among you, ἐνὑμῖν] according to our rule abundantly antly, 16To preach the gospel in the regions [as far as the parts, εὶςτὰὑπερὲχινα beyond17you, and not to boast in another man’s line of things made ready to our hand. Buthe that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord. 18For not he that commendeth himself is approved, but whom the Lord commendeth. AND In passing to a new section (δέ), the tone of the Apostle’s discourse becomes much altered. [“The conciliatory and affectionate strain of entreaty which pervaded the first part, is exchanged for that of stern command, and almost menace: there is still the same expression of devotion to the Corinthian Church; but it is mixed with a language of sarcasm and irony which has parallels in the First Epistle, but none up to this point in the Second. With this change in the general tone agrees also the change in details. Instead of the almost constant use of the first person plural, he here almost invariably (and in some instances with unusual emphasis) employs the first person singular; the digressions no longer go off to general topics, but revolve more closely round himself; the Corinthians are no longer commended for their penitent zeal, but rebuked for their want both of love and penitence. The confident hopes which he had expressed for the future are exchanged for the most gloomy forebodings. This change is not to be accounted for by supposing this section to be a distinct fragment between his First and Second Epistles; for, after all, the differences between the different parts are no greater than those between other portions of his writings: nor by supposing that he is addressing a different portion of the Corinthian congregation, for no intimation of this is given; but it is possible that some considerable pause, either of time or thought, now took place, during which additional news or recollections of an unfavorable character came before him, and gave a new turn to his discourse. As the time drew near also in which he was to visit and test his apostolic power among them, he was perhaps haunted by the fear that he should have to visit them in anger and not in love. Such a feeling is the basis of this, as that of gratitude was the basis of the first portion of the Epistle. It is from this that he starts (2 Corinthians 10:1-7), from this the digressions fly off (2 Corinthians 10:12; 2 Corinthians 12:10), and to this his conclusion returns (2 Corinthians 12:11; 2 Corinthians 13:13).” Stanley (abridged)]. His object now is to vindicate his Apostolic character and authority against those hill-disposed and arrogant opponents who had made light of them. The tendency of what he says is still to draw off the Church, with which he was anxious to deal tenderly, from those antagonists on whom he had determined to exert the Apostolic powers they had depreciated. 2 Corinthians 10:1-6. Now I Paul myself, beseech you by the meekness and gentleness of Christ, who in presence, indeed, am lowly among you, but being absent am bold toward you (2 Corinthians 10:1).—[In no other part of his Epistles has he made his individuality so prominent. He usually says, “I Paul,” (Galatians 5:2; Ephesians 3:1; Philemon 1:19), or uses simply the first person (singular or plural) of some verb]. Here αυ̇τός is added, and by way of emphasis is placed at the head of the sentence. It should be construed neither in the sense of ultro (of my own accord), nor in that of idem (always the same) in opposition to those who reproached him that he had been fickle or inconsistent in his conduct, nor in contrast with those who had charge of the collection, with the poor saints who were to be relieved, with his calumniators, or with him who hitherto had been associated with him in the composition of the Epistle (2 Corinthians 1:1). With respect to this last suggestion, we have nothing in the remainder of the Epistle which indicates that the Apostle wished to make prominent that he was sustaining any new relation to them, or that he was now more than before addressing the Corinthians with his own hand or especially authenticating what he was about to write. The word has reference rather to the prayer in 2 Corinthians 10:2, which is brought out in a somewhat gentler form by the exhortation in 2 Corinthians 10:1, and it relates to what is said in the relative sentence in 2 Corinthians 10:1, as if he would say: I myself admonish and pray you; even I, who in personal appearance am so mean among you, but when absent am so bold toward you; i.e., even I who, according to the disparaging insinuations of my opponents, (for these are evidently aimed at), am bold only when at a distance, and so submissive (cringing, fainthearted) when personally present with you, now exhort and pray you, to save me by your conduct the necessity of being bold and overbearing when I shall be present with you. With the words e̓γὼΠαῦλος, on which the main emphasis should be placed, he meets them in that Apostolic and personal character which was so familiar to them, to which they owed so much, and on which his admonition now depended for all its power. He strengthens this, however, by the addition: by the meekness and gentleness (πραότηςκὰιἐπιεικεία) of Christ. This gentleness and benignity, or mildness (Acts 24:4) of Christ (comp. Matthew 11:29 f.; Isaiah 47:2 f.), ought move them to comply with his exhortation. As this was the ordinary spirit and manner of Christ, they ought to see that Christ’s Apostles might also be gentle, and they should not make it necessary for him to proceed against them with severity. Ewald takes it as an admonition to the Corinthians, that they should not, like his opponents mistake for weakness that meekness and humility which he carefully copied in all his conduct from the example of Christ. Neither does the scope of the passage nor analogy require that we should construe διά in the sense of a solemn protestation (Osiander). Διά with a genit. often indicates the means or accompaniments; as if the action were passing through them, and receiving a peculiar coloring from the medium. Paul’s entreaty is here supposed to acquire a special tenderness by being διὰτῆςπραιότκ. ἐπιεικ [Jelf, &905. 3 B. 1]. The distinction between πραότης and ἐπιείκεια, according to Melancthon, consists in this: the former means non temere irasci, and the latter facile placari. Bengel makes the former virtus magis absoluta, (willingness to suffer and to forgive), and the latter magis refertur ad alios. According to Meyer the contrast is between what was actually experienced and what was strictly just. Heubner: Meekness endures the pain, but gentleness corrects the faults of others with forbearance. [Webster and Wilkinson say that “πραότ is natural mildness of disposition; ἐπεεικ. a habit arising from considerateness, exemplified by our Lord in Luke 9:56, and Matthew 26:41.” Comp. Trench, Synn., First Part, pp. 207–10]. The idea (of Rόchert) that Paul felt especially touched by the insinuation contained in the relative sentence, inasmuch as he was conscious that notwithstanding all his vehemence he was really deficient in personal courage, must have originated in a sad misapprehension of the Apostle’s character as presented in his life and Epistles. Those opponents who urged this objection in order to weaken the impression which his severe reproofs had produced, had found a plausible reason for their assertion in the fact that, for fear of aggravating the evil, he had spoken of some things within the Church itself with a degree of hesitation. It is possible, too, that after his second visit to Corinth (and before our first Epistle) the state of things had become so much worse, that he had felt obliged to write with more severity than he had displayed when he was among them (Meyer). It would be hardly correct to go back as far as his first visit among them (1 Corinthians 2:3), for the observation of his opponents had probably been made at some later period. But the matter on which the Apostle exhorts his readers is contained in the prayer (δέομαί) which follows in 2 Corinthians 10:2.—But I pray that I may not when present have to be bold with that confidence with which I think to be bold against some.—[By translating παρακ. of 2 Corinthians 10:1, and δέομ of 2 Corinthians 10:2, by the same word (beseech) our common version fails to preserve the growing earnestness indicated by the latter word. For a similar interchange of these words see chap.2 Corinthians 5:20-21; 2 Corinthians 6:1; 2 Corinthians 8:4]. The δέ not only indicates that he was taking up again what had gone before, but it introduces a contrast to the sentence implied in the relative sentence. The prayer itself, as the context and the want of the accusative of the object shows, was directed not to God (for then παρακαλῶ in 2 Corinthians 10:1 would have no significance) but to the Corinthians. [“The terms in which this is expressed are taken from the description which the detractors were accustomed to give of him (2 Corinthians 10:1), which, although apparently incidental, is the key note of all that follows, in which the ideas ταπειν. and θαῥῥ. in various turns of thought and phraseology continually and prominently recur.” Stanley.] The article τό serves to make the infinitive sentence especially prominent. Παρών corresponds in signification with εἰςπρόςωπον in 2 Corinthians 10:1. The thing prayed for is, that they would not allow it to become necessary for him to be bold among them. The πεποίθησις was that confidence in his official authority and rights which was connected with good conscience, and whose dependence was indeed upon God, but need not be understood here. Λογίζομαι is not in the passive (I am reckoned) to express the way in which he was estimated by his opponents (Luther). Beza not only regards it as a passive, but takes τολμῆσαι as a preterite, which, however, would have called for some additional word (ἁπών) to imply this (comp. Meyer). It denotes here, as it often does in Euripides and Herodotus, the intention, the design or determination of the mind. [Chrysostom thinks the word does not imply a full or settled purpose. Paul “said not ’wherewith I am prepared,’ but ‘where with I think,’ for he had not yet resolved upon this, though his opponents had given him occasion enough.” Bloomfield notices a paronomasia in λογίζομαι and λογιζομένους, which if introduced into English might perhaps be best expressed by reckon]. As the case is different with λογιζομένους, the word there has the meaning of, to reckon for, or as something. ʼ ?Επίτινας should be connected not with θαῤῤῆσαι but with τολμῆσαι, which must here be taken absolutely and in the sense of, to have courage, to be resolute, to step forth boldly (as in Homer, Pindar, the tragic poets and Thucydides). [It has also something of the signification, to venture, to have the heart, as if the agent endured or suffered something, because he acted in spite of natural feeling, or under great difficulties. This idea may be traced in the use of the word here].—namely, those who think of us as if we walked according to the flesh. (2 Corinthians 10:2 b.)—He does not name these persons, but he immediately characterizes them from the way in which they were in the habit of judging him. ̔Ως is here used as in 1 Corinthians 4:1. [ΙΙεριπατού̓ντες etymologically signifies, to walk about, hither and thither, and Stanley thinks that we have here a reference to this original meaning]. Κατὰσρκαπεριπατεῖν here signifies, a course of conduct, characterized by the σάρξ (i.e., by the psychic-corporeal life), destitute of a spiritual character, and not merely dependent upon external influences, and of course feeble, but in positive antagonism to the spirit, and of course sinful; i.e., the organ and principle of sin (Beck, Christl., Lehrwiss, p. 278). The idea of weakness probably predominates, but the expression describes a course of conduct determined by the fear of men, or the desire of pleasing men, and hence a personal bearing disgraced by cowardice or servility (ταπεινός). The human nature referred to was therefore one enfeebled, not merely from the want of Divine support, but from sin (comp. on 1 Corinthians 12:17).—For though we walk in the flesh, we do not make war according to the flesh (2 Corinthians 10:3).—A reason is here given for the prayer in 2 Corinthians 10:2, and at the same time he exonerates himself from what had been charged upon him by his opponents (τοὺςλογιζ).—περιπατοῦντας. I beg of you not to allow me to be placed in such circumstances that I shall be obliged to venture on an unpleasant part when I shall be present with you. For although we are walking in the flesh, we do not take the field, or carry on war according to the flesh, i.e., we are not determined by fleshly considerations as those persons imagine. Στρατεύεσθαι (1 Corinthians 9:7), understood in the more comprehensive sense implied by its contrast with περιπατεῖν, designates the Apostles’ whole ministry in its numerous conflicts with hostile powers, under the figure of a warfare. Comp. 2 Corinthians 2:14; 1 Timothy 1:18. The emphasis lies upon the two contrasted prepositions ἐν and κατά. The flesh (σαρξ) is indeed the sphere in which we move, i.e. the psychical and corporeal life with all its sinful infirmities is the instrument by which and the department in which we act (comp. ζῶἐνσαρκί in Galatians 2:20), but it is not the influence which determines our movements.” The reason for this assertion is given in 2 Corinthians 10:4.—For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal but mighty before God for the pulling down of strong holds.—The Apostle here describes the kind of weapons he used, i.e. the means by which he carried on his ministry (ὅπλα 2 Corinthians 6:7) in contrast with those of his adversaries. As his weapons bore not the stamp of the flesh, there was no reason for saying that his action as a Christian warrior was under the direction of the flesh., W. F. Besser: “The text must certainly give a strong testimony against the mingling of ecclesiastical authority with the civil power of the sword (comp. Augsb. Conf. p. 64, Art. of Smalc. p. 344].”—The Apostle brings into positive contrast with the carnal σαρκικά), comp. 2 Corinthians 1:12) not the spiritual (πνευματικα) but the mighty in God’s sight (δυνατὰτῶνεᾶ). The fleshly is also that which is feeble, and especially when it is in conflict with the world for the cause of God, it is entirely powerless.Σαρκικός however is not precisely equivalent to, feeble, but the only thing which in this case is powerful is that which proceeds from, and bears the impress of the Spirit. For a notice of the spiritual panoply see Ephesians 6:11 ff. Similar contrasts may be found in 2 Chronicles 32:8; Isaiah 31:3; Ps. 88:39. Power is directly related to spirit also in 1 Corinthians 2:4; Luke 1:17. Δυνατά is more particularly defined byτῷθεῷ ?to mean that which is powerful in God’s esteem, before God. Comp. ἀστεῖοςτῷθεῷ in Acts 7:20, and also Jonah 3:3. And yet the phrase is not intended to be simply a superlative, but to signify the truth or the reality (Osiander: acceptable to God) of the power. Neander: mighty, because God gave them, and overthrows strong holds by means of them. In opposition to the explanation which makes this phrase mean: through or for God, it may be said that the former would be superfluous, being self-evident; and although the latter might seem appropriate in the sense of: to the honor, or, for the use of God, (i.e. to show forth his power) there is nothing in the context to call for such a remark.—The end which these weapons were to subserve, and to which they were adapted, is announced in πρὸςκαναίρεσινὁχυρωμάτων. They are the instrumentalities by which the κόσμος, or its ἂρχων, the god of this world (τοῦαἰῶος 2 Corinthians 4:4), endeavors to obstruct the progress of God’s cause and the work of salvation. οχυρωμάτα signifies castles or fortresses. [They are things intended to serve in the mind as strong holds do in warfare. Comp. Proverbs 21:22. Stanley (p. 500) thinks that the peculiar imagery here used was suggested by the Mithridatic and Piratical wars which took place in Cilicia; the latter only 60 years before the Apostles’ birth. One hundred and twenty such strong holds are said to have been in existence and to have been taken in the war with these pirates. Each word here used strikingly carries out the metaphor]. The way in which this overthrow was effected is more particularly described in 2 Corinthians 10:5.—Casting down reasonings and every lofty thing which is erected against the knowledge of God.—As the first and most prominent of these strong holds, he mentions λογισμούς, intellectual bulwarks which were probably not so much projects or hostile plans as unevangelical thoughts or fixed conclusions of human (Hellenistic or Judaistic) philosophy, in direct opposition to the Christian faith, 1 Corinthians 3:20. [Our English “imaginations” is hardly the proper word here. The idea is rather “reasonings.” It refers to theoretic subtilties or argumentations]. Comp. the contrasted γνὥσιςτοῦθεοῦ. Καθαιροῦντες is anacoluthic; comp. 2 Corinthians 9:11. To connect it with 2 Corinthians 10:3 so as to make 2 Corinthians 10:4 a parenthesis, seems not only unnecessary but unallowable inasmuch as 2 Corinthians 10:4 is essentially a continuation of the main thought, and καθαιροῦντες is most naturally referred back to καυαίρεσιν. [As all the prominent words of this passage are evidently military we must suppose the allusion in καθαίρέω was to the use of the “crow” which pulled (not cast) down the walls or towers of an enemy. Stanley gives several instances of such a use of the word in classic writers. (See also Cobbin)]. In καὶπὰ ?́νὕψωυα, etc., (every high thing, etc.) he reverts to the metaphor he had left in λογισμούς and which had been only hinted at in καθαιροῦντες. ̔ ?Yψωμα signifies an elevation, something made high, as a tower, wall or anything of the kind. In sense it is much the same as οχυρώματα in 2 Corinthians 10:4 i.e. it is something by which the enemy strives to maintain his ground. By πᾶν it becomes a general term in which even the λογισμοί are included, and it then signifies every kind of human greatness which could be made use of in such a warfare; according to Osiander, wisdom, eloquence, power, righteousness, honor, wealth.—Agreeably to the metaphor, ἐπαιρόενον [opposite of καθαιρ] should be construed not in the middle but passive voice. That against which these high things were erected, and whose progress, and ascendency was thus to be prevented, was the knowledge of God (γνῶσιςτοῦθεοῦ); not (subjectively) as it existed in the minds of his opponents, and was opposed by the darkness of human wisdom, but objectively, something which met men in common life, and called forth their opposition: that revelation of the plan and work of salvation, in which Christ was proclaimed and God was manifested in Christ. In addition to the negative acts by which the fortresses obstructing the progress of Divine knowledge were overthrown, we have those which were positive, when the Apostle adds,—and bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ, (2 Corinthians 10:5 b.)—When the enemy is thus captured, the victory must be complete. This enemy is πᾶννόημα; which is here not the same as design, and then to be joined with εἰςτὴνὑρακοὴν, so as to mean every design in opposition to the obedience, etc., for even if we do not take into consideration the want of the article (τὸ), and the use of εἱς instead of the foregoing κατά, we should find that νόημα in this sense would be no proper object of captivity, and that a much better sense would be afforded by supposing τὴνὑπακοήν the fortress to which they were carried. Thus obedience was as it were the place to which the captive enemy was brought and hence we have εἱς instead of a dative, as in Romans 7:23. As the intellectual element predominates in the whole context, we have no reason to take νόημα in the sense of intention [Alford] or disposition; and still less of the spiritual mind itself which exercises thought, i.e. the understanding; Luther: all human reason. This obedience of Christ, in the sense of a subjection to Christ, is in other passages called the obedience of faith Romans 1:5; Romans 15:18. The idea is: to bring every thought or understanding which is otherwise opposed to Christ, into subjection to Him. ΙΙαρακοή and ὑπακοή are contrasted in 2 Corinthians 10:6. [The former signifies (strictly) a failing to hear or a hearing amiss, and so a want of obedience; the latter a listening to authority, and so a subjection to another. See Webster, synn. p. 225, also Trench, Synn. 2d Ser. p. 73. Although the Apostle does not entirely forsake the line of thought which he had pursued in the preceding paragraph, i.e., of contention generally with hostile powers, he now returns more decidedly to the affairs of the Corinthian Church. And having in a readiness to punish every failure in obedience when your obedience shall have been fulfilled (2 Corinthians 10:6).—He evidently regarded that Church as specially subject to his Apostolical authority, and it was only in their return to him that he expected the completion (πληρωθῆ) of their obedience to Christ. Upon that obedience he made to depend the time in which he should exercise his disciplinary power upon those Judaistic corrupters who might persist in opposing his authority. For this he was even then ready (ἑνἑτοίμωἕχειν=in promptu habere), and he was only waiting for the completion of the Church’s obedience. Comp. 2 Corinthians 2:1; 2 Corinthians 13:10. A delicate hint seems here conveyed that he would make a distinction between these seducers and those who had been seduced; and an admonition is expressed that the latter would do well by their entire submission to his instructions, to escape the punishment he was about to inflict (perhaps excommunication, or at least something which would be a proof of his miraculous powers as an Apostle) on those who might continue disobedient. It would be incorrect to understand this fulfilment of their obedience as referring to the Apostle’s call for a collection. He says that he was in readiness, in opposition to those who might suggest that he was not in earnest in the matter (comp. Osiander [also Jelf, &622, 2]). [Stanley’s paraphrase well expresses the idea of this passage: “I conjure you not to compel me to break the bounds of the gentle and forgiving character of Christ. But be assured that, if I do exercise when I am present, the authority which some think I shall never venture to exercise but at a distance, it will be a real authority. I shall come against you like a mighty conqueror, though with Weapons, not of earthly, but of heavenly warfare; and every alien thought and imagination shall fall before me, like fortresses before a victorious army, and shall be reduced to submission, like captive hands: and those who resist shall be punished like the last remnants of a defeated insurrection. To effect all this, I wait only till I am assured of your submission, that I may not confound the innocent with the guilty, the dupes with the deceivers.” He speaks as if his opponents were not members of the Corinthian Church, but foreign to it; and hence as if they were not addressed in this epistle, and were only awaiting the obedience of the Corinthians that he might exercise his vengeance on them]. 2 Corinthians 10:7-11. In this passage the Apostle maintains that his relations to Christ were of an intimate nature, in opposition to his opponents, who professed that they alone stood in such relations; and he adds the assurance that when he should come to Corinth in person, and not merely by his letters, as they asserted, he would give them a proof of his Apostolical authority.—Do ye look on things after the outward appearance? (2 Corinthians 10:7 a)—The way in which we interpret this sentence must depend upon the sense we give to τὰκατὰπρόσωπον. If it means things lying in sight before their eyes, from which the Corinthians might recognize, if they were disposed to do so, his Apostolical dignity, the idea would be that he was calling upon them to attend more carefully to things obviously before them. In this case βλέπετε would be construed in the imperative [: Look at what is before your own eyes]. The analogy of other passages, however, would require that this verb should have stood at the head of the sentence, comp. 1 Corinthians 1:26; 1 Corinthians 10:18; Philippians 3:2. If that expression, however, means that which is merely apparent, it may refer to something in his opponents which gave them an external advantage; or to something external in the Apostle himself, which made the Corinthians postpone him to them. In this case, βλέπετε must be construed in the indicative, either as a direct assertion, and a severe reproach to them [Vulgate, Stanley], or as a question (with Theodoret, Erasmus, Meyer [Alford, Hodge, and our English A. V.]) in accordance with the lively and earnest spirit of the general passage. The context (2 Corinthians 10:1-10), is certainly in favor of referring the expression to the Apostle himself. [In this case, however, many think that βλέπετε would be quite as much required at the commencement of the sentence, and to be preceded by a τι or some similar word. The signification finally attained is much the same, whether the indicative is taken annunciatively or interrogatively. Adopting the latter as the most probable, the Apostle] intended to speak of his outward manner, which, when he was at Corinth, had not been bold or confident, and hence had afforded ill-disposed persons an occasion for suspecting him of weakness and timidity. The question was directed not to his principal antagonists, but to the Church itself; at least, to that portion which had listened to the pretensions of these opponents. In the next verse, however, he changes his address and fixes his eye upon these opponents themselves.—If any man trusts in himself that he is Christ’s, let him conclude this again of himself, that as he is Christ’s, so also are we (2 Corinthians 10:7 b). The word ἑαυτῶ makes the personal vanity and self-conceit of such a confidence very prominent, inasmuch as it is a confidence in one’s own self. In χριστοῦεἶναι we have the idea of belonging to Christ, but the context does not imply that this was in the sense of kindred (perhaps through James), or of a particular fellowship with Peter; nor does it refer merely to the general relationship of all believers, but to the special ownership implied in δοῦλος (which indeed a number of authorities add to the reading of this passage, though it is evidently a gloss), or διάκονοςχριστοῦ (2 Corinthians 11:23). To this ἑαυτῶ corresponds ἁφ̓ ? (Lachmann ἐφ̓ ?=in, though the reading is not sufficiently authenticated) ὡαυτοῦ, which is made emphatic by πάλιν, again (not, on the other hand). But this phrase, of his own self, may mean either, proceeding from himself, i.e., referring to what he might see of himself, inasmuch as he would find the same evidences of this being Christ’s in Paul as in himself; or by himself, without any suggestion or assistance from the Apostle; as if the meaning were: we should expect that those who assume such high grounds with respect to themselves, would need no suggestions from others, but that they would apply the same principles and come to a correct conclusion here. This last explanation seems the more probable. The first reminds us of the supposed Christ-party in Corinth which claimed a special relation to Christ on account of their Jewish descent (comp. 2 Corinthians 11:22), or on account of some intercourse with him by mysterious visions, such as are referred to in 2 Corinthians 12:1 ff.; and according to it, the Apostle was maintaining that they would find the same marks of intimacy with Christ in him. But the alleged facts are altogether too uncertain to exercise any influence upon our exposition. There is no necessity of assuming that Paul had any where reference in xριστοῦεἶναι to such a party or its leaders, and the utmost that we can infer from what is here said is that he might possibly have some allusion to the name of that party. Neander thinks that Paul must have referred here to some opponents who claimed to belong exclusively to Christ on account of having received their Christianity directly from the Apostles of the original Church. The claim of these persons, whatever it might be, Paul met with the assertion that he also could speak of himself in the same terms in which those earliest Apostles said they were Christ’s. The words, as he himself is, so also are we, are intended to be a conciliatory and a moderate presentation of his true claims. When he speaks unreservedly and tells the whole truth on this subject, he goes beyond what is implied in such a comparison (2 Corinthians 11:23). Eί̀τις (delicately, instead of ὅστις) is not necessarily against the idea that his opponents were probably a number of persons. The equality or the title to an equality of position which he had claimed in 2 Corinthians 10:7, he makes clear in 2 Corinthians 10:8, by adding—For even if I should boast somewhat more abundantly of the power which the Lord gave us for edification and not for your destruction, I should not be put to shame.—He means to say, that if he should go much further in his claims of official authority, he would never be found an idle boaster. The particle ἑάν is not designed to concede that he was about to boast in this manner, and τεγὰρ has the sense of, for even as in Romans 1:26; Romans 7:7. The object of τε is to indicate that some other member of a sentence stands in harmony with it or in a reciprocal relation to it. In the present case it points out such an agreement or correlation between ἑὰν—καυχήσομαι and οὐκαίσχυνθήσομαι (Passow, Tr. A. B. I. 2 a. bb. B.). [On the use of ἕαν with the Aorist subjunctive when something objectively possible is thought of in the future, but not conceived of as exactly certain, see Winer § 43, 3 b. We may here render καυχήσωμαι like the Latin fut. exact and αἱσχυνθήσομαι as the fut. simpl. as in our common English version. The word “ἑξουσία includes both the ideas of power and of right or authority.” Hodge]. ΙΙερισσότερον (accus.) should be taken in a comparative sense. According to some, the comparison has reference to what had been said in 2 Corinthians 10:4-6; but according to others, it has reference to his opponents (more than they boast). It is most natural to suppose that he is putting himself on an equality with those opponents mentioned in 2 Corinthians 10:7, and his meaning would then be: yet more than I just now did when I made myself the equal of such as claimed to be Christ’s servants. In the words, for edification and not for destruction, the church is represented as if it were a house or a temple of God (1 Corinthians 3:16) [and Paul and his associates in the ministry are supposed to be artificers in the construction of the whole and of each part. It was no part of his mission to destroy, but only to save and put in order (a true conservatism). Howson calls attention to the fact that out of the twenty-two times in which the words edify, and edification are used figuratively in the New Testament, they are in every instance but one used by Paul; and the one exceptional instance (Acts 9:31) is in a book composed probably under his superintendence, and by a writer of his school. It is possible that his predilection for the trope may have sprung from his craft as a Cilician tent-maker. But Howson is of the opinion that the word has always a social character, i.e., that it is always applied to the progress of a community, not of an individual. Hence believers are not severally a building, but only parts (living stones) of a common structure (Metaphors of St. Paul in Sund. Mag. for Jan., 1867, pp. 257–63)]. The expressions here used incidentally also suggest that his opponents had not edified but had rather pulled down (comp. 1 Corinthians 3:17), and that they had arrogated to themselves powers which Christ had not bestowed upon them. The καθαίρεσις of 2 Corinthians 10:4 had been of a different nature from that which is here spoken of, for the object of that had been to destroy only what obstructed the Christian faith‚ and to animate and assist such as were living a life of faith (οἱκοδομὴ in 1 Corinthians 8:1). The communicative ἡμῶν indicates that there were others who shared in this power, and who were his genuine associates, and not unworthy intruders into this high office. The words I shall not be ashamed, are very concise and emphatic. They refer to what he was doing, or to the results of his labors as an Apostle, in consequence of which all his boasting on this subject would be proved to be the sober truth. With this is immediately connected a final sentence (2 Corinthians 10:9).—That I may not seem as if I would terrify you by letters.—This is introduced by no τοῦοδὲλέγω, or anything of the kind. The aim which is implied in the ἵνα must be that of God who would not allow him to be put to shame. It was by an appeal to the results of his Apostolic power that he justified himself from the charge of using expressions in his Epistles which could never be carried into execution, and had been, therefore, thrown out for mere intimidation. There is no need, therefore, of commencing a new period with ἵνα, which, after a parenthesis in 2 Corinthians 10:10, comes to a conclusion in 2 Corinthians 10:11 (that I may not seem to terrify you by my Epistles, let such a one think, etc.). There would certainly be something abrupt in the way in which such a sentence would be introduced (and hence some manuscripts insert a δὲ after ἵνα), and the idea itself would be inappropriate (since nothing is, in fact, brought forward in 2 Corinthians 10:11 to obviate the objection which 2 Corinthians 10:9 supposes). [“A clause with ἵνα, as we have seen before in this Epistle (comp. also Galatians 2:10), often depends on some word or words omitted, but easily supplied from the context. “This is the only instance in the New Testament where ἅν, after a conjunction, is used with the infinitive. Winer (§ 43 6) resolves it into ὡςἁνἑκφοβοῖμιὑμᾶς, as if I might wish to terrify you, which agrees with our translation.” Hodge]. In later usage ὡςἅν has the sense of the simple ὡς with the ἅν, i.e., of tanquam quasi (as if), and it is here employed to modify the force of ἐκφοβεῖν, or to indicate that Paul was acting like one who terrifies. The plural seems to imply that Paul had already written to the Corinthians more than one Epistle. Neander: “We may reckon up, first, an Epistle now lost; secondly, that which we now call the first; thirdly, that upon which we are now commenting, and, perhaps, finally, the one which was sent by the hands of Titus.” [Barnes and Stanley think that the Corinthians might have seen some of Paul’s Epistles to other churches, and been so well acquainted with them as to make this general remark respecting them. Four large Epistles (two to the Thessalonians, one to the Galatians, and one to the Corinthians) among those now extant had been written (the two first in the city of Corinth) before this time. Alford also suggests that Paul may have included the letter he was then writing, by way of anticipation].—For his letters, they say, are indeed weighty, and powerful, but his bodily presence is weak, and his speech contemptible (2 Corinthians 10:10).—He here introduces his opponents, urging an objection founded on the objection which had been presented in 2 Corinthians 10:9. The speakers who are the subject of φησίν, are his opponents, and this verb is equivalent to the impersonal φασίν of later usage (Passow, II. 2, p. 2238). There is no reason for confining this to some single person. Bαρύς has the sense of, gravis, significant, important, impressive, inspiring respect, the opposite of ἕξουενημένος. While his letters were important and forcible (mighty), his bodily presence was feeble (not weak on account of disease or smallness of size, but on account of a personal presence which lacked power, the opposite of ἱσχυραί), and his oral discourse (instructions of all kinds, exhortations) commanded no respect, and were received with contempt (comp. 1 Corinthians 2:3 f.). There is no intimation that he was destitute of those bodily organs which were needful to a good oral expression, or of Grecian refinement and culture. Let such an one conclude this, that such as we are in word by Epistles when absent, such are we also in deed when present (2 Corinthians 10:11).—Those who insinuated such things respecting him, might be assured that he would exhibit the same character in all his apostolical conduct as in his writings, and that no one would have reason to reproach him for acting the double part ascribed to him in 2 Corinthians 10:10 (comp. 2 Corinthians 10:1). The omission of the conjunction (asyndeton), and the position of τοῦτο, at the beginning of the sentence, are emphatic. Δογίζεσθαι is here contrasted with the inconsiderate judgment mentioned in 2 Corinthians 10:10, and it has the sense of, to weigh well. To τοιοῦτοιτῷἕργω we must supply ἑσμέν, not ἑσόμεθα as if he had intended to say that he would actually fulfil his threatenings (λόγος). What he meant was, that the influence which he exerted personally as an Apostle would seem to one who carefully observed it, and reflected upon it, quite as important and energetic as that which he exhibited in his writings. [It cannot after all be denied, as Alford concedes, that some allusion is here made to a deficiency in the apostle’s personal appearance and delivery. It does not seem that his opponents, objection was founded wholly on his reserve in the use of his apostolical powers. Without conceding that he was precisely ὁτρίπηχοςἅνθρωποςκαὶτῶνοὑρανῶνἅπτομένος, and even if we receive the descriptions given in Pseudo-Lucian, Malalas, Nicephorus and the Apocraphal Acts of Paul and Thecla as either caricatures or exaggerated traditions of a modern date, we are yet compelled to yield something to the almost universal agreement of antiquity. The general notion which the whole ancient church appears to have preserved of our Apostle was, that he was of a short stature, and that his body was disfigured by some lameness or distortion; that his head was long and bald, his complexion transparent, his forehead high, his nose aquiline, his eyes sparkling, and his eyebrows close and prominent. And yet that there was nothing in his person which amounted to a very unsightly deformity, we have a right to conclude from Acts 14:12, from his public influence before his conversion, from the power he often exhibited as an orator, and from the impression he appears everywhere to have produced. It is not improbable, however, from such passages as 1 Corinthians 2:3, 2 Corinthians 2:13, and others in the epistles to the Corinthians and Galatians, that his temperament was more than commonly liable to nervous agitations; and it would not be strange if his enemies had seen something when he was at Corinth, which they could pervert to his disadvantage. See Conybeare and Howson, chap. 7. p. 224. Smith’s Diet. Art. Paul; Ad. Clarke, and Stanley.] 2 Corinthians 10:12-18. To show that his personal influence was as energetic as his epistolary discourses and exhortations, he now appeals to what he had actually done as an Apostle. He calls attention to the fact that, unlike his arrogant opponents, he had confined himself to those limits which were appointed to his calling, and within which the church of Corinth properly fell, etc.—For we venture not to number ourselves among, or compare ourselves with, some who commend themselves (2 Corinthians 10:12).—The words τολμᾶν signify either, not to have a heart for something, from a moral repugnance to such a proceeding (1 Corinthians 6:1); or, better, ironically, not to venture; [in this matter we are indeed timid], with a severe implication that his opponents were vain enough to do so. A paronomasia may be noticed in ἑγκρῖναι, signifying, to place in a line with, and συγκρῖναι, to liken, to place by the side, to make equal. The words τισὶτῶνσυνιστάντων signify with certain persons (comp. 2 Corinthians 10:2) of the class that commend themselves. But they, measuring themselves among themselves and comparing themselves with themselves are not wise [understand it not.] In this sentence αὑτοὶ with all its subsequent qualifications, appears to apply most appropriately to the Apostle himself (comp. Galatians 4:4). It then appears to be the regular positive expression, corresponding to the subsequent negative in 2 Corinthians 10:13, [they measuring themselves, etc., but we will not boast ourselves of things without measure,] and finds its further development in the assertion (ἁλλὰκατὰτὸμέτρονκ. τ. λ.) but we will boast according to the measure, etc. It was for this reason that we are able to account for a reading of the text which arose in the earliest times, according to which οὑσυνιοῦσιν. ἡμεῖςδὲ was left out. It seemed difficult to apply what was said in connection with αὑτοὶ to Paul’s opponents, and οὑδυνιοῦσιν would make no good sense if αὑτοὶ were applied to Paul himself (they commend themselves; but we, measuring ourselves by ourselves—i.e., “by what we really find ourselves to be—and comparing ourselves with ourselves, not with those wise men, those pretended knowing ones; or, “comparing ourselves with ourselves, who are so unwise, in the opinion of our opponents”!). They also found that on this interpretation the words ἡμεῖςδὲ not only seemed superfluous, but injurious to the sense of the passage, and that on the other hand the sentence read smoothly and with an appropriate meaning if οὑσυνιάσιν. ἡμεῖςδὲ were left out (“they commend themselves; but we measuring ourselves by ourselves, etc., will not boast as to things beyond our measure”). It is evident, therefore, that the reading of the Respectus which has those words is the most difficult reading, and hence was most likely to have been the true one and altered to get rid of the difficulty. This also accounts for the fact that the abbreviated reading is sustained only by Occidental manuscripts, and that even these are by no means in agreement, since some of them have ἡμεῖςδὲ. But even the reading of the Receptus which is much better sustained is capable of a very appropriate sense. Let αὐοὶ be applied to Paul’s opponents. Then the measuring themselves among themselves, is not the correct estimate which people form of themselves and their performances in contrast with a more uncertain one from a comparison with others, but a proud self-conceit springing from a constant fixing of the thoughts upon themselves and their fancied excellences and performances, and from never observing those who are superior to them, and who have distinguished themselves by more exalted achievments; in other words, it is an idle self-satisfaction and self-admiration. Nor is συνιοῦσιν to be construed as a participle in the dative plur. (anacoluthic), but a verb in the 8d pers. plur. Ind. of συνιέω, like συνιᾶσιν, the more common Attic form (adopted by Lachmann on the authority of B. and some other MSS.). The word stands here in an absolute sense: (they not understanding, not reaching a clear discernment, being deficient in understanding;) like the participle οἱσυνιέντες=those who understand, and ὁσυνιῶν Romans 3:11, and συνῆκαν Mark 6:52. It implies either that the course they take is the reason for their want of intelligence, or that it is the way in which they exhibit this want. Others explain it: they do not observe or perceive that they are measuring themselves. by their own selves; or they do so without being aware of it; but such a sense is agreeable neither to the order of the words, nor to the general sense of the passage. For the Apostle is speaking not of the way in which they were blinding themselves, but of the folly of their proceeding, in contrast with his own course. With that measuring of themselves by themselves which is sure to lead off into unbounded self-laudation, (inasmuch as no objective limits can be assigned to a man’s exaltation of himself), the Apostle contrasts that boasting of one’s self which is confined to the limits assigned him by God. Ἀλλά is to be taken in the sense of but, either like the Germ. sondern, completely reversing or giving the negative to the previous clause, or like the Germ. aber, only partially doing so. The former is preferable on account of the preceding οὐ. As he now wishes to carry out the contrast of persons which had been given already in ἑαυτούςτισι, he brings up in strong light the kind of conduct which is most opposed to the pretensions of which he had been speaking. But οὐσυνιοῦσιν offers an obvious explanation of οὐτολμῶμεν (Meyer.) [It must be confessed that there is on this interpretation an appearance of defect in that sharp contrast which seems demanded by the ἁλλὰ at the commencement of the passage. That particle seems to require that what he was about to say should be in direct opposition to the self-commendation of those of whom he had just spoken. By referring αὐτοῖ to the Apostle, this would be clear, since he would oppose his way of proceeding to theirs; but if that word is referred to his opponents, we have the conduct of the same persons shown in contrast]. Osiander endeavors to avoid this difficulty, by making αὐτοὶ especially emphatic [giving it an exclusive power] equivalent to soli [they alone, by themselves, separate from all other men. Kuehner. Gram. Am. ed. § 302, 6; Jelf. § 656, 3. a.]. This would make the Apostle say, that he would not venture to put himself among or even by the side of such persons, but that he would leave them to themselves and to their own folly. In this case a severe and bitter irony would be expressed: “but they, for their own special part, since they measure themselves, etc., are not wise; but we,” etc. Something of this kind was undoubtedly intended by the Apostle in whatever way his language is construed; but it is questionable whether it is implied in αὐτοί. [The contrast implied in referring αὐτοὶ to Paul’s opponents is in the very spirit of this section, and seems demanded by the argument. The very object he had in view was to put himself personally in opposition to them. The complete meaning developed by such a construction may be expressed thus: “we confess we have not the boldness which some have shown; and hence we shrink from numbering ourselves, or even comparing ourselves with them. On the other hand, we think that they are far from showing wisdom when they resort to self-commendations, and seek for credit by comparing themselves not with true Apostles, but with one another, and with their ownselves at different periods. Their self-love is sure to flatter them when they look solely at their own and others’ accomplishments, instead of comparing themselves with the standard which God has given us.”—See a sermon on this text by Dr. Chalmers].—Nay, neither will we boast without measure—[as far as to things which have no limit] (2 Corinthians 10:13). The authorities are here in favor of καυχησόμευα (Rec.) and are sufficiently strong to prove it genuine. The future [absolute, looking to indefinite time and to an ethical impossibility, Webster, chap. 6. p. 84; Winer, § 41, 6] implies that such a boasting could never by any possibility take place (comp. Romans 10:14). If we leave the word out of the text, we must suppose that the Apostle in 2 Corinthians 10:15, by an anacoluthon (καυχώμενοι) turned back in his thoughts to εἰςτὰἅμετρα. Fritzsche, who prefers the shorter reading of the text in 2 Corinthians 10:12, and who concludes that οὑσυνιοῦσιν originated in some marginal gloss, and then created a necessity for inserting ἡμεῖςδὲ, is in favor of such an explanation. But the Receptus has been triumphantly defended by Reiche (Commentar. I.) and Meyer.—But we boast according to the measure of the rule which God apportioned to us.—Opposed to εἰςτὰἅμετρα (on to the unmeasured, εἰς implying the extent or boundaries toward which the boasting tended, and which formed its measure or limit), stands here κατὰτὸμέτρον (according to the measure). This latter measure is more particularly defined by the additional τοῦκανόνος, which signifies [properly, a reed, rod or staff, to keep anything erect, firm or upright, and then] the measure of the line, or the space determined by the measuring line [Robinson’s Greek and Eng. Lex to the N. T.]. We prefer the latter signification in the sense of a measured space accurately defined; and hence, in this place, in accordance with what follows, the department of influence, or of official duty, assigned him by God.—A measure—even unto you. in the words οὖἐμέρισενἡμινὁθεὸςμέτρον we have an instance of a bold attraction in the sense of ποῦμέτρον (in apposition with τοῦκανόνος) ὁ ?̓ ?. The reason it is joined thus with τοῦκανόνος probably was, because the Apostle wished to give prominence to the thought that the measure was precisely determined, inasmuch as the field of his activity had been marked out for him by God, as if by a surveyor’s chain, when the Spirit within him, as well as external providential circumstances, had shown him in what direction and how far he should go (comp. Acts 16:6 ff.). In ἐφικέσθαιἄχρικαὶὑμῶν (to extend even unto you) he meant to say, that in this distribution of parts (1 Corinthians 7:17), God had made his measure extend even to Corinth. The infinitive is connected with ἐμέρισεν, in which is contained the idea of an intention. Ἄχρι, etc., i.e., to Corinth, which was then the extreme limit of Paul’s preaching in the West. He proceeds, in 2 Corinthians 10:14, to show that he might, without presumption, regard them as within the sphere of his influence, and to confirm what he had said in 2 Corinthians 10:13.—For we stretch (over-extend) not ourselves beyond our measure, as though we reached not unto you.—The phrase ἱπερεκτείνεινἑαυτόν properly signifies to stretch one’s self over or beyond the measure, which had been assigned him (by the measuring instrument); and in thus using it, the Apostle’s object was to meet the objection that he had arrogated to himself in Corinth something which did not belong to him. We must not construe ὡςμὴἐφικνούμενοι (the readings ἐφικόμενοι or ἀφικόμενοι have very feeble authority in their favor), as if it were in the preterite, but take it as a designation of those who do not come, i.e., do not reach to you. The μή denies the idea supposed, and implies that it was only an ideal case which he was supposing, viz: that he had not in fact reached to the Corinthians. He informs them what the real fact was, and confirms what he had before asserted, when he adds—For even as far as you did we come foremost in preaching the gospel of Christ.—̓Εφθάσαμεν suggests that the priority of influence in Corinth properly belonged to him, and that he had been before his opponents in preaching the Gospel and in establishing a Church there. Even if it were proved that φθάνειν in Romans 9:31; Philippians 3:16; Daniel 4:8, should have the meaning simply of to come to a place generally, we think its more fundamental meaning [in the aorist: we have already come, or have come beforehand] should be re tained in this passage. ̓Εντῷεὑαγγελίῳ implies that the announcement of salvation was the element in which he moved in all his apostolic journeys; or it simply means, while we were preaching Christ.—Not boasting without measure in other men’s labors (2 Corinthians 10:15 a)—These words must be joined to 2 Corinthians 10:13, so as to make 2 Corinthians 10:14 not merely the second half of 2 Corinthians 10:14, but a parenthesis. He resumes the subject contained in οὐκεἰςτὰἅμετρακαυχᾶσθαι, and grammatically connects what he here says with καυχησόμεθα, which had to be understood in ἀλλὰκατὰτὸμέτρον, etc., in 2 Corinthians 10:13. The participial sentence must therefore be joined with καυχησόμεθα and not with ἐφθάσαμεν (Rόckert).—But having a hope that as your faith increases we shall be enlarged among you according to our rule abundantly (2 Corinthians 10:15 b).—We have here a further development of the Apostle’s discourse. In the first place an object is given to the καυχᾶσθαι, which he had disclaimed for himself when he says: ἐνἀλλοτρίοιςκόποις. This contains an indirect allusion to his opponents, who in fact boasted of other men’s labors, and arrogated as their own what had been done by others (κόπος, John 4:38; 1 Corinthians 3:8). With this negative he goes on to connect the prospect of an extension of his sphere of labor beyond Corinth, in consequence of an anticipated increase of their faith; αὐξανομένηςτῆςπίστεωςὑμῶν is a more forcible expression than the simple participle ἐλπίζοντες would have been, and it signifies a firm, habitual confidence. The present αὐξανομένης indicates not only that their faith would be increased (Engl. A. V.), but that it was then actually increasing. He had an assurance that their faith would have a steady, pure and vigorous progress, and hence that he would not much longer be contracted and held back by his care for them. On this assurance he entertained a confident hope in a short time, ἐνὑμὶνμεγαλυνθῆναι, etc. Ἐνὑμῖν does not belong especially to that which had just been said, as if the Apostle had intended to say that he hoped their faith would be increased either in their hearts (in distinction from their outward growth among the people) or in the common fellowship of believers; for in either case ὑμῶν would be superfluous. He hoped that when their faith had been increased, he would be magnified among them, and would be assisted by their growing congregations to accomplish further and more important results. There is evidently nothing in the language used to imply that the Apostle was thinking of the geographical position of Corinth or of the favorable opportunities which would be presented there for more extensive enterprises (ἐν is in the sense of per). [And yet, as Grotius and Rosenmueller suggest, such an idea would have been peculiarly appropriate to the Corinthians, who were great navigators, and had peculiar facilities for assisting him on his journey to countries farther West and South. Not unreasonably, Osiander concludes from this passage that no Apostle had before this been further West]. Even the metaphor of a man of extraordinary stature, who could therefore reach further without going beyond his measure (Meyer), is probably foreign to the passage. Still less appropriate is the explanation of μεγαλύνειν, which makes it signify: celebrari (to be praised, although in other places the word may have that meaning), or rather: to be glorified among you. The context, however, favors the idea that the Apostle was thinking of an enlargement or exaltation of his power to perform his duties, in consequence of which he would be able to press further on, and enlarge the sphere of his labors. That this increase of his greatness would only be in conformity with his calling as an Apostle, he indicates by the words, according to our rule (κατὰτὸνκανόναἡμῶν). This rule has no reference to the general principle expressed in Romans 15:20, for the connection (2 Corinthians 10:13) required him simply to say that he was confining himself to the limits God had assigned him (according to our measuring line, i.e., never to go beyond the space God has distinctly marked off for me). He is careful, however, to inform his readers that these limits did not abridge his free action and did not make his very great enlargement impossible. This he lets us know in εἰςπερισσείαν. He was well aware that he had been ordained to an Apostleship which was universal in its object (comp. Romans 1:13 ff; Romans 15:23 f., 28), and which called for an extraordinary energy. Rόckert’s idea, that αὐξαν.—εἰςπερισσείαν has a tincture of irony about it, appears to be without foundation (comp. Meyer).—To preach the Gospel as far as the parts beyond you (2 Corinthians 10:16 a). He here informs us more definitely what would be the result of the enlargement of which he had just spoken, and what he would become capable of. Εὐαγγελίσασθαι is here the infinitive either of the design or of the result to be accomplished by the enlargement; it is not simply epexegetical of what that enlargement was to be (q. d., that is, to make known the Gospel), but to tell us what would follow that enlargement, or why he hoped for it (in order that). As in 1 Peter 1:25; 1 Thessalonians 2:9; John 8:26, εἰς is here used to imply the making known to, and bringing the Gospel into, those countries. ̓Ὑ ?̓περέκεινα is a word used in a corrupted Greek style for ἐπέκεινα. In the next clause he proceeds to give us the negative description of the same result or design—not to boast ourselves of things prepared for our hands in another’s line (2 Corinthians 10:16 b.). In this additional qualification of what he had said, he intended to signify that in such an extension of his Apostolical influence he did not mean to boast like his opponents of something already prepared for him in the sphere of other men’s labors, i.e., to appropriate to himself the fruits of other persons, labors, and thus to acquire a false reputation for greatness. [In our common English version a comma should be placed after the word “line,” so that no one should read the passage as if it were, “another man’s line of things”]. The words ὁκανών have here the sense of, what is marked off by a measuring line; properly, the extent of space intended for another and assigned to him by the measuring line. The meaning of the word is not changed here, though the general idea it conveys is affected by the context. In contrast with this false and censurable self-glorification, he now presents in a general sentence the glorying which is proper and commendable. The general rule with respect to this he announces thus—But he that I glorieth let him glory in the Lord (2 Corinthians 10:17). Comp. 1 Corinthians 1:31. The reason for this glorying which is mentioned in 2 Corinthians 10:18 makes it evident that, κύριος (God) is here represented to be not so much the object of the glorying as the reason on account of which one glories. To a selfish and arbitrary self-commendation, to a false boasting, stands opposed a glorying in a fellowship with the Lord, as the true source of all ability, or on account of that approbation which God bestows upon us and which is revealed in the blessing attending our labors. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ XIV.—HIS OWN IN WITH THAT OF . DEMANDS UPON THEIR .SEVERE OF HIS . OF THE APOSTLE 2 Corinthians 11:1-331 Would to God [Would that] ye could bear with me a little in my folly [a little 2folly in me]: and indeed [ye do] bear with me. For [me; for] I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may presentyou as a chaste virgin to Christ. 3But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, Song of Solomon 3 your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. 4For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached [a Jesus whom we preached not], or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received [received not, λαμβάνετε], or another gospel, which ye 5have not accepted [accepted not, ἐλάβετε], ye might well bear with him For I suppose I was not a whit [in any respect] behind the very chiefest [these super-eminent,] 6ὑπερλίαν apostles. But though I be rude in speech, yet not in knowledge; but we have7been thoroughly [in every respect] made manifest among you in all things. Have [among all with respect to you. Or have, ὴ ?́ ?] I committed an offence in abasing myself 8that ye might be exalted, because I have preached to you the gospel of God freely? I robbed other churches, taking wages of them, to do you service. 9And when I was present with you, and wanted, I was chargeable to no man: for that which was lacking to me the brethren which came from Macedonia supplied: and in all things I have kept myself from being burdensome unto you, and so will I keep myself. 10As the truth of Christ is in me, no man shall stop me of this boasing [this boasting shall not 11be closed against me, ήκαύχησιςαὕτηοὐφργήσεται] in the regions of Achaia. Where fore? because I love you not? God knoweth. 12But what I do, that will I [also] do, that I may cut off occasion from them which desire occasion; that wherein they glory, 13they may be found even as we. For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the [om. the] apostles of Christ. 14And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed [transforms himself, μετασχματίξεται] into an angel of light. 15Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed [and become] as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works. 16I say again, Let no man think me a fool [foolish, ἅφρονα]; if otherwise [but if it cannot be so, εἰδὲμ́ ?ͅγε], yet as a fool receive me, that I [too, κὰγὼ ?] may boast myself a little. 17That which I speak, I speak it not after [the manner of, κατὰ ?] the Lord, but as it were foolishly, in this confidence of boasting. 18Seeing that many glory after the flesh, I will glory also. 19For ye suffer fools gladly, seeing ye yourselves are wise. 20For ye suffer [it patiently], if a man bring you into bondage, if a man devour you, if a man take of you [insnares you, λαμβάνει], if a man exalt himself, if a man smite you on the face. 21I speak as concerning reproach [By way of disparagement, I speak] as though we had been [were] weak. Howbeit [but], whereinsoever any is bold, (I speak foolishly,) I am bold also. 22Are they Hebrews? so am I. Are they Israelites?so am I. Are they the seed of Abraham? so am I. 23Are they ministers of Christ? (I speak as a fool [as though beside myself, παραφρονῶν]), I am more; in [by, ἐν] labours more abundant, in [by] stripes above measure, in [by] prisons more frequent, in [by]deaths oft. 24Of the Jews five times received I forty stripes save one. 25Thrice was I beaten with rods, once was I stoned, thrice I suffered shipwreck, a night 26and a day have I been in the deep; In [by] journeyings often, in [by] perils of waters [rivers], in [by] perils of robbers, in [by] perils by [from] mine own countrymen, in [by] perils by [from] the heathen, in [by] perils in the city, in [by] perils in 27the wilderness, in [by] perils in the sea, in [by] perils among false brethren; In [by] weariness and painfulness; in [by] watchings often, in [by] hunger and thirst, in [by] fastings often, in [by] cold and nakedness. 28Beside those things that are without [Beside other things which take place, χωρὶςτῶνπαρεκτὸς], that which cometh upon me daily [day by day], the care of all the churches. 29Who is weak, and I am not weak? who is offended, and I burn not? 30If I must needs glory, I will glory of the things which concern mine infirmities. 31The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which [God, the Father of the Lord Jesus, who] is blessed for evermore, knoweth that I lie not. 32In Damascus the governor under Aretas the king, kept [guarded, ἐφρούρει] the city of the Damascenes with a garrison [om. with a garrison, desirous] to apprehend me: 33And through a window [a small opening, διὰθυριχδος] in a basket was I let down by [through, διὰ ?] the wall, and escaped his hands. AND 2 Corinthians 11:1-4. Would that ye could bear a little folly from me. Nay, indeed, ye do bear with me; for I am jealous of you with a godly jealousy.—The Apostle now felt compelled, in order to recover the respect he had once enjoyed in Corinth, and to destroy those influences which were utterly inconsistent with it, to maintain that his position in the Church was not only equal but far superior to that of those who disparaged him. This commendation of himself, to which he stooped in condescension to them and as a matter of duty to himself and the cause of truth he ironically calls a “folly‚” because it seemed to give undue importance to that which was insignificant and connected only with outward appearances. He therefore entreats them to bear with him, although he might seem for a while to contradict the principle he had just laid down.—Ὄφελον 1 Corinthians 4:8. [The word a shortened form of the Imperfect for ὥφελον (which some MSS. have instead), and in the later Greek it was used as an interjection like εἵθε, to express a wish. Its tense implies an incomplete action still in its course and not yet come to its perfection (Webster, p. 88, Winer, § 42, n. 2). It is connected with verbs in the Indicative, here with the Imperfect]. ̓Ανείχεσθε is the Hellenistic, and ἠνεχεσθε the classical form.—The imperfect (not equivalent to the pluperfect) is an expressed, and implies that he could hardly expect its realization.—If we read (with de Wette, Fritzsche) τῇἀφροσύνῃ, μου would have to be governed by ἀνείχεαθε, a construction common in the New Testament, though unusual in the classic writers. Μικρόν has the sense of: a little, and the dative τῇἀφροσύνῃ signifies: in respect to foolishness. But according to the best supported reading μου is not dependent upon ἀνείχεσθε but upon μικρόν, before which it is placed that it may become emphatic [my small degree of folly]. Such an emphasis makes insertion of an “also” unnecessary. In μουμικρόντι there is probably a slight reference to the great folly of those boastful opponents which they had already endured, [ἄφρων is one who does not rightly use his powers. Hence Bengel says that it is a milder word than μωρία which implies a folly of a perverse or wicked kind. The fault of the ἅφρων (ἀφροσύνη) is imprudence or rashness (Mark 7:22)].—The doubt which after all is apparent in ἀνείχεσθε (that ye could or would bear) supplies an occasion for the expression of confidence when he adds, “but indeed ye do bear with me.” The object of ἀλλὰ is to correct the impression, which the wish he had just expressed might have produced‚ as if there were any doubt on the point: I need have no such desire, for you are already doing this very thing. Καί has an intensive force: even in fact. Καί is not in the Imperative [but in the Indicative: but you are in fact bearing‚ etc.‚] for as a request it would be feeble‚ and as a command unsuitable to the spirit of the context.—In 2 Corinthians 11:2 a reason is given for the expectation he had just expressed in 2 Corinthians 11:1. They had good reasons for the ἀνέχεσθε‚ inasmuch as the folly alluded to‚ had its origin not in a regard for his own interest or in pride‚ but in a Divine zeal for their welfare and for Christ’s honor. (Bengel: (amantes videntur amentes‚ lovers usually seem out of their wits]; comp. 2 Corinthians 5:13). The word ζηλοῦν refers here to the jealously of love‚ the object of which is in the accusative (γυναῖκα‚ Numbers 5:14 : Ecclesiastes 9:1). He was jealous of the Church in behalf of Christ (to whom he‚ as the one who had made the match, had espoused it)‚ lest it should prove unfaithful‚ and be drawn off by seducing teachers from the simple dependence on Christ which his gospel had awakended in their hearts. He calls this feeling a zeal of God (θεοῦζήλῳ)‚ which signifies here‚ not as in Romans 10:2‚ a zeal in behalf of God (gen. obj.)‚ for the feeling was properly in behalf of Christ; not merly one which came from or was produced by God; and still less qualitatively‚ a very great or holy zeal; but such a zeal as God has (gen. subj.). This zeal was felt by God‚ inasmuch as He was exceedingly desirous that the bride‚ whom He had provided for the Son‚ who acts in His name‚ should remain constant in her attachment; and it was of course felt also by those ministers through whose in strumentality this Divine work had been accomplished. With respect to this zeal of God (among men, jealousy) as the Husband of His people‚ comp. Isaiah 54:5; Isaiah 62:5; Jeremiah 3:1. etc.: Ezekiel 16:8‚ etc.; Ezekiel 23:1 etc.; Hosea 2:19.—The reason for his use of this expression he now proceeds to give when he adds (2 Corinthians 11:2)—For I have espoused you to one Husband‚ that I might present you as a chaste virgin to Christ.—The word ἀρμόζειν when applied to the conjugal relation signifies‚ to betroth‚ to marry.—The middle voice in other places signifies‚ to betroth one’s self; but among the more recent writers it has the same meaning as the active‚ and especially denotes the act of him who was instrumental in forming the engagement and who among the Jews always continued the medium of intercourse between the contracting parties. Comp. John 3:29 [and “Chrysostom’s epithet on the Apostle: νυμφαγωγὸςτῆςοἰκουμένης (Stanley)]‚ (not the guardian who had the charge of the education of the maiden‚ as if ἀρμόζειν were equivalent to prζparare, ornare; nor the father who made the contract for her);—The word to one husband‚ are emphathic‚ in contrast with their dependence upon their party leaders. The design which the espousal was intended to accomplish was to present to Christ a chaste virgin. He here gives the name of the one husband. The idea of virginal purity is especially prominent in the epithet chaste, on which the emphasis must be placed. The presentation refers to the period of the second advent (parousia), when the union of the Church with Christ will be completely realized (the marriage Supper of the Lamb). It is one part of this exclusive devotion of the Bride to her Lord, that she should remain chaste (ἁγνότμς). [The ancient Fathers had much to say of the virgin purity of the Church, and of the duty of each Christian as a part of Christ’s betrothed Church to maintain “virginitas mentis,” which Augustine defines to be “integra fides, solida spes, sincera charitas.” Such views were striking in distinction from the spiritual polygamy and pollutions of heathenism and ancient heresy. Comp. Wordsworth]. In contrast with this endeavor on the part of the Apostle, he now mentions the danger which had awakened his fears:—but I fear lest, peradventure, as the serpent completely beguiled Eve by his many arts, so your minds might be led away from the simplicity which is in Christ (2 Corinthians 11:3). Νοήματα occurred also in 2 Corinthians 3:14; 2 Corinthians 10:5, and here signifies the mind itself, especially those faculties by which we think and will; for in the present case the reference is evidently to an impurity both in the intellect and in the will—a departure from the pure Gospel and a disturbance of their entire surrender of themselves to Christ. Beck (Seelenl. 52f.) makes it the corruption of all the spiritual powers of the soul, inasmuch as the thoughts and purposes are drawn away from the simplicity of truth by deluding the understanding with sophistries and the heart with vain hopes. The words φθαρῇἀπό are a constructio prζgnans, and signify, to be led astray, i.e., to be brought off from any thing. The verb φθείρεσθαι is significant, for it was not unfrequently appropriated to the destruction of virginal chastity (vitiare). In the present instance this spiritual chastity is called a simplicity in respect to Christ (εἰςχριστόν) because it implied a simple dependence upon Christ. He illustrates this by a comparison with the temptation of Eve by the Serpent; in which the points of comparison are: 1, the feminine character of the Church (παρθένος), and 2, the influence of Satan in both instances. He presumes that his readers were well acquainted with, and believed in, the seductive influence of Satan through the Serpent upon the woman, Genesis 3; comp. John 8:44; Revelation 12:9; Revelation 12:14-17; Revelation 20:2; 1 John 3:8. [Wordsworth finds in 2 Corinthians 11:3 “a clear assertion of the reality of the appearance of Satan in the form of a Serpent to Eve in Paradise,” and we may add that we have the Apostle’s sanction to the historical nature and accuracy of the history in Genesis 3:1 ff. In ἐξαπατάω, which the Apostle uses both here and in 1 Timothy 2:14, the ἐκ strengthens the idea of the deception. He thus expresses the thorough deception which passed upon the woman‚ and which he feared might take place among the Corinthians. Comp. Ellicott on 1 Timothy 2:14]. But those who had seduced the Corinthian Church are expressly called the ministers of Satan in 2 Corinthians 11:15. ΙΙανουργία suggests the various arts of deception and the false shows made use of by the Judaistic teachers, when they substituted their doctrine of the law for the pure Gospel Paul had preached. (Whether a Gnostic element was mingled with their instructions, and whether rhetorical and dialectic arts were employed in enforcing them, may be left undecided.—For if indeed he who is coming were preaching another Jesus whom we preached not, or ye were receiving another Spirit which ye accepted not, ye might well bear with him (2 Corinthians 11:4). This verse presents more than common difficulties, especially with reference to its connection with what precedes and what follows it. Some contend that the Apostle is here ironically giving the reasons for the solicitude he had expressed in 2 Corinthians 11:3. “For if my opponents teach and work among you things which are entirely new, you might well be pleased with them.” The idea expressed in plain terms would then be: “ye would, in fact, have reason to be much displeased with such novelties.” By his ironical reproach he would thus show what reason he had for anxiety on account of their complaisance toward those false Apostles. His reason for reproving them for such a complaisance he presents in 2 Corinthians 11:5. Thus Meyer. In like manner‚ Osiander‚ though he explains καλῶς to mean: “you endure them finely; you find much delight in them, imagining perhaps that you will acquire some honor from them;” and he makes the Apostle give in 2 Corinthians 11:5 the reason for the ironical reproach in 2 Corinthians 11:4, by directly denying there the hypothesis on which they had claimed superiority over him, viz., because they had first preached the true Jesus and brought among the Corinthians the true Spirit and the true Gospel: “If, therefore, my opponents could claim superiority over me on this account, you might well be pleased with them. But such a claim is an empty assumption; for,” etc. On this interpretation, καλῶς has a more appropriate meaning, and the connection with the preceding context is more obvious, but the idea of denying what had been supposed in 2 Corinthians 11:4, has something artificial in it. If no such irony is allowed in 2 Corinthians 11:4, its connection with 2 Corinthians 11:5, is still more difficult: “if he who presents himself preaches another‚ i.e., a better Jesus, etc.‚ you may very properly be pleased with him; but this is not so. ” In this case the connection with 2 Corinthians 11:3 is not plain, unless we add yet further: “such an endurance is not well and I have good reason for my solicitude.” The reason for his implied assertion that this was not so, would then be given more fully in 2 Corinthians 11:5.—In καλῶςἀνείχεσθε we have an apparent reference to the ἀνέχεσθε of 2 Corinthians 11:1. In the first place he tells them what reason they had for bearing with him: (2 Corinthians 11:2, ζηλῶγὰρ—his reason for this he then gives further: ἡρμοσάμην—φοβοῦμαιδὲ.)—Now he says that after seeing how they had acted toward others, he surely had reason to expect such a forbearance from them. If the man who had come to them (among them) was preaching another Jesus, altogether different from the one he had preached, etc., they might well find the greatest delight in him, i.e., they might find the utmost conceivable pleasure in his adversaries. But if this were so, he surely had reason to expect that they would tolerate him and a little folly on his part; since he was in no respect inferior to these super-eminent Apostles (2 Corinthians 11:5). In this case we only need to retain a constant recollection of what had been said in the leading sentence (2 Corinthians 11:1)‚ to gain a consistent connection for the whole passage. No actual occurrence would be introduced by εἰ, but only a supposable though extreme case: an alteration of the fundamental principles of Christianity. In the apodosis or conclusion, he introduces a sentence of a different construction (ἀνεχεσθε), but one which not unfrequently is found in classic writers. In such an apodosis the ἄν falls away, if the object is to imply that there was something surer and necessary, unless some circumstances to prevent it should take place, or if nothing is spoken of except what must have taken place according to the supposition (Passow, ἄν, D. 1.). [Winer, § 43. 2. Had he said in the protasis: ἐκήρυσσεν, etc., he would have implied that the whole supposition was an impossibility, and this is an assertion which he does not wish to make. The idea is: in the case supposed, you would indeed have been well pleased. He thus intimates that such a case was not an actual reality.—The present tense in the protasis does not compel us to take ἀνείχεδθε as a simple prζterite: “you made yourselves well pleased,” thus expressing a real displeasure or only a compulsory satisfaction; nor as a question (“have you reason to be pleased with him?”) [The leading verbs in the conditional clauses (κηρύσσωιλαμβάυετε) were each in the present, and we should naturally have expected that in the conclusion (apodosis) the verb would have been in the present also: (ἀνεχεσθε, ye bear with him). But instead of this the Apostle designedly softens the expression by saying (ἀνείςεσθε): “ye might well bear with him.” In this way he avoids saying directly that they had actually borne with the assumptions of their false teachers.] Ὁἐρχόμενος in this connection does not signify that he who comes first must of course be the best, but simply that he who comes makes his appearance; the presence of his opponents is conceived of as the coming forward of a single person (Meyer). [Wordsworth: “ὁἐρς is, he who cometh, i.e., he who is not sent with a regular ordination and mission. This is the true character of an unauthorized teacher. This one sends himself, in contrast with the Apostle who is sent by another, viz. by Christ.”] Ἂλλον as applied to Jesus, is a mere denial of identity and the meaning therefore is: if he so preaches that the Jesus preached does not seem the same as the one before preached. (Not: χριστόν, for then he would imply that same other one than Jesus was the true Messiah.)—Ἕτερον on the other hand, as applied to the gospel, signifies something different in nature or kind, comp. Acts 4:12, Galatians 1:6-7—Ἐδέζασθε has not the same meaning with ἐλάβετε (to receive), but it signifies to accept, and refers to the time when they were converted. [Bengel says that this change of verbs was because “man is passive in receiving the Spirit but active in accepting the gospel.”]—As in the relative sentence the emphasis lies upon the negation, there is no ὑμεῖς.—In the words ά̀λλον, and ἕτερον it is implied that the subjects compared are entirely different from one another, and not that the thing spoken of was more excellent in the estimation of the Apostle’s opponents. By ἕτερονπνεῦμα we are also not to understand the spirit produced in the heart by the preaching of the law, viz., the spirit of fear (Romans 8:15), or the spirit of the world (1 Corinthians 2:12)‚ or more definitely‚ the earthly spirit of a party; and by ἕτερονεὐαγγ. (scil. λαμβάνετε), those institutions or instructions which came wholly from men, etc.—[He had given two reasons for bearing with him‚ viz.‚ the jealousy which he, as the friend of Christ (the paranymph) might reasonably be expected to feel for them‚ and their easy toleration of those who were preaching something like another gospel; and] he now proceeds in 2 Corinthians 11:5 to show that if they could take such extreme pleasure in his opponents, they had some good reason for enduring him (comp. above)‚ since he was in no respect inferior to them. He now specifies some particulars. 2 Corinthians 11:5-6. For I think that in no respect have I been behind these very superior apostles—The word λογίζομαι denotes the result of careful reflection and probably has in this place still a delicate ironical tinge (Osiander).—In the negative μγδὲνὑστεργκέναι (the perfect reaching forward into the present) there is a modest reserve‚ inasmuch as he really had reason to boast of a positive superiority. But the μγδὲν forbids a limitation of the expression to anything of a partial nature. The words ἱπερλίανἅπόστολοι, however‚ both in this place and in 2 Corinthians 12:11, must apply to his opponents, previously designated by ἐρχόμενος and afterwards more particularly characterized in 2 Corinthians 11:13-15. According to Neander the Apostle intended by this compound word (ὑπελίαν) to designate the extravagant importance which was attributed to or assumed by these false teachers, comp. 2 Corinthians 11:13. The whole connection is inconsistent with the interpretation prevalent in the ancient church‚ which applied the phrase to the principal Apostles‚ Peter‚ James and John (Galatians 2:9)‚ and which the Protestants very generally accepted in their controversy with the Romanists on the subject of Peter’s primacy. Even if the expression contained nothing but praise rather than a bitter reproach, it would be entirely out of place in the argument.—But though I be perhaps rude in speech‚ I am not so in knowledge; but in every respect in regard to you we have been thoroughly made manifest among all men (2 Corinthians 11:6).—The Apostle here introduces a detailed explanation of what he had said in 2 Corinthians 11:5‚ with a concession that in one respect there might be an exception to what he had just said‚ inasmuch as his opponents might pride themselves on a kind of eloquence gained in the schools. This concession‚ however‚ he would not extend beyond the manner of discourse subordinate to that which ought to be the main point with an Apostle, viz., the γνῶσις‚ the knowledge or perception of Divine truth (2 Corinthians 10:5; 2 Corinthians 2:14). The word ι̇διώτης, 1 Corinthians 14:16, signifies a beginner‚ a bungler‚ an uneducated one who has no skill for the work in hand. [It does not deny any amount of education or skill on other or general matters. It signifies rather a man not professionally acquainted with that which he undertakes (Alford). Such a one might possibly perform the part assigned him even better than those who were trained to it‚ but he would do it in ways not taught in the regular schools. Paul was in reality a powerful speaker (Acts 19:12; Acts 22:1; Acts 24:10; Acts 26:2; Acts 17:22)‚ but he did not speak in the methods usually practised by professional orators. Webster’s Synn. p. 215, and Trench, Synn. 2d Part, p. 152]. The occasion for such a reproach may be seen (comp. 2 Corinthians 10:10) in 1 Corinthians 1:17; 1 Corinthians 2:1; 1 Corinthians 2:4. The Apostle was an impressive but not an artificial orator. When he says, we have been thoroughly made manifest, etc., he passes as he often does in this epistle and in his other writings (e.g. 2 Corinthians 5:11; 2 Corinthians 10:11; 1 Thessalonians 3:4-5) from the use of the singular to that of the plural (φανερωθέντὲς); from the individual to the collective or collegial form of expression. If φανερώσαντες be adopted as the true reading αὐτήν (γνῶσιν) must be understood. [The recent addition of the authority of the Sinaiticus to that which before was so strong in favor of this reading almost compels us to adopt it. Alford accepts of it and renders the clause thus: But in every matter we made things manifest, i.e., he made the things of the Gospel (not as our author suggests, his knowledge itself) known among all men].—The connection with 2 Corinthians 11:7 will not permit us to refer φανερωθέντες to γνῶσιν for what is there presupposed as well as what is implied in ἐνπαντί (in the sense of: in every respect, not: at all times) requires a more general assertion. We see no need of supplying: “as an Apostle and an upright man‚” or anything of a similar kind to define more particularly what he meant by φανερωθέτες; for the specification of what he intended was very obvious. In every respect, so far as you are concerned‚ we have been quite manifest among (with) all men; i.e. what we are to you‚ and what advantage you have derived from us is well known to every one (Meyer). [The phrase εἰςὑμῖν cannot mean among you, as in the A. V., for that would have required ἐνὑμῖν (Hodge)].—The second ἀλλ’ introduces not a second conclusion or apodosis, but something contrasted with οὐτῇγνώσωι‚ and it is called for by the transition to a more general assertion which includes the possession of the γνῶσις.—Mistaking this‚ some have connected it with 2 Corinthians 11:5‚ in such a way as to include εἰ ?—γνώσει in a parenthesis. This is not only unnecessary‚ but it deprives what is asserted in the parenthesis of all appropriate signification. After φανερωθέτες‚ we may supply ἐσμέν from the context‚ so that the general meaning will be: “not however with respect to knowledge, for in every respect are we manifest; or, we are plainly known,” etc.—Ἐνπᾶσιν after ἐνπαντί is in the masculine and not in the neuter: [i.e. in all things among all men].—From the ἐνπαντί he now proceeds to select and give special prominence and vividness to one point‚ viz., the unselfishness of his whole life while he was at Corinth, 2 Corinthians 11:7 ff. [It would have been natural for him now to have gone on to speak of his knowledge‚ by means of Divine revelations‚ etc.‚ but the use of φανερωθέτες had suggested to him one of the charges made against him at Corinth, and he now proceeds immediately to answer this, leaving his “boast” of knowledge in spiritual things to be pursued afterwards (chap. 12). This charge was that he had taken no money from the Corinthians but had supported himself by his own labors; and from this his enemies had insinuated: 1, that if he had been a real Apostle he would have claimed a support as his right; 2, that it indicated a want of confidence in his brethren there; and 3, that he was now making his former disinterestedness a cover for large collections under Titus, ostensibly for the poor, but really for himself. The first two of these objections‚ as they bore on his affection and open dealing with the Corinthians‚ he answers immediately‚ but the third he does not notice till further on‚ 2 Corinthians 12:15-18. See Stanley]. 2 Corinthians 11:7-12. Or have I committed an offence in abasing myself that ye might be exalted‚ because I preached unto you the gospel of God without charge?—[The particle ἢ is not rendered in our Eng. versions‚ and yet it is expressive as marking a transition to a new objection by his oppenents (Hodge)]. The Corinthians would necessarily understand the Apostle‚ when he asserted that he had been made manifest among them‚ as in every respect maintaining that he had behaved himself honorably among them. This induces him to raise the question given in 2 Corinthians 11:7. As the object of this question is to ward off from himself a very foul reproach‚ it implies a very painful and bitter reproof. His opponents probably represented his gratuitous labors and his earning of his own support by his daily toil‚ as a letting down of his apostolic dignity, not merely a defect and a violation of decency, but as an ἁμαρτία [a transgression of established law]‚ as a refusal of the dignity and position which God had assigned him, and perhaps also as a contempt for the Corinthians themselves by scorning to receive any thing from them. The relation of the following sentences to the principal proposition and to one another has been variously explained. The two sentences, ταπεινῶνἐμαυτόν‚ etc., and ὅτι—ὑμῖν‚ may be coφrdinated [so as to be two forms of expressing the same thought] and may be thus regarded as a misrepresentation: 1, of the Apostle’s humility; and 2, of his disinterestedness. On the other hand‚ the first sentence may be taken as the essential part of his offence‚ and the second as an epexegesis of the first. Or‚ finally, ὅτι—ὑμῖν may be regarded as the proper substance of the objection, and ταπεινῶν, etc., as describing‚ in a parenthesis‚ or in a transposed or hyperbatic sentence‚ the character of the act of preaching the Gospel without support (as if he had said: because humbling myself‚ I preached the Gospel without charge). The correct way undoubtedly is to make the one sentence subordinate to and not coφrdinate with the other; and then the best‚ and probably the easiest‚ way is to take the participial sentence as a parenthesis [Have I committed an offence in abasing myself, because I preached‚ etc.]. It is, however‚ not to be resolved into: while I was abasing myself (Meyer). By the words abasing myself that ye might be exalted‚ which he brings forward to the earlier part of the sentence‚ he shows how he thought his gratuitous preaching might be and ought to be regarded. His opponents looked upon it as an act of self-degradation‚ whereas it deserved to be esteemed an act of affectionate self-renunciation‚ an abstaining from the assertion of an acknowledged right (1 Corinthians 9:4)‚ and a supporting himself by the work of his own hands (Acts 18:3)‚ to which he submitted for their good (ἵναὑμεῖςὑψωθῆτε). The exaltation at which he aimed was not merely that of general prosperity‚ but a spiritual elevation from the depths of a sinful corruption to the heights of a Christian salvation. In the words‚ preaching the Gospel without charge‚ we have a refined contrast between what is gratuitous and what is of the utmost possible cost and value (τοῦθεοῦ is here the gen. auctoris). [Meyer: “observe the collocation of the words δωρ.τ.τ. θεοῦεὐαγγ.: the Divine or most precious Gospel for nothing.”]—I spoiled other churches‚ receiving wages from them‚ that I might minister to you (2 Corinthians 11:8). The idea contained in δωρεὰν he here more fully carries out; and he places in contrast with the Corinthian Church some churches (the Macedonian‚ comp. 2 Corinthians 11:9)‚ on whom he had made demands‚ in order that he might serve them (officially‚ εὐαγγελιζόμενος). Ἐσύλησα is a strong expression and calculated to awaken shame in the hearts of those to whom he wrote‚ inasmuch as it implies that others in straitened circumstances had been reduced to want in order to do them a favor (comp. 2 Corinthians 8:2). The word is more particularly explained when he comes to say ὀψώνιονλαβών (1 Corinthians 9:7), which signifies wages for service performed for a livelihood. This he received while he was doing service for the Corinthians; it was contributed, not for the poor‚ like that mentioned in 2 Corinthians 8:4; 2 Corinthians 9:1‚ but for the promotion of their spiritual welfare. [Chrysostom: “he did not say took‚ but robbed‚ i.e.‚ I stripped them bare and made them poor. And‚ what is surely greater‚ it was not for superfluities‚ but for the supply of his necessities; for when he says wages he means necessary subsistence. And‚ what is more grievous yet‚ to do you service”]. He first speaks of what was needful during his journey to Corinth‚ and while establishing himself there. Immediately afterwards he speaks of his condition while residing there.—And when I was present with you and was in want, I was chargeable to no man (2 Corinthians 11:9 a). When I also suffered want (καὶὑστερηθείς)‚ when I became destitute (ὑστερεῖσθαι in Luke 15:14, καὶ concessive), when, particularly, what I had brought with me was exhausted‚ and what I could earn was not sufficient. Καταναρκᾶντινος (I was chargeable lo no one) occurs also in 2 Corinthians 12:13-14). [Wordsworth: “The metaphor is from the fish‚ νάρκη, or torpedo‚ which attaches itself to other creatures and produces torpor in that to which it attaches itself, and then endeavors to derive nourishment from it. ‘I was not‚’ says Paul‚ ‘like a torpedo to any among you’ ”]. According to Hesychius, the word has the sense of βαρύνειν, properly to grow torpid‚ and so to press down upon any one. Jerome speaks of it as a Cilician expression‚ meaning gravare; in this place to be a burden to any one by relying upon him for support. Others regard it as meaning here: to be inactive in my duties. Οὐδενός in the sense of: to no one’s disadvantage [i.e.‚ not enough to injure any one]‚ would not be appropriate in this passage (comp. 2 Corinthians 11:9), nor in 2 Corinthians 12:13-14.—For that which was lacking to me the brethren which came from Macedonia supplied. (2 Corinthians 11:9 b.)—This was the way in which he avoided being burdensome. The words need not be regarded as a parenthesis [as in Alford and Stanley]. ΙΙροσαναπληροῦνὑστέρημά occurs also in 2 Corinthians 9:12. As in all this connection no allusion is made to the Apostle’s supporting himself by his own earnings‚ we may reasonably doubt whether the πρὸς in this compound verb contains any hint‚ of the kind‚ as if it implied an addition to what he earned. We rather understand by it an addition to the small amount which he perhaps yet possessed‚ or that which was necessary to complete what he lacked. The brethren here mentioned were possibly Silas and Timotheus‚ who we know actually came to him from Macedonia (Acts 18:5)‚ and may have brought with them additional means for his support. The Corinthians knew very well whom he meant. Philippians 4:15 has no reference to this transaction. It is very likely that he had some reference to such means of support when he goes on—in every thing I have kept myself from being burdensome to you, and so will I keep myself. (2 Corinthians 11:9 c.)—That is‚ he had always kept from being burdensome to them in any way‚ and he now announces that this would be his principle of action for the future (καὶτερήσω). This was said that they might not think he was reminding them of these things in order to induce them afterwards to contribute to his support‚ or to establish some claim upon them for another time. This assurance he further confirms by a solemn affirmation—As the truth of Christ is in me‚ this boasting shall not be closed against me in the regions of Achaia (2 Corinthians 11:10). A similar expression is found in chapter 2 Corinthians 1:18 and Romans 9:1. He pledges the truth of Christ which dwelt within him and which was pure truthfulness‚ in opposition to all hypocrisy or falsehood, as the security or warrant for what he was asserting, viz. that this boast (about keeping himself free in future‚ καὶτηρήσω, should never be suppressed; i.e.‚ that he would always so conduct himself that no one would be able to contradict him when he confidently maintained that his life had been and should be unselfish. [Alford (with whom Dr. Hodge agrees) maintains that there is no oath or even solemn affirmation here‚ but that the expression is exactly analogous to that in Romans 9:1‚ and signifies: “the truth of Christ is in me, that, etc.; i.e.‚ I speak according to that truth of which Christ Himself was our example, when I say that‚” etc.]. The metaphor in φραγήσεται is essentially neither that of a road hedged in‚ nor of a stream dammed up‚ but a φράσσεινστόηα‚ i.e.‚ a stopping of the mouth, inasmuch as καύχησισ is talking in a loud tone (comp. Romans 3:19; Hebrews 11:33; Psalms 107:42; Job 5:16; 2Ma 14:36). The καύχηαις personified. Its mouth shall not be stopped‚ it shall never be put to silence. Εἰςἐμέ is here simply, in respect to me, not adversatively, as if he had meant, for my injury or in spite of me. In ἐμέ also may be perceived a silent contrast to those with whom it would be very different. “The truth of Christ is in me‚” contains nearly the same idea with that which asserted that the life of Christ was in him, and other expressions of a like nature Galatians 2:20; 1 Corinthians 2:16; Romans 8:9-12) Olshausen’s interpretation: “as truly as I am a Christian‚” is not in accordance with the spirit of the words. Rόckert’s explanation, on the other hand: “This assertion, that my boasting shall never be taken from me, is the truth of Christ in me, i.e.‚ is as surely true as if Christ Himself asserted it,” is rather forced. Instead of saying ἐνὑμῖν‚ he more solemnly and beautifully says, in the regions of Achaia (ἑντοῖςκλῖμαςιντῆς̓Αχαιας. Meter). Κλίματα means a district or a region of country‚ and it occurs also in Romans 15:23; Galatians 1:21. It was very possible for Paul’s readers to explain this assertion so as to make it an indication of his aversion to them and estrangement from them‚ inasmuch as love usually receives with readiness what is offered by a beloved one‚ and even what is done from a different motive. He guards against such a construction when he subjoins—Wherefore? Because I love you not? God knoweth (2 Corinthians 11:11).—He calls God to witness that his resolution to receive nothing from them, sprung not from any defect of love toward them. He then proceeds (in 2 Corinthians 11:12 a). to explain positively the object he had in view, and the reasons which moved him in this whole affair.—But what I thus am doing‚ I will also continue to do‚ that I may cut off the occasion from those who desire an occasion.—He refers once more to this matter in ὅδὲποιῶ, καὶποιήσω‚ which is not a single proposition, corresponding to ἐτήρησα and τηρήσω in 2 Corinthians 11:9‚ for in that case διὰτοῦτοποιῶ or ποιῶκαιποιήσω would have to be understood. The assurance refers to his future course‚ and this makes it necessary that καὶποιήσω should be the concluding proposition of the sentence (Meyer). A τοῦτο before it can very well be dispensed with. He thus testifies that he had had his eye upon his opponents in this affair‚ and that his object had been that no one should be able to allege that he thus showed that he had no affection for the Church. This he expresses in a final sentence: that I may cut off the occasion‚ etc. By ἀφορμήν he designates the particular matter with respect to which his adversaries wished to assail him; the occasion for making an attack upon him. According to the context this must refer to his disinterestedness. When he took nothing from the Corinthian Church‚ his object had been to deprive his opponents of all power to disparage him for his want of this disinterestedness. In τὴνἀφορμήν the article implies‚ this precise occasion. The last ἀφορμήν‚ without the article‚ signifies‚ any occasion in general.—that wherein they glory, they may be found even as we (2 Corinthians 11:12 b).—Some connect this second final sentence with the first‚ and regard ἐνὦκαυχῶνται as a parenthesis‚ referring to εὑρεθῶσικαθὼςκαὶἡμεῖς. [This goes on the supposition that they themselves took money of the Corinthians‚ and desired that the Apostles should do so “in order that (in this matter on which they boasted) we might be found even as they”]. In opposition to this it must be recollected‚ that they pretended to be superior to Paul. It may‚ however‚ be said that his opponents regarded the reception of money as an apostolic prerogative‚ and hence that this was the object of their καυχᾶσθαι (1 Corinthians 9:7 ff.) [:“from those who desire occasion that in this apostolic right of which they boast‚ they might be found even as we,” i.e., they desired that we should receive money as an apostolic right‚ that thus they and we might stand before the people on the same level of apostolical authority in the matter of receiving a maintenance (Stanley). But in whatever way this second final clause is made dependent upon the first‚ and thus expressive of the desires of Paul’s antagonist]‚ the whole passage assumes an ironical tinge‚ and implies that‚ although they would willingly allow him to participate in their boast, it was only that they might thus conceal their own shame, and deprive him of his just fame (Olshausen). But such a view of the passage is justified neither by what is said in 1 Corinthians 9:7 ff. (where no allusion is made to any such assertions of his opponents)‚ nor by our context. In such a case also the words‚ ought to have been εὑρεθῶμων—αὐτοί. The correct construction would seem to be to coφrdinate the second final sentence with the first [i.e.‚ regard both as expressive of the Apostle’s design in keeping himself as he was]‚ and yet this seems to imply that these opponents actually received nothing from the people, and prided themselves upon that fact‚ and endeavored to make it a ground for triumphing over the Apostle. Paul‚ in this case‚ says that he had given such a direction to his conduct that in this respect they should be found like himself‚ i.e.‚ that they should have no reason for preference to himself. Such an explanation, however, is opposed to what is contained in 2 Corinthians 11:20, 1 Corinthians 9:12‚ and to our context (2 Corinthians 11:13), even if we pass over the necessity of giving to καθὼς the strange meaning of‚ no better than. Besides‚ how could he urge upon their consideration his own gratuitous services among them‚ if his opponents were in the same position. [Alford proposes another interpretation. He finds the clue to it in 2 Corinthians 11:18 ff., where he thinks this καυχῶνται is again taken up and described as being κατὰσάρκα‚ and the καθὼςκαὶἡμεῖς is taken up by ̔Εβραῖοίεἰσιν;κἁγώ‚ etc. From this he thinks it manifest that the meaning of the present clause is: that in the matters of which they boast they may be found even as we‚ i.e.‚ that we may be on a fair and equal footing. This, he thinks‚ affords a natural connection with the next verse, since the Apostle implies by the γαρ there that this would end in their discomfiture; for realities they had none‚ no weapons but misrepresentation‚ they being false apostles‚ etc. The objection to this is, that before and after this verse the Apostle is not speaking of general apostolic claims‚ but only of the specific point—that he had received no support from the Corinthians, and that he had declined to receive it that he might cut off occasion‚ etc.]. The correct presumption is‚ that they boasted of their own disinterestedness without reason‚ and that Paul was determined by a course of actual disinterestedness‚ not only to cut off all occasion for imputing to him mercenary motives‚ but to compel them to assume a position in actual practice like his own (Meyer). The sordid spirit which is ascribed to them in 2 Corinthians 11:13 shows that they had no good ground for boasting of their disinterestedness‚ and we need not‚ therefore‚ with do Wette‚ assume that the point on which they made their boast was their performances as apostles, for such a claim would have been too vague (comp. Meyer). He now shows (in 2 Corinthians 11:13-15) by his representation of their true character, that he had had good reasons for such precautions with respect to them. 2 Corinthians 11:13-15. For such persons are false apostles‚ deceitful workers transforming themselves into Apostles of Christ.—In a very arbitrary manner some who interpret ἵνα—καθὼςκαὶἡμε͂ις in 2 Corinthians 11:12 to mean “no better than we‚” interpolate in this place the thought: “but rather worse, for” etc. (Rόckert.). The same must be said of the interpolation of the sentence: I doubt not that they employ such artifices (as pretending that they receive no remuneration), for” etc. (Billroth). Probably also the connection with ἵναεὑρεθῶσι which Meyer proposes: “not without reason do I make it my object that they may be found even as we in those things on which they make their boast; for the part these persons are acting is that of falsehood and deceit‚” is rather too intimate.—The words ὁιτοιοῦτοι (such persons) form the subject‚ and ψευδαπόστολοι (false apostles) the predicate of the sentence. It is only in this way that they receive their proper force as a discovery of the true character of these teachers‚ and they thus form a harmonious whole with the remaining predicates. If ψευδαπ. be taken as the subject of the sentence‚ the object of οἱτοιῦτοι would be‚ what the course of the argument does not call for‚ to distinguish them from other false apostles, and the subject would be brought into too close contact with the predicates (Osiander). By such persons the Apostle intended the same as those who in 2 Corinthians 11:12‚ are said to desire occasion and to boast. The false apostles were such as wished to be regarded as apostles‚ as men who had been commissioned perhaps as Paul was, by Christ Himself, and who therefore assumed the name and claimed to be called apostles. Whether they claimed to have seen Christ‚ or only to have been the true founders of the church at Corinth, is uncertain. In either case their claim was without foundation and contrary to actual facts‚ since they were obviously contending for their own interests and not for Christ’s cause (comp. Osiander).—The second designation, deceitful workers, (not workers of deceit‚ or such as busied themselves with deceit), has reference to their influence upon the people‚ leading them astray by deceptive arts, having no care for the welfare of their hearers but pursuing their own selfish ends, and organizing parties in opposition to the Apostle, and to the true interests of the congregation (perhaps also corrupting the doctrines of the gospel, comp. 2 Corinthians 2:17; 2 Corinthians 4:2). ̓Εργάταικακοί occurs in Philippians 3:2‚ and the opposite ἑργάτηνἀνεπαίχυντον in 2 Timothy 2:15.—[The middle part. ματασχηματιζόμενοι, signifies, changing for themselves their form into (as far as to) Apostles of Christ. Revelation 2:2. In saying that these pretended apostles did this, he intimates that their proper form was a very different one‚ and rather that of messengers of Satan, comp. 2 Corinthians 11:14-15, (Osiander says: emissaries of men and of human factions—in opposition to the context)‚ and of course that their representation of themselves as the messengers of Christ was a mere pretence assumed for the occasion.—W. F. Besser says: They disguised themselves a. in respect to doctrine‚ inasmuch as they retained many words and names which belonged to Christianity, but which were only like empty husks wrapped around some seeds which belonged not there; b. in respect to conduct‚ inasmuch as they outwardly imitated the works which Christ’s Apostles wrought, but they were destitute of that benevolence which constituted the perfection of a Christian’s doings (2 Corinthians 5:12).—And no marvel; for Satan himself transforms himself into an angel‚ of light. (2 Corinthians 11:14 a).—The Apostle finds it altogether natural (οὐθαῦμα) that they should thus disguise themselves‚ inasmuch as it was a matter of notoriety that their Master was wont to assume a garb altogether opposed to his proper character. [Milton has made use of the hint here given in Par. Lost. B. III. 2 Corinthians 11:6, 34–44. The relative αὐτος is in contrast with οἱδιάκοονοιαὐτοιῦ of 2 Corinthians 11:15.—Good angels are called angels of light‚ because their purity is a participation in God’s light (1 John 1:5). This light has sometimes become perceptible to men‚ when such angels have made their appearance on earth (Matthew 28:3, Acts 12:7‚ et. al.). Satan, on the other hand is a dark power (comp. Ephesians 6:12, Acts 26:18). We have no reason to maintain that the Apostle had his eye at this time upon any particular event like the temptation of the first man or of Christ; much less that he was thinking (like the later Rabbins and others) of magical appearances of angels in radiant forms. The only explanation which is probable is that which refers it to certain moral and spiritual influences of a seductive character‚ under some splendid semblance of truth and goodness.—It is no great thing therefore if his ministers also should transform themselves‚ so as to seem to be ministers of righteousness (2 Corinthians 11:15).—In this way‚ he draws a conclusion from the greater to the less: if such is the conduct of the prince of darkness‚ it is no great matter (μέγα 1 Corinthians 9:11)‚ and therefore‚ nothing remarkable or extraordinary (therefore οὐθαῦμα 2 Corinthians 11:14)‚ if his ministers undertake to do a similar thing. His ministers are those who prove to be his agents by their efforts to corrupt the work of God‚ and to disturb the churches.—Μετασχηματίζονταιὡς is equivalent to: ωἰςτὸἐ ?͂ιναιὡς. Righteousness represents in this passage a power in opposition to Satan‚ and his dark and unholy influence (comp. 2 Corinthians 6:7‚ 14).—Whose end shall be according to their works (2 Corinthians 11:15 b).—He thus finally‚ refers solemnly to the doom which such sinners must ultimately meet‚ inasmuch as the end of such servants of Satan must be according to their works, comp. Philippians 3:19‚ Romans 6:21, 1 Peter 4:17. The saintly form they have here assumed will hereafter be removed and they will suffer the doom of those hypocrites who‚ under a fair exterior‚ are opposed to every good cause and are in harmony only with Satan’s designs. 2 Corinthians 11:16-20. I say again let no man think me foolish, but if it cannot be so, yet as a foolish man receive me that I may boast myself a little (ver 16).—The Apostle here commences a more extended comparison with his opponents. In the first place lie demands that they would not regard what he was saying upon this subject as foolish (ἅφρονα); but in case they could not grant this request he entreats them to extend to his foolish boasting that indulgence which they had learned so willingly to yield to the more extravagant demands his opponents had made upon it. The πάλιν (again) in connection with what immediately follows‚ awakens some surprise‚ and hence some have been disposed to refer it entirely to his request to be received as a fool (ὡςἅφροναὃὲξασθέ)‚ camp. 2 Corinthians 11:1. But there is no necessity for passing over such an interval‚ inasmuch as the word has reference to both these expressions. It must have been evident from the whole tenor of his discourse that he had spoken in 2 Corinthians 11:1 quite ironically of his ἀφροσύνη, and of course that he really did not regard his boasting as a folly.—[Εἰμη signifies by an ellipse of εστι: if it be not; and thence by the addition of δε it takes a force adversative to the preceding context: ‘but if otherwise’ (Jelf § 860, 5. c). The μή indicates that the whole is in the mind, μήτις implying a wish‚ and a will‚ and εἰμή an opposition in the mind alone]. Εἰσὲμήγε (Matthew 6:1) even in the classic writers sometimes follows a negative proposition‚ where it is intended that a positive wish is not to be gratified. The idea here is: I desire that no one should think me a fool, but if this wish is not complied with then‚ etc. The γε makes the negation more striking and is equivalent to‚ even if not‚ truly if not. Κᾃν (also in Mark 6:56; Acts 5:15) is an elliptical mode of expression‚ equivalent to‚ receive me‚ even though you receive me as a fool; provided you extend to me the forbearance usually allowed to a fool. In δέξασθέ he refers back to ἁνέχεσθαι in 2 Corinthians 11:1‚ as if he would say‚ receive me, give me a hearing; and his object is to obtain from them what is needful for that which he immediately afterwards declares that he intended to do‚ viz., that I also may boast myself a little. The phrase I also (κᾴγὼ) has reference to the boasting of his opponents, comp. 2 Corinthians 11:12; 2 Corinthians 11:18.—But under a clear conviction of what became an Apostle of Christ‚ he wished them to understand that this boasting in which he put himself on a level with his opponents‚ was not a style of address to which he had been led by the Lord (Christ) or by the Divine Spirit. It was not a way conformed to our Lord’s pattern‚ in His spirit (Matthew 11:39; Luke 17:10)‚ or as His servant might be expected to do‚ but it was an expression of Paul’s own feelings as a man.—What I am speaking, I am speaking not after the Lord, but as if in foolishness (2 Corinthians 11:17).—In ὅλαλῶ he has in mind; in this confidence of boasting; what he had already arranged in thought‚ and what he had already begun to express in some introductory words. [Stanley draws attention to Paul’s use of o ὁλάλῶ, ‘my language‚’ ‘my general strain‚’ in distinction from ὅφημί or λέγω ‘my words.’ In classical usage λαλῶ appears to have had the sense of a continuous flow of talk, comp. Lat.‚ lallo.‚ Germ.‚ lallen‚ and Eng. lull. Eupol. Bern. 8; λαλεῖνἅριστοςἀδυνατώτατοςλέγειν. Plut. 2. 909 A.: λαλοῦσιμὲνοὗτοι, φραζονσιδὲοὕ . The word is in the future present because the Apostle was already thrown forward into the discussion (Osiander)]. With respect to κατὰκύριον comp. κατὰ in 2 Corinthians 7:9; Romans 15:5‚ and analogous expressions in 1 Corinthians 7:10‚ 25, 40; comp. Bengel‚ Meyer‚ Osiander.—Ὡςἐνἀφροσύνη‚ as if in folly‚ as one who is in a foolish state of mind.—The concluding words; in this confidence of boasting. (ἑνταύτητῇὑποστάσειτῆςκαυχήσεως)‚—must be joined with the λαλῶ which must be supplied to ἀλλ̓ὡςἐνἀφροσύνῃ ?‚ but I speak as if in folly‚ in the confidence of boasting. Meyer connects them with οὐκατὰ ?—ἀφροούνη, I speak this not according to the Lord but as a fool with this confidence‚ etc. Such a construction seems rather constrained and harsh. Υπόστασις, has here the same meaning as in 2 Corinthians 9:4, i.e. confidence not matter‚ object (in this matter‚ etc.‚) still less circumstance (since we have come to boasting). [Stanley: “The whole phrase” refers to the boasting not of himself but of his opponents‚ or at least of himself and his opponents conjointly; and it is intended to limit the justification of his boasting to this particular occasion].—Inasmuch as many boast after the flesh I will boast also (2 Corinthians 11:18).—He here more fully develops what he meant by the κάγὼ of 2 Corinthians 11:16‚ and puts himself in direct contrast with his opponents, whose boasting according to the flesh he implies had led him to these self-laudations. According to the flesh‚ is in contrast with according to the Lord(κατὰκύριον) in 2 Corinthians 11:17‚ and corresponds with as if in foolishness (ὡςἐνἀφροσύύνη). It designates here either (1) the object of these self-commendations (external advantages) such as are in other places (esp. Philippians 3:3‚ etc.‚) declared to be ἑνσαρκί; or (2) the objective rule according to which one judges; or finally (3) the subjective turn or determination of the mind under the influence of such sensual and selfish motives as pride‚ vanity‚ etc. Our explanation of the phrase will depend upon the answer to the question whether in the succeeding clause the Apostle carried forward the same idea, as seems to be intimated by the καγὼ and by the connection with 2 Corinthians 11:17; 2 Corinthians 11:19. The third method, however, seems unsuitable‚ if we are obliged to conclude that‚ the Apostle was determined by sinful and selfish motives. The best way is probably to unite the third and the first in such a way that the self-commendation intended was one which sprung from his higher spiritual nature‚ and yet took the direction of the flesh‚ because it was concerned with such external advantages‚ as genealogical descent (2 Corinthians 11:22)‚ and individual position (2 Corinthians 11:23). Paul had done and experienced many things which might incline him to speak of such things (2 Corinthians 11:24‚ etc.). Such carnal boastings are here represented, though perhaps in an ironical manner, and confessed to be‚ on the part of the Apostle‚ foolishness (ἁφροσύνη) [As κατὰτ. σάρκα (the article much strengthens the expression and makes it mean according‚ to their flesh) cannot be made to signify‚ in carnal things, and as it can be made to mean nothing but‚ according to unsanctified human nature (as opposed to κατὰκύριον of the preceding verse)‚ we see not how we can adopt any interpretation which makes Paul declare his determination‚ καυχᾶσθαικ. τ. σάρκα. It would not be possible to make it consistent with Paul’s‚ character or a Christian spirit. Nor does the language strictly require it. Hodge: “There is no necessity of supplying κατὰσάρκα after the last clause. What Paul says is‚ ‘As many boast from unworthy motives‚ I also will boast.’ If they did it from bad motives (κατὰσάρκα)‚ he might well do it from good ones”].—For ye who are wise suffer fools with pleasure (2 Corinthians 11:20). He here tells them what it was that strengthened or at least encouraged him in this purpose. It was their toleration of such persons, and, in fact, their pleasure in fools. [People usually tolerate the chatter of fools, as they do the petulance of children]. The reason for this he assigns in a sudden turn of his discourse, ironically reminding them that they must be wise men (comp. 1 Corinthians 4:10). Ὄντες is not here by way of concession‚ in order that the force of the reproach might be increased and their guilt aggravated; but its object is to suggest the reason for their indulgence, though in a way to inflict a severe reproof in connection with the irony. As intelligent people can have no pleasure in the vaunting talk of fools, they should not by their indulgence encourage others in their folly.—For ye suffer it, if one brings you into bondage‚ if one devours you, if one enslaves you, if one exalts himself, if one smites you in the face (2 Corinthians 11:20). He here illustrates further what he had said by reminding them of the extraordinary degree to which they had carried their indulgence‚ when they had taken pleasure in even the most unworthy treatment, yea, abuse of themselves (how much more, therefore, might he expect them to endure his ἁφροσύνη). In the first place, he recalls to their recollection the complete subversion of their freedom under the arrogant exercise of power which these false Apostles had put forth among them (εἴτιςκαταδουλοῖ). In this we must understand not so much the imposition of the yoke of the law and the loss of evangelical freedom, as a tyrannical assertion of authority, a sacerdotal guardianship of their consciences, and a requirement of a blind obedience. In the next place‚ he reminds them of the selfish, avaricious practices to which they had submitted: εἰτιςκατεσθίει if a man consumes you‚ and wrests from you all you have, comp. Psalms 53:5; Matthew 23:13. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ Xv.—his Revelations As A Ground For Boasting (2 Corinthians 12:1 ff.). How He Had Been Kept From Self-exaltation, And Been Led To Glory In His Infirmities (2 Corinthians 12:7 ff.). How He Ought To Have Been Saved The Necessity Of Such Self-commendation By The Corinthians Themselves (2 Corinthians 12:11 ff.) 2 Corinthians 12:1-181 It is not expedient for me doubtless to glory, [I must needs boast: it is not expedient 2for me, for] I will come to visions and revelations of the Lord. I knew [know, οἶδα] a man in Christ above [om. above] fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell [know not, οἷδα], or whether out of the body, I cannot tell [know not]; God knoweth): such an one caught up to [even unto, ἔως] the third heaven. 3And I knew [know] such a man, (whether in the body, or out of [apart from, χωρὶς] 4the body, I cannot tell [know not]; God knoweth: How [om. how] that he was caught up into Paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a5[om. a, ἀνθρώπῳ)] man to utter. Of such a one will I glory: yet of myself I will notglory, but in mine infirmities. 6For though I would [should] desire to glory, I shall not be a fool; for I will say the truth: but now [om. now] I forbear, lest any man should think of me above that which he seeth me to be, or that he heareth of [from,7ἐξ] me. And lest I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger [an angel,8ἄγγελος] of Satan to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above measure. For [concerning, ὑπὲρ] this thing [angel] I besought the Lord thrice, that it [he] might depart9 from me. And He [hath, εἴρηκἐν] said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee: for my [om. my] strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest [abide] upon me.10Therefore I take pleasure [am well contented, εὐδοκῶ ?] in infirmities, in reproaches, in necessities, in persecutions, in distresses for Christ’s sake: for when I am weak, then am I strong. 11I am become a fool in glorying [om. in glorying]; ye have compelled me: for I ought to have been commended of you: for in nothing am [was, ὑστέρησα I behind the very chiefest [these overmuch, ὑπερλίαν] apostles, though I be nothing.12Truly the signs of an Apostle were wrought among you in all patience, in [by] signs and wonders and mighty deeds. 13For what is it wherein ye were inferior to other churches, except it be that I myself was not burdensome to you? forgive me this14 wrong. Behold, the third time I am ready to come to you; and I will not be burdensome to you [om. to you]: for I seek not yours, but you: for the children ought not to lay up for the parents, but the parents for the children. 15And I will very gladly spend and be spent for you [your souls, τῶνψυχῶν]; though [if, ἐι] the more abundantly I love you, the less I be loved. 16But be it so, I did not burden you: nevertheless, being crafty, I caught you with guile. 17Did I make a gain of you by any18 of them whom I sent unto you? I desired [besought, παρεκάλεσα]Titus [to go to you] and with him I sent a [the] brother. Did Titus make a gain of you? walked we not in the same spirit? walked we not in the same steps? AND 2 Corinthians 12:1-6.—It is necessary to boast; it is not for my advantage, for I will come to visions and revelations of the Lord.—Although we should not regard the Apostle as precisely breaking off from a special history commenced in the last two verses (Meyer), he certainly passes now to a new subject of boasting (καύχησις). In a preface composed of short sentences grammatically unconnected (asyndeton) but logically arranged, he declares that under the circumstances he could not avoid self-commendation, but that in a moral respect it was not expedient, inasmuch, as it exposed him to the temptation to exalt himself (comp. 2 Corinthians 12:7 ff.). Αεῖ must be taken in an absolute sense, equivalent to, it must be so. It is not necessary to connect μοι with it. The γάρ introduces the reason why he once more speaks in self-commendation. It is that he was about to relate something which might incline him to an unprofitable self-exaltation (comp. 2 Corinthians 12:7). With less simplicity, Meyer thinks that because boasting was unprofitable, Paul was anxious to pass on to something in which there was no self-commendation (2 Corinthians 12:5), and he thinks that οὐσυμφέρειμοι is thus accounted for and justified, although he himself notices what the Apostle says in 2 Corinthians 12:7 of self-exaltation on account of the abundance of the revelations. If we adopt the reading of the Receptus, the idea of the Apostle would be: Truly it is not expedient for me to glory (comp. 2 Corinthians 11:1; 2 Corinthians 11:17; 2 Corinthians 11:30). The reason for this he would assign by pointing to the elevating character of his subsequent glorying, for it is implied that the danger would be more imminent, the more exalted the boast and its object was. Thus Osiander, who adheres to the Receptus, explains it, but essentially concedes that the original clause with δεῖ would have seemed so very abrupt, and the asyndeton so unusually harsh, that a plausible reason was presented for a change. It will not do to lay the emphasis upon μοὶ, as if Paul had meant that it was not for his own, but for their good that he boasted himself (i.e., to correct their judgment respecting himself, Reiche), for this would have required οὐκἐμοὶ, or ἐμαυτῷ at least ἐμοί, instead of μοι. The things of which he now begins to speak are visions and revelations of the Lord (ὀπτασίαικαὶἀποκαλύψειςκυρίου). Κυρίου is the genitive, not of the object, but of the subject [i.e., not respecting, but from, the Lord]. Nothing is said in the context which implies that the transaction here spoken of was a vision of Christ, in which the Lord was revealed to him (the way of speaking is different in 1 Corinthians 11:1; Galatians 1:16). Christ had given him disclosures and revelations of himself (1 Corinthians 14:6). The visions (ὀπτασίαι), however, describe the form in which he had received them. No further nor profounder disclosures are intended by the revelations (ἀποκάλυψεις) than by the visions (ὀπτασίαι). Osiander thinks that the words describe two ways in which supersensual objects are presented: one by a figurative apparition for the eye, and the other by means of sound for the ear. The Berlenb. Bible makes visions refer to those representations of heavenly forms which the Holy Ghost makes to the inward spirit of man, in a Divine light and in a spiritual manner; and revelations (the higher manifestation) to that thorough enlightenment of the mind and heart by the Holy Ghost in which we learn the true mind of the Spirit. W. F. Besser: From the very commencement of his Christian experience, the Lord had allowed Paul to see in visions and to hear in revelations those mysteries which belonged to a world invisible and imperceptible to the external sense. By Christ’s own appearance to him at first (Acts 22:15; Acts 26:16), his want of outward evidence through the eye and ear had been made up to him in an extraordinary manner, and his authority had been made equal to that of the twelve Apostles. The visions (ὀπτασίαι) may designate the general form in which the revelation was made, but in addition to them an explanation of the visible objects was given by words addressed to the ear (as in the prophetical visions). We feel obliged, with Meyer, to maintain that we have no evidence that Paul had in view here some pretensions of his opponents with respect to which he wishes to show that he had the advantage of them, for nothing in the context seems to imply that his object was to show that an external acquaintance with Christ was unnecessary to the Apostolical character (Baur), nor to show that he was quite equal to the Christ-party who boasted largely of visions. I know a man in Christ, fourteen years ago (whether in the body I know not, or whether out of the body I know not, God knows), such a one was rapt as far as the third heaven (2 Corinthians 12:2). The Apostle here affords a specimen of what he had just given only an intimation. It is certainly inconsistent with the context and with the general aim of the writer to maintain that he was here giving an account of some other person than himself. It was perfectly accordant with the nature of the occurrence for him to speak of such an occurrence in the third person, inasmuch as the individual spoken of was in a passive state, and might seem in his normal state of activity as another person (Meyer). Osiander suggests that his own proper person had become estranged to him in his ecstatic state, and was here conceived of as still remaining with the Lord. [Οἶδα should be translated, not: I knew, but: I know]. It may be doubted whether the word has any special emphasis, as if the Apostle intended to give prominence to his complete, certainty about a fact which might be questioned by many on account of its extraordinary character (Osiander). A man in Christ signifies a Christian, and not a minister of Christ. He is not, indeed, expressly speaking of himself. Neander: “It is an expression in which Paul distinguishes between that which he had become by the grace of God and that which was merely human in himself.” There is, however, no very obvious contrast between the humble ‘man’ and the exalted character of the revelation. In Christ indicates that the man was in the great general fellowship of the common faith. The words imply nothing connected with the ecstasy, and still less do they have a special bearing against the suspicion of a demoniac ecstasy. The precise statement of the time belongs to ἁρπαγέντα (from which it is separated only by a parenthesis: ἔιτε—οἶδεν), and not to ἄνθρ. ἐνχριστῷ as if he had intended to say, a man who has been serving Christ fourteen years. The reason he so accurately specifies it was, that the occurrence was particularly important to him, and peculiarly appropriate to his representation of what pertained to a third person. There can be no reference here to events attending his conversion, which must have taken place from seventeen to eighteen or oven twenty years before the composition of this Epistle. Even if chronology were not against supposing that he here referred to the appearance in the Temple mentioned in Acts 22:17-21, the facts related in the two visions are essentially so different that we cannot suppose them the same. The only way to meet this is (with Osiander) to suppose that there were different elements in this ecstasy, and that what is here mentioned was only the culminating point. With this view it would be chronologically connected with 2 Corinthians 11:32-33. [Alford: “The date probably refers back to the time when he was at Tarsus waiting for God to point out his work, between Acts 9:30; Acts 11:25.” Wordsworth says: “Fourteen years, reckoned inclusively, carry us back to the time of St. Paul’s ordination to the Apostleship of the Gentiles, which must not be confounded with the time of his conversion to Christianity.” “Probably this vision and revelation were vouchsafed to him then, because he was going forth for the first time to incur shame and suffering,” and they were not communicated to the world until fourteen years afterwards, and even then only as facts and not in detail, because they were designed only for him, and for such a purpose. On this use of πρὸ, Webster says: “The primary idea of πρό is, in sight, and it is applied to what is before one, in some place opposite, in view. From this meaning it passes on to denote priority in time, and so with a trajection in its use it signifies here, before, in time.” Syntax and Synn. p. 150]. We have no other account of what is here related. With respect to the manner in which it took place, the Apostle was entirely uncertain, he was not sure that the soul retained any connection with the body. The latter may have been raised by the Spirit’s power along with Paul’s spirit into heavenly regions, or this connection may have been for the time dissolved, and his spirit rapt away from its earthly tenement. In a word, the whole person, composed of his soul and his body together, or his soul alone, separate from his body (or at least without any of its external functions) was lifted up into a celestial world, Ἁρπαγέντα signifies much more than the different varieties of subjective mental vision, whether accompanied by bodily mental perceptions or not. The uncertainty here expressed does not refer to the question, whether this was a mere vision (ἐν), or an actual trance of the spirit (ἐκτός). Any doubt on such a point would have seriously impaired the importance of the occurrence itself (comp. Meyer, Osiander). We have no means of determining to which of these suppositions, the ἐν or the ἐκτός) the Apostle was most inclined. But the whole representation which he gives makes it probable that the ascent was real and in actual space, and not merely ideal. Εἴτε, εἴτε have here the sense of: whether, or whether. ̔Αρπαγῆναι, is spoken of sudden, involuntary removals from one place to another (comp. Acts 8:39; Revelation 12:5; 1 Thessalonians 4:17), [and it hero implies great celerity and the power of some external force].—And I know such a man (whether in the body or out of the body I know not, God knows); that he was caught up into Paradise (2 Corinthians 12:3-4 a.).—In the words, such a man (τὸντοιοῦτον) the Apostle recurs to the subject of the ecstasy, the one he had before described as the man in Christ. Osiander, thinks that the phrase, such a man, contains an allusion to the fact, that he is now endowed with qualities which fitted him for such an exaltation. The point reached in the course of his ecstasy under the influence of the higher power (the Spirit of God) which had taken possession of him, he calls the third heaven (τρίτοςοὐρανός). This is not to be interpreted spiritually of the utmost degree of Divine knowledge, etc. (the number three being taken simply as a symbol of perfection), for the Apostle had unquestionably in his mind a higher sphere of the heavenly world. A plurality of heavens is not inconsistent with Scriptural doctrine, for something f the kind is implied even in the plural (heavens, οὐρανοί) here used, and in the description (Hebrews 4:14) of Christ’s ascension, in which He is said to have passed into the heavens διεληλυθέναιτοὺςούρανούς), the termination of which is described (Hebrews 9:24) as an entrance into heaven itself (εἰσελθεῖνεἰςαὐτὸντὸνοὐρἀνόν), i.e., into the dwelling place of the Divine Majesty, to which the heavens he had passed through were related, just as the sanctuary in the tabernacle was related to the holy of holies. Jewish tradition generally speaks of seven heavens (Rabbi Judah alone speaks of two). To such common views and forms of speech the Apostle doubtless had some reference, but the original idea must be distinguished from the arbitrary and monstrous details of the Rabbinical writers. As neither here nor elsewhere (except in some later ecclesiastical writers, who probably derived their views from the passage before us) is it necessarily implied that there were no more than three heavens, this third need not, of course, be regarded as the highest heaven. Neither here nor in Hebrews 4:14 must we suppose the allusion to be to some region of the visible heavens (the clouds, etc.), but to some supersensous space between the stellar and the highest heaven, the true holy of holies (comp. Riem, d. Lehrbegr. des Hebr. Br. p. 512). And yet we must unquestionably make a distinction between this higher region called the third heaven, and the place called Paradise although it does not follow that the former must of course be a lower region than the latter). It does not seem probable that what is said in 2 Corinthians 12:3-4, should be a mere repetition of what had been said in 2 Corinthians 12:2. On the other hand the Apostle probably speaks in 2 Corinthians 12:3-4 of a higher degree of ecstasy than that which he had mentioned in the other. And yet the Paradise was not exactly some interior department of the third heaven, but some higher region, that which is called in Revelation 2:7 the Paradise of God (the lower department in Sheol, Luke 23:43, comp. Luke 16:23). Osiander: “The abode in which the highest peace and joy are enjoyed, where fellowship with God and the God-man is most intimate, and where the world of spirits has its most delightful and most perfect development.” Neander: “Paul here describes a higher degree of life in God, a foretaste of that which the soul will reach at a later period, no illusion of the imagination or product of Jewish superstition, but a certain and actual exaltation of the soul. And yet we may here distinguish between the supernatural and the divine on the one hand and the human on the other, and we may concede that the representation here given to the Apostle was in that form which was most familiar to him in his actual state of mind at the time.”—And heard unspeakable words which it is not lawful for man to utter (2 Corinthians 12:4 b).—It is evident from the use of the word ἤκουσεν that ῥῆμα cannot here be equivalent to things, but that it must mean a word. But ἄῤῥητον signifies, not what cannot be expressed, for then the words could not have been perceived, but as the relative sentence immediately following shows, words of such mysterious import as ought not to be uttered or to be generally known. In this sense the word is used in Herod, and other writers. Ἐξόν is equivalent not to δυνατόν but to fas est.—The substance of the communication was so exalted that it would have been a profanation to give it in human language. W. F. Besser: “It is likely that the substance of the heavenly words was taken up by the Apostle as he heard them, but he felt that no man after receiving such a communication in successive details, could find language adequately and worthily to express what he had heard in that sacred presence. And even if God had given him power to express on earth what he had heard in heaven, there were no earthly ears which could intelligently receive the communication.” We cannot accept of Ewald’s explanation, that the reason Paul determined to keep these revelations to himself (revelations, as he thinks likely, of the final victory of Christ over Rome and heathenism, and also over Jerusalem and the Jews), was because he saw that other men might easily be led to pervert them in many ways and then to obtain credit on his authority. [These words were “unspeakable,” (not only to him but to man) perhaps on account of their nature, but as Paul tells us that it was not “lawful to utter” them, we must suppose that he was restrained from uttering them principally by a moral reason. The whole vision appears to have been intended for the Apostle alone, to prepare him personally for his work, and for this reason alone he had no occasion to speak of it for fourteen years, and never to speak of its contents. The apocryphal literature of subsequent times, shows what follies the minds of men are inclined to, on such mysteries. (See the ἀναβάτικονΠαύλου used by the sect of Caοani, mentioned by Epiphanius, Haeres: 18, 38). But nothing in this passage implies that the Apostle possessed any arcana or mysteries on the general subject of salvation, which are to be withheld as dangerous matters, from common inspection, and yet capable of investigation to more philosophical and learned persons.] Ἀνθρώπῳ is not the object of λαλεῖν but is governed by ἐξόν. There are no means of determining whether Paul was brought to this conclusion by an express command with regard to it, or whether he saw its propriety without such a command. The speaker, however, must have been the Lord, comp. 2 Corinthians 12:1, ἀποκ. κυρίου. What was said must have been very significant and eminently strengthening to the Apostle’s mind (comp. Osiander).—Instead of proceeding to say now: ἐντούτω (of such a thing) καυχήσομαι, as must have been in his mind, he says, in accordance with the mode of representation commenced in 2 Corinthians 12:2. Of such a one will I glory (2 Corinthians 12:5).—Τοῦτοιούτου is not neuter but masculine. This is proved not only by ὑπέρ which has relation to a person in whose behalf the boasting must take place (2 Corinthians 7:14; 2 Corinthians 5:12; 2 Corinthians 8:24), but by the contrasted ἐμαυτοῦ, and the unmistakable reference to τὸντοιοῦτον in 2 Corinthians 12:2-3.—The principle which lies at the basis of the whole passage is, that he was not to boast of such revelations, as though they argued anything in his own favor, but only as an incident connected with a man in Christ, who had been at this period completely lifted out of his own individuality and had been thought worthy of such grace merely on account of his being in Christ. His only object in condescending to this boasting of such a one, was that he might bear witness that such glorious things had been granted to such a one.—But of myself I will not boast, save in my infirmities (2 Corinthians 12:5 b).—In behalf of himself, (regarded simply as himself), ho would boast only with reference to his infirmities (comp. 2 Corinthians 11:30). He alluded here to those many manifestations of human weakness, which had occasioned so much humiliation to him, which had completely extirpated all vanity from his bosom, and which had finally compelled him to boast only of that divine power which evinced its greatness through his infirmities, (comp. vv.9, 10.).—For if I shall desire to boast, I shall not be foolish, for I will speak the truth (2 Corinthians 12:6 a).—There is some difficulty here in determining the connection which the γαρ implies with 2 Corinthians 12:5. To make it refer back to the first half of that verse, and thus to make the Apostle begin to reveal his identity with the man in Christ (Osiander) does not seem after all very probable. And yet to supply something to οὐκαυχησομαι (2 Corinthians 12:5) by which it shall mean: I will not boast of these great revelations, and to make εἱμή signify but only, and then in this 2 Corinthians 12:6 to make if I should desire to boast refer to the same things with the additional thought: although I could thus boast (De Wette), seems very harsh. We would prefer, without any such completion of the sense, to understand before the words οὐκαυχ. εἰμή, etc., in 2 Corinthians 12:5, simply: I could thus boast concerning myself if I wished to do so (i.e., of my worth and merits), and to suppose that when he continues, if I should desire, etc., he is giving the reason for this thought which had sprung from what is obviously implied in the sentence itself (Meyer). But, perhaps after all it would be simpler to make the γάρ refer to the whole of 2 Corinthians 12:6, so that the writer would have already in view the subsequent φείδομαι and the sentence connected with it: I will not boast of myself except of my infirmities; for although I should not be a fool even if I were to boast myself, inasmuch as I should tell the truth, yet I forbear, lest, etc. Or: not because I should be a fool, if I were inclined to boast myself, etc., but because I would guard against, etc. In this case there would be no need of adding anything to the thought expressed.—The boasting (καυχήσασθαι) has reference to something the reverse of weakness, and hence to deeds (comp. 1 Corinthians 15:10) in which power was exhibited. In ἄφρων (senseless, without reason) he alludes probably to the empty boasting of his opponents, in which there was no basis of truth like that in his self-commendations—but I forbear, lest any one should reckon of me above what he sees me to be or hears from me (2 Corinthians 12:6 b).—There is no need here of supplying ὐμῶν to φείδομαι; along with μή (or in the infinitive) this verb has the sense of: to shrink back or to act with reserve, i.e. to deal sparingly with his self-commendation. In μή we have certainly the idea of mental care (Meyer: of guarding against something). This anxiety, however, was well founded, so far as it referred to the inclination to boast in men then so strong among the Corinthians, and the Apostle did not wish to encourage in any way a disposition against which he had so earnestly contended. Τις has reference to no particular individual, for we have no reason to suppose that he is hero aiming at some Pauline party at Corinth. The over-valuation of his person which ho here deprecates, he expresses in the words beyond what he sees me, or hears something from me (ὑπὲρο͂βλέπειμεἤἀκούειτιἐξἐμοῦ) i.e., beyond the immediate impression which my personal presence would make. There is no necessity of supplying either εἶναι or ποιεῖν, after δβλέπειμε, which has reference to his whole appearance, his bearing and behavior. ̓Ακούει refers to his performances in oral discourse. Ἐξἐμοῦ (ex me) from myself, in contrast with that which might be heard of him through others. Τι is a brachyological or concise form of expression equivalent to ἐίτιἀκούει. Notwithstanding the unfriendly opinions which had been expressed of him (2 Corinthians 10:1; 2 Corinthians 10:10), he desired to have no other standard laid down for judging of him than a strict conformity to what all might perceive in him. 2 Corinthians 12:7-10. And lest I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations (2 Corinthians 12:7 a).—[Stanley, adopting Lachmann’s reading of διὸ before ἴνα, is obliged also with him, to connect καὶτῇὐπερβ. τῶνάποκ. with ἀσθενείαις in 2 Corinthians 12:5, and to make the whole of 2 Corinthians 12:6 a parenthesis. Even Alford concedes that, if διὸ forms a part of the text, it must be the commencement of a sentence, and that we must adopt Lachmann’s punctuation. But he thinks that “a very strange sense would thus be given,” for then the Apostle would refuse to glory in himself, except in his infirmities and in the exceeding abundance of his revelations; thus making his glorying in his revelations a part of his glorying in himself. But rejecting διὸ, for which we have hardly sufficient authority, the sentence reads smoothly. Osiander remarks that everything in K. τῇὑπερβ. τῶνἀποκ is remarkable: the expression itself, the way in which the words are joined together, and the position of the words in the sentence. For emphasis the words are placed first (comp. 2 Corinthians 2:4), the revelations are represented as multifarious, and for additional force a substantive is used with an adjectival signification.] Having said (2 Corinthians 12:5-6) that he now abstained from further boasting, not because he lacked in good grounds for it, but from a regard to them, that they might not overvalue his person, he now returns to the revelations he had spoken of in 2 Corinthians 12:1, etc., and shows how he had been kept from a possible self-exaltation on account of these revelations, by means of a peculiarly severe affliction. Kαί here signifies not: even, but: and, merely connecting with the former sentence.—Υπερβολή occurs also in 2 Corinthians 4:7. It is difficult to decide whether the dative is that of the instrument (: by means of), or of the cause (on account of) like ἑπαίρεσθαιτινι. The meaning is much the same in either case. We have ὑπεραίρεσθαι in 2 Thessalonians 2:4, in the sense of to exalt himself.—There was given to me a thorn in the flesh, an angel of Satan to buffet me—There can be no doubt that a Divine intention or design is implied [by ί́να], whether God or Satan is looked upon as the giver in ἐδόθη. It is possible to interpret it of either, but it seems rather more appropriate to refer it to God, inasmuch as the object to be accomplished by it was under the Divine direction. We must not, however, conclude from thence that ἐδόθη implies merely a Divine permission, for it includes the idea of disposing, and ordaining. God gives even what is afflictive for the attainment of some higher and benevolent end; i.e, as the means of trial and humiliation. Σκόλοψ is a sharpened piece of wood, a stake, or a thorn (as in Numbers 33:55). The first of these meanings is not altogether inappropriate. [Stanley adheres to this, and contends that σκόλοψ is not a thorn (from which he finds it sometimes distinguished, esp. Hosea 2:6; Sept. Artemid. 3:33) but generally a pointed stake or palisade (Numb. 30:55; Ezekiel 28:24). It must be conceded that this is the usual meaning. Hence Luther and many understand by it a stake, for the execution of criminals. Stanley finds ἀνασκολοπίζω in the Sept. of Esther 7:10 explained by Phavorinus and Hesychius as equivalent to ἀνασταυρίζω, and he thence infers that σκόλοψ was equivalent to σταυρός, the cross, or the stake. In Lucian, too (De morte Per. 11), ἀνασκολοπίζω is used for the crucifixion of Christ. As in describing his state of constant torture the Apostle draws his image from crucifixion. so here he draws it from impalement. The angel of Satan like Death in 1 Corinthians 15:55, is armed with the impaling stake; or the Apostle was himself already impaled or crucified. The phrase τῇσαρκὶ is certainly unsuitable to this interpretation]. In the flesh (τῇσαρκὶ) is not in apposition with to me (μοι) and dependent upon was given (ἐδόθη), but it is to be connected with σκόλοψ (a thorn) as a dative of appropriation. But σάρξ is not human nature in general, unregenerate and sinful, but man’s corporeal nature with the sinful disposition connected with it. In this place it has reference especially to the sensitive horror which that nature feels at pain, or its recoil from the suffering which God had decreed for it. Σκόλοψ is undoubtedly the subject of έδόθη, and ἄγγελοςσατᾶν is in apposition to σκόλοψ, though the converse of this may not be true (as if σκόλοψ were an ἄγγελος). These words in apposition, however, are the subject of ἵνα—κολαφίζη, which involves a metaphor no longer quite suitable to σκόλοψ. But such an apparent irregularity of construction may be found in other places. And yet there is no inversion of the words, as if he would say: that the angel of Satan might buffet me. Κολαφίζῃ expresses continued action and it is therefore in the subj. prζs, not in the aorist. Ἄγγελοςσατᾶν does not signify merely a hostile angel, for σατᾶν never is to be found precisely as an adjective, and in the New Testament it never has the sense of adversarius (an angel, an adversary). Nor can it mean Satan himself [the angel Satan] who is never designated an ἄγγελος; but an angel of Satan like ἄγγελοιτοῦνδιαβόλου in Matthew 25:41, Σατᾶν therefore is in the genitive (the var. σατανᾶ. has less authority for it, is a correction of the indeclinable noun, which is a ἄπαξλεγόμενον). An exceedingly painful suffering is indicated by σκόλοψ, and is described by the phrase an angel of Satan. It is not merely a Suffering sent upon the Apostle by Satan, (for Satan’s angel in the estimation of the Apostle was a real malignant power) by means of which God had ordained for him a humiliating torment (comp. 1 Corinthians 5:5, Job 2:6), with the exalted purpose which he afterwards brings forward in an emphatic manner when he says:—lest I should be exalted above measure (2 Corinthians 12:7).—The idea conveyed therefore is, that in accordance with the divine decree the Apostle was abased in a humiliating manner by an angel of Satan, and that in consequence of this tormenting influence sent on him from the kingdom of darkness, he was kept from unduly exalting himself on account of the glorious revelations vouchsafed him from the kingdom of light. But of what nature were these sufferings? Of course we are not to think of literal and real blows or buffetings. The idea of an internal assault of Satan by means of blasphemous thoughts, or by remorse of conscience on account of his earlier persecution of the followers of Christ, or by means of temptation’s to lust, must be regarded (irrespective of the last mentioned suggestion, which was an improbable product of the ascetic exegesis of the monks, comp. Osiander p. 473 and 2 Corinthians 4:7), as directly in opposition to τῇσαρκί (according to Meyer also in opposition to σκόλοψ and κολαφίζη in which are described an acute and continuous pain). Still more improbable is the idea of external assaults on the part of hostile opponents, called here ministers of Satan (2 Corinthians 11:15), and designated collectively an angel of Satan, inasmuch as one of them (sing.) may have distinguished himself above the rest; or the idea of a great pressure of apostolic duties in general. The context leads us to think of a definite and special form of suffering (Meyer) in contrast with the abundance of the revelations, and of something for whose cessation he could properly and earnestly pray (2 Corinthians 12:8), as he could hardly do with respect to his official duties.—The most probable supposition is that he had in view some very severe and painful bodily suffering, which however did not prevent his undergoing exhausting labors and his persisting in numerous hardships. But it is utterly out of our power to determine precisely what this suffering consisted in (hemorrhoids, hypocondria and melancholy, epilepsy, stone, violent head-ache, etc.). Ewald: “When this disease came upon him, it was like a terrific blow upon the head (κολαφίζῇ) without a previous warning.” It was something personal, not affecting him simply as a minister of Christ, and an ἀσθένεια (2 Corinthians 12:9), although of a peculiar kind, reminding him of his human frailty and hence having a tendency to keep him from undue self-exaltation on account of his remarkable experiences of divine favor. We are very naturally reminded of Luther’s disease of the stone which in like manner was ascribed to the devil.—Osiander unites together the ideas of bodily and spiritual assaults, and his explanation is favored by the fact that there is usually a reciprocal action between the two, but the general impression of our passage is rather in favor of a long-continued evil rather than of a temporary darkening and .disturbance of mind.—In 2 Corinthians 12:8-9, he tells us how he prayed that this evil and its consequences might be removed from him.—Concerning this, I besought the Lord thrice, that he might depart from me (2 Corinthians 12:8).—Ὑπέρ, since Demosthenes, has frequently had the sense of περί: in consideration of, in respect to. Τούτου is not neuter but masculine, as is shown by ἀποστῇ (might depart). Ho had in his mind the angel of Satan. Τρίς is not equivalent to πολλάκις, nor is it a number for perfection. There may have been long intervals of time between each prayer, and perhaps he only prayed when under extreme paroxysms of suffering. That he was under this affliction when he wrote however, is not necessarily implied. He received no answer from the Lord until the third petition, when, of course, he ceased. The Lord (κύριος) is Christ who has obtained the victory over every kind of Satanic power. Παρακαλεῖν is a word which in the New Testament is never used with reference to God and only with reference to Christ. It has the sense of, to call for help, and in the classic writers is used to designate a call on the gods. ̓Αποστῆναι ( to depart) as in Luke 4:13 is used with regard to Satan, but in Acts 5:38; Acts 22:29, it is applied to human assailants.—And he has said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee, for power is made perfect in weakness (2 Corinthians 12:9).—In this place εἵρηκε express a continued action [the perfect of a continued past action], but we have no means of determining how it was said, whether in a vision, or merely by some internal encouragement. (Osiander: “probably a testimony of the Holy Spirit in the exercise of the highest spiritual functions, by means of which the Apostle’s heart was thoroughly tranquilized, assured of his gracious state and enlightened with respect to this special case. It was thus a distinct revelation of the mind of Christ, by special inspiration, and confirmed, perhaps, by the application of some passage of Scripture.” The answer was an apparent refusal, with such a promise as was a virtual granting of his request. The ἀρκεῖ, which stands for emphasis at the head of the sentence, is not equivalent to: will protect (a poetical usage), or will assist (Xenophon and others), but it means simply, will be sufficient for, will satisfy; it will be enough that I am gracious to thee, and that I love thee, and will take pleasure in thee. There is no reference to miraculous gifts. To show that he would need nothing else, the Lord adds: for my strength, etc. The μου has only a few authorities in its favor, but they are of the highest importance; and even if it is not supplied in the text, it must be understood. The fact that ἐνἀσθενείᾳ has no σου after it may have had some influence in inducing transcribers to leave it out. The meaning is: with one who is in this weak state, my power comes into more perfect activity (comp. 2 Corinthians 4:7; 1 Corinthians 2:3-4). But this power of the Lord dwells only in those who share also in His grace; .i.e., it is put forth in its full strength and activity only where there is nothing but helplessness and painful weakness; for where a consciousness of power is, it is rather impeded in its action. (Τελεῖται has not the sense of: proves itself to be perfect).—Most gladly, therefore, will I rather glory in my infirmities, that Christ’s power may abide upon me—(2 Corinthians 12:9).—The Apostle here describes the effect of this promise. He gave up all expectation of being freed from his trouble, and he was satisfied with the prospect (of enjoying the grace whose work was to be completed in his weakness. Grammatical usage will not permit us to refer μᾶλλον to ἤδιστα. Nor should we supply after it: than before, when I prayed thus (2 Corinthians 12:8), or: than any thing, or: than in my own power, or: than in the revelations which I had. It belongs rather, as its position necessarily shows, to καυχήσομαι. Instead of complaining and praying that the suffering might cease, I will rather glory in my infirmities. This, however, would lead to the accomplishment and experience of the promise given him when the Lord visited him, i.e., that Christ’s power might dwell (permanently abide) upon him. The word ἐπισκηνοῦν signifies to enter, to turn into, a tent or dwelling. Ἐπ̓ἐμέ, in other places, has reference to the direction generally; and here, where the Apostle is speaking of the power of Christ, who was then in heaven, it means, to come down upon me and to abide with me (the figure is that of a permanent connection). Whether any thing of unusual solemnity attaches to the expression, as if it had reference to the Shekinah, as if the power of Christ were as a pavilion extended over him for his protection, or as if he himself were the space in which it was to be manifested, is uncertain.—Wherefore I am well contented in infirmities, in reproaches, in necessities, in persecutions, in distresses for Christ’s sake (2 Corinthians 12:10). From what he had just described as the object of all this proceeding, and of course from the promise of Christ which had been accomplished by his glorying in his infirmities (2 Corinthians 12:9), the Apostle now makes a practical inference, viz.: inasmuch as this glorying in my infirmities has brought Christ’s power to take possession of me, I take pleasure in infirmities, etc. Ἐυδοκεῖνἐν signifies here a voluntary endurance, a patient satisfaction with these sufferings [Our English A. V.: take pleasure in, is too strong; the Greek is: I am well contented in (Fausset)]. The ἀσθένειαι, the suffering condition in which these infirmities become perceptible, are particularized in ὔβρεσιν, insulting abuses, ἀνάγκαις, etc., comp. 2 Corinthians 6:4 (external afflictions proceeding from those around him). ̓Υπὲρχριστοῦ, which belongs to and qualifies all these preceding nouns, signifies here: for the sake (or, in behalf) of Christ.—For when I am weak, then am I strong (2 Corinthians 12:10 b.). The reason for his good courage while enduring these sufferings for Christ’s sake, was that he had felt strengthened under all his infirmities by the power of Christ dwelling continually in him (comp. Philippians 4:13). In these words we have the fulfilment of the promise in 2 Corinthians 12:9. Τότε is emphatic, and shows how triumphant were the Apostle’s feelings, comp. 1 Corinthians 15:54; Colossians 3:4. [Stanley: “The long burst of passionate self-vindication, has now, at last expended itself, and the Apostle returns to the point from whence he diverged at 2 Corinthians 10:7, where he was asserting his intention to repress the disobedience of those who still resisted his authority at Corinth. Before, however, he enters again upon this, he looks back over the long digression, and resumes here and there a thought which needed explanation or expansion. Hence, although this concluding section stands apart from the interruption of 2 Corinthians 10:10 to 2 Corinthians 12:10, and is truly the winding up of the main argument begun in 2 Corinthians 10:1-7, it is filled with traces of the torrent which has passed through his mind in the interval. His ‘folly,’ 2 Corinthians 11:1-10; the ‘commendatory epistles’ (2 Corinthians 3:1; 2 Corinthians 5:12); the ‘apostolical’ pretensions of his opponents (2 Corinthians 11:12-13) are resumed in 2 Corinthians 12:11; his miracles and sufferings (2 Corinthians 11:23-28), in 2 Corinthians 12:12; the question of self-support (2 Corinthians 11:12) in vv.13–18; the strength and weakness united in Christ (2 Corinthians 12:19), in 2 Corinthians 13:3-4; 2 Corinthians 13:9”]. 2 Corinthians 12:11-15.—I am become a fool; ye have compelled me: for I ought to have been commended by you; for in nothing was I behind these overmuch apostles, although I am nothing (2 Corinthians 12:11).—He here makes an ironical concession (for the words should not be regarded as a question) with reference to the many things he had said in commendation of himself in the course of the last two chapters: I am become a fool. [The verb γέγονα indicates that he had become what he was not originally]. And yet he follows this immediately with a justification of himself; for he throws upon them the responsibility of all: ye have forced me thus foolishly to boast myself, for I ought to have been commended by you, instead of being obliged to commend myself. [The ironical nature of the passage explains the concession without taking this verse interrogatively, as Wordsworth, after some Greek scholiasts, suggests]. In emphatic correspondence with one another are arranged the words: ὑμεῖς, ἐγώ, ὑφ̓ὑμῶν. By ἑγω he does not put himself in special contrast with those opponents who were so highly commended by the Corinthians. He merely censures here the want of attention which these Corinthians had shown to his claims. Their positive injustice toward him he exposes when he comes to say, that he had been in no respect behind those much-lauded apostles (comp. 2 Corinthians 11:5). Ὑατέρησα limits the time of the comparison to the period of his residence at Corinth. With humility, however, he adds (comp. 1 Corinthians 15:8, etc.), that he was after all nothing, i.e., I am absolutely powerless in myself (1 Corinthians 1:28). This is a sincere assertion, though it contains a severe allusion to the pride of his opponents (Osiander). He shows that he was in no respect behind these supereminent apostles, by referring to those proofs of his Apostleship which he had given among them.—Truly the signs of an Apostle were wrought among you in all patience by signs and wonders and miracles (2 Corinthians 12:12). The signs of an Apostle here signify those things by means of which the Apostles showed that they were Apostles, and were recognized as such among their fellow men. The article makes the idea of an Apostle especially prominent (Bengel: ejus, qui sit apostolus); the reality and not merely the ideal of one. The first σημεία is here to be taken in the more comprehensive sense [of general evidences], whereas the second should be explained in the narrower signification [of special tokens of a Divine power]. Neander: “Our faith in the reality of the Apostle’s performance of miracles need not therefore be founded solely upon tradition, for Paul here asserts that he wrought them, and he thus comes in direct opposition to all mythical views of the narratives of New Testament miracles.” The passive κατηργάσθη (were wrought) or κατειργάσθη is a modest form of expression for: I wrought. Even if we are not influenced by the inappropriateness of such an idea ἐνπάσῃὑπομονῇ cannot be taken as the first in the series of σημείοις, etc., for the ἐν is not really a part of the original text. The phrase designates the ethical element in which these signs were wrought in Corinth (ἐνὑμῖν), and which had a tendency to confirm believers there. It shows his perseverance, with all steadfastness in the midst of the opposition and sufferings he had to meet as an Apostle (comp. 2 Corinthians 6:4). Ὑπομονή has reference here not to an outward objective tolerance of all kinds of evils (for it has no genitive of the object in connection with it, as in 2 Corinthians 1:6), but it refers to the feelings with which he persevered under his trials. Πάσῃ implies the degree, the completeness of his patience, for if we refer it to the extent to which it was carried in respect to the variety of its exercises, it would more properly apply to the objective interpretation. These proofs of his Apostleship (κατεργ. is said of that which is a res ardua) he calls σηὴεία, τεράτα, δυναμε͂ις. The words designate the same thing under various aspects; we have: 1, their significance, with reference to the Divine legation; 2, their impression, on account of their extraordinary and wonderful appearance; 3, their causality, as expressions of Divine power. [Σημεῖα are “signs,” and have an ethical purpose beyond themselves as credentials of a Divine mission; τέρατα are “wonders,” regarded simply as supernatural prodigies to excite surprise, and are never spoken of except in connection with some of the other names; and δυναμεῖς are “mighty works,” looked upon simply as putting forth of Divine power. See Trench, part 2, p. 198 ff.; Webster, 233f. It is much to be regretted that each of these words in the original is not rendered in our English version uniformly by the same word]. The same words are used in 2 Thessalonians 2:9 (of Satanic miracles), but in Hebrews 2:4 and in Romans 15:19, they are referred to for the same purpose as in our passage, i.e., to legitimate Apostolical authority. The accumulation of such words brings into more distinct prominence the magnitude and variety of the miracles. Some have attempted, rather arbitrarily, to refer the first to the cure of diseases which were curable by ordinary means; the second, to the cure of diseases beyond the reach of human art; and the third, to exercises of Apostolical power in punishing crimes, or to spiritual powers. The force of the passage is entirely lost by those who explain it of the extraordinary effects produced by his preaching and character. The μέν gives a hint of a contrast, on which the Apostle is other-wise silent, i.e., the want of acknowledgment which these signs had suffered. Meyer: the proofs were indeed (truly) wrought, but they have failed to produce the corresponding conviction among you. There is no γάρ in the sentence, and the omission is in accordance with the abrupt and lively style of the general passage. It is, however, supplied in 2 Corinthians 12:13, where he corroborates by a touching question what he had said in 2 Corinthians 12:12.—For what is there in which ye were inferior to the rest of the churches? (2 Corinthians 12:13 a).—The proofs of an Apostleship had been wrought among them, for in nothing were they inferior to the other churches where he had labored. Ὑπέρ signifies generally over, beyond; but here on account of ἡττᾶσθαι, downwards, below. In other places we have ἠττᾶσθαιτινόςτινι (but with the accus. of the “wherein”). Rόckert, very incorrectly and contrary to the connection with 2 Corinthians 12:12, gives the meaning: ye have suffered no more injury than, etc. It seems also an arbitrary limitation of the thought, to make it refer exclusively to the gifts of the Spirit.—The Apostle, however, allows that there was one respect in which they might be considered inferior:—except that I myself was not burdensome to you (2 Corinthians 12:13 b); i.e. had labored among them without compensation. This was a delicate though painful irony, which amounted to bitterness when he added the prayer which follows. Εὶμὴὅτι: i.e. except perhaps; or: except this, that, etc. The great distance of 2 Corinthians 12:16, etc., renders it improper to explain αὐτὸςἐγώ by a reference to it. [Αὐτὸς is very emphatic especially before ἐγὼ ?]. He places his own person in contrast with those Apostolic works to which his question had just alluded. οὐκατενάρκησα is explained on 2 Corinthians 11:7-8.—This fact that he had received no personal maintenance from them as he had done from other churches, made them inferior to those churches and was an injustice to them, for which he craved their pardon:—forgive me this wrong (2 Corinthians 12:13 c).—Such a request was a severe censure, as if they had been so ungrateful and had so completely failed to appreciate his conduct, that they had become grossly prejudiced against him through the influence of his contemptuous and suspicious opponents.—Chrysostom and some others contend that the Apostle was not here speaking ironically, but that he was endeavoring to mitigate the wounded feeling he had produced by his allusion to his self-denying course among them (as if it were a sign of a defect in his regard for them). But the irony of the preceding question compels us to regard the prayer as a continuation of the same strain.—Not until he comes to 2 Corinthians 12:14, does he come back, to his ordinary tone:—Behold, I am ready to come unto you the third time, and I will not be burdensome to you.—In this verse τρίτον does not belong to ἑτοίμωςἔχω but to ἐλθε͂ινπρὸςὑμᾶς, for it is not with reference to his readiness, but to his actual coming among them that he could say he was resolved not to be burdensome to them. He intended to say that on two occasions when he had been among them [see on 2 Corinthians 13:1], he had not been a burden to them and he was equally resolved not to be a burden to them on this third visit for which he was now prepared. On ἰδού comp. 2 Corinthians 6:2; 2 Corinthians 6:9; 2 Corinthians 7:11.—His reason for this purpose he says was to be found in his dis-interested love for them (comp. Philippians 4:17); they were of importance to him, not because of what they possessed, and hence not for any advantage they would be to him, but for their own sakes; since if they were won to Christ and advanced in the work of salvation, he would gain by them as much as he desired (Rόckert reverses this: the Apostle would gain them for himself, and in this way for Christ; but such a view is not as much according to the spirit of the passage, comp. Osiander).—This idea he traces back to the natural relation between parents and children; by virtue of which children were not bound to make provision for the parents, but the parents for the children:—For the children are not bound to lay up for the parents, but the parents for the children (2 Corinthians 12:14 b).—This applied to him as their spiritual father (1 Corinthians 4:15), and it was therefore his part not to seek for their possessions, but to care for them and to collect spiritual treasures for them (as the duty of providing for children by the investment of property is not abolished but brought within the proper limits of a confidence in God and a heavenly mind by what is said in Matthew 6:19, so here the duty of children to support their parents is not excluded, Osiander). After οἱγονεῖς understand ὀφείλουσιθησαυρίζειν.—He applies this rule to himself in 2 Corinthians 12:15, but he implies that his love was strong enough to go far beyond the limits usually reached by parental duty:—And I will most gladly spend and be spent for you.—The gradual rise in the discourse or the climax indicated by δέ is clearly brought out even in ἤδιστα, which goes far beyond ὀψείλει, but it is carried far beyond both in in ἔκδαπανηθήσομαι. Instead of collecting something for himself at their expense, he was determined not merely to expend with hearty good will, all that he had acquired or possessed, for their benefit, but so to use all his powers as to wear them out in the interest of their souls, i.e., to sacrifice his life and his whole self, if he could thereby promote their supreme good. The compound verb ἐκδαπανᾶςθαι is much stronger than the original simple verb, and signifies to be utterly consumed (comp. Osiander’s admirable remarks). The Apostle adds:—although the more abundantly I love you, the less I am loved, (2 Corinthians 12:15 b)—If we accept εἰκαί according to the Receptus, the sense would be: although I shall be loved the less, the more I love you. Rόckert and Osiander preserve this idea, even if καί is rejected (making εἰ concessive), but such an interpretation is very doubtful. Meyer takes εἰ in the sense of: if, equivalent to ἐπεί, as if the Apostle hesitated to make the direct and confident assertion, but declared that he was willing to go to the utmost in overcoming their hostile spirit toward him. This willingness he would still express if the condition were set forth as an actual and known fact: though I, as is now evident, shall be loved the less, etc. If this is presented by the Apostle as the motive of his conduct the language certainly is very severe, but on any other view the idea comes out in a very awkward and feeble manner. It is better probably to take it in a concessive sense, but then it becomes necessary with Tischendorf to retain the καί, which has many and good authorities in its favor.—Περισσοτερως—ἦττον is an abbreviated expression for ὅσῳ ?—τοιούτῳ.—Nothing needs to be understood in addition to the comparative (as: more them other churches, or: less than my opponents). 2 Corinthians 12:16-18. He here meets the attempt to throw on him the suspicion that under the pretence of personal disinterestedness he had sent deputies, and through them had imposed burdens upon the Corinthians. He comes upon his readers boldly and confidently with the question whether these deputies had not exhibited a disinterestedness similar to his own.—But be it so, I was not burdensome to you; nevertheless, being crafty, I caught you with guile (2 Corinthians 12:16). In ἔστω, etc., he puts himself in the position of an objector. Such a one must concede that the Corinthians had not been burdened with any selfish claims on his part, but it might be insinuated that this had been only to play a deeper game of craft to get them into his power, and to overreach them by means of his emissaries. Ἔστω is found with a similar use in Plato, as in the Latin: esto! sit ita sane ! ̓Εγώ is here emphatic in contrast with those intermediate agents mentioned in 2 Corinthians 12:17-18. With ἀλλά he introduces the precise objection (in contrast with ἔστω—ὑμᾶς): he had caught them by a crafty method gaining them over by an appearance of disinterestedness (ἔλαβον is found in 2 Corinthians 11:20). Πανοῦργος signifies adroit, sly, subtle (2 Corinthians 4:2; 2 Corinthians 11:3). Paul’s real prudence and skill was here represented in an unfavorable light (comp. Osiander). Ὑπάρχων is used in a similar manner in 1 Corinthians 11:7.—Did I make a gain of you by any of them whom I sent unto you (2 Corinthians 12:17). This verse is an anacoluthon; where τινὰ is in an emphatic position at the commencement of the sentence, and as an accusative absolute. He was probably about to write: ἀπέσταλκαεἰςτὸπλεονεκτῆσαιὑμᾶς, but with an impressive abbreviation, he leaves this second ἀπέσταλκα out, and, losing sight of the accus.: τινὰ, writes: δἰἀντοῦἐπλεονεκτησα. The ὦν is here an instance of attraction for τούτωνοὕς.—I besought Titus to go on this mission, and with Him I sent the brother (2 Corinthians 12:18 a). He here names these deputies, and especially Titus, whom he had sent last, and the brother [not a brother, as in our English A. V.] accompanying Titus, unnamed, but well known to his readers. It is impossible for us to determine who this brother was. We conclude from the word συναπέστειλα, and from the fact that only Titus is afterwards named, that he was subordinate to Titus. The sending is the one mentioned in chap. 7. [soon after the writing of the first Epistle of our canon] and not that spoken of in chap. 8. On παρεκάλεσα comp. 2 Corinthians 8:6; 2 Corinthians 8:17. [Osiander draws attention to the fact that in each of the three passages (2 Corinthians 7:13; 2 Corinthians 8:6) in which Paul’s agency in inducing Titus to enter upon this mission, the same word (παρακαλέω) is used. The word appears to convey an idea intermediate between that of a command and that of a prayer, i.e., a friendly requirement, a reminding of what ought to be done].—Did Titus make a gain of you? Walked we not in the same spirit and in the same steps? (2 Corinthians 12:18). Τῳαὐτῷπνεύματι is the dative of the mode and manner (Romans 13:13), or of the rule or law. The meaning is: did not the same Holy Spirit control us all in our conduct, and keep us from all selfish conduct, from every thing like making a gain of any one? The dative οὐτοῖςαὐτοῖςἴχνεσιν is probably the local dative, as in Acts 14:16, and the words here signify an agreement in external conduct, as the preceding clause refers to an agreement in internal purpose and feeling. The Apostle is not here speaking directly of Christ’s footsteps (1 Peter 2:21), but we must conclude that they walked in the same steps, because Titus followed those of Paul (Meyer). AND ETHICAL1. When a Christian is distinguished for remarkable degrees of Divine grace, he is very apt to become elevated in his own estimation. A faithful God not unfrequently prevents this by bringing him into circumstances of deep humiliation, that by such painful methods he may become conscious of his own inability, and that he may not claim those glorious distinctions which are given him for Christ’s sake, as if they were his own and were intended for his personal honor. In all such afflictions, whether bodily or spiritual, or both combined, there is an influence of Satan designed to torment and worry him, but God will use them to drive him to the throne of grace. And though his ardent request to be freed from the distress may not be granted, he will surely receive that Divine grace which will enable him to bear the heaviest burden. Divine power will find its best sphere of activity in his weakness, and the result will be that he will be strong in his weakness. Instead, therefore, of complaining and fretting about his various infirmities and those sufferings which make him conscious of them, he will experience and exhibit to the world no small degree of satisfaction in them. 2. A faithful member of Christ will be inclined to keep his own person in the background, wherever he is. He seeks, no honor for himself, and least of all will he boast himself when he gains esteem and influence in consequence of some special impartations of grace from on high. Every attempt to give him an undue importance on account of such things will be offensive to him, because it will seem like giving him an honor which belongs only to God. He desires to be esteemed only for what he has actually done and spoken. The important thing with him is not the fleece, but the sheep, that those souls which Christ has purchased may be brought to Him and be saved. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ XVI—REPROOF OF SOME MORAL NOT YET REMOVED, AND TO SPARE HIM THE OF . AND 2 Corinthians 12:19-21. 2 Corinthians 13:1-1419 Again, think ye that we excuse ourselves unto you? [For a long time ye are thinking that it is to you that we are excusing ourselves πάλαιδοχεῖτε; ὅτιὑμῖνἀπολογόυμεθα]; we speak before God in Christ: but we do all things, dearly beloved, [but all, beloved,] for your edifying. 20For I fear, lest, [haply μήπως] when I come, I shall not find you such as I would, and that I shall be found unto you such as ye would not: lest [haply] there be. debates [discord], envyings [emulation, ζῆπως], wraths, 21 strifes, backbitings, whisperings, swellings, tumults: And lest, when I come again, my God will humble me among [with respect to, πρὸς] you, and that I shall bewail many which have sinned already, [before, προημαρτηχότων], and have not repented of the uncleanness and fornication and lasciviousness which they have committed. 2 Corinthians 13:1. This is the third time am coming to you. In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established. 2I told you before, and foretell you, as if I were present, the second time; and being absent now I write [I have said before, and now say beforehand as I did when I was present the second time, so now also in my absence, om. I write] to them which heretofore have sinned, and to all others, that, if I come again, I will not spare: 3Since ye seek a proof of Christ speaking in4 me, which [who] to you-ward is not weak, but is mighty in you. For though he [For He also, καιγὰρ] was crucified through weakness, yet he liveth by the power of God. For we also [om. also] are weak in him, but we shall live with him11 by the power of God toward you. 5Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves, Know [or, know] ye not your own selves, how that Jesus6 Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates? [to some extend unapproved, τὶὰδὁκιμοί?] But I trust that ye shall know that we are not reprobates [unapproved]. 7Now I pray to [yet we pray, εὐχόμεθαδὲ ] God that ye do no evil; not that we should appear approved, but that ye should do that which is honest, [excellent], though we be as reprobates [as if unapproved]. 8For we can do nothing against the truth, but [we can do something] for the truth. 9For we are glad, [rejoice, χαίρομεν], when we are weak, and ye are strong: and also we wish, [pray for, εὐχόμἐθα], even your perfection10 [prefect restoration, κατάρτισν]. Therefore I write these things being absent, lest being present I should use sharpness, according to the power which the Lord hath given me to [for, εἰς] edification, and not to [for] destruction. 11Finally, brethren, farewell, [rejoice, χαίρετε] Be perfect [be restored to order, καταρτίζεσθε], be of good comfort, 12 be of one mind, live in peace; and the God of love and peace shall be with you, greet one another with a holy kiss. 13All the saints salute you. The grace of our Lord 14Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Amen. [om. Amen]. AND 2 Corinthians 12:19-21. For a long time ye are thinking that we are excusing ourselves unto you (ver.1).—Paul here guards against the erroneous impression which he anticipated some might receive from his self-defence, that he was standing in judgment before them; he assures them that his only object was to do them good. Nothing was then of more importance to him than their amendment, unless he was willing to have their whole conduct come before him in his judicial capacity. The interrogative form of the sentence would become necessary if we adopt the word πάλιν of the Receptus (a reading perhaps occasioned by 2 Corinthians 3:1); but it would be quite unsuitable if πάλαι be adopted. With this latter reading Paul must be understood to refer to what would take place, when his Epistle should be read or heard at Corinth, especially that part which was of an apologetical character. Ὑμῖν stands at the commencement of the sentence for the sake of emphasis. It is the dative of direction or tendency (with, or before you) as in Acts 19:33. He was about to set before them the positive bearing of his self-defence upon them, i.e., to show them that its true object was to promote their spiritual life (οἰκοδομή). This required that all obstructions to his Apostolical influence, and all prejudices and wrong thoughts against him and his conduct among them, should be removed, and that all dependence upon their false teachers should be broken off. But before he presented this it was of consequence to assure them that he was standing with his apology at the bar of God, to whom alone he was responsible.—we speak before God in Christ, but all things, beloved, for your edification (2 Corinthians 12:19 b).—In these words (comp. 2 Corinthians 2:7) his object was not to affirm the sincerity of his purpose, but to let them know that it was to God that he was accountable, and from God that he expected an acquittal. The words in Christ (ἐνΧριστῷ) point out the sphere in which he was speaking, one far above every human tribunal, as a Christian and an Apostle, conscious of his fellowship with Christ. In connection with the last clause (τὰδὲπάντα) we must supply λαλοῦμεν (we speak) from the preceding sentence. Some would join the sentence with the preceding [and unite τὰ and δὲ together] so as to read: λαλοῦμενταδεπάντα, etc; but τάδε usually refers to that which follows it, and never is made use of by Paul in any other passage. [It refers here to something definite, and not to all things in general, for it is confined to those matters of which he had been speaking, and especially his apology for himself]. In this last clause also, he makes, by way of conciliation, a direct appeal to them as his beloved ones (ἀγαπητοί), before entering upon a more severe remonstrance. The reason for this is apparent in 2 Corinthians 12:20-21.—For I fear that haply when I come, I shall not find you such as I would, and that I shall be found unto you such as ye would not (2 Corinthians 12:20 a).—He here notices the unhappy condition he had reason to fear they were in, and which called for these efforts on his part for their benefit. His first reference to this condition is very tender. He merely mentions the impression which such a state of things would necessarily make upon him when he should come among them, and he alludes to the proceedings which such a state would necessarily call forth from him. Even when he says, I fear lest, etc., he expresses the solicitude of a father, and his earnest desire that his intercourse with them might be free from annoyance; but in μήπως we have something likewise of a conciliatory nature. [The word is used in two successive clauses (anaphora), but in the third (2 Corinthians 12:21) it is exchanged for μὴ, inasmuch as the hesitation to express his thought in decisive terms wears away as he proceeds. The expressions: “such as ye would not,” and “such as I would,” are euphemistic, to avoid a more disagreeable phrase. The use of the verb θέλω for βούλομαι was not uncommon, and yet we may recognize something of the specific meaning of θέλω here, inasmuch as the Apostle meant perhaps to express some determination of the will in the case]. In κᾆγώ—οἶονοὐθέλετε he shows that he was painfully conscious of an Apostolic power of discipline which he would be obliged to exert; and he now reappears in that triumphant attitude of authority which he had formerly assumed (comp. Meyer). ̓Υμῖν has not the sense of: by you, but to you, or for you, as in Romans 7:10. The position of the second οὐ before the θέλετε is especially emphatic. What he meant by such as he would not, he shows in greater detail in the second part of 2 Corinthians 12:20 and in 2 Corinthians 12:21.—lest I shall find, perchance, among you debate, emulation, passions, contentions, slanderings, whisperings, insolences, tumults (2 Corinthians 12:20).—The unpleasant things which he found are arranged under two different relations, according to the two different kinds of moral defect he knew to be in the Church. [Bengel: “That which was not such as he would, is treated of to the end of the chapter, then what was such as they would not, is treated of from 2 Corinthians 8:1 and onwards.” Such vices indicate how great were the difficulties to be met with in churches just emerged from heathenism, but we are not to suppose them prevalent among that portion which Paul had described in chap. 7 as penitent and obedient]. Not, however, until the commencement of the next chapter does he come to speak of the exercise of his Apostolic power to punish offenders (for in the next verse he brings before us another kind of offences). To μήπωςἔρις, etc., must be supplied εὑρεθῶσιν (or ὦσιν) ἐνὑμῖν. We have ἔρις and ζῆλος in 1 Corinthians 3:3, and ἔρις in 1 Corinthians 1:11; on ἔριδες comp. Winer, § 9 [p. 59, Philad. ed.]. Θυμοί occurs also in Galatians 5:20, and signifies vehement passion, boiling emotion. Θυμός signifies the heart as the seat of passionate emotion, and then this emotion itself—passion, wrath, rage; the plural is found also in the classic writers. ̓Ερίθεια signifies hired work, mercenariness, love of intrigue, a disposition to foment parties. See Romans 2:8; Galatians 5:20; Philippians 1:17; Philippians 2:3; James 3:14; James 3:16 (not of ἔρις) Com. Meyer and Fritzsche on Romans 2:8. Καταλαλιαί signifies, evil reports in general; ψιθυρίσμοί, secret slanderings. The original verb of φυσιώσεις is used with reference to the insolence of faction, an arrogant conceit of knowledge, and arrogance with respect to gifts in general, in 1 Corinthians 4:6; 1 Corinthians 8:1; 1 Corinthians 13:4. ̓Ακαταστασίαι occurs in 2 Corinthians 6:5; 1 Corinthians 14:33. In addition to these moral defects, which had their origin in the factious spirit prevailing at Corinth, and hence called for decisive measures, the Apostle now proceeds (2 Corinthians 12:21) to mention some manifestations of that sensuality for which their city was noted.—Lest again when I come, my God shall humble me with respect to you (2 Corinthians 12:21 a).—There is no need of commencing a new period here, and so of giving this whole verse an interrogative form. The reading ταπεινώσει does not require this, for this word, like the μή (previously μήπως), indicates simply an increased anxiety that such a sad calamity should not come upon him. We may also notice that a question calling for a negative answer (comp. 2 Corinthians 12:17-18) would not be appropriate in this connection (2 Corinthians 12:20). The πάλιν qualifies the whole phrase: ἐλθόντοςμουταπεινώσειμε (comp. 2 Corinthians 2:1), and not merely either ἐλθόντοςμου or ταπεινώσει. He does not intend to say that he had experienced a similar mortification during some former visit [and yet comp. 2 Corinthians 2:1. We see not how πάλιν can have its force without supposing some reference to a former visit, even if it should be made to qualify ἐλθόντος alone. And yet this could not have been his first visit when he had great success and general joy in spite of his persecutions, but certainly no such humiliations. We are obliged to think of a second unrecorded visit between his first and second Epistle. See on 2 Corinthians 12:1 of the next chapter]. The genitive absolute here is remarkable, and hence the reading in the Receptus. The ταπεινοῦν has reference not to the exercise of discipline among them, as if this would produce a feeling of humiliation on account of his love to the Church and to the Lord, and would be traceable to God because it would take place according to the Divine will, but rather to the mortification the Apostle would experience if he were compelled to see the fruit of his labors among them utterly destroyed, and thus to find all his boasting either much abated or completely wrested from him. Should such a humiliation come upon him, he would trace it to the hand of God, and receive it as a wholesome discipline. He would therefore humbly submit himself to it, and find consolation in the reflection that the God who did it was his God (Romans 1:8; 1 Corinthians 1:4), the God whom he served, and with whom he was in such intimate fellowship that the interests of one were the interests of both. If we give the word the sense of: to trouble, or to grieve, it will have precisely the same signification with πενθήσω. Πρὸςὐμᾶς has here the sense, not of: with or among you, for with such a meaning it would be superfluous, but of: in respect to you.—And I shall bewail many of those who have sinned before and have not repented of the uncleanness and fornication and lasciviousness which they have committed (2 Corinthians 12:21 b). The word πενθεῖν signifies, to mourn, to lament, lugere, especially for the dead, etc. It expresses the genuine feeling of a spiritual pastor (comp. Calvin), and perhaps it alludes to the idea of a spiritual death. It expresses either the sorrow he would feel on account of their impenitence (Meyer), or the grief he would feel in denouncing punishment or in excommunicating them (De Wette, et al.). [In ancient times sentence of condemnation in the Church was pronounced with outward signs of sorrow and mourning; see 1 Corinthians 5:2; 2 Corinthians 7:7; 2 Corinthians 7:9 (Old Paraphrase). Perhaps the customs attending excommunication were derived from an extreme interpretation of such passages]. The objects of this sorrow are mentioned when he says: πολλοὺςτῶνπροημαρτηκότωνκαὶμὴμετανοησάντων, etc. This is not an inexact form for designating a general class, instead of saying τοὺςμὴμετανοὴσαντας; many, i.e., who have not repented. But the Apostle had not in mind all unconverted sinners, in every congregation, among whom he gave especial prominence to those in Corinth by using the word πολλὸυς (Lόcke), for nothing in the context warrants us in giving such an extension to- the idea. He unquestionably had his eye upon sinners in Corinth alone, when he used the phrase προημαρτηκότες, etc. But our further explanation must depend upon the answer to the question, whether ἐπὶτῇἀκαθαρσίᾳ etc., should be connected with μετανοησάντων or with πενθήσω. The first method would be without analogy, so far as the New Testament is concerned, for in every instance there, μεταν. is construed with ἀπό or ἐκ (with ἐπί only in the Old Testament, in Joe 2:13, and Amos 7:3, where the μετανοεῖν in both cases is the act of God). And yet it is probably admissible, even if the idea of a mere change of mind without that of sorrow for sin, be connected with the word. It would then signify, a change of mind in respect to, or on account of, etc. [Osiander draws attention to the contrast of προ: and μετα:] The connection of the words with πενθήσω seems rather unusual and strange, inasmuch as in other places we meet with πενθεῖνἐπίτινι in the sense of: to lament over something, but not with πενθεῖντιναἐπίτινι. It is, however, not altogether unallowable on this account. If we adopt the first mode of connecting the words, we must understand by πολλούς the worst among the class of persons mentioned (De Wette, Osiander), i.e., those whom he would be obliged to punish by excluding them from the Church (πενθεῖν would then be: to mourn for them as dead persons; and it is used with respect to such an act in 1 Corinthians 5:2). If we adopt the other mode, προημαρτηκότες etc., would signify those who had in any manner sinned, etc., and we should make the Apostle say that he feared he should have to mourn over many of these on account of the sins of the flesh, of which they were guilty; and he designs to mention here the other class of sins which were most prevalent at Corinth i.e., besides those mentioned in 2 Corinthians 12:20). We prefer the second of the methods, because the reference to the excommunication of the worst contains something unnatural, and 1 Corinthians 5:2 by no means justifies us in referring πενθήσω to such a transaction. Against this second method no objection should be urged on account of the position of πενθήσω, nor of the thought itself, to mourn for one on account of such things. Πενθήσω stands at the commencement of the clause for the sake of emphasis, and ἐπί stands not at a very extraordinary distance from it. The Apostle might very reasonably be understood to mourn over such impenitent persons on account of their sins, even though he does not in this place, as in other places (comp. 1 Corinthians 6:9-10), bring prominently before us the consequences of those sins. The προ, however, refers not to the period before their conversion, but to the time preceding his second visit, when misunderstandings had begun to prevail, and when he had admonished them to repent (comp. 2 Corinthians 13:2), though with so little success that he found the peculiar faults mentioned in 2 Corinthians 12:20-21 were still prevalent among them. ̓Ακαθαραία signifies sins of a sensual nature generally, such as defiled both soul and body, Romans 1:24; Galatians 5:19; Ephesians 4:19. Πορνεία (1 Corinthians 5:1), and ἀσέλγεια (wantonness, shamelessness, voluptuousness, Romans 13:13; Galatians 5:19, et al.), are particular exhibitions of ἀκαθαρσία. Πράσσειν signifies, to bring about, achieve (comp. Passow). We do not (with Meyer and Osiander) make μὴμετανοησάντων refer to those who should be impenitent at the anticipated coming of the Apostle at Corinth: “and shall not have repented,” but to the fruitlessness of his admonitions when he was among them the second time. [The perfect in προημ. has here a special force and significance, implying that the sins were continued, and were not overcome by a true repentance. The aorist of μὴμεταν. is in contrast with this, and we see no reason why it may not be taken in the sense of a futur. exact, i.e., those who will not have repented when I shall be with you]. 2 Corinthians 13:1-4. This is the third time I am coming to you (2 Corinthians 13:1 a).—Now follows the Apostle’s announcement of his determination to proceed with an unsparing judicial severity, in accordance with what he had said in 2 Corinthians 12:20 : κᾳ ?̇γὼεὑρηθῶὑμῖν, οἰονοὐθέλετε. Τρίτοντοῦτο signifies here: this is the third time, as in John 21:14, et al. Ἔρχομαι speaks of his actual coming, and presupposes that he had been at Corinth twice before this (it cannot refer to a mere purpose or plan of such a journey, nor to a coming by letters). [General note on Paul’s visits to Corinth. It seems to us impossible to interpret 2 Corinthians 13:1, on any other view than that Paul had previously been twice at Corinth. It cannot be made to mean simply, this is the second time Ι have been ready, and if it could it would have been a most unfortunate reference, in which he would rather remind his readers of his failure actually to come. The usual appeal to 2 Corinthians 12:14, is unsatisfactory, not only because our passage should not be a repetition of that, but because the proper idea of that is, I am ready to come the third time. The word διέρχομαι in 1 Corinthians 16:5, is not quite to the point (Wordsworth), since it would only show how the will was taken for the fact, but would not account for his expected coming, being the third of a series of the same kind. Certainly no one, reading 2 Corinthians 13:1, without a previous bias, would ever think of anything but a third actual visit. In 2 Corinthians 2:1, Paul also implies that he had once visited them “in heaviness,” evidently on account of the misconduct of Christians there; in 2 Corinthians 12:21 he intimates that God had then humbled him; and in 2 Corinthians 13:2 (rightly rendered) he implies that he had then given them warning that if he came again he would not spare them. Now when could that visit have been paid? The whole idea is unsuitable to the first visit when the church was formed. Nor could it have been after that which we now call the First Epistle, when he announced his intention to remain at Corinth until Pentecost (1 Corinthians 16:8), and after “the Epistle” in which he had written to them “not to keep company with fornicators” (1 Corinthians 5:9), and answered the inquiries the Corinthians had made of him (1 Corinthians 7:1). See Introd. § 6. But we know that Paul resided at Ephesus during the whole time between his first visit to Corinth and his journey through Macedonia, during which he wrote our present Second Epistle. There must, however, have been time enough after his departure from Corinth for the springing up of the disorders which were censured in that unrecorded visit, and the subsequent lost Epistle, and for the sending of a letter and perhaps a deputation from the Corinthian Church to Paul (1 Corinthians 7:1; 1 Corinthians 1:11; 1 Corinthians 16:17). On the supposition that Paul came to Ephesus late in the year 54, Alford ventures to place the unrecorded journey in the Spring of 55, and the lost Epistle in the Spring of 57, or at least early in the same year in which he left Ephesus for Macedonia (1 Corinthians 16:8). As Ephesus and Corinth were the usual points of transit between Asia and Europe, Paul might easily have made a brief visit of the kind supposed, but as it was attended with no special results, it was not mentioned in the Acts. The shipwrecks and disasters at sea mentioned in 2 Corinthians 11:23-28, indicate that Paul must have made several voyages during his missionary life, which are not recorded. Comp. Alford, Introd. to Cor. § 5., and Essay on How to use the Epistles in Sun. Mag. for 1867. J. L. Davies, Art. Paul in Smith’s Dict. of the Bible]. In the mouth of two witnesses and of three shall every word be established (ver. l b).—By a citation from the very letter of the Law in Deuteronomy 19:15, the Apostle lets them see how rigid and precise were to be his disciplinary proceedings when he should come to them this third time. He would so arrange the proceedings that the witnesses should be heard in the presence of the congregation (comp. 1 Corinthians 5:12-13; 1 Corinthians 5:3, etc.), for in the trial of notorious offences, it would be necessary to adhere strictly to all legal forms, that he might avoid any appearance of partiality.Ῥῇμα [the word, after the Hebrew manner] stands here for the matter, cause, conduct or charge in dispute.Σταθήσεται, signifies: shall be established, determined or brought to a decision. ̓Επὶστόματος, i.e., on account of what is spoken. The καί instead of ἤ before τριῶν was designed to imply, and by three, as if there are so many; or, also by three, if he had said, from two to three. The free application which some have made of this citation from the law, (either to his repeated warnings and their certainty and validity; or to those repeated announcements of his coming with the accompanying warnings and threatenings which were equally sure to prove true; or to the various occasions on which he had been or was about to be present among them, as if these were distinct personal witnesses to establish the truth of the matter) seems to us by no means ingenious or plausible, even if we accept the more delicate and profound explanation which Osiander proposes, viz., that his apostolic visits among them were, in consequence of their repetition, not merely means by which he directly saw them, but distinct practical attestations of his faithful testimony among them, deposing against those who should continue impenitent (comp. Matthew 8:4; Matthew 10:18).—Whether any relation was intended between τρίτον and τριῶν is very uncertain. Inasmuch as he was about to announce in 2 Corinthians 13:2, that he was now determined to proceed in an unsparing manner against them, it is difficult to perceive in what way he can imply that he was especially patient in delaying and in repeatedly warning them.—What is said in 1 Timothy 5:19 shows that the law in such matters was not looked upon as abrogated. [Its validity, however, depended upon its general reasonableness and upon Christ’s recognition and re-institution (Matthew 18:15) and not upon the perpetual obligation of the Mosaic precept].—I have said already and now say beforehand, as when I was present the second time so now also in my absence, to them which heretofore have sinned and to all the rest (2 Corinthians 13:2 a).—The verb προείρηκα (I have said before) has reference to previous announcements which still remained in force (perfect tense), and προλέγω (I foretell) to what he was then writing [in which he probably used precisely the same words, viz.: “If I come again,” etc.] With respect to the former, he says: that he had said when present the second time, i.e., as I did when I was present the second time; and with respect to the latter he says, I say beforehand, now when I am absent (καὶἀπὼννῦν, comp. 2 Corinthians 13:10). There is a correspondence between the two clauses προείρηκα and προλέγω on the one hand, and τὸδεὺτερον and νῦν on the other, and hence the τὸδεύτερον should not be separated from παρών and connected with προλέγω. It is evident from 2 Corinthians 13:1 (τρίτοντοῦτοἒρχομαι) and other passages, that the Apostle had already been twice at Corinth, and hence there is no need of the interpretation here: “as if I were present the second time, although I am now absent.” The προημαρτηκότες were those in general who had previously sinned (and even then [open perfect] continued to do so), whether before his second visit (ὡςπαρὼντὸδεύτερον), or until his present writing . The λοιποί were not those who had become impure after those just mentioned, as if προημαρτ. were related to προείρηκα and οἱλοιποί to προλέγω, for such an expression would be not only forced but indistinct. It means rather the remaining members of the congregation, either such as witnessed his threatenings, or (better) such as should be brought by his warnings and their own reflection to a reformation, and hence such as would not fall under discipline. The substance of what he had thus told them, and now foretold them, was:—that if I come again I will not spare (2 Corinthians 13:2 b).—In the words εἰςτὸπάλιν the πάλιν which had been used as a noun, is converted by the εἰς back again into an adverb. Why it was that he had been so lenient on his second visit is not told us; it may have been because he had hoped that they would themselves come to a better mind by reflection, or because he had feared that he would only make matters worse, etc. With οὐφείσομαι is intimately connected what is said in 2 Corinthians 13:3.—Since ye seek a proof of Christ speaking in me, who toward you is not weak, but is strong among you (2 Corinthians 13:3).—The reason he would not spare them, is introduced by ἐπεί: “I will not spare, since now ye seek, and indeed challenge by your conduct a proof,” etc. Others make ἐπεὶζητεῖτε the protasis or conditional proposition to 2 Corinthians 13:5, and regard the words, “Who is not weak toward you—by the power of God toward you,” or at least the whole of 2 Corinthians 13:4, as a parenthesis. Such a construction, however, seems unnecessary and awkward. Δοκιμήν, which stands for emphasis at the commencement of the sentence, signifies: proof, trial, verification by experiment [see on 2 Corinthians 2:9]. The genitive, however, may be either of the object: the proof of the fact, etc., i.e., the proof that Christ is speaking in me; or of the subject: that Christ may give proof that He is in me. That which follows, who is not weak toward you, etc., is rather in favor of the latter interpretation. In the words, Christ speaking in me, he had reference not merely to Christ’s speaking through him (ἐν=διά), but to Christ’s being and acting in him. By their impenitent conduct they were putting Him to the proof whether he could carry out what He had threatened against them, and so they challenged Him to make a demonstration of His power to punish them. What is said in the relative sentence, was intended to make them consider how dangerous such a challenge was: “who is not weak with respect to you [εἰς], but is mighty among [ἐν] you.” In this he refers not to earlier manifestations of this power among them by means of spiritual gifts and miracles, etc., but to such an exercise of it among them as would become indispensable to punish them if they continued impenitent. The word δυνατεῖ occurs nowhere else except here and in Romans 14:4, though it is analogous to ἀδυνατεῖ, and was perhaps occasioned by the use of ἀσθενεῖ. The reason for the assertion that Christ was not weak but mighty, he now proceeds to give in 2 Corinthians 13:4 :—For he also was crucified on account of weakness, but he lives on account of the power of God (2 Corinthians 13:4 a). The Apostle here reminds them that Christ was once reduced to an extremity of weakness, but that he now lived by the power of God. That extremity was when He endured crucifixion in consequence of the human infirmity which He had experienced in the season of His (voluntary) humiliation and privation (Philippians 2:7-11). Ἑκ here designates the cause or origin. The ζῇν refers to the life of absolute power (energy) which began with Christ’s resurrection, was derived from God, and was afterwards proved by influences among men (comp. Romans 6:4; Acts 2:33; Ephesians 1:20-23; Philippians 2:9). If we accept the reading: καὶγὰρεἰ (which Osiander with Tischendorf adopts as the lect. diffic.), εἰ must be taken as concessive, and by itself it seems not inconsistent with the ἀλλά which follows. But καὶγὰρ does not correspond with ἀλλά very well, inasmuch as it signifies not merely: for, but: for even. Καὶγὰρεἰ would then signify: for even (although) if. But καὶεἰ indicates that the condition must be looked upon as an extreme one, and not to be expected. On the other hand εἰκαί would have implied that this condition was probable or certain, but that for the argument in hand it was a matter of indifference. We are obliged in this case to suppose that there has been an exchanging of καὶεἰ for εἰκαί, which must be ascribed to some transcriber having interpolated the εἰ, rather than to Paul. A concessive protasis appears appropriate on account of the ἀλλά. The solution of the difficulty which Osiander proposes, viz., that the καί implies that the case of Christ was similar to that of his ministers, does not seem clear to us, and indeed appears unintelligible. The best way would seem to be, to leave out the εἰ, as it may easily have been inserted. It is evident that the Apostle looked upon this as the actual condition in which Christ was, for he now proceeds to show that he himself was in the same condition of weakness and life through the power of God:—for we also are weak in him, but we shall live together with him through the power of God toward you (2 Corinthians 13:4 b).—It is evident, therefore, that he leaves us to infer what must be the condition of Christ from that of one who stood in fellowship with Christ (ἐν—σὺναὐτῷ); inasmuch as the condition of the former was reflected or was repeated in that of his followers, or was the consequence of it. ̓Ασθενοῦμεν refers not to the Apostle’s sufferings, but to his appearing to lack power when he spared the Corinthians It must be regarded, therefore, as something which was like Christ’s own weakness, voluntarily assumed. He describes it also by the words ἐναὐτῷ as something which was the consequence of his fellowship with Christ [Winer’s Idioms, § 52, p. 311 note], and therefore like Christ’s own weakness transient and temporary, inasmuch as the Divine power which made Christ alive would necessarily and in that very act make alive all who were connected with him (σὺνἀυτῷ). And indeed, εἰςὑμᾶς indicates that his being alive would be manifested in the energy by which they would be directed. There is no reference in the word ζῃν, as here used, to the future resurrection, but it means simply to be vigorous, to be full of life. Neander: “In the discharge of our Apostolic authority among you will be manifested the Divine power of a risen and glorified Christ.” [The Apostle, in this passage, surely claims that Christ spoke and acted in him, and we reasonably infer that his Apostolic words, Epistles and acts were those of an infallible Christ within him. It has been said that he never advanced such a claim. Not only in the ἀλλὰ, which occurs in both clauses of 2 Corinthians 13:4, but in the use of the present (ζῇἀσθενοῦμεν) and the future (ζήσομεν) in opposition to (ἐστανρώθη), we have a strong contrast with the resurrection and all its endless and perpetual influences through Christ and His people]. 2 Corinthians 13:5-10.—Examine your own selves whether ye are in the faith, prove your own selves (2 Corinthians 13:5 a).—In opposition to the thought represented in 2 Corinthians 13:3, according to which they desired a proof of Christ in him, the Apostle presents the demand that they should direct their examination to their own selves. For the sake of emphasis ἐαυτούς is put first. Πειράζειν signifies, to make proof or trial of one, to tempt (1 Corinthians 10:9, ἐκπειράζεινΧριστόν which is here the same as δοκιμὴνζητεῖν, etc.). [On the ordinary distinction to be observed between these expressions, see Trench, Synn. 2d Part, p. 119ff]. He then more particularly defines the point to which that self-examination should be directed, i.e., whether they were in the faith; thus probably intimating that their δοκιμὴυζητεῖν betrayed a serious defect in that respect, inasmuch as they would hardly have needed any proof of Christ in him if they had been in the faith. To be in the faith, or, to esteem themselves standing in the faith, were phrases which designated a living Christianity, the original principle of which is a faith laying hold of Christ, surrendering the whole heart to Him, and in this way bringing us into fellowship with Him (not: fides qaζ creditur, in contrast with erroneous doctrines; and also not the faith of miracles). The δοκιμάζειν also is not in this passage equivalent to δόκιμονποιεῖν but as in 1 Corinthians 11:28, it signifies, to try, to inquire into the worthiness of a thing, with the view of accurately distinguishing between what is and what is not genuine. The word here properly refers back to their seeking a proof of Christ (δοκιμὴνζηεῖτε). The essential nature of the faith is further pointed out in the succeeding clause.—Or know ye not your own selves, that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye are to some extent unapproved (ver.5b) ?—(Comp. Ephesians 3:17; Galatians 2:20). The use of the entire name ἸησοῦςΧριστός indicates more than usual solemnity, and implies that the presence of Christ’s spirit, by faith, in the Church and in the hearts of its members, produces a practical fellowship with the whole person of Christ (comp. 2 Corinthians 6:16; 1 Corinthians 3:16; Ephesians 2:21-22). In ἐαυτούς, ὅτι—ἐνὑμῖν we have an attraction of a peculiar kind (where the attracted word is not the subject of the succeeding sentence). [Winer’s Idioms, § 63, 3. a. p. 396]. Yourselves (ἐαυτόυς) in this connection is emphatic, since it is contrasted with Christ speaking in you, in 2 Corinthians 13:3. [Our English version entirely overlooks the ἢ at the head of the clause.] There are two ways by which ἢοὐκἔπιγιν. etc., may be connected in sense with that which precedes it; according to the first, the spiritual relation which Christ sustained toward them, and of which indeed they must be conscious if they were Christians, imposed on them the obligation to examine more carefully into their relation to Him and their conduct toward Him, and of course into their faith, in order to ascertain whether it was not wavering (Osiander). According to the second, he appeals to their sense of honor, and implies that for this reason they should not shrink from self-examination; i.e., they surely ought not to be so entirely destitute of a Christian spirit as not to know their own selves (Meyer, deWette). In either case there was a motive for self-examination; but the ἢον̓κ argues in favor of the latter method. In εἰμήτιἀδόκιμοιἐστε, he intended to say, that they would find this to be the case with themselves, unless they should prove to be unworthy, spurious Christians (Osiander: He throws out a doubt of that gracious state to which they laid claim, in the same proportion in which they were ignorant of their relation to Christ and did not examine themselves). Ἐιμήτι is used in 1 Corinthians 7:5; and the τι has the effect rather to soften the force of the expression [unless ye are “somewhat reprobates,” or “to some extent abide not the proof”]. Αδόκιμοι has reference to δοκιμάζετε and δοκιμήν which he had previously used.—But I trust ye shall know that we are not unapproved (2 Corinthians 13:6).—This verse is intimately connected with the latter part of 2 Corinthians 13:5. Αδόκιμοι, in this verse, has reference to Paul’s power as an Apostle to punish offenders, and he expresses the hope that (in case he should be compelled to exercise it) they would find him [if they ventured to put him to the proof] (in this respect) not unapproved, i.e., as one who throws out empty threatenings, but is too feeble to execute the but rather one who would make those who perseveringly resisted him feel his power (comp. 2 Corinthians 13:7; 2 Corinthians 13:9). This was the δοκιμή which they sought (2 Corinthians 13:3). His hope, however, was not fixed exclusively upon the punishment in itself, but upon the proper authentication of his office, the maintenance of his Apostolic authority by such means. The interpretation which maintains that γνώσεσθε (ye shall know) is to be understood, not of an experimental knowledge, but of a knowledge gained by their reformation in consequence of his warning, or by an observation of his life and works as an Apostle [i.e., if you put our Apostolical power to the test by appealing to our clemency], is not quite consistent with the general scope of the passage. The same may be said of the view which aims to mediate between the different explanations, and maintains that the knowledge was to be obtained partly by an examination of themselves and partly by their experience of ecclesiastical discipline.—But in 2 Corinthians 13:7 he shows that he would gladly be spared such an authentication of his power:—But we pray God that ye do no evil (2 Corinthians 13:7 a);—His desire is expressed in the form of a prayer. The explanation which makes ὑμᾶς the object and the Apostle himself the subject of ποιῆσαι [that I may do you no evil], is unsatisfactory: 1, because he could not apply such a designation to the punishment he inflicted; 2, because κακὸνποιεῖνμηδέν has an evident reference to τὸκαλὸνποιεῖν [the one being what is morally bad or worse, and the other what is morally honorable, beautiful and right].—not that we should appear approved, but that ye should do what is good, though we be as unapproved (2 Corinthians 13:7 b).—He here expresses what was more particularly the purport of his prayer. (We should observe the change which here takes place in the construction: the infinitive and ἵνα, comp. προσεύχεσθαιἵνα Colossians 1:9; 2 Thessalonians 1:11). The prayer was not (I pray or I desire), that he might appear approved (in consequence of the infliction of punishment, or the accomplishment of his threatenings) but that the Corinthians might do well (that which is right), though he should be unapproved (inasmuch as his threatenings would remain unfulfilled, or seem needless and uncalled for). [In this case he would use the word ἀδόκιμος in two different senses: in the one sense he would not be unapproved, since the reformation of the Corinthians would be the best proof of his Apostolic power, but in another sense he would be unapproved, because he would fail in the fulfilment of his threatenings, on account of their reformation. He meant to say that he cared not for being unapproved in the latter sense, since they would be saved and edified. Comp. Stanley]. Another explanation is given by Meyer, who takes ἵνα in the sense of, that, in order that, and understands δόκιμοι of the approbation which would be awarded to him as their spiritual father, if they should conduct themselves well; but he makes ἀδόκιμοι. refer to his failure in exercising and applying his power as an Apostle to inflict punishment. It must be conceded that the idea advanced in this first explanation lies not within the range of thought pursued by the context, and yet it would not be inconsistent with Paul’s manner, to say that the good conduct of his readers might make him seem in one aspect δόκιμος and in another ἀδόκιμος. He certainly gives reason in 2 Corinthians 13:8 for saying that if they did well he would have no occasion for exercising his power as an Apostle to punish them, and therefore would in that same degree appear unapproved, inasmuch as he had laid down the rule by which he would be governed in his course with them:—For we can do nothing against the truth, but for the truth (2 Corinthians 13:8).—The truth here may be explained either as equivalent to moral truth (comp. 1 Corinthians 5:8) or righteousness (a sense which is not allowable unless it is made necessary by the context); or as signifying that he could do nothing which did not accord with the facts of the case, a meaning very appropriate to a judicial proceeding, but entirely unsuitable when we come to the phrase for the truth. Meyer makes the word mean the truth κατ̓ἐξοχήν, i.e., the gospel: “If their good conduct had not been his. object (ἀλλ̓ἴνα) he would have been working against the Gospel; since that was a system designed to promote morality on Christian principles.” Osiander’s explanation is preferable: “The Divine law was the truth from which we deduce all our rules of discipline; and in Paul’s Apostolic work he could do nothing against this, but every thing he did would finally result in the advancement of that Divine truth which was dispensed in the Gospel.” Κατᾳ ?̇ ? against—ὑπέρ, for its interests. In the latter sentence δυνάμεθάτι should be supplied.—For we rejoice when we are weak and ye are strong: this also we pray for, even your restoration to complete order (2 Corinthians 13:9).—His object here was to confirm what he had said an 2 Corinthians 13:8, by assuring them that he would rejoice, even if he were weak, i.e., powerless, so far as relates to the exercise of discipline among them (from want of occasion); and they were strong, i.e., should conduct themselves so wisely as to disarm him of all judicial authority against them. If this were so, how could he do anything in opposition to the truth, and to those rules of action which the truth prescribed? He furthermore assures them that it was the object of his constant prayer, that they might in this way be made strong. As in 2 Corinthians 13:7 εὔχεσθαι signifies not merely to wish, for it is an advance beyond the thought expressed in χαίρομεν. Τὴνκατάρτισινὑμῶν is added after τοῦτο epexegetically, and signifies your restoration to complete order, i.e., perfection. The verb is used in 2 Corinthians 13:11 and in 1 Corinthians 1:10, and καταρτισμός in Ephesians 4:12. It contains a reserved hint that their condition at that time was disorderly.—For this cause being absent I write these things, lest being present I should use sharpness according to the power which the Lord gave me for edification and not for destruction (2 Corinthians 13:10).—In this he adds an explanation of his design in writing this Epistle: “I have written because my joy and my great anxiety before God is, that ye may be strong and restored to your proper state.” In this expression he had reference to the whole Epistle, but especially to the latter part of it.—lie here uses the singular number, because he begins to treat of conduct and purposes which belonged only to himself. Ἀποτόμως (Titus 1:13, the noun is in Romans 11:22) signifies roughly, rigorously, with strict severity (from a verb signifying to cut or tear off). Κρῆσθαι is here used absolutely, and signifies to proceed, to act; in other places it is used with the dative of the mode of proceeding or acting, but here, with an adverb, there is no need of supplying ὑμῖν. The reason for his wishing not to act thus, he gives when he says that his power was given him for edification and not for destruction (comp. 2 Corinthians 10:8). [He had no power or authority for the injury of men: it was all for their edification. Except for the latter purpose therefore it was not only null and void as to authority, but it was actually powerless in result. By a beautiful figure he conceives himself as a builder intrusted with no right or means to do anything except for the welfare of his fellow-men, to advance the true interests of humanity. Such were the Apostle’s views of the limits of ecclesiastical power with respect to οἰκοδομὴν Comp. on 2 Corinthians 5:1; 2 Corinthians 10:8. Also J. S. Howson, on Paul’s use of Metaphore in Sund. Mag., 1867]. 2 Corinthians 13:11-13. Finally, brethren, rejoice. Be perfectly joined together, be comforted, be of one mind, be at peace (2 Corinthians 13:11 a).—Having in the previous verses resumed his original mildness of manner, he now concludes with some friendly admonitions, though without relaxing anything in the earnestness of his purpose. [The word ἀδελφοὶ, which he so often uses in his other Epistles and especially in his First Epistle but so seldom (only four times) in his Second Epistle to the Corinthians, indicates here the importance of what he was about to say, and his transition to a new section, in which his affectionate spirit breathes forth with especial power.] In 2 Corinthians 13:11, λοιπόν does not signify: for the future, henceforth, but it is a concluding particle in the sense of, as for the rest (ceterum), as in the Ephesians 6:10 etc.; 2 Thessalonians 3:1. Osiander: “His object was to say, that he had something of importance to them, still upon his heart.” This was addressed not exclusively to those whose minds were best disposed toward him, but like the preceding verses, to the whole congregation. Χαίρετε is not here a parting salutation, for that is given afterwards in 2 Corinthians 13:13; but an exhortation to rejoice in the Lord (Philippians 3:1; Philippians 4:4), very appropriately pressed upon them after all that he had said in this Epistle to grieve them. But this χαίρειν could take place only on condition of the καταρτίζεσθαι and the τέλειονγίνεσθαι i.e., on condition of their complete restoration to order and to their perfection. These are here urged upon them as acts which they must themselves perform [middle voice and reflexive] under the power of the χαίρειν, which again is conditioned by the καταρτίζεσθαι W. F. Besser: “In the alarm cry: Be perfect, (prepare yourselves)! hear the call of your commander, to form into rank and file, and to get into order of battle” (Colossians 2:5). But both the χαίρειν and the καταρτίξεσθαι were the conditions on which the παρακαλεῖσθαι was dependent. This παρακαλεῖσθε is here not an admonition or an exhortation that they should make progress in spiritual things (give attention to it among you), but that they should be comforted (comp. 2 Corinthians 1:4-7; 2 Corinthians 7:7-13) with respect to all those things which had grieved them. An exhortation to mutual comfort (to comfort one another) would have been differently expressed: παρακαλεῖτεἑαυτούς or ἀλλήλους (1 Thessalonians 4:18; 1 Thessalonians 5:11; Hebrews 3:13). Finally he calls upon them to be of one mind (τὸαὐτὸφρονεῖτε), which may be regarded as implying an humble estimate of each one’s own self, a love for one another, and a tender interest in each other’s welfare, on the ground that they had a community of interests in the Christian life (Philippians 3:15-16; Philippians 4:2; Romans 12:16; Romans 15:5; Beck See lenl. p. 61), and to live in peace, i.e., to maintain unity of action in the outer life (Mark 9:50; Romans 12:18; 1 Thessalonians 5:13). To these admonitions he attaches yet further a promise:—And the God of love and peace shall be with you (2 Corinthians 13:11 b)—i.e., if ye do these things, the God who is the author of love (τὸαὐτὸφρονεῖν) and of peace (comp. 1 Corinthians 14:33; Romans 15:33; Romans 16:20; Philippians 4:9; 1 Thessalonians 5:23; Hebrews 13:20) will be with you, will be near you o bless you, and to grant you the enjoyment of His gracious communion. That God from whom love and peace proceeds, makes those who yield to His influences in these respects, and are faithful in such things, experience how rich is His grace, and how abundant are His blessings.—Salute one another with a holy kiss (2 Corinthians 13:12).—On this verse comp. 1 Corinthians 16:20. [With respect to the φίλημαἁγ. see on 1 Thessalonians 5:26; Romans 16:16, and 1 Corinthians 16:20. Among the Greeks the kiss had only an erotio signification, but among the Jews and Oriental nations it was generally a token of affection among kindred and friends. The Jews refused it to all except the holy seed of Israel. Thence it passed into the Christian community, and Justin says, (Apol. II. p. 37), “After the prayers, are ended (in the church), we greet one another with a kiss.” Cyril (Hier.) says that before the ‘sursum corda,’) a deacon proclaimed to the communicants in the words of this verse: “Salute” etc. In the Eastern, churches it was given before, and in the Western after the consecration of the sacramental emblems, and before their distribution, as a sign of reconciliation and love. In the Apost. Constt. it is said: “Let the men salute one another, and the women also one another, with a holy kiss in the Lord.” Paul anticipated that his Epistle would be read before the whole Church, and he, therefore, connected with it this ecclesiastical or hieratic usage, as a sign of the common covenant by which they were all members one of another and the body of Christ. Bingham, Chr. Antt. B. XII. Ch. IV. § 5. Smith’s Dict, of the Bible, Osiander and Wordsworth, on 1 Thessalonians 5:26].—All the saints salute you (2 Corinthians 13:13).—The words οἱἅγιοιπάντες refer to those saints who lived in the region from which he was writing (Macedonia), but a more comprehensive sense of the words is not excluded (comp. Osiander, who very thoroughly discusses the meaning of this whole verse). In place of his own salutation, he gives us finally that precious Benediction which has acquired such a liturgical importance in every age and in every part of the Christian world:—The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all (2 Corinthians 13:14).—[It is the most formal and solemn of all Paul’s forms of benediction, and accordingly has been universally selected as the one to be used by the Church in its worship. It ascribes to each Person of the Trinity a special but not an exclusive part in the work of redemption. Each of those Persons share in the work of grace and love and communion, but each of them is distinguished for a peculiar prominence in one of these departments. Each of them are mentioned with equal, but with a distinct honor and efficiency. They are presented, not according to their ontologic or metaphysical nature, but to their economic relation to sinful men in the work of salvation. That salvation comes to us “from (ἐκ) God the Father, through (διὰ) God the Son, and by God the Holy Ghost.”] The Benediction itself is divided into three parts in accordance with the relations of the sacred Trinity. We have first, the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ (comp. 2 Corinthians 8:9; Romans 5:15), that grace which is continually bestowed upon, intercedes for (Romans 8:34), and strengthens (2 Corinthians 12:9) those whom he has redeemed, and by means of which they come into the possession and enjoyment of the love of God. The communion of the Holy Ghost, the participation in Him and in His gracious influences, is the product of that grace and this love, and is His continual direction and application of them to believers (comp. Romans 8:9-27; Romans 7:6; Romans 8:11; Galatians 4:6; Galatians 6:8. Κοινωνία, as in Philippians 2:1, and 1 Corinthians 1:9, signifies not communication merely, for τοῦπνευμ. is the gen. subj.). He thus desires that the whole Church [even that portion which he had been obliged in some respects to censure] may enjoy all the blessings of God’s salvation, as they are shed forth by the Lord of the Church, including that Spirit which is the bond of its fellowship and the source of its organic life. Neander: “We have in this passage the practical doctrine of the Trinity, the Father revealing His love in Christ; Christ, in and through whom he reveals Himself, and by whom the work of redemption (grace) is accomplished; and the fellowship of Divine life, which proceeds from Christ.”—Ewald: “We cannot but feel an intense interest in knowing what was the effect of a letter containing such an unusual amount of severity. Fortunately we have some reason to conclude from Romans 15:25-27, and Acts 20:2, that the result was all that could be wished. Paul actually returned to Corinth soon after sending this Epistle, and remained there for some time in peace, as he certainly could not have done, if this letter had not smoothed the way for him there, and enabled him to return to his beloved Church in triumph. AND ETHICAL1. Where an impenitent spirit which disregards all warning and admonition becomes manifest in a congregation, there is no other way than to administer discipline with severity. And yet the minister of Christ should always be careful to produce the impression that he is by no means proud of his official authority, but that he rather feels humbled under the hand of God when he finds that he is compelled to administer discipline with severity. He must indeed never spare, when he is called to act in behalf of Christ’s authority, if it is evident that his forbearance will be imputed to a want of power in that Lord whom he represents, and whose organ he is known to be. Every one should be made to see not only that a minister, in imitation of his Divine Master, may for awhile lay aside his power and oven appear feeble as he bears and forbears with his brethren, but that through the same Divine power which raised his Lord from the weakness of the cross to the might of an absolute and all-sufficient life, he possesses a living power for the accomplishment of those objects which are essential to the office he has received, and to his-triumph over all who oppose him in his lawful work. But the same love which, on suitable occasions, refrains from all assertions of authority, will also incline him to make every exertion to avoid any necessity for its exercise. He will admonish, entreat and implore God that every thing which insolently puts Christ in him to the proof whether His threatenings are seriously intended, and whether He will venture to execute them, may disappear; that all who have been refractory and disorderly may have their attention turned rather to themselves to see whether they are in the faith and whether Christ is in them, and that so they may be reλstablished in Christian fellowship, may do that which is good, and may be saved from the necessity of discipline. It will be a pleasure to him when he is able to exchange severity for gentleness, even though he may thus have the appearance of weakness. His only care will be so to conduct himself that Divine truth may be vindicated, that complete order may be secured, and that practical religion may be promoted. 2. Where Jesus Christ causes His grace to abound, and abundantly forgives, blesses and saves men, the love of God is revealed, and God Himself is freely and powerfully communicated to our souls. When this is the case and our souls are sealed by His grace, this love will be shed abroad in the heart by the Holy Ghost, we shall be of one mind, we shall seek for the things that make for peace, we shall rejoice in the Lord, we shall earnestly aspire after perfection, and never want consolation when we are in trouble. In this manner the Church will be built up; and it is a blessed work to co-operate in the production of such a result by praising this grace and love, by bringing men into the communion of the Holy Ghost and by confirming them in it. No one, however, can perform such a work unless he knows by experience what it is to rejoice in this grace, love and communion, and regards it as his highest privilege to continue to do so. AND Starke:—2 Corinthians 12:19. That no impediments may be thrown in the way of our work, we must, though with humble diffidence, repel those assaults which may be made upon it; but we must be especially careful lest we use such means of defence as will only make matters worse. Those who truly servo God, speak as though they were conscious of being ever before God in Christ, as though they were in communion with Him, and were under His direction. 2 Corinthians 12:20. Where love is wanting, hatred will be found, and will break forth into every kind, of discord, though all its forms will show a family likeness to one another. Hedinger: 2 Corinthians 12:21. How distressing to look upon such disorders! Those whose hearts are still bleeding from the wounds which former sins, especially those of lewdness and impurity, have left upon the conscience, should be careful that those wounds be properly healed, and that the old sore is not liable to break out afresh. Isaiah 38:15.—Spener: Chap. 13. If. Even when we conclude that spiritual discipline does not call for a public judicial process, it should not be entered upon without reflection. If sinners have no fear of punishment, they will flatter themselves with the hope of impunity in sin.—Hedinger:—To bear long is not necessarily to bear always. Even Elisha finally called for the bears, Samuel grasped the sword, and Elijah invoked fire from heaven, when time and patience were exhausted. Scoff not at God, who will surely give testimony in behalf of His servants. 2 Corinthians 13:3. Let us see to it, that we do not so conduct ourselves that Christ is obliged to put forth His hand to punish rather than to assist us. The threatenings of God’s faithful ministers will not be found empty words.—Hedinger: 2 Corinthians 13:4. Rejoice, for the Lord is King, and reigns in the midst of His enemies! Let no one be intimidated when the powers of darkness seem to prevail! If we would be exalted, we must humble ourselves and cheerfully bear Christ’s cross.—Spener:2 Corinthians 13:5. Many know not their own selves; for while some think too well of their own goodness, others are faint-hearted. A faithful self-examination would rectify all such errors. Most of us by nature have the bad habit of trying our neighbors and seeking a proof of what is in them, but of neglecting the same thing with respect to ourselves, Matthew 7:1-3.—Hedinger:—“Thou sayest: I am a Christian, a child of glory!” But hast thou proved this? Art thou really sure of it? Is it not possible that thou hast taken up with a vain conceit and received base coin for gold? Let every one search his own heart diligently, and if he finds Christ and the graces of Christ’s Spirit there, if Christian love and a fraternal spirit reigns there, all is well.—Spener:—While we examine ourselves, we almost invariably are led to pray that the Lord also would search and make us know our hearts, Psalms 139:23-24.—If we have a faith which works by love, we have good evidence of our gracious state and of our salvation. Such an examination of ourselves is of great importance: 1, because our hearts are naturally so corrupt and our self-love is so inordinate that we never discover evil in ourselves without great difficulty; 2, because in the midst of so many cares and so much intercourse with our fellow-men, we are in danger of neglecting to watch over our thoughts, words, etc.; 3, because of the injury which is sure to follow the omission of this duty, in our continuance under delusive fancies, or our relapse into them; 4, because of the benefits which a frequent self-examination must bring, in the increase of faith, in assurance of salvation, in our security against apostasy, in our growing union and intimacy with God, in our better acquaintance with our faults, and in our purification from them by Divine grace. But the object or this trial is, to ascertain: 1, whether we have been truly converted, believe in Christ, and are united to Him, and whether we have the comforts and put forth the fruits of faith, such as the love of God and of our neighbor, delight in spiritual things, an inclination to every form of obedience, earnestness in prayer, lively hope, patience, etc.; 2, how successful we have been in following Jesus. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/