THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE — — — — 1:1, 2 THE Paul, a divinely chosen Apostle, and Timothy our brother, give Christian greeting to the Corinthian Church and to the Christians near it. 1Paul, an Apostle by divine appointment, and Timothy whom ye all know, give greeting to the body of Corinthian Christians and to all Christians in the Province. 2May the free and unmerited favour of God be yours, and the peace which this favour brings! May our Heavenly Father and the Lord Jesus Christ grant them to you! The Salutation has the usual three parts; the writer, those addressed, and the greeting. 1. ΠαῦλοςἀπόστολοςΧριστοῦἸησοῦ . St Paul states his own claim to be heard before mentioning Timothy, who is ἀδελφός and not ἀπόστολος . Vos Corinthii mihi debetis obedire, et falsos apostolos respuere, quia sum Paulus apostolus Jesu Christi, id est mirabilis legatus Salvatoris Regis. Apostolus sum, non usurpative, sed per voluntatem Dei Patris. Pseudo autem, apostoli, nec a Christo sunt missi, nec per Dei voluntatem venerunt. Ideoque respuendi sunt (Herveius Burgidolensis). In nearly all his letters, including the Pastorals, St Paul introduces himself as an Apostle, with or without further description; and here, as in Philippians 1:1 and Colossians 1:1, he is careful not to give to Timothy the title of ἀπόστολος . Cf. the opening words of 1 and 2 Thess., Phil., and Philemon. We find the same feature in 1 and 2 Pet. The amplification, ἸησοῦΧριστοῦδιὰφελήματοςΘεοῦ , is specially in point in Epistles in which he has to contend with the opposition of false teachers, some of whom claimed to have a better right to the title of Apostle than he had (Batiffol, Primitive Catholicism, p. 42). We find it in 1 Cor., Eph., Col., 2 Tim.; and in Galatians 1:1 the fact that his Apostleship is of God and not of man is still more clearly stated. It did not come to him in the ordinary course of events, but by a definite Divine decree. τιμόβεοςὁἀδελφός . He is mentioned, like Sosthenes in 1 Cor. to show that what St Paul sends by Apostolic authority has the approval of one who can regard these matters from the Corinthians’ own point of view, as a fellow-Christian, without authority over them (1:19; Acts 18:5). The Apostle might be prejudiced by his high position; Timothy is influenced simply by his brotherly affection. ‘ He agrees with me in what I have to say to you.’ Timothy is joined with Paul in the addresses of five other Epistles (1 and 2 Thess., Phil., Col., Philemon) and is mentioned at the close of two others (1 Corinthians 16:10; Romans 16:21; cf. Hebrews 13:23).* He was converted by St Paul at Lystra during the First Missionary journey, and afterwards seems to have been more often with the Apostle than not. Very possibly he was the Apostle’ s amanuensis for some of the Epistles; but this does not follow from his being included in the Salutations: Tertius (Romans 16:2) is not mentioned in the address of that Epistle. But, whether or no he acted as scribe, it is not likely that Timothy here, or Sosthenes in 1 Cor., or Silvanus and Timothy in 1 and 2 Thess., had much to do with the composition. Whoever acted as amanuensis may have made an occasional suggestion; but in every case we may be sure that the letter is St Paul’ s and not a joint production. St Paul had been anxious about the reception which Timothy would have at Corinth (1 Corinthians 16:10), and here he shows how highly he thinks of Timothy. But nowhere in 2 Cor. does he say anything about Timothy’ s reception at Corinth. Either Timothy never reached Corinth (Lightfoot, Bibl. Essays, p. 220), or (more probably) he was so badly received that St Paul does not think it wise, after the submission of the Corinthians, to recall Timothy’ s ill-success in trying to induce them to submit (K. Lake, Earlier Epistles of St Paul, p. 134; Paley, Horae Paulinae, IV.). What is certain is that the mission of Timothy to Corinth, whether carried out or not, is done with when 2 Cor. was written. There is no need to mention it. (Redlich, S. Paul and his Companions, p. 279.) ὁἀδελφός . This does not mean ‘ my spiritual brother’ ; Timothy was St Paul’ s spiritual son (1 Timothy 1:2; 2 Timothy 1:2); nor does it mean ὁσυνεργόςμον (Romans 16:21). It means ‘ one of the brethren,’ a member of the Christian Society. Deissmann (Bible Studies, pp. 87, 88, Light from the Anc. East, pp. 96, 107, 227) has shown from papyri that ἀδελφός was used of members of pagan brotherhoods. While the Master was with them, Christ’ s adherents were described in their relation to Him; they were His ‘ disciples’ : in the Gospels, μαφητής occurs more than 230 times. After His presence had ceased to be visible they were described in their relation to one another as ‘ brethren,’ and in relation to their calling as ‘ saints’ : in the Epistles, μαφηταί nowhere occurs; its place is taken by ἁδελφοί and ἅγιοι . In Acts all terms are found. τῇἐκκλησίᾳτ . Θεοῦ . Having reminded them of his high authority as ‘ an Apostle of Christ Jesus, ’ he at the same time reminds them of their own high position as ‘ the Church of God.’ In both cases the genitive is possessive. The Society of which they are members has as its Founder and Ruler the Creator of the world and the Father of all mankind. St Paul is not hinting that in Corinth there is an ecclesia which is not ‘ of God.’ Rather, as Theodoret suggests, by reminding them of their Lord and Benefactor, he is once more warning them against divisions — εἰςὁμόνοιανπάλινσυνάπτων : what God has founded as one body they must not divide. It is probable that, wherever he uses this phrase, τοῦΘεοῦ is not a mere otiose amplification, but always has point (1 Thessalonians 2:14; 2 Thessalonians 1:4; 1 Corinthians 1:2, 1 Corinthians 1:10:32, 1 Corinthians 1:11:16, 1 Corinthians 1:22, 1 Corinthians 1:15:9; Galatians 1:13; 1 Timothy 3:5 without articles). Everywhere else in this Epistle we have ἐκκλησίαι in the plur., showing that local Churches are meant (8:1, 18, 19, 23, 24, 11:8, 28, 12:13); and here ἡἐκκλησία is expressly limited to Corinth; so that nowhere in the letter is the Church as a whole mentioned. In Romans 16:16 we have all αἱἐκκλ . τοῦΧριστοῦ , an expression which occurs nowhere else in N.T. In Acts 20:28 both reading and interpretation are doubtful. In LXX we have ἑκκλησίαΚυρίον and other expressions which show that the ἑκκλ is a religious one. There is no instance of ἐκκλ being used of religious assemblies among the heathen. The οὔσῃ implies that the Church was now established in Corinth (Acts 13:1; cf. 5:17, 14:13, 28:17); it had ceased to be a congregation of hearers. We can draw no reasonable inference as to change in the Apostle’ s feelings from the brevity of the description of the Church in Corinth here when compared with that in 1 Corinthians 1:2. σὺντ . ἀγίοιςπᾶσιντ . οὖσινἐνὅλῃτ . Ἀχαίᾳ . ‘ With all the saints which are in the whole of Achaia.’ All Christians are ‘ holy’ in virtue, not of their lives, but of their calling; they are set apart in a holy Society as servants and sons of the Holy God. Chrysostom thinks that St Paul addresses ‘ all,’ because all alike need correction. In Thess. he does not include all in Macedonia, nor in Rom. all in Italy. Achaia may be used loosely for the district of which Corinth was the chief city. St Paul does not mention other Churches in Achaia (contrast Galatians 1:2), and therefore we can hardly regard this as a circular letter. But there were Christians in Athens and Cenchreae, and probably in other places near Corinth, and the Apostle includes all of them in the address. We may perhaps, with Lietzmann, regard this as the germ of the later Metropolitan constitution. See on 1 Corinthians 1:2. The Corinthians were apt to be exclusive and to plume themselves upon a supposed superiority. St Paul may be reminding them that they are not the whole Church (1 Corinthians 14:36), even in Achaia; at any rate he lets Christians outside Corinth know that they are not forgotten. The whole of Greece may possibly be included. ΧριστοῦἸησοῦ (א B M P 17) rather than ΙησοῦΧρ (A D E G K L, Latt. Copt. Arm. Aeth. Goth.). F, f omit. In the best texts of the earlier Epp. (1 and 2 Thess. Gal.) always Ἰ . Χρ ; in the later Epp. (Phil. Eph. Col. Philem, 1 and 2 Tim.) almost always Χρ . Ἰ . In the intermediate Epp. (1 and 2 Cor. Rom.) the readings vary, and St Paul’ s usage may have varied. While Χριστός was a title, it was naturally placed after Ἰησοῦς , which was always a name. But Χρ became a name, and then the two words in either order, became a name. See on Romans 1:1, and Sanday, Bampton Lectures, p. 289. 2. Χάριςὑμῖνκ . εἰρήνη . So in all the Pauline Epp. (except 1 and 2 Tim.) and in 1 and 2 Pet. In N.T., ‘ peace’ probably has much the same meaning as in Jewish salutations,— freedom from external enmity and internal distraction. The two Apostles “ naturally retain the impressive term traditional with their countrymen, but they subordinate it to the term ‘ grace,’ which looked back from the gift to the Giver, and which the Gospel had clothed with special significance. This subordination is marked not only by the order, but by the collocation of ὑμῖν , which invariably precedes καὶεἰρήνη ” (Hort on 1 Peter 1:2; see on 1 Corinthians 1:3). It is the grace which produces the peace, In 2 Macc. 1:1 we have Χαίρειν … εἰρήνηνἀγαθήν , and in 2 Macc. 1:10, 9:19, we have the frequent combination Χαίρεινκ . ὑγιαίνειν , which is found in the oldest Greek letter known to us, 4th cent. b.c.. (Deissmann, Light from Anc. East, p. 149). See J. A. Robinson (Eph. pp. 221 f.) on χάρις in Bibl. Grk., and G. Milligan (Thess. p. 127f.) on St Paul’ s use of current epistolary forms and phrases. ἀπὸΘεοῦπατρὸςἡμῶνκαὶκυρίουἸ . Χρ . As at the beginning of the earliest book in N.T. (1 Thessalonians 1:1) we find the notable phrase ‘ God the Father,’ so here we find Christ called ‘ Lord,’ the usual title of God, and we find Christ linked with God the Father under one preposition, which shows that the Apostle regards the two as on an equality. “ In the appellation ‘ Father’ we have already the first beginning— may we not say the first decisive step, which potentially contains the rest?— of the doctrine of the Trinity … The striking thing about it is that the Son already holds a place beside the Father” (Sanday, Outlines of the Life of Christ, p. 218). “ It is well known that the phrase ‘ God the Father’ is especially common in these opening salutations. We cannot think that it is a new coinage of St Paul. It comes to his pen quite naturally, and not as thought it needed any explanation. We may safely set it down as part of the general vocabulary of Christians. Its occurrence in Q is proof that it was familiar in circles far removed from Pauline influence” (Christ in Recent Research, p. 131). It is not probable that the Spirit is omitted because eo templore nullus errabat de Spiritu. St Paul is not consciously teaching Trinitarian doctrine; he uses language which indicates, without his intending it, how much he held of that doctrine. Cf. 13:13. This Salutation exhibits undoubted resemblances in form to secular letters that have come down to us from the same period. But the differences are greater, and that in three respects. There is the firm assertion of Apostolic authority, the clear indication that those whom he addresses are not ordinary people but a consecrated society, and the spiritual character of the good wishes which he sends them. Comparison with a letter from some religious official, addressed to those who had been initiated into one of the Mysteries, if we did but possess such, would be of great interest. The Thanksgiving which follows the Salutation, in accordance with St Paul’ s almost invariable practice, is also a common feature in secular letters; cf. 2 Macc. 9:20. Deissmann (Light from Anc. East, p. 168) gives a close parallel to this one in a letter from Apion, an Egyptian soldier, to his father, 2nd cent. a.d. After the usual greeting and good wishes he says: “ I thank the Lord Serapis, that, when I was near being drowned in the sea, he saved me straightway” — εὐΧαριστῶτῷκυρίῳΣεράπιδι , ὅτιμονκινδυνεύσαντοςεἰςφάλασσανἔσωσεεὐφέως . See also Bibelstudien, p. 210, an example not given in Bible Studies. St Paul usually thanks God for some grace bestowed on those whom he addresses, and hence his omission of the Thanksgiving in the stern letter to the Galatians; here and in 1 Timothy 1:12 he gives thanks for benefits bestowed on himself. But his readers are not forgotten (vv. 6, 7); it is largely on their account that he is so thankful. The Thanksgiving is in two parts; for Divine Comfort (3-7) and for Divine Deliverance (8-11). 1:3-11 OF AND HOPE I bless God for the recovery and comfort which enables us to recover and comfort the fallen and distressed. 3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,— the Father who is full of compassion and the God who is the Source of all comfort. 4 Blessed be He, for He ever comforts us all through our affliction, and He does this as a lesson to us how to comfort other people in any kind of affliction whether of body or soul, viz. by using the same way of comforting that God uses with us. 5 For if, through our intimate union with the Christ, we have an abundant share of His sufferings, to just the same extent, through His merciful mediation, we can draw upon an abundant fund of comfort. 6 So then, whatever happens to us, you reap an advantage: for, if we receive afflictions, it is to bring comfort and spiritual well-being to you; and if we receive comforting in our afflictions, our comforting is for your benefit, for God makes it effective to you when you courageously accept the same kind of sufferings as He lays upon us. And our confidence in your future is too well founded to be shaken, 7because we know well that, as surely as you share our sufferings, so surely do you share our comfort. 8 When I speak of our sufferings, I mean something very real. I do not wish you, my Brothers, to be in any uncertainty about that. Affliction so intense came upon us in Asia that it prostrated us beyond all power of endurance; so much so that we despaired of preserving even life. 9 Indeed, when we asked within ourselves, whether it was to be life or death for us, our own presentiment said ‘ Death,’ — a presentiment which God sent to teach us not to rely any more on our powers, but on Him who not only can rescue from death but restores the dead to life. 10 Of course He can do both; for it was He who delivered us out of such imminent peril of death and will do so again; and it is on Him that we have set our hope that He will continue to deliver us, 11 while you also join in helping on our behalf by your intercessions for us. And the blessed result of this will be that from many uplifted faces thanksgivings on our behalf will be offered by many for the mercy which has been shown to us. As in Ephesians 1:3-14 (see Westcott), the rhythmical flow of the passage will be felt, if it is read according to the balance of the clauses, which is very marked in the first half. ΕὐλογητὸςὁΘεὸςκαὶπατὴρτοῦκυρίουἡμῶνἸησοῦΧριστοῦ , ὁπατὴρτῶνοἰκτιρμῶνκαὶΘεὸςπάσηςπαρακλήσεως , ὁπαρακαλῶνἡμᾶςἐπὶπάσῃτῇθλίψειἡμῶν , εἰςτὸδύνασθαιἡμᾶςπαρακαλεῖντοὺςἐνπάσῃθλίψει διὰτῆςπαρακλήσεωςἧςπαρακαλούμεθααὐτοὶὑπὸτοῦΘεοῦ . ὅτικαθὼςπερισσεύειτὰπαθήματατοῦΧριστοῦεἰςἡμᾶς , οὕτωςδιὰτοῦΧριστοῦπερισσεύεικαὶἡπαράκλησιςἡμῶν . εἴτεδὲθλιβόμεθα , ὑπὲρτῆςὑμῶνπαρακλήσεως , εἴτεδὲπαρακαλούμεθα , ὑπὲρτῆςὑμῶνπαρακλήσεως . 3. ΕὐλογητὸςὁΘεὸςκ . πατὴρτοῦκυρίουἡμῶνἸ . Χρ . The AV is inconsistent here in separating ὁΘεός from τ . κυρίουκ .τ .λ , while in 11:31, as in Ephesians 1:3. and 1 Peter 1:3, it takes both nominatives with the following genitive; ‘ Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.’ The latter is probably right, in accordance with 1 Corinthians 15:24; Ephesians 1:17; Revelation 1:6, Revelation 1:3:12; Mark 15:34; John 20:17. If St Paul had meant ὁΘεός to be separated from πατήρ , he would probably have written ὁΘεόςμου , as in Romans 1:8; Philippians 1:3; Philemon 1:4. It is remarkable that the Apostles Paul, Peter, and John, while thinking of Christ as God and giving Him Divine attributes, do not shrink from saying that God is not only Christ’ s Father but also His God. Benedictus Deus, qui Christum secundum humanitatem creavit et secundum divinitatem genuit, atque ita est Deus et Pater ejus (Herveius). ‘ God who is also Father of our Lord Jesus Christ’ is a possible translation, in accordance with Colossians 1:3; ‘ God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ’ ; but it is not the most natural rendering. See on Romans 15:6, and Hort on 1 Peter 1:3. Εὐλογητός occurs eight times in N.T., chiefly in Paul (11:31; Romans 1:25, Romans 1:9:5; Ephesians 1:3), and always of God. When human beings are called ‘ blessed,’ εὐλογημένος is used, but this occurs only in the Gospels. In a few passages in LXX (Deuteronomy 7:14; Rth 2:20; 1 Samuel 15:13, 1 Samuel 25:33), εὐλογητός is used of men. The adjective implies that blessing ought to be given, the participle that it has been received. This difference is pointed out by Philo (De Migr. Abrah. 19); but it cannot be rigidly insisted upon in exegesis. In Dan. 3:52-56, εὐλογητός and -ημένος are used indifferently of God, εὐλογητός being more frequent (4 to 2) in LXX, and εὐλογημένος (4 to 2) in Theod. Grammatically, we may understand either ἔστω or ἐστίν . In Romans 1:25, ἐστίν is expressed, as also in 1 Peter 4:11, which is not quite parallel; here, as in Ephesians 1:3 and 1 Peter 1:3, we almost certainly have a wish: but in Ephesians 1:3 the Old Latin has benedictus est. Eusebius (Praep. Evang. ix. 34) quotes from Eupolemus of Alexandria a letter from Surom (Hiram)* to Solomon which begins thus; ΣούρωνΣολομῶνιΒασιλεῖΜεγάλῳχαίρειν . ΕὐλογητὸςὁΘεός , ὃςτὸνοὐρανὸνκαὶτὴνγῆνἔκτισεν , ὃςεἵλετοἄνθρωπονχρηστὸνἐκχρηστοῦἀνδρός . ἅματῷἀναγνῶναιτὴνπαρὰσοῦἐπιστολὴνσφόδραἐχάρηνκαὶεὐλόγησατὸνΘεὸνἐπὶτῷπαρειληφέναισὲτὴνβασιλείαν . τοῦκυρἱουἡμῶν . A translation of the Aramaic Maran (1 Corinthians 16:22) or Marana, and a continuation of the title by which the disciples commonly addressed the Master. Christ refers to Himself as ὁκύριοςὑμῶν (Matthew 24:42; cf. 21:3). The general use of Maran after the Ascension is strong evidence for at least occasional use during our Lord’ s ministry. See Bigg on 1 Peter 1:3; Plummer, Luke, p. xxxi; Dalman, Words of Jesus, p. 328. “ It may be said with certainty that, at the time when Christianity originated, ‘ Lord’ was a divine predicate intelligible to the whole Eastern world. St Paul’ s confession of ‘ our Lord Jesus Christ’ was, like the complemental thought that the worshippers are the ‘ slaves’ of the Lord, understood in its full meaning by everyone in the Hellenistic East, and the adoption of the Christian term of worship was vastly facilitated in consequence” (Deissmann, Light from Anc. East, p. 354). ‘ Lord’ or ‘ the Lord’ is very frequent as a name for Christ in 1 and 2 Thess., eight times without, and fourteen times with, the article. But this lofty title, so full of meaning in the Apostolic age, “ has become one of the most lifeless words in the Christian vocabulary” (Kennedy on Philippians 2:2: with Klö pper, Lipsius, and B. Weiss, he holds that Κύριος is the ‘ Name above every name’ which God has given to Christ). ὁπατὴρτ . οἰκτιρμῶνκ . θεὸςπ . τ . παρακλήσεως . The two genitives are probably not quite parallel, although Theodoret makes them so by rendering the first ὁτοὺςοἰκτιρμοὺςπηγάζων . The first is probably qualifying or descriptive; ‘ the Father who shows mercy,’ ‘ the merciful Father,’ as in ὁπ . τ . δόξης (Ephesians 1:17), τὸνΚύριοντ . δόξης (1 Corinthians 2:8), ὁΘεὸςτ . δόξης (Acts 7:2), and perhaps the difficult expressions, ὁπατὴρτ . φώτων and τ . ΚυρίουἡμῶνἸ . Χριστοῦτῆςδόξης (James 1:17, James 2:1). But there is not much difference between ‘ the merciful Father’ and ‘ the Father from whom mercy flows.’ The plur. τῶνοἰκτιρμῶν does not refer to separate merciful acts, “ Father of repeated compassions” ; it is a Hebraism, very frequent in LXX, even when combined with ἔλεος in the sing. (Psa_102 [103]:4; Is. 53:15; Isa_1 Macc. 3:44). In N.T., excepting Colossians 3:12, the plur. is invariable. Recte igitur non Pater judiciorum vel ultionum dicitur, sed Pater misericordiarum, quod miserendi causam et originem sumat ex proprio, judicandi vel ulciscendi magis ex nostro (S. Bernard, In Nativ. Dom. v. 3). Theodoret’ s explanation is right of the second genitive; ‘ the Supplier’ or ‘ Source of all comfort.’ * Vulg. has Deus totius consolationis, instead of omnis; and this has misled some commentators who interpret totius as meaning integrae or perfectae. In v. 4, in tota tribulatione might have been better than in omni tribulatione. The threefold πάσης , πάσῃ , πάσῃ , intensifies the idea of abundance; and the whole passage illustrates St Paul’ s fondness for alliteration, especially with the letter π . παρακλήσεως . The word occurs six times in these five verses, with παρακαλεῖν four times.† AV spoils the effect by wavering between ‘ consolation’ and ‘ comfort.’ ‘ Comfort’ for both substantive and verb preserves the effect. Vulg. also varies between consolatio and exhortatio, and between consolari and exhortare. The change to exhortatio and exhortare in vv. 4 and 6 confuses the Apostle’ s meaning, and the double change in v. 4 causes great confusion. 4. Vulg. Qui consolatur nos in omni tribulatione nostra, ut possimus et ipsi consolari eos qui in omni pressura sunt, per exhortationem qua exhortamur et ipsi a Deo. ὁπαρακαλῶν . ‘ Who continually comforts us’ ; not once or twice, but always; the παράκλησις is without break (Chrys.); and it is supplied in various ways— vel per Scripturas, vel per alios sanctos, vel per occultam inspirationenem, vel per tribulationis allevationem (Herveius). The ἡμᾶς need not be confined to Paul and Timothy, still less to Paul alone. It probably includes all missionaries, and perhaps indirectly all sufferers; Isaiah 40:1. It is unreasonable to suppose that St Paul always uses the Ist pers. plur. of himself in his Apostolic character, and the 1st pers. sing. when he speaks as a private individual; and it would be rash to assert that he never uses the plur. without including others; but the latter statement is nearer the truth than the former. He seems to use the 1st pers. plur. with varying degrees of plurality, from himself with one colleague to himself with all Christians or even all mankind; and he probably uses it sometimes of himself alone. Some elasticity may be allowed in this passage. Each case must be judged by its context. But we cannot be sure that, when he employs the plur. of himself, he is emphasizing his official authority, for Milligan (Thess. p. 131) has shown that this use of the plur. is found in the ordinary correspondence of the time, and also in inscriptions. In Epistles written without any associate (Gal. Rom. Eph. Past.), the sing. is dominant. In 2 Cor., the plur. is frequent, and sometimes changes rapidly with the sing. (1:13, 5:11, 7:2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 12, 14, 9:4, 10:2, 8, 11:6, 21, 12:19, 20, 13:6-10). It is very unlikely that all the plurals are virtually singular and also official; but in 7:5 ἡσὰρξἡμῶν must mean St Paul only. See Lightfoot on 1 Thessalonians 2:4. ἐπὶπάσῃτῇθλίψειἡμῶν . As in 7:4 and 1 Thessalonians 3:7, the ἐπί expresses the occasion on which the comfort is given; and the article indicates that the θλίψις is regarded as a whole, ‘ in all our affliction,’ whereas ἐνπάσῃθλ means ‘ in every kind of affliction’ that can occur, whether of mind or body (Blass, Gram. d. N. T. Gr. § 47. 9, p. 158). There is no exception on God’ s side (Psalms 94:19), and there must be none on ours. Both AV and RV. mark the difference by change from ‘ all’ to any. The change from ἐπί to ἐν can hardly be marked in English without awkwardness: Latin versions make no change, and some Greek texts read ἐν for ἐπί . Θλίψις is found in all Pauline groups, except the Pastorals. It is rare in class. Grk.,— perhaps never before Aristotle, and then always in the literal sense of ‘ crushing.’ In LXX it is very frequent, especially in Psalms and Isaiah. AV obliterates its frequency here by varying between ‘ tribulation’ and ‘ trouble’ (vv. 4, 7, 8) and ‘ affliction’ (2:4, 4:17, etc.). RV. has ‘ affliction’ always in 2 Cor., but in other Epistles has ‘ tribulation’ also: it retains ‘ tribulation’ always in Rev. and in the Gospels, except John 16:21, where ‘ anguish’ is retained. Vulg. usually has tribulatio, which is not classical, but sometimes has pressura: in v. 4 it has both, as if St Paul used two different words. In Colossians 1:24 it has passio. εἰςτὸδύνασθαικ .τ .λ . With the construction comp. 1 Corinthians 9:18. The teleological standpoint is Pauline: non sibi vivebat Apostolus, sed Ecclesiae (Calv.). Evangelists are comforted, not for any merit of their own, but in order that they may be able to comfort others. In missionary work sympathy is the great condition of success (1 Corinthians 9:22), and it was part of the training of the Apostles that they should need and receive comfort in order to know how to impart it; and the comfort is deliverance, not necessarily from the suffering, but from the anxiety which suffering brings. There is the assurance that sufferers are in the hands of a loving Father, and this assurance they can pass on to others in all their afflictions. But we need not confine ἡμᾶς to Apostles and missionaries; the words apply to all Christians. It is, however, exaggeration to say that only those who have received consolation know how to impart it. It is not impossible that St Paul is here thinking of the affliction which the Corinthians had recently been experiencing in their agony of self-reproach and remorse when the severe letter of the Apostle and the remonstrances of Titus, who had brought the letter to them, had convinced them that they had treated their spiritual father abominably in listening to the misrepresentations and slanders of the Judaizing teachers and in rebelling against him. These emotional Greeks, as Titus had reported to St Paul, had been crushed by the thought of their own waywardness and ingratitude. The Apostle, hardly less emotional than themselves, longs to comfort them, and he knows how to do it. They, by their rebellion and maltreatment of him had taught his tender and affectionate heart what affliction, in one of its most intense forms, could be; and God had comforted him and sustained him in it all. Now he knows how to comfort them. “ The affliction had intensified Paul’ s capacity as a son of consolation” (Massie, The Century Bible, p. 71). ἧςπαρακαλούμεθα . This kind of attraction is not common in N.T.; comp. τῆςχάριτοςαὐτοῦ , ἧςἐχαρίτωσενἡμᾶς and τῆςκλήσεως , ἧςἐκλήθητε (Ephesians 1:6, Ephesians 4:1). In these cases it may be “ simplest” to take ἧς as ᾗ but in all of them the acc. is possible, as in Mark 10:38 and John 17:26; and in all five cases a substantive is followed by its cognate verb. Ephesians 1:19, τὴνἐνέργειαν … ἣνἐνέργηκεν , and 2:4, τὴνπολλὴνἀγάπηναὐτοῦ , ἣνἠγάπησενἡμᾶς , suggest the acc. rather than the dat. The attraction of the dat. is very rare, but we find it Psalms 90:15; Haggai 2:18. For ἐπί , C, Eus. Chrys. have ἐν . M, Hil. Ambr. omit ἡμῶν . For εἰς , F has ἵνα . Vulg. ins. καί before ἡμᾶς D E F G, Latt. (not r) ins. καί before αὐτοί . For ὑπό , F has ἀπό . 5. ὅτικαθώςκ .τ .λ . ‘ Because just as the sufferings of the Messiah abound unto us, so through the Messiah our comfort also aboundeth.’ For καθὼς … οὔτως … see 1 Thessalonians 2:4. The sufferings are those quas Christus prior pertulit et nobis perferendas reliquit (Herveius). The preachers of the Kingdom have to suffer persecution as He had (1 Peter 4:13); but Chrys. gives too much meaning to περισσεύει , when he interprets it as meaning that Christ’ s ministers suffer more than He did. ‘ The sufferings of the Messiah’ are those which He was destined to suffer, which ἔδειπαθεῖντ . Χριστόν (see on Luke 24:26 and cf. Acts 17:3; 2 Corinthians 4:10; Romans 6:5; Philippians 3:10, with Lightfoot’ s note).* ‘ Sufferings endured for Christ’ s sake’ is wrong as translation (cf. 4:11), and inadequate as exegesis. ‘ Sufferings which the glorified Christ suffers when His members suffer’ is questionable exegesis, which is not justified by the Apostle’ s use of τοῦΧριστοῦ instead of τοῦἸησοῦ as in Galatians 6:17. It is the sufferings of the Messiah that he is pointing to, for his recent opponents were Jews. Moreover, τ . Χριστοῦ is necessary in the second clause, for not the historical Jesus who suffered is the Consoler, but the glorified Christ; and it would have marred the antithesis to have ‘ Jesus’ in the first clause and ‘ Christ’ in the second. In 4:10, he has ‘ Jesus’ in both clauses. In the background is the thought of the absolute unity between Christ and His members; and although we can hardly think of Him as still liable to suffering when His members suffer, yet their sufferings are a continuation of His, and they supplement His (Colossians 1:24) in the work of building up the Church. One purpose of His sufferings was to make men feel more certain of the love of God (Romans 8:32). Cf. 4:10; Romans 6:5, Romans 6:8:17; Philippians 3:10; Matthew 20:22, Matthew 20:25:40, 45). It is less likely that he is hinting at opponents who had said that his sufferings were richly deserved. So far as possible, he wishes to suppress all allusion to the unhappy past, and hence the obscure wording of this paragraph. What he desires to emphasize is the comfort which he and those who had opposed him now enjoy, owing to their submission. In N.T., πάθημα is confined to the Pauline Epp., Heb. and 1 Pet. The change from plur. to sing. is effective; illa multa sunt, haec una, et tamen potior (Beng.). D E have τὸπάθημα to match ἡπαράκλησις . περισσεύειεἰςἡμᾶς . Cf. 9:8; Romans 5:15; Ephesians 1:8. διὰτοῦΧριστοῦ . ‘ Through the Messiah’ : it is through His instrumentality that the reconciliation between the Jew of Tarsus and his Jewish antagonists in Corinth, which has been such a comfort to both sides, has come about. This use of διά is freq. of the Son (1 Corinthians 8:6; Colossians 1:16; Hebrews 1:2), but it is also used of the Father (1 Corinthians 1:9; Romans 11:36; Hebrews 2:10), and therefore, as Chrys. remarks, is not derogatory to the Divinity of the Son. It is He who sends His Spirit to bring comfort. He has become πνεῦμαζωοποιοῦν (1 Corinthians 15:45). καὶἡπαράκλησιςἡμῶν . This does not mean the comfort which we give, but the comfort which we receive. After περισσεύει we may understand εἰςὑμᾶς . St Paul and Timothy have received abundant comfort and have abundant comfort to impart. D E F G 17, 37, Latt. Copt. ins. καί after οὕτως . Vulg. omits καί before ἡπαράκλησις . 6. εἴτεδὲθλιβόμεθα . ‘ But whether we be afflicted, it is for your comfort [and salvation].’ How this is the case, has been shown in v. 4. The teachers’ sufferings and subsequent consolations have taught them how to comfort others; so that all their experiences, whether painful or pleasing, prove profitable to the Corinthians. τῆςὑμῶνπαρακλήσεως . We have ὑμῶν between article and substantive twice in this verse. The arrangement is peculiar to Paul (7:7, 15, 8:13, 14, 12:19, 13:9, etc.). The alternatives, εἴτε … εἴτε , are almost peculiar to Paul, and are very frequent in 1 and 2 Cor. Elsewhere in N.T., 1 Peter 2:3 only. εἴτεπαρακαλούμεθα . ‘ Or whether we be comforted, it is for your comfort, which is made effective in the endurance of the same sufferings which we also suffer’ ; i.e. the comfort which their teachers receive overflows to them, when the sufferings of both are similar. Are we to suppose that there had been persecution of the Christians at Corinth? The πειρασμός in 1 Corinthians 10:13 might mean that some who had refused to take part in idolatrous practices had been denounced as disloyal. But, if there is a reference to persecution at all, it is more probable that St Paul is thinking of the possibility of future trouble, as ἡἐλπίς indicates. The fact that ἐνεργουμένης and ἐστε are presents must not be pressed; they are timeless and refer to what is normal. St Paul expected further persecution for himself (v. 10): he would neither cease to preach, nor preach a rigid Gospel pleasing to Judaizers, nor preach an elastic Gospel pleasing to freethinking Hellenists and Gentiles. ἐνεργουμένης . Lightfoot has sanctioned the view that the passive of ἐνεργε͂ν does not occur in N.T. J. A. Robinson (Eph. p. 245) has given reasons for doubting this. The instances, with the exception of Jam 5:16, are all in Paul (4:12; 1 Thessalonians 2:13; 2 Thessalonians 2:7; Galatians 5:6; Romans 7:5; Ephesians 3:20; Colossians 1:29). In all of them it is difficult to decide between the middle and the passive, and even in James 5:16 the passive is not impossible. Here Chrys. seems to regard the participle as passive, for he points out that St Paul says ἐνεργουμένης and not ἐνεργούσης . The comfort does not work of itself, but ‘ is made to work’ by him who bestows it. If we regard it as middle, the meaning will be ‘ which makes itself felt.’ See Blass, § 55. 1. ἐνὑπομονῇ . Manly endurance without cowardly shrinking (6:4, 12:12) is meant. The word is found in all groups of the Pauline Epp. Cf. ἡθλίψιςὑπομονὴνκατεργάζεται (Romans 5:3). In LXX it generally means patient expectation and hope, a meaning which prevails even in Ecclus. (2:14, 16:13, 17:24, 41:2); but in 4 Macc., which was written not long before this Epistle, the N.T. meaning is found: τῇἀνδρείᾳκαὶτῇὑπομονῇ (1:11), τῆσδετῆςκακοπαθείαςκαὶὑπομονῆς (9:8), ἀρετὴδι ʼ ὑπομονῆςδοκιμάζονσα (17:12; also 17, 23). See on Luke 8:15; Trench, Syn. § liii. τῶναὐτῶνπαθημάτων . Note the attraction of ὧν . Not the identical sufferings, as if the Corinthians were pained whenever the Apostle was pained, in which case the καί would be meaningless; but the same in kind, arising out of devotion to Christ. Communio sanctorum egregie representatur in hac epistola (Beng.). The text is confused as to the order of the clauses. The received Text, which is followed in AV, was made by Erasmus without MS. authority. The two arrangements, between which the choice lies, are given by WH., one in the text and one in a foot-note. The former, which is preferable, runs thus; εἴτεδὲθλιβόμεθα , ὑπὲρτῆςὐμῶνπαρακλήσεωςκαὶσωτηρίας · εἴτεπαρακαλούμεθα , ὑπὲρτῆςὐμῶνπαρακλήσεωςτῆςἐνεργουμένηςἐνὑπομονῇτῶναὐτῶνπαθημάτωνὧνκαὶἡμεῖςπάσχομεν , καὶἡἐλπὶςἡμῶνβεβαίαὑπὲρὑμῶν (א A C M P). The other runs thus; εἴτεδὲθλιβόμεθα , ὑπὲρτῆςὑμῶνπαρακλήσεως [καὶσωτηρίας ] τῆςἐνεργουμένηςἐνὑπομονῇτῶναὐτῶνπαθημάτωνὧνκαὶἡμεῖςπάσχομενκαὶἡἐλπὶςἡμῶνβεβαίαὐπὲρὑμῶν · εἴτεπαρακαλούμεθα , ὑπὲρτῆςἡμῶνπαρακλήσεωςκαὶσωτηρίας (B D E F G K L). B 17, 176 omit the first καὶσωτηρίας . Assuming that the text of א A C M P is original, we may explain the origin of the other arrangement by supposing that, owing to homoeoteleuton , the words καὶσωτηρίαςεἴτεπαρακαλούμεθαὑπὲρτῆςὑμῶνπαρακλήσεως were accidentally omitted and afterwards written in the margin, and that the next copyist inserted them in the wrong place. Editors differ as to the punctuation and the division of the verses, according as they regard ἡἐλπὶςἡμῶν as connected with what precedes or with what follows. Some place only a comma at πάσχομεν and a colon or full stop at ὑπὲρὑμῶν . Others place a colon or full stop at πάσχομεν and only a comma at ὑπὲρὑμῶν . The latter is better, and καὶἡἐλπὶςκ .τ .λ . is rightly assigned to v. 7. 7. καὶἡἐλπὶςἡμῶνβεβαίαὑπὲρὑμῶν . ‘ And our hope is sure concerning you.’ See Deissmann on βεβαίωσις , Bible Studies, pp. 104-109. Wetstein gives examples of the expression ἐλπὶςβεβαία . There may be trouble in store for both sides, but those who have shared distress and consolation on a large scale may face the future without dismay. This is much higher praise than he bestows on the Thessalonians (1 Thessalonians 3:2, 1 Thessalonians 3:3, 1 Thessalonians 3:5). εἰδότες . ‘ Because we know’ ; cf. 1 Corinthians 15:58; Colossians 3:24; Ephesians 6:8. Strict grammar would require εἰδότων , but this use of the nom. participle, not in agreement with the noun, is common in Paul and in papyri; e.g. θλιβόμενοι (7:5), στελλόμενοι (8:20), πλουτιζόμενοι (9:11), ἐρριζωμένοι (Ephesians 3:17), ἀνεχόμενοι (4:2), διδάσκοντες (Colossians 3:16), ἔχοντες (Philippians 1:30), etc. Some refer εἰδότες here to the Corinthians; ‘ because ye know,’ which is improbable. It is expressly said that the knowledge is the security for ‘ our hope.’ κοινωναίἐστε … τῆςπαρακλήσεως . He does not claim the credit of comforting them: they receive comfort from the same source that he does— from God through Christ. For the construction, cf. 1 Peter 5:1; 2 Peter 1:4; for ὡς … οὕτως , Romans 5:15, Romans 5:18. For ὡς (א A B C D* M P 17), D2 and 3 K L have ὥσπερ . 8-11. The Thanksgiving still continues, these verses explaining why he blesses God for mercies to himself rather than for graces bestowed on them, and the wording continues to be obscure. The obscurity may be due to reference to a delicate matter which is understood rather than expressed. This would be very intelligible, if the ‘ affliction’ is the Corinthian rebellion against the Apostle, and the ‘ comfort’ is their submission and reconciliation to him. But a reference to persecution is not impossible. 8. Οὐγὰρθέλομενὑμᾶςἀγνοεῖν , ἀδελφοί . The formula is used six times by St Paul (1 Corinthians 10:1, 1 Corinthians 10:12:1; Romans 1:13, Romans 1:11:25; 1 Thessalonians 4:13), always with ἀδελφοί , as if the information given was an appeal to their affection and sympathy. Excepting 1 Corinthians 12:3, where ἀδελφοί has preceded, the similar expression, γνωρίζωὑμῖν , is also followed by ἁδελφοί (8:8; 1 Corinthians 15:1; Galatians 1:11). The less frequent θέλωὑμᾶςεἰδέναι (1 Corinthians 11:3; Colossians 2:1) is not so followed. Similar expressions are found in papyri; γινώσκεινσεθέλω is often placed at the beginning of letters. It is not quite exact to say that logically the οὐ belongs to ἀγνοεῖν : there is something which he does not wish. The expression is not parallel with οὐκἔφηχρήσειν , which does not mean that she did not say that she would, but that she said that she would not. St Paul does not wish the Corinthians to remain in ignorance of the intensity of his recent affliction, for when they know how greatly he has suffered, they will regard their own sufferings more patiently, and will also appreciate his present comfort and derive comfort from it. τῆςθλίψεωςἡμῶντῆςγενομένηςἐντῇἈσίᾳ . Evidently the θλίψις is something which the Corinthians already know, for the vague statement that it ‘ took place in Asia’ is enough to tell them what he means. He gives no particulars, but merely enlarges upon the terrible effect which the affliction had upon himself. This leaves plenty of room for conjecture, and there are many guesses. We must find something very severe and capable of being regarded as ‘ sufferings of the Christ.’ Neither illness nor shipwreck seem to be very suitable, and a shipwreck would hardly have been described as taking place ‘ in Asia.’ News that his beloved Corinthians had rebelled against him, and thereby had set an example of revolt to other Churches in Europe, is more probable. Such tidings might go far towards making so sensitive and affectionate a worker think that he could not live any longer. On the other hand, it is perhaps a little improbable that, after the joyous reconciliation, he should revive the past by telling them that they had almost killed him by their misbehaviour. Yet he might do this in order to show them how intensely everything that they do affects him.* If this conjecture is set aside as improbable— and the language of vv. 8-10 does seem to be rather strong for the effect of painful news— we may fall back upon the hypothesis of persecution, not by officials, but by furious mobs, consisting of, or hounded on by, exasperated Jews, so that he was nearly torn in pieces by them (1 Corinthians 15:31, 1 Corinthians 15:32). Such θλίψις would fitly be compared with ‘ the sufferings of the Messiah.’ This is Tertullian’ s view (De Resur. Carnis, 48); the pressura apud Asiam refers to illas bestias Asiaticae pressurae. Those who, with Paley, think that the reference is to the uproar raised by Demetrius at Ephesus (Acts 19:23-41) must admit that, in that case, St Luke has given an inadequate account of St Paul’ s peril, for he gives no hint that he was near being killed. Paley’ s argument suffices to show that vv. 8, 9 cannot have been written by a forger who wished to make an allusion to Act_19.; a forger would have made the allusion more distinct; but it does not prove that the allusion is to Acts 19.. There may easily have been a much worse outbreak at Ephesus somewhat later, and even a plot to kill St Paul, as in Acts 23:12, and this peril may have hastened his departure from Ephesus. It is probably right to assume that ‘ in Asia’ means in Ephesus. Ephesus was the metropolis of the Roman province of Asia, which contained the Seven Churches of Rev 1:11. See on 1 Corinthians 16:19. In Ephesus he had ‘ many adversaries’ (1 Corinthians 16:9). If Timothy shared this great affliction, either it took place before he started for Corinth, or he had returned to the Apostle before the latter left Ephesus. κοθ ʼ ὑπερβολὴνὑπὲρδύναμινἐβαρήθημεν . Some teachers and leaders insist upon their glories and successes; St Paul insists rather on his sufferings (12:5, 9, 10). Whatever this θλίψις may have been, he hints that it was far worse than what the Corinthians had to endure. He says that he (and Timothy?) ‘ were weighed down exceedingly beyond our power.’ Does καθ ʼ ὑπερβολήν qualify ὑπὲρδύναμιν or ἐβαρήθημεν Our English is as amphibolous as the Greek. The placing of ὑπὲρδυν after ἐβαρήθημεν (E K L) is an attempt to decide the point. Only once in LXX does καθ ʼ ὑπερβολήν occur, in one of the latest books (4 Macc. 3:18), and there of acute physical suffering, τὰςτῶνσωμάτωνἀλγηδόναςκαθ ʼ ὑπερβολὴνοὔσας . St Paul has it five times (4:17; 1 Corinthians 12:31; Galatians 1:13; Romans 7:13), all in this group of Epistles. ὥστεἐξαπορηθῆναιἡμᾶςκαιτοῦζῇν . ‘ So that we were utterly without way of escape, were utterly at a loss, were quite in despair, even of life’ (4:8 only; in LXX, Ps. 87:16 only). This is the right meaning, which is preserved in the Old Latin, ut de vita haesitaremus (Tert. De Res. Carn. 48), and by Jerome (on Ephesians 3:13), ita ut desperaremus nos etiam vivere. But Vulg. supports the less probable meaning, that he did not wish to live any longer, ut taederet nos etiam vivere. We have a braver strain in 4:8 and in Philippians 4:3. St Paul has many moods, and he has no wish to conceal from the Corinthians how profoundly great trouble had depressed him. On τοῦ , see J. H. Moulton, pp. 217, 200. ὑπὲρτῆς (B K L M) is more likely to be original than περὶτῆς (א A C D E F G P 17); περί is the usual constr. after ἀγνοεῖν (1 Corinthians 12:1; 1 Thessalonians 4:13), and hence the change here. Cf. 8:23, 12:8; 2 Thessalonians 2:1; Romans 9:27. א 3 D2 and 3 E K L Syrr. Copt. ins. ἠμῖν after γενομένης , א A B C D F G M P 17, Latt. Arm. omit. ὑπὲρδύναμιν before ἐβαρήθημεν (א A B C M P 17) rather than παρὰδίν after ἐβαρ (D F G). 9. ἀλλὰαὐτοὶἐνἑαυτοῖς Cf. Romans 8:23. ‘ Nay, we ourselves had the sentence of death within ourselves.’ * We may render ἀλλά either ‘ Nay,’ i.e. ‘ It may seem incredible, but,’ or ‘ Yea,’ i.e. ‘ One may put the matter still more strongly.’ The ἀλλά confirms what has just been said (7:11, 8:7, 10:4), and is equivalent to our colloquial, ‘ Why.’ In his own mind the Apostle was convinced that in all human probability his hours were numbered. With ἐσχήκαμεν comp. ἔσχηκα (2:13), πεποίηκα (11:25), πεποίηκεν (Hebrews 11:28). Here we might explain the perf. as expressing the permanent effects of the ἀπόκριμα as vividly recalling the moment when the ἀπόκριμα was recognized. But there seems to be a “ purely aoristic use of the perfect.” (Winer, p. 340), especially in late Greek. In Rev. v. 7 we have aor. and perf. combined, and the same in reverse order in Revelation 3:3, Revelation 8:5, Revelation 11:17. See J. H. Moulton, pp. 143-146; Blass, § 59. 4. Both AV and RV. express doubt whether ‘ sentence’ or ‘ answer’ is the better translation of ἀπόκριμα . Vulg. has responsum. The word occurs nowhere else in Biblical Greek, but Josephus and Polybius use it for a decision of the Roman Senate; and Deissmann (Bible Studies, p. 257) quotes an inscription dated a.d. 51 in which ἀπόκριμα is used of a decision of the Emperor Claudius. Both Chrys. and Thdrt. use τὴνψῆφον as an equivalent, to which Chrys. adds τ . προσδοκίαν and τ . ἀπόφασιν Cf. ὦθάνατε , καλόνσουτὸκρίμαἐστίν , and μὴεὐλαβοῦκρίμαθανάτου (Ecclus. 41:2, 3). ἵναμὴπεποιθότεςὦμενἐφ ʼ ἑαυτοῖς . A thoroughly Pauline touch. He has told us of one Divine purpose in sending afflictions and comfort, viz. to train him for administering comfort to others who are in affliction (v. 4). Here he tells us of another. Suffering of great intensity has been sent to prove to him his own helplessness, and to teach him to trust in God, who has the power of life and death (2 Kings 5:7), and can not only recover the dying but restore the dead (4:14; Romans 4:17). We need not water down ἵνα into a mere equivalent to ὥστε : the telic force is quite in place here. This dreadful trial was sent to him in order to give him a precious spiritual lesson (12:7-10). τῷἐγείρότι . Timeless present participle expressing a permanent attribute, like ὁπαρακαλῶν in v. 4. Cf. Hebrews 11:19, where δυνατός gives a Divine attribute. In such extreme danger and dread, human aid was worthless; real relief could come only from Him who had power to raise the dead: and to be rescued from so desperate a condition was almost a resurrection. Bousset refers to the “ Eighteen-petition-prayer” of the Jews, the Schmone-Esre or chief prayer which each Jew ought to say thrice daily. It really contains nineteen petitions, as Schü rer (Gesch. d. Jü d. Volk. ii. pp. 460-462, 3rd ed. 1898) has shown. In the second petition we have, “ Thou art almighty for ever, O Lord, for Thou makest the dead to live. Thou art mighty to help, Thou who sustainest the living through Thy mercy, and makest the dead to live through Thy compassion. … Who is like unto Thee, O King, who killest and makest alive and causest help to spring up. And true art Thou in making the dead to live.” This is the great mark of Divine power— restoring the dead to life. Chrys. thinks that it is mentioned here because the possibility of resurrection was questioned at Corinth (1 Corinthians 15:12). But the mention is quite natural, without any polemical purpose. A reflexion on Corinthian scepticism is more probable in 4:14 and 5:15. Thdrt. and some others weaken the meaning greatly by substituting ἐγείραντι for ἐγείροντι , as if it referred to the single act of raising Christ from the dead. Even in Deo qui suscitat mortuos (Vulg.) is not quite adequate: in Deo mortuorum resuscitatore is the full meaning. Of the whole clause, ἵναμὴκ .τ .λ ., we may admit that facit locus iste contra eos qui suis aliquid meritis tribuere praesumunt (Pseudo-Primasius). 10. ὃςἐκτηλικούτουθανάτουἐρύσατοἡμᾶς . ‘ Who out of so great a death delivered us.’ He says ‘ death’ rather than ‘ peril of death,’ because he had regarded himself as a dead man; the ἐκ seems to imply peril rather than death personified, but Wetstein shows that ἐρύσατοἐκθανάτου is a common expression. This may be one of the rare N.T. reminiscences of the Book of Job;* ἐρύσατοτὴνψυχήνμουἐκθανάτου (33:30). A comparison with ἐρύσθηνἐκστόματοςλέοντος . ῥύσεταίμεὁκύριος (2 Timothy 4:17, 2 Timothy 4:18) and ἵναῥυσθῶἀπὸτῶνάπειθούντωνἐντῇἸουδαίᾳ (Romans 15:31) rather favours the hypothesis that the great θλίψις in Asia was violent persecution. As in Hebrews 2:3, τηλικοῦτος here means ‘ so great’ as to require such a Saviour: cf. Revelation 16:18; James 3:4. In LXX the word is found in Macc. only; in class. Grk. it is used more often of age than of size, ‘ so old,’ and sometimes ‘ so young.’ καὶῥύσεται . This is superfluous, anticipating and somewhat spoiling the next clause. Hence some witnesses read ῥύεται or omit, and some editors either omit the word or adopt awkward punctuation: see critical note. But St Paul, in dictating, might easily repeat himself, toning down the confident ‘ He will deliver’ into a confident hope that He will do so. Thus affliction is set before us as a school of sympathy (v. 4), a school of encouragement (v. 5), and a school of hope (v. 10). He proclaims that the rescue in all cases is God’ s work, not their own: it must come from Him, if at all. εἰςὃδνἠλπίκαμεν [ὅτι ] καὶἔτιῥύσεται . ‘ Unto whom we have directed our hope that He will also still deliver us’ ; or, omitting ὅτι , ‘ and He will still deliver us’ ; or ὅτι , ‘ may be intensive, ‘ that He will indeed deliver us.’ Praescit se adhuc passurum qui sperat se liberandum (Pseudo-Primasius). He had enough experience of perils of death (11:23; 1 Corinthians 15:31) to feel that he must be prepared for others in the future. Cf. προαποθνήσκωπόλλους , θανάτουςὑπομένων (Philo, In Flaccum, 990 A); μενέτωἐνταῖςψυχαῖςἀκαθαίρετοςἡἐπὶτὸνσωτῆραΘεὸνἐλπίς , ὃςπολλάκιςἐξἀμηχάνωνκαὶἀπόρωνπεριέσωσετὸἔθνος (Leg. ad Caium, 574). For ἐλπίζεινεἰς , see John 5:45; 1 Peter 3:5; ἐλπίζεινἐπί is more common (Romans 15:12; 1 Timothy 4:10, 1 Timothy 5:5, 1 Timothy 6:17); in quo spem repositam habemus is nearer to ἐπί . Origen (on Leviticus 11:2), with too rigid logic, argues that, as it is not to be supposed that St Paul expected to be immortal, he cannot mean physical death when he says that he hopes that God will continue to deliver him from deaths; he must mean sins. Origen evidently read ἐκτηλικούτωνθανάτων , With Vulg. (de tantis periculis) Syrr., Jerome (on Ephesians 1:13), Rufinus (ad loc.), Ambrst. He also read καὶῥύεται with D3 E F G K L M, Latt. Goth., Chrys. But ἐκτηλικούτουθανάτου and καὶῥύσεται is to be preferred with א B C P 17, Copt. Arm. A D omit καὶῥύσεται B D M omit ὅτι , and F G place it affer καί Goth. Aeth. omit both καί and ἔτι . B. Weiss proposes to read εἰςὃνἠλπίκαμεν . καὶἔτιῥύσεται . 11. συνυπουργούντωνκαὶὑμῶνκ .τ .λ . ‘ Ye also helping together on our behalf by your supplication,’ which may mean either ‘ provided you help’ or ‘ while you help.’ * The latter is more probably right; the Apostle is as secure of the intercession of the Corinthians as he is of God’ s protection, and the one will contribute to the other. With whom do the Corinthians cooperate? Various answers have been given to this question. ‘ With the Apostle, in his hope or in his prayers’ (Romans 15:30); or, ‘ with one another’ ; or, ‘ with the particular purpose.’ He has just said that God will rescue, and he adds that the Corinthians will help. Their intercessions are part of the machinery which God has provided for preserving His Apostle from deadly peril. “ Even if God doeth anything in mercy, yet prayer doth mightily contribute thereto” (Chrys., who, however, takes συνυπουργ . of the Corinthians uniting with one another in intercession). We need not take ὑπὲρἡμῶν after τῇδεήσει : it goes well with συνυπουργ . As a word for ‘ prayer,’ δέησις is almost as general as προσευχή , with which it is often joined. It is commonly an expression of personal need (see on Luke 1:13), but is often used of intercession; 9:14; Romans 10:1; Philippians 1:4 (see Lightfoot); 2 Timothy 1:3; Hebrews 5:7. Cf. the letter of Agrippa in Philo, Leg. ad Caium, § 36 sub init. (2. p. 586); γραφὴδὲμηνύσειμουτὴνδέησιν , ἥνἀνθ ʼ ἱκετηρίαςπροτείνω … δέομαιὑπὲρἁπάντων . ἵναἐκπολλῶνπροσώπων … ὑπὲρἡμῶν . A perplexing sentence. Among the doubtful points are (1) whether πολλῶν qualifies προσώπων or is the gen. after προσώπων (ex multorum personis, Vulg.); (2) whether τὸεἰςχάρισμα refers to God’ s rescue of the Apostle from death or to the Corinthians’ intercessions for him; (3) whether διὰπολλῶν is masc. or neut.; (4) the meaning of προσώπων . (1) The meaning is much the same whether we say ‘ many πρόσωπα ’ or ‘ the πρόσωπα of many,’ but the former is almost certainly right. (2) The context strongly suggests that τὸεἰςἡμαςχάρισμα means the Divine favour in delivering St Paul from death. That deliverance had already taken place, and was a more conspicuous subject for thanksgiving than the intercessions of the Corinthians on his behalf. Here, as in 1 Peter 4:10, χάρισμα means an external blessing. All the other passages in N.T. in which χάρισμα occurs are in Paul (1 Cor., Rom., 1 and 2 Tim.), and it is commonly used of a spiritual gift, especially of some extraordinary power. (3) It is true that, if διὰπολλῶν is masc., it is superfluous after ἐκπολλῶνπροσώπων . But St Paul is dictating, and such repetitions as ῥύσεται … ῥύσεται (v. 10) and ἐκπ . πρ … διὰπ are quite natural. Similarly, ὑπὲρἡμῶν is superfluous after τὸεἰςἡμ . χαρ , and yet is quite natural. Moreover, it is not easy to find a satisfactory meaning for διὰπολλῶν , if πολλῶν if is neut. ‘ With many thanks’ (ingentes gratias), or ‘ with many words’ (prolixe), makes poor sense, even if such a translation is possible. We may safely regard διὰπολλῶν as meaning ‘ through many people’ (per multos, Vulg.). (4) The meaning of πρόσωπον is less easily determined. The word occurs twelve times in this letter; in eight places it certainly means ‘ face,’ 3:7 (bis), 13, 18, 8:24, 10:1, 7, 11:20; in one it means ‘ face’ in the sense of outward appearance (5:12); in three it may mean either ‘ face’ or ‘ person’ (here, 2:10, 4:6). Herveius renders ex personis multarum facierum and interprets homines multarum aetatum et qualitatum diversarum. Ambrosiaster has multorum faciebus. Bengel is much less happy than usual in giving the impossible ex multis respectibus. The conjectural emendation, προσευχῶν for προσώπων , has not found much support. ‘ From many persons’ makes excellent sense, and this late use of πρόσωπον is abundantly illustrated in the Greek of the period. But the literal sense is more probable and more attractive. It is difficult to explain ἐκ , if persons are meant; and we can well believe that the Apostle, as he dictates, sees in thought the many upturned faces, lighted up with thankfulness, as praises for this preservation rise up from their lips. Some, however, while giving this meaning to ἑκπ . προσώπων , understand it of the intercessions for the Apostle’ s protection; others (AV, RV) give this meaning to διὰπολλῶν . Certainty is unattainable; but the following renderings are intelligible; (1) ‘ that from many mouths, for the favour shown to us, thanks may be offered by means of many on our behalf’ ; or (2) ‘ that the benefit accruing to us from the intercessions of many persons may through many be a matter of thanksgiving on our account’ ; or (3) ‘ that for the gift bestowed upon us by means of many, thanks may be given by many persons on our behalf’ (RV). The last is questionable; it involves taking τὸεἰςἡμ . χαρ . διὰπολ as if it were τὸδιὰπολ . εἰςἡμ . χαρ . The second is still more questionable; it involves taking π . προς . τὸεἰςἡμ . χαρ as if it were τὸἐκπ . προς . εἰςἡμ . χαρ . The first is more accurate and makes equally good sense. But in any case the words show what an impression this great affliction had made on St Paul, as if “ even in a life of peril this peril in Asia had marked an era” (J. Agar Beet, p. 322). διὰπολλῶνεὐχαριστηθῇ . Lit. ‘ may be thanked for by many,’ i.e. may be made a subject of thanksgiving through the instrumentality of many thankful persons. The passive occurs nowhere else in either N.T. or LXX. By Justin it is used of the eucharistic bread which has been dedicated with thanks (Apol. i. 65). For ὑμῶνὑπὲρἡμῶν , A has ἡμῶνὑπὲρὐμῶν , while D F have ὐμῶνπερὶἡμῶν and G has ὑμῶνπερὶὑμῶν . For ἐκπολλῶνπροσώπων , F G M have ἐνπολλῷπροσώπῳ , g in multa facie. For εὐχαρ . ὑπὲρἡμῶν (א A C D G M 17, Vulg. Syrr. Copt. Arm. Goth.), B D3 E F K L P Chrys. have εὑχαρ . ὑπὲρὑμῶν . Baljon would omit both διὰπολλῶν and the second ὑπὲρἡμῶν as glosses. Neither of them has the look of a gloss, but both might be omitted without injury to the meaning. 1:12-7:16. REVIEW OF RECENT WITH THE This is the first of the main divisions of the Epistle, and it may be divided into three sections; 1:12-2:17, 3:1-6:10, 6:11-7:16. But the Second Epistle does not present such clearly marked divisions as the First. There the Apostle takes up the matters which had been reported to him and the questions which had been asked, disposes of them one by one, and passes on. Here it is his strong feeling rather than any deliberate arrangement that suggests the order of his utterances. Nevertheless, although exact analysis is seldom possible owing to digressions and repetitions, yet some divisions are fairly clear, and the letter becomes more intelligible when they are noted. The headings given to the different sections are tentative: they are offered, not as adequate summaries of the contents of each section, but as stating what seems to be its dominant thought, or one of its dominant thoughts. In each section we have often to be content with highly conjectural explanations of the language used, seeing that we are in complete ignorance of the circumstances to which the Apostle alludes, and about which he perhaps sometimes writes, from feelings of delicacy, with studied vagueness. In some cases the meaning of individual words is uncertain. 1:12-2:17. DEFENCE OF HIS CONDUCT WITH REGARD TO HIS VISIT AND THE GREAT This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/iccnt/ 2:1. Quisquis fuerit capitum divisor, fecit hic ineptam sectionem, says Calvin with justice. The connexion with what goes before is very close. The Apostle is continuing his answer to the charge of levity. He had changed his plans in order to spare them. Having stated what he did not mean when he spoke of sparing them (1:24), he now explains what that expression does mean. ἔκριναδὲἐμαυτῷτοῦτο . It is not easy to decide whether δέ or γάρ is the right reading. External evidence seems to be somewhat in favour of δέ , but γάρ is more likely to have been changed to δέ than vice versa, and γάρ makes a good connexion; ‘ It was to spare you that I gave up the idea of another visit to Corinth, for I determined this for myself.’ But another γάρ immediately after τῇγὰρπίστειἐστήκατε is unpleasing and somewhat unlikely, and δέ makes quite a natural connexion, whether one renders it by ‘ and’ or ‘ but.’ ‘ It was to spare you, and as regards myself, etc.’ For ἔκρινα , see on 1 Corinthians 2:2 and but 7:37; in the latter passage we have, as here, τοῦτο pointing forward to what is coming. The verb at once excludes the idea of levity or caprice; he thought the matter over and came to a definite conclusion; cf. v. 14; also Romans 14:13, where we have exactly the same construction as here, κρίνειν with an anticipatory τοῦτο , followed by τὸμή with the infinite; ἀλλὰτοῦτοκρίνατεμᾶλλον , τὸμὴτιθέναιπρόσκομματῷἀδελφῳ . In 1 Jn. τοῦτε commonly refers to what follows (3:1, 8, 4:3); so also in 1 Cor. (1:12, 7:29, 15:50). Ἐμαυτῷ is dat. commodi rather than dat. ethicus, which would have been μοι rather than ἐμαυτῷ . It was chiefly for their sakes that he postponed his visit; but he came to the conclusion that for his own sake he had better not have the pain. AV, following the Vulg., statui autem hoc ipsum apud me, has ‘ But I determined this with myself,’ which would require παρ ʼ ἐμαυτῷ or ἐνἐμαυτῷ , a reading found in no text. And ipsum is in the wrong place; we should have statui autem (or enim) mihi ipsi hoc.* τὸμὴπάλινἐνλύπῃπρὸςὑμᾶςἐλθεῖν . There is little doubt that this is the right order of the words; see below. The translation of them is disputed. Those who hold that 12:14 and 13:1 compel us to believe that St Paul had already paid two visits to Corinth, translate, ‘ Not again in sorrow to come to you.’ ‘ Again in sorrow’ is to be taken together and is emphatic by position. He has had to come once in sorrow; and if he visited them on his way to Macedonia, he would have again to come in sorrow. This he decided not to do. The distressing visit cannot refer to the long stay during which he converted them; therefore there must have been a second visit, which was probably short. See Introduction; also G. H. Rendall, p. 57. Among recent writers, “ Is it not plain,” says K. Lake, “ that this passage (2:1-11) implies a recent visit which had ended so unpleasantly that St Paul had determined not to come back if he was likely to undergo similar experiences?” (Earlier Epp. p. 150). On the other hand, those who think that the silence of Acts and the difficulty of fixing a time for this second visit are fatal to the supposition that it took place, translate thus, ‘ Not to come to you again (and this time) in sorrow,’ or, ‘ Not at my second coming to come to you in sorrow.’ He had paid them one very happy visit, and he would not revisit them in circumstances which must make the second visit a sad one. There is no need to determine whether λύπη means the sorrow which the Apostle must cause or that which he must feel: the context shows that he is thinking of both. The AV has ‘ heaviness’ for λύπη here, with ‘ sorrow’ in v. 3, 2:7, 7:10; Philippians 2:27, etc.; and ‘ sorrow’ is used to translate other Greek words. Even the R. V. uses ‘ sorrow’ for both λύπη (often) and ὀδύνη , which in Romans 9:2 it renders ‘ pain.’ B 17, 37, Syr-Hark. Copt. support γάρ : D*, Aeth. support τε : almost all others support δέ . T.R. with a few cursives reads πάλινἐλθεῖνἐνλύπῃ . Nearly all authorities have πάλινἐνλύπῃπρὸςὑμᾶςἐλθεῖν , but D E G, Syr. Pesh. have π . ἐνλ . ἐμθεῖνπρὸςὑμᾶς . Copt. omits πάλιν and has ἐλθεῖνπρὸςὑμᾶςἐνλύπῃ . 2. εἰγὰρἐγὼλυπῶὑμᾶςκ .τ .λ . ‘ For if I (with emphasis) make you sorrowful, who then is he that maketh me glad, but he that is made sorrowful by me.’ ‘ Sorry’ and ‘ sorrowful’ (6:10) are not synonymous, and the latter is what is meant here: see on v. 5. The καί makes the τίς emphatic and thus adds force to the question, ‘ Why, who is there to make me glad?’ Ja wo ist denn dann noch einer, der mich erfreute So Bachmann. The answer to this question is ‘ No one, for the only people who can cheer me have been made sad by me.’ The καί accepts the previous statement, and the question shows what a paradox it involves; cf. v. 16; Mark 10:26; John 9:36. See Winer, p. 545; Blass, § 77. 6. The singular ὁεὐφραίνων , ὁλυπούμενος , does not allude to any individual. The rhetorical τίς is necessarily singular, and thus the community is spoken of as an individual. The point is delicately put. ‘ You Corinthians are my fount of joy; how could I be the one to wish to trouble with sorrow the source whence I draw my own gladness?’ But ὁλυπούμενος does not refer to the penitent rebel who has been pained by the process of conversion; and ad hoc vos contristo ut gaudeam de vobis (Pseudo-Primasius) is certainly not the meaning of the verse. Ambrosiaster is far better; ideo noluit ire, ne forte corripiens paucos multos contristaret, ipse etiam contristatus; compatiuntur enim omnia membra unius moerori. καὶτίς without ἐστιν (א A B C, Copt.); other authorities insert. It is probably not original. 3. ἕγραψατοῦτοαὐτό . This may be accepted as the right reading (see below), but its meaning is not certain, for both ἔγραψα and τοῦτοαὐτό may be understood in more ways than one. Is ἔγραψα a simple aorist referring to a previous letter? Or is it an epistolary aorist referring to the present letter? In other words, ought it to be translated ‘ I wrote’ or ‘ I am writing’ ? It is not quite certain that there is anywhere in N.T. an instance of ἔγραψα as an epistolary aorist meaning ‘ I am writing,’ although there are several cases which may be such. It is not such in 7:12, or 1 Corinthians 5:9, or 3 John 1:9: in all three cases ἔγραψα refers to a previous letter. It may be an epistolary aorist in 1 Corinthians 9:15 (see note there), but more probably it refers to an earlier part of the letter (see on 1 John 2:21, 1 John 2:26); and this is clearly the meaning of προέγραψα in Ephesians 3:3. See Lightfoot on Galatians 6:11, where ἔγραψα may mark the place where St Paul ceased to dictate and began to write himself; also on Philemon 1:19, where ἔγραψα seems to show that he wrote the whole letter with his own hand. Ἐγράψαμεν near the opening of the Martyrdom of Polycarp is a clear instance, and there are instances in papyri. There is no doubt that ἔπεμψα is used in the sense of ‘ I am sending’ in 8:18, 9:3; Philippians 2:28; Philemon 1:12; and there is an interesting example in the papyrus letter quoted above (introd. to 1:3) from Apion to his father; ἔπεμψάσοιτὸεἰκόνινμουδιὰΕὐκτήμονος , “ I am sending you by Euctemon the little portrait of me.” * Other examples might be quoted. What is stated here and what is stated in 7:8-12 show that ἔγραψα does not mean ‘ I am writing,’ in reference to this part of 2 Cor.; it means ‘ I wrote,’ in reference to some earlier letter. Like ἔκρινα in v. 1, ἔγραψα refers to what took place in the past; and it is possible that both aorists refer to the same period in the past. In that case the meaning would be that, when he decided not to come to Corinth. he sent a letter instead of coming. That is thoroughly intelligible and natural, and we may regard as certain that ἔγραψα does not refers to 2 Cor. 1-9. It is equally certain that it does not refer to 1 Cor. The language of vv. 3, 4 and of 7:8-12 has to be explained in an unnatural manner, or indeed has to be explained away (see below), in order to make it fit 1 Cor. The meaning of τοῦτοαὐτό may be ‘ for this very reason.’ That rendering is linguistically possible; see on 2 Peter 1:5; Winer, p. 178; Blass, § 49. But elsewhere (v. 5; Romans 9:17, Romans 9:13:6.; Colossians 4:8) St Paul writes εἰςαὐτὸτοῦτο to express this; and in v. 9; 1 Thessalonians 3:3; 1 Timothy 4:10 we have εἰςτοῦτο with a similar meaning. Nowhere else does St Paul use τοῦτοαὐτό or αὐτὸτοῦτο , without εἰς , in the sense of ‘ for this reason,’ and the probability is that it is not used in that sense here. ‘ This very thing’ is the simpler and more probable rendering; and what precedes shows what ‘ this very thing’ was,— viz. that to spare them he had given up the idea of coming, because he did not wish to pay a (second) painful visit, and was dealing with them by letter instead of coming. It is quite possible that in these verses he is quoting his earlier letter, just as in 1 Cor. he sometimes quotes the Corinthians’ letter; but we cannot detect the quotations with any certainty. We may, however, feel sure that there was not only a letter from St Paul to Corinth before 1 Cor. (see on 1 Corinthians 5:9), but also a letter between 1 Cor. and 2 Cor.† That 2 Cor. 10-13 is part of the latter letter is a theory which here finds further confirmation (see on 1:23). In 13:10 he says, ‘ For this cause when absent I write these things, that when present I may not deal sharply.’ Here, with apparent reference to those very words, he says, ‘ I wrote this very thing that I might not by coming have sorrow.’ It is natural that what he called ‘ dealing sharply’ when they were in revolt, he should call ‘ having sorrow’ now that they have submitted. ἵναμὴἐλθὼνλύπηνσχῶ . ‘ In order that I might not by coming have sorrow.’ He does not say ἵναἐλθὼνμὴλ . σχῶ , ‘ that when I came I might not have sorrow.’ AV and RV. rather imply the latter reading. ἀφ ʼ ὦνἔδειμεχαίρειν . ‘ From the hands of those from whom I ought to have been rejoicing,’ if he had come. They were his spiritual children who ought to be making him happy by following his wishes and example (see on 1 Corinthians 4:16). πεποιθὼςἐπὶπάνταςὑμᾶς . ‘ Because I had reposed trust on you all.’ Even when they were rebels he was confident that there was real sympathy with him, and that they would wish to please him. Confidens vos omnes intelligere, quia tunc verum gaudium habitis, si ego gaudeo (Pseudo-Primasius). In the fulness of his heart he expresses what he hopes rather than what he knows; μέγατιοἰκονομῶν (Chrys.). For the construction cf. οἱπεποιθότεςἐπὶΚύριον (Psalms 125:1); also 2 Thessalonians 3:4. Contrast 1:9, 10:7; Philemon 1:21, where we have the more classical dative. ἔγραψα without ὑμῖν (א A B C O P 17, Am. Copt., Ambst.): other authorities insert. C O, Chrys. have αὐτὸτοῦτο : A, Copt. Arm. omit αὐτό : other authorities have τοῦτοαὐτό , which D E F G, Latt. Goth., Aeth. place before ἔγραψα D F, Latt. insert ἐπὶλύπην after λύπην . σχῶ (א * A B O P, Chrys.) rather than ἔχω (א 3 C D E F G K L); cf. 1:15; Romans 1:13; Philippians 2:27. 4. ἐκγὰρπολλῆςθλίψεως … διὰπολλῶνδακρύων . These strong words, expressive of deep emotion and intense distress, are quite in place, if they refer to a letter of which 10-13. formed a chief part. That passionate outburst of feeling might well have been written in ‘ deep affliction and anguish of heart amid a flood of tears.’ But, as a description of the state of his mind when he wrote 1 Cor., the language is extravagant.* It might apply to the short section about the incestuous person, but that is only a fragment of the Epistle; and nowhere in the range of his extant letters can we find any considerable portion to which this statement would so fitly apply as to 10-13. It is interesting and instructive to compare the Apostle’ s description of his own condition during the writing of this vindication of his own authority with J. H. Newman’ s statements respecting himself, while he was writing the marvellous Apologia pro Vita sua in the spring of 1864. He wrote to Sir F. Rogers on April 22; “ During the writing and reading of my Part 3 I could not get from beginning to end for crying.” He wrote to Mr. Hope-Scott on May 2; “ I have been writing without interruption of Sundays five weeks. I have been constantly in tears, and constantly crying out with distress.” The Apostle’ s statement explains how it came about that one whose function it was to be a ‘ helper of their joy’ (1:24) should write a letter which was sure to cause great sorrow. That incongruity was only too keenly felt by the writer, and it caused him intense distress. Yet the object of the letter was not to spare himself and inflict pain on them, but to prove the reality of his affection. He had had more than enough of λύπη . The change from ἐκ to διά has significance. It was out of a condition of affliction that the letter was written, and it passed through a flood of tears. We should more naturally say ‘ amid many tears.’ There is a similar change from ἐκ to διά in Romans 2:27: for διά of “ attendant circumstances,” cf. Romans 4:2, Romans 8:25, Romans 16:20. Both πολλῆς and καρδίας may be taken with both substantives; ‘ out of much affliction of heart and much anguish of heart.’ In class. Grk. συνοχή is nearly always literal, of actual contraction, junction or check. It occurs Luke 21:25 and nowhere else in N.T. In LXX it occurs Judges 2:3; Job 30:3; Jeremiah 52:5; Micah 5:1 (4:14), with a variety of meanings. Jerome’ s carelessness in revision is seen again in his rendering of the word. In Luke 23:25 he has pressura for both ἀνάγκη and συνοχή , although Lat. Vet. distinguishes with compressio and necessitas, and here he has angustia for συνοχή . In his speech to the Ephesian elders at Miletus, St Paul twice mentions his frequent tears (Acts 20:19, Acts 20:31). One may call it softness, as Calvin remarks, but it is more worthy of a hero than illa ferrea durities Stoicorum would have been. The Apostle was no Stoic, and for him the suppression of all emotion was no road to perfection. The sympathy which he felt he showed, with utter disregard for Stoical ἀπάθεια and ἠρεμία , and Epicurean ἀταραξία : ἄλογοςκαὶπαρὰφύσινψυχῆςκίνησις is a doctrine to which he could never subscribe. ἀλλὰτὴνἀγάπηνἵναγνῶτε . Placing τ . ἀγάπην in front of ἲνα throws great emphasis on the word; cf. τῶνπτωχῶνἵναμνημονεύωμεν (Galatians 2:10). He could have spared himself the pain of writing such a letter; he could have come at once and used severity, without giving them time to return to their obedience: but his love for them would not allow him to do either. As Chrys. points out, the run of the sentence requires ‘ not that you should be made sorrowful, but that you should be induced to repent.’ Instead of this he substitutes ‘ that you should know the exceptional love which I have for you.’ It was affection, not cold or cruel severity which made him write. He bears ‘ Corinth’ written on his heart; 1:12, 3:2; 12:15; 1 Corinthians 4:15, 1 Corinthians 9:2: καταγλυκαίνειτὸνλόγονβουλόμενοςἐπισπάσασθαιαὐτούς (Theophyl.). That ἀγάπη is not a word of Biblical origin has been shown by Deissmann (Bible Studies, p. 199). It has been found in Egypt in papyri of the Ptolemaic period. 2:5-17. The Treatment of the Great Offender and the Result of the Severe Letter The offender ought now to be freely forgiven. And for the intense relief caused by the report of you brought by Titus I thank God who does not allow ministers that work in sincerity to fail. 5As regards him who has been the cause of the sorrow, it is not so much to me that he has caused it (I do not wish to be considered at all) as to all of you; and perhaps not to all of you, for there may be exceptions, and I do not wish to be hard upon any one. 6I think, therefore, that the punishment which was inflicted by the majority is sufficient in the circumstances, and those who thought it inadequate need not insist upon anything more; 7on the contrary, you may now turn round and forgive and encourage him. 8If you fail to do this, a person in his circumstances may sink down in despair in the excess of his grief. I therefore implore you to leave him no longer in suspense, but at once, by some formal act, put into execution, not any sentence of further punishment, but the renewal of your love for him. 9This request that you should forgive him is not at all inconsistent with the letter which I sent instead of coming, for I wrote that letter, not so much in order to be severe on him, as to have a sure test whether in all respects you are prepared to obey me. 10You have proved your loyalty by punishing where punishment was due; but now, if you decide to forgive, you may rest assured that I agree with that decision; for— and this is one more point— if there has been anything for me to forgive, it is for your sakes that I have forgiven it, not thoughtlessly, but as in the presence of Christ. 11Satan is always on the watch to get an advantage over us. He did get an advantage when he caused this member of our body to sin so grievously. Are we to let him have another advantage— over a sinner that has repented? 12My disturbing anxiety about you is now removed; but it was so intense that, although, when I came to Troas to preach the Gospel, God gave me openings there which were very favourable, 18yet I could not settle to any fruitful work, because Titus, who was to bring me news of you, was not to be found there. In my eagerness to learn what success he had had among you I said good-bye to Troas and went on to Macedonia to meet him the sooner. 14But, God be thanked, all has turned out for the best. God, as always, led us along in His triumphal train with Christ, using us as His instruments to diffuse the sweet odour of His Gospel in every place. 15For it is of the fragrance of Christ that we ourselves are a sweet savour to God among both those who are in the way to deliverance and those who are in the way to destruction, 16to the one being a savour exhaled from death and breathing death, to the other a savour exhaled from life and breathing life. It is an awful charge, and what ministers are competent to undertake it? 17Some are not, but by God’ s grace we are. For, unlike most teachers, we are not men who for their own ends corrupt God’ s message. No; with sincerity in our hearts, nay with God in our hearts, and with His eye upon us, as befits those who are members of Christ, we deliver our message. 5-11. This paragraph about the great offender is not really a digression (Meyer), and the fact that we should have a good sequence of thought if it were omitted does not prove it to be a digression. It is part, and not on unimportant part, of St Paul’ s vindication of himself. The Corinthians’ chief grievance was his sending them a severe letter instead of coming to them for the long and happy visit indicated in 1 Corinthians 16:5-7. But there was also the treatment of the ringleader against Apostolic authority. The majority censured him in a way which some thought inadequate. The Apostle assures them that the action of the Church in condemning the offender satisfies the requirements, all the more so as the person condemned is very penitent. He assures them that he is more than ready to join in their formal restoration of the man to favour; and there is now no bar to his coming. We are ignorant as to the exact nature of the penalty which was inflicted by the majority, but apparently it was not that which St Paul was believed to require. Possibly it was that suggested in 1 Corinthians 5:11, τῷτοιούτῳμηδὲσυνεσθίειν , as also in 2 Thessalonians 3:14, μὴσυναναμίγνυσθαιαὐτῷ , ἵναἐντραπῇ , where we have the important addition, καὶμὴὡςἐχθρὸνἡγεῖσθε , ἀλλὰνονυετεῖτεὡςἀδελφόν . In accordance with this addition, the Apostle now pleads earnestly for a generous forgiveness. Punishment had been inflicted in order to rescue him from perdition by inducing him to repent; and he had repented. If punishment were continued, it might drive him to perdition by making him desperate. We are ignorant also as to who this offender was and as to what was the exact nature of his offence. But “ it should no longer require to be proved that this offender is not the incestuous person of 1 Corinthians 5:1, but some one who had wronged Paul himself” (Moffatt, Int. to the Literature of the N.T., p. 122). This theory is still advocated by Zahn (1909), McFadyen (1911), and others, and therefore it is necessary to point out once more how untenable it is. Tertullian’ s vigorous argument almost suffices without any others (De Pudic. 13). After quoting this passage (5-11) he asks whether the Apostle could possibly have written in this effusively indulgent way about a man who had been guilty of fornication aggravated by incest, and this without one word of severity about the past or warning about the future.* We must remember that, if the offender here is the incestuous person of 1 Corinthians 5:1, then the incest was of a specially monstrous character, for the sinful union was contracted in the lifetime of the man’ s father. This passage and 7:12 refer to the same case, and there, if ὁἀδικήσας is the incestuous son, ὁἀδικηθέις must be the woman’ s injured husband, who was still alive when St Paul wrote.† This adds immense force to Tertullian’ s question. Moreover, it is unlikely that St Paul would view such a sin simply as an injury inflicted by one man on another. When he treats of incest in 1 Cor., it is the infection of the whole Church upon which he enlarges (v. 6, 7, 11, 13). Lastly, it is incredible that St Paul would say (v. 9) that he had insisted upon the punishment of so grievous a sin, merely to test the Corinthians, whether they were ready to obey him in all things. If ὁἀδικηθείς is the Apostle himself, the language used here and in 7:12 is quite natural. This man had grossly wronged St Paul, but the particulars are unknown to us.* Of such an offender St Paul might reasonably say that he had demanded his punishment to test the loyalty of his converts. This man had insulted and defied him. The personal affront St Paul could treat as nothing, but he could not allow his authority to be defied. The man must be punished, and punished by the community; that would test their loyalty. If this was done, the amount of punishment was of comparatively small importance; and when the man had expressed contrition, prolongation of his punishment would do more harm than good. On this interpretation, everything falls into its place. From a feeling of delicacy, St Paul uses indefinite language; it sufficed to tell the Corinthians what he meant, but it does not suffice to tell us.† 5. Εἰδέτις . The indefiniteness begins at once. ‘ But if any one has caused sorrow, it is not to me that he has caused it.’ The personal element is brushed on one side at once; the injury to the Church, whose members are members of Christ, is what matters. The argument that we have here a τις and a τοιοῦτος (v. 6) and Σατανᾶς (v. 11), and that in 1Co_5. we have also a τις (v. 1) and a τοιοῦτος (v. 5) and Σατανᾶς (v. 5), and that therefore this passage refers to the same case as that, is very shallow. In every sinful πρᾶγμα (7:11) there is a τις and a τοιοῦτος , with Satan at work also. The use of τοιοῦτος in the two places is different. In the other case St Paul refuses to stain his letter with the name of such a transgressor, and perhaps intimates that any one who transgresses in a like manner will receive the like punishment. In this case, he refrains from naming him out of consideration for the offender’ s feelings, whose case he states hypothetically; ‘ if there is such a person’ : in v. 10, 7:14, 10:7 we have a similar use of εἰ . So also there is difference in the way in which Satan is introduced in each case. There he was made the instrument of chastisement; here he is to be guarded against as a crafty enemy. ἀλλὰἀπὸμέρουςπάνταςὑμᾶς . This is the best arrangement of a sentence which has suffered by being dictated; ‘ He hath caused sorrow, not to me, but in part (that I press not too heavily) to you all.’ So RV and others. He does not wish to be severe, but it is really the whole Corinthian Church that has been troubled by this man’ s ἀδικία . A qualifying ἀπὸμέρους is inserted, because there were a few who were not distressed by the scandalous treatment of the Apostle. It is possible, with Mosheim, Olshausen, and others, to include πάντας in the parenthesis and make it the acc. after ἐπιβαρῶ , ‘ that I press not too heavily upon all.’ But this gives a weak position to πάντας , and leaves ὑμᾶς awkwardly alone after the parenthesis. If πάντας is taken with ὑμᾶς we have a pointed and almost necessary antithesis to ἐμέ , ‘ not me but all of you.’ The AV rendering, ‘ He hath not grieved me but in part: that I may not overcharge you all,’ follows Tertullian, Vulgate, Luther and others, but it cannot stand, for ἀλλά does not mean ‘ except’ (Mark 10:40), and St Paul is not urging that he has been distressed even ‘ in part’ ; he is dismissing the personal affront altogether. It is not quite certain whether ἀπὸμέρους means that not quite all the Corinthians had been distressed, or that all of them had been distressed to some extent; but the former is much more probable as being more true, and this is an additional objection to the rendering in AV. B. Weiss understands ἀπὸμέρους as limiting the action of the λελυπηκώς : the offender was only partly the cause of the Corinthians’ ; grief; the other part was caused by the Apostle’ s severe letter. Hofmann gives ἀπὸμέρους the highly improbable meaning of ‘ for a time,’ and with perverted ingenuity makes the first part of the verse interrogative; ‘ If any one has caused sorrow, is it not to me that he has caused it?’ The answer to this question is, ‘ Yes; nevertheless, for a time (that I may not press too heavily on you all) sufficient to such a one, etc.’ This is a very clumsy construction, and— what is far more serious— it destroys the tact and delicacy of the Apostle’ s appeal by laying the whole emphasis on the personal injury to himself— the thing about which he desires to say as little as possible. * In Biblical Greek, ἐπιβαρεῖν is peculiar to Paul, who always uses it in a metaphorical sense (1 Thessalonians 2:9; 2 Thessalonians 3:8) and with the acc. Appian has it several times, always with the dat. (examples in Wetstein); and it is found in inscriptions. Cf. καταβαρεῖν , 12:16. On the whole verse see Stanley and Alford. 6. ἱκανὸντῷτοιούτῳἡἐπιτιμίααὕτη . ‘ A sufficient thing for such a person is this punishment.’ We may understand ἔστω , but ἐστιν is more probable. This substantival use of the neuter adjective accompanied by a feminine substantive is found elsewhere; ἀρκετὸντῇἡμέρᾳἡκακίααὐτῆς (Matthew 6:34); ἀρεστόνἐστιντοῖςἸουδαίοιςἡἐπιχείρησιςαὐτοῦ (the reading of D and other authorities, Acts 12:3); ἡψυχὴπλεῖόνἐστιντῆςτροφῆς (Luke 12:23). Blass, § 31. 2, quotes also ἱκανόνἐστιν (Luke 22:38), but the meaning there is, ‘ Enough of this subject,’ not, ‘ two swords are a sufficient thing.’ There is perhaps a slight difference of meaning between ἱκανόν and ἱκανή . The latter would mean that the existing ἐπιτιμία need not be prolonged. The former means that no additional penalty need be imposed. But this cannot be insisted on. † The meaning here is that ‘ the punishment is a sufficient thing.’ It is not said that it is adequate to the offence, but that it satisfies the requirements of the case. ‡ Apostolic authority has been defied, and the Church, acting through the majority, has censured the offender. Nothing further is necessary. In Wisd. 3:10 we have οἱδὲἀσεβεῖςκαθ ʼ ἃἐλογίσαντοἕξουσινἐπιτιμίαν , but nowhere else in Bibl. Grk. does ἐπιτιμία occur. In Attic Grk. it means ‘ possession of political rights,’ ‘ citizenship.’ The transition to ‘ punishment’ is curious, the intermediate step being ‘ getting one’ s due’ : the citizen gets his due, and the criminal gets his. Cf. the Biblical use of ἐπιτιμᾶν = ‘ rebuke, censure severely,’ and the classical use of τὸἐπιτίμιον = ‘ legal penalty.’ The Latin renderings of ἐπιτιμία vary; increpatio (Tert.), correptio (Aug.), objurgatio (Vulg.); in Wisd. 3:10, Vulg. has correptio. It is possible that both ἱκανόν and ἐπιτιμία are forensic terms. In 2 Thessalonians 1:9 St Paul has δίκη = ‘ punishment,’ a word of somewhat similar history, passing from ‘ customary rights,’ through ‘ legal action’ to ‘ penalty.’ ‘ Punish’ and ‘ punishment’ are freq. in O.T., but not so in N.T. ἡὑπὸτῶνπλειόνων . ‘ Which was inflicted by the many’ (RV) or ‘ by the majority,’ rather than ‘ by many’ (AV). A similar correction should be made 4:15, 9:2; 1 Corinthians 10:5; Philippians 1:14; cf. 1 Corinthians 15:6. It may be lawful to translate οἰπλείονες ‘ many’ or even ‘ several’ (Blass, § 44. 4), but in this and other places in N.T. ‘ the many’ or ‘ the majority’ is probably right. They are contrasted with a minority who did not concur in what was done by οἱπλείονες , and it is often assumed that this minority opposed the infliction of the ἐπιτιμία as being excessive, or as being altogether undeserved. Those who hold this view remind us that there was an anti-Pauline party at Corinth which would be sure to refuse to punish a man whose only offence was that of having defied St Paul. But there is no hint that this minority had been patronizing a rebel. St Paul tells them that ‘ contrariwise they should rather forgive’ the rebel, which implies that hitherto they had refused to forgive him. It is more likely that the minority were the Paul party (1 Corinthians 1:12, 1 Corinthians 1:13), who thought that one who defied the Apostle ought to be much more severely punished; and it is this minority whom he is specially addressing. Kennedy, Second and Third Corinthians, pp. 100 f.; Lake, Earlier Epistles, p. 171. 7. ὥστετοὐναντίονμᾶλλονκ .τ .λ . ‘ So that on the contrary you may rather forgive him fully and comfort him.’ The ἕστε gives the natural consequence of the view that the penalty which has been imposed satisfies the requirements. So far from imposing anything more, they may put an end to what has been imposed. He is not telling them what they must do; there is no δεῖν . He tactfully points out the logical consequence of admitting the ἱκανόν , and leaves them to act upon it. The μᾶλλον is probably genuine (see below), and it indicates that there were still some who felt that the punishment was insufficient. For χαρίσασθαι , which implies making the man a present of the remainder of the penalty, * and forgiving him absolutely, cf. 12:13; Luke 7:42, Luke 7:43; Colossians 2:13, Colossians 2:3:13; Ephesians 4:32. μήπωςτῇπερισσοτέρᾳλύπῃκαταποθῇὁτ . ‘ Lest by any means such a one should be swallowed up by his overmuch sorrow.’ Neither here nor 9:4 nor 12:20 does the AV give the right force to μήπως : it does so 1 Corinthians 9:27; Galatians 2:2. Various conjectures are made as to what the Apostle feared might be the result; apostasy, reckless indulgence in sin, suicide. It is more important to notice that this implies that the man had already repented; he was no longer rebellious; and vera poenitentia est jam cessare a peccato (Herveius). Evidently, his grief was already great, and there was danger of his despairing of being restored to favour in Christian society. For καταπίνειν in the metaphorical sense cf. v. 4; 1 Corinthians 15:54; 1 Peter 5:8. It is freq. in LXX. The ‘ swallowing,’ as Chrys. says, may be ὡςἐπὶθηρίου , ὡςἐπὶχειμῶνος , ὡςἐπὶκλύδωνος . In the Ep. of the Churches of Lugdunum and Vienna those who had apostatized are said to have been swallowed by the Beast, ἵναἀποπνιχθεὶςὁθήρ , οὓςπρότερονᾤετοκαταπεπωκέναι , ζῶνταςἐξεμέσῃ (Eus. H.E. v. ii. 6). The rather superfluous repetition of ὁτοιοῦτος at the end of the sentence gives a touch of compassion, enforcing the plea. Locus diligenter observandus, says Calvin; docet enint qua aequitate et clementia temperanda sit disciplina Ecclesiae, ne rigor mtodum excedat. Severitate opus est ne impunitate (quae peccandi illecebra merito vocatur) mali reddantur audaciores. Sed rursus, quia periculum est, ne is qui castigatur animum despondeat, hic adhibenda est moderatio; nempe ut Ecclesia simulatque resipiscentiam illius certo cognoverit, ad dandam veniam sit parata. He goes on to contrast the cruel sentences of the penitential system. The comment is remarkable as coming from so rigorous a disciplinarian. H. C. Lea points out that in the Roman Catholic version of the N.T. there is a note appended to this text explaining that “ the Apostle here granted an indulgence or pardon in the person and by the authority of Christ to the incestuous Corinthian whom he had put under penance, which pardon consisted in a releasing of part of the temporal punishment due to sin.” This, says Lea, is “ a typical instance of the facility with which men read into Scripture whatever they desire to find there” (Hist. of Auricular Confession and Indulgences, iii. p. 5). * A B, Syr-Pesh., Aug. omit μᾶλλον , which is found before ὑμᾶς in א C K L O P, Syr-Hark. Vulg. Copt. Arm., Chrys. Ambrst. and after ὑμᾶς in D E F G17, Goth., Thdrt. Tert. 8. διὸπαρακαλῶὑμᾶς . He does not invoke his Apostolic authority and command the forgiveness; as an equal he entreats them to grant it. The community had selected and enforced the penalty, whatever it may have been, and he leaves to them the removal of it. He respects the democratic feeling of the Corinthian Church, and he respects the spirit of the Lord’ s commission to the whole Church. “ It is a fact of the highest importance and clearly established by the documents, that the commission given on the evening of the first Easter Day— the ‘ Great Commission’ — was given to the Church and not to any class in the Church— to the whole Church and not to any part of it, primarily. ‘ Receive ye the Holy Ghost; whosoever sins ye forgive, they are forgiven unto them; whosoever sins ye retain, they are retained’ (John 20:22 f.). The words are the Charter of the Christian Church, and not simply the Charter of the Christian Ministry” (Westcott, Ephesians, pp. 169 f.). On that first Easter evening, not all the Apostles were present, and others were present who were not Apostles. The commission, in the first instance, was to the community as a whole. The Apostle here makes his appeal to the whole community, and not to any class of officials, and he leaves the community free to act. The change of meaning from παρακάλεσαι , ‘ to comfort’ (v. 7), to παρακαλῶ , ‘ I beseech’ (v. 8), should be noted: see on 1:4. παρακαλῶὑμᾶςκυρῶσαιεἰςαὐτὸνἀγάπην . Oro vos, constituatis in eum dilectionem (Tert.). Obsecro vos, ut confirmetis in illum caritatem (Vulg.). The differences are characteristic, and constituo is perhaps better than confirmo, in the sense of ‘ make effective’ ; we have constituere libertatem, victoriam, pacem, concordiam fidem, etc. We need not suppose that κυρῶσαι implies that a formal resolution, rescinding the previous sentence, is to be passed, any more than ‘ ratify’ would imply that in English. What the Apostle cares about is the change from censure to affection; the way in which the affection is to be made effective he leaves to them. What it is that they are to ratify is kept with effect to the last. Comp. Luke 14:18, where παραιτεῖσθαι comes as a surprise at the end; one would have expected just the opposite. At Corinth there were some who wished for a more severe punishment on the offender than censure and separation. The Apostle says, Ἑνώσατετὸμέλοςτῷσώματι , συνάψατετῇποίμνῃτὸπρόβατον , θερμὴναὐτῷδιάθεσινδείξατε · προσήκειγὰρὑμᾶςμὴμόνοντέμνοντισυνεργεῖνἀλλὰκαὶσυνάπτοντι (Thdrt.). With κυρῶσαιεἰςαὐτὸνἀγάπην comp. ἐκυρώθηὁἀγρὸςτῷἈβραάμ (Genesis 23:20). In papyri (Oxyrh. 513, 4) ἐκυρώθηνοἰκίαν . Thuc. VIII. lxix. 1, ἡἐκκλησίακυρώσασαταῦταδιελύθη . 9. εἰςτοῦτογὰρκαὶἔγραψα . ‘ For it was just for this that I also wrote’ ; the ‘ just’ marks the emphasis on εἰςτοῦτο , which looks forward to ἵναγνῶ . As in v. 3, ἔγραψα refers to the letter between 1 Cor. and 2 Cor., of which 2 Cor. 10-13 is probably a part. The καί marks the agreement of this letter with that, not of this letter with what he had said, or of this passage with the earlier part of this letter. And we must not translate as if we had καὶγὰρεἰςτοῦτο . τὴνδοκιμὴνὑμῶν . The proof of you, i.e. he wished to have them tested; ut cognoscam probationem vestram (Tert.), which is better than ut cognoscam experimentum vestrum (Vulg.). In 2:9, 8:2, 13:3, Vulg. has experimentum for δοκιμή , as also in Philippians 2:22; but in 9:13 and Romans 5:4 it has probatio. AV has ‘ experience,’ ‘ experiment,” ‘ trial,’ and ‘ proof,’ but without following Vulg. in its changes. εἰεἰςπάνταὑπήκοοίἐστε . ‘ Whether in all respects ye are obedient,’ ‘ whether to every call of duty you lend your ear.’ They were not to be obedient just so far as the claims made on them pleased them. The ἐστέ . ‘ implies that the proof was satisfactory; they are obedient in all points; cf. ἐστεἄζυμοι (1 Corinthians 5:7). Here, as in 7:12, St Paul seems to be interpreting his original intention in writing the letter by the light of the actual results of the letter. The reading ἧ for εἰ may possibly be right; * it refers to δοκιμήν , ‘ the proof whereby ye are, etc.’ This would strengthen the ἐστέ in indicating that they are found to be perfectly obedient. St Paul does not say, and perhaps does not mean, that they are obedient to himself: rather, they are obedient to the principles of the Gospel. Once more we have considerable confirmation of the theory that 10-13. is part of the severe letter to which allusion is made by ἔγραψα here and in v. 3. In 10:6 he says, ‘ Being in readiness to avenge all disobedience when your obedience shall be fulfilled’ ; here he says, ‘ For it was just for this that I also wrote, that I might know the proof of you, whether you are obedient in all things.’ As in v. 3 and 1:23, he here writes in the past tense of the same thing as that of which in 10-13. he writes in the present tense. It is quite natural that in the previous letter written in severity, he should speak of ‘ avenging disobedience,’ and that in this letter of reconciliation he should omit all allusion to such a possibility. That within the compass of a dozen verses we should have three close parallels between 1.-9. and 10.-13., and all of the same character, make a case of considerable strength. And we shall find other facts pointing in the same direction. A B 17 have ᾗ , other authorities εἰ Cf. Hebrews 6:14, where εἰμήν has been corrupted to ἧμήν . 10. ᾧδέτιχαρίζεσθε , κἀγώ . They had joined with him in condemning; he joins with them in forgiving. They had shown obedience in consenting to censure; let them now be sure of his consent if they desire to give love instead of blame. The Apostle is not promising always to follow their lead in exercising leniency: although the statement is general, it is manifestly limited to the particular case; and with regard to that he is not acting in the dark. He has the report of his official representative Titus to guide him, and that made it clear to him that generous treatment of the offender would do a great deal of good and little or no harm. καὶγὰρἐγὼὃκεχάρισμαι . Here we have καὶγάρ (contrast v. 9), introducing an additional reason, and ἐγώ is emphatic; ‘ For also what I have forgiven,’ I on my side as distinct from you. AV is faulty in turning the perfects into aorists. εἴτικεχάρισμαι . A gracious parenthesis; ‘ if I have forgiven anything,’ i.e. ‘ if I have had anything to forgive.’ He is not suggesting a doubt as to whether he has granted forgiveness, but he puts the fact of there being something for him to forgive as a mere hypothesis. The hypothetical statement is exactly parallel to εἴτιςλελύπηκεν : ‘ if there is such person, he has received forgiveness so far as I am concerned.’ Some would translate, ‘ what I have been forgiven, if I have been forgiven anything,’ which is grammatically possible, but it spoils the appeal, and is out of harmony with δι ʼ ὑμᾶςἐνπροσώπῳΧρ . St Paul is not thinking of the Corinthians’ change of attitude towards himself, but of his own towards the offender and them. It is ‘ for their sakes’ that he has so entirely blotted out the thought of the man’ s offence. Their relation towards the offender has been a painful one, but it need not continue; let it be changed for a happy one. ἐνπροσώπῳΧριστοῦ . ‘ In the presence of Christ’ ; in facie Christi, or in conspectu Christi (Calv.); ὡςτοῦΧριστοῦἐφορῶντοςκαὶἀρεσκομένουτοῖςγενομένοις (Thdrt.). Cf. εὐφραινόμηνἑνπροσώπῳαὐτοῦἐνπαντὶκαιρῷ (Proverbs 8:30). This is more probable than ‘ in the person of Christ’ (AV, RV); in persona Christi (Vulg.), an Christi Statt (Luth.), or ‘ unto the glory of Christ’ (Chrys.). See on 1:11. But, however we may translate the expression, the purpose of it is to correct a possible misunderstanding of δι ʼ ὑμᾶς . Although it was for their sakes that he acted as he did, yet he remembered whose eye was upon him to approve or condemn his action. κἀγώ (א A B C2 D E O P) rather then καὶἐγώ (א 3 C F G K L), as in most places where such crasis is possible. ὅκεχ . εἴτικεχ (א A B C F G O) rather than εἴτικεχ . ᾧκεχ (D2 K L 17). Baljon suggests that εἴτικεχ is a gloss. It would be a very clever gloss,— subtly Pauline. As in the case of 1:6, 7, there is difference of opinion about the division of the verses. Some editors assign ἵναμὴ … Σατανᾶ to v. 10. 11. ἵναμὴπλεονεκτηθῶμενὑπὸτ . Σατ . ‘ To prevent our being overreached by Satan.’ The man is penitent and is freeing himself from Satan; what a grievous error to aid Satan in getting control over him again! Chrys. remarks that the Apostle is quite right in speaking of the πλεονεξία of Satan, of his getting more than his due. That Satan should take man by sin is proper to him, but that he should do so through man’ s repentance is too much, for repentance is our weapon, not his. Vulg. has at non circumveniamur a Satana, * which is not so good as ne fraudemur (Tert.), but better than ne possideamur (Aug. Ambrst.). The verse explains the δι ʼ ὑμᾶς . It was to the Corinthians’ advantage and the Apostle’ s as well (his including himself in this gain is a delicate touch) that Satan should not be allowed to gain through a Christian’ s penitence: debemus cavere ne remedium nostrum fiat ejus triumphus (Ambrose). Nowhere else in Bibl. Grk. is the passive of πλεονεκτεῖν found. In LXX the verb is rare; in N.T. both πλεονεκτεῖν and πλεονέκτης are peculiar to Paul. The ‘ us’ or ‘ we’ means the Church as a whole, not the Apostle. οὐγὰραὐτοῦτὰνοήματαἀγνοοῦμεν . This is probably an intentional play upon words, but it can hardly be imitated in English; ‘ for we are not unwitting of his wiles’ : non ignoramus astutias ejus. This is the rendering of Pseudo-Cypr. (De sing. cler. 19) and of Ambrst. Sedulius has versutias; Tert, injectiones. Vulg. is very capricious in its translation of νοήματα , a word which in N.T. is almost peculiar to 2 Cor., in which it always has a bad sense. Here it has cogitationes, in 3:14 (with Cypr. Test. 1. 4) and in 11:3 it has sensus, in 4:4 mentes, in 10:5 intellectum (sing.), and in Philippians 4:7 intelligentias. Chrys. gives a variety of expressions to represent τὰνοήματα , all of them pointing to the wiliness of the evil one; τὸδολερόν , τὸκακομήχανον , τὸποικίλον , τὸἐπὶπροσχήματιεὐλαβείαςἐπηρεαστικόν : and this thought is freq. in Paul (4:4, 11:14; 1 Corinthians 7:5; 2 Thessalonians 2:9). See on 3:14. Of the Scriptural designations of the evil one, four are found in this Epistle; ‘ Satan’ (here, 11:14, 12:7), ‘ the serpent’ (11:3), ‘ Beliar’ (6:15), ‘ the god of this age’ (4:4). Elsewhere St Paul calls Satan ‘ the tempter’ (1 Thessalonians 3:5), ‘ the devil’ (Ephesians 4:6, etc.), ‘ the evil one’ (Ephesians 6:16), ‘ the prince of the power of the air’ (Ephesians 2:2). It is not necessary to dwell on the obvious fact that here and elsewhere he regards the evil power which opposes God and the well-being of man as a personal agent. Excepting 12:7, Σατανᾶς always has the article in the Pauline Epp. So also most frequently in the rest of the N.T. But, whether with or without the article, Σατανᾶς in N.T. is always a proper name which designates the great Adversary of God and man. 12, 13. From the λύπη caused by the great offender the Apostle returns to the θλίψις which was nearly fatal to him in Asia, from which the news brought by Titus enabled him to recover. But the joyous recollection of the recovery makes him omit to mention the news. This dropping a subject and taking it up again is very natural, especially in a man of strong feeling, who dictates his letters. 12. ἘλθὼνδὲεἰςτὴνΤρῳάδα . ‘ Now’ (not ‘ furthermore,’ AV) ‘ when I came to Troas.’ The words might mean ‘ to the Troad,’ the region between the Hellespont and Mount Ida, but a town must be meant. * St Paul would not tell Titus to meet him in a large district, and the city of Troas was a convenient landing-place from Macedonia. Its full name was Alexandria Troas, ΑλεξάνδρειαἡΤρῳάς , Τρῳάς being an adjective to distinguish it from other places called Ἀλεξάνδρεια ; and while in N.T. and Pliny it is called simply Troas, in Strabo it is called simply Alexandria. Its modern name is Eski Stambui or Eski Stamboul, Old Constantinople. It was one of the few Roman colonies in Asia Minor, and Suetonius says that there was a widely spread rumour that Julius Caesar meant to transfer the capital of the Empire to this colony. † A coast-road ran northwards from Ephesus through Adramyttium to Troas, and when St Paul left Ephesus (Acts 20:1) for Troas he probably followed it; but he may have gone by sea. Troas is a few miles south of Novum Ilium, which was on the site of the Homeric Troy. See Enc. Bib. iv. 5215. εἰςτὸεὐαγγέλιοντοῦΧριστοῦ . ‘ For,’ that is, ‘ to preach the Gospel (that tells) of the Christ.’ This was his primary object. Such missionary work would take time, and during this time he expected that Titus would arrive with news as to the state of affairs at Corinth. If the report of Titus was encouraging, St Paul was conveniently placed for going on to Corinth through Macedonia. θύραςμοιἀνεῳγμένῆἐνΚυρίῳ . ‘ Although a door stood open to me in the Lord’ See on 1 Corinthians 16:9 and Lightfoot on Colossians 4:3 and 1 Thessalonians 1:9, where ὁποίανεἴσοδονἔσχομεν is used of an excellent opening for missionary work. It was hardly necessary to add ἐνΚυρίῳ after τοῦΧριστοῦ , but he wishes to make it quite clear that he had come for the work of a Christian missionary, and that it was precisely in that sphere that he found a promising opportunity. This intensifies the significance of what follows. In spite of all this he found it impossible to remain and work. εἱςτὸεὐαγγέλιον with almost all authorities, except F G, Latt., which have διὰτὸεὐαγγέλιον , propter evengelium. D E here do not agree with d e, but have διὰτοῦεὐαγγελίου : see critical note on v. 17. For θύραςμοιἀνεῳγμένης , F G, Latt. have θύραμοιἦνἀνεῳγμένη , ostium mihi apertumesset. Some editors assign οὐκἔσχηκαἄνεσιν … ἀδελφόνμου to v. 12, not without reason. There is similar difference between vv. 10 and 11; see above. 13. οὐκἔσχηκαἄνεσιντῷπνεύματίμου . ‘ I had no relief for my spirit.’ He uses the same expression in 8:5, οὐδεμίανἔσχηκενἄνεσινἡσὰρξἡμῶν , where the change from πνεῦμα to σάρξ has no special significance: it is the seat of human emotion and sensation that is meant in each case. We talk of ‘ weariness of the spirit’ and ‘ weariness of the flesh,’ without much change of meaning. We may explain the perf. as vividly recalling the moment when the Apostle had this experience and could say ‘ I have not got relief’ ; but more probably this is another instance of the aoristic use of the perf. See on 1:9. Like νόημα , ἄνεσις is specially freq. in this letter (7:5, 8:13) and occurs elsewhere in N.T. only in 2 Thessalonians 1:7; Acts 24:23. Vulg. usually renders it requies, but ‘ relaxation’ in the sense of loosening some kind of tension or restriction is its meaning rather than ‘ rest.’ Being set free from θλίψις is the main idea in this letter, as in 2 Thess. In Ecclus. 15:20, 26:10, it means freeing from wholesome restraint, licence. So also in the Epistle of Barnabas 4:2; μὴδῶμεντῇἑαυτῶνψυχῇἄνεσινὥστεἔχειναὐτὴνἐξουσίανμετὰἁμαρτωλῶνκαὶπονηρῶνσυντρέχειν . With the dat. ‘ for my spirit,’ comp. οὐχεὑροῦσαἡπεριστερὰἀνάπαυσιντοῖςποσὶναὐτῆς (Genesis 8:9). τῷμὴεὑρεῖνμεΤίτοντὸνἀδελφόνμου . ‘ Because I found not Titus my brother.’ For some reason, he fully expected to find Titus there, and his failing to do so seems to have robbed him of the power of work; his anxiety about Corinth was so great. Chrys. thinks that St Paul may have wished to remain at Troas, but that God required him to go on. St Paul tells us that he could not endure remaining at Troas; he was so miserable there. There is no hint of any other reason. Thdrt. thinks that the Apostle felt that he must have a colleague; that a missionary working alone was wasted. What is intimated here is quite an intelligible reason. The Apostle was very human; he was so anxious about the effect of his severe letter, that he decided to shorten the time of torturing suspense by going where he could meet Titus the sooner. Moreover, he may have reasonably thought that the rescue of the Corinthian converts from disaster was more important than making new converts at Troas. We know little of Titus, except what can be gathered from 2 Cor. and Gal. St Paul evidently had the highest opinion of him. Here he calls him ‘ my brother,’ and in 8:23, ‘ my comrade and fellow-worker in your interest’ ; in 12:18 he mentions him as one who was utterly incapable of being mean or grasping. Ἕλληνὤν , Titus is the first missionary of purely ‘ Greek’ and pagan origin that is known to us (Galatians 2:3). But in N.T. Ἕλλην means no more than ‘ Gentile,’ and we cannot be sure of the nationality of Titus. Nevertheless, his acceptability among the Corinthians, and his success in the delicate mission which St Paul entrusted to him, are evidence of his being by race a Greek. K. Lake, Earlier Epp. pp. 146 f., 275 f. Titus is mentioned nine times in 2 Cor. and is highly praised. In 1 Cor. he is not mentioned at all. The reason may be that he was the bearer of 1 Cor. Ramsay, Paul the Traveller, p. 284. There is no parallel in N.T. to the causal dat. τῷμὴεὑρεῖν , ‘ by reason of my not finding’ ; in 1 Thessalonians 3:3 the true reading is τὸμηδένασαίνεσθαι , not τῷ . But examples are found elsewhere; τῷμὴκαὶταῦταπανταχοῦμηδ ʼ ἐντοῖςδημοσίοιςἀποκεῖσθαιτόποις (Jos. Ant. xiv. x. 1). Moulton quotes from papyri, ἄλλωςδὲτῷμηθέν ʼ ἔχεινπλὴντοῦΠτολεμαίον . See Winer, p. 413 for other references. ἀποταξάμενοςαὐτοῖς . The same words occur Mark 6:46, the only place in N.T. in which the verb occurs outside the writings of Paul and Luke, and where αὐτοῖς is as indefinite as here. In N.T. the mid. only is found, and its meaning is ‘ to bid farewell to friends,’ in Mk. probably to the disciples, here obviously to the converts at Troas; cf. Luke 9:61, Luke 9:14:33; Acts 18:18, Acts 18:21. The word suggests that he left them with reluctance. In Josephus it is used of Esther’ s fasting, τροφῇκαὶποτῷκαὶἡδέσινἀποτοξαμένη (Ant. xi. vi. 8). Hence it comes to mean ‘ to renounce,’ as in the baptismal formula, ἀποτάσσομαιτῷΣατανᾷκαὶσυντάσσομαιΧριστῷἀποτάσσομαίσοι , Σατανᾶ , καὶτοῖςἔργοιςσου . Suicer gives many references. Vulg. has vale facere here and in Acts, but in Lk. renunciare. See Index IV. ἐξῆλθονεἰςΜακεδονίαν . In Acts 16:10, Acts 20:1 we have ἐξελθεῖνεἰςτὴνΜακ ., and in each case it is needless to ask whether ἐξελθεῖν refers to leaving the town or leaving the province. Both Asia and Macedonia were Roman provinces. See Index IV. In these two graphic verses (12, 13), St Paul once more shows the Corinthians how erroneous it was to suppose that his not visiting them at the time proposed was due to levity or any want of care for them. For their sakes he abandoned a very promising field of missionary enterprise. He is so overwhelmed with thankfulness at the thought of the ultimate result, that, without going on with his narrative, he bursts out into a hymn of praise. We can imagine the surprise of his amanuensis, as the Apostle suddenly changed his line of thought and began to dictate the next four verses. See 7:5 f. for the narrative. It is difficult to believe that the man who had just been freed from an agony of anxiety as to the effect of a severe letter to the Corinthians should forthwith write the severe reproaches and sarcasms contained in 10-13:10, and should send them to the Corinthians in the same letter in which he tells them of this agony of anxiety. For τῷμή (א 3 A B C G K) L P have τὸμή and א C2 have τοῦμή , both of which may safely be disregarded, while D E 17 have ἐντῷμή , which Blass is inclined to adopt. Schmiedel rightly rejects the conjectures that vv. 12, 13 originally came after 1:22, or were written by Paul as a marginal note to 1:16. The conjectures are quite unnecessary. 14. ΤῷδὲΘεῷχάρις . St Paul generally writes χάριςτῷΘεῷ (8:16, 9:15; Romans 6:17, Romans 7:25), but here, as in the similarly sudden transition to thanksgiving in 1 Corinthians 15:7, he puts τῷΘεῷ first with great emphasis. The two thanksgivings should be compared. In each case we have a noble digression of irrepressible gratitude. And the gratitude here is evoked by the thought of the intense revulsion of feeling from anxiety to joy when he met Titus and heard that all was well in Corinth. To seek for any other explanation is unintelligent waste of time. The remembrance of the victory of God’ s cause at Corinth leads him on to think of the triumph of the Gospel generally, and of the very subordinate but glorious share which Apostolic missionaries have in that triumph. He thinks of its progress as a magnificent procession moving onwards through the world. The victorious commander is God, and the Apostles are— not His subordinate generals, but His captives, whom He takes with Him and displays to all the world. St Paul thanks God, not for ‘ always causing him to triumph’ (AV), but for ‘ at all times leading him in triumph.’ The Apostles were among the first to be captured and made instruments of God’ s glory. When a Roman imperator triumphed, clouds of incense arose all along the route; and in the triumph-train of the Gospel the incense of increased knowledge of God is ever ascending. The Apostles cause this increase of knowledge, and therefore they themselves are a fragrance to the glory of God, a fragrance that is life-giving to those that are on the road to salvation, but will prove deadly to those who are on the other road. The atmosphere of the Gospel is one which only those who are prepared to welcome it can breathe with safety and delight; to others it is a peril and a pain. Some editors make vv. 14-17 a separate paragraph; but the connexion with vv. 12, 13 should not be broken. τῷπάντοτεθριαμβεύοντιἡμᾶς . ‘ Who at all times leadeth us in triumph’ is almost certainly right. It is true that some verbs in -ευω acquire a causative sense: μαθητεύω may mean ‘ I make a disciple of’ (Matthew 28:19; Acts 14:21) as well as ‘ I am a disciple’ (Matthew 27:57), and βασιλεύω may be ‘ I make to be king’ (Isaiah 7:6) as well as ‘ I am a king’ (Luke 19:14, Luke 19:27). But we do not know that θριαμβεύω ever means ‘ I cause to triumph,’ although that meaning would make good sense here and is adopted by various interpreters; qui facit ut semper triumphemus (Beza), qui triumphare nos facit (Calvin). But in Colossians 2:15 θριαμβεύω has its usual meaning of ‘ I lead in triumph,’ and that is likely to be its meaning here. Earlier writers have nos in triumpho circumduco. This is Thdrt.’ s explanation; τῇδεκἀκεῖσεπεριάγειδήλουςἡμᾶςπᾶσινἀπογφαίνων . And Chrys. is similar; τῷπᾶσιποιοῦντιπεριφανεῖς . Oecumenius also; τῷφανεροῦντιἡμᾶςκαὶκαταδήλουςποιοῦντι .* See on 1 Corinthians 4:9, where we have a similar metaphor, and the leading idea in both places is that of exhibiting, displaying to the world. As to the usual signification of θριαμβεύω one example may suffice; Cleopatra, captured by Caesar, says to the Manes of Mark Antony, whom she had recently buried, μηδ ʼ ἐνἐμοὶπεριίδῃςθριαμβευόμενονσεαυτόν (Plut. Ant. 84). Wetstein gives other examples. See also Field, Notes on Translation of the N.T. p. 181, who, however, questions the allusion to a Roman triumph. The derivation of θρίαμβος , like that of εἰλικρινία (1:12), is a problem, but its meanings are well established. Originally a hymn sung in processions in honour of Bacchus, it was used as equivalent to the Roman triumphus, probably through similarity of sound and of association. Thus Polybius says that the Senate can add glory even to the successes of generals by bringing their achievements in tangible form before the eyes of the citizens in what are called ‘ triumphs’ (6., 15:8).† Wetstein well sums up the meaning of the passage; “ God leads us round as it were in triumph, so that we do not stay in one place or move on to another according to our own will, but as seems good to our all-wise Director. The man whom He vanquished at Damascus He leads in triumph, not at Rome, and just once, but through the whole world, as long as he lives.” See also McFadyen, ad loc., and also on the Pauline phrase ‘ in Christ’ in Truth in Religion, pp. 242-259, from which much of the next note is taken. ἐντῷΧριστῷ . Cf. ἐνΚυρίῳ in v. 12. The expressions, ἐνΧριστῷ , ἐντῷΧριστῷ , ἐνΧριστῷἸησοῦ , ἐνἸησοῦΧριστῳ , ἐντῷΧριστῷἸησοῦ , ἐνΚυρίῳἸησοῦΧριστῷ , occur upwards of fifty times in N.T., and nearly all of them are found in the Pauline Epp. The exceptions are 1 Pet. v. 10, 14, of which 5:10 is doubtful, and both may be due to Pauline influence. Of the six forms of expression (which cover all four groups of the Pauline Epp.), the first three are very common, while the last three are rare, occurring only once or twice each. The differences in the forms of expression may not mean much, but the total amount may show channels of thought in which the Apostle’ s mind habitually ran. ‘ In Christ’ or ‘ in Christ Jesus’ was a sphere in which his inner life ever moved. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/iccnt/ 3:1-6:10. THE GLORY OF THE OFFICE The first three verses, like 1:12-14, are transitional. They are closely connected with the preceding expression of thankfulness and confidence, for ἑαντοὺςσυνιστάνειν clearly looks back to ἐξεἰλικρινίας … λαλοῦμεν . But μὴχνήσομενκ .τ .λ equally clearly anticipates πεποίθνσιντοιαύτην , and there is more pause between the chapters than between vv. 3 and 4. These three verses, therefore, are best regarded as introductory to the Apostle’ s vindication, not only of himself, but of the high office which he holds, and of the message which he is commissioned to deliver. The first verse gives us further insight into the opposition which confronted St Paul at Corinth. Evidently one of the charges brought against him was that he was always asserting himself and singing his own praises,— of course because nobody else praised him. A man who has often to speak with authority is open to this kind of criticism, and there are passages in 1 Cor. which would lend themselves to such a charge; 2:6-16, 3:10, 4:3, 14-21, 9:1-6, 11:1, 14:18. But more probably it was the severe letter, of which 10-13. may be a part, which provoked this criticism. There is plenty of material for such criticism in those four chapters. Titus, no doubt, had reported the existence of these cavillings, and perhaps he knew that they had not been completely silenced. The Apostle does not assert that they still exist, but he meets the possibility of their existence with a tactful question. Then he still more tactfully asks a question which can be turned against his opponents. Finally, he makes a statement which is likely to go home to the hearts of the Corinthians and win those who are still wavering back to their devotion to him. The readiness with which the passionate outburst of 2:14-17 is turned to account for the vindication of the Apostolic office is very remarkable. 3:1-3. I have no desire to commend myself. The only testimonial which I need I have in you, and all the world can read it. 1 In claiming to be competent to deliver a message which involves the momentous alternative of ultimate life and death, do I seem to be commending myself once more? I was obliged to assert myself in my last letter, but I have no need to do so now. There are people who bring letters of recommendation to you, and ask you to give them such; and no doubt they require them. 2 But what need have I of such things, when you yourselves are my letter of recommendation written on my very heart, a letter which the whole world can get to know and construe, wherever I go and tell of you? 3 It is made plain to all that you are a letter composed by Christ and published by me; written not with the blackness of perishable ink, but with the illuminating Spirit of the living God ; written not, like the Law, on dead tables of stone, but on the living tables of sensitive human hearts. 1. Ἀρχόμεθαπάλινἑαυτοὺςσυνιστάνειν ; ‘ Are we beginning again to commend ourselves?’ It makes no difference whether we take πάλιν with ἀρχόμεθα or with συνιστάνειν . The sentence is certainly a question. Taking it as a statement involves a clumsy insertion in order to get a connexion with ἢμὴκ .τ .λ ., such as, ‘ Or if you object to our commending ourselves, I reply with this question, Do we need, etc.’ Ἀρχόμεθα is a sort of echo of the supposed criticism; ‘ He is beginning to belaud himself again.’ The πάλιν plainly shows that St Paul is aware that this charge of self-praise had been made. He alludes to it again 4:5, 5:12, 6:4. It may have been an insult offered to him by ὁἀδικήσας , the great offender; but, whoever started it, it was accepted as true by some of the Corinthians. There are passages 1 Cor. which would give a handle to such a charge; 9:15, 14:18, 15:10 ; cf. 4:16, 7:40, 11:1; 2 Corinthians 1:12. The question may be a direct reference to τῶνἑαυτοὺςσυνιστανόντων (10:12) and to ὑφ ʼ ὑμῶνσυνίστασθαι (12:11). If they are, we have further evidence that 10-13. is part of the severe letter written between 1 Cor. and 2 Cor. 1-9. These three verses are strangely out of harmony with the last four chapters, if those chapters are part of the same letter: they are natural enough, if those chapters had been previously sent to Corinth and had occasioned, or intensified, the charge that St Paul was too fond of praising himself. See Rendall, p. 65. We find συνιστάνειν or συνιστάναι , ‘ to bring together,’ used in two senses in N.T. (1) ‘ To bring persons together,’ to introduce or commend them to one another; 4:2, 5:12, 6:4, 10:12, 18; Romans 16:1. (2) ‘ To put two and two together,’ to prove by argument and evidence; 7:11; Galatians 2:18; Romans 5:8. This difference of meaning is not clearly marked in LXX, but in Susann. 61, Theod. has συνέστησεν of Daniel’ s proving that the elders have borne false witness. See on Romans 3:5. In these two senses the verb is peculiar to Paul in N.T. and is found chiefly in this Epistle. It occurs elsewhere only Luke 9:32 and 2 Peter 3:5, in quite other senses. The position of the reflexive pronoun is to be noted. In this Epistle we have ἑαυτού̀ςσυν , in a bad sense, 3:1, 5:12, 10:12, 18 ; and συν . ἑαυτούς , in a good sense, 4:2, 6:4, 7:11. ἢμὴχρῄζομενὥςτινες ; ‘ Or is it the fact that we need, as some people do?’ This side-stroke at the false teachers is very effective ; he alludes to the οἱπολλοί of 2:17 and others like them. St Paul often speaks of his opponents as ‘ certain persons,’ τινες (10:2; 1 Corinthians 4:18, 1 Corinthians 4:15:12; Galatians 1:7; 1 Timothy 1:3, 1 Timothy 1:19). The μή , implying a negative answer, throws back its force on the previous question, and shows that the suggested criticism is unjust. Harnack thinks that the Apostles required a fresh commission for each missionary expedition. That was clearly not the case with St Paul. συστατικῶνἐπιστολῶνπρὸςὑμᾶςἢἐξὑμῶν . These words tell us three things : that the Judaizers had brought letters of recommendation from some one; that they had already left Corinth ; and that before leaving they had obtained, or had tried to obtain, letters of recommendation from the Corinthian Church. We know nothing, however, as to who gave recommendations to the Judaizers ; perhaps leading persons in Palestine did so. It is not likely that they had obtained credentials from any of the Twelve or from the Church at Jerusalem.* Letters of this kind were commonly brought by travelling brethren as evidence that they were Christians and honest persons. The Epistle to Philemon is a συστατικὴἐπιστολή for Onesimus; and ἐλάβετεἐντολάς , Ἐὰνἔλθῃπρὸςὑμᾶς , δέξασθεαὐτόν (Colossians 4:10) probably refers to a previous letter of recommendation. St Paul sometimes commends individuals to the Church whom he addresses; e.g. Titus and his companion (8:22 f.), Timothy (1 Corinthians 16:10 f.), Phoebe (Romans 16:1). Cf. Acts 15:25 f., Acts 15:18:27; 2 John 1:12. Papyri yield examples; Deissmann (Light from the Ancient East, p. 226) says that the letters in Episiolographi Graeci, Hercher, pp. 259, 699, begin, like Rom. 16., with συνίστημι . Suicer (ii. 1194) gives instances of such letters in the early Church. The Latins called them epistolae commendaticiae or literae formatae. How necessary they were is shown by Lucian, who says that an adroit unscrupulous fellow, who has seen the world, has only to get among these simplehearted Christians, and he can soon make a fortune out of them (Perigr. Prot. 13). Diogenes condemned γράμματασυστατικά as useless ; nothing but personal experience of men, he said, was of any real value (Arrian, Epict. 11, iii. 1). This, however, was what existed between St Paul and the Corinthians; and it was πασῆςσυοτατικώτερονἐπιστολῆς Cf. Acts 28:21, and see Harnack, Mission and Expansion, i. p. 328. If we are right in inferring from this verse that the Judaizers had left Corinth, we have a strong argument for the view that 10-13. was written before 1-9, for in 10-13. the Judaizers are denounced as a present plague in Corinth. If the reading εἰμή be adopted, we must translate, ‘ unless it possibly be the case that we are needing, etc.’ ; and we must interpret this as a sarcasm ; ‘ unless it be the case that we are so unable to get recommendations that we are compelled to praise ourselves.’ This sarcasm shows that the charge of St Paul’ s praising himself is ridiculous. So clumsy an interpretation need not be accepted, for the balance of evidence is decisive against εἰμή א B C D E F G, Latt. and other versions have ἢμή , A K L P, Arm. have εἰμή B D 17 have συνιστᾶν , F G συνιστάναι , all other witnesses συνιστάνειν A D have ὥσπερτινες , other authorities ὥςτινες D E F K L P, d e Syrr. add συστατικῶν after ἐξὑμῶν , and F G add συστ . ἐπιστολῶν . Omit both words with א A B C 17, 67 , Vulg. Copt. Arm. Aeth., Chrys. Ambrst. 2. ἡἐπιστολὴἡμῶνὑμεῖςἐστέ . The asyndeton is effective, and the two pronouns are in telling juxtaposition. The convincing statement is flashed out with emphatic suddenness and brevity; ‘ The letter of recommendation which we have to show are ye.’ * No other testimonial is needed, either to the Corinthians or from them. They know what Apostolic teaching has done for them ; and all the world can see this also. Their changed life is an object lesson to themselves and to all outside ; and both they and the outsiders know how this change has been produced; it is writ large in the history of the foundation of a Church in such a city as Corinth. The Apostle appeals, not to written testimony, which may be false, but to the experience of all who know the facts. There seems to be an allusion to this passage in the Ep. of Polycarp (11:3), where he says “ among whom the blessed Paul laboured, who were his letters in the beginning.” See on 4:14 and 8:21. The details which follow are neither quite clear nor quite harmonious. St Paul dictates bold metaphors, in order to set forth the convincing character of his credentials, and he does not stop to consider whether they can all be combined in one consistent picture. ‘ Written in our hearts’ does not agree well with ‘ read by all men,’ and yet both were true. The Christian life of the Corinthians was impressed in thankful remembrance on the hearts of those who had converted them, and it was recognized by all who knew them. It was also impressed on the hearts of the Corinthians themselves. See on 1 Corinthians 9:2. Experience showed to the teachers that their ministry had been blessed by God; the existence of the Corinthian Church convinced them of this, and they could appeal to that conviction with a good conscience. Experience also taught the world at large that the men who had produced this change at Corinth were no charlatans ; and it had taught the Corinthians themselves the same truth. ἐνγεγραμμένηἐνταῖςκαρδίαιςἡμῶν . There is probably no allusion to Aaron ‘ bearing the names of the children of Israel in the breastplate (pouch) of judgment upon his heart, when he goeth in unto the holy place, for a memorial before the Lord continually’ (Exodus 28:36). The idea of intercession is foreign to this passage. ‘ Written on our hearts’ suggests to us the idea of deep affection, and Chrys. interprets the words of the love to the Corinthians which causes Paul to sing their praises in other Churches. But it may be doubted whether this is the exact meaning of the words. The context seems to require some such meaning as this; ‘ Our own hearts tell us that you are our recommendation, and everybody else can see this also.’ The compound ἐνγεγρ implies that this fact cannot slip from our hearts, cannot be forgotten ; cf. ἣνἐγγράφουσὺμνήμοσινδέλτοιςφρενῶν (Aesch. Pr. V. 789) ; and ἐπίγραψονἐπὶτὸπλάτοςτῆςκαρδίαςσου (Proverbs 7:3). The plur. ‘ hearts’ probably implies that other teachers are included with the Apostle; contrast ‘ our heart’ in 6:11 The ‘ heart’ in Scripture is the inner man, the centre of personality, known only to God; Romans 5:5, Romans 5:8:27; Ephesians 1:18, Ephesians 1:3:17; 1 Peter 3:4; Revelation 2:23. See art. ‘ Heart’ in Hastings, DB. and DCG.; Milligan on 1 Thessalonians 2:4. Lietzmann and Bousset would read ὑμῶν for ἡμῶν with א 17 after καρδίαις . Confusion between the two pronouns is often found in MSS., and might easily be made at the outset in dictating, the pronunciation being similar. ‘ My testimonial is written in your hearts and can be read by all, for all can see that you are Christians.’ Schmiedel and J. Weiss would omit the whole clause as a gloss. γινωσκομένηκαὶἀναγινωσκομένη . Note the change from perf. to pres. participles. It was written long ago and the writing still remains, and this is continually becoming known and being read. See on 1:13 respecting the word-play* and the meaning of ἀναγινωσκομένη . Some suggest that these participles are in the wrong order, for one reads a letter before one knows its purport. Has St Paul been careless, or has he sacrificed sense to sound? Probably neither: one recognizes the hand-writing before one reads the letter; at any rate, one perceives that it is a letter before one reads it. ὑπὸπάντωνἀνθρώπων . Another blow, whether intended or not, to his opponents, whose testimonials were not published. 3. φανερούμενοι . The construction is continued from ὑμεῖςἐστέ , and the meaning is continued from ἀναγινωσκομένη . ‘ Ye are our epistle, read by all, for you are being made manifest.’ The idea of ‘ making manifest’ is freq. in this part of the letter; 4:10, 11, 5:10, 11, 7:12. ἐπιστολὴΧριστοῦ . Is the genitive subjective, objective, or possessive? Probably the first, and in that case it may be another hit at the false teachers; ‘ their testimonials have little authority, but ours were written by Christ.’ * Or he may be merely disclaiming all credit; ‘ Christ is the agent to whom the composition of the letter is due; I am only the instrument.’ Chrys. takes the genitive as objective; ‘ a letter which tells of Christ.’ Some moderns make it possessive; ‘ ye are a letter belonging to Christ,’ i.e. ‘ ye are Christians.’ διακονηθεῖσαὑφ ʼ ἡμῶν . We need not seek an exact interpretation and ask whether, if Christ is the author of the letter, διακ . ὑφ ʼ ἡμῶν means that St Paul was His amanuensis, or that he carried the letter to its destination.† The metaphor is not thought out in detail. The words mean that St Paul and his colleagues were Christ’ s ministers in bringing the letter of recommendation into existence by converting the Corinthians. See on 1 Corinthians 3:5, 1 Corinthians 4:1. We have ὑπό here, not, as in 1:19, 1:4, the more usual διά . Chrys. understands διακονηθεῖσα of St Paul’ s preparation of their hearts; ‘ for as Moses hewed the stones and tables, so we your souls.’ Per ministerium nostrum scripsit Christus in vobis fidem seem caritatem ac reliqua bona (Herveius). We have the passive διακονεῖσθαι , as here, in 8:19, of the service rendered; in Mark 10:45 it is used of the person who receives the service. οὐμέλανι . Cf. 2 John 1:12; 3 John 1:13; Jeremiah 36:18. See artt. ‘ Ink’ and ‘ Writing’ in Hastings, DB., atramentum and tabulae in Diet. of Ant. Ink could be blotted out (Exodus 32:33) or washed off (Numbers 5:23, where see Gray’ s note). Non atramento scriptum est, id est non ita ut possit deleri, sicut ea quae atramento scribuntur; sed Spiritu Dei vivi, id est ut aeternaliter et vivaciter in cordbus nostris aut vestris permaneat, sicut ille qui scripsit vivit et aeternus est (Herveius). See the beautiful passage in Plato, Phaedrus, 276 C, in which it is said of the good teacher, that he does not much care to write his words in perishable ink, tracing dumb letters which cannot adequately express the truth, but finds a congenial soul, and then with knowledge sows words which can help themselves and him who planted them, and can bear fruit in other natures, making the seed everlasting and the possessor of it happy. πνεύματιΘεοῡζῶντος . See on 1 Corinthians 12:3 and Romans 8:9, Romans 8:14. The epithet ζῶντος is not otiose; the Spirit is an efficient force, and the letter which it produces consists of living persons. Moreover, the epithet accentuates the contrast between the abiding illumination of the Spirit and the perishable blackness of inanimate ink. In the Pauline Epp. and Hebrews, Θεὸςζῶν is frequent; in Matthew 16:16, Matthew 16:26:63; Revelation 15:7, we have the less common ὁΘεὸςὁζῶν . For the difference see Westcott on Hebrews 3:12. οὐκἐνπλαξίνλιθίναις . This again is not quite in harmony. It would have agreed better with the metaphor of a letter to have said ‘ not on parchment’ (ἐνμεμβράναις , 2 Timothy 4:13), or ‘ not on papyrus’ (ἐνχάρτῃ , 2 John 1:12). But the Apostle has already in his mind the contrast between the Mosaic and the Christian ministry (vv. 4-11), and he therefore introduces here ‘ tables of stone’ (Exodus 31:18, Exodus 34:1) rather than ordinary writing materials. He suggests that the living ‘ letter of Christ,’ which is his testimonial, is superior, not only to the formal letters brought by the Judaizing teachers, but even to the tables at Sinai. Those tables were indeed written with the finger of God; yet they remained an external testimony, and they had no power of themselves to touch men’ s hearts; whereas the credentials of the Christian teachers are internal, written on the yielding hearts both of themselves and of their converts. The Corinthians cannot disregard a commendation written on their own hearts. The law written externally is a terror to evil-doers; the internal law is an inspiration to those who do well. As soon as the Apostle’ s thought had reached the ‘ tables of stone,’ the current contrast between ‘ the heart of stone’ and a ‘ heart of flesh,’ τὴνκαρδίαντὴνλιθίνην and καρ . σαρκίνην (Ezekiel 11:19, 36:26; cf. Jeremiah 31:33, Jeremiah 32:38), would easily come in to strengthen the comparison. Omitting details, which give fulness but somewhat disturb the metaphor, we have as the main thought this; ‘ That which Christ by the Spirit of God has written on your hearts is recorded in our hearts as commending us to all mankind.’ Once more (see on 1:22) we can perceive how the elements of Trinitarian doctrine lie at the base of the Apostle’ s mind and influence his thought and language; cf. Romans 15:16. ἐνπλαξὶνκαρδίαιςσαρκίναις . This difficult expression is the better attested reading: καρδίαις is a manifest correction, for no one would alter KapBias to Unless with WH. and Wendland we suspect a primitive error, such as the accidental insertion of the second πλαξίν , we must accept the harder reading and take καρδίαις in apposition with πλαξίν Two ways are possible, according as σαρκίναις is taken with πλαξίν or with καρδίαις . The former is very awkward; ‘ on tables (viz. hearts) of flesh.’ It does not follow, because σαρκίναις balances λιθίναις , and λιθίναις agrees with πλαξίν , that therefore σαρκίναις agrees with πλαξίν . But Syr-Hark. takes it so; ‘ on tables of flesh— on hearts.’ ‘ On tables (which are) hearts of flesh’ is less awkward, but not pleasing. In dictating, St Paul might easily utter the words slowly in the order in which we have them, ἐνπλαξίν — καρδίαις — σαρκίναις . But the proposal to omit πλαξίν is attractive. Both λιθίναις and σαρκίναις indicate the material of the πλαξίν , which in each case has ἐν , while the instruments have no preposition; σαρκικαῖς (1:12, 10:4; see on 1 Corinthians 3:1) would indicate quality, especially ethical quality. B, f Vulg. insert καί before ἐνγεγραμμένη . K has γεγραμμένη . καρδίαις (א A B C D E G L P, Syr-Hark., Eus.) rather than καρδίας (F K, Latt. Syr-Pesh. Copt. Aeth. Arm. Goth. Iren. and perhaps Orig. Did. Cyr-Alex.). 3:4-11. The Superiority of the New Ministration to the Old God alone made us competent to be ministers of the new covenant, which in splendour immeasurably surpasses the old. 4This confidence, that you are a letter composed by Christ testifying to the effectiveness and validity of our commission, is no fiction of my own invention: it comes through Christ, and it looks reverently to God as its source. 5It is not a confidence that of ourselves we are competent to form any estimate of results, as though we made ourselves sufficient. All our competence to form such an estimate has its source in God. 6For of course He did not leave us incompetent of serving Him when He called us to be ministers of His new covenant with men,— a covenant which consists, not of a lifeless written code, but of an active penetrating Spirit. For the written code imposes a sentence of death, but the Spirit breathes new life. 7Now if the Law’ s dispensation of death, which was a thing of letters graven on stones, was inaugurated with such dazzling manifestations of glory that the Children of Israel could not look steadily at the brightness on the face of Moses, a brightness which was already beginning to fade away, 8how much greater must be the glory of the dispensation of the Spirit! 9For, surely, if the dispensation which sentences men to death can be a manifestation of God’ s glory, then the dispensation which offers righteousness as a gift to men must be a far greater manifestation. 10For the former may be said to have had no real glory, because its glory pales and vanishes before the overwhelming glory of the latter. 11For if that which comes and soon passes away has somewhat of glory, much more must that which for ever abides be arrayed in glory. 4. Πεποίθησινδὲτοιαύτηνἔχομεν . ‘ And confidence of this kind we possess through Christ to God-ward.’ He refers to the πεποίθησις just expressed, viz. that he has no need of any credentials other than the testimony which the existence of the Corinthian Church bears: that fact by itself suffices to prove his Apostleship. But he at once hastens to show that in this confidence there is no self-praise and no claim to credit; for it is conditioned in two ways which entirely exclude vain-glorious thoughts; it is through Christ, and it is towards God. In LXX πεποίθησις occurs only in the taunt of Rabshakeh, Τίἡπεπ . αὕτηἣνπέποιθας ; but it is fairly freq. in other versions. It is found six times in Paul and nowhere else in N.T. See Index IV. διὰτοῦΧριστοῦ . ‘ Therefore not through any innate power of our own. Apart from Him we could do nothing (John 15:5). He gave us the power that we have’ — τοῦτοἡμῖνδεδωκότοςτὸθάρσος (Thdrt.). πρὸςτὸνΘεόν . Erga Deum, which is the second security against boastfulness. ‘ The quiet confidence which gives us strength (Isaiah 30:15) is not directed towards anything earthly as the ultimate source of strength, but towards God’ (Romans 15:16). The idea is that of looking towards the person on whom one relies. This use of πρός is rare; the usual prepositions after πεποίθησις are εἰς (8:22) and ἐν (Philippians 3:4), and after πεποιθέναι , which is very freq. in N.T. and LXX, εἰς , ἐν , and ἐπί with dat. (1:9) or acc. (2:3). In 2 Thessalonians 3:4 we have πεποίθαμενδὲἐνΚυρίῳἐφ ʼ ὑμᾶς , a construction which would have stood very well here. 5. οὐχὅτι … ἀλλ ʼ . The πεποίθησις is further explained, both negatively and positively, in order to exclude still more emphatically the suspicion of self-commendation. ‘ I do not mean that (1:24) of ourselves we are sufficient (2:16) to account anything as originating with ourselves.’ He does not claim the right or power to judge that he and his fellows are the real authors of any part of the work; they claim no credit whatever. Experience has proved that as ministers they are competent, for the Corinthian Church exists; but all their competency comes from above. The statement is particular, not general; and it has reference simply to the successful work at Corinth. The Apostle is not denying free will, nor is he declaring that the natural man can do nothing but evil. Calvin’ s remark, Paulus non Poterat igitur magis hoininem nudare omni bona, is altogether beside the mark. By a fanciful derivation, El Shaddai, as a name for God, was sometimes interpreted as meaning ‘ The Sufficient One.’ In Rth 1:20, Rth 1:21, ὁἹκανός , and in Job 21:15, Job 31:2, 39:32 [40:2]. Ἱκανός , is used as a Divine name. It is just possible that St Paul had this in his mind here; ‘ Our sufficiency comes from the Sufficient One.’ Nowhere else in LXX or N.T. is ἱκανότης found. ἀφ ʼ ἐαυτῶν should be placed before ἱκανοίἐσμεν (א B C, Copt. Arm.) rather than after λογ . τι (A D E F G P, Latt.) or after ἱκ . ἐσμεν (K L, Syr. Hark.) or be omitted (17, Syr-Pesh.). λογίσασθαι (א A B K L P) rather than λογίζεσθαι (C D E F G). For έξἑαυτῶν , B F G have έξαὑτῶν (WH. ii. p. 144). 6. ὃςκαὶἱκάνωσενἡμᾶς . ‘ Who also made us sufficient as ministers,’ where ‘ who’ = ‘ for He.’ No English version before the RV. marks the repetition, ἱκανοί , ἱκανότης , ἱκάνωσεν : nor does the Vulgate, which has sufficientes, sufficientia, idoneos fecit. There is a similar repetition in διακονηθεῖσα , διακόνους , διακονία , and this is followed by δόξα (eight times in five verses), δεδόξασται , τὸδεδοξασμένον . As in 1 Corinthians 3:5, διάκονος is used in quite a general sense. There is no evidence that at this time διάκονος had an exclusively official sense, or designated any particular class of Christian minister: see Westcott on Ephesians 4:12. The aorist ἱκάνωσεν points to the time when St Paul was called to be an Apostle; at that crisis he was made competent (Colossians 1:12) to respond to the call. See Index IV. καινῆςδιαθήκης . ‘ Of a new covenant’ (RV): ‘ of the New Testament’ (AV) is misleading. The covenant is fresh and effective, with plenty of time to run, in contrast to the old covenant, which is worn out and obsolete. Thiss is the constant meaning of καινός as distinct from νέος , so that καινός always implies superiority to that which is not καινός , whereas what is νέος may be either better or worse than what is not νέος . See Trench, Syn. § lx. and Lightfoot on Colossians 3:10. The usual word for ‘ covenant’ is συνθήκη , which occurs thirteen times in LXX, but not at all in N.T. It is not suitable for a covenant between God and man, for it suggests that the parties meet on equal terms. See on 1 Corinthians 11:25. Here the emphasis is on καινῆς . Contrast διαθήκηςκαινῆςμεσίτης (Hebrews 9:15), where the emphasis is on διαθήκης . To be ministers of the old covenant was no great distinction; there were large numbers of them, and their duties were largely matters of routine. But to be made competent ministers of a new covenant with God was an extraorinary grace. In Hebrews 12:24 we have διαθήκηςνέαςμεσίτης , the only passage in which διαθήκηνέα occurs. Christianity was both νέα and καινή , it was of recent origin and it was effective, whereas Judiasm was old and effete. It was also αἰωνία . ‘ I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel’ with them, that I will not cease to do them good’ (Jeremiah 32:40). We are not yet in a position to say the final word respecting the rendering of διαθήκη in N.T., where the word occurs thirtythree times, mostly in Paul (nine) and in Hebrews (seventeen). Probably the extremists on both sides are in error. It seems to be reasonable to hold that διαθήκη cannot always be rendered ‘ covenant’ in accordance with LXX use, and that it cannot always be rendered ‘ testament’ in accordance with the usage of classical writers and that of Greek-speaking populations in the East in the first century. Among the crucial passages are Galatians 3:15-18 (see Lightfoot) and Hebrews 9:16, Hebrews 9:17 (see Westcott). It does not follow that, because ‘ covenant’ is the meaning elsewhere in N.T., therefore ‘ covenant’ is the meaning in both these passages; or that, because ‘ testament’ is the meaning in one or both of these, therefore ‘ testament’ is the meaning everywhere. Deissmann (Light from Anc. East, p. 341; Licht von Osten, p. 243) says; “ There is ample material to back me in the statement that no one in the first century a.d. would have thought of finding in the word διαθήκη the idea of ‘ covenant.’ St Paul would not, and in fact did not. To St Paul the word meant what it meant in his Greek O.T., ‘ a unilateral enactment,’ in particular ‘ a will or testament.’ This one point concerns more than the superficial question whether we write ‘ New Testament’ or ‘ New Covenant’ on the title-page of the sacred volume; it becomes ultimately the great question of all religious history; a religion of grace, or a religion of works? It involves the alternative, was Pauline Christianity Augustinian or Pelagian?” On this Lietzmann rightly remarks that, however true it may be that διαθήκη almost always means ‘ testament’ in profane literature, yet in the very numerous passages in LXX in which a διαθήκη between God and man is mentioned it cannot have this meaning; and this is true also of the passages in N.T. which have been influenced by the LXX. “ I know of no instances of ‘ a unilateral enactment’ (einseitige Verfü gung). We must abide by the Hebrew and translate ‘ covenant.’ One instance of this usage we at any rate have in Aristoph. Birds, 440. Peisthetairos refuses to have any dealings with the birds, ἢνμὴδιάθωνταίγ ʼ οἵδεδιαθήκηνἑμοί — not to peck him.” See Ramsay’ s valuable dissertation, Galatians, § § 33, 34, pp. 349-370; A. Lukyn Williams, Galatians, pp. 68-70; Wickham, Hebrews, pp. 71-73; Expositor, Dec. 1908, pp. 563-565; E. Riggenbach, Der Begriff der Diatheke im Hebraerbrief, 1908; Muntz, Rome, St Paul, and the Early Church, pp. 146 f., 165 f. οὐγράμματοςἀλλὰπνεύματος . ‘ Not of letter, but of spirit, for the letter puts to death but the spirit gives life.’ This saying holds good of many other things besides the Law and the Gospel; everywhere letter prescribes, spirit inspires. But we must not be misled by the common contrast in English between ‘ letter’ and ‘ spirit,’ which means the contrast between the literal sense and the spiritual or inward sense of one and the same document or authority. By γρμάμα and πνεύμα St Paul means two different authorities; γράμμα is the written code of the Law, πνεῦμα is the operation of the Spirit in producing and promulgating the Gospel. See on Romans 2:29, Romans 7:6.* This passage is almost a summary of the Ep. to the Romans. St Paul mentioned the tables of stone (v. 3) in preparation for this comparison between the old ministration and the new. The old put forth a written code of duty, so onerous as to kill hope and love; the new is inspired by the spirit, which is able to revive what is ready to die. See Swete, The Holy Spirit in N.T., p. 319. We see here once more (see on 1 Corinthians 9:20; Dobschü tz, Probleme, p. 82) how completely St Paul had broken with the Jewish Law.† He has now reached the main topic in this portion of the Epistle (3:1-6:10), viz. the glory of Apostleship under the new covenant. The Judaizing teachers had not been able to extricate themselves from the trammels of the old covenant. But experience has taught St Paul that the embrace of the Law has now become deadly. It is effete and cannot adapt itself to the new conditions. It is purely external; ‘ Thou shalt not do this overt act,’ ‘ Thou shalt do this overt act.’ It has no power to set free and strengthen the moral elements in man. It makes heavy demands, but it gives nothing. It commands and imposes a punishment for disobedience; but it gives no power or encouragement to obey. The spirit of Christianity is the opposite of this. It is a living force. Instead of pressing the man down from without, it lays hold of him from within; it supplies, not slavish rules, but emancipating principles. It enriches and quickens those who welcome it, and it makes them both desirous and able to follow its inspirations. “ The Law,” says Chrys., “ when it takes a murderer, puts him to death; grace, when it takes a murderer, gives him light and life.” It is evident from the language used that the Apostle is contrasting the spirit of the Gospel, not merely with ceremonial regulations, but with the whole code, whether ceremonial or moral, of the Mosaic Law. That Law said to the Jew, “ Obey, or it will be worse for you.” The Christian says to the Gospel, “ Obedience is the thing that I long for.” The genitives, γράμματος and πνεύματος , probably depend on διακόνους (see v. 8); but the meaning is much the same if we take them after διαθήκης . They are qualifying or characterizing genitives and are equivalent to adjectives: we might translate, ‘ not letter-ministers, but spirit-ministers.’ Winer, p. 297; Blass, § 35. 5. τὸγὰργράμμαἀποκτ . This does not refer to capital punishment, which the Law inflicted for a variety of crimes, such as adultery, blasphemy, dishonour to parents, idolatry, murder, prophesying falsely, sabbath-breaking, witchcraft, etc., although there may be some indirect allusion. In a much more serious sense the Law kills, in that it sends men along the road which leads to eternal death. It does this by its prohibitions, which at once suggest the doing of what is prohibited, and also make men conscious of having sinned and merited punishment. “ By giving edge to the conscience, it intensifies the sense of remorse. A child will go on doing a wrong act ignorantly, till it has become a habit, without any inward dissatisfaction; till at length some authoritative voice says, ‘ That is a wicked act.’ Then everything is changed. Each recurrence of the evil habit brings misery to the child. It has the sentence of condemnation in itself. The commandment has slain the child” (Lightfoot). Again, the letter kills by setting up lofty standards, which it does not help men to reach, and which without help they cannot reach. This takes the heart out of them, for they feel from the first that disastrous failure is certain. Moreover, the Law held out no hope of a resurrection, by means of which the failures of this life might be rectified. Lex non est adjutrix legentium, sed testis peccantium quae mortificat peccatores (PseudoPrimasius). Spiritus vivivicat qui intus docet animam qualiter ea quae audit intelligere debeat (Herveius). With St Paul the principle that ‘ the letter puts to death’ is an axiom; and it was confirmed by his own experience. See on Romans 7:7-25, pp. 184-189. But this verse would have been very obscure if we had not possessed Romans, which was written in Corinth and shows what St Paul had been teaching there. In all this disparagement of τόγράμμα there was no danger of seeming to disparage Christian writings, for as yet there were no Christian Scriptures. The Apostle, without being aware of it, was beginning to make such writings. The excellent cursive 17 has οὐγράμματιἀλλὰπνεύματι , which is supported by Lat-Vet. non litera sed spiritu; but Vulg. has non litterae sed spiritus. B has ἀποκτείνει , א G K P 17 have ἀποκτέννει , a form said to be Aeolic, A C D E L ἀποκτενει which D3 L accentuate ἀποκτένει . 7. ἡδιακονίατοῦθανάτου . See on 1 Corinthians 15:56 and comp. Galatians 3:10, which quotes Deuteronomy 27:26: διακονία is not abstract for concrete, ‘ ministry’ for ‘ ministers’ ; it means the whole dispensation of the Mosaic Law. The Apostle’ s main object is to show the superiority of the Christian ministration. This involves disparaging the Jewish ministration, which he does in strong language, because of the mischief done by the Judaizers. “ See,” says Chrys., “ how he again cuts the ground from under the Judaistic point of view.” He adds that the Apostle does not say that the Law produced death, but that its ministry tended to death, when it declared ‘ the soul that sinneth, it shall die’ (Ezekiel 18:4).* The inferiority of the Law to the Gospel is shown in three different aspects, the second of which is an explanation or justification of the first; it is a ministration of death, a ministration of condemnation, and a ministration which was designed to be only temporary. ἐνγράμμασιν , ἐντετυπωμένηλίθοις . ‘ In letters, and engraven on stones.’ It is necessary to insert ‘ and,’ in order to make clear that we have here two attributes of the διακονία , which was in writing that might never be read or understood, and written on dead and heavy material. ‘ Graven in letters on stones’ would give only one of these ideas. Κεκολαμμένηἐνταῖςπλαξίν is said of the writing made by God on the first tables (Exodus 32:16). It is not said who wrote on the second tables (the nom. may be God or Moses), nor whether the writing was engraved or not (Exodus 34:28). The Commandments, as the centre and basis of the Mosaic code, are here put for the whole of it, as the Sermon on the Mount is sometimes put for the whole of the Christian code. ‘ In writing’ would be better than ‘ in letters’ ; but the connexion between γράμμα and ἐνγράμμασιν must be preserved. ἐγενήθηἐνδόξῃ . ‘ Came into existence in glory,’ i.e. had a glorious inauguration; or ‘ came to be in glory,’ i.e. was transported into a glorious condition. Bachmann defends the latter rendering by a number of instances from papyri in which γίγνεσθαιἐν seems to mean ‘ pass into a certain state’ ; ἐννόσῳγενόμενος , ἐνἀσφαλεῖγενέσθαι , κ .τ .λ . This use is not rare in N.T. Cf. [Luke 22:44]; Acts 22:17; Philippians 2:7; 1 Timothy 2:14; 1 Timothy 1:10, 1 Timothy 1:4:2; but it does not fit the context here. The Law was not given in an inglorious condition and afterwards promoted to a glorious one; it was ἐνδόξῃ from the first. Driver notices that St Paul’ s key-words in this passage are suggested by the LXX rendering of ‘ shone’ in Exodus 34:29, Exodus 34:35, viz. δεδόξασται . We may contrast the aor. here with the fut. ἔσται in v. 8; the latter implies permanence, the former not. ὥστεμὴδύνασθαιἀτενίσαι . Exodus 34:30 says no more than that ‘ they were afraid to come nigh him’ ; but Philo (Vita Moys. i. 2, p. 665) gives the current belief; κατέβαινεπολὺκαλλίωντὴνὄψινἢὅτεἀνῄει , ὡςτοὺςὁρῶνταςτεθηπέναικαὶκαταπεπλῆχθαι , καὶμηδὲνἐπιπλέονἀντέχειντοῖςὀφθαλμοῖςδύνασθαικατὰτὴνπροσβολὴνἡλιοειδοῦςφέγγουςἀπαστράπτοντος . There was a Jewish tradition that the light which shone in Moses’ face was the light which inaugurated the Creation. Vulg. here varies the translation of πρόσωπον in a capricious way; ut non possent intendere filii Israhel in faciem Mosi propter gloriam oultus ejus, quae evacuatur. See Index IV. On the difference between ὥστε with the infinitive and ὥστε with the indicative, see T. S. Evans in Expositor, 3rd series, iii p. 3. Excepting here and v. 13, ἀτενίζειν is peculiar to Luke in N.T.; it is freq. in Acts. In LXX it is rare and late. τήνκαταργουμένην . ‘ Which was being done away’ ; imperfect participle. It was very splendid, but it was very transient. This is not stated in Exodus, but it seems to be implied, and it is brought in here with much effect at the end of the sentence, to be enlarged upon as a separate point of inferiority in v. 11. ‘ Was to be done away’ (AV) is certainly wrong,* and ‘ was passing away’ (RV) is doubtful. In v. 14, as generally in Paul, the verb is passive, and it may be passive here and in vv. 11, 13; see on 1 Corinthians 1:28, 1 Corinthians 15:26 and on Luke 13:7 for the meaning of the verb. γράμμασιν (א A C D2 and 3 E K L P, d e f g Vulg. Copt. Syr. Pesh. Goth.) rather than γράμματι (B D* F G). f Vulg. omit the ἐν before γραμμ , א c D2 and 3 E K L, d e f Vulg. Arm. insert ἐν before λίθοις . In all three cases note the divergence between Greek and Latin in bilingual MSS. 8. πῶςοὐχὶμᾶλλον . ‘ How shall not to a greater extent the ministration of the spirit be in glory?’ The ἔσται does not point to the future coming of the Messianic Kingdom; it indicates that διακονίατ . πνεύματος will continue to be in an atmosphere of glory. Or ἔσται may be the logical future, of the natural consequence of what has been stated. Cf. εἰδὲἀπεθάνομενσὺνΧριστῷ , πιστεύομενὅτικαὶσυζήσομεναὐτῷ (Romans 6:8). 9. εἰγὰρἡδιακονίατῆςκατακρίσεως . The second point of contrast is explanatory of the first; the Law is a διακ . τ . θανάτου because it is διακ . τ . κατακρ , for condemnation results in death. ‘ If such a ministration is glory, to a much greater extent the ministration of righteousness is superabundant in glory.’ * The use of the pres. here is against ἔσται being the logical future. By ‘ righteousness’ is meant that which is attributed to man when he is justified. Through faith in Christ man is more than forgiven; his debt is cancelled and he has something placed to his credit. The ἐν which is usual after περισσεύειν (8:7; Ephesians 1:8; etc.) is omitted here, probably to balance δόξα in the first clause. In the first contrast we have ἐνδόξῃ … ἐνδόξῃ in the second, δόξα … δόξῃ Cf. 1 Thessalonians 3:12; Acts 16:5; here many texts insert ἐν . ἠδιακονίατο . κατ (B D2 E K L P, f g Vulg. Copt. Goth.) is probably to be preferred to τῇδιακονίᾳτ . κατ (א A C D* F G 17 d e Syrr.); but the latter may be original ; ‘ For if the ministration of condemnation has glory.’ D E G have ἐστιν after δόξα א 3 D E F G K L P, Latt. Arm. have ἐν before δόξῃ . 10. καὶγὰροὐδεδόξασταιτὸδεδοξασμένον . ‘ For indeed that which has been made glorious in this respect has been deprived of glory by reason of the glory which exceeds it?’ It is outshone by something which is much more dazzling and beautiful. When the sun is risen, lamps cease to be of use; orto sole lumen lucernae caecatur. In this way the paradox becomes true that ‘ what had been made glorious was not made glorious.’ In comparison with the glory which superseded it, it seemed to have had no glory at all. Cf. ὁμοῖοιτοῖςτυφλοῖςἂνἦμενἕνεκάγετῶνἡμετέρωνὀφθαλμῶν (Xen. Mem. iv. iii. 3). Stallbaum on Plato, Rep. 329 B gives other examples of this use of ἕνεκα . If ἐντούτῳτῷμέρει be taken with τὸδεδοξασμένον , the meaning will be ‘ in respect of the illumination of Moses’ countenance.’ But it is better to take the words with οὐδεδόξασται and understand them as anticipating what follows; ‘ in this respect,’ viz. because of the overwhelming glory of the Gospel. The phrase is repeated 9:3, and nowhere else in N.T. Ὑπερβάλλειν is found only 9:14; Ephesians 1:19, Ephesians 1:2:7, Ephesians 1:3:19; and its derivative ὑπερβολή is also purely Pauline in N.T., peculiar to this group, and most freq. in 2 Cor. (1:8, 4:7, 17, 12:7); in LXX only 4 Malachi 3:18. For οὐδεδοξ a few cursives and a few Latin texts have οὐδὲδεδοξ . Vulg. has nec and also spoils the oxymoron by rendering nam nec glorificatum est quod claruit in hac parte. εἵνεκεν (א A B D E G P) rather than ἕνεκεν (C K L). 11. Third contrast; again explanatory and in support of what precedes. ‘ For if that which was being done away was through glory, to a much greater extent that which abideth is in glory.’ What is given to last only for a time is as nothing in comparison with what is given to last for ever. Christianity is εὐαγγέλιοναἰώνιον (14:6), a Gospel reaching forward into eternity and bringing with it σωτηρίαναἰώνιον (Isaiah 45:17; Hebrews 5:9), and its ministers are ministers διαθήκηςαἰωνίου (Hebrews 13:20). They have not the transitory glory of Moses in their faces, but in their souls they have the everlasting glory of the message which they deliver. Supply ἐστίν rather than ἔσται with ἐνδόξῃ . The change from διὰδόξης to ἐνδόξῃ may indicate the difference between what passes and what abides. We have a similar change Romans 5:10, in a sentence very similar in construction to this; εἰγὰρἐχθροὶὄντεςκατηλλάγημεντῷΘεῷδιὰτοῦθανάτουτοῦυἱτοῦαὐτοῦπολλῶμᾶλλονκαταλλαγέτεσσωθησύμεθαἐντῇζωῇαὐτοῦ . In Ephesians 1:7 we have the converse change from ἐν to διά , from what is permanent to what was transitory; ἐνᾧἔχομεντὴνἀπολύτρωσινδιὰτοῦαἵματοςαὐτοῦ . St Paul is fond of changes in prepositions; 1 Corinthians 12:8; Galatians 2:16; Romans 3:30. These verses (7-11) show what a revolution had taken place in the mind of St Paul since he had exchanged the Law for the Gospel. Christianity is so superior to Judaism that it has extinguished it. Even in its best days, when it also was a Divine revelation to the human race, Judaism had a glory which was infinitesimal compared with that which was inaugurated by Christ. A rich variety of expressions is used to bring this out. The Gospel is μᾶλλονἐνδόξῃ is πολλῷμᾶλλονἐνδόξῃπολλῷμᾶλλονπερισσεύειδόξῃ , and the δόξα is ὑπερβάλλουσα . It secures from death, it secures from condemnation, and it abides. In this argument the Apostle has chiefly in view the Judaizers who made the Law indispensable and superior to the Gospel. Beet, p. 349. 3:12-4:6. The Great Boldness of the New Ministers Conscious of the vast superiority of the New Covenant, we need no veil to cover deficiencies, but deliver our message with boldness and openness. 12 Seeing, therefore, that we servants of the Gospel have a sure expectation that the glory of the new covenant will prove as superior in duration as it is in splendour, and will never disappear before a far greater glory, we venture to preach with great confidence, frankness, and courage, at the risk of being accused of self-commendation. 13 Unlike our opponents, we have nothing to conceal. We have no need to act as Moses did. He used to put a veil over his face, to prevent the children of Israel from gazing at the gradual dying away of the glory which the presence of the Lord had imparted to his countenance. The passing away of that glory symbolized the transitory character of the Mosaic dispensation; and by concealing the former from the people Moses might seem to be concealing the other also. 14 But, so far from seeing what the fading of the glory signified, or profiting by our plain speaking, their spiritual perceptions were deadened. For down to this very day, when the records of the old covenant (which might teach them so much) are read, the same veil of ignorance as to the transitory character of the Law lies still upon their minds, still unlifted, because by becoming members of Christ, and in that way alone, is it done away. 15 And unto this very day, whenever the Law of Moses is read in their synagogues, a veil of miscomprehension lies upon their hearts. 16 But just as Moses, when he returned to the presence of the Lord, removed the veil from his face, so, when any one of them turns to the Lord, the veil is removed from his heart, and he sees that the dispensation of the Law has come to an end. 17 Now the Lord to whom such an one turns is the Spirit of Christ, and where the Spirit of Christ is, there is emanicipation from the bondage of the Law and of sin. 18 And all we Christian men, freed from the Law and freely obeying a higher commandment, have a glory which resembles that of the unveiled Moses. As we gaze with unveiled face upon the glory of the Lord Christ, before which the glory of Moses vanished away, we are daily being transformed into spiritual likeness to Him, from one degree of brightness to another,— an amazing transformation, but not beyond belief, when we remember that the power which transforms us is a Spirit which is Lord. 4. 1 Seeing then that the Gospel is so glorious and is so unreservedly made known, and that we by God’ s mercy have been made competent for the ministration of it, we have a courage which corresponds with that mercy. 2 We are not cowardly schemers,— far from it. We have from the first refused to adopt underhand methods of unworthy trickery; we follow no courses of unscrupulous cunning; we do not tone down or in any way tamper with God’ s message. On the contrary, we set forth the truth so clearly and purely that this at once commends us to the conscience of our hearers, however much it may differ in different men. If, however, the verdict of all human consciences may err, we are not afraid to appeal to the judgment of God. 3 I do not deny that the Gospel which we proclaim so openly and honestly does not penetrate to the hearts of all who hear it; a veil intervenes. That is true, but only of those who are lost, 4 in whose case the god of this evil dispensation has blinded their understandings, unbelievers, as they are, so that for them there is no morning-glow from the light which is shed by the Gospel,— the Gospel which is charged with all the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. 5 Yes, the glory of Christ; for it is not our own claims that we press, but those of Christ Jesus, as the risen and glorified Lord. Our relation to you is that of bondservants, in the service of Him who Himself took the form of a bondservant. 6 Is say that we do not press our own merits, because we have none; all that is of value in us is derived. To the God who in the beginning said, Out of darkness light shall shine, we owe the light that has shined in our hearts, the light which springs from the knowledge of the glory of God, which we must pass on to others. I have knowledge of that glory, for I have seen it myself on the face of Christ. The closing words of this section are a complete explanation of the statement made at the beginning of it and elaborated in 4:2. The man who has always in his heart the Divine light which shone into it from the face of the glorified Lord cannot be guilty of tricky artifices and double-dealing with a view to commending himself and winning applause. The light transfigures him, and he is ever transparent and open. He works to impart the light to others, not as coming from himself, but from God through Christ. We may notice the close correspondence between the last seven verses of this chapter and the first six verses of the next chapter. In both we have three subjects in the same order; the excellence of the Gospel ministry, the sad condition of those who are so blind as to be unable to see the excellence of the Gospel, and the Divine source of the excellence. Both passages begin with similar words expressing the rich possession of those to whom the ministry of the Gospel has been entrusted, and in both the metaphor of the veil is used. In the first passage this metaphor is applied to the unbelieving Jews, in the second to unbelievers generally, especially, but not exclusively, Gentiles. The repetition of ἔχομεν and ἔχοντες of the treasure possessed by Christian misssionaries should be noted (3:4, 12, 4:1, 7, 13). See below on 4:1. 12. Ἔχοντεςοὖντοιαύηνἐλπίδα . That he says ‘ hope’ rather than ‘ confidence’ (v. 4) does not prove that ἔσται is to be supplied with ἐνδόξῃ in v. 11. The glory of the Gospel has already begun, and therefore ἐστίν rather than ἔσται is required. But that the Gospel will prove permanent is a matter of hope, and therefore ἐλπίδα is here quite in place. ‘ Because, therefore, we have a sure hope that our glory will continue, we use great boldness.’ For οὖν following a participle see 1:17, 5:6, 11, 7:1; 1 Corinthians 11:20; Romans 5:1; Hebrews 4:14, Hebrews 4:10:19; 1 Peter 2:1. πολλῇπαρρησίᾳχρώμεθα . He had been accused of having in one matter used such levity that his word could not be relied on (1:17). He says here that he habitually uses great boldness and openness of speech, because he is in possession of a great hope. The word παρρησία implies that the boldness is exhibited either in speech or in action. It is opposed, not only to timidity, but to reserve, and it is sometimes misunderstood, for it may seem to imply self-confidence and self-commendation.* But it has quite other sources. Ministers who feel that God has made them competent (2:16, 17), and that their work will endure, have ground for παρρησία . Chrys. expands, οὐδὲνἀποκρυπτόμενοι , οὐδὲνὑποστελλόμενοι , οὐδὲνὑφορώενοι . Calv., aperta et plena Christi manifestatio. It is possible that in explaining the nature of this παρρησία the Apostle is not only following up his answer to the charge of ἑαυτοὺςσυνιστάνειν (v. 1), but also again glancing at the hole-and-corner methods of his Judaizing opponents; but what follows is on a higher level than mere controversy. In Vulg. παρρησία is generally fiducia, but also constantia (Acts 4:13), and confidentia (Hebrews 10:35), while μετὸπαρρησίας is audenter (Acts 2:29), and παρρησίᾳ (adv.) is palam or manifeste. Beza’ s in loguendo evidentia is no improvement on fiducia, and Erasmus goes wrong in changing utimur (Vulg.) to utamur. See Index IV. 13. καὶοὐκαθάπερΜωυσῆς . The structure is defective, but the sentence is quite intelligible; ‘ And we do not put a veil over our faces, as Moses used to put a veil over his face.’ Comp. Mark 15:8, where there is nothing to correspond to καθὼςἐποίειαὐτοῖς and ‘ to do’ has to be supplied. From the lofty position in which God has placed him the Apostle looks down even on Moses. Moses and the Prophets often spoke obscurely, for they did not always understand their own message, and much had not been even dimly revealed to them that was clearly known to the Apostles. ‘ Many prophets and righteous men desired to see the things which ye see and saw them not’ (Matthew 13:17). ‘ Concerning which salvation the prophets sought and searched diligently.’ And ‘ not unto themselves but unto you did they minister these things’ (1 Peter 1:10, 1 Peter 1:12). For καθάπερ see on 1:14. πρὸςτὸμὴἀτενίσαι . ‘ That the children of Israel should not look steadfastly upon the end of that which was passing away.’ There is no δύνασθαι in this verse, and we have πρὸςτὸμή , and not ὥστεμή . In v. 7 ‘ could not look steadfastly’ is right; but here ‘ could not’ (AV) is incorrect and misleading. The difference is considerable. In v. 7 it is said that the glory was so dazzling that the people could not look steadily at it. This is not stated in Exodus 34:29 f., but it is not inconsistent with what is stated there. Here it is said that Moses used to veil his face so that the people should not see the fading away of the glory on it. This is inconsistent with the AV. Of v. 33; ‘ Till Moses had done speaking with them he put a veil on his face’ ; which means that the people were terrified by the brightness and would not come near him, and so he wore a veil all the time that he was addressing them. This is erroneous. The correct translation is, ‘ When Moses had done speaking with them he put a veil on his face.’ He knew that the brightness was caused by converse with Jehovah, and would fade away when he was absent from the Divine presence. He did not wish the people to see the disappearance of the brightness, and therefore, when he had delivered his message, he covered his face, until he returned to the presence of the Lord. This is plain in LXX and Vulg., * as also in RV., but it is quite obscured in AV. Apparently we are to understand that this practice was continued by Moses throughout the wanderings in the wilderness. The Apostle’ s main point is this fading of the glory, which he treats as symbolizing the temporary nature of the Mosaic Law. He does not say that it was intended to convey this lesson; but, as in 1 Corinthians 10:2-4 and Galatians 4:21-26, he takes the O.T. record and gives it a spiritual meaning. The meanig of πρὸςτό with the infinitive is in N.T. generally final, expressing the subective purpose, ‘ with a view to,’ ‘ in order that.’ Matthew 5:28, Matthew 16:12, and Luke 18:1 seem to be exceptions. St Paul has it four times (here; 1 Thessalonians 2:9; 2 Thessalonians 3:8; Ephesians 6:11), and in each case it expresses the purpose of the agent or agents. In this case it was the purpose of Moses that the Israelites should not witness the vanishing of the glory from his face. This does not imply that Moses understood the vanishing to be a sign of the transitory character of the Law; still less that he wished to conceal its transitory character from the Israelites. He wished to conceal from them the end of the fading illumination. He did not wish them to go on watching him till there was no more glory to watch. It is the Apostle who makes the passing away of the glory a symbol of the transitoriness of the Law, and the veil a symbol of obscurity and concealment. In these two respects the Gospel ministration is greatly superior to that of the Law. It is permanent, and it conceals nothing that its adherents can understand. Its ministers deliver a message which reaches out into eternity, and they deliver it fearlessly, with entire frankness and freedom. τὸτέλοςτοῦκαταργουμένου . The whole phrase and the context make the meaning of τέλος certain: ‘ the end of that which was passing away,’ or (passive) ‘ was being done away,’ means the cessation of the glory. We may set aside ‘ the end of that which is abolished’ (AV), which seems to mean Christ as the end of the abolished Law (Romans 10:4). This meaning of τὸτέλος is adopted by Aug. and Thdrt., but it does not stand investigation. St Paul could not mean that Moses veiled his face to prevent the Israelites from seeing Christ. Nor does τὸτέλος mean the final cause, the aim and object of the Law. Why should that be concealed from the people, and how would the use of a veil conceal it? And Luther is certainly wrong in making τοῦκαταργουμένου masc., ‘ of him who is passing away,’ viz. Moses, which is quite alien from the context. The Vulg. is puzzling, in faciem ejus, quod evacuatur, but the quod shows that this reading gives no support to the view that τοῦκαταργ is masc. αὐτοῦ (A B C G L P 17) rather than ἑαυτοῦ (א D E K). For τέλος , A has πρόσωπον , which some copyist may have taken from the previous line or from v. 7. f Vulg., Ambrst. have faciem for finem. 14. ἀλλὰἐπωρώθητὰνοήματααὐτῶν . ‘ But their minds were dulled.’ The ἀλλά looks back to the preceding μή . ‘ Dulled’ is perhaps better than either ‘ blinded’ (AV) or ‘ hardened’ (RV). The Rhemish version has ‘ their senses were dulled,’ following the Vulg., which has obtunsi sunt census eorum. Vulg. generally has excaecare, but John 12:4, indurare. ‘ Harden’ is the original meaning of the verb, but this does not agree well with ‘ minds’ ; minds are blinded, blunted, dulled. As ‘ blinded’ is wanted for ἐτὐφλωσεν (4:4), ‘ blunted’ or ‘ dulled’ will be better here. J. A. Robinson (Ephesians, pp. 264-274) gives a full history of πωρόω and πώρωσις , and comes to the conclusion that from the original idea of petrifaction the words come to indicate insensibility, especially of the eyes. The meaning generally required by the context in the N.T. is obtuseness or intellectual blindness rather than hardness. Lightfoot on 2 Thessalonians 2:8 remarks that St Paul sometimes uses καταργεῖν in opposition to ‘ light’ (1 Corinthians 2:7; 2 Timothy 1:10) as here in vv. 7, 13, and this is somewhat in favour of ‘ blinded’ or ‘ dulled’ rather than ‘ hardened.’ Strictly speaking, νοήματα are the products of νοῦς , and therefore ‘ thoughts’ rather than ‘ minds’ : but here, as in 4:4 and 11:3, νόημα seems to mean the thinking faculty. The same difference of meaning is found in class. Grk.* See on 2:11. It is not necessary to decide whether St Paul is speaking of the Jews of his own day, as what follows seems to intimate, or of the contemporaries of Moses, as what precedes rather implies. He is thinking of the nation as a whole without distinction of time. The aor. may be timeless, and in that case may be rendered ‘ have been dulled’ or ‘ are dulled.’ Nor need we ask whether their minds were dulled by God, or by the evil one, or by themselves: in different ways all three contributed to the result. The indefinite passive has the advantage of raising no side issue; the one important fact is the intellectual πώρωσις of the Jews, which is a warning to the Corinthians not to exchange Christian clearness and freedom for the obscure entanglements of Judaism. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/iccnt/ 4:1. Here again, as between 1 and 2, the division of chapters is unintelligently made. The first six verses of this chapter belong to the preceding one, and the close connexion between the two paragraphs is obvious: the opening verses of this chapter show how close it is, for the Apostle is still urging the claims of his office, especially against those who charge him with insincerity and self-commendation. The six verses run in couplets; the glory of the new ministry (1, 2); the condition of those who are too blind to see the glory of the Gospel (3, 4); the source of the glory (5, 6). A fresh departure is made at v. 7. With 1-6 comp. 1 Thessalonians 2:1-12, which is a similar vindication of Apostolic authority on behalf of St Paul and his colleagues, and contains several similar expressions. Διὰτοῦτο . In 1 Corinthians 4:17 both AV and RV have ‘ For this cause,’ which might well be retained here, v 7:13, and 13:10, in order to mark a difference between διὰτοῦτο , διό (4:16), which might be ‘ wherefore,’ and οὖν (5:20), which is usually ‘ therefore.’ Vulg. has ideo for διὰτοῦτο , propter quod for διό , and ergo for οὖν , not invariably, but in this Epistle. See Index IV. καθὼςἠλεήθημεν . ‘ Even as we received mercy.’ The words belong to what precedes; ‘ seeing that, in full accordance with God’ s mercy, we have this ministry.’ It is of God’ s goodness, and not of any merit of his own, that he has a calling of so high an order. Habentes eam, non ex meritis, sed ex Dei misericordia, quae nos ministros suos fecit (Herveius). Cf. the similar use of καθάπερ in 3:18 to show how Divine action is the explanation of wonderful results. Hort, on 1 Peter 2:10, points out that this verb is used “ in reference to the signal mercy of the gift of the Gospel.” St Paul uses it several times of his own conversion and call (here; 1 Corinthians 7:25; 1 Timothy 1:13, 1 Timothy 1:16). The use of so humble an expression respecting his appointment to the Apostleship had special point in writing to Corinth, because there he had been accused of being self-asserting and aggressive. Cf. 1 Corinthians 15:9, 1 Corinthians 15:10. For διακονία see on 5:18. In these six verses, as in the preceding chapter, St Paul is sometimes answering charges which had been brought against himself, and sometimes indirectly bringing charges against his Judaizing opponents by hinting that they do what he declares that he himself does not do; and we cannot always decide which of the two he is doing. In some cases he may be doing both. It is also difficult to decide whether the 1st pers. plur. includes Timothy or anyone else. Apparently the Apostle is thinking mainly of himself. οὐκἐγκακοῦμεν . ‘ We do not lose heart.’ The verb indicates the timidity which shrinks from coming forward and speaking out. Such faintheartedness takes refuge in silence and inactivity, in order to escape criticism, and therefore is the opposite of παρρησία . In Ephesians 3:13, μὴἐνκακεῖν follows a mention of παρρησία . The consciousness that he owed his ministry to the graciousness of God inspired the Apostle with courage and frankness. Misericordia Dei, per quam ministerium accipitur, facit strenuos et sinceros. Etiam Moses misericordiam adeptus est, et inde tantam invenit admissionem (Beng.). Chrys. paraphrases, οὐκαταπίπτομεν , ἀλλὰκαὶχαίρομενκαὶπαρρησιαζόμεθα . In short, the Apostle acts up to his own exhortation, ἀνδρίζεσθε , κραταιοῦσθε (see on 1 Corinthians 16:13). Cf. οὐγὰρἔδωκενἡμῖνπνεῦμαδειλίας (2 Timothy 1:7). Excepting Luke 8:1 (where see note), the verb is found only in Paul (v. 16; 2 Thessalonians 3:13; Galatians 6:9; Ephesians 3:13), and everywhere there is a v. l. ἐκκακ . Here we should read ἐγκακ . (א A B D F G 17, 67) rather than ἐκκακ (C D3 E K L P). In all five passages D3 K L P have ἐκκακ , in four they are joined by C and E, and in three by F and G. The other uncials vary between ἐνκακ , which is right in Luke 18:1, and may be right in Galatians 6:9 and Ephesians 3:13. The evidence is tabulated by Gregory in Prolegomena to Tisch. Exo_8, p. 78. The verb is not found in LXX, but ἐγκακ is used by Symmachus four times, and ἐκκακ once. Polyb. 4:19:10 has τὸπέμπειντὰςβοηθείαςἐνεκάκησαν of the Lacedemonians dishonourably neglecting to send the promised reinforcements; and Philo, De confus. ling. § 13, has οὔτεἐκκακούμενοςἐκνάμφθην , ἀλλὰέρρωμένωςὠνείδισατοῖςἐξαὐτῶνμοικαταρωμένοις . Vulg. here has non deficimus, d and e non deficimus, g non fiamus segnes, Ambrst. non infirmemur. 2. ἀπειπάμεθα . The verb both in act. and mid. has a variety of meanings, but there is no doubt as to its meaning here; ‘ we have renounced’ or ‘ we renounce,’ abdicamus occulta dedecoris (Vulg.). The aor. is timeless, or “ ingressive,” J. H. Moulton, pp. 109, 134. This is more probable than that the aor. refers to the same period as ἠλεήθημεν . It is not likely that St Paul means that at his call he definitely renounced certain things. And of course ἀπειπάμεθα does not mean that he had previously practised what he here says that he has renounced, as was the case with St Matthew and Zacchaeus as toll-collectors. He means that these practices are quite alien to the work of an Apostle. On this 1st aor. in -α see WH. App. p. 164; Winer, p. 103; Blass, § 21. 1. The mid. of ἀπεῖπον is not found in classical Attic, and the dictum of Thomas Magister (57) that ἀπειπάμην is better Greek than ἀπεῖπον may be doubted. In Joseph. Ant. XVII. iii. 1 we have ἀπείπεσθαιτήνδετὴνγαμετήν ,— a very rare instance of the 2nd aor. mid. τὰκρυπτὰτῆςαἰσχύνης . The exact meaning of ‘ the hidden things of shame’ is not clear; but they are the opposite of παρρησία . ‘ The hidden things which bring disgrace when they are known,’ or ‘ which make a man ashamed of himself,’ or ‘ which shame makes a man conceal.’ The general sense is much the same however we analyse the expression. He is not thinking of heathen vices (Ephesians 5:12), but of the underhand methods of the false teachers. An allusion to circumcision (Thdrt.) is certainly not intended. See on τὰκρυπτὰτοῦσκότους (1 Corinthians 4:5). ‘ The hidden things of dishonesty’ (AV) was not far wrong in 1611, when ‘ dishonesty’ might mean ‘ disgrace,’ and ‘ honesty’ (1 Timothy 2:2) might mean ‘ decorous behaviour,’ and ‘ honest’ (Romans 12:17) ‘ honourable,’ or ‘ of good report.’ This usage still survives in the expression “ to make her an honest woman,” but ‘ dishonesty’ here is now misleading. μὴπεριπατοῦντεςἐνπανουργίᾳ . ‘ So that we do not walk in craftiness’ ; non ambulantes in astutia (Vulg.). This is a result of renouncing τὰκρυπτὰτ . αἰσχύνης . By πανουργία is meant unscrupulous readiness to adopt any means in order to gain one’ s ends. Excepting Luke 20:23, only in Paul (11:3; 1 Corinthians 3:19; Ephesians 4:14). The Apostle had been accused of being a πανοῦργος (12:16), and if 10-13 is part of the intermediate severe letter, this passage may be a reference to that, or to 11:3. If πανουργία refers to the manoeuvres of the Judaizers, it may point to their efforts to undermine the influence of the Apostle. In our ignorance of the circumstances, there is abundant room for conjectures. See on 1 Corinthians 3:3 for περιπατεῖν of daily conduct, a very freq. use in Paul, = versari; also Hort on 1 Peter 1:15; Milligan on 1 Thessalonians 2:12; Lukyn Williams on Galatians 1:13. μηδὲδολοῦντεςτ . λόγοντ . Θεοῦ . See on 3:17. The verb occurs nowhere else in N.T. and only twice in LXX (Psalms 15:3, Psalms 36:2). Here, as in 2:17 and 1 Corinthians 14:36, ὁλόγοςτ . Θεοῦ means the Gospel message, which is its usual, though not invariable, meaning in Paul (1 Thessalonians 2:13; Philippians 1:14; Colossians 1:25; 1 Timothy 4:5; 2 Timothy 2:9; Titus 2:5). See Harnack, The Constitution and Law of the Church, p. 340. By δολοῦντες he means using fallacious arguments and misinterpretations, and falsifying the relation of the old revelation to the new. The Judaizers of course resented his use of the O.T. and his disregard of the letter of the Law. ἀλλὰτῇφανερώσει . ‘ But, on the contrary, by manifestation.’ The word occurs in Biblical Greek only here and 1 Corinthians 12:7: it is selected in opposition to τὰκρυπτὰτῆςαἰσχύνης Cf. 1:12, 3:12, 11:3. τῆςἀληθείας . In opposition to δολοῦντες . ‘ By the manifestation of the truth’ stands first with emphasis; by that, and by nothing else, do they commend themselves; no letters of recommendation, no wily arts, no crying of ‘ peace’ when there is no peace (Jeremiah 6:14, Jeremiah 8:11). In Galatians 2:5, Galatians 2:14, where St Paul is dealing with similar opponents, we have the more definite expression ἡἀλήθειατ . εὐαγγελίου , and in Colossians 1:5, ὁλόγοςτῆςἀληθείαςτ . εὐαγγελίου . In all these places the expression is a protest against misrepresentations of the Gospel and spurious substitutes for it, especially such as destroyed Christian liberty. Veritas quam manifestamus nos ipsos effcit commendabiles (Herveius). συνιστάνοντεςἑαυτούς . This looks back to 3:1-6. Remembering who sent him and made him competent for the work, he is not afraid to magnify his office, although he knows that his doing so may be maliciously misinterpreted. Reflexive pronouns of the 3rd pers. with verbs of the 1st pers. plur. are freq. (v. 5, 5:12, 15, 6:4; 1 Corinthians 11:31; Romans 8:23, Romans 8:15:1; etc.). The simplification is convenient where it causes no ambiguity. πρὸςπᾶσανσυνείδησινἀνθρώπων . ‘ Unto the human conscience in all its forms’ ; see Westcott on Ephesians 1:3, Ephesians 4:8, and cf. Romans 2:9; Ephesians 1:8, Ephesians 1:4:19, 31, Ephesians 1:5:3, Ephesians 1:9, Ephesians 1:6:18; etc. Passion and prejudice are no safe judges; reason cannot always be trusted; even conscience is not infallible, for the conscience of this or that individual, or class, or profession may give a faulty decision. St Paul takes a wider range. He appeals to every kind of conscience among men, confident that they will all admit the justice of his claim; and securus judicat orbis terrarum. For this use of πρός comp. πρὸςτὸνΘεόν in 3:4; for συνείδησις see on 1:12. ἐνώπιοντοῦΘεοῦ . The accumulation of solemn language in this verse here reaches a climax. He has felt the seriousness of the charges which had been openly formulated, or secretly insinuated, against him by his wily opponents, and he meets them seriously and without compromise. He appeals, not only to every form of human conscience, but to Him to whose mercy (v. 1) he owes the high calling which has subjected him to so much criticism, and under whose eye every conscience works: τοὺςεὖφρονοῦνταςἔχομενμάρτυραςκαὶτὸντοῦσυνειδότοςἘπόπτην (Thdrt.). The appeal can go no higher. Magnum esset, si hoc solummodo de hominibus diceret; sed, quia homines falli possunt, ideo subjunxit quod majus est incomparabiliter (Atto Vercellensis). Cf. 7:13; Romans 14:22. The reading συνιστάνοντες (A ? B P 47, 67, 80) is not quite certain; συνιστάντες (א C D F G 17, 39) is preferred by some editors: either is to be preferred to συνιστῶντες (D3 E K L). Winer, p. 94, note. 3. εἰδὲκαὶἔστινκεκαλυμμένοντὸεὐαγγέλιονἡμῶν . ‘ But even though the Gospel which we preach really is veiled.’ The use of εἰκαί (v. 16, 5:16, 12:11) rather than καὶεἰ , and the emphatic position of ἔστιν , which here cannot be enclitic, show that St Paul concedes what is stated hypothetically to be actually a fact. Winer, p. 554. In spite of the φανέρωσιςτῆςἀληθείας , the good tidings were not recognized as such by all. Some denied that there had been any φανέρωσις : his preaching was obscure and shifty. He had said that a veil hid the meaning of the Law from them; it was more true to say that a veil hid his Gospel from them. The Apostle here admits this; a veil has hid and does hide (perf. part.) the Gospel from them, but the veil is on their own hearts (3:15). It is not the fault of the Gospel or of those who preach it that it is rejected by some; it is the hearers’ own fault, because they listen in an attitude that is fatal. They desire, not the truth, but the confirmation of their own views. The sublimity of St Paul’ s teaching and his paradoxical expressions laid him open to the charge of saying ‘ things hard to be understood’ (2 Peter 3:16). But that was not the cause of the vehement opposition to his teaching. His chief offence was his declaring the Law to be obsolete, and thereby (his enemies said) opening the door to boundless licence. So they declared that his Gospel was imperfect. He had never known the Christ, nor had been intimate with those who had known Him. They, on the contrary, had authentic information. ἐντοῖςἀπολλυμένοις . ‘ In the case of those who are perishing’ (see on 2:15). The ἐν is not superfluous (Blass, § 41. 2); nor does it mean ‘ in the hearts of,’ for the Gospel had not reached their hearts; nor ‘ in their judgment,’ like ἐνἐμοί , 1 Corinthians 14:11, for the question is one of fact, not of opinion; but ‘ in their case.’ The uses of ἐν in late Greek are very various; J. H. Moulton, p. 103. Calvin comments on the confidence of the Apostle in this declaration; magnae fiduciae argumentum est, quod pro reprobis ducere audet omnes qui doctrinam respuunt. And then, perhaps remembering his own attitude towards those who dissented from him, he adds, Verum simili fiducia instructos esse convenit, quicunque pro Dei ministris haberi volunt; ut intrepida conscientia non dubitent omnes doctrinae suae adversarios ad Dei tribunal citare, ut illiuc damnationem certam referant. See on 1 John 4:16, where the writer says that he and his fellow-teachers receive their inspiration from God, and their message is rejected only by those who are not of God and are not striving to know Him. 4. ὁθεὸςτοῦαἰῶνοςτούτου . The expression occurs nowhere else; but St Paul speaks of τὸνἄρχοντατῆςἐξουσίαςτοῦἀέρος (see on Ephesians 2:2), while St John, in three utterances attributed to Christ, has ὁἄρχωντοῦκόσμουτούτου . In Mark 3:22 = Matthew 12:24 and Luke 11:15 (Matthew 9:34), Christ’ s opponents say that He casts out demons ἐντῷἄρχοντιτῶνδαιμονίων . In all these cases Satan is meant, and in harmony with these passages St John says that the whole κόσμος , i.e. the whole of the moral and intellectual universe, so far as it is estranged from God, lies in the power of the evil one (see on 1 John 5:19). This does not mean that God abdicates or surrenders any portion of His dominion to Satan, but that those to whom He has granted free will place themselves under the power of darkness.* Here it is not this κόσμος , mundus, but ὁαἰὼνοὗτος , ‘ this age,’ seculum, that is said to have Satan for its god. During the time— believed by St Paul to be short— which would elapse before the Coming of the Lord, Satan reigned wherever there was opposition to the will of God, and this was an enormous sphere. St Paul speaks frequently of ὁαἰὼνοὗτος (1 Corinthians 1:20, 1 Corinthians 1:2:6, 1 Corinthians 1:8, 1 Corinthians 1:3:18; Romans 12:2; Ephesians 1:21), or ὁνῦναἰών (1 Timothy 6:17; 2 Timothy 4:10; Titus 2:12), or ὁνῦνκαιρός (Romans 3:26, Romans 8:18, Romans 11:5), or ὁαἰὼνὁἐνεστώς (Galatians 1:4), where it is especially stigmatized as πονηρός , or, in a remarkable expression which combines both terms, ὁαἰὼντοῦκόσμουτούτου (Ephesians 2:2). The opposite of this evil age or world is ὁαἰὼνμέλλων (Ephesians 1:21; cf. Hebrews 6:5; Luke 15:30, Luke 20:35), which is more commonly designated ἡβασιλείατοῦΘεοῦ , the period or realm in which God reigns supreme. If Satan is the ruler of this limited age, God is the King of the countless ages which are to follow it; He is ὁβασιλεὺςτῶναἰώνων (1 Timothy 1:17; Tob. 13:6, 10; cf. Psalms 145:13, and see J. H. Bernard on 1 Timothy 1:17). In [Clem. Rom.] 2:6 it is said ἔστινδὲοὗτοςὁαἰὼνκαὶὁμέλλωνδύοἐχθροί , and as we cannot be friends of both, we must detach ourselves from this one and cling firmly to the other. It is startling to find one who had all his life held idolatry in abomination, and been zealous for the glory of the one true God, using this grandis et horribilis descriptio Satanae (Beng.) and electing to apply the term θεός to the arch-enemy of God and of mankind (P. Gardner, The Religious Experience of St Paul, p. 203); but what he says about the worship of demons (see on 1 Corinthians 10:20) is some explanation of his view. There was a Rabbinical saying, “ The first God is the true God, but the second God is Samael,” and Irenaeus (1. v. 4) says that the Valentinians called the devil Κοσμοκράτωρ . See J. A. Robinson on Ephesians 6:12; Dalman, Words, p. 165. This verse contains the strongest item of evidence for what is called “ the dualistic element in the thinking of St Paul,” i.e. the recognition of a power or powers other than God, external to man, exerting influence over human affairs, and in some sense independent of God; and it has been maintained that on this point the dualism of the N.T. is sharper than that of contemporary Judaism. It may be so. Increased recognition of the mystery of ‘ the unsearchable riches of Christ’ would lead to a deeper appreciation of ‘ the mystery of lawlessness.’ Fear of giving Apostolic support to the Manichaean doctrine of a good God and an evil one caused various Fathers, both Greek and Latin, to interpret this passage of God. Irenaeus (111. vii. 1) and others (Orig. Chrys. Thdrt. Tert. Hil. Aug.) adopt the device of taking τοῦαἰῶνοςτούτου as the gen. after τῶνἀπίστων — ‘ in whom God has blinded the minds of the unbelievers of this world’ ; and ‘ the unbelievers of this world’ is interpreted to mean those who have no part in the other world, the world of light and bliss. Aug. (c. Faust. xxi. 2) says that plerique nostrum take the sentence in this way. He and others seem to be aware that this is questionable exegesis; but they are of opinion that, as Atto of Vercelli expresses it, because to interpret the words as meaning Satan brings us near to error, we must understand them as meaning God Himself. Calvin’ s comment on this is to the point; Videmus quid faciat contentionis fervor in disputationibus: si composito animo legissent illi ones Pauli verba, nemini eorum in mentem venisset ita in coactum sensum torquere: sed quia urgebant adversarii, magis de illis propulsandis quam de inquirenda Pauli mente solliciti fuerunt. See Chase, The Lord’ s Prayer in the Early Church, pp. 88 f. ἐτύφλωσεντὰνοήματατῶνἀπίστων . ‘ Blinded the minds of the unbelieving.’ Nothing is gained by making τ . ἀπίστων proleptic, ‘ so that they did not believe’ ; on the contrary, it spoils what is the probable meaning. It was because they refused to believe that Satan had power to blind them. They resisted the influence of light until they lost the power of appreciating it. If the adjective had been proleptic, we should have had ἄπιστα rather than τωσνἀπίστων , which is a kind of after-thought added to explain how the disastrous blinding became possible. Neither ἀνεγκλήτους in 1 Corinthians 1:8 (see note there), nor σύμμορφον in Philippians 3:21 (see note) is parallel to τῶνἀπίστων here. As in 3:14, νοήματα here must mean ‘ minds’ rather than ‘ thoughts’ : to speak of blinding men’ s thoughts is somewhat incongruous. In LXX ἄπιστος is very rare; in N.T. it is specially freq. in 1 and 2 Cor., and is almost always used of unconverted Gentiles But here there is such constant allusion to the Judaizers that we can hardly limit τῶνἀπίστων to heathen. Cf. Titus 1:15. In dictating, St Paul has packed his sentence too full, and the construction is so nearly broken that the meaning is in some respects obscure. It is not clear whether οἱἀπολλύμενοι and οἱἄπιστοι are coextensive. If not, which of the two includes the other? The latter question can be answered with some certainty, if it arises. It is not likely that οἱἀπολλύμενοι is the larger class, of which only some are ἄπιστοι . But it is possible that οἱἄπιστοι is a large class, some of whom, by being blinded, become ἀπολλύμενοι . We must translate ἐνοἶς ‘ in whose case,’ not ‘ among whom’ : either ‘ in whose case Satan has blinded the understandings of some who believed not’ ; or, ‘ in whose case Satan blinded their understandings because they believed not.’ The latter is more probably correct, as being the simpler construction. If we adopt it, then all the ἄπιστοι are blinded and become ἀπολλύμενοι , and the two classes are coextensive. The interest of the discussion lies in the question whether St Paul contemplated the possibility of ‘ unbelievers’ who were not ‘ perishing.’ εἰςτὸμὴαὐγάσαι . The verb may be either transitive, ‘ to see,’ or intransitive, ‘ to dawn’ ; therefore either, ‘ that they should not see the illumination of the Gospel of the glory of the Christ,’ or, ‘ that the illumination of the Gospel, etc., should not dawn’ upon them. Both AV and RV take the latter meaning; RV. marg. takes the former, which has in its favour the order of the words and the absence of αὐτοῖς , which is not genuine, but has been inserted in some texts in order to make the latter meaning more possible. Qui oculos ad lucem claudunt justum est ut eis lux occultetur (Herveius); or, as Thdrt. puts it, ἀσθενοῦσιγὰρὀφθαλμοῖςπολέμιοςἥλιος . The rapid sequence, ‘ see’ or ‘ dawn,’ ‘ illumination,’ ‘ good-tidings,’ ‘ glory,’ ‘ the Christ,’ ‘ image of God,’ shows how anxious St Paul is to give some idea of the amazing brightness and beauty which was lost when unbelievers came into the power of Satan. There is something stately both here and in v. 6 in the series of four genitives in succession. In N.T. αὐγάζειν occurs nowhere else, and in LXX it is very rare; φωτισμός occurs here and v. 6 and six times in LXX. It is possible that here we have a trace of the influence of the Book of Wisdom on St Paul; cf. ἀπαύγασμαγάρἐστινφωτὸςαἰδίου , καὶἔσοπτρονἀκηλέδωτοντῆςτοῦθεοῦἐνεργείας (Wisd. 7:26). See on 5:1, 4. In the Testaments (Leviticus 14:4), τὸφῶςτουςνόμουτὸδοθὲνεἰςφωτισμὸνπαντὸςἀνθρώπον . As we might expect, neither αυηγάζειν nor φωτισμός has been found in papyri; they deal with subjects that do not require the use of such words. τῆςδόξηςτοῦΧριστοῦ . The Gospel ‘ which contains and proclaims the glory of the Messiah.’ This was precisely what the Gospel preached by the Judaizers did not do.* The addition of these words was perhaps suggested by the glory of Moses. In 1 Timothy 1:11 we have ‘ the Gospel of the glory of the blessed God.’ Neither expression is inconsistent with ὁλόγοςτοῦσταυροῦ , which is foolishness τοῖςἀπολλυμένοις (see on 1 Corinthians 1:18). It was the cross which led direct to the glory: ‘ He became obedient to the death of the cross; wherefore also God highly exalted Him’ (Philippians 2:9; cf. John 10:17; Hebrews 2:9).† . ὄςἐστινεἰκὼντουςΘεοῦ . Here again, as in ἐνώπιοντοῦΘεοῦ (v. 2), we reach the supreme climax. This addition to the sentence, which is complete without it, is made in order to show what ‘ the glory of the Christ’ means; hinc satis intelligi potest, quanta sit gloria Christi (Beng.). It means the glory which is shed abroad by the one visible Representative of the invisible God, a glory which cannot be seen by those whom Satan has blinded. See on Philippians 2:6 and Colossians 1:15, and comp. Χαρακτὴρτῆςὑποστάσεωςαὐτοῦ (Hebrews 1:3). This is one of the passages in which St Paul comes near to the Johannine doctrine of the Λόγος . See Bernard, ad loc. The Alexandrian school interprets the εἰκὼνΘεοῦ of the Λύγος : see Lightfoot on Colossians 3:10, and Foundations, pp. 192 f. Cf. John 8:19; Wisd. 7:26. Baljon and others suggest that τῶνἀπίστων is a gloss; Bachmann, that the original reading may have been αὐτῶντῶνἀπίστων or simply αὐτῶν . αὐγάσαι (א B F G K L P) rather than καταυγάσαι (C D E H) or διαυγάσαι (A 17). After αὐγάσαι D2 and 3 E K L P, Syrr. Vulg. Aeth. Goth. add αὐτοῖς , which some editors accept; but א A B C D* F G H 17, Lat-Vet. omit, and insertion to smooth the construction is more probable than accidental omission. For Χριστοῦ C has Κυρίου . After τοῦΘεοῦ , א 3 L P, Syr-Hark. add τοῦἀοράτου from Colossians 1:15. 5. οὐγὰρἑαυτοὺςκηρύσσομεν . In spite of such strong disclaimers as 1 Corinthians 1:13, St Paul was accused of preaching himself. His giving himself as a pattern to be imitated (1 Corinthians 4:16, 1 Corinthians 4:7:7, 1 Corinthians 4:11:1; etc.) would serve as a handle for this charge; see on 3:1. It is less probable that by this accusation his enemies meant that his revelations were delusions or deliberate fictions; he had never seen Jesus and knew nothing about Him; what he called “ preaching Christ” was preaching his own fancies. This does not suit the context very well. The γάρ refers to the preceding verses. ‘ I call it “ our Gospel” (v. 3), because we preach it, but its contents are “ the glory of Christ” (v. 4); for it is not ourselves that we preach, but (what is very different) Christ Jesus as Lord.’ Ἑαυτούς is emphatic by position, but κυρίους is not to be understood with it. ‘ It is not ourselves that we preach as lords, but Christ Jesus that we preach as Lord’ is an antithesis which St Paul would not be likely to make. To ‘ preach Christ as Lord’ is to preach Him as crucified, risen, and glorified, the Lord to whom ‘ all authority in heaven and earth has been given.’ To confess Him as Lord is to declare oneself a Christian (Romans 10:9; 1 Corinthians 12:3). Κύριον suggests the δούλους which follows as an antithesis. ἑαυτοὺςδὲδούλουςὑμῶν . ‘ While (we account) ourselves as your bondservants.’ Grammatically, κηρύσσομεν governs the second ἑαυτοὺς as well as the first, but that is not what the Apostle means. He has just stated that he does not preach himself, which is to be understood absolutely. From no point of view and in no capacity does he do that; but the position which he assumes in relation to his converts is not that of Saviour, but of a slave. In 1 Corinthians 3:5 he said διάκονοι , ‘ servants’ : in 1 Corinthians 4:1, ὑπηρέται , ‘ underlings’ ; here he says δοῦλοι , ‘ slaves.’ Elsewhere he calls himself the δοῦλος of Jesus Christ (Romans 1:1; Philippians 1:1); and the qualifying words which he adds here show that this is his meaning here. It is because Christian ministers are the bondservants of Christ that they are the bondservants of those to whom they minister; and only so far as service to them does not interfere with service to Him, is it allowable to be bondservants to men. This is the only passage in which St Paul speaks of being the δοῦλος of his converts. See Chadwick, Pastoral Teaching of St Paul, p. 128. Cf. 1 Corinthians 7:23, 1 Corinthians 9:19. διὰἸησοῦν . Propter Jesum, ‘ for Jesus’ sake.’ The use of this name without Χριστόν commonly denotes our Lord in the time of His humiliation (vv. 10-14; 1 Thessalonians 1:10, 1 Thessalonians 4:14); see on 1 Corinthians 9:1; J. A. Robinson, Ephesians, pp. 23, 107. It is rare in the Pauline Epistles, but it has special point here. It is not in order to curry favour with the Corinthians, or to flatter their conceit, that he counts himself as their δοῦλος , but he does so for the sake of Him who ἑαυτὸνἐκένωσενμορφὴνδούλουλαβών (Philippians 2:7); for the sake of Him who commanded His Apostles to be ready for the meanest service (John 13:14-16). Non ad gloriam nostram praedicamus Evangelium, sed ad claritatem Christi, cui obedimus, dum vobis in ministerio verbi servimus non propter vestrum meritum, sed propter Domini praeceptum (Herveius). For His sake they made themselves the servants of all, in order to bring the more adherents to Him; see on 1 Corinthians 9:19. Some editors make vv. 3 and 4 parenthetical and treat this verse as a continuation and explanation of v. 2. Others, with more reason, make this verse a parenthesis. Clearness is not gained by either arrangement. The connexion of v. 5 with vv. 3 and 4 has been pointed out. There is perhaps yet another thought. ‘ We do not preach ourselves but Jesus as Lord; therefore those unbelievers who reject our preaching reject, not us, but the Lord Jesus.’ On the other hand, the connexion between v. 4 and v. 6 is close. This is one of the places in which it is hard to decide between ΧριστὸνΙησοῦν (B H K L, Syr-Pesh. Copt. Arm.) and Ἰης . Χπ (א A C D E, Latt. Syr-Hark. Goth.). F G have Κύριον before Ἰης . Χρ . P omits Κύριον . Vulg-Clem. and some inferior Latin authorities insert nostrum after Dominum; ‘ we preach Jesus Christ our Lord.’ For διὰἸησοῦν , א * A** C 17, Latt. (per, not propter) Copt. have διὰἸησοῦ , ‘ through Jesus.’ 6. ὅτι . This explains why they must preach Christ and not themselves; ‘ Because the God who said, Out of darkness light shall shine, is He who shone in our hearts.’ This is another reason for not treating v. 5 as a parenthesis. ‘ Out of darkness’ should come before ‘ light shall shine’ in English, as in the Greek. To omit ὅς is a needless simplification; ἐστιν is to be supplied with ὅς . The statement is in antithesis to v. 4, which has influenced the structure of this verse. The unbelieving opponents have been blinded by Satan; the Apostle has been illumined by God Himself, the Creator of Light. Satan reduced them from unbelief to total blindness; God has brought him from darkness to light. In this verse the 1st pers. plur. must mean primarily the Apostle, for the reference to his own experiences on the road to Damascus and in Damascus are almost as clear as his reference to ‘ Let there be light.’ With regard to that, it is possible that some recollection of ἐξανέτειλενἐνσκότειφῶς (Psalms 111:4), or of φῶςποιήσᾶἐκσκότους (Job 37:15), has influenced his wording. He wants for his purpose ἐκσκότους as well as φῶς : it was out of darkness, both physical and spiritual, that God rescued him. God blinded his bodily eyes for three days as a means towards healing his spiritual blindness. How could a man who had had these experiences preach himself? ὁεἰπών , Ἐκσκότουςφῶςλάμψει . The Apostle reminds his converts of the first creative word that is recorded. The God who is Light (see on 1 John 1:5), the nature of which is to communicate itself and expel darkness, and who is ‘ the Father of lights’ (James 1:17), and therefore the Source of all intellectual and spiritual illumination, is the God who illuminated the Apostles, and in a special manner St Paul. God did not allow darkness to reign over the material universe. With the first utterance attributed to Him He dispersed it. Magnum opus, as Bengel remarks. It is not likely that He would allow darkness to prevail throughout the spiritual world. From the first He provided means for dispersing that also. The old lamps, however, were going out; but better ones have taken their place, and some of them have been sent to Corinth. ὃςἔλαμψενἐνταῖςκαρδίαιςἡμῶν . ‘ Is He who shone in our hearts,’ illuminating our whole moral and spiritual being. He who over the primeval chaos said, ‘ Let there be light,’ and provided sun, moon, and stars to preserve and spread it, has shed light into the chaos of our souls, and has thus provided instruments for the perpetual φανέρωσιςτῆςἀληθείας (v. 2). The details of this process in the case of St Paul himself are told us to some extent in Galatians 1:15, Galatians 1:16. As λάμψει must be intransitive in the previous clause, it is probable that ἔλαμψεν also is intransitive. Some, however, understand φῶς , which is the nom. to λάμψει , as the acc. after ἔλαμψεν , ‘ made light to shine.’ But in class. Grk. the transitive use of λάμπειν is poetical and somewhat rare. πρὸςφωτισμὸντῆςγνώσεωςτῆςδόξηςτοῦΘεοῦ . The stately series of genitives is parallel to that in v. 4. In both cases the first genitive is subjective; ‘ the illumining which the knowledge of the glory (or, the Gospel of the glory) produces.’ * In v. 4, φωτισμὸςτ . εὐαγγελίον cannot mean ‘ the enlightenment which produces the Gospel,’ and it is unlikely that φωτ . τ . γνώσεως means ‘ the enlightenment which issues in knowledge.’ The knowledge which has this illumining power is in the Apostles, imparted to them by God with a view to their employing it to illuminate others. In the account of his conversion given by St Paul to King Agrippa he states that Christ told him of this purpose at the outset; ‘ To this end have I appeared to thee, to appoint thee a minister and a witness, delivering thee from the People and from the Gentiles, to whom I send thee, to open their eyes that they may turn from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God’ (Acts 26:16-18). ‘ With a view to illumining men with the knowledge of the glory of God’ gives the sense. Some would limit the action of φωτισμός to ἐνταῖςκαρδίαιςἡμῶν , ‘ God shone in our hearts to illumine them, ’ so that the scope of the statement does not extend beyond the Apostles and preachers; but vv. 3 and 4 clearly cover those to whom they preached, and the hearers are probably included here. ἐνπροσώπῳΧριστοῦ . Like ὅςἐστινεἰκὼντ . Θεοῦ in v. 4, this is an addition to a sentence which would be complete without it, yet an addition which is full of meaning. Christ is the image of God, and in His face is revealed so much of the Divine glory as can be communicated to men, and it is this which Apostles know and have to make known. It may be that St Paul is still thinking of the reflexion of the Divine glory on the face of Moses, and hence says ἐνπροσώπῳΧριστοῦ rather than ἐνΧριστῷ .† But it is more probable that he is thinking of the Divine glory in the face of Christ, which he himself saw on the road to Damascus. Elsewhere he merely affirms that he has seen the Lord (1 Corinthians 9:1, 1 Corinthians 15:8), or that God revealed His Son to him (Galatians 1:15). Here he seems to be desiring to tell, as in the narratives in Acts, the splendour of the vision. Christ was revealed to him by God-in a glory which was Divine. When he speaks of having knowledge ‘ of the glory of God in the face of Christ,’ he is speaking of what he himself has seen. See Bousset, ad loc. For προσώπῳ see on 2:10. On this lofty level St Paul leaves for a while (till v. 11) the glorification of Apostleship, which is a different thing from glorification of himself. God does wonderful work with very humble instruments, and takes His instruments sometimes from very unexpected quarters. St Paul often remarks how true this is of himself. But whatever this demerits may be, they only enhance the glory of the Apostleship. What he has accomplished is due to the grace given to an Apostle, not to the abilities of Saul of Tarsus. It is often debated whether the experiences which produced his conversion were objective or subjective, whether there was any light that was seen by others and any voice that was heard by others. The accounts agree about the sight, but not about the sound. May there not be an error about both? May not the whole of the experiences have been mental, and confined to the future Apostle?* These questions will continue to be asked, and no answer to them can be proved to be true. What is certain is that these experiences produced in St Paul a conviction, which lasted the whole of his life and influenced his whole life, that he had seen and held a conversation with the risen Lord Jesus. In this passage he himself seems to give us both a subjective and an objective element. In ὃςἔλαμψενἐνκαρδίαιςἡμῶν we have an internal experience; in ἡδόξατοῦΘεοῦἐνπροσώπῳΧριστοῦ we have an external one. Comp. ἐνἐμοί (Galatians 1:16) with the one and ἑώρακα (1 Corinthians 9:1) with the other (Klö pper, ad loc.). The reasonableness of believing in both these elements is well put by A. T. Robertson, Epochs in the Life of St Paul, ch. iii.; and by J. H. Ropes, The Apostolic Age, pp. 107-110. See also Ramsay, The Teaching of Paul in Terms of the Present Day, p. 15. λἀμψει (א A D 67**, Syrr. Aeth.) rather than λάμψαι (א 3 C D3 E F G H K L P, Latt. Goth. Arm.), which was perhaps substituted because the wording is so different from Genesis 1:3; ‘ who commanded the light to shine out of darkness’ avoids divergence as to the form of the command. D F G Chrys. Tert. Ambrst. omit ὅς before ἔλαμψεν , which simplifies the construction. C D* F G d e g r Aeth. substitute αὐτοῦ for τοῦΘεοῦ , ένπροσώπῳΧριστοῦ (A B 17, Arm. (codd.), Orig. Chrys. Tert.) rather than ἐνπρ . ἸησοῦΧρ (א C H K L P, Syrr. Copt. Goth.) or ἐνπρ . Χρ . Ἰησοῦ (D E F G, Latt.). 4:7-5:10. The Sufferings and Supports of an Apostle It may seem strange that so glorious a dispensation should be proclaimed by such frail and suffering ministers; but that proves that the power of it is from God and not from them. They are sustained by God’ s power and by the prospect of future blessedness. The sure hope that present suffering leads on to eternal glory enables them to bear all things in the service of Christ. 7 But this glory has another side. This illuminating power is entrusted to unattractive and worthless persons, as treasure is stored in earthen jars, in order that it may be patent to all that the excellence of power which we exhibit is God’ s gift, and does not emanate from us. 8 In our conflicts we suffer heavily, but are never utterly defeated. Often hard pressed, yet not driven to surrender; in desperate plight, yet not in despair; 9 chased from the field, yet not left to the mercy of the foe; beaten to the earth, yet not killed outright; 10 always carrying about in the body the imminent danger of dying as Jesus died, in order that by the continual escapes and deliverances of our bodies it might be manifest to the world that Jesus is still alive. 11 Yes, every day that we live we are continually being handed over to death for the sake of Jesus, in order that in just that part of us which is liable to death it might be made manifest to all that the living Jesus is at work. 12 So then it is His death that takes effect in us while it is His life which, through its power in us, takes effect in you. 18 There is a Psalmist who has written, ‘ I believed, therefore I spoke.’ That is just our case. We have exactly the same spirit of faith and trust that he had, and therefore we do not keep silence. 14 We also speak with confidence, because we know that He who raised the Lord Jesus from the grave will, in virtue of His Resurrection, raise us up also, and will bring us into His presence, side by side with you. 15 For all that we do and all that we suffer is done and suffered for your benefit, in order that the grace which is bestowed on us, being augmented by the increasing number of those who believe with us and pray for us, may cause a greater volume of thanksgiving to rise both from us and from them to the glory of God. 16 No wonder, therefore, that, with your salvation to work for and this faith to sustain us, we do not lose heart and act as cowards. On the contrary, although our physical powers are wasting away, yet what is spiritual in us is being ceaselessly made fresh and strong. 17 By this I mean that our present afflictions, which may seem heavy and protracted, are really light and momentary compared with the enduring substantiality of glory which they are working out for us in an ever increasingly preponderating degree. 18 And we are sure of this, because we direct our gaze, not towards the fleeting things which we now see around us, but towards the lasting realities which to us are at present unseen. 5. 1 I affirm this because we known well that, if the tentlike body which is our earthly dwelling should be taken down, God supplies us with a better building, a dwelling that is supernatural, lasting, with its site not on earth but in heaven. 2 For truly in this tent-dwelling we sigh and groan, desiring greatly to have our heavenly home put over us, 3 sure that this putting of it on will secure us from being found at Christ’ s coming without any house at all. 4 For verily we that are still in our tent, awaiting His return, have reason to sigh and groan, feeling oppressed because, while we shrink from the idea of losing it by death, we desire to have the better dwelling placed over it, in order that all that is perishable in the one may be swallowed up by the imperishable nature of the other. 5 Our feelings may seem to be a poor security for this, but we have a far stronger one. He who has schooled us for this very change is none other than God Himself; and He has given us, as a guarantee that we shall have it, no less than His Holy Spirit. 6 Having, therefore, at all times such a sure ground for confidence, and knowing that so long as we are still at home in the body we are in a sort of exile from our home in the Lord— 7 for here we have to guide our steps by means of faith, because the realities which shape our lives cannot be seen— 8 we have, I say, a sure ground for confidence, and in that confidence we are well content rather to go into exile from our home in the body, and take up our abode in our home with the Lord. 9 Having such a preference, we are not only well content to leave the body, but we earnestly desire that, whether we are still in it or already out of it, we may find acceptance with Him. 10 This desire, in all conditions of existence to be acceptable to Him, is inevitable, when we remember that, by God’ s decree, from which we cannot escape, there is not one of us but will have the whole of his life and character laid bare before Christ at His judgment-seat, in order that he may receive recompense for the things of which his body was the instrument, in exact requital for his conduct, whether it was meritorious or worthless. Edmund Waller’ s lines on Old Age may serve as a prelude to this part of the Epistle. The soul’ s dark cottage, battered and decayed, Lets in new light through chinks that Time hath made: Stronger by weakness, wiser men become As they draw near to their eternal home. Leaving the old, both worlds at once they view That stand upon the threshold of the new. The subject remains the same,— the value of the Apostolic office; but it is regarded from a new point of view. He has shown the exceeding glory of the new dispensation and its superiority to the old, especially with regard to the courage and frankness exhibited by its ministers (3:4-4:6). That does not mean that the ministers are magnificent persons. In the Apostle’ s case, so far from external magnificence, there is constant weakness with frequent suffering and depression. But in the weakness of the preachers the Divine power of the Gospel becomes all the more conspicuous, and they know that they may count upon the necessary support here and an eternal reward hereafter. These sufferings and compensating supports are discussed in three aspects; in reference to the difficulties of ministerial work (7-15), in reference to the hope of resurrection (16-5:5), and in reference to life, death, and judgment (5:5-10). In the first of these he is possibly referring once more to his opponents’ reproaches. They may have said that his frequent sufferings were a judgment on him for his false teaching about the Law. We know that they had laughed at his mean appearance and want of eloquence (10:10). But, he now urges, the contents of a vessel cannot always be inferred from the character of the vessel. 7. Ἔχομεν . The Apostle again and again dwells upon the goodly possessions of the Christian, and especially of the Christian minister; πεποίθησιντοιαύτην (3:4), τοιαύτηνἐλπίδα , (3:12), τ . διακονίανταύτην (4:1), θησανρὸντοῦτον (4:7), τὸαὐτὸπνεῦματῆςπίστεως (4:13), οἰκοδομὴνἐκΘεοῦ (5:1), πάντα (6:10), ταύταςτὰςἐπαγγελίας (7:1); and he often builds an argument upon these goodly possessions. Ἔχομενδὲτὸνθησαυρὸντοῦνον . The δέ marks the contrast between the glory on which he has been enlarging and the humiliations about to be described; ‘ But there is a great deal to be said on the other side.’ The contrast is skilfully drawn: I. it confirms the declaration that the preachers do not preach themselves, for in themselves they are despised and persecuted; 2. it works round to a conclusion which is much in favour of the Corinthians (vv. 12-15). ‘ This treasure’ is the illumining power of the knowledge of Divine glory. The power is limitless, but it is stored in very unlikely receptacles. ἐνὀστρακίνοιςσκεύεσιν . The expression σκεῦοςὀστράκινον occurs four times in Leviticus, and ἂγγος or ἀγγεῖονὀστρ is common elsewhere in LXX. Here we have to determine the literal meaning of σκεύη and from this to reach the metaphorical use. The word in its literal sense has a wide range. Articles of furniture in a house (Luke 17:31), differing greatly in value and use (Romans 9:21-23; Rom_2 Tim. 1:20), are σκεύη . Not only a vessel for holding things (John 19:29), but a sheet (Acts 10:11), is a σκεῦος . A σκεῦος is inanimate; it is an instrument or implement, as distinct from a ζῶον (Plat. Rep. x. 601 D, Gorg. 506 D). It is doubtful whether σκεῦος in its literal sense ever means a body its metaphorical sense in N.T. is commonly assumed to be taken from the meaning ‘ vessel,’ but this is not always correct. In Acts 9:15, σκεῦοςἐκλογῆς , ‘ a vessel of election,’ ‘ a chosen vessel,’ should rather be ‘ an elect instrument.’ In 1 Peter 3:7, ὡςἀσφενεστέρῳσκεύελ , ‘ as to the weaker vessel,’ should rather be ‘ as to the weaker chattel’ : both husband and wife are articles of furniture in God’ s house, and one of them is stronger than the other. In 1 Thessalonians 4:4 the meaning of τὸἑαυτοῦσκεῦος remains doubtful and does not help us here. In this passages ‘ vessel’ is certainly right; treasure was frequently stored in earthen jars, a fact of which Wetstein gives numerous illustrations. * If the treasure is the illumining power of the knowledge γῆςδόξηςτοῦΘεοῦ , what are the vessels in which it does its work? We perhaps give too limited an answer when we say, ‘ the bodies of the chosen ministers.’ It is quite true that the human body is often spoken of as a mean vessel or vase which holds the much more precious mind or soul. It is one of those metaphors which are so obvious as to be inevitable. Cicero (Tusc. Disp. i. 22), vas animi. Seneca (Ad Marciam Consolatio, 11) Quid est homo? Quodlibet quassum vas, et quodlibet fragile … imbecillum corpus, ad omnem fortune contumeliam projectum. Philo (Quod deterius potiori inside. sol. § 46), τὸτῆςψυΧῆςἀγγεῖον , τὸσῶμα . And again (De Migr. Abr. § 35) ὁμὲνγὰρἡμέτεροςνοῦςπεριέχεταιὡςἐνἀγγείῳτῷσώματι . See also the parallel Wisd. 9:15. Marcus Aurelius (x. 38) bids us remember that what is within the vessel, τὸἔνδονἐγκεκρυμμένον is the real ἄνθρωπος , and τὸπερικείμενονἀγγειῶδες ought not to be included. Chrys., Thdrt., and others think that the ὀστρ . σκεῦος here means the human body, and that the epithet ‘ earthen’ refers to man being made of the dust of the earth. The reference to the creation of light in v. 6 makes such an allusion not impossible; but in that case we should have expected Χοῦνἀπὸτῆςγῆς (Gen . 2:7) to have suggested either χοϊκο͂ς (1 Corinthians 15:47), or γηγενής (Wisd. 8:1), or γήινος , rather than ὀστράκινος . Gideon’ s ὐδρείαι (Judges 7:16, Judges 7:19) have no epithet, and they were used to hide light. Tertullian understands the vessels here as meaning bodies; he translates (De Res. Carn. 7, 44) in testaceis vaseulis or vasis, and adds scilicet in carne. Vulg. has in vasis fictilibus. But it is not impossible that here the σκεῦος is the whole personality. It was in the man as a whole, and not in his body in particular, that the Divine treasure which was to enrich the world was placed to be dispensed to others. In this work the body was indispensable, but it was not the only factor. The participles in vv. 8-10 apply partly to the body and partly to the mind, and they apply more to the former than to the latter, because the metaphors are taken from bodily contests; and the epithet ὀστρακίνοις indicates the general unattractiveness and insignificance of the men who preached the Gospel, and not merely the fragile character of their bodies. The metaphor of earthenware as representing human beings is common in O.T. (Isaiah 29:16, 30:14, 45:9, 64:8; Jeremiah 18:6; Lamentations 4:2; Job 10:9), and in such passages it is the whole man, and not merely his body, that is contemplated. Cf. 4 Esdr. 4:11; quomodo poterit vas tuum capere Altissimi viam? The epithet here is chosen because of the treasure, inestimable worth in a worthless vessel; and ὀστράκινος is sometimes used in the sense of worthless. Epictertus applies ὀστράκινος to discourse, opinions, pursuits, desires; “ Your utensils,” he says, “ are of gold, and your discourse of earthenware,” χρυσᾶσκεύη , ὀστράκινονδὲλόγονκ .τ .λ (Dis. iii. 9). ἵναἡὑπερβολὴτῆςδυνάμεωςᾖτοῦΘεοῦ . ‘ (In order) that the exceeding greatness (12:7) of the power may be God’ s and not from us.’ Here ‘ may be’ means ‘ may be seen to be,’ φανῇ or εὑρεθῇ in Romans 3:4, γινέσθω is used in the same sense, and in Romans 7:13, γένηγαι Cf. οὐκἀφ ʼ ἐαυτῶν … ὡςἐξἑαντῶν (3:5). ‘ Of God and not of us’ (AV) obliterates the difference between τοῦΘεοῦ and ἐξἡμῶν . ‘ May be perceived to belong to God and not to originate with ourselves’ is the meaning. Dei, non modo ex Deo; deus non modo largitur virtutem, sed semper praestat (Beng.). The reading ἐκτ . Θεοῦ (Baljon and others) is pure conjecture. By ὐπερβολή (see on 1:8) is meant that the power is a great deal more than is sufficient for its purpose; it triumphs over all opposition. The δύναμις is the power of his preaching (1 Corinthians 2:4), with which we may perhaps couple the power of his miracles, and certainly that of his endurance,— all the power which produced the conversion of so many in spite of such great obstacles. Ut sublimitas sit virtutis Dei, et non ex nobis (Vulg.) is misleading, the sit being misplaced. It is possible to translate ‘ that the exceeding greatness may be of the power of God and not from ourselves,’ but the position of ᾖ is against it, and ὑμερβολή without further definition is awkward; superabundance of what? Those who take the sentence in this way give very different answers to this question. Elsewhere Jerome takes the more probable construction; ut abundantia fortitudinis nostrae sit ex Deo et non ex nobis (Con. Pelag. iii. 9). So also Augustine; ut eminentia uirtutis sit Dei et non ex nobis (Serm. 169, 12). God designed that the power in speading the Gospel should be recognized as His; He therefore chose humble instruments who could not be supposed to have produced such effects by their own powers. 8-10. The rhythm in these three verses is clearly marked by the balance of the clauses. We have four illustrations of the way in which the frailty of the instruments might have been fatal to any other cause, but in this case were not allowed to be so. The fifth instance is different. They are all taken from the Apostle’ s own experience. 8. ἐνπαντὶθλιβόμενοι . We have the same words in 7:5; ‘ in everything pressed.’ In 1:6 it was necessary to translate θλιβόμεθα ‘ are afflicted,’ because of the frequent ‘ affliction’ in that passage. But here the radical signification of ‘ pressure’ (Mark 3:9) must be retained, because of στενοΧωρούμενοι . The pressure is that of persecution (1 Thessalonians 3:4; 2 Thessalonians 1:6, 2 Thessalonians 1:7; Hebrews 11:37). The indefinite ἐνπαντί is to be understood with all the pairs of participles. Chrys. paraphrases, ‘ in respect of foes and friends, of those who are hostile and those who are of one’ s own household.’ Ἐνπαντί occurs ten times in 2 Cor. Elsewhere in Paul, 1 Corinthians 1:5 only. οὐστενοΧωρούμενοι . ‘ Not in hopeless straits,’ not in a plight from which extrication is impossible: nunquam deest exitus 1 Corinthians 10:13); in inviis vias salutis invenimus; ἐνἀπόροιςπράγμασινπόρουςεὑρίκομενσωτηρίας (Thdrt.) He is speaking of external difficulties, not of mental anxiety: that comes next. Here we have οὐ with a participle (which is rare in N.T.) four times in two verses; but there are eight other examples in the Pauline Epistles; see on 1 Corinthians 9:26; J. H. Moulton, p. 231; Blass, § 75.5. We have στενοΧωρία Romans 2:9, Romans 8:35. ἀπορούμενοιἀλλ ʼ οὐκἐξαπορούμενοι . Once more a play upon words (see on 1:13); ‘ in despondency, yet not in despair’ ; indigemus, sed non perinde indigemus (Tert. Scorp. 13). * There may be the greater anxiety and perplexity, so that one does not know what to do, and yet confidence that all will end well. Such a state of mind is quite compatible with expectation of death (see on 1:8). 9. διωκόμενοι , ἀλλ ʼ οὐκἐλκαραλειπόμενοι . ‘ Pursued by men (1 Corinthians 4:12), yet not forsaken by God.’ ‘ Pursued by foes, yet not left in the lurch by friends’ (Plat. Symp. 179 A), might be the meaning, but it has less point. The ruling idea throughout is that God manifests His power in His servants’ weakness. Whatever hostile agents, whether human or diabolical, may do, the earthen vessels are able to bear the shock and continue to render service. In LXX, the verb is used of the Divine promise; οὐμήσεἐγκαταλείπω (Genesis 28:15; Joshua 1:5; cf. Deuteronomy 31:6, Deuteronomy 31:8). καταβαλλόμενοι , ἀλλ ʼ οὐκἀπολλύμενοι . ‘ Struck down, yet not destroyed’ ; struck down, either ἐνῥομφαίᾳ (2 Kings 19:7), or ἐνμαχαίρᾳ (Jeremiah 19:7), or any other weapon (Hdt. iv. 64). It is probable that the last two illustrations, and possible that all four, are taken from combatants in battle or in the arena; ‘ hard pressed, yet not hemmed in; in difficulties, yet not in despair; pursued, yet not abandoned; smitten down, yet not killed.’ But ἐγκαταλειπόμενοι must not be understood of being left behind in a race, nor καταβαλλόμενοι of being thrown in wrestling. The four form a climax. 10. The fifth illustration sums up the preceding four, and carries the climax to the supreme point, ‘ always dying, yet always alive.’ The four kinds of suffering are condensed as ἡνέκρωσιςτοῦἸησοῦ , and the four kinds of deliverance as ἡζωὴτ . Ἰ . The emphatic παντοτε repeats the emphatic παντί (v. 8) and anticipates the emphatic ἀεί (v. 11), from which it should be distinguished in translation; ‘ at all times’ (2:14, 5:6, 9:8). τὴννέκρωσιντ . Ἰ . The meaning of this ‘ putting to death of Jesus’ is explained in the next verse. The missionaries were perpetually being delivered unto death for Christ’ s sake. They were never free from peril. Enemies were always seeking their lives, as they sought His life, and to a large extent the enemies in both cases were Jews. All this He and they endured, because it was so decreed in accordance with the will of God. They shared His sufferings, including the process which in His case ended in death, and which at any time might so end in their case (see on Philippians 3:10 and 1 Corinthians 15:31). This shows that St Paul taught his converts details in the history of Jesus, especially His sufferings ending in death. Here he assumes that they know. In this late Greek the different shades of meaning attached to terminations become somewhat indistinct. See on 1:12, 14 and on 9:10. Here νέκρωσις has the old force of indicating a process, whereas in Romans 4:19 νέρωσις means ‘ deadness’ rather than ‘ putting to death’ or ‘ deadening.’ Epictetus says that most people take all means to prevent the mortification of the body, while few care much about the mortification of the soul (Dis. 1:5). The Apostle’ s life, like the Lord’ s, was a perpetual martyrdom, ending at last in actual putting to death; with this difference, that Christ knew, up to the arrest in Gethsemane, that His hour was not yet come, whereas St Paul had no such knowledge. Here again the Apostle expresses in mystic and paradoxical language his union with Christ. In his frail, weary, battered person he ever bears the dying of Jesus, in order that the life also of Jesus may be exhibited to the world. This may mean that the frequent deliverances from difficulty, danger, and death are evidence that the Crucified is still alive and has Divine power; cf. 1:5; Colossians 1:24; 2 Timothy 2:12; 1 Peter 4:13, 1 Peter 5:1.* See on 1 Peter 3:18, p. 161. Thdrt. and others explain the ἵνα … φανερεθῇ of the hope of a future resurrection and immortality. But ἐντῇφνητῇσαρκὶἡμῶν in v. 11, which paraphrases v. 10, compels us to confine the explanation to this life. From the repetition of τοῦἸησοῦ (see on v. 5) we see that St Paul does not separate the historic Jesus from the glorified Christ. To him it is the same Jesus. † Bengel thinks that St Paul repeats the name Jesus, because singularitur sensit dulcedinem ejus. That thought inspired St Bernard’ s “ Joyful Rhythm,” Jesus dulcis memoria, well known through Caswall’ s translation, “ Jesu, the very thought of Thee,” and the Jesu dulcedo cordium of the Paris Breviary; to which we may add Newton’ s “ How sweet the name of Jesus sounds” (Olney Hymns, No. 57, ed. 1779): but it may be doubted whether it is the cause of the repetition here. The point here is that the dying and living of one and the same Jesus are found in one and the same servant of Jesus. In περιφέροντες we have an allusion to missionary journeys. For the first τοῦἸησοῦ , D* F G, d e f g have τοῦΧριστοῦ , and between τοῦ and Ἰησοῦ , K L, Syr-Hark. insert Κυρίον . See Blass, § 46. 10, who points out that the art. with Ἰησοῦς is usual in the Gospels, but rare in the Epistles and Rev. After the first τῷσώματι , D E F G Latt. Syr-Pesh. Copt. add ἠμῶν . For the second τῷσώματι , א , Vulg. have τοῖςσώμασιν . 11. ἀεὶγὰρἡμεῖςοἱζῶντες . ‘ For always we who are alive are being handed over unto death.’ Death is a monster that devours victims who are alive. All their life long, the missionaries are being thrown, like Daniel, into peril of almost certain death, and are as wonderfully delivered (2 Timothy 4:17; see on 1 Corinthians 15:31, 1 Corinthians 15:32). Hence the pointed insertion of οἱζῶντες : ‘ we are ever a living prey.’ It was natural to use παραδιδόμεθα in such a context; but the verb may have been chosen because tradition habitually used it of Christ being “ handed over” to His blood-thirsty enemies (Mark 9:31, Mark 9:10:33, Mark 9:14:10, Mark 9:18, Mark 9:21, etc.): we have παραδοῦναιεἰςθάνατον 2 Chronicles 32:11. διὰἸησοῦν . Here Vulg. rightly has propter Jesum, not, as in v. 5, per Jesum. The constant risking of life is well worth facing for His sake, and the risking is thus amply justified. For lower reasons it might be wrong. ἐντῇθνηρῇσαρκὶἡμῶν . This comes at the end in a tone of triumph and repeats the paradox of v. 10 in a stronger form; so that, while the first half of v. 11 elucidates the first half of v. 10, the second half intensifies the second. In just that element of our nature which is liable to death, the life of Jesus is to be manifested. Hence the change from σῶμα to σάρξ and the addition of θνητή , a word found only in this group of Epistles in N.T. This manifestation of the life of Jesus probably does not refer to the transformation of the physical body into a spiritual body which envelops and absorbs it (v. 1-5; see on 1 Corinthians 15:40-44). Such an explanation destroys the parallel between ἐντῷσώματι and ἐντῇθνητῇσαρκί . Rather it refers to the case which Dryden (Abs. and Achit. i. 156) describes; A fiery soul, which, working out its way. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/iccnt/ 5:1-5. Here again, as between i and ii, and between iii and iv, the division of chapters is not well made. There is no clear break at this point, and vv. 1-5, or indeed vv. 1-10, have a closer connexion with what precedes than with what follows them. In vv. 1-5 the subject of the sufferings and compensations of Christ’ s servants in reference to the hope of the Resurrection is continued. The opening words show that once more we have an explanation of what has just been stated, especially οὐκἐγκακοῦμεν . Οἴδαμενγάρ here is equivalent to εἰδότες in 4:14, ‘ because we know, fide magna (Beng.). In both cases St Paul goes far beyond human experience, and yet he says, ‘ we know.’ He could say that experience had taught him that the Lord Jesus had been raised from the dead, and that he himself had been often rescued from imminent death. But experience had not taught him that God will raise us from the dead, if we die before the Lord comes; or that He will supply us with spiritual bodies, in exchange for our material bodies, if we are still alive when He comes. Yet he has a sureness of conviction which we may perhaps call a Divine intuition. He is confident that in these matters he possesses knowledge which transcends experience, and with the inspiration of a Prophet he declares what has been revealed to him. See on 1 Corinthians 15:20 and 51. For some there will be a resurrection: for others there will be a transformation; for all there will be a spiritual body suitable to the new state of existence. The contrast between material bodies which are daily being wasted and spirits which are daily being renewed, will not continue much longer. Cf. 1 Thessalonians 4:15. Men of science have contended that in this last point St Paul is confirmed by science; “ The same principles which guide us from the continuous existence of the outer world to acknowledge an Unseen, lead us, on the assumption of our own existence after death, to acknowledge a spiritual body. … We certainly hold that, if we are to accept scientific principles, one of the necessary conditions of immortality is a spiritual body, but we as resolutely maintain that of the nature of this spiritual body we are and must probably remain profoundly ignorant” (The Unseen Universe, by Balfour Stewart and P. G. Tait, 4th ed. PP. 7, 8; see also p. 203). 1. οἴδαμενγάρ . St Paul frequently uses this verb of things which are known by experience and which any Christian may come to know (1 Corinthians 8:1, 1 Corinthians 8:4; Romans 2:2, Romans 2:3:19, Romans 2:8:28; etc.), although for such knowledge γινώσκειν would be the more suitable word. But here οἴδαμεν is used of intuitive knowledge. Haec scientia non est humani ingenii, sed ex Spiritus sancti revelatione manat (Calvin). Comp. the οἶδαγάρ of Job 19:25, Job 19:27, where there is much which resembles this passage, and see on 1 Corinthians 15:51. Bousset thinks that St Paul is appealing to apocalyptic traditions known to him and the Corinthians, but no longer known to us.* ὅτιἐάν . ‘ That if our earthly tent-dwelling were taken down.’ There is no καί , and we must not translate ‘ that even if, etc.’ He is merely taking the case of those who do not live to see the Lord’ s return, which he still thinks will be exceptional; most people will live to see it. ἡἐπίγειοςἡμῶνοἰκίατοῦσκήνους . ‘ The earthly house of our tabernacle.’ Vulg. is interesting, but not accurate; Scimus enim quoniam si terrestris domus nostra hujus habitationis dissolvatur, quod aedificationem ex Deo habeamus. Here ὅτι is translated twice, by quoniam, and then superfluously by θυοδ . Hujus is also superfluous, but it is meant to represent τοῦ . In 1 Corinthians 1:20, ὁκόσμος is rendered hoc seculum, and in 3:19, 4:13, 5:10, 14:10, hic mundus.† Habitatio is trebly unsatisfactory. (1) It makes no sufficient contrast to aedificatio, the one being temporary and fragile, the other permanent and solid. (2) In v. 2, habitatio is used to translate the permanent οἰκητήριον . (3) In v. 4, σκῆνος is rendered tabernaculum. The metaphor of a tent to indicate the human body would readily occur to a σκηνοποιός (Acts 18:3), but St Paul employs it only this once, and it is common enough in literature, although not in N.T. (cf. John 1:14; 2 Peter 1:13, 2 Peter 1:14) or in O.T. (cf. Isaiah 38:12). Modern writers may have had this passage in their minds, as in J. Montgomery’ s well-known verse; Here in the body pent Absent from Him I roam, Yet nightly pitch my moving tent A day’ s march nearer home. Ἐπίγειος certainly means ‘ earthly’ and not ‘ earthy’ or ‘ earthen’ ; it is opposed to ἐπουράνιος (1 Corinthians 15:40; Philippians 2:10; John 3:12), and denotes what exists on earth and is connected with this world. Vulg. commonly renders it terrestris, which likewise cannot mean ‘ earthen,’ but in Philippians 2:10 and James 3:15 has terrenus, which might mean that. Clem. Alex. (Strom. v. 14, p. 703, ed. Potter) says that Plato called man’ s body γήινονσκῆνος , and in Wisd. 9:15 we have τὸγεῶδεςσκῆνος , but in neither case does the epithet seem to be quite congruous. It is probable that St Paul knew Wisdom, and that here and elsewhere that book has influenced his language, if not his thought; the verse runs φθαρτὸνγὰρσῶμαβαρύνειψυχὴνκαὶβρίθειτὸγεῶνοςσκῆνοςνοῦνπολυφρόντιδα . With this passage comp. Wisd. 3:1-4, and see Sanday and Headlam, Romans, pp. 51, 52, 267. In Job 4:19, οἰκίαςπηλίνας , ‘ houses of clay,’ there is no incongruity, and there the reference to the material of which man was made is expressed; ἐξὧνκαὶαὐτοὶἐκτοῦαὐτοῦπηλοῦἐσμεν . There is no doubt that ἡἐπίγειοςοἰκίατοῦσκήνους means the body, but some understand ἐπίγειος of the earth on which we dwell. The genitive is one of apposition, a house that is a tent, a ‘ tabernacle-house’ or ‘ tent-dwelling.’ Field thinks that the use of σκῆνος for the human body comes from Pythagorean philosophy. In this he follows Wetstein, who says that the Pythagoreans compared man’ s skin to the skins of which tents were made. Wetstein gives abundant quotations in which the body is called σκῆνος . Hippocrates, “ the Father of Medicine,” has ἀπολείπουσαἡψυχὴτοῦσώματοςσκῆνος (Aph. viii. 18), and he may have been a disciple of Hippocrates the Pythagorean. Philo (De Somn. i. 20) uses the less depreciatory term οἶκος — τὸνσυμφυᾶτῆςψυχῆςοἶκον , τὸσῶμα , and it is οἰκία which is the leading term here; τοῦσκήνους is adjectival. An allusion to the camp-life of the Israelites is possible, but the passage is quite intelligible without it; see Lightfoot on Philippians 1:23. The general meaning is that life here is only a pilgrimage. Christians are citizens of a realm that is in heaven, and on earth they are only sojourners; see Hort on πάροικος and παρεπίδημος in 1 Peter 2:2. The idea that life in this world is only a pilgrimage towards a better and permanent abode is not peculiar to Christianity. Cicero has it often. He says that animos, cum e corporibus excesserint, in caelum, quasi in domicilium serum, pervenire (Tusc. 1. xi. 24); and again, that the soul is in the body as in a house that does not belong to it, aliena domus; heaven is its home (Tusc. I. xxii. 51).* Again, Ex vita ita discedo tanquam ex hospitio, non tanquam e domo; commorandi enim natura diversorium nobis, non habitandi, dedit (De Sen. xxiii. 84). And Pope (Essay on Man, i. 97) follows him. The soul, uneasy and confined from home, Rests and expatiates in a life to come. So also in the well-known lines of the Emperor Hadrian, who, however, is doubtful about the future home; Animula, vagula, blandula, hospis comesque corporis, quae nunc abibis in loca, Pallidula, rigida, nudula? See the account which Josephus (B.J. ii. viii. 11) gives of the creed of the Essenes; the freed souls are borne aloft, μετεώρουςφέρεσθαι . Two genitives, depending in different relations on the same substantive, ἡμῶνοἰκίατοῦσκήνους , are not rare either in Greek or Latin, the most common instances being, as here, where one is of a person, the other of a thing; Philippians 2:30; 2 Peter 3:2; Hebrews 13:7. Cicero (Tusc. 1. xv. 35) defines labor as functio quaedam vel animi vel corporis gravioris operis. καταλύθῃ . ‘ Dissolved’ (AV, RV), ‘ destroyed’ (Tyn. Cran. Genevan). Neither houses nor tents are ‘ dissolved,’ although the human body may be. ‘ Pulled down’ would apply to both houses and tents, and would not be inappropriate to our bodily frames. Bengel calls καταλύθῃ mite verbum, but in the case of buildings it commonly implies destruction (Matthew 24:2; Mark 14:58; Luke 21:26; Acts 6:14), being the opposite of οἰκοδομεῖν (Galatians 2:18). οἰκοδομὴνἐκΘεοῦἔχομεν . If ἐκΘεοῦ belonged to ἔχομεν , it would have been placed first or last. It belongs to οἰκοδομήν , ‘ a building proceeding from God as Builder.’ In 1 Corinthians 3:9 (see note there), οἰκοδομή is the building process, which results in an edifice. Here we seem to be half-way between the process and the result, ‘ a building in course of erection,’ the result being οἰκίαν , a word in which there is no intimation of a process. The inner man is being renewed day by day, and the production of the spiritual body is connected with that. The shade of difference between the words is well preserved in AV and RV. by ‘ building’ for οἰκοδομήν and ‘ house’ for οἰκίαν , as in Vulg. by aedificatio and domus. In N.T., οἰκοδομή is almost peculiar to Paul (15/3), and chiefly in 1 and 2 Cor. (9/6). See Lightfoot on 1 Corinthians 3:9 and J. A. Robinson on Ephesians 2:21. By ἔχομεν is meant ‘ we come into possession of.’ ἐκΘεοῦ . Cf. 1 Corinthians 1:30, 1 Corinthians 8:6, 1 Corinthians 11:12. It is true that the σκῆνος , the material body, proceeds from God (see on 1 Corinthians 12:18, 1 Corinthians 12:24), but man takes part in the production of it. The spiritual body is wholly His creation (see on 1 Corinthians 15:38). Lietzmann, A. Sabatier, and Bousset would press ἔχομεν to mean that the spiritual bodies of those who are still in the flesh on earth are awaiting them in heaven, “ created perhaps from all eternity.” It is not necessary to believe that this is the Apostle’ s meaning. The present tense is often used of a future which is absolutely certain. The spiritual body is so certain to take the place of the material frame when the latter is pulled down, that we may be said to have it already. See on 1 John 5:15. The idea of a disembodied spirit was abhorrent to both Jew and Gentile. A spirit which survives death must have a body of some kind, and it is this spiritual body which is raised. Its relation to the material body is real, but it cannot be defined.* οἰκίανἀχειροποίητον . ‘ A house not made with hands,’ i.e., supernatural, immaterial, spiritual; Hebrews 9:11, Hebrews 9:24. The human body is not made with hands, but it is natural and material. The difference is that between πνευματικός and ψυχικός (see on 1 Corinthians 15:44). In LXX χειροποίητα is used of idols. αἰώνιον . Here, as in 4:18, the idea may be that of indefinite durability rather than of timelessness; cf. Luke 16:9. ἐντοῖςοὐρανοῖς . It is in heaven that this supernatural habitation has its proper environment, but heaven is not the habitation. We often think of heaven as the home of departed spirits; but St Paul thinks of each departed spirit as having an οἰκία of its own, the site of which is in heaven. The three attributes, ἀχειροποίητον , αἰώνιον , and ἐντοῖςοὐρανοῖς , are in antithesis to ἐπίγειοςτοῦσκήνους : ἐντοῖςοὐρανοῖς does not belong to ἔχομεν , ‘ we already possess in heaven.’ D E F G, Latt. Goth. insert a second ὅτι before οἰκοδομήν . In English there is a tendency to insert a superfluous ‘ that’ in such sentences; ‘ We know that, if the makeshift dwelling which we have in this world be pulled down, [that] there is a much better one to replace it.’ 2. καὶγὰρἐντούτῳ . AV ignores the καί — ‘ For in this.’ The καί is either intensive, ‘ For verily’ (RV), ‘ For in fact,’ ‘ For indeed,’ introducing some important reason; or argumentative, ‘ For also,’ ‘ For moreover,’ introducing an additional reason. Either of these makes good sense. Again, ἐντούτῳ may be either ‘ in this tent-dwelling’ (v. 1), or ‘ hereby,’ or ‘ herein,’ lit. ‘ in this fact’ ; John 15:8; 1 John 2:3, 1 John 2:5; see on 1 Corinthians 4:4. The last meaning is specially freq. in the Johannine writings, where it commonly points forward to what is about to be stated. The first meaning is simplest here; ‘ For truly in this tabernacle-house we groan.’ * The words which immediately follow (τὸοἰκητήριονκ .τ .λ .) seem to show that St Paul is still thinking of the σκῆνος when he says ἐντούτῳ . Comp. Romans 8:12, Romans 8:13 and 18-23. But ‘ herein’ makes good sense, looking forward to ἐπιποθοῦντες . τὸοἰκητήριον … ἐπιποθοῦντες . The participle explains and gives the reason for στενάζομεν : ‘ we groan, because we yearn.’ St Paul has ἐπιποθεῖν in all four groups (1 Thessalonians 3:6; Romans 1:11; Philippians 1:8, Philippians 1:2:26; 2 Timothy 1:4). Elsewhere in N.T., James 4:5 and 1 Peter 2:2, where see Hort. Everywhere else in Paul it expresses the longing for absent friends, to which the longing for a permanent and glorious home is analogous. He regards this yearning as evidence of the reality of the thing yearned for: si desiderium naturae non est frustra, multo minus desiderium gratiae frustra est (Aquinas). In late Greek, compounds take the place of simple verbs without much increase of meaning, and in N.T. ποθεῖν does not occur. The ἐπι - may indicate direction; cf. ἐπιπόθησις (7:7, 11). In LXX ποθεῖν is rare, except in Wisdom. See Index. IV. τὸοἰκητήριον . Not a diminutive; it denotes a permanent abode or home (Jude 1:6); cf. λογιζόμενοςτὴνπόλινἝλλησινοἰκητήριονποιήσειν (2 Macc. 11:2). The difference between οἰκία and οἰκητήριον is that the latter implies an οἰκητήρ , an inhabitant, while the former does not. ἐπενδύσασθαι . A double compound which is not found elsewhere in N.T. or LXX. Cf. ἐπενδύτης (John 21:7; Leviticus 8:7; the A text of 1 Samuel 18:4). The body may be regarded either as a dwelling or as a garment, and here we have the two ideas combined; ‘ longing to be clothed upon with our habitation which is from heaven.’ The more permanent dwelling is to be drawn over the less permanent one, as one garment is drawn over another, and is to take its place. In some way not described, the now useless σκῆνος is destroyed, without being dissolved in the grave, as in the case of those who die before the Lord comes. The change from the carnal to the spiritual body is regarded as instantaneous (1 Corinthians 15:52), and the change is longed for. We may therefore be content to adopt as the more probable rendering; ‘ For indeed, in this tent-dwelling we groan, because we long to put on over it our true habitation, which comes to us from heaven.’ This last point is a repetition of ἐκΘεοῦ in v. 1. In all cases it is God who furnishes the spiritual body, through Christ (Philippians 3:21), but the method differs: the dead receive their spiritual body through resurrection, the living through transfiguration (1 Corinthians 15:38, 1 Corinthians 15:51), and it is the living who are described here. Comp. μετασχηματιζόμενοςεἰςἀφθαρσίαν (4 Macc. 9:22). See Briggs, The Messiah of the Apostles, p. 130. We may set aside as improbable, if not impossible, the suggestion that στενάζομενἐπιποθοῦντες is to be treated as equivalent to ἐπιποθοῦμενστενάζοντες , the main idea being in the participle, and not in the finite verb. It is doubtful whether any such usage is found in N.T. Nor is it likely that the ἐπί in ἐπενδύσασθαι indicates mere succession; that the clothing with the οἰκητήριον comes after the clothing with the σκῆνος . The context, especially v. 4, shows that the former comes over the latter and extinguishes or absorbs it. It is probable that fondness for alliteration has led to the juxtaposition of the two compounds, ἐπενδύσασθαιἐπιποθοῦντες . It is not easy to decide how far this idea of clothing living Christians with spiritual bodies is to be identified with that of the bright robes which adorn the saints in glory. In some passages the two seem to be identical, while in others the identification is doubtful. In Revelation 3:5, Revelation 3:18, Revelation 3:4:4, the saints have ἱμάτιαλευκά , in 6:11, 7:9, 13, στολαὶλευκαί : in 2 (4) Esdr. 2:39, splendidae tunicae: in Herm. Sim. 8:2, ἱματισμὸςλευκός . These “ garments of glory,” and “ garments of life,” which will not grow old (Enoch 62:15, 16) are a frequent feature in Jewish apocalypses, and in some of them we have an approach to what is stated here. In 2 (4) Esdr. 2:45, Hi sunt qui mortalem tunicam deposuerunt, et immortalem sumpserunt, et confessi sunt nomen Dei; modo coronantur, et accipiunt palmas. In the Book of the Secrets of Enoch 22:8, “ And the Lord said to Michael, Go and take from Enoch his earthly robe, and anoint him with My holy oil, and clothe him with the raiment of My glory.” In the Ascension of Isa 9:16 this raiment is said to be stored in heaven; “ But the saints shall come with the Lord, with their garments which are laid up on high (supra repositae sunt) in the seventh heaven; with the Lord they shall come, those whose spirits are reclothed, they shall descend and shall be in the world (1 Thessalonians 4:15-17); and He will confirm (?) those who shall be found in the flesh with the saints, in the garments of the saints, and the Lord will serve those who shall have watched in this world (Luke 12:37; cf. John 13:4). And after that, they shall be changed in their garments [from] on high, and their flesh shall be left in the world.” Again, 9:9, “ I saw those who had put off their garments of flesh and were now in garments from on high (exutos stolis carnalibus et existentes in stolis excelsis), and they were as angels” ; and 9:17, “ Then shall there ascend with Him many of the just, whose souls have not received their garments until the Lord Christ is ascended and they have ascended with Him” ; and 11:40 we have the final charge; “ And do you watch in the Holy Spirit, to receive your garments, thrones, and crowns of glory, which are laid up in the seventh heaven.” AV places a full stop at the end of v. 2, RV. a colon: a comma is all that is needed. 3. εἴγεκαὶἐνδυσάμενοι . Here the metaphor of the garment becomes more distinct; ‘ if so be that being clothed we shall not be found naked,’ i.e. without either a material or a spiritual body.* This possibility is excluded by the fact that the heavenly οἰκητήριον envelops the earthly σκῆνος , which is not destroyed until it is replaced by something very much better. The force of the καί is to strengthen the doubt expressed by εἴγε , and this may be done by emphasizing the ‘ if.’ Comp. Xen. Mem. III. vi. 13, Λέγειςπαμμέγαθεςπρᾶγμα , εἴγεκαὶτῶντοιούτωνἐπιμελεῖσθαιδεήσει . ‘ Of course, on the supposition that,’ is the meaning. The ἐνδυσάμενοι refers to the same fact as ἐπενδύσασθαι , for here the simple verb suffices, and its relation to εὑρησόμεθα shows that it refers to some future clothing, which, when it takes place, will prevent the calamity of being found γυμνοί , like the souls in Sheol, without form, and void of all power of activity.† Some would place a comma after ἐνδυσάμενοι , and treat ἐνδυσάμενοι , οὐγυμνοί as a case of asyndeton, like γάλα , οὐβρῶπα (1 Corinthians 3:2), προσώπῳ , οὐκαρδιᾳ (1 Thessalonians 2:17); ‘ on the supposition that we shall be found clothed, not naked.’ The construction is not admissible, and the instances quoted in support of it are not parallel to it, being both of them pairs of substantives, not an aorist participle with an adjective. Others would understand some such word as ‘ wondering’ or ‘ doubting’ before εἴγε , which might be implied in στεν . ἐπιποθοῦντες , ‘ we groan, wondering whether we really shall be found clothed, not naked.’ The sentence is a kind of afterthought, added to v. 2, as if to anticipate a misgiving, or objection. Some might suggest that our στενάζομενἑπιποθοῦντες proves no more than that we have a strong desire to be freed from the suffering body; it gives no security for the acquisition of a better body. Such an objection might easily be felt by those Corinthians who doubted about a resurrection. The Apostle rejects it with decision. No one yearns for the γυμνότης of being a bodiless spirit, and God has better things in store for us. εἵγε (א C K L P) is perhaps to be preferred to εἵπερ (B D F G 17). ἐνδυσάμενοι (א B C D3 E K L P, Vulg. Syrr. Copt. Arm. Aeth. Goth.) is certainly to be preferred to ἐκδυσάμενοι (D* F G, d e g, Tert.), which is an early alteration to avoid apparent tautology. Pseudo-Primasius adopts the Vulg. vestiti and yet explains expoliati corpore. 4. καὶγὰροἱὄντεςἐντῷσκήνει . ‘ For verily we that are still in the tent’ — the tent-dwelling mentioned in v. 1; ‘ we who are in no immediate danger of being separated from our mortal body by death.’ After the supplementary remark in v. 3, he returns to the contents of v. 2, viz. our present deplorable condition; and here the plur. seems to mean all Christians. στενάζομενβαροὺμενοι . Not a mere repetition of στενάζομενἐπιποθοῦντες . In the one case groaning is caused by a feeling of intense longing, in the other by a feeling of intense depression. At first sight this seems to mean, ‘ we groan because we are oppressed by the sufferings of the body.’ But these sufferings would lead to a desire to be rid of the body,* and what follows shows that there is no such desire. The groaning is caused by the oppressive thought that death may come before the Lord returns, and may leave us γυμνοί , without any bodies at all. The use of βαρούμενοι here looks like another reminiscence of Wisd. 9:15; see on v. 1 and 2:6 . Aug., after quoting these verses, remarks that “ the cause of the burdensomeness is not the nature and substance of the body, but its corruptible character. We do not desire to be deprived of the body, but to be clothed with its immortality. For then also there will be a body, but it will no longer be a burden, being no longer corruptible” (De Civ. Dei, 14. 3). For καὶγάρ , Vulg. has Nam et in both v. 2 and v. 4; Aug. is more accurate with etenim, which serves to subjoin a corroborative clause, ‘ For verily’ ; a freq. use in Cicero. ἐφ ʼ ᾧ . This may mean either ‘ wherefore’ (Lightfoot on Philippians 3:12) or ‘ because,’ ἐπὶτούτῳὃτι , propterea quod (Romans 5:12). The latter is better here. ‘ We feel oppressed, because we do not wish to be unclothed, i.e. to be divested of our body by death’ ; in other words, ‘ because we shrink from the idea of being left without a body.’ † AV and RV. transpose the negative, in order to smooth the construction, ‘ not for that we would be unclothed’ ; but the smoothness weakens the sense. The οὐ belongs to θέλω , and, as in the case of οὐθέλωὐμᾶςἀγνοεῖν (see on 1:8), there is something which is very far from being wished; the total loss of the body is a thought of horror. Tantam vim habet corporis et animae dulce consortium. … Sub terrena tunica gemimus, ad coelestem festinamus, illam volumus accipere, istam nolumus ponere (Herveius). St Paul regards this instinctive horror of being without a body as strong evidence that a heavenly body will be given to us. To him, as to many Greeks, a disembodied spirit seemed to be utterly against nature. But there is no intimation here or elsewhere of a third body, an interim body, to be occupied between the earthly body and the resurrection body. ἀλλ ʼ ἐπενδύσασθαι . ‘ But (we wish) to be clothed upon,’ to be invested with the heavenly body before the earthly one is taken away, so that there may be no interval of separation between soul and body. ἵνακαταποθῇ ‘ In order that the mortality of the one may be swallowed up by the immortal life of the other.’ In Irenaeus (IV. xxxvi. 6) we have Nolumus exspoliari, sed superindui, uti absorbeatur mortale ab immortalitate; and (v. xiii. 3) ut absorbeatur mortale a vita. Only what is mortal perishes; the personality, consisting of soul and body, survives. The Apostle again seems to have Isaiah 25:8 in his mind; see on 1 Corinthians 15:54. Theodoret says that the imperishable life makes corruption to vanish in much the same way as the entrance of light counteracts darkness. Conversely, Chrys. says that corruption can no more conquer incorruption than wax can conquer fire. After σκήνει , D E F G, Syrr. Copt. Aeth. Goth. add τούῳ . א B C K L P, Vulg. Arm. omit. For ἐθ ʼ ᾦ (all uncials) a few cursives have ἐπειδή . 5. ὁδὲκατεργασάμενοςἡμᾶς . Both AV and RV have ‘ Now’ for δέ , yet it seems to imply a certain amount of contrast; ‘ You may think that this is fanciful, and that our feelings of longing or of horror prove nothing as to the reality of what is desired or dreaded; but He who wrought us out for this very thing, viz. to expect that our mortal garb will be absorbed by a heavenly one, is God.’ As in 1:21, Θεός comes at the close with great emphasis; cf. Hebrews 3:4 and see Westcott’ s additional note on 1 John 4:12. Chrys. refers κατεργασάμενος to the creation; it refers rather to the καινὴκτίσις , to our regeneration, as what follows shows. The Latins vary between operari, facere, perficere, efficere, and consummare for κατεργάζεσθαι , and Vulg. has all five in different places, e.g. 4:17, 12:12; Romans 7:18; 2 Corinthians 5:5; 1 Peter 4:3, operari being the usual translation, e.g. 4:17, 7:10, 11, 9:11; etc. But nowhere does instruere, praeparare, disponere, concinnare or elaborare seem to be used. The fact that no less than five different translations have been allowed to remain is further evidence that Jerome’ s revision of the Epistles was somewhat perfunctory. In the Gospels κατεργάζεσθαι does not occur. See Index IV. and footnote on v. 1. ὁδοὺςἡμῖν . This explains how God prepared us for this sure hope of receiving a spiritual body; ‘ He gave us the earnest of the Spirit.’ That implies that He has placed Himself in the position of a debtor who has paid an instalment; and He is a debtor who is sure to pay the remainder in full. The Spirit inspires the longing and is the security that our longing for the spiritual body, the σῶματῆςδόζης (Cf. 3:18, 4:17), will be satisfied. See on 1:22 for the doctrine that the Spirit is given to us as an instalment. On this difficult verse see Salmond, Christian Doctrine of Immortality, pp. 565-575: also Briggs, The Messiah of the Apostles, p. 130, who takes a different view. ὁδούς (א B C D G P 67*, Vulg. Syr-Pesh. Copt. Arm. Aeth.) rather than ὁκαὶδούς (א c D2 and 3 E K L, Syr-Hark. Goth.). 6-8. ‘ Confident, therefore, at all times, and knowing that while we are at home in the body we are in exile from the Lord,— for we walk by means of faith and not by means of what we can see,— we are confident, I say, and are well pleased to go into exile from the body and to go home unto the Lord.’ The construction of v. 6 is broken by the parenthetical v. 7, and then a new construction is started in v. 8. St Paul does not mean that while we are in the body we are absent from the Lord; our union with Him both in life and in death is one of his leading doctrines (4:10, 11; 1 Thessalonians 5:10). He is speaking relatively. The life of faith is less close and intimate than the life of sight and converse. The passage assumes that the dead are conscious, conscious of the Lord (Philippians 1:20-23; Luke 23:43; Acts 7:59); otherwise departure from the body would be a worse condition, with regard to Him, than being in the body. In agreement with this, Polycarp (Phil. 9), following Clement of Rome (Cor. 5), says that St Paul and other Apostles εἰςτὸνὀφειλόμενοναὐτοῖςτόπονεἰσὶνπαρὰτῷΚυρίῳ . See on 3:2. 6. θαρροῦντεςοὖνπάντοτε . Both in LXX (Proverbs 1:21) and in N.T. (7:16, 10:1, 2; Hebrews 13:6) θαρρεῖν is rare, θαρσεῖν being the common form. Vulg. varies between audere (here and 10:2) and confidere (7:16 and 10:1). Confidere would be better here, for the notion of ‘ daring’ is foreign to the passage. Θαρρεῖν is a favourite word with the Stoics. See Epictetus, Dis. ii. 1, where he shows in what sense we can be both confident and cautious. The οὖν means, ‘ because we have God as our security’ (v. 5), and πάντοτε (2:14, 4:10, 9:8) means that ‘ in every event,’ whether we die soon or live till the Lord returns, we have this confidence. It is worth while to distinguish between πάντοτε and ἀεί . Vulg. has semper, and AV and RV. have ‘ always’ for both. See on 4:10. καὶεἰδότες . Co-ordinately with θαρροῦντες , εἰδότες looks onwards to εὐδοκοῦμεν . ἐνδημοῦντες … ἐκδημοῦμεν . Neither verb is found in LXX, and neither occurs in N.T. except in these verses.* Tertullian has immorari and peregrinari throughout. Vulg. varies the translation of both verbs capriciously; dum sumus in corpore peregrinamur a Domino (6); peregrinari a corpore et praesentes esse ad Deum (8); sive absentes sive praesentes (9). Domi esse and exsulare would express the respective meanings better. Quamdiu domi sumus in hoc corporis habitaculo is the paraphrase of Erasmus; and it is evident that St Paul is thinking of the house in which we dwell rather than of the city or country in which we dwell. But ἐκδημ is a great deal more than ‘ out of the house’ ; it means ‘ away from home.’ The true home is with the Lord; nam peregrinator patriam habet, sive cito sive tardius eo perventurus (Beng.). In papyri we have both ἐκδημεῖν and ἀποδημεῖν , ‘ to go abroad’ and ‘ to be abroad,’ in opposition to ἐνδημεῖν , ‘ to stay at home’ or to ‘ be at home.’ See critical note below. ἀπὸτοῦΚυρίου . ‘ Separate from the Lord’ ; cf. Romans 9:3. This is true, in spite of His constant presence (Matthew 28:20) and of our union with Him (1 Corinthians 6:15, 1 Corinthians 12:27); quia non exhibet se coram videndum, quia adhuc exulamus ab ejus regno, et beata immortalitate, qua fruuntur angeli qui cum eo sunt, adhuc caremus (Calvin). For ἐνδημοῦντες , D G have ἐπιδημοῦντες , and for ἐκοσημοῦμεν , D E G have ἀποδημοῦμεν . For Κυρίου , D G, Copt. have θεοῦ . 7. διὰπίστεωςγὰρκ .τ .λ . The Apostle seems to feel that ἐκδημ . ἀπὸτοῦΚυρίου may cause perplexity, and he hastens to explain in what sense such an expression is true. ‘ It is through a world of faith that we walk here, not through a world of visible form’ ; and non videre prope tantundem est atque disjunctum esse (Beng.). In this life we have to walk under conditions of faith, not under conditions of what is seen. Belief, however strong, cannot be the same as sight; and from a Christ whom we cannot see we are to that extent separated, just as a blind man is cut off from the world to which he nevertheless belongs; νῦναὐτὸντοῖςτοῦσώματοςὀφθαλμοῖςοὐχὁρῶμεν , τότεδὲκαὶὀψόμεθακαὶσυνεσόμεθα (Thdrt.). AV and RV. give the general sense of the verse correctly, but εἶδος cannot mean ‘ sight.’ It means ‘ that which is seen,’ species. Cf. ἐνεἴδεικαὶοὐδι ʼ αἰνιγμάτων ; τὸδὲεἶδοςτῆςδόξηςΚυρίου (Exodus 24:17), species gloriae Domini. Haec erit species, Augustine says, quando faciet quod dixit, Ostendam me ipsum illi. And again, Neque enim jam fides erit qua credantur quae non videantur, sed species, qua videantur quae credebantur (De Trin. xiv. 2). There is a slight change from διὰπίστεως to διὰεἴδους , the former being subjective and the latter objective, but it causes no difficulty. In this world the Christian is under the condition of belief in Christ, not under the condition of His visible form. Here we have faith only; hereafter both faith and sight.* Faith is a virtue which ‘ abideth’ ; see on 1 Corinthians 13:13. 8. θαρροῦμενδὲκαὶεὐδοκοῦμεν . After the parenthetical explanation in v. 7 the θαρροῦντες of v. 6. is taken up again by the δέ , for which ‘ I say’ (AV, RV) is a good equivalent. Without the injected explanation the sentence would have run θαρροῦντες … εὐδοκοῦμεν , but in his emotion at the thought the Apostle forgets the original construction and resumes with θαρροῦμενκαὶεὐδοκοῦμεν , ‘ we are confident and are well pleased.’ The emphatic word, as is shown in both places by its position and here by its repetition, is θαρρεῖν . It takes the place of στενάζειν in vv. 4 and 6. The thought which there suggested sighing and groaning, now that it is further considered, suggests confidence. Even the possibility of being left γυμνός for a time loses its terrors, when it is remembered that getting away from the temporary shelter furnished by the body means getting home to closer converse with the Lord.† The change from presents to aorists must be observed, and the force of the aorists may be expressed by ‘ getting.’ With ἐκδημῆσαι comp. ‘ He has got away,’ which in the North of England is a common expression for ‘ He is dead’ ; and with ἐνδημῆσαι comp. the German heimgegangen. εὐδοκοῦμεν . ‘ We are well pleased, ’ as both AV and RV in Matthew 3:17, Matthew 3:12:18, Matthew 3:17:5; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22; 1 Corinthians 10:5; 2 Peter 1:17; and as RV. in 1 Thessalonians 2:8. The verb is used both of God and of men. When used of men (12:10; Romans 15:26, Romans 15:27; 1 Thessalonians 2:8, 1 Thessalonians 2:3:1; 2 Thessalonians 2:12), it expresses hearty goodwill and perfect contentment, and it is often used of giving consent, especially in legal transactions. This goodwill and contentment is not quite the same as θέλομεν (v. 4) or ἐπιπθοῦντες (v. 2). It is possible to long for one thing, and yet be content with, or even prefer, another, because one knows that the latter is well worth having, and perhaps better for one. St Paul longed to have a spiritual body, in exchange for his material body, without dying: but rather than remain in his material body he was quite ready to die. It was better to see the Lord than to be deprived of this bliss through being in the body: and to be sure of seeing Him robbed death of its terrors. Comp. Proinde intrepidus horam illam decretoriam prospice: non est animo suprema, sed corpori. Quidquid circa te jacet rerum, tanquam hospitalis loci sarcinas specta: transeundum est. Detrahetur tibi haec circumjecta, novissimum velamentum tui cutis: detrahetur caro et suffusus sanguis. Dies iste, quem tanquam extremum reformidas aeterni natalis est (Seneca, Ep. ciii. 24, 25). Perhaps in no other case is the caprice of the Vulg. so conspicuous as in the translation of εὐδοκεῖν . The verb occurs fifteen times in the Epistles, and it is translated in ten different ways;— bonam voluntatem habemus (here), placeo mihi (12:10), placuit with a dat. (1 Corinthians 1:21; Romans 15:27; Galatians 1:15; 1 Thessalonians 3:1; Hebrews 10:6, Hebrews 10:38), beneplacitum est Deo (1 Corinthians 10:5), probaverunt (Romans 15:26), complacuit (Colossians 1:19), cupide volebamus (1 Thessalonians 2:8), consensuerunt (2 Thessalonians 2:12), placita sunt tibi (Hebrews 10:8), mihi complacui (2 Peter 1:17). And in this case the Gospels are not more uniform than the Epistles. The verb occurs six times in them, and it is translated in five different ways, three of which differ from all the renderings in the Epistles; mihi complacui (Matthew 3:17), bene placuit animae meae (Matthew 12:18), mihi bene complacui (Matthew 17:5), complacui (Mark 1:11), complacuit with a dat. (Luke 3:22, Luke 12:32). πρὸςτὸνΚύριον . Here, as in Philippians 1:23-25, his reason for wishing to depart from the body is the same, viz. to be with the Lord, σὺνχριστῷεἶναι · πολλῷμᾶλλονκρεῖσσον . But his reasons for wishing to remain in the body differ. There it is for the sake of others, because his beloved Philippians still need him. Here it is for his own sake, because he desires to be alive when the Lord comes, and thus to escape dying. In both passages he implies that at death there is immediate entrance into closer fellowship with Christ. Comp. Seneca, Ep. cii. 22; Cum venerit dies ille qui mixtum hoc divini humanique secernat, corpus hoc, ubi inveni, relinquam: ipse me diis reddam. Nec nunc sine illis, sum, sed terreno detineor carcere. Once more Plato (Apol. 40, 41), followed by Cicero (Tusc. 1. xli. 98), to some extent anticipates Christian thought. “ If indeed when the pilgrim arrives in the world below, he finds sons of God who were righteous in their own life, that pilgrimage will be worth making. What would not a man give if he might converse with Orpheus and Musaeus and Hesiod and Homer? What infinite delight would there be in conversing with them and asking them questions!” Still more closely Philo (Leg. Alleg. 3:14), “ It is not possible for one who is dwelling in the body, in a race that is mortal, to hold communion with God, but God floods one who is free from the prison.” And again (De Migr. Abr. § 34, 466 Mang.); “ Rouse yourselves and seek for that migration hence which proclaims to us, not death, but deathlessness.” Non est vivere, sed valere, vita (Mart. vi. lxx. 15). For θαρροῦμεν , א 17, Orig. Tert. have θαρροῦντες . For Κύριον , D* 17, Vulg. have θεόν . 9. διὸκαὶφιλοτιμούμεθα . ‘ Wherefore also we make it our aim.’ Both διό , which looks back to εὐδοκοῦμεν , and καί , which adds something to it, show that a new section does not begin here, as Calvin and Bachmann suppose. The verb may in this place retain its classical meaning (Haec una ambitio legitima, as Beng. says); but in late Greek (1 Thessalonians 4:11; Romans 15:20) it need not mean more than ‘ desire earnestly,’ or ‘ make it one’ s aim’ (RV), which is probably right here. Xenophon and Plato seem sometimes to use it in this sense, followed, as here, by an infinitive. In meaning and construction it is thus equivalent to σπουδάζειν (1 Thessalonians 2:17; Galatians 2:10; Ephesians 4:3; 2 Timothy 2:15). ‘ We make it a point of honour,’ wir setzen unsre Ehre darein (Bousset, Bachmann), is a translation which looks neat, but is not preferable to ‘ desire earnestly’ or ‘ make it our aim.’ εἴτεἐνδημοῦντεςεἴτεἐκδημοῦντες . Two questions have been much discussed with regard to these two participles. (1) How are they to be understood? (2) Do they belong to φιλοτιμούμεθα or to εὐάρεστοιαὐτῷεἶναι The answer to the second question depends upon the answer to the first. (1) As to the meaning of the participles there are three suggestions. They refer to one’ s place of abode in this world; ‘ whether we are at home or away from home.’ This interpretation may be safely rejected as having no point and as unworthy of the dignity of the passage. They refer to the communion with Christ just mentioned, πρὸςτὸνΚύριον being understood with ἐνδημοῦντες and ἀπὸτοῦΚυρίου with ἐκδημοῦντε . This is better, but the order is against it, for the Apostle would hardly have mentioned the future condition before the present one; he would have written εἴτεἐκδ . εἴτεἐνδ ., and a few authorities have this order; see critical note below. The participles refer to the body just mentioned, ἐντῷσώματι being understood with ἐνδημοῦντες and ἐκτοῦσώματος with ἐκδημοῦντες . This is almost certainly right. It makes good sense in itself and it fits the context. ‘ Whether we are at home in the body, or away from home out of it,’ is the meaning. But ἐκδημοῦντες is not to be rendered ‘ going from home,’ ‘ migrating from the body,’ i.e. dying. The alternative is not between staying and leaving, but between being in the body and being out of the body, between ἐνδυσάμενοι and ἐκδυσάμενοι (v. 2). (2) With this explanation of the participles there can be little doubt that they belong to εὐάρεστοιαὐτῷεἶναι . It would hardly be congruous to say that, when we are absent from the body and at home with the Lord, we ‘ desire earnestly’ or ‘ make it our aim’ to be acceptable to Him; in that blissful condition we are εὐάρεστοιαὐτῷ . It is in this life that we desire and strive to please Him. The meaning of the verse is, therefore, ‘ We aim at winning the Lord’ s approval, whether at His Coming He finds us in the body or already out of it.’ Again we have a parallel in Seneca (Ep. cii. 29); Haec cogitatio nihil sordidum animo subsidere sinit, nihil humile, nihil crudele. Deos omnium rerum esse testes ait, illis nos approbari, illis in futurum parari jubet, et aeternitatem proponere. The whole letter should be compared with this passage. εὐάρεστοι . ‘ Acceptable.’ RV. has ‘ well-pleasing,’ which is right in meaning, but cannot well be used by those who translate εὐδοκοῦμεν ‘ we are well pleased.’ The word is late Greek; only twice in LXX (Wisd. 4:10, 9:10), although εὐαρεστεῖν is common. See Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 214. Excepting Hebrews 10:6, the word in N.T. is exclusively Pauline, eight times in all, and in all groups, except Thessalonians. Cf. Ephesians 5:10; Colossians 3:20; Philippians 4:18. In nearly all places it is used of what is acceptable to God or to Christ. So also in Wisd. 4:10, 9:10, from which book St Paul may have got the word; see on ἐπίγειος in v. 1. Vulg. varies between placens (Romans 12:1, Romans 12:2), beneplacitum (Ephesians 5:10), placitum (Colossians 3:26), and placere (here). f g and Syr-Pesh. have the order εἴτεἐκδημοῦντεςεἴτεἐνδημοῦντες : see above, p. 154 sub fin. 10. τοὺςγὰρπάνταςἡμᾶς . ‘ We have good reason for making this our aim, for every one of us, whether in the body or out of it, must be made manifest (1 Corinthians 4:5) before the judgment-seat of Christ.’ A desire to be persons who are acceptable to Him must abide in us, when we remember that our whole life will be laid open before Him and judged according to its exact deserts. All Christians, without exception, are summed up under τοὺςπάνταςήμᾶς . And they have not only to ‘ appear’ , but to have their whole character ‘ made manifest’ . It is probable that, as in the Parables of the Talents and of the Sheep and the Goats, being made manifest to one’ s own conscience and to other persons is included; * but it is manifestation to the Judge whose approval is desired that is specially meant. See on 1 Corinthians 4:4, 1 Corinthians 4:5. He reminds the Corinthians, who are so prone to criticize, that a time is coming when they themselves will be laid bare to the most searching criticism. ‘ Appear’ (AV) is inadequate. δεῖ . By Divine decree which cannot be evaded. ἔμπροσθεντοῦβήματοςτοῦχριστοῦ . Cf. 2 Timothy 4:1. In Romans 14:10 it is ‘ the judgment-seat of God,’ God being said to do Himself what He does through His Son (John 5:22). In the Gospels, as here, Christ is the Judge. In the Apocalypse it is ‘ He that sitteth upon the throne,’ i.e. the Almighty Father, who judges (Swete on Revelation 20:11). Polycarp (Phil. 6) combines our verse with Romans 14:10; πάνταςδεῖπαραστῆναιτῷβήματιτοῦΧριστοῦ , καὶἕκαστονὑπὲρἑαντοῦλόγονδοῦναι . See on 3:2. The βῆμα is the tribunal, whether in a basilica for the praetor in a court of justice, † or in a camp for the commander to administer discipline and address the troops. In either case the tribunal was a platform on which the seat (sella) of the presiding officer was placed. In LXX, βῆμα commonly means a platform or scaffold rather than a seat (Nehemiah 8:4; Neh_1 Esdr. 9:42; 2 Macc. 13:26). In N.T. it seems generally to mean the seat (Matthew 27:19; John 19:13; Acts 18:12, Acts 25:6, etc. Seven times in Acts in this sense). But in some of these passages it may mean the platform on which the seat was placed. On Areopagus the βῆμα was a stone platform; ὅστιςκρατεῖνῦντοῦλίθουτοῦ ʼ ντῇΠυκνί (Aristoph. Pax, 680): cf. Xen. Mem. III. vi. 1. Fond as St Paul is of military metaphors, and of comparing the Christian life to warfare, he is not likely to be thinking of a military tribunal here. Other N.T. writers speak of the Divine judgment-seat as a θρόνος (Matthew 19:28, Matthew 19:25:31; Revelation 20:11; cf. Daniel 7:9, Daniel 7:10). The idea of a judgment-seat is frequent in the Book of Enoch, and it is the ‘ Elect One’ or the ‘ Son of Man’ who sits on the throne of His glory to judge (45:3, 55:4, 62:3, 5). He has been placed thereon by the Lord of Spirits and all judgment has been committed to Him (61:3, 62:2, 69:27, 29). See Charles on 45:3. In the Assumption of Moses the Eternal God rises from His royal throne and goes forth to judge and punish (10:3, 7). Though nearer in date to St Paul (perhaps a.d. 20), this is further from him in thought. ἵνακομίσηταιἕκαστοςτὰδιὰτοῦσώματος . ‘ In order that each one may receive as his due the things done by means of his body.’ This corrects the false inference which might be drawn from τοὺςπάνταςἡμᾶς . We shall not be judged en masse, or in classes, but one by one, in accordance with individual merit. “ St Paul does not say merely that he shall receive according to what he has done in the body, but that he shall receive the things done— the very selfsame things he did; they are to be his punishment” (F. W. Robertson, Lectures on the Epp. to the Corinthians, p. 377). Chrys. points out that men are not much influenced by the prospect of losing possible blessings; the dread of possible pains is more influential. But present gains and losses are the most influential of all. Cf. εἰδότεςὅτιἕκαστος , ἐάντιποιήσͅἀγαθόν , τοῦτοκομίσεταιπαρὰΚυρίου (Ephesians 6:8), and ὁγὰρἀδικῶνκομίσεταιὃἠδίκησεν (Colossians 3:25). In all three passages, κομίζεσθαι , ‘ to get what is one’ s own,’ comes to mean ‘ to get as an equivalent,’ ‘ to be requited.’ Hort (on 1 Peter 1:9) says that κομίζεσθαι “ always in N.T. means not simply to receive but to receive back, to get what has belonged to oneself but has been lost, or promised but kept back, or what has come to be one’ s own by earning.” This use is freq. in LXX also; Genesis 38:20, κομίσασθαιτὸνἀρραβῶνα : Leviticus 20:17, ἁμαρτίανκομιοῦνται : Psalms 40:15; Ecclus. 29:6; 2 Macc. 8:33, 13:8; etc. De Wette points out that the metonymy by which we are said to receive back what we have done is not a mere idiom, but “ lies deeper in the identity of the deed and its requital.” In papyri we find the same usage. This is not always brought out in Vulg., which again varies greatly in its renderings. In the eleven passages in which κομίζεσθαι occurs it uses five different words, some of which do not bear this meaning; referre (here), percipere (Ephesians 6:8; 1 Peter 5:4; 2 Peter 2:13), recipere (Colossians 3:25; Matthew 25:27), reportare (Hebrews 10:36; 1 Peter 1:9), and accipere (Hebrews 11:13, Hebrews 11:19, Hebrews 11:39). The words from which this shade of meaning is absent are those which are most frequently employed. The renderings of this clause in Tertullian, Cyprian, and the Vulgate are worth comparing. Tert. (Adv. Marc. v. 12) ut recipiat unusquisque quae per corpus admisit, sive bonum sive malum; (De Res. Carn. 43) uti unusquisque reportet quae per corpus secundum quae gessit, bonum sive malum; (ibid. 60) ut quis referat per corpus prout gessit, where quis is probably a slip for quisque. Cypr. (Test. ii. 28 and iii. 56) ut reportet unusquisque sui corporis propria secundum quae egit sine bona sine mala. Vulg. ut referat unusquisque propria corporis prout gessit, sive bonum sive malum, where referat, grout gessit, bonum, malum agree with Tertullian, propria corporis with Cyprian. The latter expression points to a reading ἴδια for διά , a reading which is attested also by d e f g Goth. Arm., Ambrst., and several of the Fathers. In the Pelagian controversy it came to the front, because infants have no ἴδια sins, and could not be supposed to be justly liable to punishment. τὰδιὰτοῦσώματος . ‘ Done by means of the body,’ and therefore, as Herveius points out, dum in corpore fuit; and these include words and thoughts as well as deeds, for the tongue and the brain are instruments in producing them. In Plato we have ὁμηδὲνφροντίζωντῶνἡδονῶναἵδιὰτοῦσώματόςεἰσιν (Phaedo, 65); and again, ὄψιςἡμῖνὀξντάτητῶνδιὰτοῦσώματοςἔρχεταιαισθήσεων , ἧφρόνησιςοὐχὁρᾶται (Phaedr. 250): cf. αἱκατὰτὸσῶμαἡδοναὶἀπομαραίνονται (Rep. 328 D). In Xenophon (Mem. 1. v. 6) οὐμόνοντῶνδαὶτοῦσώματοςἡδονῶνἐκπάτει , ἀλλὰκαὶτῆςδιὰτῶνχρημάτων . The διά is probably instrumental, but it may be temporal, ‘ during his bodily lifetime,’ bei Leibesleben. So Aug. De Civ. Dei, xvii. 4. πρὸςἃἕπραξεν . Works are needed as well as faith, and it is habitual moral action , rather than mere performance and production , that has weight. Cf. 12:21; 1 Corinthians 5:2; Romans 2:1, Romans 2:2, Romans 2:7:15, Romans 2:19, Romans 2:13:4, where πράσσειν is used of doing what is morally evil; 1 Corinthians 9:17; Philippians 4:9, of what is morally good; and Romans 9:11, as here, of both: see on Romans 1:32, Romans 1:7:15, Romans 1:19, Romans 1:13:4; John 3:20, John 3:21, John 3:5:29, where both verbs occur. Vulg. distinguishes with ago for πράσσω and facio for ποιέω . Although this cannot be pressed, for the difference between the two verbs is often very slight, yet πράσσειν is more appropriate here. With regard to both verb and preposition comp. ὁμὴποιήσαςπρὸςτὸθέλημααὐτοῦ (Luke 12:29). Noble ancestors, even righteous ancestors, says Chrys., will not count. Only a man’ s own deeds will be of any value; and, as Thdrt. adds, there will be exact correspondence between action and requital . Cf. κατὰτὰἔργα (Romans 2:6; Romans 2:23, Romans 2:20:12). See on 11:15. εἴτεἀγαθὸνεἴτεφαῦλον . The change to the neuter singular is significant. It seems to imply that, although persons will be judged one by one and not in groups, yet conduct in each case will be judged as a whole. In other words, it is character rather than separate acts that will be rewarded or punished. It is a mistake to suppose that any act, however heroic, can secure eternal life. We must ask, not τίποιήσαςκληρονομήσω ; (Luke 10:25), but τίμεδεῖποιεῖν ; (Acts 16:30). It is habitual action that will be judged. And this explains the aorist; it is what he did during his lifetime that is summed up and estimated as a total. Human tribunals deal with crime; they have punishments, but no rewards. The Divine tribunal has both. See on 1 Corinthians 3:13 and 4:5. There are two things about which the Apostle is silent. He does not say when the φανερωθῆναι will take place, whether at death or at the Second Advent, but he seems to imply that the requital will follow immediately upon the manifestation. Moreover, while he states that the period spent in the body is a time of probation, and that there will be a scale of requitals proportionate to our conduct here (cf. 9:6), he says nothing about the possibility of further probation hereafter, and he seems to imply that there will be no further opportunity. But it is going beyond what is written to say that the idea of a ‘ second chance’ is contrary to what St Paul asserts here. Here, as elsewhere in Scripture, that possibility is veiled. See on 1 Corinthians 10:22. Here again we have Pauline doctrine partly anticipated on philosophical grounds by Plato (Gorgias, 523, 524). After telling the story how Zeus was led to decree that men must not be judged till after death, “ because there are many who have evil souls clad in comely bodies,” and that they must be stripped of these misleading coverings in order to be fairly judged, Socrates continues; “ This story, Callicles, I have heard and believe to be true, and from it I think that some such inference as this may be drawn. Death, it seems to me, is nothing else than the separation of two things from one another, the soul and the body. And when they are separated from one another, each of them has pretty much the same character which it had when the man was alive. If he was tall, fat, long-haired, scarred, misshapen, the same characteristics are found on the dead body, either all of them, or most of them, for some time. The very same thing, it seems to me, Callicles, holds good of the soul. When the soul is stripped of the body, all its natural qualities and all those which the man acquired through his devotion to this or that pursuit, are laid bare to view. And when the souls come to the judge, he takes that of some potentate, whose soul is full of the prints and scars of perjuries and crimes with which his conduct has marked it, and has many crooked places, because of lying and vanity, and has no straightness, because he lived without truth. This soul the judge looks at and sends away to a place where it must undergo the treatment which it requires.” There is no doubt that ἔπραξεν , not κομίσηται , is to be understood with εἴτεἀγαθὸνἔιτεφαῦλον : it is the conduct, not the recompense, that is thus characterized. The recompense would not be called φαῦλον , ‘ worthless,’ whether it were reward or punishment, and κομίσηται has τὰδιὰτοῦσώματος as its object. What a man does may be worthless, ξύλα , χόρτον , καλάμην (1 Corinthians 3:12), without being so evil as to exclude from the Kingdom. It may be doubted whether the Apostle is here taking account of those who are excluded; if so, they are quite in the background. Excepting John 5:29 there is perhaps no passage in N.T. in which a resurrection of the wicked is clearly indicated. St Paul seems to regard it as a blessing reserved for members of Christ. Here it is genuine Christians, τοὺςπάνταςἡμᾶς , of whom he is speaking. All their shortcomings and failures will one day be exposed, and therefore they ‘ make it their aim’ to avoid such defects. Both Orig. and Thdrt. seem to have known the reading τάἴδιατοῦσώματος , but it is found in no Greek MS. L omits τὰδιὰτ . σωμ ., and Balion would bracket the words as a gloss. D G have ἅδιὰτοῦσώματοςἔπραξεν . It is difficult to decide between φαῦλον (א C 17 and other cursives) and κακόν (B D F G K L P); but it is more probable that κακόν , as the usual antithesis to ἀγαθόν , should be substituted for the less usual φαῦλον , than vice versa. But φαῦλον might come from Romans 9:11. The word occurs in four other passages in N.T., always of what is morally bad (John 3:20, John 3:5:29; Titus 2:8; James 3:16); Aristotle has it often in this sense. Only in James 3:16 does Vulg. distinguish φαῦλον from κακόν : there it has pravum, elsewhere malum. In Ecclesiastes 12:14 we have σύμπαντὸποίημαὁΘεὸςἄξειἐνκρίσειἐὰνἀγαθὸνκαὶἐὰνπονηρόν . NOTE ON 5:1-10 Two questions have been discussed, with a minuteness and fulness out of proportion to their importance; and conclusions respecting them have been asserted, with a positiveness which is not warranted by the evidence which is at our disposal. Can what is stated here be reconciled with what is stated in 1 Corinthians 15:20-55? If not, are we to suppose that the painful experiences which troubled the Apostle in the brief interval between the writing of the two Epistles caused him to modify his beliefs respecting the Resurrection, the Parousia, and the Judgment? Or it is possible that further acquaintance with Alexandrian ideas, which he may have obtained through Apollos, led him to change his views? Again, can what is said in 5:6-10 be reconciled with what is said in v. 5:1-5? If not, how can we account for the Apostle’ s uttering two discordant views almost in the same breath? It is to be remembered that in dealing with death, the condition of the departed, resurrection, and judgment, the language, not only of St Paul, but of Scripture generally, is highly symbolical, and that it is impossible to find symbols that are in all respects harmonious. Moreover, it is not justifiable to draw inferences from metaphors and treat the inferences as original statements. Thirdly, we are not to suppose that St Paul had a clearly defined theory respecting these mysterious topics, and that he kept this theory in mind and was careful to make all his statements respecting these topics in a form which would harmonize with the preconceived theory. He was fully convinced of the truth and importance of certain things. e.g. that Christ died and has been raised, that Christians who die will be raised, that they will be requited in accordance with their conduct in this life, and that neither in life nor in death are they separated from Christ; and each time that he has to handle any of these subjects he states his conviction in words which at the time seem to be forcible and fitting. The Epistles to the Corinthians are written in the glow of intense feeling, which varies according to the subject; and it is unreasonable to interpret them as if they were parts of a carefully elaborated system of theology. “ The man who wrote the great Resurrection-chapter in 1 Corinthians,” says Wernle, “ did not possess the capacity for altering his opinions which belongs to the modern theologian. For him, his hope, which he there expresses, is a truth for which he is willing to live and die. … The yearning to die and to be with Christ is for him the same thing as the hope of resurrection. His yearning overleaps all between death and resurrection, and hurries to its goal for reunion with Jesus” (H. A. A. Kennedy, St Paul’ s Conception of the Last Things, p. 272). That is the reasonable explanation of the apparent difference between this passage and 1Co_15. There he is dealing with those who rejected the Resurrection because it was incredible that the material body will be resuscitated. He assures these sceptics that the resurrection-body will be something quite different from the material body. The material body will be destroyed. Here he is dealing with the contrast between the Christian’ s sufferings in this life and his hope of future glory. The latter is so strong that it far outweighs the sufferings, and even drives away the natural horror of leaving the material body. In 1Co_15. the argument is directed against an error which assumed an interval between death and resurrection. Here no such interval comes into view; it is neither assumed nor denied. Those who live to see the Parousia will have their material bodies changed to spiritual bodies. Those who die before the Parousia will be better off than they were in this life, for they will be nearer to Christ. Whether there will be an interval between death and the reception of a body suitable to the new conditions of life is lost sight of.* To one who believed that the Lord was near at hand, and that at His Coming all would receive spiritual bodies, the condition of those who died before His Coming was not a matter of much interest, and he tells us only one thing respecting their condition. They are happier, because they are in closer communion with Christ, than they were when they were in the body. This implies that they are conscious; they are not, in any literal sense, asleep: see on 1 Corinthians 11:30. Jewish thought on the subject seems to have gone through several stages, which were not always logically consecutive. They may be stated roughly in some such way as this. In Jeremiah 51:57 the sleep is not only said to be perpetual , but one from which the sleepers shall not wake . All rewards and penalties are given in this life; good and bad alike go to Sheol, which is almost equivalent to annihilation. In Isa_26. and Enoch 83-90. there is to be a resurrection of the righteous Israelites. In Dan_12. there is to be a resurrection of the exceptionally righteous and the exceptionally wicked among the Israelites, but resurrection is of the spirit only, not of the body. This implies that Sheol is only a temporary abode for those who are to be raised, which leads to a division of Sheol. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/iccnt/ 6:1-10. There is once more an unintelligent division of the chapters: 6:1 is closely connected with 5:20, 21, and the first ten verses of this chapter are a continuation of the Apostle’ s self-vindication from another point of view; they set forth his conduct and his experiences as God’ s ambassador, and as a minister to whom has been entrusted the message of reconciliation. After an earnest appeal to the Corinthians not to lose through neglect the grace offered to them, the spiritual exaltation of the Apostle once more gives a rhythmic swing to his language, as if he were singing a song of triumph. Magna res est, et granditer agitur, nec desunt ornamenta dicendi (Aug. De Doc. Chris. iv. 20). Way calls it a “ Hymn of the Herald of Salvation.” There is no good reason for supposing that St Paul here turns to “ the better-disposed heathen believers.” He is addressing weak believers, who were in danger of a lapse into heathen laxity, through making so poor an attempt to reach a Christian standard of holiness. He points to the way in which an Apostle does his work, and to what he has to endure: these are things which the Corinthians can appreciate.* 1. Συνεργοῦντεςδὲκαὶπαρακαλοῦμεν . ‘ But there is more to be said than this : as working together with God we entreat that you do not accept the grace of God in vain.’ God had committed the message of reconciliation to His ambassadors; St Paul had brought it to the Corinthians; they must do their part and make a right use of it. Where συνεργεῖν (1 Corinthians 16:16; Romans 9:28) or συνεργός (1:24, 8:23; 1 Corinthians 3:9) or other compounds of σύν occur, it is plain that the force of the συν - depends on the context. But that principle is not decisive here, because there are several possibilities in the context. Five connexions have been suggested. (1) ‘ Co-operating with God’ ; which is the natural inference from 5:18, 21, and it is confirmed by 1 Corinthians 3:9. (2) ‘ With Christ’ ; which might be inferred from 5:20, if ὑπὲρΧριστοῦ means ‘ in Christ’ s stead.’ (3) ‘ With you’ (so Chrys.); the Corinthians have co-operated with the missionaries in listening to their message, and so the Apostle is a fellow-worker with them. The objection to this is that the whole context is concerned with the preachers’ part rather than with that of the hearers. (4) ‘ With other teachers.’ This explanation assumes that the 1st pers. plur. refers to St Paul alone. If it included other teachers, the συν - would be meaningless; ‘ co-operating with ourselves.’ (5) ‘ With our exhortations, ’ i.e. adding our example to our precept. If this had been meant, it would have been expressed in a plainer manner. εἰςκενόν . ‘ To no profit’ ; in vacuum (Vulg.), frustra (Beza). The expression is freq. in LXX (Leviticus 26:20; Job 39:16; Isaiah 29:8; Jeremiah 6:29, 28:58), but in N.T. it is peculiar to Paul (1 Thessalonians 3:5; Galatians 2:2; Philippians 2:16). It is probable that δέξασθαι is a timeless aorist after παρακαλεῖν , like κυρῶσαι (2:8), παραστῆσαι (Romans 12:1), συναγωνίσασθαι (Romans 15:30), περιπατῆσαι (Ephesians 4:1), and may be rendered ne recipiatis (Vulg.). The reference is to the present time; acceptance of grace is continually going on, and there ought to be good results. But the aorist may have the force of a past tense and be rendered ne reciperetis (Beza). In this case the reference is to the time of their conversion; he exhorts them not to have accepted the grace of God in vain, i.e. not to show by their behaviour now that they accepted it then to no profit. Chrys. seems to take it in the latter way, for he interprets ἐςκένον as losing through unfruitfulness the great blessings which they have received. In any case, ὑμᾶς comes last with much emphasis; ‘ you, whatever the rest of the κόσμος may do.’ ‘ We are commissioned to preach to all mankind; I beseech you not to let the preaching prove vain in your case.’ 2. As in 5:7, 16, we have a Pauline parenthesis. He remembers an O.T. saying which will drive home the exhortation that he has just given, Isaiah 49:8, and he injects it. In a modern work the verse would be a foot-note. As usual, he quotes the LXX with little or no change; cf. 4:13, 8:15, 9:9. Here there is no change. In LXX the words are introduced with οὕτωςλέγειΚύριος , and we readily understand ὁΘεός here (Blass, § 30. 4 from the context. But λέγει (Romans 15:10; Ephesians 4:8) and φησίν (see on 1 Corinthians 6:16), without subject, are common forms of quotation, equivalent to inverted commas. The conjecture is often repeated that δέξασθαι suggested the passage about καιρὸςδεκτός . It may be so; but a deeper reason is possible. The passage may have occurred to St Paul because of the resemblance of his own case to that of the Prophet. In Isa_49. the Prophet points out that the Lord has formed him from the womb to be His servant, and to reconcile Israel again to Him; but also to give him as a light to the Gentiles, that His salvation may be to the end of the earth. The servant has delivered his message, and a period of labour and disappointment follows (LXX of v. 4). Then come the encouraging words which St Paul quotes, and comforting thoughts arise. Although men despise him, God will honour him by confirming his message; and the God who has had compassion on Israel in spite of their sins, will have compassion on all the nations (see Driver, Isaiah, p. 149; W. E. Barnes, ad loc.). Word for word, this is true of the Apostle; and he also has his καιρὸςδεκτός , δεκτός to all the parties concerned. In Philippians 4:18, δεκτήν means acceptable to God, and τῷΘεῷ is expressed. In Luke 4:19, δεκτόν means acceptable to man, and here the meaning is probably the same; the time in which such benefits are offered is welcome to the human race. On God’ s side it is ‘ a season of favour,’ on man’ s it is ‘ a season to be welcomed.’ Εἰσακούειν , freq. in LXX, occurs here only in N.T. ἰδοὺνῦν . The Apostle at once applies the words of the Prophet to his readers; they are to take the saying to heart. By νῦν is meant all the time between the moment of writing and the Advent. The common application of the ‘ now,’ viz. ‘ act at once, for delay is dangerous,’ is not quite the meaning of the νῦν here. The point is rather that the wonderful time which the Prophet foresaw is now going on; the Apostle and his readers are enjoying it. His comment is equivalent to that of Christ, Luke 4:21, but this carries with it the warning already given, not to neglect golden opportunities. To some persons the νῦν may be very short. Ex quo in carne Salvator apparuit semper est acceptabile tempus. Unicuique tamen finitur hoc tempus in hors obitus sui (Herveius). * εὐπρόσδεκτος . In LXX δεκτός is freq., especially in the Psalms, and εὐπρόσδεκτος is not found, but St Paul prefers the compound, probably as being stronger; he uses it again 8:12 and Romans 15:16, Romans 15:31; and his use of it here indicates his jubilant feeling; ‘ Behold now is the welcome acceptable time.’ The word is found of heathen sacrifices; κατανοεῖνεἰεὐπρόσδεκτο͂ἡθυσία (Aristoph. Pax, 1054). D*FG, d e g have καιρῷγὰρλέγει for λέγειγάρ · καιρῷ . 3. μηδεμίανἐνμηδενὶδιδόντεςπροσκοπήν The construction shows that v. 2 is a parenthesis, the participles in vv. 3 and 4 being co-ordinate with συνεργοῦντες in v. 1. Aug. (De Doc. Chris. xx. 42) has nullam in quoquam dantes offensionem, which is more accurate than Vulg. nemini dantes ullam offensionem. Luther follows in making ἐνμηδενί masc., and he makes δίδοντες an exhortation; lasset uns aber niemand irgend ein Aergerniss geben. Both context and construction show that this is wrong. It is the exhorters themselves who aim at ‘ giving no cause of stumbling in anything whatever.’ Ἐνμηδενί embraces πρεσβεύομεν , δεόμεθα , παρακαλοῦμεν , and all the details of the διακονίατῆςκαταλλαγῆς . Here again, as in 5:21, the μή probably has its subjective force: ‘ not giving what could be regarded as a προσκοπή .’ Note the Pauline alliteration; cf. 8:22, 4:5, 8, 10:6. Nowhere else in Bibl. Grk. does προσκοπή occur; πρόσκομμα and σκάνδαλον are the usual words. All three denote what causes others to stumble, in behaviour or belief, such as vainglory, self-seeking, insincerity, inconsistency of life. Necesse est ejus praedicationem negligi, cujus vita despicitur (Greg. M.). ἵναμὴμωμηθῇἥδιακονία . ‘ That the ministry may not be vilified,’ vituperetur (Vulg.), verspottet. The verb is rare (Proverbs 4:7); St Paul, who has it again 8:20, may have got it from Wisd. 10:14, Ψευδεῖςτεἔδειξεντοὺςμωμησαμένουςαὐτόν (Joseph), which AV vaguely renders ‘ those that accused him.’ Heinrici quotes Lucian, Quom. hist. 33, ὃοὐδεὶςἄν , ἀλλ ʼ οὐδ ʼ ὁΜῶμοςμωμήσασθαιδύναιτο where Μῶμος is mocking criticism personified. Wetstein quotes Apollonius, Lex. μωμήσονται , οἱονεὶκαταπαίξονται · μώμοςγὰρὁμετὰψόγουκαταπαιγμός . In class. Grk. the verb is mostly poetical (Hom. Aesch. Aristoph.), and in late prose it often implies ridicule as well as blame, with disgrace as a result. Here the thought of being made a laughing stock may be included. * In any case, it is man’ s criticism and abuse that is meant, not Divine condemnation. The Apostle is not thinking of the Judgment-seat of Christ (5:10); neither προσκοπή nor μωμηθῇ would be used in reference to that. He may be thinking of the insults offered to him by ὁἀδικήσας (7:12). After διακονία , D E F G, Latt. Syrr. Sah. Goth. add ἡμῶν : א B C K L P, Copt. omit. The insertion spoils the sense. He is thinking of the Apostolic office in general; his conduct must not cause it to be reviled. In what was done at Corinth, the credit of the cause for which all ministers laboured was at stake. RV. wrongly substitutes ‘ our ministration’ for ‘ the ministry.’ 4. ἀλλ ʼ ἐνπαντὶσυνιστ . ἑαυτούς . ‘ On the contrary, in everything commending ourselves, as God’ s ministers should do.’ The comprehensive ἐνπαντί , in opposition to ἐνμηδενί , comes first with emphasis; cf. 7:11, 9:8, 11:9. He is glancing at the charge of self-commendation made against him, but here he uses the expression in a good sense, and therefore ἑαυτούς has not the emphatic position which is given to it in 3:1 and 5:12. Vulg. has sed in omnibus exhibeamus nosmet ipsos sicut Dei ministros, which is doubly wrong, making the participle into a finite verb co-ordinate with μωμηθῇ , and making διάκονοι accusative, which gives a wrong turn to the meaning. Aug. is right with commendantes, but wrong with ministros. St Paul does not say ‘ commending ourselves as being God’ s ministers,’ but ‘ as God’ s ministers do commend themselves,’ viz. by rectitude of life. As in 4:8-12 and 11: 23-31, he enumerates his sufferings, and in all three passages we have a lyrical balance of language which gives a triumphant tone to the whole. Both Augustine and Erasmus express detailed admiration for the beauty of this passage. The latter analyses thus; totus hic sermo per contraria, per membra, per comparia, per similiter desinentia, per ἀναδιπλώσεις aliaque schemata, variatur, volvitur et rotatur, ut nihil esse possit vel venustius vel ardentius. Both critics feel the glow that underlies the words. The Apostle leads off with one of the chief features in his ministry, ἐνὑπομονῇπολλῇ , and then mentions three triplets of particulars in which the ὑπομονή is exhibited. Respecting these triplets Chrys. uses his favourite metaphor of snow-showers ; they constitute, he says, a blizzard of troubles. Then come eight other leading features, still under the same preposition , the repetition of which (18 times in all) has become monotonous, and is therefore changed to διά . Here the stream, which in the last four of the features introduced with ἐν had begun to swell, reaches its full volume and flows on in more stately clauses. After three with διά , we have a series of seven contrasts, ending with a characteristic three-fold alliteration and an equally characteristic play upon words. ἐνὑπομονῇπολλῇ . See on 1:6; also Lightfoot on Colossians 1:11 and Mayor on James 1:3. The high position given by our Lord to ὑπομονή (Luke 8:15, Luke 21:19) and to ὑπομένειν (Mark 13:13; Matthew 10:22, Matthew 24:13) accounts for the prominence given to it here and 12:12. It not only stands first, but it is illustrated in detail; huc spectat tota enumeratio quae sequitur (Calv.). The word appears in all four groups of the Pauline Epistles, chiefly in Rom. and 2 Cor., often with the meaning of fortitude and constancy under persecution. This meaning is very freq. in 4 Macc., whereas in Ecclus. and in the Canonical Books of the O.T. it commonly means patient and hopeful expectation. In 1 Thessalonians 1:3; 1 Timothy 6:11; 2 Timothy 3:10; Titus 2:2, it is placed next to ἀγάπη in lists of virtues. Like ἀγάπη , it is a word which, although not originally Biblical, has acquired fuller meaning and much more general use through the influence of the N.T. It is often treated as one of the chief among Christian virtues. Chrys. can scarcely find language strong enough to express his admiration for it. It is “ a root of all the goods, mother of piety, fruit that never withers, a fortress that is never taken, a harbour that knows no storms” (Hom. 117). Again, it is “ the queen of virtues, the foundation of right actions, peace in war, calm in tempest, security in plots,” which no violence of man, and no powers of the evil one, can injure (Ep. ad Olymp. 7). These and other quotations are given in Suicer, s.v. Clem. Rom. (Cor. 6) places this virtue at the beginning and end of his praise of the Apostle; Παῦλοςὑπομονῆςβραβεῖονὑπέδειξειν … ὑπομονῆςγενόμενοςμέγιστοςὑπογραμμός . Cf. 12:12. ἐνθλίψεσιν , ἀνάγκαις , ἐνστενοχωρίαις . This triplet consists of troubles which may be independent of human agency, and it is probably intended to form a climax; ‘ afflictions’ (1:4, 8, 2:4, 4:7), which might be avoided; ‘ necessities’ (12:10), which cannot be avoided; ‘ straits,’ angustiae (12:10), out of which there is no way of escape. Like ἀγάπη and ὑπομονή , θλίψις was a word of limited meaning and use in late Greek, which acquired great significance and frequent employment when it became a term with religious associations. In 1 Thessalonians 3:7, as in Job 15:24; Psalms 119:143; Zephaniah 1:15, θλίψις is coupled with ἀνάγκη . In the De Singularitate Clericorum appended to Cyprian’ s works, ἐνθλίψεσιν is translated twice, in pressuris, in tribulationibus; see below on ἐνἀκαταστασίαις . It is difficult to decide between συνιστάνοντες (B P and some cursives), συνιστάντες (א C D FG 17), and συνιστῶντες (א 3 D 3 E K L). In 3:1 the evidence is decisive for συνιστάνειν , and that gives great weight to συνιστάνοντες here. For διάκονοι , D*, f g Vulgt. have διακόνους . 5. ἐνπληγαῖς , ἐνφυλακαῖς , ἐνἀκαταστασίαις . This triplet consists of troubles inflicted by men. It is doubtful whether there is any climax; but St Paul might think ‘ stripes’ (11:23) less serious than ‘ imprisonments’ (11:23), which stopped his work for a time, and imprisonments less serious than ‘ tumults,’ which might force him to abandon work altogether in the place in which the tumult occurred. Clem. Rom. (Cor. 6) says of St Paul, ἑπτάκιςδεσμὰφορέσας , but the only imprisonment known to us prior to 2 Cor. is the one at Philippi. Popular tumults against St Paul are freq. in Acts (13:50, 14:5, 19, 17:5, 18:12, 19:23-41). In 1 Corinthians 4:11, the Apostle, in describing the experiences of Apostles, says κολαφιζόμεθα , ἀστατοῦμεν , ‘ we are buffeted, are homeless,’ and some would give the meaning of ‘ homelessness, vagrant life’ to ἀκαταστασία here. Chrys. seems to understand it in the sense of ‘ being driven from pillar to post,’ but in N.T. the signification of the word is ‘ disorder’ in one of two senses, viz. ‘ want of order, confusion’ (1 Corinthians 14:33; James 3:16), and ‘ breach of order, tumult’ (here and Luke 21:9). In LXX only twice, in the former sense (Proverbs 26:28; Tob. 4:13). In De Singularite Clericorum we again have two words in the Latin for one in the Greek; in seditionibus, in invocationibus. It is difficult to see what the latter can mean, and one might conjecture in concitationibus, the in being accidentally repeated, or in implicationibus, ‘ in entanglements.’ ἐνκόποις , ἐνἀγρυπνίαις , ἐννηστείαις . This third triplet consists of those troubles which he took upon himself in the prosecution of his mission. Thdrt. groups the first two triplets together as τὰἔξωθενἐπίοντα . and ἀκούσια : προστίθησιδὲτοῖςἀκουσίοιςκαὶτοὺςαὐθαιρέτουςπόνους . There is order in this triplet also, and perhaps one may call it a climax; κόποι disturb the day, ἀγρυπνίαι the night, and νηστεῖαι both. St Paul repeatedly speaks of κόποι as a prevailing feature in his own life (11:23, 27; 1 Thessalonians 2:9, 1 Thessalonians 2:3:5; 2 Thessalonians 3:8). While πόνος indicates the effort which was required, κόπος points to the fatigue which was incurred. Trench, § cii., suggests ‘ toil’ for πόνος and ‘ weariness’ for κόπος : but in the ordinary Greek of this period the difference between the two words was vanishing. Swete remarks that κόπος with its cognate κοπιᾷν is “ almost a technical word for Christian work,” and that in Revelation 2:2 τὸνκόπον and τὴνὑπομονήν are “ two notes of excellence, self-denying labour and perseverance.” ἐνἀγρυπνίαις . Here and 11:27 only in N.T. The word covers more than sleeplessness; it includes all that prevents one from sleeping. At Troas Paul preached until midnight and yet longer (Acts 20:7, Acts 20:9). In LXX the word is almost confined to Ecclus., where it is freq. and commonly means forgoing sleep in order to work. The Apostle no doubt often taught, and travelled, and worked with his hands to maintain himself, by night. ἐννηστείαις . Not ‘ fasts’ in the religious sense; * but, just as ἀγρυπνία is voluntary forgoing of sleep in order to get more work done, so νηστεῖαι is voluntary forgoing of food for the same reason. St Paul often neglected his meals, having ‘ no leisure so much as to eat’ (Mark 6:31). We infer from 11:27 that νηστεῖαι are voluntary abstentions from food, for there they are distinguished from involuntary hunger and thirst. Here the meaning might be that he neglected the handicraft by which he earned his bread (1 Corinthians 4:11, 1 Corinthians 4:12), or that he refused the maintenance which he might have claimed (1 Corinthians 9:4). But omitting meals in order to gain time is simpler. These sufferings, voluntarily undertaken, form an easy transition to the virtues which are evidence that he is one of God’ s ambassadors and fellow-workers. 6. ἐνἁγνότητι . The three triplets which state the sphere of ὑπομονή are ended, and the virtues mentioned in vv. 6 and 7 are co-ordinate with ὑπομονή . Ἁγνότης is mentioned again (probably) in 11:3, but nowhere else in Bibl. Grk. While castimonia (Tert.) or castitas (Vulg.) is too narrow on the one hand, ἡτῶνχρημάτωνὑπεροψία . (Thdrt.) is too narrow on the other. It means purity of life in both senses, chastity and integrity, the delicacy of mind which makes a man careful to keep a clean heart and clean hands. The six virtues in this verse have reference to principles of action, then ἐνλόγῳἀληθείας characterizes preaching, and ἐνδυνάμειΘεοῦ sums up the whole of Apostolic labour. ἐνγνώσει . Not merely practical wisdom or prudence in dealing with different men and different circumstances, recte et scienter agendi peritia (Calv.), but comprehensive knowledge of the principles of Christianity (8:7, 11:6; 1 Corinthians 1:5; Romans 15:14). ἐνμακροθυμίᾳ , ἐνχρηστότητι . While ὑπομονή is the courageous fortitude which endures adversity without murmuring or losing heart, μακροθυμία is the forbearance which endures injuries and evil deeds without being provoked to anger (James 1:19) or vengeance (Romans 12:19). It is the opposite of ὀξόθυμία , hasty temper; cf. Proverbs 14:17, ὀξόθυμοςπράσσειμετὰἀβουλίας . In Proverbs μακρόθυμος is uniformly applied to men, and the μακρόθυμος is highly praised (14:29, 15:18, 16:32, 17:27); in the other O.T. Books it is almost always applied to God. Μακροθυμία is late Greek and is rare, except in LXX and N.T. In N.T. it is freq. (ten times in Paul), and is used of both God (Romans 2:4, Romans 2:9:22; etc.) and men. It is coupled with χρηστότης both of God (Romans 2:4) and men (Galatians 5:22). See on 1 Corinthians 13:4. Χρηστότης , bonitas (Vulg.), benignitas (Aug.), is ‘ graciousness.’ It is opposed to ἀποτομία , severitas, of God (Rom. 10:22; cf. Titus 3:4). In men it is the sympathetic kindliness or sweetness of temper which puts others at their ease and shrinks from giving pain; ut nec verbo nec opere nostro aliis generemus asperitatem amaritudinis (Herveius). ἐνπνεύματιἁγίῳ . It is scarcely credible that St Paul would place the Holy Spirit in a list of human virtues and in a subordinate place, neither first to lead, nor last to sum up all the rest. We may abandon the common rendering, ‘ the Holy Ghost’ (AV, RV) and translate ‘ a spirit that is holy,’ i.e. in the spirit of holiness which distinguishes true ministers from false. The Apostle sometimes leaves us in doubt whether he is speaking of the Divine Spirit or the spirit of man in which He dwells and works; e.g. ἐνἁγιασμῷπνεύματος (2 Thessalonians 2:13); κατὰπνεῦμαἁγιωσύνης (Romans 1:4). This is specially the case with ἐνπνεύματι (Ephesians 2:22, Ephesians 3:5, Ephesians 5:18, Ephesians 6:18). Westcott on Ephesians 3:5 says. “ The general idea of the phrase is that it presents the concentration of man’ s powers in the highest part of his nature by which he holds fellowship with God, so that, when this fellowship is realised, he is himself in the Holy Spirit and the Holy Spirit is in him.” See on Romans 12:2. It is worth noting that πνεῦμαἅγιον is far more freq. in N.T. than τὸπνεῦματὸἅγιον or τὸἅγιονπνεῦμα . ἐνἀγάπῃἀνυποκρίτῳ . See on Romans 12:9. In 1 Timothy 1:5 and 2 Timothy 1:5, ἀνυπόκριτος is used of the πίστις which is one of the sources of ἀγάπη : in James 3:17, of the heaven-sent σοφία : in 1 Peter 1:22, almost as here, of φιλαδελφία , “ the love like that of brothers to those who are not brothers” (Hort). In Wisd. 5:18 it is applied to judgment which does not respect persons; and 18:16, to the Divine command. This seems to be the first appearance of the word, and St Paul may have derived it from that Book. Hort remarks that the word is chiefly Christian, as might be expected from the warnings of Christ against hypocrisy and from the high standard of sincerity manifested by the Apostles. M. Aurelius (8:5) has ἀνυποκρίτως , of saying what seems to be most just, but always with kind intention, and with modesty, and without hypocrisy. 7. ἐνλόγῳἀληθείας . We have the article omitted in James 1:18, as here; so also in διὰλόγουζῶντοςΘεοῦ (1 Peter 1:23), a passage which perhaps was suggested by James 1:18. In Ephesians 1:13; Colossians 1:5; 2 Timothy 2:15, we have the full expression, ὁλόγοςτῆςἀληθείας . The genitive may be of apposition, ‘ the word which is the truth’ ; or possessive, ‘ the word which belongs to the truth’ ; or objective, ‘ the declaration of the truth.’ The last is best,— the teaching which told the truth of the good tidings, the preaching of the Gospel. Some think that general truthfulness is the meaning here; and this fits on well to ‘ love unfeigned.’ There was no insincerity either in the affection which he manifested or in the statements which he uttered (2:17, 4:2). ἐνδυνάμειΘεοῦ . This Divine power was all the more conspicuous because of his personal weakness (4:7, 12:9). See on 1 Corinthians 2:4: neither there nor here is the chief reference, if there be any at all, to the miracles wrought by St Paul. In 12:12, where he does mention them, ἐνπάσῃὑπομονῇ is placed first among τὰσημεῖατοῦἀποστόλου , and the miracles are secondary. Here he is referring to his missionary career in general, the results of which showed that he must be working in the power of God. If there is allusion to one feature in the career more than to another, it is probably to the exercise of the Apostolic authority in enforcing Christian discipline. The expression δύναμιςΘεοῦ is chiefly Pauline in N.T. (13:4; 1 Corinthians 1:18, 1 Corinthians 1:2:5; Romans 1:16; 2 Timothy 1:8; cf. 2 Thessalonians 1:11). On ἐνδυνάμειΘεοῦ (1 Peter 1:5) Hort remarks; “ What is dwelt on is not so much that the power of God is exerted on behalf of men, as that men are uplifted and inspired by power, or by a power, proceeding from God. Ἐν is not here instrumental, but is used with its strict meaning. In one sense the power is in men; but in another and yet truer sense men are in the power, they yield to it as something greater and more comprehensive than themselves, in which their separateness is lost.” διὰτῶνὅπλωντῆςδικαιοσύνης . ‘ Through ( = by) weapons of righteousness.’ Here again the Book of Wisdom (5:17-20) may have suggested the expression used: cf.1 Thessalonians 5:8; Ephesians 6:13-17; and see on Romans 13:12.Isaiah 59:17 is another possible source. The change from ἐν to διά is made partly because the frequent repetition of ἐν has become intolerable; but the change may point to the difference between the δύναμιςΘεοῦ and the ὅπλα used by the διάκονοιΘεοῦ . ‘ Weapons of righteousness’ are those which righteousness supplies and which support the cause of righteousness (Romans 6:13). Whether he assailed others or defended himself, it was always with legitimate weapons and in a legitimate cause. He adds τῶνδεξιῶνκαὶἀριστερῶν to intimate that he is thoroughly equipped; his panoply is complete. On the right hand, etc. (AV, RV), is ambiguous; ‘ for the right hand,’ is better, i.e. ‘ right-hand and left-hand weapons,’ offensive and defensive armour, the shield being carried on the left arm. Chrys. interprets ἀριστερά as afflictions, which not only do not cast down but fortify. So also Thdrt.; δεξιὰδὲκαλεῖτὰδοκοῦνταθυμήρη , ἀριστερὰδὲτὰἐναντία . But the meaning of success and failure— ne prosperis elevemur, nec frangamur adversis— is alien to the passage and to N.T. usage. 8. διὰδόξηςκαὶἀτιμίας . ‘ Through ( = amid) glory and dishonour.’ The meaning of διά has changed; in v. 7 it marks the instrument, in v. 8 it marks the state or condition. We must give δόξα its usual rendering; ‘ honour and dishonour’ would be τιμῆςκ . ἀτιμίας (Romans 9:21; 2 Timothy 2:20). The Apostle received δόξα from God and from those whose hearts God touched, especially from his beloved Philippians and the Galatians, who would have dug out their eyes to serve him (Galatians 4:14). And he received plenty of ἀτιμία from both Jews and heathen. In this clause the good member of the pair comes first, in the clauses which follow the contrary order is observed, so that the first two pairs are back to back, producing chiasmus, as in 2:16, 4:3, 9:6, 10:11, 13:3. An open vowel after διὰ is avoided by this means; otherwise we should have had διὰἀτιμίας or διὰεὐφημίας . In the couplets with ὡς , the order is determined by the sense; and the point of the whole series is that the combination of all these contradictions in the same persons is evidence that they stand in a special relation to God. διὰδυσφημίαςκαὶεὐφημίας . ‘ Through ( = amid) evil report and good report.’ This is not a repetition of the preceding clause. That refers to personal treatment of the Apostle; this refers to what was said behind his back. It was during his absence from Corinth that the worst things were said of him. The next two couplets give specimens of the δυσφημία and εὐφημία . ὡςπλάνοι . Ut seductores; in rendering ὡς , Vulg. varies between ut, quasi, and sicut. These clauses with ὡς look back to συνιστάνοντεςἑαυτοὺςὡςΘεοῦδιάκονοι , and the thought behind them is, ‘ Our Apostleship is carried on under these conditions.’ Their being called πλάνοι by their opponents told in their favour, for the calumnies of base persons are really recommendations.* The opprobrious word combines the idea of a deceiver and a tramp, an impostor who leads men astray and a vagabond who has no decent home. The idea of seducing prevails in N.T., the notion of vagrancy not appearing anywhere (1 Timothy 4:1; 2 John 1:7; Matthew 27:63; cf. 1 John 2:26; John 7:12): ἀληθεῖς shows that ‘ deceivers’ is the meaning here. Καί = ‘ and yet’ is freq., esp. in Jn. (1:10, 11, etc.). 9. ὡςἀγνοούμενοικαὶἐπιγινωσκόμευοι . The present participles, of what is habitual and constant, continue throughout these two verses. ‘ As being known to none, and becoming known to all.’ † Ἀγνοούμενοι does not mean ‘ being misunderstood, misread,’ but ‘ being nonentities, not worth knowing,’ homines ignoti, obscuri, without proper credentials; τοῖςμὲνγὰρἦσανγνώριμοικαὶπερισπούδαστοι , οἱδέοὐδὲεἰδέναιαὐτοὺςἠξίουν (Chrys.). This was the view that contemptuous critics took of them, while from those who could appreciate them, they got more and more recognition. See on 1 Corinthians 13:12. With this couplet the ἀτιμία and δυσφημία received from opponents almost passes out of view. The four remaining couplets consist, not of two contradictories, one of which is false, but of two contrasted ways of looking at facts, both of which, from different points of view, are true; διὰτῶνἐναντίωντὴνμίανἐκέρασενἀρετήν (Thdrt.). ὡςἀποθνήσκοντεςκαὶἰδοὺζῶμεν . He is not thinking that his enemies regarded him as a doomed man over whose desperate condition they rejoiced; he is taking his own point of view (4:10, 11), ἐνθανάτοιςπολλάκις (11:23), καθ ʼ ἡμέρανἀποθνήσκων (1 Corinthians 15:13). He is moribund through infirmities of body, and is exposed to afflictions and dangers which may any day prove fatal. But he bears within himself ‘ the life of Jesus’ which continues to triumph over everything, and will continue to do so (1 Corinthians 1:10). The change from the participle to καὶἰδοὺζῶμεν marks the exulting and confident feeling; ἰδού as in v. 2 and 5:17. ὡςπαιδευόμενοικαὶμὴθανατούμενοι . * He regards himself as requiring chastening. His enemies might regard it as a sign of Divine displeasure, but he knows that the chastening is a merciful dispensation of God. He is probably thinking of Psa 118:17, Psalms 118:18, οὐκἀποθανοῦμαιἀλλὰζήσομαι … παιδεύωνἐπαίδευσένμεΚύριος , καὶτῷθανάτῳοὐπαρέδωκένμε . 10. Here, at any rate, we may suppose that he has ceased to think of the accusations and insinuations of his adversaries, and is soaring above such distressing memories. It is somewhat far-fetched to see in these contrasts allusions to the sneer that he refused the maintenance of an Apostle, because he knew that he was not an Apostle, and that he took no pay for his teaching, because he knew that it was worthless. Yet B Weiss thinks that Paul and his fellow-workers had been called “ doleful, penniless paupers,” — trü bselige, armselige Habenichtse,— and that he is alluding to that here. There was plenty of λύπη in his life (Romans 9:2; Philippians 2:27), and in spite of his labouring with his hands to support himself, he was sometimes in need of help and gratefully accepted it (11:9; Philippians 4:15). ἀεὶχαίροντες . Romans 5:3-5; 1 Thessalonians 5:16; Philippians 2:18, Philippians 3:1, Philippians 4:4. Such passages illustrate John 15:11, John 16:33. The thought of God’ s goodness to him and to his converts is an inexhaustible source of joy. πολλοὺςπλουτίζοντες . dagger; Chrys. refers to the collections for the poor saints; but they made no one rich, and such an explanation is almost a bathos in a pæ an of so lofty a strain. It was spiritual riches which he bestowed with such profusion; of silver and gold he had little or none. “ Apart from 1 Timothy 6:17. no instance of πλοῦτος in the sense of material wealth is to be found in St Paul’ s writings. On the other hand, his figurative use of the word has no parallel in the rest of the Greek Bible. Of fourteen instances of it, five occur in Ephesians. In the use of the derivatives πλούσιος , πλουσίως , πλουτεῖν , πλουτίζειν , the same rule will be found to hold, though there are some interesting exceptions” (J. A. Robinson on Eph. iii. 8). ὡςμηδὲνἔχοντες . ‘ As having nothing’ ; not even himself. In becoming the bondservant of Jesus Christ, he had given both soul and body to Him, and he was no longer his own (Romans 1:1; 1 Corinthians 6:19). The μηδέν may have its proper subjective force, but this view of the case is his own, not that of his adversaries. καὶπάντακατέχοντες . The word— play between simple and compound resembles that in 3:2 and 4:8. The compound implies ‘ keeping fast hold upon, having as a secure possession’ . See Milligan, Thessalonians, p. 155. Bachmann quotes Ephraim; omnia possidemus per potestatem, quam in coelis et in terris habemus. Meyer quotes Gemara Nedarim, f. 40. 2; Recipimus non esse pauperem nisi in scientia. In Occidente seu terra Israel dixerunt; in quo scientia est, is est ut ille, in quo omnia sunt; in quo illa deest, quid est in eo? What the Stoic claimed for the wise man is true of the Christian; πάνταγὰρὑμῶνἐστίν (1 Corinthians 3:21). “ The whole world is the wealth of the believer,” says Aug. in reference to this verse (De Civ. Dei, xx. 7); and in showing that evil may have its uses in the world he says of these last four verses; “ As then these oppositions of contraries lend beauty to the language, so the beauty of the course of this world is achieved by the opposition of contraries, arranged, as it were, by an eloquence not of words, but of things” (ibid. ix. 18). Jerome says on v. 10; “ The believer has a whole world of wealth; the unbeliever has not a single farthing” (Ep. liii. 11, in Migne, 10). 6:11-7:16. THE OF BETWEEN THE APOSTLE AND THE Under the impulse of strong feeling the Apostle has been opening his heart with great frankness to his converts. He now asks them with great earnestness to make a similar return and to treat him with affectionate candour. The appeal is conveniently regarded as in two parts (6:11-7:4, 5-16), but the first part is rather violently interrupted by the interjection of a sudden warning against heathen modes of life which are sure to pollute the lives of the Corinthians (6:14-7:1), and would impede their reconciliation with the Apostle. 6:11-7:4. Appeal of the Reconciled Apostle to the Corinthians Let me have some return for my affectionate frankness. Close intimacy with heathen life is impossible for you. Open your hearts to me as mine is ever open to you. 11O men of Corinth, my lips are unlocked to tell you everything about myself; my heart stands wide open to receive you and your confidences. 12There is no restraint in my feeling towards you; the restraint is in your own affections. 13But love should awaken love in return— I appeal to you as my children— let your hearts also be opened wide to receive me. Warning against Intimacy with Heathen (6:14-7:1). 14 Come not into close fellowship with unbelievers who are no fit yokefellows for you. For What partnership can righteousness have with iniquity? Or how can light associate with darkness? 15What concord can there be between Purity and pollution? Or what portion can a believer have with an unbeliever? 16And what agreement can God’ s sanctuary have with idols? For we, yes we, are a sanctuary of the living God. This is just what was meant when God said, I will dwell in them and move among them, And I will be their God, and they will be My people. 17Therefore come out from the midst of them, And sever yourselves, saith the Lord, And lay hold of nothing that is unclean: And I will give you a welcome. 18And I will be to you a Father, And ye shall be to Me sons and daughters, Saith the Lord Almighty. 8. 1Seeing then that the promises which we have are no less than these, beloved friends, let us cleanse ourselves from everything that can defile flesh or spirit, and secure perfect consecration by reverence for God. 2Make room for me in your hearts. Why hesitate? In no single instance have I wronged any one, ruined any one, taken advantage of any one. 3It is not to put you in the wrong that I am saying this. Do not think that. In pleading my own cause I am blaming no one. I repeat what I said before; ye are in my very heart, and you will ever be there whether I die or live. 4I feel the greatest confidence in you; I take the greatest pride in you. And so I am filled with comfort, I am overflowing with joy, for all the affliction that I have to bear. 11. Τὸστόμαἡμῶνἀνέῳγεν . ‘ Our mouth is open.’ In late Greek ἀνέῳγα is almost always intransitive (John 1:51; 1 Corinthians 16:9) with the meaning of standing open. In class. Grk. the perf. pass. is preferred (2:12; Romans 3:13). There is much discussion as to whether these words refer to what the Apostle has just said or to what he is about to say. The former is right, but the latter may be to some extent included. He is himself a little surprised at the fulness with which he has opened his heart to them. The phrase is not a mere Hebraistic pleonasm, used to indicate that what is said is important (Matthew 5:2, Matthew 5:13:35; Acts 8:35, Acts 8:10:34; etc.). It is a picturesque indication that there has been no reserve on his part. Lata dilectio cordis nostri, quae vos omnes complectitur, non sinit ut taceamus ea quae prosunt vobis. Profectus enim discipulorum aperit os magistri (Herveius). His delight in them does not allow him to be silent. Κορίνθιοι . Very rarely does the Apostle address his converts by name (Galatians 3:1; Philippians 4:5). Nowhere else does he do so to his Corinthians. The whole passage is affectionately tender. ἡκαρδίαἡμῶνπεπλάτυνται . Just as his lips have been unsealed to tell them everything about himself and his office, so his ‘ heart has been set at liberty’ (Psalms 119:32) to take all of them in. It has been expanded and stands wide open to receive them. Heat, as Chrysostom remarks, makes things expand, and warm affection makes his heart expand. Their hearts are so contracted that there is no room in them for him. Ab ore ad cor concludere debebant (Beng.). In his heart their misconduct is forgotten; their amendment and progress cancels all that, and sorrow is turned into joy (7:2-4). 12. οὐστενοχωρεῖσθεἐνἡμῖν . ‘ There is no restraint on my side; but whatever restraint there is is in your hearts.’ He had perhaps been accused of being close and reserved. Like the rapid changes of expression in vv. 14-16, the change from his καρδία to their σπλάγχνα is made to avoid repetition of the same word. In both cases the seat of the affections is meant. ‘ Bowels’ is an unfortunate rendering; the word means the upper part of the intestines, heart, liver, lungs, etc. “ Theophilus (ad Autol. ii. 10, 22) uses σπλάγχνα and καρδία as convertible terms” (Lightfoot on Philippians 1:8). Many things cause the heart to close against others, meanness, suspicion, resentment for supposed injury. Are they quite free from all these things? 1 John 3:17. 13. τὴνδὲαὐτὴνἀντιμισθίαν . In dictating he omits to supply a verb to govern this acc. Lit. ‘ But as the same requital,’ i.e. ‘ In order to give me an exact equivalent for what I give you, repay open heart with open heart.’ Ἀντιμισθία occurs Romans 1:27, but nowhere else in Bibl. Grk. Various ways are suggested of explaining the irregular construction, but the meaning is the same however we regard it. The simplest explanation is that, after the affectionate parenthesis ὡςτέκνοιςλέγω , he forgets the opening construction. See cornely, ad loc.; Blass, § 34. 3, 6. ὡςτέκνοιςλέγω . ‘ I am speaking as to my children’ ; not ‘ as to children,’ implying that they are still young in the faith and need to be fed with milk (νηπίοις , 1 Corinthians 3:1); still less ‘ as the children say,’ which the Greek cannot mean. In neither case would τέκνα be used, but it is St Paul’ s usual word in speaking of or to his spiritual children; 1 Corinthians 4:14, 1 Corinthians 4:17; Galatians 4:19; 1 Timothy 1:2, 1 Timothy 1:18; etc. By inserting these words he mitigates the severity of στενοχωρεῖσθε . ‘ It is not a large demand, if a father claims affection from his children.’ πλατύνθητεκαὶὑμεῖς . ‘ Do you also open your hearts wide’ ; looking back to v. 11. The Corinthians must surely make some response to his open-hearted statement; τὸναὐτὸνπλατυσμὸνὡςἀντιμισθίανπλατύνθητε . “ He asks for the enlargement of their heart towards him; which was to be shown in separation from the world’ (F. W. Robertson). 6:14-7:1. This strongly worded admonition to make no compromise with heathenism comes in so abruptly here that a number of critics suppose that it is a fragment of another letter, and some maintain that the fragment is not by St Paul. We may set aside the latter hypothesis with confidence. The fact that ἑτεροζυγέω , μετοχή , συμφώνησις , συνκάθεσις , Βελίαρ , and μολυσμός are found nowhere else in N.T. counts for very little. There are more than three dozen of such words in each of the three Epistles, Ephesians, Colossians, and Philippians, and here these unusual words are needed by the subject. There is no inconsistency between this severe injunction and 1 Corinthians 5:9 f., 1 Corinthians 10:27 f. What is discouraged here is something much more intimate than accepting a heathen’ s invitation to dinner. And there is nothing un-Pauline in ‘ defilement of flesh and spirit.’ It is true that he often treats the flesh as the sphere of sin, and the spirit as its opponent. But here he is using popular language, in which ‘ flesh and spirit’ sum up the totality of human nature. What stains the whole man is an abomination to be avoided. * There is more to be said for the hypothesis that we have here a fragment of another of the Apostle’ s letters, and probably the one mentioned 1 Corinthians 5:9. These verses might easily form part of the one there described. Moreover, if we abstract the passage, 7:2 fits on to 6:13 admirably; it is obviously a continuation, either immediate or by resumption, of the same topic. Nevertheless, this attractive hypothesis is a violent one. † There is no evidence in Ms., or version, or quotation, that any copy of the Epistle ever lacked this passage. If it belonged originally to another Epistle, how did it come to be inserted here, if not in the letter dictated by St Paul, in one of the earliest copies made from it? An interpolator would have chosen a more suitable place. The interpolation, if it be one, might possibly be due to accident, the careless insertion of a leaf from one MS. among the leaves of another. But we require very strong internal evidence to justify the use of such an explanation; and on this point opinions differ. ‡ Some critics regard the disconnexion with the context so glaring, and the connexion of 6:13 with 7:2 so obvious, that the theory of insertion, either deliberate or accidental, is demonstrated. Others contend that the connexion with the context is natural and close. There is perhaps some exaggeration in both these views. It is not incredible that in the middle of his appeal for mutual frankness and affection, and after his declaration that the cramping constraint is all on their side, he should dart off to one main cause of that constraint, viz. their compromising attitude towards anti-Christian influences. Having relieved his mind of this distressing subject, he returns at once to his tender appeal. On the whole, this view seems better than the hypothesis of interpolation. But this is one of the many places in 2 Cor. in which our ignorance of the state of things at Corinth renders certainty unattainable. We do not know to what kind of intimacy with heathen acquaintances and customs the Apostle is alluding. But a sudden digression for a few minutes is more probable than a long pause.* In the latter case the return to v. 13 in 7:2 would be less probable. See Meyer or Kiö pper, ad loc.; Zahn, Intr. i. p. 349. 14. μὴγίνεσθεἑτεροζυγοῦντεςἀπίστοις . Here, although perhaps not in 4:4, we shall be right in confining ἄπιστοι to those who do not believe the Gospel, the unconverted heathen (1 Corinthians 6:6, 1 Corinthians 7:12 ff., 1 Corinthians 10:27, 1 Corinthians 14:22 ff.). The false apostles are certainly not included, and the dat. does not mean ‘ to please unbelievers.’ And the metaphor in ἑτεροζυγοῦντες doubtless comes from Deuteronomy 22:10, where, among other unnatural combinations, ploughing with an ox and an ass harnessed together is prohibited. Species are made distinct by God, and man ought not to join together what He has put asunder. Cf. Leviticus 19:19. There may also be some allusion to Deuteronomy 11:16, where for ‘ lest thy heart be deceived’ LXX has μὴπλατυνθῇἡκαρδίασου , and what follows is a warning against idolatry, λατρεύεινθεοῖςἑτέροις , ‘ lest thy heart be enlarged so as to embrace heathenism.’ But the other allusion is manifest. ‘ Heathen belong to one species, Christians to quite another, and it is against nature that Christians should be yokefellows with them. They will not walk as Christians do, and Christians must not walk in their ways.’ † The meaning is not to be confined to mixed marriages; intimate combinations of other kinds are condemned. But with characteristic tenderness and tact St Paul does not assert that such things have taken place. He says, ‘ Become not incongruously yoked with unbelievers’ ; such things may happen if they are not warned. Even the RV. does not preserve the important γίνεσθε . There is much softening in ‘ Do not let yourselves become.’ Cf. μὴοὖνγίνεσθεσυνμέτοχοιαὐτῶν (Ephesians 5:7). See Blass, § 37. 6, § 62. 3. The idea of ζυγός = ‘ balance’ and of scales unfairly tipped is certainly not in the phrase, although Theophylact takes it so; ‘ be not too much inclined to the heathen.’ St Paul had said that he himself was willing to behave as a heathen to heathen (1 Corinthians 9:21; cf. Galatians 2:19), but not in the way of sharing or condoning their practices. τίςγὰρμετοχηή ; The absolute incongruity between Christians and pagans is emphasized by quickly delivered argumentative questions, as in 12:17, 18. They are illustrations of the Apostle’ s rhetorical power. The first four questions are in pairs; the last being a conclusion to the series and a premiss for what follows. The great variety of expression is no doubt studied, and it is effective. But inferior MSS. here and there spoil the effect by assimilating the constructions. ‘ For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness, or what association can there be between light and darkness?’ The change from μετοχή to κοινωνία is for the sake of change, and we need not look to any important difference of meaning, as that μετοχή implies that each partner has a share, e.g. of the profits, whereas every member of a society enjoys the whole of what is κοινὀν , as the use of a park or building. Here, as in v. 8 , AV makes a verbal antithesis which does not exist in the Greek. We require ‘ righteousness with lawlessness’ (2 Thessalonians 2:7; 1 John 3:4) or ‘ with iniquity’ (Romans 4:7, Romans 6:19). Although μετοχή is a hapaxleg., μετέχω occurs five times in 1 Cor. πρὸςσκότος . We have four different constructions in the five sentences, all for the sake of variety; two datives, dat. followed by πρός ,. gen. followed by πρός , dat. followed by μετά The πρός after κοινων . is late Greek; φυσικήἐστινἡμῖνκοινωνίαπρὸςἀλλήλους (Epict. Dis. ii. 20); cf. Ecclus. 13:3. Light and darkness as a spiritual antithesis is freq. in N.T. and elsewhere (Romans 13:12; Ephesians 5:8; 1 John 2:9; Acts 26:18; Isaiah 42:16f; etc.). In N.T., σκότος is neuter. 15. τίςδέσυμφώνησιςχριστοῦπρὸςβελίαρ ; In the first couplet of questions we have abstract terms, in the second, concrete; ‘ And what concord is there of Christ with Belial?’ The Head of the Heavenly society is opposed to the Head of the infernal kingdom, the Pattern of perfect purity to the representative of devilish abominations. But is it possible that ‘ Beliar’ here is Antichrist? ‘ What harmony can there be of Christ with Antichrist?’ The antithesis is attractive rather than probable; but Bousset treats it as certain, and Antichrist is here represented as the devil incarnate. The Sun of righteousness and the Prince of darkness is the probable antithesis. In O.T. ‘ Belial’ is often mentioned as meaning ‘ worthlessness,’ ‘ ruin,’ ‘ desperate wickedness.’ Later, ‘ Belial’ or ‘ Beliar’ or ‘ Berial’ comes to be a name for Satan or some Satanic power. In the Book of Jubilees (1:20) Moses prays, “ Create in Thy people an upright spirit, and let not the spirit of Beliar rule over them to accuse them before Thee.” In the Testaments it is connected with various evil spirits, e.g. of impurity (Reub. 4:11, 6:3; Sim. 5:3), wrath (Daniel 1:7, Daniel 1:8), and so forth. “ Choose, therefore, for yourselves either the light or the darkness, either the law of the Lord or the works of Beliar” (Leviticus 19:1). The interchange of λ and ρ is not uncommon; e.g. κλίβανος and κρίβανος , γλώσσαλγος and γλώσσαργος . Alcibiades had a lisp which turned ρ into λ , saying ὀλᾷς for ὁρᾷς , κόλαζ for κόραζκ .τ .λ . (Aristoph. Vesp. 45). ‘ Inferior texts here have Βελίαλ , or Βελἰαν , or Βελίαβ ; Vulg. Belial. In LXX it is translated ἀνόμημα , ἀνομία , ἀποστασία , παράνομος , and in the A text ἀσεβής . For the Beliar myth see Charles, Ascension of Isaiah, pp. liv f. ξριστοῦ (א B C P, d e f Copt.) is to be preferred to ξριστῷ (D E G K L, g Syrr.). Note that d e differ from D E. τίςμερὶςπιστῷμετὰἀπίστου ; Here we have a verbal antithesis, and AV obliterates it; ‘ he that believeth with an infidel.’ Better, ‘ What portion hath a believer with an unbeliever?’ (RV). Comp. 1 Timothy 5:16 and Acts 16:1 with John 20:27. Μερίς suggests that there is a whole to be shared (Acts 8:21). Cf. μετὰμοιχῶντὴνμερίδασουέίθεις (Psa_93 [1. 18). It is certain that πιοτῷ does not mean ‘ one who is faithful,’ viz. God; πιστὸςκύριοςἐντοῖςλόγοιςαὐτοῦ . Fidelis Dominus in omnibus verbis suis (Psa_144 [v.] 13).* 16. τίςδὲσυνκατάθεσιςναῷΘεοῦμετὰεἰδώλων ; In this final question, which has no pair, there is no new construction; ‘ What agreement hath God’ s sanctuary with idols?’ The noun is a technical term with the Stoics; it is not found elsewhere in Bibl. Grk., but ἐκσυνκαταθέσεως , “ according to agreement” occurs in papyri. Cf. οὐσυνκαταθήσημετὰτοῦἀδίκου (Exodus 23:1). Manasseh had put a graven image of Ashera in the house of the Lord, and Josiah removed and burnt it (2 Kings 21:7, 2 Kings 23:6). Ezekiel tells of other abominations (8. 3-18), for which unsparing punishments were inflicted by God. The history of Israel had shown with terrible distinctness that God allowed no agreement between His house and idols. This shows that ναοῦ is not to be understood before εἰδώλων , as if the opposition was between the temple of God and a temple of idols. The absolute incongruity is between God’ s sanctuary, in which not even an image of Himself might be put up, and images of false gods; also perhaps between dead idols and the temple of the living God. By the introduction of idols the temple ceases to be a temple of God. ἡμεῖςγὰρναὸςΘεοῦἐσμὲνζῶντος . ‘ The Most High dwelleth not in temples made with hands’ (Acts 7:48, Acts 17:24). The only suitable temple of the living God is the souls of living beings who can adore and love Him. ‘ And such are we.’ The ἡμεῖς (see crit, note) is very emphatic. The Christian Church, rather than the individual Christian (1 Corinthians 6:19), is here regarded as God’ s sanctuary. What is it about us that is divine? asks Seneca; Quaerendum est quod non fiat in dies deterius, cui non possit obstari. Quid hoc est? animus; sed hit rectus, bonus, magnus. Quid aliud voces hunc, quam Deum in humano corpore hospitantem Subsilire in coelum ex angulo licet; exsurge modo, et to quoque dignum finge Deo (Ep. xxxi. 9, 10). Calvin states the same fact somewhat differently: In Deo hoc speciale est, qui quemcunque locum dignatur sua praesentia, etiam sanctificat. As in John 2:21, ὁναὸςτοῦσώματοςαὐτοῦ , we have ναός rather than ἱερόν , when human beings are spoken of as shrines for God to dwell in. The ναός was the most sacred part of the ἱερόν , which included buildings for other uses than that of worship and also open spaces. Cf. 1 Corinthians 3:16, 1 Corinthians 3:3:6. 1 Corinthians 3:19; Ephesians 2:21. Ναός is from ναίειν , ‘ to dwell.’ We ought certainly to read ἡμεῖς … έσμἑν (א B D L P 17, 67**, d e Copt. Aeth.) rather than ὑμεῖς … ἐστε (א 3 C D3 E F G K, Vulg. Syrr. Arm.), which probably comes from 1 Corinthians 3:16. The confusion between ἡμεῖς and ὑμεῖς in MSS. is freq. Cf. 7:12, 8:8, 19; 1 Corinthians 7:15. א * has ναοί , an obvious correction. καθὼςεἶπενὁΘεός . We have first a paraphrase and then a quotation of the LXX of Lev 26:11, Leviticus 26:12, with a mixture of other passages. Cf. Isaiah 52:11; Ezekiel 20:34, Ezekiel 20:37:27; 2 Samuel 7:14; but the remarkable ἐνοικήσωἐναὐτοῖς is not in any of them. It is much stronger than ‘ walk among them’ or ‘ tabernacle among them.’ The introductory words show in each case what passage the Apostle has in his mind. καθὼςεἶπενὁΘεός points to Leviticus 26:12, λέγειΚύριος to Isaiah 52:5 or Ezekiel 20:33 or 37:21, and λέγειΚύριοςπαντοκράτωρ to 2 Samuel 7:8. Cf. Ezekiel 11:17; Zephaniah 3:20; Zechariah 10:8. καὶἔσομαιαὐτῶνΘεός . This privilege depends upon their willingness to accept Him; Deus natura omnium est, voluntate paucorum (Pseudo-Primasius). 17. διὸἐξέλθατε . The διό introduces the practical conclusion to be drawn from vv. 14-16, and to make it as impressive as possible it is expressed in language taken from the utterances of Jehovah in O.T. The withdrawal is to be moral and spiritual, not local; it is not meant that Christians are to migrate from heathen cities. And the aor. imperat. shows that the withdrawal is to be immediate and decisive, as in 18:4, where Swete remarks that “ the cry ἑζελθε , ἐξέλθετε , rings through the Hebrew history; in the call of Abram, in the rescue of Lot, in the Exodus, in the call to depart from the neighbourhood of the tents of Dathan and Abiram, etc.” Cf. Ephesians 5:11; 1 Timothy 5:22. See Index IV. ἀκαθάρτουμὴἅπτεσθε . In Heb. it is an unclean person. Here the adj. may be masc. or neut. Luther, AV, RV., follow Chrys. in regarding it as neur. εἰσδέξομαιὑμᾶς . ‘ Will receive you with favour.’ The compound verb is found in LXX, esp. of God’ s promises, but no where else in N.T. St Luke, both in Gospel and Acts, often has ἀποδέχομαι in the same sense = ‘ welcome.’ 18. ἔσομαιὑμῖνεἰς . This may mean ‘ I will become to you’ (Matthew 19:5; Ephesians 5:31); but more probably the εἰς means ‘ for, to serve as (Hebrews 1:5, Hebrews 1:8:10; Ephesians 1:12) father.’ There is to be a family likeness and family affection between God and them. Cf. Jubilees 1:24. They have been called out of their original home, and their new one will more than compensate them. If the friendship of the world means enmity with God (James 4:4), the only N.T. passage in which φιλία occurs,— it is likely to be true that separation from the world will lead to friendship with God. The second Isaiah (43:6), with characteristic insight, penetrates to the truth that there are daughters of God as well as sons of God. But this truth was only dimly recognized until Christianity raised woman from the degradation into which she had been thrust, not only in heathen cities, like Corinth, but even among the Chosen People. With the wording comp. 2 Samuel 7:14. λέγειΚύριοςΠαντοκράτωρ . ‘ Saith the Lord All-Ruler’ or ‘ All-sovereign.’ See Swete on Revelation 1:8, the only other book in N.T. in which παντοκράτωρ occurs. There and in O.T. it is freq. It indicates One who rules over all rather than One who is able do all things, ὁπαντοδύναμος (Wisd. 7:23, 11:17, 18:15). The promises of such a Potentate are no mean thing, and they are sure to be fulfilled. * This chapter was the Second Lesson at Evensong on 8 June 1688, after the Seven Bishops had been imprisoned in the Tower. See also Job 11:14-20, which was part of the First Lesson. * Calvin finds meaning in the order of the clauses; Prius tempus benevolentiac ponitur, deinde dies salutis; quo innuitur ex sola Dei misericordia tanquam ex fonte manare nobis salutem. D D (Sixth century). Codex Claromontanus; now at Paris. A Graeco-Latin MS. The Latin (d) is akin to the Old Latin. Many subsequent hands (sixth to ninth centuries) have corrected the MS. * information respecting the commentator is to be found in the volume on the First Epistle, pp. lxvi f. F F (Late ninth century). Codex Augiensis (from Reichenau); now at Trinity College, Cambridge. G G (Late ninth century). Codex Boernerianus; at Dresden. Interlined with the Latin (in minluscules). The Greek text is almost the same as that of F, but the Latin (g) shows Old Latin elements. d d The Latin companion of D e d The Latin companion of E g d The Latin companion of G * Nihil enim magis ridiculum quam de tua apud alios existimations vindicanda contendere quam ipse tibi flagitiosa ac turpi vita contumeliam arcessas (Calv.). E E (Ninth century). At Petrograd. A copy of D, and unimportant א Ԡ א (Fourth century). Codex Sinaiticus; now at Petrograd, the only uncial MS. containing the whole N.T. B B (Fourth century). Codex Vaticanus. C C (Fifth century). Codex Ephraemi, a Palimpsest; now at Paris, very defective. Of 2 Corinthians all from 10:8 onwards is wanting. K K (Ninth century). Codex Mosquensis; now at Moscow. L L (Ninth century). Codex Angelicus; now in the Angelica Library at Rome. P P (Ninth century). Codex Porfirianus Chiovensis, formerly possessed by Bishop Porfiri of Kiev, and now at Petrograd. 17 17. (Evan. 33, Act_13. Ninth century). Now at paris. “ The queen of the cursives” and the best for the Pauline Epistles; more than any other it preserves Pre-Syrian readings and agrees with B D L. f d The Latin companion of F * St Paul would not mention as an apostolic hardship the fasts which he practised for his own spiritual good (Beet). * “ Their enemies did them service against their wills” (Chrys.). † Sicut qui ignoti et cogniti (Vulg.); ut qui ignoraniur et cognosciniur (Aug.). * ut castignti et non mortificati (Vulg.); ut coerciti et non mortificati (Aug.). dagger; multos locuplolantes (Vulg.); multos ditanles (Aug.). * “ It is an error to suppose that Paul makes a rigorous distinction between the σάρξ and the σῶμα and its members in relation to the seat of sin” (O.Cone. Paul, p. 228). † A. Sabatier, who rejects the less violent hypotheses that 10.— 13. is part of another letter, accepts this hypotheses as correct (The Apostle Paul, p. 177 n.). This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/iccnt/ 7:1. Here again, as between 1. and 2., and between 3. and 4., and between 4. and 5., and between 5. and 6., the division between the chapters is not well made. As the οὐν shows, 7:1 belongs closely to what precedes. It closes the digression which warns the Corinthians against fellowship with heathen modes of life; and then we have a resumption of the tender appeal in which his beloved converts are implored to make some response to the frankness with which he has opened his heart to them. 1. Ταύταςοὖνἔχοντεςτὰςἐπαγγελίας . Ταύτας comes first with emphasis; ‘ These, then, being the promises which we have.’ They are so incalculably precious, and so sure to be fulfilled if they are properly met. ἀγαπητοί . With us this affectionate address has become almost a canting expression in sermons, and it means very little. But the Apostle is not prodigal in his use of it, and with him it means a great deal; twice in 1 Cor. (10:14, 15:58), once again in 2 Cor. (12:19); twice in Phil. (2:12, 4:1); once in Rom. (12:19). καθαρίσωμενἑαυτούς . He again softens the severity of his words, as in ώςτέκνοιςλέγω (v. 13); this time by including himself among those who need cleansing. Baptism cannot be repeated, and earnest Christians would not need a repetition of it; but all in their walk through life become soiled and need frequent cleansing (John 13:10). He who looks for a fulfilment of the gracious promises must strive to be καθαρὸςὅλος . If we are to have God to dwell in us, we must purify the dwelling. If we are to have Him as a Father, we must strive to acquire some likeness to Him. The verb is not peculiar to Bibl. Grk. It occurs in Josephus (Ant. xi. v. 4) and is found in inscriptions (followed by ἀπό , as here and Hebrews 9:14) in much the same sense as in this verse, of the necessity for purification before entering a holy place. Deissmann, Bib. St. p. 216. Cf. ἀπὸπάσηςἁμαρτίαςκαθάρισονκαρδίαν (Ecclus. 38:10). Index IV. ἀπὸπαντὸςμολυσμοῦ . ‘ From every kind of defilement.’ The noun implies an evil stain, foul pollution; in LXX in connexion with idolatry (1 Esdr. 8:80 [84]; 2 Macc. 5:27; cf. Jeremiah 23:15). In the Testaments (Symeon 2:13) we have ἀποσχῶἀπὸπαντὸςμολυσμοῦ . On the date of the Testaments see Lightfoot, Galatians, p. 320. Here there may be a reference to τὴντῶνεἰδώλωνκοινωνίαν , but not to that exclusively. The noun occurs nowhere else, but μολύνω is freq. in O.T. and N.T. Trench, Syn. § xxxi.; Wetst. ad loc. σαρκὸςκαὶπνεύματος . Man may be defiled in either flesh or spirit, and in either case there must be cleansing. The two together sum up human nature, and the intercommunion of the parts is so close, that when either is soiled the whole is soiled. St Paul is using popular language covering the material and immaterial elements in man, and it is manifest that he is not under the influence of the Gnostic doctrine that everything material is ipso facto evil. He says that the flesh must be cleansed from every kind of pollution. Gnostics maintained that it was as impossible to cleanse flesh as to cleanse filth. In either case the only remedy was to get rid of the unclean matter. See P. Gardner, Religious Experience of St Paul, p. 165. He quotes Reitzenstein; “ All the different shades of meaning which πνεῦμα has in Paul’ s writings may be found in the magic papyri … Paul has not developed for himself a peculiar psychology, and a mystic way of speaking in accordance with it, but speaks in the Greek of his time” (Die Hellenistischen Mysterienreligionen, pp. 42, 137). Epictetus (Dis. ii.13) has a similar thought; “ When you are conversing with others, know you not that you are exercising God? Unhappy man, you carry God about with you, and know it not. You carry Him within you, and perceive not that you are polluting Him with unclean thoughts and filthy acts. If an image of God were present, you would not dare to do any of the things which you do. But when God Himself is present within and sees all, you are not ashamed of thinking such things and doing such things, ignorant as you are of your own nature and subject to the anger of God.” Nestle’ s proposal to take only σαρκός with μολυσμοῦ and transfer καὶπνεύματος to ἀγιωσύνην need not be more than mentioned.* The latter constr. is intolerable. With μολ . σαρκὸςκ . πνεύματος comp. ἁγίατῷσώματικ . τῷπνεύματι (1 Corinthians 7:34). It is uncritical dogmatism to assert that St Paul would never have used such an expression as ‘ defilement of flesh and spirit.’ See on v. 5. ἐπιτελοῦντεςἁγιωσύνην . The mere cleansing oneself from defilement is not enough. It is right that the unclean spirit should be cast out; but the place which he has occupied must be filled with such things as will make it impossible for him to return; there must be a process of self-consecration always going on. This is the meaning of ‘ bringing to completeness (8:6, 11; Philippians 1:6) a state of holiness’ (1 Thessalonians 3:13; Romans 1:4). Cf. Zechariah 4:9. In LXX, ἀγιωσύνη is used generally of God. In the Testaments (Leviticus 18:11) we are told that the saints who enter Paradise will eat from the tree of life, καὶπνεῦμαἁγιωσύνηςἔσταιἐπ ʼ αὐτοῖς . Here it is the divine quality of ἁγιωσύνη that fits Christians to become God’ s sanctuary and to have Him as their Father. ἐνφόβῳΘεοῦ . Not in the fear or love of men. The ἐν may mark either the sphere in which the perfecting of holiness takes place or the means by which it is accomplished; cf. ἐντῇπαρουσίᾳ , ἐντῇπαρακλήσει (v. 7). ‘ The fear of God’ or ‘ the fear of the Lord’ is repeatedly given in O.T. as the principle of a good life; so esp. in Psalms (2:11, 5:7. etc.) and Proverbs (1:7, 1:29. 13, etc.). It is the whole duty of man (Ecclesiastes 12:13). “ He who tries to do any good thing without the fear of the Lord,” says Herveius, “ is a proud man.” Cf. v. 11; Romans 3:18; Acts 9:31, Acts 9:10:2, Acts 9:35. In Ephesians 5:21 what is said in O.T. of Jehovah is in a remarkable way transferred to Christ, ἐνφόβῳΧριστοῦ . 2-4. The return to the affectionate appeal in 6:11-13 is as sudden as the digression at 6:14. He has concluded the warning against what would hinder complete reconciliation and gladly resumes tender language. χωρήσατεἡμᾶς goes back at once to πλατύνθητεκαὶὑμεῖς . It shows still more clearly what he means by their opening wide their hearts; they are to open them to him. 2. χωρήσατεἡμᾶς . Capite nos (Vulg.), Accipite nos (Beza). The latter is better, but dots not give the exact sense. ‘ Make room for us’ in your hearts is the meaning. ‘ Not all men have room for the saying,’ that it is not good to marry (Matthew 19:11). Cf. Mark 2:2, and οὐκἐχώρειαὐτούςγῆκατοικεῖνἅμα (Genesis 13:6).* The asyndeton throughout these verses is expressive of the eagerness with which he dictates the telling sentences. He rapidly negatives reasons which might make them hesitate to open their hearts to take him in. οὐδέναἠδικήσαμεν . The οὐδένα comes first in each case with emphasis, and the aorists imply that there has not been a single case in which he has wronged, ruined, defrauded, any of them. Evidently he had been accused or suspected of something of the kind; but here again we are in ignorance as to the facts to which he alludes. Cf. 4:2 and οὐκἐκπλάνηςοὐδὲἐεἀκαθαρσίαςοὐδὲἐνδόλῳ (1 Thessalonians 2:3). We have a similar protest in the Apostle’ s speech at Miletus (Acts 20:26, Acts 20:27); cf. 1 Samuel 12:3; Numbers 16:15. Those who think it improbable that he is alluding to charges actually made by the Corinthians take the words as playfully ironical, or as a hit at the Judaizing teachers, who had injured the Corinthians with their corrupt doctrine and perhaps lived in Corinth at their expense. See on 4:2. οὐδέναἐφθεἰραμεν . ‘ We ruined no one,’ a vague expression, which we cannot define with certainty. It may refer to money, or morals, or doctrine. Calvin is too definite; corruptela quae fit per falsam doctrinam, which may or may not be right. He might be said to have ruined people who had had to abandon lucrative but unchristian pursuits. The Judaizers declared that his doctrine of Christian freedom was thoroughly immoral and some of his disciples, who misinterpreted his teaching, gave the freedom an unchristian and immoral meaning. οὐδέναἐπλεονεκτήσαμεν . ‘ We took advantage of no one.’ ‘ Defrauded’ (AV) is too definite, as implying financial dishonesty; and we are not sure that there is any such allusion in any of the three verbs. If 10-13 is part of a letter written before this letter, ἐπλεονεκτήσαμεν may refer to 12:17, 18. Excepting the difficult passage 1 Thessalonians 4:6, the verb is peculiar to 2 Cor. in N.T., and in LXX it is rare; πλεονεζία is more freq. in both LXX and N.T. See Trench, Syn. § xxiv. With the rhetorical repetition of οὐδένα comp. that of κἀγώ in 11:22, and of μήπάντες (seven times in all) in 1 Corinthians 12:29, 1 Corinthians 12:30. 3. πρὸςκατάκρισινοὐλέγω . ‘ It is not for condemnation that I am saying this.’ He does not wish to find fault with any one; they must not think that; he is merely defending himself. This seems to show that in v. 2 he is answering accusations which had actually been made, either by some Corinthians or the false teachers. In spite of what people say of him, there is no reason why they should not open their hearts to take him in. Cf. πρὸςἐντροπὴνὑμῖνλέγω (1 Corinthians 6:5). προείρηκαγάρ . He has not said these words before or anything that is exactly equivalent to them; indeed in 4:12 he has said what is very different. But he has spoken of the bonds of affection which bind him to them, and he now speaks of these ties in a very emphatic way. Cf. 13:2; Galatians 1:9; Gal_3 Macc. 6:35. ἐνταῖςκαρδίαιςἡμῶνἐστὲεἰςτὸσυναποθανεῖνκαὶσυνζῆν . ‘ Ye are in our hearts to share death and to share life’ ; i.e. ‘ You are in our hearts, whether we die or live.’ The general meaning is clear enough, but, as in Romans 8:39, there is a rush of emotion which does not allow the Apostle to choose his words carefully. He probably means that neither death nor any experience in life can extinguish his affection for them; but he may mean that he is ready to share either death or life with them. He will (if need be) die with them, and he cannot live without them. This is the mark of a good shepherd (John 10:12). Perfecta charitas profectum vel detrimentum aliorum credit esse suum (Herveius). It is evident that here St Paul is including his colleagues in the ἡμῶν . In v. 2, as in vv. 11, 12, Timothy and others may have dropped out of sight, but here, if ἡμῶν meant himself only, he would have said ἐντῇκαρδια . See on 3:2, and Lightfoot on 1 Thessalonians 2:4, where we have a similar case. Probably he includes others in all four verses. The interchanges between ‘ I’ and ‘ we’ in vv. 2Ti_4 are quite intelligible. We cannot infer from ‘ dying’ preceding ‘ living’ that dying with Christ in faith in order to live with Him is meant (5:15). The reason for putting ‘ dying’ first is not clear; but it may point to his being ἐνθανάτοιςπολλάκις (11:23). In Athenaeus, vi. 249 (quoted by Wetstein), the more usual order is observed; τούτουςδ ʼ οἱβασιλεῖςἔχουσισυζῶνταςκαὶσυναποθνήσκοντας . πρὸςκατ . οὐλέγω (א B C P) rather than οὐπρὸςκατ . λέγω (D E F G K L), which is an obvious correction. B omits. ἐστε . συνζῆν (א B* C D E F G) rather than σοζῆν (B3 K L P). 4. πολλήμοιπαρρησίαπρὸςὑμᾶςκ .τ .λ . Note the alliteration, of which St Paul is fond, esp. with the letter π . It is probable that παρρησία here means ‘ confidence’ (1 Timothy 3:13; Hebrews 10:19), rather than ‘ boldness of speech’ (3:2). ‘ Great is my confidence respecting you; great is my glorying on your behalf.’ * The confidence is the result of their obedience and affection as reported by Titus, and this feeling of confidence manifests itself in glorying. He is very proud of them and is not afraid to say so, for they will not come short of his praise. He has told them (v. 12) that they ought to glory on behalf of their teachers, and he tells them (here and 8:24) that he is ready to glory respecting his converts. Καύχησος (see on 1:12), παράκλησις (see on 1:3), and θλίΨις (see on 1:4) are specially freq. in this Epistle, and the frequency should be marked in translation. πεπλήπωμαιτῇπαρακλήσει . ‘ I am filled with the comfort’ ; ‘ I was then and I am still’ (perf.). The usual constr. is with the gen. (Acts 2:28, Acts 2:13:52; Romans 15:13; etc.); but the dat. occurs in late Greek; ὁβασιλενῦςχαπᾷπεπληρωμένος (3 Macc. 4:16). Cf. 2 Macc. 6:5, 7:21; Romans 1:29. ὑπερπερισσεύομαιτῇχαρᾷ . ‘ I am overflowing with the joy.’ A double climax; ‘ overflowing’ is more than ‘ filled,’ and ‘ joy’ is more than ‘ comfort.’ The article should probably be translated; it points to the comfort and the joy caused by the report brought by Titus. The compound verb is very rare; only here and Romans 5:20; not in LXX. We have similar alliterations with π in 8:22, 9:5, 13:2. ἐπὶπάσητῇθλίΨει . ‘ Amid all my affliction.’ The ἐπί does not mean that the affliction was the basis of the comfort and joy, a paradox (12:10) which here would have no point; but that, in all his great trouble, he was able to have abundant comfort and joy. He at once goes on to explain the cause of this happiness. En qualiter affectos esse omnes pastores conveniat (Calvin). 7:5-16. The Reconciliation Completed This part of the chapter is all of one piece; but for convenience we may divide it into three, according to the subject matter. The Apostle speaks first of his longing for the arrival of Titus, and of his relief at the tidings which he brought (5-7), especially about the great offender and the Apostle’ s painful letter (8-12); and finally he speaks of the joy of Titus at being able to bring such good tidings (13-16). The close parallel with the description of Timothy’ s mission to Thessalonica, and the Apostle’ s anxiety, followed by joy at the happy result (1 Thessalonians 3:1-9), should be noted. 5 For indeed, even after I had got as far as Macedonia, my poor suffering frame found no relief, but at every turn I found something to distress me; round about me were bitter conflicts for and against me, within, me were haunting fears as to how it would all end. 6 I was almost in despair; but God, who is ever ready to comfort the depressed, comforted me then by the arrival and company of Titus. 7 Yes, and not only by his arrival and company, but also by the comfort, with which you comforted him in his intercourse with you; for he gave a most welcome report of how you longed for reconciliation with me, how you lamented the trouble that you had caused, how eagerly you espoused my cause; so that this still further increased my joy. 8 Because, although I know that I gave you pain by the letter which I sent you, I cannot bring myself to regret it. When I saw that that letter gave you pain, although only for a season, I was inclined to regret it; 9 but now I am very glad,— not glad because you were pained, but because your pain issued in repentance. For you were pained in God’ s way and not in the world’ s way, and it was His will that you should not be the worse for anything that we did. 10 For the pain which is directed in God’ s way leads to a repentance whose fruit is salvation, a repentance which can never be regarded with regret; whereas the pain which the heathen world inflicts on those who belong to it works out into moral ruin. 11 For see! it was this very thing, your being pained in God’ s way, and not anything else, which did so much for you. See what earnestness it worked out in you, how keen you were to clear yourselves from just reproach, how indignant with the chief offender, how alarmed as to what the consequences might be, how eager for my forgiveness and return, how zealous in condemning evil, how stern in punishing it. In every one of these points you put yourselves right and purged yourselves from complicity in this distressing matter. 12 So then, although I did not let things slide but wrote severely to you, it was not in order to get the wrong-doer punished, nor yet to have the wronged man avenged. No, I wrote in order to bring out clearly before you all what a genuine interest you do take in us; I wrote as in God’ s sight, with a full sense of responsibility. 13 It is this right conduct of yours and my own consciousness of having meant well that is such a comfort to me. But over and above our own comfort we were the more exceedingly glad at the gladness of Titus; for refreshment and repose have come to his spirit, thanks to all of you. 14 For I told him how I gloried in you, how proud I was of you, and I have had no reason to be ashamed of what I said. You have not come short of my commendation of you. Just as all that we said to you was said in truth, so all that we said before Titus in praise of you has turned out to be quite true. 15 And he feels as we do. His inmost heart goes out the more abundantly towards you, as often as he recalls the ready obedience of all of you, and how timidly and nervously anxious you were in the reception which you gave him. 16 I am indeed glad that in every particular I can be of good courage in respect of you. 5. καὶγὰρἐλθόντωνἡμῶνεἰςΜακεδονίαν . ‘ For indeed when we were come into Macedonia.’ He is going back to 2:13, where he tells us that even the excellent opening for preaching the Gospel which he found at Troas could not keep him there, because of his intense anxiety about Corinth, and so he crossed to Macedonia in order to meet Titus the sooner and learn how the Corinthians had taken his rebukes. So that we may regard the whole of 2:14-7:4 as a digression. The fact that it exists makes the hypothesis that 6:14-7:1 is a digression all the more probable. It is St Paul’ s way to dart off to some important side-topic and then return to what he had previously been saying. He would probably land at Philippi. But coelum non animum mutat; he is just as feverishly anxious in Macedonia as he had been in Troas. οὐδεμίανἔσχηκενἄνεσινἡσὰρξἡμῶν . In 2:13 he says οὐκἔσχηκαἄνεσιντῷπνεύματίμου . If there were any reason for wishing to get rid of either that passage or this, we should be told by some critics that it is impossible that St Paul, who elsewhere opposes σάρξ and πνεῦμα , can have written both. See above on μολυσμοῦσαρκὸςκαὶπνεύματος (v. 1). Language was made for man, not man for language. The use of words in a technical sense does not bar the writer from using them elsewhere in a popular sense. Here ἡσάρξ is the sphere, not of sin, but of suffering. Intense anxiety affects both flesh and spirit. In both passages we have the perf.; cf. 1:9; Romans 5:2. In all four places we might have expected the aor., and hence the reading ἔσχεν here. See on 1:9 and 2:13. For ἄνεσιν see on 2:13; also Index IV. ἐνπαντὶθλιβόμενοι . ‘ In every way pressed,’ as in 4:8. He was experiencing every kind of tribulation. The participle without any verb is irregular, but intelligible and not rare; cf. 9:11, 11:6, and other instances quoted in Moulton, p. 182. Here παρεκλήθημεν might be understood, but it is not required. Ἐνπαντί is very freq. in 2 Cor., and often first with emphasis; 6:4, 9:8, 11:6, 9. What follows explains ἐνπαντί : the pressure was both external and internal. ἔξωθενμάχαι . What these conflicts in Macedonia were we cannot tell; Chrysostom thinks they were with unbelievers. The asyndeton is impressive, as in vv. 2-4. ἔσωθενφόβοι . The conflicts would produce fears as to the issue, but his chief fears, as the context shows, were about the state of things at Corinth. Mental perturbations, Augustine points out, are not wrong. “ The citizens of the Holy City of God, who live according to God in the pilgrimage of this life, fear and desire, grieve and rejoice. … That fear of which the Apostle John says, ‘ Perfect love casteth out fear,’ is not of the same kind as that which the Apostle Paul felt lest the Corinthians should be subdued by the subtlety of the serpent; for love is susceptible of this fear, yea, love alone is capable of it (De Civ. Dei, xiv. 9). ἔσχηκεν (א C D E L P) rather than ἕσχεν (B F G K), a correction, because the perf. seemed to be out of place. C F G, Latt. Syrr. have ἔσχ after ἄνεσιν . 6. ἀλλ ʼ ὁπαρακαλῶντοὺςταπεινούς . ‘ But He who comforteth the downcast.’ The context shows that ‘ the lowly’ (RV) is here not the meaning of τ . ταπεινούς . It means ‘ those that are cast down’ (AV), ‘ the dejected, the depressed’ ; these rather than the lowly require to be comforted. In Ecclus. 25:23 a wicked woman is said to produce καρδίαταπεινὴκαὶπρόσωπονσκυθρωπόν , which RV. renders ‘ abasement of heart and sadness of countenance.’ The wording here (cf. 1:3) comes from Isaiah 49:13, τοὺςταπεινοὺςτοῦλαοῦαὐτοῦπαρεκάλεσεν . Cf. Isaiah 40:1, Isaiah 40:11, 51:3, Isaiah 40:12, 61:2, 66:13. ἐντῇπαρουσίᾳΤ . ‘ By the arrival and company of T.’ The word implies not only the coming but the staying; a παρουσία lasts some time. Deissmann (Light from the Anc. East, pp. 372, 382) has shown that it was a technical term to denote the visit of a potentate or his representative, and hence its ready transfer to the Second Advent. No such meaning attaches to it here. St Paul is not suggesting that the return of Titus to him was of an official character, but perhaps he desires to intimate that the coming meant a great deal to himself. The ἐν is instrumental rather than local, it gives the means rather than the sphere of the comforting; cf. ἐνφόβῳΘεοῦ (v. 1). 7. ἐφ ʼ ὑμῖν . The exact meaning of this is uncertain; perhaps ‘ over you’ is safest, indicating that the Corinthians were the basis of the comfort. Comp. the parallel passage, 1 Thessalonians 3:7. ἀναγγέλλωνἡμῖν . ‘ While he told us.’ The actual making of his report was a comfort to Titus. In strict grammar we ought to have ἀναγγέλλοντος , but the participle is attracted to the verb, almost inevitably. ἐπιπόθησιν . We have to conjecture the object of this ‘ longing’ ; to be on good terms once more with the Apostle may be right, or perhaps to see him again. The noun is very rare in Bibl. Grk. (v. 11; Ezekiel 23:11), but ἐπιποθεῖν occurs in all groups of the Pauline Epp. and is not rare in Lxx. ὀδυρμόν . ‘ Lamentation’ (Matthew 2:18) for having caused so much distress. ζῆλον . ‘ Zeal’ (v. 11, 9:2) for the Apostle against those who had attacked him, or eagerness to carry out his wishes. Trench, Syn. § xxvi. For the exclusively Pauline ὑμῶν between the art. and the noun (thrice in this verse) see on 1:6 and 12:19. ὥστεμεμᾶλλονχαρῆναι . The μᾶλλον may be understood in several ways. (1) ‘ So that I rejoiced still more’ ; the meeting with Titus delighted him; the report that Titus gave of the Corinthians increased his delight. (2) ‘ So that I rejoiced rather than was merely comforted.’ (3) ‘ So that I rejoiced instead of being distressed.’ The first is best. The threefold ὑμῶν throws light on the meaning. It was the Corinthians’ longing, the Corinthians’ lamentation, the Corinthians’ eagerness which inspired Titus with such joy. Previously the longing, lamentation, and eagerness had been St Paul’ s, and it was a delight to his emissary to find similar feelings in the Corinthians. With characteristic tact the Apostle attributes his own happiness to the comfort which the Corinthians had given to Titus and which Titus had communicated to him. He does not tell the Corinthians that he had doubted as to how they would take his letter, and how great had been his anxiety as to its possible effect. The position of μᾶλλον and the contents of v. 13 favour (1) rather than (2) or (3). 8. ὅτιεἰκαὶἐλύπησαὑμᾶςἐντῇἐπιστολῇ , οὐμεταμέλομαι . ‘ Because, though I made you sorrowful (see on 2:2) in my letter, I do not regret it.’ That he pained them by what he wrote is treated as a fact; εἰκαί rather than καὶεἰ : see on 4:3. The difference between μεταμέλομαι (Matthew 21:30, Matthew 21:21:32, Matthew 21:27:3; Hebrews 7:21 from Psa_109[110]:4) and μετανοέω (12:21; Acts 2:38, Acts 2:3:19; etc.) is fairly represented by the difference between ‘ regret’ and ‘ repent,’ but no hard and fast line can be drawn, such as that the former refers to transitory feelings respecting details, while the latter implies moral choice affecting the whole life. Either verb is used either way. But, as the derivations show, μετανοέω has the richer and more serious meaning. Trench, Syn. § lxix. εἰκαὶμετεμελόμην . See crit. note below. Whether we read βλέπω or βλέπων , we may take νῦνχαίρω as the aposdosis of εἰκαὶμετ ., and treat what lies between as a parenthesis. This is somewhat awkward when written, but might easily be given in dictation. ‘ Though I was inclined to regret it— I see that that letter, though but for a time, made you sorrowful— now I rejoice.’ We may put it more smoothly thus; ‘ I see that that letter gave you pain, though only for a while; at the time I was inclined to regret having written it, but now I am very glad.’ Ἐκείνη puts the letter away from him; it is remote from his present attitude. It is quite clear that he had written a letter about which he had had misgivings and regrets; he could have wished that he had not written it. It is difficult to agree with those who think that he could ever have had such feelings about 1 Corinthians. Could he for a moment have regretted having written such a letter? There must have been another letter of a much more painful character. See on 1:17, 2:3, 9. If 2 Cor. 10— 13. is part of that letter, it is easy to point to passages which he might sometimes wish that he had never written.* The arrangement given above is that of Tisch., WH., and the American Revisers, but RV. gives it no recognition, perhaps because of its apparent awkwardness. AV capriciously renders ἐπιστολή first ‘ letter’ and then ‘ Epistle,’ and treats ἐλύπησεν as a perf., as if the pain still continued, which the Apostle certainly did not mean to imply. πρὸςὥραν . The pain will not last; there is nothing that need rankle; the present letter will entirely extinguish it. Galatians 2:5 and Philemon 1:15 show that the expression may be used of either a short or a long time, either a few minutes or several months. The main point is that an end is certain. Cf. πρὸςκαιρόν (1 Corinthians 7:5; Luke 8:13), πρὸςὀλίγον (1 Timothy 4:8), and πρὸςκαιρὸνὤρας (1 Thessalonians 2:17). It is possible that εἰκαὶπρὸςὥρανἐλύπησενὑμᾶς should be taken together, ‘ although it pained you for a season,’ and that the sentence is left unfinished. Perhaps some such words as ‘ has had excellent effects’ ought to have followed. However we unravel the confused constr., the general sense is clear. After ἐντῇἐπιστολῇ D E F G, d e f g add μου . B inserts δέ between at and καί . א D2 E F G K L P, f g Syrr. Copt. inserts γάρ after βλέπω . In all three cases we may omit. Lachmann and Hort would follow Vulg. (videns) and read βλέπων , βλεπω̄ having been read as βλεπω . Videns, like the insertion of γάρ , may be an attempt to smooth the constr. Only to those who believe in verbal inspiration in the most rigid sense, could this verse cause any difficulty, other than that of reading and constr. There is no need even to ask the question, “ How could an inspired Apostle ever regret what he had written?” Such questions belong to views about Holy Scripture which criticism has demonstrated to be untenable. The Apostle himself would scarcely have understood what such a question meant. If he did, he might ask, “ Do you suppose that I never make a mistake?” 9. ἀλλ ʼ ὅτιἐλυπήθητεεἰςμετάνοιαν . With much delicacy, he makes them rather than himself the cause of his present happiness. It was not his letter, the writing of which was no pleasure to him, but their way of receiving it, which produced so much joy. He claims no credit for it. ἐλυπήθητεγὰρκατὰΘεόν . ‘ For you were made sorrowful in God’ s way’ ; i.e. as God would have you sorrowful; not “ owing to the grace of God,’ ‘ thanks to His help.’ Cf. Romans 8:27; Rom_4 Macc. 15:2. ‘ God’ s way’ is opposed to man’ s way and the devil’ s way. ἵναἐνμηδενὶζημιωθῆτεἐξἡμῶν . Such was God’ s intention; ‘ that in nothing ye might suffer loss (1 Corinthians 3:15; Luke 9:25) at our hands.’ If he had not urged them to change their course, that would have been great loss to them and great blame to him. God did not will either his negligence or their loss. It is unnatural to make ἵνα depend upon ἀλλ ʼ ὅτιἐλ . εἰςμενάνοιαν .* 10. μετάνοιανεἰςσωτηρίανἀμεταμέλητον . The adj. belongs to μετάνοιαν . There is no need to say that salvation brings no regret. To make this clear we must repeat; ‘ repentance unto salvation, a repentance which bringeth no regret’ (RV), or ‘ repentance which bringeth no regret, repentance unto salvation.‘ Repentance not to be repented of’ (AV) is a pleasing verbal antithesis, like ‘ righteousness with unrighteousness’ (6:14), but neither is justified by the Greek.† Vulg. has paenitentiam in salutem stabilem operatur, and stabilem can be taken readily with salutem without perpetrating a truism; but stabilis is not an accurate rendering of ἀμεταμέλητος . In Romans 11:29 Vulg. has sine paenitentia for ἀμετ . Εἰςσωτηπίαν is freq. in Paul, being found in all groups (Romans 1:16, Romans 1:10:1, Romans 1:10; Philippians 1:19; 2 Thessalonians 2:13; 2 Timothy 3:15), but nowhere does he weaken σωτηρία by giving it an epithet. ἡδὲτοῦκόσμουλύπηθάνατονκατεργάζεται . ‘ But the sorrow of the world worketh out death.’ The Revisers adopt the reading κατεργάζεται (see below), but make no difference between it and ἐργάζεται , and Vulg. has operatur in both places; ἡκατὰΘεὸνλύπη ‘ works’ or ‘ promotes’ σωτηρία , ἡτ . κόσμουλ ‘ works out’ or ‘ produces’ θάνατον Cf. Romans 7:13.* Perhaps the reference is chiefly to sorrow for sin, and Cain, Esau, and Judas may be illustrations of the wrong kind of sorrow. But we need not confine the verse to that. Sorrow for worldly losses and troubles does not lessen them; indeed sorrow for sickness may aggravate the disease and prevent recovery; but sorrow for sin may cure the sin. Affliction which is not taken as discipline, but resented as unreasonable, hardens and deadens the soul: submission to God’ s will brings peace. Moreover, men regret the sorrow which they feel for worldly losses, but they do not regret the sorrow which cures sin. Cf. ἔστιναἰσχύνηἐπάγόσαἁμαρτίαν , καὶἔστιναἰσχύνηδόξακαὶχάρις (Ecclus. 4:21). In the Testaments (Gad 5:7) there seems to be a reminiscence of this passage; ἡγὰρκατὰθεὸνἀληθὴςμετάνοια … ὁδηγεῖτὸδιαβούλιονπρὸςσωτηρίαν . See Heinrici-Meyer. ἐργάζεται (א * B C D E P 37) after ἀμεταμέλητον is to be preferred to κατεργάζεται (א 3 G K L), which is assimilation to the next clause. 11. ἰδοὺγάρ . He wants them to see how they themselves afford an example of the right kind of λύπη and its fruits. ‘ For behold, this very thing, your being sorrowful in God’ s way, what earnestness (see on 8:7) it worked out in you.’ He looks back to what was said in v. 7, and in his desire to give them full credit for the excellent change in them he adds a great deal to what was said before; in v. 7 we have three particulars, here we have seven. He is brimming over with affectionate delight.† The repeated ἀλλά means ‘ but moreover,’ ‘ but over and above this,’ and the same effect is produced in English with either ‘ yea’ or ‘ nay.’ Blass, § 77.13. ἀλλὰἀπολογίαν . Not merely earnestness instead of their previous indifference; but ‘ self-vindication.’ They were anxious to exculpate themselves and show that they had not abetted the offender or condoned his offence. ἀγανάκτησιν . Indignation at the shame brought upon the Church. Ἀγανακτέω occurs several times in the Synoptists, but here only does the noun occur. Cf. Thuc. 11. xli. 3. φόβον . Ne cum virga venirem (Beng.); but we need not restrict it to that. God’ s judgments may be included. Indeed it is unlikely that St Paul would put fear of himself in the foreground. ‘ Happy is the man that feareth alway’ (28:14). ἐπιπόθησιν . Yearning for the Apostle’ s favour and return. Yearning for their own improvement, quo desideratis in melius provehi (Herveius), is less probable. ζῆλον . Zeal for God and the Apostle and against the evil which dishonours both. ἐκδίκησιν . Avenging, in punishing the offender, about which there had been difficulty (2:6). It is placed last, possibly for that reason, or possibly because St Paul does not now regard it of great importance. Enough had been done to vindicate the authority which had been outraged. Ἐκδικησῖ is from ἔκδικος (1 Thessalonians 4:6; Romans 13:4) through ἐκδικέω (10:6; Romans 12:19). Hort (on 1 Peter 2:14) says, “ In both Lxx and N.T. ἐκδίκησις stands for both ‘ avenging’ or ‘ vindication,’ and, as here, for ‘ vengeance,’ ‘ requital.’ This sense is specially abundant in Ecclus.” Bengel and Meyer arrange the last six items in pairs, dealing respectively with the shame of the Church, feeling towards the Apostle, and treatment of the offender. But the grouping is perhaps fanciful: ἀγανάκτησις may have reference to the offender, and ζῆλος to the Apostle. The grouping is probably not intended by St Paul. ἐνπαντὶσυνεστήσατεἑαυτούς . ‘ In everyone of these points ye approved yourselves.’ See on v. 5. He acquits them of all responsibility for the offence which was committed. At first they had been to blame. By not protesting against the outrage they had seemed to acquiesce in it, but all this had been put right by their reception of Titus and submission to Paul’ s letter. ἁγνοὺςεἶναιτῷπράγματι . ‘ To be pure in the matter,’ to be purged from all complicity in it, because they no longer felt any sympathy with it. St Paul does not say γενέσθαι but εἶναι : he does not wish to hint that they had not always been ἁγνοί . Ἁγνός marks predominantly a feeling, and καθαρός a state (Westcott on 1 John 3:3). The indefinite τῷπράγματι points to a disagreeable subject which he does not care to specify; the Corinthians know all about the unhappy business. Neither the use of this vague term (1 Thessalonians 4:6) nor ἁγνούς (11:2) is any argument for the incredible identification of this oftender (2:5) with the incestuous Corinthian (1 Corinthians 5:1). After λυπηθῆναι , א 3 D E K L P, d e Vulg. add ὑμᾶς . א B C F G 17, g omit. κατειργάσατο (א B3 C G K L P) rather than κατηργάσατο (B D E). Before ὑμιν , א 3 C F G P, f g Vulg. Syrr. read ἐν . א B D E L K omit. א B C D F G, f g omit the ὲν before τῷπράγματι , which is probably an insertion to ease the construction. 12. ἄραεἰκαὶἔγραψαὑμῖν . ‘ So then, although I did write to you.’ The subject seems to be closed, and yet the Apostle does not end here. The excellent results of the mission of Titus and St Paul’ s intense joy have been fully described, but something more is added as a sort of explanatory appendix. He goes on to explain why he wrote the letter which has borne such good fruit. There was one point in which it had partially failed, for the Corinthians had not treated the offender in the way in which he had expected; they had been more lenient than he had perhaps suggested. But he has assured them that he is content with what was done and does not desire anything further (2:5 f.); and he now tells them that his main object in writing was not to get the offender punished, or the person who was offended righted, but to give them an opportunity of showing how loyal they really were to himself. We may regard it as almost certain that the person offended was himself. His whole treatment of τὸπρᾶγμα is in harmony with this view. This is another allusion to the severe letter. The ἄρα here is equivalent to ὤστε with a finite verb; ‘ so then,’ ‘ accordingly,’ ‘ consequently.’ In class. Grk. it is almost invariably sub joined to another word, as in 1 Corinthians 7:14; Romans 7:21; Galatians 3:7; etc., and is hardly ever placed first, as here; 1 Corinthians 15:18; Romans 10:17; Galatians 5:11. οὐχἕνεκεντοῦἀδικήσαντος . St Paul is always exhibiting Hebrew modes of thought and language. In Jewish literature we often have two alternatives, one of which is negatived, without meaning that it is negatived absolutely, but only in comparison with the other alternative, which is much more important. ‘ I will have mercy, and not sacrifice’ (Hosea 6:6) does not prohibit sacrifice; it affirms that mercy is much the better of the two. Cf. Mark 9:37; Luke 10:20, Luke 14:12, Luke 23:28. Here St Paul does not mean that he had no thought of the offender or the offended person in writing; he means that they were not the main cause of his doing so. His object was to get the Corinthian Church out of the false position in which it was in reference to himself. That was the thing for which he chiefly cared, and in comparision with that all other ends were as nothing. Cf. 1 Corinthians 1:17. Is it possible to believe that the letter to which allusion is here made Isa_1 Corinthians? It is still less possible to believe that τοῦἀδικήσαντος is the incestuous person of 1 Corinthians 5:1. St Paul would hardly have regarded such a sin as a personal injury to an individual; it was a monstrous injury to the whole of the Corinthian Church. But there is a stronger reason than this. If ὁἀδικήσας is the man who had his father’ s wife, then ὁἀδικήθείς must be the man’ s father, who was alive when the son committed incest with his father’ s wife. Disorderly as the Corinthian Church was, it is difficult to believe that one of its members would be guilty of taking his father’ s wife while his father was living, and that the rest of the Church, so far from being scandalized, were as much puffed up with self-complacency as usual (see on 1 Corinthians 5:2). What is said about forgiving the offender (4:5 f.) is strangely worded, if he was an offender of such heinousness. It is possible that ὁἀδικηθείς was Timothy (Hastings, D B. iv. p. 768), but almost certainly it was St Paul himself (D B. iii. p. 711).* That hypothesis satisfies all requirements, especially with regard to the reserve with which he speaks of the matter. The Corinthians would understand. Who ὁἀδικήσας was was known to them, but is unknown to us. He was probably a turbulent Corinthian who in some outrageous and public manner had defied the Apostle’ s authority. Now that the Corinthians had withdrawn all sympathy from him and had submissively sought reconciliation with St Paul, it did not matter whether the punishment inflicted by the congregation had been adequate or not. ἀλλ ʼ ἕνεκεντοῦφανερωθῆναιτὴνσπουδὴνὑμῶντὴνὑπὲρἡμῶνπρὸςὑμᾶς . Not for either of these ends, ‘ but in order that your earnestness on our behalf might be made manifest unto you.’ If the same translation is to be given to ἕνεκεν in all three places, we may say, ‘ not in order to punish the wrong-doer, not yet in order to avenge the wronged, but in order, etc.’ The main object was to get the Corinthians to realize their true state of mind respecting the Apostle. In the friction and excitement of the recent crisis they had fancied that they could part from him with a light heart; but his letter showed them what casting him off would mean, and they found that the ties which bound them to him could not be so easily broken. They cared for him too much for that. ‘ Unto you’ is simpler and more telling than ‘ among you’ or ‘ with you’ (1 Thessalonians 3:4) for πρὸςὑμᾶς . It was unto themselves that this revelation had to be made; they did not know the state of their own hearts till the shock of the letter came. With ὑμῶν … πρὸςὑμᾶς comp. 1:11. ἐνώπιοντοῦθεοῦ . Placed last with emphatic solemnity, as in 4:2 (see the last note there). The words are to be taken with ἔγραψα : he wrote with a deep sense of responsibility. God would judge of his reason for writing and of the words which he said. In this verse we twice have in MSS. the common confusion between ἡμεῖς and ὑμεῖς . The reading of Vulg., sollicitudinem nostram, quam pro vobis habemus, and of T.R., τ . σπουδὴνἡμῶντ . ὑπὲρὑμῶν is inconsistent with the context. He did not write to manifest his zeal for them, but to bring out their zeal for him. The σπουδή in this verse is the same as in v. 10. B C D2 E K L P, e Syrr. Copt. have τ . σπ . ὑμῶντ . ὑπὲρημῶν . 13. διὰτοῦτοπαρακεκλήμεθα . ‘ For this cause (because our good purpose was accomplished in bringing your loyalty to light) we have been and are comforted.’ These words, with a full stop after them, should have, been given to v. 12. Chrysostom ends a Homily with them, and he begins another (16.) with the words which follow. A teacher is comforted by the progress of his pupils, a spiritual ruler by the loyalty of the ruled; and spiritual rule is the highest of all arts. Ἐπὶδὲτῇπαρακλήσειἡμῶν . ‘ But over and above our personal comfort.’ The δέ is certainly rightly placed here (see below), and it bars the rendering of Luther, Beza, and AV, which takes ἐπὶτ . π . with the preceding παρακεκλημεθα , reading ὑμῶν for ἡμῶν , ‘ we were comforted in your comfort.’ This does not fit the context. περισσοτέρωςμᾶλλονἐχάρημενἐπὶτῇχαρᾷΤίτου . ‘ My own comfort was great; in addition to it came the more abundant joy at the joy of Titus.’ The strengthening of the comparative with a pleonastic μᾶλλον is not rare; μᾶλλονπερισσότερονἐκήρυσσον (Mark 7:36); πολλῷγὰρμᾶλλονκρεῖσσον (Philippians 1:23). It is found in class. Grk. Blass, § 44. 5; Wetstein on Philippians 1:23. In 12:9 μᾶλλον does not strengthen ἥδιστα , but belongs to καυχήσομαι . ὅτιἀναπέπαυταιτὸπνεῦμααὐτοῦἀπὸπάντωνὑμῶν . ‘ Because his spirit has been refreshed, thanks to all of you.’ Cf. ἀνέπαυσανγὰρτὸἐμὸνπνεῦμα (1 Corinthians 16:18; see note there). In Philemon 1:7, Philemon 1:20 we have τὰσπλάγχνα for τὸπνεῦμα . “ The compound ἀναπαύεσθαι expresses a temporary relief, as the simple παύεσθαι a final cessation” (Lightfoot), a truce as distinct from a peace. It is refreshment and relief which Christ promises to the weary and heavy laden, not a permanent removal of their burdens, ἀναπαύσωὑμᾶς (Matthew 11:28). For ἀπό where ὑπό might have stood, ‘ at the hands of’ rather than ‘ by,’ cf. πολλὰπαθεῖνἀπὸτῶνπρεσβυτέρων (Matthew 16:21; also Luke 7:35, Luke 7:17:25; James 1:13). Blass, § 40. 3. This πάντωνὑμῶν is repeated in v. 15. The whole Corinthian Church had had a share in making this happy impression on Titus, and he was deeply grateful to them for it. The Apostle is careful to let them know this, because Titus is to return to them to carry out the arrangements for the collection for the poor at Jerusalem (8:6, 16). δέ is certainly to be retained after ἐπί , and to be omitted after περισσοτέρως , with א B C D F G K L P, Latt. Goth. The insertion after περισς . has very little authority. A few cursives and Arm. omit δέ altogether. F K L, Copt. have τῇπαρακλήσειὑμῶν , another confusion of the two pronouns, as in v. 12. 14. ὅτιεἴτιαὐτῷὑπὲρὑμῶνκεκαύχημαι , οὐκατῃσχύνθην . ‘ For if in anything I have gloried to him on your behalf, I was not put to shame.’ This is added in explanation of the great relief which the conduct of the Corinthians had been to Titus. Titus had accepted the mission to Corinth with serious misgivings; his overtures might be rejected with contempt and violence. St Paul had praised the Corinthians to him, and had assured him that the strained situation would pass, because they were thoroughly sound at heart. St Paul is now able to tell them that his praise of them had been completely justified by their subsequent conduct. He was ‘ not put to shame’ (RV) by being proved to be utterly mistaken about them. Titus had found that the Apostle’ s high estimate of them was correct. The Corinthians were rightminded people who knew how to listen to reason and respect authority. He had told them to welcome and obey Titus, and they had done so; and this had quite won Titus’ heart. For κεκαύχημαι see on 9:2. ὡςπάνταἐνἀληθείᾳκ .τ .λ . ‘ As we spake all things to you in truth, so our glorying also before Titus was proved to be truth.’ For ἐπί = ‘ in the presence of,’ ‘ before,’ cf. 1 Corinthians 6:1, 1 Corinthians 6:6; Mark 13:9; Acts 25:9. The introductory ἀλλά means, ‘ On the contrary; so far from my being put to shame, etc.’ He appeals to his own truthfulness and sincerity, which had been challenged at Corinth and had been proved to be real: ὑμῖν and ἐπὶΤίτου balance one another, and there is a sort of chiasmus; ἐνἀληθείᾳὑμῖν … ἐπὶΤίτουἀλήθεια . The first ἀλήθεια is subjective, the second is objective. πἄντα (א B D E K L P, Latt.) rather than πάντοτε (C F G, g Copt.). C D E P, Latt. have ὑμῖνἐνἀληθείᾳ by assimilation of order to ἐπὶΤ . ἀλ . No ἡ before ἐπὶΤ . (א * B). 15. καὶτὰσπλάγχνααὐτοῦ . ‘ And so his heart goes out to you the more abundantly,’ i.e. still more than before he came to you and had this happy experience.* They received him as the Galatians received St Paul (Galatians 4:14), in spite of the stern letter which he brought. Hence his affection for them when he recalls it all. Cf. αἱκαρδίαιαὐτῶνεἰςπονηρίαν (Daniel 11:27, Theod.). τὴνπάντωνὑμῶνὑπακοήν . These words indicate that Titus had very definite demands to make, and that compliance with them was universal. There was no thought of rebellion against the Apostle or his delegate. μετὰφόβουκαὶτρόμου . This strong expression suggests something more than that they were afraid that they could not do enough to please him. St Paul himself had confessed to having had this feeling when he first begun his work in Corinth (1 Corinthians 2:3), and in him it meant a nervous anxiety to do his duty.* No other N.T. writer uses the phrase, and this seems to be its meaning in the four places in which it occurs. The other two are Ephesians 6:5 and Philippians 2:12, where see Lightfoot. In Ephesians 6:5 this ‘ fear and trembling’ is opposed to ‘ eye-service’ In Isaiah 19:16, ἐνφόβῳκαὶἐντρόμῳ means actual terror. 16. χαίρωὅτιἐνπάντιθαρρῶἐνὑμῖν . A joyous conclusion to the whole section (6:11-7:16), added impressively without any connecting particle. The οὖν , ‘ therefore’ (AV) is one of those freq. insertions made by scribes and translators (here Goth. Arm.) for the sake of smoothness, and such smoothness generally involves weakness. It does not much matter how we take ὅτι , whether ‘ I rejoice that, ’ or ‘ I rejoice because.’ The translation of θαρρῶ is more important; ‘ I am of good courage’ (RV), as in 10:1, 2, rather than ‘ I have confidence’ (AV). If 10-13. is part of the painful letter which preceded 1-9., this verse may refer to 10:1, 2. There he is of good courage in standing out against some of them; here he is of good courage about the present obedience of all of them, and (as he hopes) about their readiness to help in raising money for the poor at Jerusalem. This verse prepares the way for the request which he is about to urge in 8. and 9. Their past good works and present loyalty give him courage in pressing this matter upon them. See on 1:23, 2:3, 9, 4:2, 5:13, 7:2 for other instances in which these first nine chapters seem to refer to passages in the last four. Whatever may be the truth about this or any other possible reference, the Apostle’ s mood and judgment must have changed extraordinarily, if, after dictating these verses (13-16), he dictated 12:20, 21 as part of the same letter. ἐνὑμῖν . ‘ Concerning you’ ; cf. ἀποροῦμαιἐνὑμῖν , ‘ I am perplexed about you’ (Galatians 4:20); lit. ‘ in your case.’ Others explain that the root of the courage or the perplexity is in them, and translate ‘ through you.’ The difference is not very great. The reconciliation between the Apostle and the Corinthians is now complete; and with this verse the first main division of the Epistle (1:12-7:16) ends. Sicut sapiens medicus jam paene sanata vulnera lenissimis medicamentis curabat, ut prioris increpationis usura sanaretur (Herveius). Before leaving this chapter we must notice once more its exuberant and passionate tone. The Apostle “ lets himself go,” and can hardly find language in which to express his appreciation of the present attitude of the Corinthians towards himself and Titus, and his consequent joy over them and over the joy which they have produced in Titus. Words expressive of comfort, rejoicing, glorying, boldness, and courage occur with surprising frequency, as if he could not repeat them too often. We have παρακαλέω four times, παράκλησις thrice, χαίρω four times, χαρά twice, καύχησις twice, καυχάομαι and παρρησία and θαρρῶ once each. With regard to the good conduct of the Corinthians we have ζῆλος twice, σπουδή twice, μετάνοια twice, φόβος twice, together with ὑπακοή and other terms of approbation. And all this is within the compass of fifteen, or rather of thirteen verses. It is all the more necessary to notice this because of the very marked change of tone which is at once evident directly we leave this part of the Epistle and begin to study the next two chapters. The change of subject causes a sudden cessation of this overflowing enthusiasm and generosity of language. So far from letting himself go, the Apostle manifestly feels that he is treading on delicate ground, and that he must be cautious about what he says and the language in which he says it. The Epistle is full of rapid changes of feeling, perhaps caused in some cases by breaks in the times of dictating. Here it is the new subject that causes the change. * The proposal has been anticipated by Augustine (De Doc. Chris. iii.2), who points it out as possible, but does not adopt it. * Several of the Latin commentators, misled by Capite nos, take this as meaning mente capite, intelligite, ‘ Consider what I say.’ Others interpret, ‘ Consider me, take me as an example.’ The Greek cannot mean this. Theophylact is right; δέξασθεἡμᾶςπλατέωςκαίμήστενοχορώμεθαἐνὑμῖν . Bengel expands ήμᾶς thus; vestri amantes, vestra causa laetante. א Ԡ א (Fourth century). Codex Sinaiticus; now at Petrograd, the only uncial MS. containing the whole N.T. B B (Fourth century). Codex Vaticanus. C C (Fifth century). Codex Ephraemi, a Palimpsest; now at Paris, very defective. Of 2 Corinthians all from 10:8 onwards is wanting. P P (Ninth century). Codex Porfirianus Chiovensis, formerly possessed by Bishop Porfiri of Kiev, and now at Petrograd. D D (Sixth century). Codex Claromontanus; now at Paris. A Graeco-Latin MS. The Latin (d) is akin to the Old Latin. Many subsequent hands (sixth to ninth centuries) have corrected the MS. E E (Ninth century). At Petrograd. A copy of D, and unimportant F F (Late ninth century). Codex Augiensis (from Reichenau); now at Trinity College, Cambridge. G G (Late ninth century). Codex Boernerianus; at Dresden. Interlined with the Latin (in minluscules). The Greek text is almost the same as that of F, but the Latin (g) shows Old Latin elements. K K (Ninth century). Codex Mosquensis; now at Moscow. L L (Ninth century). Codex Angelicus; now in the Angelica Library at Rome. * information respecting the commentator is to be found in the volume on the First Epistle, pp. lxvi f. * Cf. Τόεστήσεταιὲνπαρρησιᾳὀδίκαιος (Wisd. 5:1): λάβετασκῦλακαὶμετὰπαρρησίας (1 Macc. 4:18): also Hebrews 3:6, Hebrews 4:16, Hebrews 10:35 * “ We must remember that we have not the letter in its entirety. Are not the passages which he most repented those have disappeared?” (Rendall, The Epp. of St. Paul to the Corinthians, p. 69). d d The Latin companion of D e d The Latin companion of E f d The Latin companion of F g d The Latin companion of G * It is remarkable that μετανοια occurs only four times in the Pauline Epistles, twice in these two verses and once in Romans 2:4 and 2 Timothy 2:25, while μετανοέω occurs only in 2 Corinthians 12:21. This does not imply “ the almost complete ommission of the twin Rabbinic ideas of repentance and forgiveness” (C. G. Montefiore, Judaism and St. Paul, p. 75). These words are rare, but the thought of forgiveness, such as he himself had won, is often present as reconciliation to God. † Superest ne rursus prauinciae, quad damnasse dicitur, placeat, aeatque pxnitmtiam poenitentias suae (Plin. Ep. vii. 10). * See the Essay and the Sermon on these words by F. Paget, The Spirit of Discipline, pp. 1 f. and 51 f. 37 37. (Evan. 69, Acts 69, Rev_14. Fifteenth century). The well-known Leicester codex; belongs to the Ferrar group. † A steady reformation is a more decisive test of the value of mourning than depth of grief" (F. W. Robertson). 17 17. (Evan. 33, Act_13. Ninth century). Now at paris. “ The queen of the cursives” and the best for the Pauline Epistles; more than any other it preserves Pre-Syrian readings and agrees with B D L. * Bousset says with reason; so gibt diese Wendung nur dann einen er traglichen Sinn, wenn man annimt, dass Paulus selbst der Betroffence sti. * But it is possible that περισσοτέρως is simply ‘ very abundantly’ and implies no comparison with any other occasion. * “ In the same spirit with which a young man of character would work who was starting in business on capital advanced by a friend” (Denney). 8:1-9:15. THE FOR THE POOR AT This is the second of the main divisions of the Epistle, and it may be divided into five sections, which, however, are made for convenience of study, without any assumption that they were intended by the Apostle. In 8:1-7 he sets forth the Example of Liberality set by the Macedonian congregations; 8:8-15 he points to the Example of Christ and indicates the proportion to be observed in contributing; 8:16-24 he informs the Corinthians that this new Mission to them is to be entrusted to Titus with two others; 9:1-5 he exhorts them to have everything ready when he comes; and 9:6-15 he exhorts them to be liberal, for their own sakes and for the good of the Church. The subject of this Palestine Relief Fund is mentioned in four places in N.T.; 1 Corinthians 16:1-3; these two chapters; Romans 15:26, Romans 15:27; Acts 24:17. Paley (Horae Paulinae, ii. 1) has shown how these four passages fit into one another and explain one another, and his arguments well repay study. The fact that St Paul mentions the collection of this fund in three of his four great Epistles, and that in this one he devotes so large a portion of the letter to the subject, is evidence that he took a very keen interest in the matter and was most anxious that the collection should be a success; and there was no place in which it was more important that the collection should be a generous one than at Corinth. The distress at Jerusalem was great; that was an argument that could be urged everywhere. But it was specially fitting that it should be pressed home in Gentile Churches; for seeing that the Gentiles had been admitted to share the spiritual possessions of the Jews, it was not unreasonable that the Jews should be admitted to a share of the worldly possessions of the Gentiles. If this was freely done, the union of Jew and Gentile in Christ would be shown to be a very real and practical thing, and would be made all the more binding in future. “ This collection formed the one visible expression of that brotherly unity which otherwise was rooted merely in their common faith” (Harnack, Mission and Expansion, i. p. 183). It was specially desirable that Corinth should come to the front in this matter. Here Judaizing teachers had been at work, claiming to have the sanction of the Mother Church at Jerusalem, and denying that St Paul had any such sanction; they said that he had no authority from the Twelve and was disowned by them. Therefore, if he succeeded in raising a good sum in Corinth for the Jerusalem poor, it would show Christians in Palestine that his authority in Corinth was an influence for good, and show his detractors that he was on good terms with the Mother Church. But perhaps his chief aim was to strengthen the ties which bound Gentile Christians and Jewish Christians together. See notes on 1 Corinthians 16:1-4. It is there pointed out that St Paul uses seven different words in speaking of this collection. Excepting λογία , which is peculiar to 1 Corinthians 16:1, all are found in 2 Cor., viz., χάρις (1 and 2 Cor.), κοινωνία (2 Cor. and Rom.), διακονία , ἁδρότης , εὐλογία , and λειτουργία (2 Cor. only). Theodoret notes that φιλανθρωπία is not used in this sense. What is still more remarkable, St Paul does not use ἀργύριον , or ἄργυρος , or χρυσίον , or χρυσός in this connexion: he seems to avoid the mention of money. His thus asking the Corinthians to bring to a generous and speedy conclusion the collection which they had begun to make before their recent attitude of rebellion against the Apostle, was of course strong evidence that he regarded the old happy relation between himself and them as being completely restored. He could not easily have given them a more convincing proof of his complete confidence in them. But at the same time there was risk in doing so. After restoring friendly relations with persons who have been cherishing resentment against us, we do not think it politic to begin at once to ask favours or to remind them of their duties; and yet this is just what the Apostle feels bound to do with the Corinthians, to whom he has only just become reconciled. One sees that he feels the difficulty of the situation. He desires to be, and to seem to be, confident of success; confident that his beloved converts will do all that he wishes them to do, and all that they ought to do, in this matter. And yet he does not quite feel this confidence.* It looks as if the Corinthians were not very generous givers in this or in other things (11:8, 9, 12:13; 1 Corinthians 9:11, 1 Corinthians 9:12, 1 Corinthians 9:16:4). No one from Corinth is mentioned Acts 20:4. That may be accidental; yet it may mean that what was subscribed at Corinth was so insignificant that it did not require a special delegate, but was entrusted to one of the others. Be this as it may, St Paul evidently feels his way cautiously, weighing his words and careful about his arguments. The thought of the malice of the Judaizing teachers is still in his mind, and he knows that he has to deal with excitable people. No word of his must give a handle to the former or provocation to the latter. It was probably owing to the Judaizing teachers that the collection had hung fire. They would oppose any scheme that St Paul advocated. There is no good reason for suspecting that these two chapters are part of another letter, different from both the first seven chapters and the last four. They follow the seventh chapter quite naturally, and the change of tone is thoroughly intelligible. The tone is similar to that in the Epistle to Philemon. In both cases he makes a request with diffidence, delicacy, and courtesy, but at the same time with firmness, with the conviction that it ought to be granted, and the hope that it will be. And in both cases the favour which he asks is not a personal one; he will not be the richer, if it is granted. He pleads for others, assuring those who can grant the favour that they themselves will be the better for granting it. 8:1-7. The Example of the Macedonian Churches is Worthy of Imitation 1 Now I should like to justify this expression of the good courage which I feel respecting you all. Let me make known to you, my Brothers, the grace of God which has been and still is being exhibited very remarkably in the Churches of Macedonia. 2 In the midst of an ordeal of affliction which has served to bring out their genuine Christianity, their overflowing happiness, combined with quite desperate poverty, has issued in a rich stream of simpleminded generosity. 3 For I can testify that up to the very limits, yes, and beyond the limits of their very slender means, they have given freely, and this without one word of suggestion from me. 4 So far from my asking them to help, they begged us most urgently to be allowed the privilege of taking part in the work of ministering to the necessities of their fellow-Christians in Jerusalem. 5 I should be misleading you if I were to say that in this they acted just as we expected that they would; one does not expect much from very poor people; they did far more than we expected. It was their own selves that they gave first and foremost to the Lord and also to us, and they made the offering in both cases because it was so willed by God. 6 The result of their double self-dedication was this. I urged Titus that, as he had been the person to start the raising of a relief-fund on a former visit, so he would now go once more and complete among yourselves this gracious undertaking. 7 Well now, as in everything ye are found to be abundant,— in faith, and utterance, and knowledge, and every kind of zeal, and in the love which unites your hearts with ours,— do see to it that in this gracious undertaking also ye are found to be abundant. The possession of so many rich gifts may well bear this noble fruit, and you ought not to fall short of your endowments. 1. Γνωρίζομενδὲὑμῖν , ἀδελφοί . ‘ Now I proceed to make known to you, brethren.’ ‘ Moreover’ (AV) is certainly wrong. As in Romans 15:14, Romans 15:16:17; 1 Corinthians 1:10, 1 Corinthians 4:6, 1 Corinthians 7:29, 1 Corinthians 12:1, etc., the δέ and the address mark a transition to something more or less different from what has preceded, and here δέ perhaps suggests some such connexion as ‘ Now do not let the joy which I have just expressed prove vain,’ or ‘ Now I must pass on from the happiness which you have brought me to the happiness which I had in Macedonia.’ Γνωρίζωὑμῖν intimates that what he is about to communicate deserves attention (Galatians 1:11; 1 Corinthians 12:3, 1 Corinthians 15:1, where see note). The phrase is found only in the Epistles of this group, but the verb is freq. in N.T. See on 1:8. τὴνχάριντοῦΘεοῦτὴνδεδομένηνἐντ . ἐκκλ . τ . Μακ . ‘ The grace of God which has been given in the Churches of Macedonia.’ God’ s grace has been and still is operating there, producing in the converts a marvellous degree of Christian generosity. Not ‘ bestowed on the Churches’ (AV), but ‘ given in’ them (RV). Contrast 1 Corinthians 1:4. It was among the Christians there that this grace was exhibited. St Paul probably means the ancient kingdom of Macedonia, in which Philippi, Thessalonica, and Beroea were situated, rather than the Roman province, which included Thessaly and Epirus. The Romans had been very hard on these Macedonians; they had taken possession of the gold and silver mines which were rich sources of revenue, and had taxed the right of smelting copper and iron; they had also reserved to themselves the importation of salt and the felling of timber for building ships. The Macedonians said that their nation was like a lacerated and disjointed animal (Livy, 45:30). On the top of this had come persecution in the case of Christian converts. But God had enabled these impoverished people to do great things for their fellow-Christians; no doubt, with the grace of God, the Corinthians would do the like. 2. ὅτιἐνπολλῇδοκιμῇφλίψεως . ‘ That in much testing of affliction.’ The ὅτι depends on γνωρίζομεν , ‘ we make known to you that.’ For δοκιμή see on 2:9; here it seems to mean ‘ testing’ rather than ‘ proof’ (RV); cf. Romans 5:4. With the general sense comp. James 1:3; 1 Thessalonians 3:3. Affliction tested the Macedonians and showed what genuine Christians they were. The test was severe and prolonged ; οὐδὲγὰρἁπλῶςἐθλίβησαν , ἀλλ ʼ οὕτωςὡςκαὶδόκιμοιγένεσθαιδιὰτῆςὑπομονῆς (Chrys.). For sufferings of the Thessalonians see 1 Thessalonians 1:6, 1 Thessalonians 2:14. ἡπερισσείατῆςχαρᾶςαὐτῶν . ‘ The abundance of their joy’ ; a strange thing to be found ‘ in much testing of affliction.’ But few things are more characteristic of the Christians of the Apostolic Age than their exuberant joy. Both substantive and verb are freq. in N.T., and there is plenty of evidence elsewhere. This abiding and conspicuous effect of ‘ the good tidings’ was one leading cause of the Gospel’ s rapid success. Its missionary power was then, and is still, where it exists, very great. Those who witness great joy in people whose lives are full of trouble are led to think that such people are in possession of something which is well worth having. Περισσεία (10:15; Romans 5:17) is a rare word in literature, but it is found in inscriptions (Deissmann, Light from the Anc. East, p. 80). The repetition of αὐτῶν in this verse has rather a heavy effect; but the Apostle desires to make quite clear that the joy and the poverty and the liberality are found in the very same people, and that it was the joy and the poverty which produced the liberality. The poverty, extreme though it was, neither extinguished the joy nor prevented the liberality. ἡκατὰβάθουςπτωχείααὐτῶν . ‘ Their down-to-depth poverty.’ Perhaps a phrase of St Paul’ s own coining. It does not mean that their poverty was going deeper and deeper, but that it had already reached the lowest stage. Strabo’ s ἄντρονκοῖλονκατὰβάθους is quoted in illustration. Cf. κατὰκεφαλῆς (1 Corinthians 9:4). There is an effective oxymoron in ἡπτωχείαἐπερίσσευσενεἰςτὸπλοῦτος . Cf. The widow’ s two mites given out of her want (Luke 21:4), and one Christian having this world’ s good while another has only need (1 John 3:17). τὸπλοῦτοςτῆςἁπλότητοςαὐτῶν . ‘ The riches of their liberality.’ The passage from ‘ single-mindedness’ or ‘ simplicity’ to ‘ liberality’ as the meaning of ἁπλότης is not quite obvious. In LXX it means ‘ innocency’ (2 Samuel 15:11; 1 Chronicles 29:17; Wisd. 1:1; 1 Macc. 2:37, 60), generally, if not quite always. In N.T. it is peculiar to Paul, and in 11:3 it seems to mean ‘ innocency’ or ‘ simplicity.’ But in these two chapters (9:11, 13) and in Romans 12:8 (see note there) it seems to mean that simplicity of purpose which is directed towards relieving the necessities of others, and hence to denote ‘ generosity’ or ‘ liberality.’ * St Paul speaks of the richness, not of their gifts, which could not have been large, but of their minds. Munificence is measured, not by the amount given, but by the will of the giver. Excepting 1 Timothy 6:17, πλοῦτος is always used in the Pauline Epp. of moral and spiritual riches; and here, as in Ephesians 1:7, Ephesians 1:2:7, Ephesians 1:3:8, Ephesians 1:16; Philippians 4:19; Colossians 1:27, Colossians 2:2, the best texts make πλοῦτος neut. In Romans 9:23 and Ephesians 1:18 it is masc., as perhaps elsewhere in N.T. τὸπλοῦτος (א * B C P) rather than τὸνπλοῦτον (א 3 D F G K L). 3-5. ὅτικατὰδύναμιν … διὰθελήματοςΘεοῦ . It will be convenient to take the whole of this long sentence first, and then examine the separate clauses; the constr. is irregular, owing to prolonged dictation. ‘ For according to their power, I bear witness, and beyond their power, of their own accord, with much entreaty beseeching of us the favour and the fellowship of the ministering to the saints; and [this] not in the way that we expected, but it was their own selves that they gave first of all to the Lord and to us, through the will of God.’ Three things have been already stated with regard to the help given by the Macedonian Christians. It was rendered (1) in a time of great affliction, (2) in spite of great poverty, (3) with great joy. The Apostle now adds four more particulars. The help was rendered (4) to an extent quite beyond their small means, (5) of their own free will, (6) so much so that they begged to be permitted to take part in ministering to their fellow-Christians, (7) placing themselves at the disposal of St Paul in a way quite beyond his expectation. The long and awkward sentence requires to be broken up, and this almost necessarily involves inserting a few words. But AV is not quite consistent in putting what is inserted in italics; for ‘ take upon us’ (v. 4) and ‘ this’ (v. 5) should be in italics as well as ‘ their,’ ‘ they were,’ and ‘ they did.’ Moreover, ‘ that we should receive’ (v. 4) is no part of the true text (see below). In RV. ‘ this grace’ (v. 4) is in excess of the Greek, which has ‘ the grace.’ But, in order to make the meaning clear it is almost necessary, with RV., to have ‘ they gave’ twice, although it comes only once in the Greek. 3. μαρτυρῶ . Nowhere else is the word used absolutely, as here; cf. Galatians 4:15; Romans 10:2; Colossians 4:13; Revelation 22:18. With this parenthetical insertion of a confirmatory statement comp. ὡςτέκνοιςλέγω (6:13), λέγωὑμῖν (Luke 13:24), and the classical οἶδα , οἶμαι , ὁρᾷς . Blass, § 79.7. παρὰδύναμιν . Somewhat stronger than ὑπὲρδύναμιν (1:8), which K L P have here; it implies not only ‘ above and beyond,’ but ‘ against, contrary to’ (Hebrews 11:11). It was a sort of contradiction to their poverty to give so much. The words do not belong to αὐθαίρετοι , ‘ spontaneous beyond their power,’ but to the belated ἔδωκαν .* αὐθαίρετοι . The word occurs nowhere in Bibl. Grk., excepting here and v. 17. In Xen. Anab. v. vii. 29 we have it of selfelected commanders, but it is more often used of things which are spontaneously accepted, death, slavery, etc. (Thuc. 6:40). Cf. αὐθαιρέτως (2 Macc. 6:19; 3 Macc. 6:6), in the same sense as αὐθαίρετοι here, viz. of persons acting spontaneously. The combination ἑκουσίωςκαὶαὐθαιρέτως is freq. in papyri. Of course this excludes only the Apostle’ s asking; vv. 1 and 5 show that the Divine prompting is fully recognized. 4. δεόμενοιἡμῶντὴνχάρινκαὶτὴνκοινωνίαντῆςδιακονίας . ‘ Begging of us the favour, viz. the sharing in the ministering to the saints.’ The Macedonians entreated to be allowed the privilege of fellowship in so good a work. Cf. 1 Thessalonians 2:3. St Paul had possibly been unwilling to take much from people who were so poor. οὐχἡμεῖςαὐτῶνἐδεήθημενἀλλ ʼ αὐτοὶἡμῶν (Chrys.). AV here is much astray; τὴνχάριν is not the gift for the Apostle to receive, but the favour for him to grant, viz. allowing the Macedonians to help. Cf. Acts 24:27, Acts 25:3. They knew that it was more blessed to give than to receive. The καί probably epexegetic. An aec. of a substantive after δέομαι is unusual, although τοῦτοδέμαιὑμῶν is common. τῆςδιακονίαςτῆςεἰςτοὺςἁγίους . ‘ The charitable ministering to the Christians.’ This is a freq. meaning of διακόινα (9:1, 12, 13; Acts 6:1, Acts 11:29, Acts 12:25), a word which occurs more often in 2 Cor. and Acts than in all the rest of the N.T. He adds εἰςτοὺςἁγίους to explain the motive of the Macedonians; it was because help was wanted for Christians that they were so urgent in asking to be allowed to contribute; sic mavult dicere quam ‘ pauperes’ ; id facit ad impetrandum (Beng. on 1 Corinthians 16:1). Deissmann (Bib. St. p. 117) thinks that this use of εἰς instead of the dat. comm. is Alexandrian rather than Hebraistic; it is found in papyri. δέξασθαιἡμᾶς after ἁγίους is an unintelligent gloss found in a few cursives and other inferior authorities. 5. ὃκαὶοὐκαθὼςἠλπίσαμεν . ‘ And they did this, not as we expected (but far beyond our expectations).’ To confine this to their giving spontaneously is probably a mistake. What follows shows what is meant. Cf. οὐτὰὑμῶνἀλλάὑμᾶς (12:14). ἀλλ ʼ ἑαυτουςἔδωκανπρῶτον . The emphasis is ἑατούς by position. ‘ On the contrary, it was their own selves that they first and foremost gave to the Lord and to us.’ Cf. Exodus 14:31. Πρῶτον here does not mean ‘ before I asked them,’ and probably does not mean ‘ before they gave money.’ It means ‘ first in importance’ ; the crowning part of their generosity was their complete self-surrender. They placed themselves at the Apostle’ s disposal for the service of Christ. It is possible that this means no more than a general disposition to do all that was within their power; but it may refer to “ personal service in the work of spreading the Gospel, such as was given by Sopater of Beroea, Aristarchus and Secundus of Thessalonica, and Epaphroditus of Philippi” (J. H. Bernard). To these we may add Jason and Gaius, who were Macedonians, and perhaps Demas. With τῷκυρίῳκαὶἡμῖν comp. τῷπνεύματιτῷἁγίῳκαὶἡμῖν (Acts 15:28). διὰθελήματοςΘεοῦ . Some confine this to καὶἡμῖν but it belongs to the whole clause; their offering of themselves was governed by the will of God; see v. 1. B has ἠλπίκαμεν , which may be safely rejected; the aor. is quite in place. 6. εἰςτὸπαρακαλέσαιἡμᾶςΤίτον . We are still under the influence of the rather hard-worked ἔδωκαν , which totam periochae structuram sustinet (Beng.). ‘ It was their own selves that they gave … so that we entreated Titus, that, just as he started (the collection) before, so he would also complete among you this gracious work also.’ The εἰςτό implies some such connecting thought as ‘ I was so encouraged by the generosity of the Macedonians that I thought I would send Titus to you.’ We hardly need καί in both places, but the pleonasm would easily be made in dictating. The second καί , however, may mean that there were other things which Titus had started. The rare verb προενήρξατο implies that Titus has been at Corinth before he took the severe letter alluded to in 7:12. This is some confirmation of the view that he, rather than Timothy, was the bearer of 1 Cor. But he may have been in Corinth before 1 Cor. to start the collection. In 1 Corinthians 16:1 the λογία is mentioned as a subject already known to the Corinthians; see note there. They may have asked about it. See on 12:18. B here has ἐνήρξατο , a verb which occurs Galatians 3:3 and Philippians 1:6, in both of which passages it is combined with ἐπιτελέω , and in both of them Lightfoot thinks that a sacrificial metaphor may be intended, for both verbs are sometimes used of religious ceremonials, the one of initiatory rites and the other of sacrifices and other sacred observances. See Westcott on Hebrews 9:6. * The ἵνα gives the purport rather than the purpose of the entreaty or exhortation, and ἵναἐπιτελέσῃ is almost equivalent to a simple infinitive; cf. 1 Corinthians 4:3, 1 Corinthians 16:12. εἰςὑμᾶς . ‘ Among you’ ; lit. ‘ towards you,’ ‘ in reference to you.’ καὶτὴνχάρινταύτην . ‘ This gracious work also.’ This has no reference to τὴνχάριντοῦΘεοῦ (v. 1): it is not ‘ the grace of God’ which Titus is to make efficacious, but the gracious efforts for the poor Christians that he is to bring to a fruitful conclusion. Nor is it likely that there is any reference to the good work done by Titus in reconciling the Corinthians to the Apostle; that would hardly be spoken of as χάρις . It is remarkable how frequently ταύτην , ταύτῃ or ταύτης recurs in this connexion; vv. 7, 19, 20, 9:5, 12, 13. In 9:1. εἰςτοὺςἁγίους takes its place for variety. The precise force of καί , ‘ as well as something else,’ remains doubtful. 7.ἀλλ ʼ ὥσπερἐνπαντὶπερισσεύετε . ‘ But there is another and a stronger consideration. What God has enabled the Macedonians to do is one incentive; you must also remember what He has done for you. You abound in everything; do not fall short of your great powers.’ πίστει . Faith in Christ, such as every believer has. See on Romans 1:17, pp. 31f. λόγῳκαὶγνώσει . These were specially valued at Corinth; St Paul treats both as Divine gifts, and, except in his Epistles and 2 Pet., γνῶσις is rarely so regarded in N.T. There is probably no reference to speaking with Tongues. See on 1 Corinthians 1:5, which to a considerable extent is parallel to this. σπουδῇ . The word combines the ideas of eagerness, earnestness, and carefulness. AV employs seven different terms in translating it; in the Epistles, ‘ carefulness,’ ‘ care,’ ‘ diligence,’ ‘ forwardness,’ ‘ earnest care,’ and ‘ business’ ; in the Gospels, ‘ haste.’ Even the Revisers use four; in the Epistles, ‘ earnest care,’ ‘ earnestness,’ and ‘ diligence’ ; in the Gospels, ‘ haste.’ These variations show the wide compass of the word. τῇἐξὑμῶνἐνἡμῖνἀγάπῃ . The reading is doubtful, and the meaning in either case is not quite certain, whether we read ὑμῶνἐνἡμῖν or ἡμῶνἐνὑμῖν . Neither ‘ the love which comes from you and dwells in us,’ nor ‘ the love which comes from us and dwells in you,’ is a phrase which has a very clear meaning. The love which wins love in return may be meant, and that may be expressed by either reading; ‘ your love for us which binds us to you’ seems to suit the context. The love, like the faith, etc., is in the Corinthians. ἵνακαὶἐνταύτῃτῇχάριτιπ . This shows clearly the meaning of τὴνχάρινταύτην in v. 6. The ἵνα is probably elliptical, and we may understand παρακαλῶ from v. 6, or a similar verb. The elliptical ἵνα is then a gentle substitute for the direct imperative, as in the letter of the Jerusalem Jews to those in Egypt, 2 Macc. 1:9; καὶνῦνἵναἄγητετὰςἡμέραςτῆςσκηνοπηγίαςτοῦΧασιλεὺμηνός . Cf. also Galatians 2:10; 33; 23. This use of ἵνα is found in papyri. The ἀλλά is against making ἵνα co-ordinate with the ἵνα v. 6; and in any case this would be an awkward constr. Ἀλλά is at rather than sed; it marks, not opposition, but the transition from statement to exhortation (Matthew 9:18; Mark 9:22; Luke 7:7). Ταύτῃ is emphatic by position; ‘ in this gracious work also,’ as in faith, utterance, knowledge, and love. He is anxious not to seem to be finding fault. 8:8-15. I Give No Orders. The Example of Christ Need Only Be Mentioned. Each of You Must Decide How Much He Ought to Give. 3 Do not think that I am issuing commands. I am not dictating to you. Not at all. I am merely calling your attention to the enthusiasm of the Macedonians in order to prove how genuine is your love also. (9 There is no need to give orders to you. You know how gracious the Lord Jesus Christ was. He was so rich in the glory of the Godhead; yet all for your sake He became so poor, in order that you, yes you, might become spiritually rich.) 10 I say I am not giving orders; it is just a view of the matter that I am offering you in what I write. This surely is the proper way in dealing with people like you, who were first in the field, not merely in doing something but in cherishing a desire to help, and that was as far back as last year. 11 But now do carry the doing also through, so that your readiness in desiring to help may be equalled by your way of carrying it through, so far, of course, as your means allow. 12 For if the readiness to give is forthcoming, and to give in proportion to one’ s possessions, this is very acceptable: no one is expected to give in proportion to what he does not possess. 13 I do not mean that other people should be relieved at the cost of bringing distress on you, but that there should be equality of burdens. At the present crisis your surplus goes to meet their deficit, 14 in order that some day their surplus may come to meet your deficit, so that there may be equality. 15 This is just what stands written in Scripture;— ‘ He who gathered his much had not too much, And he who gathered his little had not too little. 8. Οὐκατ ʼ ἐπιταγὴνλέγω . ‘ Not by way of command am I speaking.’ Κατ ʼ ἐπιταγήν is a Pauline phrase, and it is used in two different senses. With a negative, as here and 1 Corinthians 7:6 (see note), it means ‘ not by way of command’ ; there is nothing dictatorial in what he says; he is not issuing orders or laying down rules. Without a negative and with a following gen., e.g. Θεοῦ , as Romans 16:26; 1 Timothy 1:1; Titus 1:3, it means ‘ in accordance with God’ s command,’ equivalent to διὰθελήματοςΘεοῦ (1:1, 8:5; 1 Corinthians 1:1; Ephesians 1:1; Colossians 1:1; 2 Timothy 1:1). Vulg. is capricious; here, non quasi imperans; 1 Corinthians 7:6, non secundum imperium; Romans 16:26, secundum praeceptum; so also 1 Timothy 1:1 and Titus 1:1. Cf. Philemon 1:8, Philemon 1:9. ἀλλὰ … δοκιμάζων . ‘ But as proving (13:5), by means of the earnestness of others, the sincerity of your love also.’ No verb has to be supplied; λέγω continues. The mention of the zeal of the Macedonians will show that the Corinthians’ love is as real as theirs. Excepting Luke 12:56, Luke 12:14:19; 1 Peter 1:7; 1 John 4:1, δουκιμάζω is a Pauline word, and it is found in all four groups, 17 times in all. Whereas πειράζω is sometimes neutral, but generally means testing with the sinister object of producing failure, δοκιμάζω is sometimes neutral (as in Lk.), is never used in the sense of ‘ tempt,’ and often as here, means ‘ prove’ with the hope of a favourable result, or with the implied idea that the testing has had such a result. Hence it acquires the sense of ‘ approve’ (Romans 2:18, Romans 14:22), and is never used of the attempts of Satan to make men fail. AV in translating uses ‘ examine,’ ‘ try,’ ‘ discern,’ ‘ prove,’ ‘ approve,’ ‘ allow,’ ‘ like’ ; RV. uses some of these and adds ‘ interpret’ (Luke 12:56). Vulg. has comprobo here, but everywhere else in N.T. probo or temto. The meaning here is that St Paul is quite sure that the good example of the Macedonians will be followed at Corinth. See Trench, Syn. § lxxiv.; Cremer, Lex. s.v. καὶτὸτῆςὑμετέραςἀγάπηςγνήσιον . ‘ Whatever is genuine in your love also.’ St Paul is fond of the substantival adj. followed by a gen.; τὸμωρὸντοῦΘεοῦ , τὸὑπερέχοντῆςγνώσεως , τὸχρηστὸντοῦΘεοῦ . Cf. 4:17. We have a similar expression James 1:3, τὸδοκίμιονὑμῶντῆςπίστεως , and still more similar in 1 Peter 1:7, if τὸδόκιμον be the right reading. Deissmann (Bib. St. pp. 250, 259) cites an inscription of Sestos which has πρὸπλείστουθέμενοςτὸπρὸςτὴνπατρίδαγνήσιον . See Blass, § 47. 1. Ινήσιος means ‘ not supposititious,’ ‘ legitimate,’ ‘ genuine,’ and ὑμετέρας answers to ἐτέρων . both being emphatic.* 9. γινώσκετεγάρ . The γάρ introduces the reason why he issues no orders; there is no need. The Corinthians have their own loyal affection; they have the example of the Macedonians; and, if that were absent, they have the far more constraining example of Christ. The γάρ in itself is almost proof that γινώσκετε is indicative, which is probable on other grounds. Scitis enim gratiam (Vulg.). τοῦκυρίουἡμῶνἸησοῦ [Χριστοῦ ]. B omits Χριστοῦ , but it is probably original. The full title adds to the impressiveness of the appeal; Domini nostri Jesu Christi (Vulg.); ‘ the free gift of our Lord Jesus Christ.’ δι ʼ ὑμᾶς . Placed first with great emphasis. There is not only the example of a self-sacrificing life, but of a sacrifice made on behalf of the Corinthians. Christ not only claimed obedience by declaring Himself to be the Legislator of a new Church and the Supreme judge of all mankind, He also inspired intense affection and devotion by laying men under an immense obligation. He was One whom it was impossible for men to benefit by conferring on Him earthly advantages, and yet, being so great and rich, He sacrificed for over thirty years more than men can at all comprehend, in order to do them good; Ecce Homo, ch. v. sub fin. The pre-existence of Christ is plainly taught here, as in Galatians 4:4 (see Lightfoot). See on Romans 8:3, Romans 8:4 and Colossians 2:9 f.; also on 1 Corinthians 10:4. ἐπτώχευσενπλούσιοςὤν . Egenus factus est, cum esset dives (Vulg.). The ὤν is imperf. part., and the aor. points to the moment of the Incarnation. Previous to that He was rich (John 17:5); at that crisis He became poor. That was the immeasurable impoverishment (Philippians 2:6-8). That for years He lived the life of a carpenter, and that when He left His Mother’ s house He had not where to lay His head, is of small account, and would be a very inadequate interpretation of ἐπτώχενσεν . He was not like Moses, who renounced the luxury of the palace in order to serve his brethren; He never had any earthly riches to renounce. “ His riches were prior to His earthly life in a pre-existent life with God. He became poor when He entered the world, with a definite purpose to enrich His disciples, not in earthly goods, but in the same riches He Himself originally possessed in the heavenly world” (Briggs, The Messiah of the Apostles, p. 121). * Here is the supreme incentive to benevolence; to being willing, nay, eager, to give up a great deal in order to help others. ‘ This ineffable surrender was made for you.’ ἵναὑμεῖςτῇἐκείνουπτωχείᾳπλουτήσητε . Both pronouns are emphatic; ‘ that you, through His poverty, might become rich,’ viz. with the heavenly riches of union with God in Christ and the assurance of eternal life. Meum ergo paupertas illa patrimonium est, et infirmitas Domini mea est virtus; maluit sibi indigere, ut omnibus abundaret (Ambrose on Luke 2:41). Perhaps the main lesson of the verse is that Christ gave Himself, and in all genuine liberality something of self must be given. Cf. John 17:22, John 17:24; Romans 8:30; 2 Timothy 2:11, 2 Timothy 2:12. This motive for liberality is remarkable as being made so incidentally, as if there was no need to do more than mention it. It was so well known, and it was so unanswerable. Perhaps we ought hardly to call it a parenthesis; but such a description is only a slight exaggeration. The Apostle at once returns to the point about which he is nervously anxious. He is not giving commands as an authority who must be obeyed; that would spoil everything. He is laying his own views before them, and they must act of their own free will. We have again the common confusion between ἡμεῖς and ὑμεῖς . Read διὐμᾶς (א B D F G L P, Latt. Syrr. Copt, Goth.) rather than διἡμᾶς (C K), which makes sense, but very inferior sense. To read ἡμετέρας (some cursives) in v. 8 spoils the sense. 10. καὶγνώμηνἐντούτῳδίδωμι . ‘ And it is an opinion that I am offering you in this,’ not a command. Here, as in 1 Corinthians 7:25, where γνωνμη is contrasted with ἐπιταγή , Vulg. has considium for the former. He has told them before (1 Corinthians 7:40) that he believes that his opinion is worth considering. Like τοῦτο in the next sentence, ἐντούτῳ is ambiguous. It may mean either ‘ in what I am saying’ or ‘ in this matter of the relief fund.’ τοῦτογὰρὑμῖνσυμφέρει , οἵτινεςκ .τ .λ . ‘ For this is expedient for people like you, who, etc.’ Lit. ‘ for you who are of such a character as, etc.’ Τοῦτο may mean simply ‘ This giving liberally which I suggest to you’ ; and in that case συμφέρει means ‘ is for your good morally.’ But τοῦτο may also mean (and with rather more point in connexion with the preceding sentence and v. 8), ‘ To offer an opinion, and not give a command, is the method which is suitable to people like you, who were to the front, not only in doing something, but also in desiring to do something, as long ago as last year.’ People who have not even a wish to move are the kind of people to whom one issues commands. Herveius understands τοῦτο as meaning ‘ To win the riches of Christ by imitating His poverty is well worth your doing.’ This is a more elaborate form of the first interpretation. The force of οἵτινες must in any case be preserved. But why is doing placed in this position, as if it were inferior to willing? To say that in morals it is the will that is of value, and not what is accomplished, is not satisfying. It is not probable that St Paul had any such thought. Nor is it very satisfactory to suppose that in dictating he inadvertently transposed the two verbs. We get a better explanation if we suppose that he wished to say that the Corinthians were the very first in the field, not only in setting to work, but in intending to set to work. This explanation does not require us to give to the προ - in προενήρξασθε the meaning ‘ before the Macedonians,’ which is perhaps too definite; but, if that is the force of the preposition, the explanation has all the more point. The change from the aor. ποιῆσαι to the pres. θέλειν is to be noted, indicating the difference between some particular action and the continual wishing to act. This may perhaps intimate that the acting has ceased, and that only the wishing remains. They had been first in both, but now others were before them in acting. There are two other explanations, ‘ not only to do, but to do it willingly,’ and ‘ not indeed with the doing, but at any rate with the willing.’ Both make good sense, but neither can be got out of the Greek as we have it. There must be conjectural emendation of the text in order to justify either; and if we are to make conjectures, the simplest is the transposition of the two verbs, as is done in the Peshitto Syriac. ἀπὸπέρυσι . ‘ From last year,’ i.e. ‘ as long ago as last year.’ Not ‘ a year ago,’ as AV and RV., which implies twelve months ago. If, as is probable, 2 Cor. was written late in the year, and if St Paul is reckoning, either according to the Jewish civil year, or according to the Macedonian year, then ‘ last year’ might mean the spring of the same year, according to our reckoning. If he is following the Olympiads, which he might do in writing to Corinthians, this way of expressing himself would be still more easy. The Macedonian year is said, like the Jewish civil year (Tisri), to have begun about October; and counting by Olympiads the year would begin in the summer. Therefore in all three cases a person writing in November might speak of the previous January— April as ‘ last year.’ When 1 Cor. was written the collection of money at Corinth had hardly begun (1 Corinthians 16:1 f). On this point turns the interval between 1 Cor. and 2 Cor. Here we are told that ‘ last year’ the collecting had begun. Does this imply an interval of much less than a year or of much more than a year? See Introduction; also K. Lake, Earlier Letters of St Paul. p. 140. The expression ἀπὸπέρυσι is found in papyri, and the combination probably belongs to the language of the people; προπέρυσι and ἐκπέρυσι are also used in the like sense. Deissmann, Bib. St. p. 221. προενήρζασθε (א B C K L P) rather than ἐνήρξασθε (D F G); cf. v. 6. 11. νυνὶδὲκαὶτὸποιῆσαιἐπιτελέσατε . ‘ But now complete the doing also, that as there [was] the readiness to will, so there may be the completion also according to your means.’ It would be a sad thing that those who were foremost in willing should be hindermost in performing; they must bring their performance into line with their willingness. There is no verb expressed with καθάπερἡπροθυμίατοῦθέλειν . We may supply either ‘ was’ or ‘ is.’ Each Corinthian would know whether he still possessed this προθυμια . The stronger form νυνί intimates that there should be no more delay; ‘ precisely now and not later.’ It is rare else where in N.T., but freq. in Paul, generally as here in the usual temporal sense, but sometimes logical, as 1 Corinthians 13:13; cf. Heb. 9:29. ἐκτοῦἔχειν . Ambiguous; it might mean ‘ out of that which ye have’ (AV); which has little point: if they give, it must be out of what they possess. The next verse shows that it mean’ s ‘ in proportion to what you possess.’ Evidently the readiness to give had for some time not been very great, certainly not since the rupture between the Apostle and the Corinthians, and now he does not wish to alarm them. He had put before them the example of the Macedonians, who had given ‘ beyond their means’ (v. 3). He assures the Corinthians that he is not suggesting that they ought to give beyond their means; but they no doubt see that they ought to give, and he urges them to do so without further delay. Excepting Acts 17:11, προθυμία is peculiar to 2 Cor. (vv. 12, 19, 9:2). 12. εἰγὰρἡπροθυμίαπρόκειται . ‘ For if the readiness is there , it is acceptable according as [a man] may have, and not according as [he] has not.’ The τις is not original, but perhaps it ought to be supplied (RV). Otherwise ἡπροθυμία personified is the nom. to ἔχη and ἔχει . Cf. Tobit 4:8, which is one of the offertory sentences in the English Liturgy. It is not likely that πρόκειται here means ‘ precedes,’ ‘ be first’ (AV), prius adsit (Beza). The amount that a man may have is indefinite, ἐὰνἔχῃ : his not having is a definite fact . In Romans 15:31 εὐπρόσδεκτος is again used in reference to the Palestine relief fund. See on 6:2, and Hort on 1 Peter 2:5; also Index IV. * ἐάν (B C D3 E K P) rather than ἄν (א D F G L). א B C D F G K P omit τις , which C2 L have after ἔχῃ and D F G after ἔχει . 13, 14. οὐγὰρἵναἄλλιοςἄενσις . Something is often understood before ἵνα : ‘ I mean’ (AV), or ‘ I say this’ (RV), or ‘ the object is’ (Waite and others), etc. But the ellipse is just as intelligible in English as in Greek, and in English no conjunction is needed; ‘ Not that there is to be relief for others, pressure for you: but according to equality, etc.’ For ἄνεσις see on 2:13; also Index IV. ἀλλ ʼ ἐξἰσότητος . These words may be taken either with what precedes or with what follows. Although ὅπωςγένηταιἰσότης occurs at the end of the next sentence, it is perhaps best to take ἀλλ ʼ ἐξἰσότητος at the beginning of it. Place a colon at ‘ pressure for you’ and continue; ‘ but according to equality— at the present season your abundance to meet their want, that their abundance also may meet your want, so that the result may be equality.’ * There is to be reciprocity, mutual give and take, so that in the end each side has rendered the same kind of service to the other. We need not bring in here the thought in Romans 15:27 of Gentiles giving material help in return for spiritual help. Here the help on both sides is material. The Apostle contemplates the possibility of Corinthian Christians being in distress, and of Jerusalem Christians sending money to relieve it, Vulg. supplies words which are not in the Greek; and something must be supplied; vestra abundantia illorum inopiam suppleat; ut et illorum abundantia vestrae inopiae sit supplementum. Beza has suppleat in both clauses. Ἐντῷνῦνκαιρῷ as in Romans 3:26, Romans 11:5. τὸὑμῶνπερίσσευμα … τὸὑμῶνὑστέρημα . This use of ὑμῶν between the art. and the noun is freq. in Paul; see on 1:6 and cf. 1 Corinthians 7:35, 1 Corinthians 9:12. The δέ after ὑμῖν (א 3 D E G K L P, Vulg. Goth. Arm.) is probably an insertion for the sake of smoothness; א * B C 17, d e, Aeth. omit. Note D E and d e. 15. The quotation hardly illustrates more than the idea of equality of some sort; not the equality which is the result of mutual give and take, which is a voluntary process, but that which is the result of the same measure being imposed on all, which is not voluntary. In LXX we have οὐκἐπλεόνασενὁτὲπολύ and ὁτὸἔλαττονοὐκἠλαττόνησεν (Exodus 16:18). Some Israelites were eager to gather much manna; others through modesty or indifference gathered little. When they came to measure it, they all found they had exactly the prescribed amount. St Paul perhaps suggests that the equality which had to be forced upon those Israelites ought to be joyfully anticipated in the new Israel. The Corinthian Christians ought spontaneously to secure themselves against getting more than their share of this world’ s goods by giving to the Jerusalem Christians before there was any need to require help from them. καθὼςγέγραπται . Cf. 9:9; 1 Corinthians 1:31. 1 Corinthians 1:11:9; Romans 1:17; ect. This form of citation is in Paul confined to Corinthians and Romans, and it is very freq. in Romans. ὁτὸπολὺκ .τ .λ . Qui multum, non abundavit, et qui modicum, non minoravit (Vulg.). ‘ He who gathered his much had not too much, And he who gathered his little had not too little.’ In one sense this equality holds good in the other world also (Matthew 20:9, Matthew 20:10); quia omnes habebunt vitae aeternae aequalitatem (Herveius). But it does not follow from this that there will be no distinctions in that life. In what follows we have the business arrangements respecting the collection for the fund. It is a kind of ἐπιστολὴσυστατική (3:1) for the officials. 8:16-9:5. Titus and Two Approved Colleagues Will Help You to Organize the Fund. There Shall Be No Room for Suspecting Underhand Dealing. Give a Hearty Welcome to the Three, and Have Everything Ready in Good Time 16 But thanks be to God, who is putting into the heart of Titus the same eager zeal that I myself always entertain. 17 I am not speaking at random. He not only readily responds to my appeal, but being from the first full of zealous eagerness, it is of his own unprompted choice that he is setting off to go to you. 18 And I am sending with him as a colleague that brother whose services in spreading the Gospel have won him the praise of all the Churches. 19 And, what is more, this brother has been elected by the Churches to be our fellow-traveller in this work of benevolence which is being administered by us to promote the honour of the Lord Himself and increase my own readiness. 20 I want to make quite sure that no one shall be able to criticize or suspect our conduct in the matter of this charity-fund which is being administered by us. 21 For I aim at doing what is absolutely honourable, not only in the sight of the Lord, but also in the sight of men. 22 And with Titus and the brother just mentioned I am sending another brother of whose eager zeal I have had many proofs in many particulars; and in the present matter his zeal is in a very special degree eager, by reason of the special confidence which he has been led to place in you. 23 If anyone wishes to know about Titus, he is my intimate colleague and my fellow-labourer in all work for you; and as to the two brethren who accompany him, they are apostles of Churches, an honour to Christ. 24 Give them therefore a conspicuous proof of your affection and of the good reason that I have to be proud of you; so that the Churches from which they come may know how well you have behaved. 9. 1 For, in the first place, with regard to the ministration to the poor Christians at Jerusalem, it is really superfluous for me to be writing to you: 2 for I know your readiness, about which I am always boasting on your behalf to the Macedonians. ‘ Achaia,’ I tell them, ‘ has been ready since last year.’ And your zeal has been a stimulus to most of them. 3 And, in the second place, I am sending Titus and his two colleagues to make sure that my boasting about you is not stultified in this matter of the relief-fund; that you might be quite ready, as I used to tell the Macedonians that you were. 4 For it would be disastrous if Macedonians were to come with me and find you unprepared. That would bring utter shame to me— to say nothing of you— for having expressed this great confidence in you. 5 To avoid this possible discredit I thought it absolutely necessary to entreat these three brethren to go to you before me, and get into order before I come the bounty which you promised before, so that all may be ready in good time as really a bounty and not as a grudging and niggardly contribution. 16. ΧάριςδὲτῷΘεῷτῷδίδοντικ .τ .λ . ‘ But thanks be to God who is perpetually putting the same earnest care on your behalf in the heart of Titus.’ Vide quam late pateat hoc officium gratias agendi (Beng.). Cf. 2:14, 9:15; 1 Corinthians 15:57; Romans 6:17. We had διδόναιἐνταῖςκαρδίαις in 1:22; cf. John 3:35; Joh_1 Macc. 2:7, 5:50; 3 Macc. 2:20. The ἐν implies that whatever is given remains where it is placed. The changes of meaning in this chapter with regard to χάρις should be noted (vv. 4, 6, 7, 19 of the relief-fund; but vv. 1, 9, 16 quite different). ‘ The same earnest care’ probably means ‘ that I have on your behalf,’ rather than ‘ that you have for the relief-fund,’ or ‘ that Titus had for the Thessalonians.’ There is a delicate touch in ὑπὲρὑμῶν . The Corinthians might think that the zeal of Titus for the relief-fund was zeal on behalf of the Jerusalem poor; but it was really on behalf of the Corinthians. They would be the chief losers if a suitable sum was not raised in Corinth. δίδοντι (א * B C K P, g) rather than δόντι (א 3 D E G L, d e Vulg.). 17. ὅτιτὴνμὲνπαράκλησινἐδέξατο . ‘ For, to begin with, he welcomes our appeal.’ This and the next two verbs are epistolary aorists, which must be rendered as presents in English. Cf. 2:3, 9:3. σπουδαιότεροςδὲν̔πάρχωνκ .τ .λ . ‘ Secondly, in his characteristic earnestness, of his own accord he is going forth to you.’ 18. συνεπέμψαμενδὲτὸνἀδελφὸνμετ ʼ αὐτοῦ . ‘ And we are sending together with him the brother, whose praise for proclaiming the Gospel rings through all the Churches’ ; lit. ‘ whose praise in the Gospel is through all the Churches’ ; der das Lob hat am Evangelio durch alle Gemeinen (Luther). As in Galatians 2:12, a verb compounded with συν is followed by μετά . The point of a description of the two brethren who are to accompany Titus (vv. 18-23) is that St Paul is not sending to the Corinthians persons of no repute.* Both of them are tried men who have done good service. Lietzmann thinks that in the original letter the names must have been given, and that they were afterwards omitted, possibly because these two delegates proved to be not very acceptable at Corinth. But if the two were as yet unknown at Corinth, to mention their names would be of little use; this letter was to go with them, and Titus would introduce them. It was, however, of importance that the Corinthians should know how highly the Apostle and others thought of them. There have been many conjectures as to the first of the two brethren; Barnabas (Chrys., Thdrt.), Luke (Origen, Hom. 1. in Luc., Ephraem), and (in modern writers) Silas, Mark, Erastus, Trophimus, Aristarchus, Secundus, and Sopater of Beroea. On the whole, Luke seems to be the best guess, and it is evidently assumed in the Collect for St Luke’ s Day. Bachmann and G. H. Rendall strongly support it. If Luke was left at Philippi from the time when St Paul first visited it to the time of his return to it, a period of about six years, he might have become a favourite in Macedonia and be an obvious person to select to collect alms for Jerusalem in Gentile Churches. Rendall regards it as “ hardly short of demonstrable that this was none other than S. Luke” (p. 79). Renan rejects it (p. 455 n.). But of course ἐντῷεὐαγγελίῳ cannot refer to St Luke’ s Gospel, which was not yet written. Souter takes τὸνἀδελφόν in the literal sense as meaning the brother of Titus (Exp. Times, 18 pp. 285, 325-336). 19. οὐμόνονδὲἀλλὰκ .τ .λ . ‘ And not only [is he praised through all the Churches], but he was also appointed by the Churches to be our fellow-traveller in this work of grace which is being administered by us to promote the glory of the Lord Himself and our readiness.’ There are some doubtful points here. (1) To which word does πρὸςτὴνκ .τ .λ . belong? To χειροτονηθείς or to διακονουμένῃ Was this brother appointed to promote the glory, etc.? Or is the fund being administered for this purpose? The latter seems more suitable, and is adopted in Vulg. (2) Has πρός the same sense in reference to προθυμἱανἡμῶν as to τήν … δόξαν Both AV and RV make a change of meaning, which is somewhat violent, but not impossible in a dictated letter. Yet no change is necessary. We may render πρός either ‘ to show’ or ‘ to promote’ in both cases. ‘ To show the glory and our readiness’ is simple enough; but ‘ to promote the glory and our readiness’ makes good sense and may be right, if the clause be taken with χειρονηθείς . The appointment of this efficient colleague tended to increase the glory of God and the Apostle’ s readiness. His enthusiasm was made still greater when the prospects of success were increased by giving Titus such a helper. The constr. of χειροτονηθείς . is irregular; we want ἐχειροτονήθη . Cf. θλιβόμενοι (7:5), and στελλόμενοι (v. 20). Blass, § 79. 10. Χειροτονέω is an interesting verb exhibiting three marked stages in its history; (1) ‘ elect by show of hands’ ; (2) ‘ elect’ in any way; (3) ‘ appoint,’ whether by election or not. Elsewhere in N.T. Acts 14:23 only. It is certain that the verb is used by contemporary writers for appointment without election; and the substantive also. Josephus has the verb of God’ s appointing David to be king (Ant. vi. xiii.9) and of Jonathan being appointed high priest by Alexander (Ant. xiii. ii. 2). Philo uses χειροτονία of Pharaoh’ s appointment of Joseph to be governor of Egypt. (De Josepho, § 21, Mang. p. 58). Similar usage is found in inscriptions. Neither here nor in Acts does it mean the imposition of hands in ordination, ἐπἰθεσιςτῶνχειρῶν , or the stretching out of the hands previous to imposition, which is a much later use. In Acts 14:23 the ordination of the presbyters is implied in προσευξάμενοι , not in χειστονήσαντες . In Acts Vulg. has constituo, here ordino; AV has ‘ ordain’ in Acts and ‘ choose’ here; RV has ‘ appoint’ in both. συνέκδημος . ‘ To go abroad with us,’ ‘ to be our companion in travel,’ a subordinate, not a colleague, like Barnabas. Here and Acts 19:20 only. Vulg. has comes perigrinationis here and comites without perigrinationis in Acts, where συνεκδήμους is used of Aristarchus and Gaius. Hence some think that it refers to Aristarchus here (Redlich, S. Paul and his Companions, p. 217). ἐντῇχάριτι (B C P, f Vulg. Copt. Arm. Aeth.) rather than σὺντῇκ . (א D F G K L, d e g, Syrr.). B C D * G L, Latt. Copt. omit αὐτοῦ before τοῦκυρὶαν . F and a few cursives, followed by T. R., have ὑμῶν after προθυμίαν , an obvious correction, to agree with v. 11 and 9:2, where the προθυμία is in the Corinthians. Baljon conjectures κατὰπροθ . ἡμῶν . 20. στελλόμενοιτοῦτο , μήτιςἡμᾶςμωμήοηται . ‘ Taking precautions about this, that no man blame (6:3) us in the matter of this bounty which is being administered by us.’ The participle explains why this colleague has been given to Titus, and in construction it belongs to συνεπέμψαμεν : δίδοντες (v. 12) is some what similar in constr. Cf. Wisd. 14:1; 2 Macc. 5:1; also 2 Thessalonians 3:6, the only other passage in N.T. in which στέλλομαι occurs. From meaning ‘ tighten,’ στέλλω comes to mean ‘ hold back,’ ‘ check,’ and στέλλομαι means ‘ draw back from’ ; cf. ὑποστἐλλω (Galatians 2:13), and see Westcott on Hebrews 10:38. Here Vulg. has devitantes and in 2 Thessalonians 3:6 subtrahatis vos: Τὸστέλλεσθαιἀντὶτοῦχωρίζεσθαιτέθεικε (Thdrt.). τῇἁδρότητι . Plenitudine (Vulg.). From ‘ fulness and firmness’ in the human body and speech it comes to mean any kind of ‘ abundance.’ Wetstein says it occurs four times in Zosimus of ‘ munificent giving,’ which is the meaning here. The Apostle assumes that the amount raised will be large, and he must secure himself against all possibility of suspicion that he administered it dishonestly.* He might have repeated ἐντῇχάριτιταύτῃ (vv. 7, 19), but he prefers an unusual word (nowhere else in Bibl. Grk.) to show that he feels sure that the Corinthians will be bountiful. 21. προνοοῦμενγὰρκαλά . He is quoting LXX of Pro 3:4, καὶπρονοοῦκαλὰἐνώπιονΚυρίουκαὶἀνθρώπων , where the Heb. gives, ‘ And thou shalt find favour and good understanding in the sight, etc.’ See Toye, ad loc. St Paul quotes the text again Romans 12:17, προνοούμενοικαλὰἐνώπιονπάντωνἀνθρώπων , as a reason for not being revengeful, in both cases following LXX rather than the Heb. ‘ For we aim at things honourable’ ; lit. ‘ we take forethought for’ ; cf. Wisd. 6:8. Caput autem est in omni procuratione negotii et muneris publici, ut avaritiae pellatur minima suspitio (Cic. De Off. 11. 21:75). Coram Deo sufficit bona conscientia, sed coram hominibus necessaria est bona fama (Herveius). Not to care what others think of us may be unfair to them. It would have been disastrous to his converts for them to be able to suspect the Apostle of dishonesty. Qui fidens conscientiae suae negligit famam suam crudelis est, says Augustine (Serm. 355). That St Paul was merely establishing a precedent, to protect future bearers of charitable funds from suspicion, is not probable. He knew that his critics would suspect him. Cf. Ep. of Polycarp, vi. 1. προνοοῦμενγὰρκαλά (א B D F G P, Latt. Syrr.) rather than προνοούμενοικαλά (K L) co-ordinate with στελλόμενος , or than προνοούμενοιγὰρκαλά (C, Copt. Goth.). 22. συνπέμψαμενδὲαὐτοῖς . ‘ And we are sending (epistolary aor.) together with them our brother whom we have proved to be in earnest many times in many things.’ ‘ Our brother’ of course does not mean the brother of St Paul,† any more than ‘ the brother’ in v. 18 means the brother of Titus. In both cases ‘ brother’ means ‘ fellow-Christians.’ Giving him a name is pure guesswork; some conjecture Tychicus, others Apollos. The freq. alliteration with π is conspicuous in this verse. Cf. 1:5, 7:4, 8:2, 9:8, 11, etc. νυνὶδὲπολὺσπουδαιότερον . ‘ But now much more in earnest by reason of much confidence to you-ward.’ In this way it is easy to continue the alliteration. See on 1:15 for the Pauline word πεποίθησις , which no doubt means the envoy’ s confidence (RV) rather than the Apostle’ s (AV). The latter would require a pronoun to make it clear. But this mention of the envoy’ s confidence respecting them does not prove that he had been in Corinth. What he had heard about them might make him eager to come. See Index IV. 23. εἴτεὑπὲρΤίτου … εἴτεἀδελφοὶἡμῶν . The constr. is broken in dictating. ‘ Whether [anyone asks] about Titus, he is my partner and fellow-worker to you-ward; or our brethren [be asked about], they are apostles of Churches, a glory to Christ.’ Titus is to represent the Apostle; the two brethren are to represent the Macedonian Churches. Cf. 1 Corinthians 11:7. He does not say ‘ Apostles of Christ’ ; that was true of himself and the Twelve, who had received their commission direct from our Lord, but it was not true of these two brethren who were merely messengers or delegates of Churches, as Epaphroditus of Philippi; legati, qui publico nomine pium exsequuntur officium (Beng.). See Harnack, Mission and Expansion, i. pp. 319, 327. Nevertheless, to be selected by their Churches was a guarantee for their characters and capacities. In these two verses he brings the commendatory section to a close. For εἴτε … εἴτε see on 1:6; cf. 1 Corinthians 3:21, 1 Corinthians 13:8. Its use without a verb is classical. Blass, § 78. 2. See Hastings, DB. and DCG. art. ‘ Apostle.’ 24. τὴνοὖνἔνδειξιν … ἐνδείξασθε . See crit. note below. ‘ Demonstrate therefore to them the demonstration of your love and of our glorying on your behalf to the face of the Churches.’ ‘ Show the proof’ (AV, RV) does not preserve the repetition, which is probably deliberate. Vulg. has Ostensionem ergo … ostendite. It is easily preserved in English; ‘ Exhibit to them the exhibition,’ ‘ Manifest to them the manifestation.’ The Corinthians are urged to show that their own love is genuine and that the Apostle’ s pride in them is fully justified. Ἔνδειξις in N. T. is a Pauline word (Romans 3:25, Romans 3:26 and Philippians 1:28 only), and it is not found in LXX. It means ‘ an appeal to facts,’ demonstratio rebus gestis facta. εἰςπρόσωποντῶνἐκκλησιῶν . ‘ To the face of the Churches’ ; i.e. as if the congregations to which they belong were present. They are representative men; delegates, who will report to the Churches that elected them what they see and hear at Corinth, to which they are coming with high expectations; and the Corinthians must take care that there is no disappointment. This last clause is added with solemnity; it points to a host of witnesses, in whose presence the Corinthians will virtually be acting. The Apostle has suggested a variety of motives, from the example of Christ down to respect for their own reputation, for being generous. It is not easy to decide between ἐνδείξασθε (א C D 2 and 3 E K L P, f Vulg. Syrr. Copt. Arm. Aeth.) and ἐνδεικνύμενοι (B D E G 17, d e g Goth.). WH. prefer the former, with the latter in marg. Tisch. prefers the latter, which would be likely to be corrected to ἐνδείξασθε . The καί before εἰςπρόσωποντ . ἐκκλ ., ‘ and before the Churches’ (AV) has very little authority (only a few cursives). * “ L’ habilite, la souplesse de language, la dexterite epistolaire de Paul, etaient employees tout entieres a cette oeuvre. 11 trouve pour la recommandevaux Corinthiens les tours les plus vifs et les plus tendres” (Renan, Saint Paul, p.453). * Simplicitas malignitati opponitur (Calvin). In the Testaments the word is freq., esp. in Issachar, e.g. πάνταγὰρπένησικαὶθλιβομένοιςπαρεῖχονἐκτῶνἀγαθῶντῆςγῆςἐνἁπλότητικαρδίαςμου . But the usual meaning is ‘ simplicity,’ ‘ innocence,’ rather than ‘ liberality.’ א Ԡ א (Fourth century). Codex Sinaiticus; now at Petrograd, the only uncial MS. containing the whole N.T. * information respecting the commentator is to be found in the volume on the First Epistle, pp. lxvi f. B B (Fourth century). Codex Vaticanus. C C (Fifth century). Codex Ephraemi, a Palimpsest; now at Paris, very defective. Of 2 Corinthians all from 10:8 onwards is wanting. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/iccnt/ 9:1. Here again (see on 7:1) the division between the chapters is not well placed. As the γάρ shows, 9:1 is closely connected with what precedes. The Apostle continues to make arrangements respecting the collection. He has assumed all along that what has been begun will not be allowed to drop, and he has suggested reasons for a liberal contribution. He now begs them, whether they give much or little, to have all in readiness before he himself arrives. As in the case of 6:14-7:1, we have again to consider the hypothesis that a fragment of another letter has somehow or other been inserted here. It is urged that 9:1 does not explain 8:24, and therefore the γάρ cannot refer to 8:24, and that in 9. we have repetitions of things which have been already said in viii. Repetitions in letters are common enough, especially when the writer is very much in earnest and has to feel his way with caution. “ The tautological urgency of the appeal does not show a plurality of epistles, but a lack of certainty as to the result” (Reuss). The γάρ , as we shall see, is very intelligible. Indeed, if the division between the chapters had not been so misplaced, no one would have proposed to separate 9:1-5 from 8:16-24. Schmiedel divides the paragraphs between 8:23 and 24, giving 24 to what follows.* Hypotheses of stray leaves from other documents being imbedded in N.T. writings are to be received with much scepticism, unless they are supported by strong external evidence, as in the case of Joh 7:53-11. Some critics suggest that it is ch. 8. that has been interpolated. But there is no evidence in any MS., or version, or series of quotations, that ii Corinthians ever existed without 8. or without 9. Cyprian quotes from both, and commentators, both Greek and Latin, comment on both without betraying doubt about the genuineness of either. It will be found that 9. helps us to understand 8. See Massie, pp. 60, 61. 1. Περὶμὲνγὰρτῆςδιακονίαςεἰςτοὺςἁγίους . The μέν anticipates δέ in v. 3; the γάρ looks back to the conclusion of 8. Cf. 1 Corinthians 11:5, 1 Corinthians 12:8. ‘ I have commended the envoys to you rather than commanded you to give (8:8), for, with regard to the ministration to the saints, in the first place it is superfluous for me to be writing (pres. not aor.) to you.’ The similar statements in 1 Thessalonians 4:9 and 5:1 should be compared; also 4:13. For διακονίαεἰςτ̔ἁγ see on 8:4. In neither place does the εἰς limit the ministration to the transmission of the money. C, Arm. omit γάρ as unintelligible. περισσόνμοίἐστιν . Ex abundanti est mihi scribere vobis (Vulg.); better, supervacaneum est. We often do this; especially in cases in which we are deeply interested. We begin, ‘ I need not say’ ; and immediately we do say, perhaps at some length: σοφῶςδὲτοῦτοποιεῖ , ὥστεμᾶλλοναὐτοὺςἐπισπάσασθαι (Chrys.). On the art. with γράφειν see Blass, § 71. 2, and comp. 7:11; Philippians 2:6, Philippians 4:10. 2. οἶδαγὰρτὴνπροθυμίανὑμῶν . He has stated that he knows that they thought of doing something and began to do something in the previous year, and he assumes that they are still anxious to do something; solet enim se meliorem praebere ille, de quo bene sentitur ab alio (Herveius). But we are not to suppose that St Paul deliberately gave the Corinthians praise which he knew that they did not deserve, in order to induce them to be liberal; still less that this is a right thing to do. ἥνὑπὲρὑμῶνκαυχῶμαιΜακέδοσιν . ‘ Of which I am continually glorying on your behalf to the Macedonians.’ He is staying in Macedonia, and habitually praises the Corinthians to them. As Theodoret remarks, ΔιὰμὲνΚορινθίωντοὺςΜακεδόνας , δὶαδὲΜακεδόνωντοὺςΚορινθίους , ἐπὶτὴνἀγαθὴνἐργασίανπροέτρεψεν . It would be grievous indeed, if the Corinthians now failed to imitate the Macedonians, to whom the Corinthians had been held up as a pattern. ‘ See that you who taught them do not fall behind your own disciples.’ Καυχῶμαι with acc. of the thing gloried in is not rare (7:14, 10:8, 11:30). Often in Paul καυχῶμαι is used in a good sense, not merely when the glorying is in God or in Christ (Romans 5:11, Romans 5:15:17; 1 Corinthians 1:31; etc.), but also when it is in men (here, 7:14; 2 Thessalonians 1:4; Philippians 2:16). The Apostle also glories in his own infirmities and afflictions (12:9; Romans 5:3). Here he seems to have some misgivings as to whether he may not have praised the Corinthians to the Macedonians somewhat too warmly. The report which Titus brought from Corinth had delighted him so greatly, that his glorying about the collection may have been somewhat in excess of the facts. Ἁχαῒαπαρεσκεύασταιἀπὸπέρυσι . He is quoting what he says to the Macedonians; ‘ Achaia has been prepared since last year’ (see on 8:10). As in 1:1, ‘ Achaia’ probably means Corinth and the neighbouring district; he purposely includes Christians outside Corinth, perhaps to avoid exaggeration. Corinth had done something the previous year, but apparently not very much. τὸὑμῶνζῆλος . Again we have the Pauline arrangement of ὑμῶν between art. and noun; cf. 1:6, 7:7, 15, 8:13, 14, etc. In N.T., as in LXX and in class. Grk., ζῆλος is usually masc., but here and Philippians 3:6 the neut. form is well attested. It is found also in Ign. Tral. 4. Clem. Rom. Cor. 3-6 uses both masc. and neut. indifferently. Here the meaning is uncertain, but ‘ your zeal’ is more probable than ‘ emulation of you,’ guae ex vobis est aemulatio (Aug.). ἠρέθισε . ‘ Stimulated.’ In Colossians 3:21, the only other place in N.T. in which the verb occurs, it is used in a bad sense, ‘ provoke,’ ‘ irritate.’ In LXX and in class. Grk. the latter sense prevails. ‘ Provoke’ has both meanings, but commonly the bad one. Aldis Wright (Bible Word Book, p. 482) gives examples of the good meaning. τό (א B 17) rather than ό (C D F G K L P). ὑμῶν (א B C P f Vulg. Copt. Arm.) rather than ἐξὑμῶν (D E F G K L, d e Goth.). 3. ἔπεμψαδὲτοὺςἀδελφούς . ‘ In the second place I am sending (epistolary aor., as in 8:17, 18, 22) the brethren,’ viz. Titus and his two colleagues.* The δέ corresponds to the μέν in v. 1. He need not urge them to give; he is sending these three to organize their giving. D E, Copt, have ἐπέμψαμεν . ἴναμὴτὸκαύχημαἡμῶν . ‘ That our glorying on your behalf may not be made void in this particular.’ He had praised the Corinthians for many good qualities, and he does not want his boast to be proved an empty one in the matter of the relief-fund. He is not afraid that they will refuse to give, but he is afraid that they may be dilatory for want of organization. It will produce a bad impression if the money is not ready when it is wanted. He carefully limits his anxiety to ‘ this particular.’ ἵνακαθὼςἔλεγονπαρ . ἦτε . ‘ That, just as I repeatedly said (to the Macedonians) you may be prepared.’ The second ἴνα is co-ordinate with the first; cf. Galatians 3:14. 4. ἐὰνἔλθωσινσὺνἐμοὶΜακεσόνες . The brethren who go with Titus may or may not have been Macedonians. Their finding the collection not yet complete does not matter so much. But it will look very badly, when St Paul comes to fetch the money, if Macedonians come with him and find that very little has been collected. There is nothing here to show that the situation is different from that in viii, — that there St Paul is not coming to Corinth very soon, and that here he is coming very soon. ἀπαρασκευάστους . A late and rare form, here only in N.T. The usual form is ἀπαράσκευος . Neither word occurs in LXX. καταισχυνθῶμενἡμεῖς . He puts his own shame first; but of course the disgrace would be theirs rather than his. He asks them to spare him, which is a better plea than appealing to their own interests, which are just touched parenthetically. Multa confusio est, si pro te qui te diligit erubescat (Pseudo-Primasius). ‘ We, to say nothing of you, should be put to shame’ (7:14; Romans 10:11). See Index IV. ἐντῇὑποστάσειταύτῃ . The word has a very varied history, but only one or two points need be noted here. From meaning ‘ standing ground’ or ‘ foundation’ it comes to mean ‘ ground of hope or confidence’ (Rth 1:12; Ezekiel 19:5), and hence ‘ hope’ or ‘ confidence.’ In LXX it represents fifteen different Hebrew words. In Hebrews 3:14 (see Westcott) it means the resolute confidence which resists all attack. Here it means the Apostle’ s confidence in the character of his converts. They must not make people think that he has been too sure of them. Cf. 11:17; Hebrews 11:1. In this verse St Paul makes it quite clear that he means to visit Corinth again. λέγωμεν (א B C 2 L P, f Vulg. Syrr. Copt.) rather than λέγω (C D F G, d e g), After ταύτῃ , א c Dc E K L P, Syrr. Arm. Goth. add τῆςκαυχήσεως from 11:17. א B C D G 17, 67 *, Latt. Copt. omit. 5. προέλθωσιν … προκαταρτίσωσιτὴνπροεπηγγελμένηνεὐλογίαν . ‘ To go to you before me and get into order before I come the bounty which was promised before (Romans 1:2).’ In this way, or by having ‘ in advance’ in all three places, the repetition, which is no doubt deliberate, may be preserved in English. See on 13:2. It is not quite clear that the participle means promised long before’ by the Corinthians. It might mean ‘ announced long before’ by St Paul. With ἀναγκαῖονἡγησάμην comp. 2 Macc. 9:21. εὐλογίαν . From being used of good words it comes to mean good deeds; from men blessing God and one another and God blessing men it comes to mean a concrete blessing or benefit, whether bestowed by men or by God (Judges 1:15; Ezekiel 34:26). Here it means a benefit bestowed by men on men. What the Corinthians give will be a blessing to the Jerusalem poor (Genesis 33:11; Joshua 15:19). He is not hinting that liberal giving will bring a blessing to them in this life or will be rewarded in the next; he is thinking of the good done to the recipients. In Romans 16:18 εὐλογία has the rare sense of ‘ flattering speech.’ It is remarkable that St Paul, who uses so many words in connexion with this benevolence to poor Christians, κοινωνία , διακονία , χάρις , ἁδρότης , λειτουργία and εὐλογία , nowhere speaks of it as φιλανθρωπία : that word he uses of God’ s love to man (Titus 3:4). Luke has it of man’ s love to man (Acts 28:2).* ὡςεὐλογίανκαὶμὴὡςπλεονεξίαν . Here RV. makes a change for the worse. ‘ As a matter of bounty, not of covetousness’ (AV), is better than ‘ not of extortion’ (RV). In the next verse φειδομένως as well as ἐπ ʼ εὐλογίαις applies to the Corinthians, and φειδομένως is parallel to ὡςπλεονεξίαν as ἐπ ʼ εὐλογίαις is to ὡςεὐλογίαν . ‘ Not of extortion’ makes πλεονεξία apply to the Apostle and his three envoys; ‘ that this might be ready, because you are so willing to give, and not because we force you to do so.’ The meaning rather is ‘ that this may be ready as a generous gift and not as a grudging contribution.’ Πλεονεξία is “ The disposition which is ever ready to sacrifice one’ s neighbour to oneself in all things” (Lightfoot on Romans 1:29). It has therefore a much wider sweep than φιλαργυρία (Trench, Syn. § 24), and in the case of giving it means keeping for one’ s own use what one ought to bestow on others. That is the meaning here.† But Chrysostom and Beza (ut extortum aliquid) take it as RV. εἰςὑμᾶς (א C K L) rather than πρὸςὑμᾶς (B D F G).προεπηγγελμένην (א B C D F G P) rather than προκατηγγελμένην (K L). The καί before μὴὡς is probably original; but א * F G, Latt. omit. D E gave καί although d e omit. 9:6-15. Give Liberally and Cheerfully, for Your Own Sakes and for the Sake of the Whole Church. 6 Now remember this sure law; He who sows sparingly, sparingly shall also reap, and he who sows on principles of bounty, on principles of bounty shall also reap. 7 Let each man give just what he has resolved in his mind to give, neither impulsively, because he takes no thought, nor regretfully, because he thinks that he cannot avoid giving. It is one who gives joyously that God loves and blesses. 8 Do not regard this as an impossible standard. God can and will help you to attain to it. He can shower earthly blessings in abundance upon you; and so, when you find that on all occasions you have all sufficiency in all things, you will have abundant means for accomplishing all kinds of good work. 9 This is exactly what stands written about the charitable man in Scripture; He scattered, he gave to the needy, His good deeds shall never be forgotten. God not only can do this; He certainly will do it. 10 He who so bountifully supplies seed for man to sow, and thus gives bread for him to eat, will certainly supply and multiply benefits for you to sow, and will make the harvest which springs from your good deeds to be a full one; 11 you will be enriched on every side, so that all kinds of liberality will be open to you; and this liberality of yours, which I hope to administer, will be sure to make the recipients very thankful to God. 12 For the ministration of this truly religious service of yours does a great deal more than increase the supply of the wants of our fellow-Christians; it does that, but it also, through the chorus of thanksgivings which it occasions, produces something more for God. 13 This charitable ministration of yours is a proof of your Christian character, and it gives those who profit by it two grounds of thankfulness to God; viz. the genuine loyalty with which you confess your adherence to the Gospel of Christ, and the consequent liberality of your contribution to themselves, which is a benefit to the whole Church. 14 They themselves, moreover, will respond by offering prayers on your behalf, longing for closer union with you, on account of the overflowing grace of God which has been manifestly poured upon you. 15 Thanks be to God for effecting such brotherly love between Jew and Gentile in the Church, a precious boon of which it is impossible to state the worth. The paragraph is a closely united whole and is closely connected with what precedes. Having begged the Corinthians not to spoil his praise of them by exhibiting unreadiness now, but to give without further delay, he puts before them three motives for giving liberally and joyfully. 1. Giving in a right spirit is a sowing which is sure of a harvest. Dare non est amittere sed seminare (Herveius). 2. God is able and willing to bestow the right spirit and the worldly wealth with which to exhibit it. 3. What they give will not only be a relief to the recipients, but it will fill them with gratitude to God and with affection for the donors. In a few details the exact meaning is not always clear, and in several places the grammatical construction is rugged or even broken. These blemishes are due to the deep feeling with which the Apostle advocates a cause which he has greatly at heart to those who have not been very enthusiastic about it, and who quite recently have been ill-disposed to himself. We must also remember that he is dictating, and in so doing may lose the thread of the construction. 6. Τοῦτοδέ . The δέ is merely transitional; ‘ Now’ rather than ‘ But.’ With τοῦτο we may supply a verb which is sometimes expressed, such as, λέγω , λέγομεν , φημί , or ἴστε , νοεῖτε , λογίζεσθε , ἀναλογίσασθε : either, ‘ Now this I say,’ or ‘ Now consider this.’ Cf. 1 Thessalonians 4:15; Galatians 3:17; 1 Corinthians 7:29, 1 Corinthians 7:15:50; Philippians 2:5; 2 Timothy 2:7; etc. But τοῦτο or ἐκεῖνο without a verb is freq. in class. Grk. Blass, § 81:2; Winer, p. 746. The emphatic τοῦτο calls attention to what follows; it is a well-established and important law. Lachmann takes the τοῦτο on to ἕκαστος , ‘ Now let each man do this’ or ‘ give this,’ making ὁσπείρων … θερίσει a parenthesis, which is an awkward and improbable construction. ὁσπείρωνφειδομένως , φειδομένωςκαὶθερίσει . The chiasmus is effective; ‘ He who sows sparingly, sparingly will also reap.’ St Paul is fond of chiasmus; 2:16, 4:3, 6:8, 10:11, 12, 13:3; 1 Corinthians 3:17, 1 Corinthians 4:10, 1 Corinthians 8:13, 1 Corinthians 13:2. Comp. ‘ One man spends, yet still increases; another withholds what is proper, but it tends only to want’ (Proverbs 11:24). Ut sementem feceris, ita metes (Cic. De Orat. ii. 65). Nowhere else in N.T. or LXX does the rare adv. φειδομένως occur, but cf. δώρωνδὲὁφειδόμενος (Proverbs 21:14). The harvest at which the return for the sowing will be repeated is the end of the world (Matthew 13:39), and the return, good or bad, is bestowed by Christ (5:10; Galatians 6:7; Ephesians 6:8; Colossians 3:25). ἐπ ʼ εὐλογίαις . ‘ On principles of blessing,’ or ‘ On conditions,’ or ‘ For purposes of blessing.’ Cf. τὴνἐκΘεοῦδικαιοσύνηνἐπὶτῇπίστει (Philippians 3:9), and ὁΘεὸςἔκτισεντὸνἄνθρωπονἐπ ʼ ἀφθαρσίᾳ (Wisd. 2:23), and πάντεςἠξίουνἐπ ʼ ἀγαθῷτὴνἐπιφανίανγεγενῆσθαι (2 Macc. 5:4). Papyri show that ἐπ ʼ ἀγαθῷ was a common colloquial expression, and ἐπ ʼ ἀγαθοῖς also occurs. The plur. here indicates abundance, and the adverbial phrase may be rendered ‘ generously,’ ‘ bountifully’ ; cf. Ecclus. 44:23. The Apostle has already shown (8:12) that generosity does not depend upon the amount given, but upon the mind and means of the giver; and we need not wonder that he here puts before his converts the prospect of a rich reward hereafter as a motive for being generous. Low motives, if not immoral, are admissible, esp. in dealing with those to whom high motives do not always appeal. Our Lord makes use of them (Matthew 6:4, Matthew 6:6:18; Luke 14:14), as does St Paul elsewhere (1 Timothy 6:17-19). Instead of ἐπ ʼ εὐλογίαις , ἐπ ʼ εὐλογίαις , D has ἐνεὐλογίᾳ , ἐξεὐλογίας , G has ἐνεὐλογίᾳ , ἐπ ʼ εὐλογίᾳ , Cyprian in benedictions, de benedictione. But it is clear from φειδομένως , φειδομένως that א B C etc. are right in having ἐπί in both places, and the plur. would be more likely to be changed to the sing. than vice versa. 7. ἕκαστοςκαθὼςπροῄρηταιτῇκαρδίᾳ . ‘ Each man just as he has determined in his heart.’ As in Romans 5:18, the ellipse of the verb makes the sentence more forcible. Each must make up his mind seriously as to what he ought to give, and then give joyously. There must be neither thoughtless nor unwilling giving. Students of Aristotle’ s Ethics are familiar with προαιρεῖσθαι of deliberate choosing, as also with αὐτάρκεια (v. 8); both words are freq. there, but occur nowhere else in N.T. Even if ἐπιχορηγῶν (v. 10) be allowed some weight, the use of such words is not very strong evidence that St Paul had acquaintance with Aristotelian philosophy. From philosophic schools these expressions had passed into the common language of the day, as Darwin’ s language has done among ourselves. Cf. The sluggard’ s hands ‘ deliberately refuse to do anything,’ οὐγὰρπροαιροῦνταιαἱχεῖρεςαὐτοῦποιεῖντι (Proverbs 21:25); also πρὶνἢγνῶναιαὐτὸνἢπροελέσθαιπονηπά (Isaiah 7:15); and with τῇκαρδίᾳ cf. ὁυἱόςμουπροείλατοτῇψυχῇτὴνθυγατέραὑμῶν (Genesis 34:8). ἐκλύπηςἢἐξἀνάγκης . These are not alternatives, but different ways of stating the same fact. The man who gives ἐξἀνάγκης gives ἐκλύπης . By public opinion or other influences he is forced to give, and therefore he gives with pain and regret. He cannot give willingly, and therefore cannot give joyfully. Cf. ‘ Thy heart shall not be sad when thou givest’ (Deuteronomy 15:10, where see Driver). ἱλαρὸνγὰρδότηνἀγαπᾷὁΘεός . The first word is emphatic; hilarem, Dei similem (Beng.). ‘ For it is a joyful giver that God loveth.’ The quotation is from the LXX addition to Proverbs 22:8, ἄνδραἱλαρὸνκαὶδότηνεὐλογεῖὁΘεός . St Paul is quoting from memory. He would not deliberately have changed εὐλογεῖ to ἀγαπᾷ . Nowhere else in N.T. does ἱλαρός occur, but it is fairly freq. in LXX in the Sapiential books. Wetstein quotes a Rabbinical saying, to the effect that receiving a friend with a cheerful countenance and giving him nothing is better than giving him everything with a gloomy countenance. Seneca remarks that to give with doubt and delay is almost as thankless as to refuse. Nam quum in beneficio jucundissima sit tribuentis voluntas, qui nolentem se tribuisse ipsa cunctatione testatus est, non dedit sed adversus ducenterm male retinuit. Multi autem sunt quos liberales facit frontis infirmitas. Optimum est, antecedere desiderum cujusque, proximum sequi (De Benef. ii. 1). The classical form is δοτήρ or δωτήρ . προῄρηται (א B C P 67 **) rather than προαιρεῖται (D E K L). 8. δυνατεῖδὲὁΘεός . ‘ Now God is able’ ; that is indisputable. To give joyfully when one has little to spare may seem difficult, but with God all things are possible. He ‘ is able to make every grace abound unto you.’ He can give the desire to be generous and the means of being generous. It is specially the latter that is meant here. Datur nobis, et habemus, non ut habeamus, sed ut bene faciamus. Omnia in hac vita, etiam praemia, sunt semina fidelibus, in messem futuram (Beng.). The man with a bountiful heart finds that God supplies him with something to bestow; ὁΘεὸςὄψεταιἑαυτῷπρόβατονεἰςὁλοκάρπωσιν (Genesis 22:8). As in 4:15 περισσεύω is transitive; here it must be, and there it probably is. ἐνπαντὶπάντοτεπᾶσαναὐτάρκειαν . ‘ Always having all sufficiency in all things, may abound to all good works’ ; lit. ‘ to every good work,’ or ‘ every kind of good work.’ But, as in v. 5, 6:3, 7:4, 8:22, it is worth while to keep the repetition and alliteration as far as possible. In Plato (Menex. 347 A) we have μηδεὶςμηδέναμηδαμοῦἀδικήσῃ followed by διὰπαντὸςπᾶσανπάντωςπροθυμίανπειρᾶσθεἔχειν . Αὐτάρκεια , ‘ self-sufficiency,’ is being independent of external circumstances, especially of the services of other people. The result is contentment, for the less a man needs or desires in the way of external goods, the easier it is for him to be contented. This does not mean the avoidance of society or the refusal of the blessings of civilization, as the Cynics taught;* these things are necessary for self-development: but it does mean being able to do with a small amount of these advantages. The meaning here is that the less a man requires for himself, the greater means he will have for relieving the wants of others. In 1 Timothy 6:6 (cf. Philippians 4:11) the meaning is, not ‘ sufficiency,’ but ‘ contentment.’ δυνατεῖ (א B C D F G) rather than δυνατός (C2 D2 and 3 E K L P). Here, as in Romans 14:4, the more usual word has been substituted for a rare one. In 13:3, the only other passage in N.T., δυνατεῖ is undisputed. Both in N.T. and LXX δυνατός is very freq. ; in LXX δυνατέω does not occur. 9. καθὼςγέγραπται . ‘ Even as it stands written.’ There is exact correspondence between what has just been stated and what is said of the charitable man, ‘ the man who fears the Lord,’ in Scripture. It is possible to carry on ὁΘεός from v. 8 as the subject in the quotation, and it is not fatal to this view that in Psalms 112:3, Psalms 112:9, the good man, and not God, is the subject. Quotations are often made, and with the more effect, with a complete change of application. Moreover, in Psalms 111:3, ‘ His righteousness standeth fast for ever’ is said of God, and LXX is the same in both places. Nevertheless, the context here is in favour of understanding the quotation as a description of the benevolent man. ἐσκόρπισεν , ἔδωκεντοῖςπένησιν . ‘ He scattered, he gave to the needy.’ ‘ Scattering’ is the opposite of ‘ sowing sparingly’ ; it is, as Bengel says, verbum generosum, implying giving with a full hand. But he is less happy in adding sine anxia cogitatione quorsum singula grana cadant. The really charitable man takes anxious care that his benevolence is not made mischievous by being misapplied; he gives, not to anyone who will receive, but to the needy. Herveius is better; dedit non indiscrete omnibus, sed cum ratione solis pauperibus. Per hoc removetur vitium avaritiae contrarium, id est prodigalitatis. In N.T. (Matthew 12:30 = Luke 11:23; John 10:12, John 16:32), as in LXX, σκορπίζω commonly means ‘ disperse, put to flight.’ Nowhere else in N.T. does πένης occur, and therefore it is all the more necessary to distinguish it in translation from πτωχός , which is freq. in the Gospels, but is used by St Paul rarely, and only in this group of Epistles (Romans 15:26; Galatians 2:10, Galatians 4:9). Both words are found in conjunction, several times in Ezekiel, and more often in the Psalms, where the familiar ‘ poor and needy’ is frequent. Yet no English Version makes any distinction here; nor does the Vulgate, which has no fixed rendering where the two words are found together. It varies between egenus et pauper and pauper et inops, and once has mendicus et pauper. See Index IV. Of the two words πτωχός is the stronger, ‘ abjectly poor.’ Trench, Syn. § xxxvi.; Hatch, Bibl. Grk. p. 73. With the general sense comp. Proverbs 11:25. The righteous man does not keep for selfish use what was meant for the benefit of many. ἡδικαιοσύνηαὐτοῦμένειεἰςτόναἰῶνα . ‘ His righteousness abideth for ever.’ Both subject and predicate of this simple sentence are ambiguous. Ἡδικαιοσύνη may mean either ‘ righteousness’ in the wider sense; or ‘ almsgiving’ as a form of righteousness, and according to Jewish notions a very important form; or ‘ prosperity’ as a reward for righteousness, ‘ blessing,’ which seems to be its meaning in Psalms 112:9; cf. Ezekiel 28:20; Isaiah 58:8. ‘ Righteousness leads to prosperity, and prosperity promotes almsgiving,’ is perhaps the sequence in thought. In Matthew 6:1 the original reading δικαιοσύνη was changed by some copyists to ἐλεημοσύνη , because they supposed that δικαιοσύνη was used there in the narrower sense. Cf. Deuteronomy 24:13. Μένειεἰςτὸναἰῶνα is also ambiguous, for it may refer to the life to come or be limited to this life, and the ‘ abiding’ or ‘ standing fast’ may be literal or may refer to perpetual remembrance by man or God. In LXX of both Psalms the expression is εἰςτὸναἰῶνατοῦαἰῶνος . It is unlikely that St Paul omits τοῦαἰῶνος in order to limit the meaning to this life, for εἰςτὸναἰῶνα may include the life to come (John 8:51, John 8:11:26, John 8:12:34; etc.). He himself commonly uses the plur. εἰςτοὺςαἰῶνας , sometimes adding τῶναἰώνων (Galatians 1:5; Philippians 4:20; etc.) and sometimes not (Romans 1:25, Romans 1:9:5; etc.). Among possible meanings for the whole statement these merit consideration; (1) the righteous acts of the good man continue as long as he lives, for God always supplies him with the means; (2) the prosperity which rewards his righteousness continues as long as he lives; (3) his goodness will always be remembered among men; (4) his goodness will always be remembered and rewarded by God both here and hereafter; (5) the effects of his goodness will live for ever, influencing generation after generation. Wickedness will be destroyed, but righteousness can never perish. Of these five the two last are best, and of these two the last is perhaps not sufficiently obvious; the fourth is simpler and is a principle often insisted on in Scripture. G K, f g add τοῦαἰῶνος from LXX. 10. ὁδὲἐπιχορηγῶνσπέρματῷσπείροντικ .τ .λ . He is continuing the argument that, in the long run, bounty is not ruinous to those who practise it. He has shown that God can reward it, and he now points out that we may believe that He will do so. He again resorts to Scripture, Isaiah 55:10 and Hosea 10:12. καὶἄρτονεἰςβρῶσιν . The clause is amphibolous, but no doubt should be taken with what precedes (RV), not with what follows (AV); ‘ Now He that bountifully supplieth seed to the sower and bread for eating, will supply and multiply what you sow.’ It seems to be right to make a distinction between ἐπιχορηγέω and χορηγέω , although in late Greek compound words are often no stronger in meaning than simple ones (Bigg on 2 Peter 1:5). Cf. Galatians 3:5; Colossians 2:19, in both of which passages χορηγέω means ‘ supply bountifully,’ and ἐπιχορηγία has a similar force Ephesians 4:16 and Philippians 1:19 (Lightfoot on Galatians 3:5). Χορηγέω , freq. in LXX, is found in N.T. here and 1 Peter 4:11 only. The word passed through three stages; (1) ‘ lead the chorus’ ; (2) ‘ supply the chorus’ for a drama, a λειτουργία which cost the persons who undertook it a large outlay; (3) ‘ supply anything plentifully,’ as here. Even the simple verb suggests generous behaviour. Aristotle several times uses κεχορηγημένος In the sense of ‘ well furnished,’ ‘ well fitted out’ (Est_1. viii. 15, x. 15, x. vii. 4; etc.). Rather more important than the change from ἐπιχορηγῶν to χορηγήσει is the change from σπέρμα to σπόρον , for the former is seed in the literal sense, whereas σπόρος is here used of the gifts which must be scattered generously, and which God will supply and augment. The possessions of the Corinthians are given by God, and He augments them with a view to their being employed benevolently. Both external (see below) and internal evidence can show that the three verbs are futures indicative and not optatives. A wish does not suit the context. St Paul does not seem to make much, if any, difference between καύχησις (1:12, 7:4, 14, 8:24, 11:10, 17) and καύχημα (1:14, 5:12, 9:3), and in late Greek the difference between -σις and -μα in verbal substantives is not very distinct. But in the case of βρῶσις and πόσις (1 Corinthians 8:4; Romans 14:17; Colossians 2:16) as compared with βρῶμα and πόμα (1 Corinthians 3:2, 1 Corinthians 3:6:13, 1 Corinthians 3:10:3, 1 Corinthians 3:4; Romans 14:15) he appears to observe the usual difference, the former being ‘ eating’ and ‘ drinking,’ the latter ‘ food’ and ‘ drink.’ Here βρῶσις is ‘ eating’ rather than ‘ food’ ; panem ad manducandum (Vulg.) rather than panem ad escam (Beza). But elsewhere Vulg. has esca or cibus for βρῶσις as well as for βρῶμα . αὐξήσειτὰγενήματατῆςδικαιοσύνηςὑμῶν . From LXX of Hos 10:12; ‘ will make the fruits of your righteousness to grow.’ Neither LXX nor Heb. give exactly the thought which St Paul has here, yet either might suggest the thought. His chief borrowing is the expression γενήματαδικαιοσύνης . The Heb. gives, ‘ Sow for yourselves righteousness; reap the fruit of love; break up your fallow ground; since there is (still) time to seek Jehovah, till He come and rain righteousness upon you,’ or possibly ‘ to the end that the fruit of righteousness may come to you’ (see Harper, ad loc.). If we may take the first two commands as meaning ‘ Sow for yourselves righteousness and ye shall reap in proportion to your love,’ and conclude ‘ to the end that the fruit of righteousness may come to you,’ we come close to what St Paul inculcates here. LXX is very different; ‘ Sow for yourselves unto righteousness; reap unto fruit of life; light for yourselves unto light of knowledge; seek the Lord until the produce of righteousness comes for you.’ Here, as in 1 Corinthians 3:6, 1 Corinthians 3:7; αὐξάνω is transitive ; so always in LXX. Cf. 10:15; Colossians 1:6, Colossians 1:10; 1 Peter 2:2. In N.T. it is often intransitive (Ephesians 2:21, Ephesians 2:4:15; Matthew 6:28; etc.). The change is thought to begin with Aristotle. Many verbs, mostly connected with motion, make this transition. Winer, p. 314; Blass, § 24. Γένημα is freq. in LXX of vegetable produce; cf. Matthew 26:29 and parallels. Here of the rewards of liberality. σπέρμα (א C D2 and 3 E K L P) rather than σπόρον (B D F G), by assimilation to what follows. χορηγήσαι … πληθυνεῖ … αὐξήσει (א B C D * P, Latt. Copt.) rather than χορηγήσαι … πληθύναι … αὐξήσαι (א c Dc F G K L), γενήματα (א B C D F G K L P), rather than γεννήματα . Papyri. confirm the spelling with one v, and the derivation from γίνομαι , as coexisting with the double v, and the derivation from γεννάω . Deissmann, Bib. St. pp. 109, 184. Cf. Mark 14:25; Matthew 26:29; Luke 22:18. In Matthew 3:7, Matthew 12:34, Matthew 23:33, and Luke 3:7, γέννημα is right. Blass, § 3. 10. 11. ἐνπαντὶπλουτιζόμενοι . ‘ Ye being enriched in everything. The constr. is uncertain, but the meaning is clear. It is awk-ward to make vv. 9:10 a parenthesis and connect πλουτιζόμενοι with ἔχόντεςπερισσεύητε In v. 8, for in v. 10 a new argument begins. Yet WH. follow Bengel in adopting this arrangement. It is less violent to connect πλουτιζόμενοι with the preceding ὑμῶν : the transition from gen. to nom. would be easily made in dictating. Cf. δοξάζοντες (v. 13), εἰδότες (1:7), θλιβόμενοι (7:5), στελλόμενοι (8:20). Winer, p. 716 Blass, § 79. 10. εἰςπᾶσανἁπλότητα , ἥτιςκατεργάζεταεικ .τ .λ . ‘ Unto every kind of liberality (see on 8:2), which is such as to (8:10) work out (7:10, 11) through us thanksgiving to God.’ It is difficult here to give ἁπλότης the meaning of ‘ simplicity,’ ‘ singleness of mind,’ which some prefer; Biederkeit, Herzenseinfalt, Einfalt. Here, as in 8:2. Vulg. has simplicitas, Beza benignitas. ‘ Being enriched unto singleness of heart’ is a strange expression, and it does not make it less strange to explain ‘ singleness of heart’ as ‘ the absence of selfish motives.’ The meaning is that the Corinthians will be endowed with a generosity which will enable the Apostle to excite gratitude in those who profit by it. With δι ʼ ἡμῶν comp. τῇδιακονουμένῃὑφ ʼ ἡμῶν (8:19, 20).* It does not make much matter whether we take τῷΘεῷ with εὐχαριστίαν or κατεργάζεται : the former is simpler. Datives are normal after such words as εὐχαριστία , εὐχή , προσευχή , χάρις . Here B reads Θεοῦ . There is no break in the paragraph here, as if v. 12 was the beginning of a new point; the verse merely explains what has just been stated, that charitable work promotes devout feeling towards God. There should be no full stop at end of v. 11. 12. ὅτιἡδιακονίατῆςλειτουργίαςταύτης . ‘ Because the ministration of this public service not only helps to fill up the wants of the saints, but it also is abounding through many thanksgivings to God.’ ‘ The ministration of this public service’ means ‘ the ministering which you render to others by undertaking a work of general benevolence.’ The genitive is epexegetic. When Barnabas and Saul take relief from Antioch to Jerusalem in the famine-year, it is called διακονία (Acts 11:29, Acts 12:25). Λειτουργια is used here in a sense closely akin to its classical meaning of the ‘ aids’ which wealthy citizens had to render to the public in financing choruses for dramas (see on v. 10), fitting out triremes, training gymnasts, etc. These publica munera were enforced by law, but St Paul uses the word of voluntary service. The Jews gave the term a religious meaning,* ‘ the public ministrations of priests (Hebrews 8:6, Hebrews 8:9:21; Luke 1:23; and often in Num. and Chron.) and of Levites’ (Exodus 38:19) [38:21]; cf. 1 Chronicles 16:4, 1 Chronicles 16:37. “ The words λειτουργός , -εῖν , -ία , are used in the Apostolic writings of services rendered to God and to man, and that in the widest relations of social life” (Westcott, Hebrews, p. 231). See on Romans 15:27, where the verb is used of this very contribution; also Lightfoot on Philippians 2:17, Philippians 2:30. The διακονία here is not the administration of the fund by St Paul (that is a subordinate detail), but the service of the Corinthians in raising the fund. What Athenian citizens who had the means were made to do, Gentile Christians will be glad to do, in order to render service to society and to God. Christians, a little later, gave these words a special religious meaning in connexion with the Eucharist, while retaining the Jewish usage respecting public worship of any kind. It is doubtful whether here any idea of ‘ sacrifice’ ought to be included. See on v. 10. προσαναπληροῦσα . ‘ Filling up in addition,’ ‘ helping to fill’ ; cf. 11:9. The Corinthians were not the only contributors. τῷΘεῷ . As in v. 11, this comes at the end with special force. There it seems to belong to εὐχαριστίαν rather than to κατεργάζεται ; and that is in favour of taking it with εὐχαριστιῶν here; but there is no certainty in either case. It may belong to εὐχ in either case or in neither. If taken with the verb, it is a dat. comm. ‘ for God,’ and in that sense St Paul would perhaps rather have said εἰςτὴνδόξαντοῦΘεοῦ (4:15); see also 1 Corinthians 10:31, Romans 15:7. To take τῷΘεῷ with εὐχαριστίαν does not destroy the antithesis between προσαναπληροῦσα and περισσευοῦσα , nor that between τῶνἁγίων and τῷΘεῷ . B has τῷΧριστῷ hhere for τῷΘεῷ . Πολλῶν may be ‘ of many people,’ but ‘ many thanksgivings’ is simpler, per multas gratiarum actiones (Vulg.). 13. διὰτῆςδοκιμῆςτῆςδιακονίαςταύτηςδοξάζοντεςτὸνθεόν . We again have an anacoluthon with a nom. participle; see above on πλουτζόμενοι (v. 11), with which, however, δοξάζοντες cannot be connected, for πλουτιζόμενοι refers to the Corinthians and δοξάζοτες to the Christians at Jerusalem, who are the people that offer the many thanksgivings in v. 12. The anacoluthon is simple enough in any case, but it is rather more simple if πολλῶνεὐχαριστίων means ‘ thanksgivings of many people’ rather than ‘ many thanksgivings.’ In any case this verse explains why Palestine Christians give thanks to God; ‘ seeing that through the proof (see on 2:9) of this ministration of yours they glorify God.’ The relief of want is one good point in benevolence, but only one; the glory of God is another; and it is greatly to the glory of God to change the spirits of others from despondency to joyous thankfulness to Him. Affliction tested the reality of the Macedonians’ Christianity (8:2), benevolence will be a proof in the case of the Corinthians. ἐπὶτῇὑποταγῇ … καὶἁπλάτητιτῆςκοινωνίας . In the fulness of his feeling the Apostle gives a compressed fulness of expression, the general meaning of which is certain, but the exact construction of which cannot in all particulars be disentangled with certainty. He has just stated what would be the occasion of the saints’ thankfulness. He now states two reasons for it, Corinthian loyalty to the Gospel, and Corinthian generosity to themselves. They had been suspicious of Corinthian loyalty; many Jewish Christians had feared that converts from heathenism were turning Christian liberty into pagan licentiousness. The brethren in Jerusalem would now see that Gentile converts were as good Christians as Jewish converts; and generosity was generosity from whatever quarter it came. It does not make much difference whether we take εἰςτὸεὐαγγέλιό with τῇὑποταγῇ or τῆςὁμολογίας , and both Vulg. (in oboedientia eonfessionis vestrae in evangelium Christi) and RV. leave it open. Beza (de vestra testata submissions in evangelium Christ) and AV decide for τῇὑποταγῇ . The other is better; cf. τὴνεἰςτὸνχριστὸντοῦθεοῦὁμολογίαν (Just. M. Try. 17. 266 D). ‘ Confession’ needs some further definition here. Later it was used of the confession made at baptism; see Suicer s.v. and ἀποτάσσομαι . We have a similar doubt as to whether εἰςαὐτοὺςκαὶεἰςπάντας should be taken with τῆςκοινωνίας or ἁπλόητι , and here again connexion with the nearer noun is better (AV, RV); ‘ and for the sincere kindness (v. 11, 8:2) of your contribution (8:4) unto them and unto all.’ Cf. κοινωνίαντιναποιήσασθαιεἰςτοὺςπτωχούς (Rom . 15:26), and ἐπὶτῇκοινωνίᾳὑμῶνεἰςτὸεὐαγγέλιον (Philippians 1:5), where the meaning is ‘ your co-operation in aid of the Gospel.’ See also Romans 15:26-31, and Hastings, DB. art. ‘ Communion.’ Whether καὶεἱςπάντας be a sudden afterthought or not, it points out to the Corinthians that a benefit conferred on the brethren at Jerusalem is a benefit to the whole body of Christians (1 Corinthians 12:26). 14. καὶαὐτῶνδεήσειὑπὲρὑμῶνἐπιποθούντωνὑμᾶς . ‘ While they themselves also, with supplication on your behalf, long after you.’ There is little doubt that we have here a gen. absol. (cf. 4. 18) stating the response which the Palestinian Christians will make to the generosity of their Corinthian brethren. The possibility of making δεήσει depend on ἐπί in v. 13 is a parenthesis), or on δοξάζοντες , or on περισσεύουσα (in which case the whole of v. 13. is a parenthesis), is not worth considering; the word implies “ special petition for the supply of wants,” and is often used of intercession. See Lightfoot on Philippians 4:6; Trench, Syn. § li. The dat. here is not instrumental, not ‘ by’ but ‘ with’ the intercession accompanies their longing. The αὐτῶν is emphatic by position. B E have ὑπὲρἡμῶν . For δέησις see Index IV. διὰτὴνὑπερβάλλουσανχάριντοῦθεοῦἐφ ʼ ὑμῖν . Note the change of constr. from διά cum gen. in v. 13; also the change of meaning in χάρις from χάριντοῦθεοῦ to χάριςτῷθεωσͅ . The clause explains the reason of the longing; ‘ on account’ of the exceeding grace of God upon you.’ In 8:1 it was the grace of God which enabled the Macedonian Christians to be so generous; the Palestinians will see that a similar grace is operating strongly at Corinth. The Apostle is very generous in his praise of both parties, of the Corinthians for their great generosity, and of the Jewish Christians for their gratitude to God, not merely for the relief given to them, but also for the genuineness of the Christianity found in the donors. The praise, esp. of the Corinthians, may seem to be somewhat extravagant; but St Paul is not praising what has taken place, but what he hopes and believes will take place.* It is a glorious picture which he has before his eyes. Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians abandoning their mutual distrust and dislike, which sometimes ended in bitter hostility, and drawing close together in mutual appreciation and love. 15. Χάριςτῷθεῷ . This glorious picture causes him to burst out into an expression of deep thankfulness to God. He sees in it an earnest of that unity of Christendom for which he has laboured so perseveringly; ‘ neither Jew nor Greek,’ but ‘ all one in Christ Jesus’ (Galatians 3:28; 1 Corinthians 12:13; Colossians 3:11.) The Jewish Christians thank God for the goodness of their Gentile brethren, and to this thanksgiving the Apostle utters a deep Amen in the brief but profound doxology contained in this verse. It is based on hope rather than on fact, and on the more remote rather than on the immediate and obvious results of his pleading. His intense thankfulness is not so much for the relief of the sufferings of the Jewish Christians in Palestine, as for the effect on Christendom of their being relieved by Gentile Christians in Europe. “ It will disarm suspicion; it will be a practical proof of the reality and power of the Gospel, it will strengthen the sense of brotherhood, it will turn distant strangers into earnest, eager friends, who pray for their benefactors and long for a sight of their face” (McFadyen, 2 Corinthians, p. 375). We may compare the interjected thanksgiving 1 Corinthians 15:57, and the similar expressions of praise Galatians 1:5; Romans 9:5, Romans 9:11:33; 1 Timothy 1:17. τῇἀνεκδιηγῆτῳαὐτοῦδωρεᾷ . ‘ For His ineffable gift;’ it is one which is incapable of expression by speech. The epithet is found nowhere else in LXX or N.T. Clement of Rome uses it, apparently of laws of nature; “ the inscrutable (ἀνεξιχνίαστα , Romans 11:33) depths of the abysses and the unutterable statutes of the nether regions” (Cor. 20:5). It is also found in Arrian; τὴνἀνεκδιήγητοντόλμαν (Exp. Alex. p. 310). Cf. ἀνεκλάλητος (1 Peter 1:8) of joy in Christ, and ἀλάλητος (Romans 8:26) of the groanings of the Spirit in intercession. All three words are rare. It is rash to say that so strong a word could not be used by St Paul of anything less than God’ s supreme gift in sending His Son for man’ s redemption. A thanksgiving for that has only a very far-fetched connexion with the context. On the other hand, the thought of the complete realization of his highest hopes for the unity of Christendom as the natural fruit of mutual goodwill between Gentile and Jewish Christians is quite sufficient to account for this outburst of fervour. Chrysostom remarks; “ If God’ s gift is indescribable, what madness it must be to raise curious questions about His Being. When what He bestows is ineffable, what must He be Himself.” Of the two explanations as to what the gift was for which St Paul was so intensely thankful, Chrysostom inclines to the less probable, that it was the gift of His Son for man’ s salvation. δωρεᾷ . Here, as elsewhere in N.T., the word is used of a Divine boon (Romans 5:15, Romans 5:17; Ephesians 3:7, Ephesians 3:4:7; Hebrews 6:4; etc.); the more freq. δῶρον is used of offerings to God (Matthew 5:23, Matthew 5:24, Matthew 5:15:5, Matthew 5:23:18, Matthew 5:19; etc.) and gifts to men (Revelation 11:10). א 3 C2 D2 and 3 E K L P, Syrr. Copt. Arm. insert δέ after χάρις א B C D * F G 17, Latt. Goth. omit. Connecting particles are often inserted by scribes and translators for smoothness, and the δέ is probably not genuine. If we omit it, the sentence is an exclamation of thankfulness, closing the subject; and thus we have an intelligible conclusion to ch. 9. But if the δέ is genuine, the sentence looks as if it were unfinished, and the want of connexion between 9:15 and 10:1 becomes glaring. This would be a point in favour of the theory that 1-9. is a letter of which the original conclusion has been lost, and which has been joined to another letter of which the original beginning has been lost. Kennedy, Hermathena, XII. xxix., 1903, p. 365. Here the second main division of the Epistle ends. The whole of it (8., 9.) is taken up with the subject of the collection for the poor at Jerusalem. On the interesting question whether the remaining four chapters are part of the same letter, or belonged originally to the severe letter which the Apostle wrote after 1 Corinthians and before 2 Cor. 1-9., see the Introduction, § IV. 5, and the note on 7:8. Here it may suffice to quote the words of two recent commentators, both of whom think that the latter hypothesis is hardly necessary. “ The most cursory reader cannot fail to perceive an abrupt difference in tone, as he passes from ch. 8 f. to ch. 10. The former chapters were complimentary and affectionate; this and the following chapters are heated, polemical, and in part ironical. There, the Corinthians were his beloved ‘ brethren,’ of whom he was proud, and of whose generosity he was not afraid to boast; here, there are enemies in the camp— enemies who have been challenging his authority, and detracting from his credit, and who will therefore have to be summarily dealt with. They will have to be convinced, by its impact on themselves, that Paul’ s authority is a very real thing, and that he is just as capable of exercising it before their eyes as he is by means of correspondence’ (McFadyen, p. 376). The other commentator allows that there is an “ abrupt change of tone and subject at 10:1, where there is no manifest connexion with what goes before, and after a peaceable discussion of the fruits to be expected from the collection, we are suddenly plunged in a piece of vehement polemical writing against adversaries, the quarrel with whom has already been adjusted in the earlier chapters” (Menzies, p. xxxv). It is very difficult to see how 8. and 9. “ prepare for the polemic against the Judaistic opponents” in 10-13. Is asking for money a good preparation for an incisive attack? * Halmel insists that the omission of ταύτης and addition of εἰςτοὺςαγίους in 9:1 (as in 8:4) proves that in ix. I we begin a different and independent appeal. The inference is not strong: εἰςτοὐςἁγἰους takes the place of ταύτης . C C (Fifth century). Codex Ephraemi, a Palimpsest; now at Paris, very defective. Of 2 Corinthians all from 10:8 onwards is wanting. א Ԡ א (Fourth century). Codex Sinaiticus; now at Petrograd, the only uncial MS. containing the whole N.T. B B (Fourth century). Codex Vaticanus. 17 17. (Evan. 33, Act_13. Ninth century). Now at paris. “ The queen of the cursives” and the best for the Pauline Epistles; more than any other it preserves Pre-Syrian readings and agrees with B D L. D D (Sixth century). Codex Claromontanus; now at Paris. A Graeco-Latin MS. The Latin (d) is akin to the Old Latin. Many subsequent hands (sixth to ninth centuries) have corrected the MS. F F (Late ninth century). Codex Augiensis (from Reichenau); now at Trinity College, Cambridge. G G (Late ninth century). Codex Boernerianus; at Dresden. Interlined with the Latin (in minluscules). The Greek text is almost the same as that of F, but the Latin (g) shows Old Latin elements. K K (Ninth century). Codex Mosquensis; now at Moscow. L L (Ninth century). Codex Angelicus; now in the Angelica Library at Rome. P P (Ninth century). Codex Porfirianus Chiovensis, formerly possessed by Bishop Porfiri of Kiev, and now at Petrograd. f d The Latin companion of F E E (Ninth century). At Petrograd. A copy of D, and unimportant d d The Latin companion of D e d The Latin companion of E * Possibly only the two colleagues are meant. Titus was going of his own initiative (8:17). Without 8:16-24, these verses (3-5) would be rather obscure. * information respecting the commentator is to be found in the volume on the First Epistle, pp. lxvi f. g d The Latin companion of G 67 67. (Eleventh century). At Vienna. Has valuable marginal readings (67 ) akin to B and M; these readings must have been copied from an ancient MS., but not from the Codex Ruber itself. * Deissmann (Bib. St. p. 144) proposes to read λογίαν here in instead ofεὐλογίαν There is no authority for it. † Wie eine Segensgabe nicht wie eine Habsuchisgabe (Schmiedel). * Ἀρέσκειδ ʼ αὐτοῖςκαὶλιτῶςβιοῦν , καθάπερΔιογένης , ὃςἔφασκεθεῶνμὲνἴδιονεἶναιμηδενὸςδεῖσθαι , τῶνδὲθεοῖςὁμοίωντὸὀλίγωνχρῄζειν (Diog. Laert. vi. 105). * Some understand δἰἡμῶν as meaning, ‘ through us weak mortals’ ; but it probably means no more than ‘ through us who have to administer the bounty.’ * This use, however, was not prculiar to the Jews. Papyri of 165-160 b.c. show that it was common in Egypt, esp. of the services in the Serapeum (Deissmann, Bib. st. p. 140). * There is evidence that it did take place. Forty years later Clement of Rome, in addressing the Corinthians (2:1), praises them as ἥδιονδιδόντεςἢλαμβάνοντες , which he would hardly have done had the historic collection been a failure at Corinth. 10:1-13:10. ST PAUL’ S OF HIS ; THE GREAT Whatever view may be taken of the origin of these four chapters, it is universally admitted that the third main portion of the Epistle, in the form in which it is found in all extant authorities, begins here. Having with much tenderness and affection effected a complete reconciliation between himself and his rebellious converts at Corinth (1-7.), and having felt his way, with diffidence amounting almost to misgiving, to an urgent request for bountiful support to the collection for the poor Christians at Jerusalem (8., 9.), he now, without any explanation of the change of topic and tone, suddenly begins a vehement assertion of his Apostolic authority as superior to that of those who oppose him, ending with something which is almost a declaration of war against those who shall have failed to submit when he pays his next visit to them, which will be soon. Like the earlier parts of the Epistle, this portion is written under the influence of strong feeling, but, as again is universally admitted, the feeling is of a very different kind. Instead of yearning affection and a desire not to seem to be straining his Apostolic authority (1:23, 24, 2:4, 4:15, 5:12, 13, 6:11-13, 7:2-4, 8:8, 9:1, 11), he now exhibits fierce indignation and asserts his authority to the uttermost. Although there is no clear evidence that in his indignation he had carefully arranged the subject-matter of his invective, we can trace changes of subject, and there seem to be three main divisions; 1. the Apostle’ s authority and the area of his mission (10:1-18); 2. the ‘ glorying,’ a folly which has been forced upon him (11:1-12:10); 3. his credentials and his final warnings (12:11-13:10). For convenience of investigation we can make further sub-divisions, but this does not imply that such sub-divisions were in the Apostle’ s mind when he dictated the letter. He takes up charges which have been brought against him and answers them as they occur to him. 10:1-6. Reply to the Charge of Cowardice When I come to Corinth, I may be obliged to take strong measures against those who disturb the peace of the Church. 1 Now this is an intensely personal matter. I, Paul, in all earnestness appeal to you by the meekness and unfailing fairness of Christ,— I, whom you accuse of grovelling when face to face with you, and of being fearlessly outspoken only when I am far away: 2 I pray you not to drive me, when I do come to you, to be fearlessly outspoken with the sure confidence with which I am persuaded that I can muster courage against certain persons who are persuaded that we think and act on worldly and carnal principles. 3 True that it is in the world and in the flesh that we do think and act, but it is not on worldly and carnal principles that we conduct our campaign. 4 For the weapons of our campaign are not those of feeble human flesh. No, they are full of power, in God’ s service and with His blessing, for the demolition of the strongholds which defy His Gospel; 5 seeing that we demolish confident persuasions and every high structure that is being lifted up to oppose the revelation which God has given of Himself, and by making captives of every rebellious device bring them into submissive obedience to the Christ. 6 We are quite prepared to punish all disobedience, whenever your obedience is complete. 1. ΑὐτὸςδὲἐγὼΠαῦλος . It is sometimes suggested that St Paul here takes the pen from his amanuensis and writes the rest of the letter with his own hand, as he tells us that he did in the case of his concluding salutations (2 Thessalonians 3:17; 1 Corinthians 16:21; Colossians 4:18). It is likely enough that he sometimes wrote other portions of his letters. Galatians 6:11 seems to imply that the last eight verses, and possibly more, were written with his own hand, and we may infer from Philemon 1:19 that in writing that short and very intimate letter he did not employ an amanuensis at all. But we cannot safely infer from αὐτὸςἐγώ that here he dismisses his amanuensis and begins to write himself; no such inference can be drawn from Romans 7:25, Romans 9:3, or 15:14, in all which places αὐτὸςἐγώ occurs. If it means this here, what does it mean in 12:13? It is possible that αὐτὸςἐγώ dismisses Timothy. Hitherto Timothy has been associated with him in writing the letter (1:1) as being one of his colleagues in forming the Corinthian Church; but now he is about to speak of purely personal matters with which Timothy has nothing to do. It is Paul and not Timothy who has been misrepresented and calumniated, and it is Paul alone who answers the slanders; the responsibility and the authority are his. It is some confirmation of this view that, whereas in the first nine chapters he commonly uses the 1st pers. plur., while the 1st pers. sing. is exceptional, in these four chapters the sing. is the rule, and the plur. is exceptional. Nevertheless, this does not carry us very far, for in this chapter the plur. is freq.; see also 11:12, 12:19, 13:4-7. Moreover, this explanation gives rather a full meaning to αὐτὸςἐγώ . Another possibility is that αὐτὸςἐγώ merely prepares the way for the words which follow; ‘ The very Paul, who seems to you so meek and mild when he is face to face with you, and so resolute and brave when he is far away, this same Paul exhorts you, etc.’ For this we should perhaps have αὑτός = ὁαὐτός . * The best parallel to αὐτὸςἐγώΠαῦλος is Galatians 5:2; ἽδεἐγὼΠαῦλοςλέγωὑμῖν , where ἐγὼΠαῦλος is partly an assertion of authority, † partly an indirect refutation of calumnies (see Lightfoot). Here the αὐτός makes the refutation more emphatic and perhaps somewhat scornful. St Paul rarely introduces his name in the body of a letter, and where he does it always has special emphasis (1 Thessalonians 2:18; Ephesians 3:1; Colossians 1:23; Philemon 1:19). In Galatians 5:2 and Ephesians 3:1. it cannot be meant to exclude those who are named in the opening salutation, for no one is coupled with the Apostle in the salutation. Those who regard 2 Cor. as only one letter sometimes endeavour to find a connexion between 9. and 10. in some such way as this; ‘ I exhort you to be kind and considerate to the brethren in Jerusalem because of the gentleness and considerateness of Christ; and I pray God that I may not be forced to do more than exhort.’ But this reads into the words a good deal which is not expressed. The subject of the collection is absolutely dropped; in these four chapters there is no further allusion to it. And it is difficult to see how “ the grateful ending” of 9. “ affords an easy platform of approach to the unpleasant matter” of 10-13. It is more reasonable to say that “ the writer moves on, without indicating any connexion, to another matter” (Denney). Whatever be our view of these four chapters, it is clear that we have a fresh start. The preceding topic is now dropped and another one is begun. Three elerrents which are conspicuous in the four chapters find expression in these two introductory verses; the strong personal feeling, indignation at the calumnies of his opponents, and the intimation that, if the opposition continues, he will not spare. See on 1 Corinthians 4:21, where the same question is raised. παρακαλῶὑμᾶς . The extraordinary change of tone which suddenly begins here is sometimes explained by the assertion that in the first two-thirds of his letter the Apostle is addressing the loyal Corinthians, and in the last third his opponents. Of this change of address there is not the smallest intimation; in both portions we have ὑμεῖς and ὑμᾶς throughout, and in both portions, as in 1 Cor., the whole Corinthian Church is addressed. In v. 2 the opponents are mentioned separately as τινας . The sudden change is in the Apostle’ s attitude towards the Corinthians. And παρακαλῶ is here ‘ exhort’ rather than ‘ entreat’ ; it has almost a minatory tone, ‘ I strongly advise you.’ In v. 2 he lowers the tone to ‘ beseech.’ διὰτῆςπραΰτητοςκαὶἐπιεικίας . This appeal has nothing to do with the collection; it refers to the warning entreaty which follows. In Aristotle πραότης is the mean between ὀργιλότης and ἀοργησια , and the opposite of χαλεπότης (Eth. Nic. 11. vii. 10, iv. v., Hist. An. ix. 1. 1). Plutarch (Peric. 39, Sertorius, 25, Caes. 57) combines it with ἐπιείκεια , as St Paul does here, and makes it the opposite of ἀποτομία . “ The Scriptural πραότης is not in man’ s outward behaviour only; nor yet in his mere natural disposition. Rather is it an inwrought grace of the soul, and the exercises of it are chiefly towards God (Matthew 11:29; James 1:21). It is that temper of spirit in which we accept His dealings with us without disputing or resisting” (Trench, Syn. § xlii.). Ἐπιείκεια is that ‘ sweet reasonableness’ (Matthew Arnold) which prevents summum jus from becoming summa injuria, by admitting limitations and making allowances for special circumstances: πραότης magis absoluta, ἐπιείκεια magis refertur ad alios (Beng.). Cf. 2 Macc. 10:4. Vulg. is capricious in its renderings of both terms. Here it has modestia for ἐπιείκεια , but Acts 24:4. clementia. Here and in some other places it has mansuetudo for πραΰτης , but Gal_6. lenitas, Ephesians 4:2. and 2 Timothy 2:25, modestia. In O.T. we find reverentia and tranquillitas (Wisd. 2:19, etc.). The appeal shows that St Paul must have instructed the Corinthians as to the character of the Redeemer, whose words and actions must therefore have been known to himself. The Gospels were not yet written, but the oral tradition was there in its fulness. That the Messiah would be πραΰς had been foretold (Zechariah 9:9), and He had proclaimed Himself to be so (Matthew 11:29), and had declared the blessedness of those who are so (Matthew 5:5). The appeal reads somewhat strangely as a prelude to one of the most bitter and vehement paragraphs in the writings of St Paul. What follows reads rather like an echo of the wrath of the Lamb. We might have expected him to say Ἰησοῦ (4:10, 11; Romans 8:11; 1 Thessalonians 4:14) when speaking of the earthly life of Christ. But Χριστοῦ may have point, because some of them professed to be in a special sense Χριστοῦ (1 Corinthians 1:12). ὄςκατὰπρόσωπονμὲνταπεινὸςἐνὑμῖν . Here ταπεινός is used in a bad sense, which is unusual. He is quoting the words of his accusers at Corinth. They had said that, when he was there, he was a Uriah Heep, very humble and cringing and artful; when he was away from them, he could pluck up his courage and be very resolute— on paper. See on 7:6. Here and throughout both LXX and N.T. we should read πραΰτης (א * B G P 17) rather than πραότης (א C D E K L). In LXX both πραΰς (Numbers 12:3 and often in Psalms) and ταπεινός (Proverbs 3:34; Zephaniah 2:3; Isaiah 11:4) are used to translate the same Hebrew, anav. 2. δέομαιδὲτὸμὴπαρὼνθαρρῆσαι . The appeal to the meekness and gentleness of Christ influences the Apostle himself, and he drops from magisterial exhortion to earnest entreaty. RV. does not sufficiently mark this with ‘ intreat’ and ‘ beseech,’ nor Vulg. with obsecro and rogo, while AV does not mark it at all, but has ‘ beseech’ for both verbs. Δέομαιδέ takes up παρακαλῶ and repeats it in a lower key; ‘ I exhort, nay I beseech you, that I may not when present show courage.’ Lit. ‘ I beg of you the not, when I am present, showing courage.’ Chrys. has μήμεἀναγκάσητε . On the constr. see Blass, § 71. 1; παρῶν is attracted to the nom. of δέομαι . Cf. ἔμαθοναὐτάρκηςεἶναι (Philippians 4:11), φάσκοντεςεἶναισοφοί (Romans 1:22). Bachmann follows Rü ckert and B. Weiss in thinking that δέομαι is addressed to God, which is not probable. As δέομαι must be distinguished in translation from παρακαλῶ , so also must θαρρῆσαι from τολμῆσαι , and here again AV ignores the change. The change of word is probably neither accidental nor merely for the sake of variety, but marks the difference between the feigned courage which his critics attributed to him and the uncompromising boldness which he is confident of exhibiting if his opponents render it necessary. He beseeches them so to behave that he may be spared the distress of proving that he can be unflinching when he is face to face with them. τῇπεποιθήσειᾗλογίζομαιτολμῆσαικ .τ .λ . ‘ With the confidence (1:15) wherewith I count on being bold against certain persons who count of us as, etc.’ The Corinthians of course would understand who the τινας , quosdam, whom he does not care to mention, are, cf. 3:1; 1 Corinthians 15:12. They are a malignant coterie in the Church which he is addressing. The thought of them changes his tone once more, and he again becomes minatory. We must give the same rendering to λογίζομαι and λογιζομένους , both of which are midd. and not pass. Nevertheless there is a difference of signification, the one meaning ‘ I reckon’ = ‘ I expect,’ the other meaning ‘ who reckon’ = ‘ who suppose.’ The verb is very freq. in Paul, esp. in Rom. and 2 Cor. Vulg. here has qua existimor audere in quosdam, qui arbitrantur nos, etc., using two different verbs and taking λογίζομαι as passive. It uses both these verbs elsewhere, and also cogito (vv. 7, 11, 3:5; etc.), reputo (5:19; Galatians 3:6; 2 Timothy 4:6; etc.), imputo (Romans 4:3, Romans 4:8), cui accepto fero (Romans 4:6), and aestimo (Romans 8:36, Romans 9:8). Romans 4:3 is remarkable, for in Genesis 15:6 Vulg. has reputo. ὡςκατὰσάρκαπεριπατοῦντας . ‘ As if our conduct were guided by carnal principles’ ; see on Romans 8:4. His opponents attributed to him unspiritual and worldly motives and conduct; that he was capricious and shuffling, verbose and vain-glorious, at once a coward and a bully, and so forth. That they accused him of unchastity is not probable; had they done so, he would have been more definite. Nor is there any reference to his physical infirmities. See on 1:17, last note; and for the Hebraistic περιτατεῖν of daily conduct see on 4:2 and 1 Corinthians 3:3, also on ἀνεστράφημεν , 2 Corinthians 1:12. The metaphor which follows suggests that κατὰσάρκα refers, among other things, to a charge of being a coward. 3. ἐνσαρκὶγὰρπεριπαιοῦντες . ‘ In the flesh (emphatic) no doubt. we walk, but not according to the flesh do we carry on our warfare.’ The γάρ implies a tacit contradiction; ‘ That is not true, for, although of course we walk in, etc.’ Like all human beings, he is subject to the limitations and weaknesses of humanity, such as timidity, indiscretion, love of influence; cf. 4:7; Galatians 2:20; Philippians 1:22. An Apostle, in his missionary work, has to reckon with these drawbacks, but they do not regulate his conduct. They constitute the condition in which he must labour, but they are not its regulating principle. Its principles are not worldly but spiritual. That a Christian’ s life is warfare is often pointed out by St Paul (6:7; 1 Thessalonians 5:8; Romans 13:12, Romans 13:13; Ephesians 6:11-17; 1 Timothy 1:18; 2 Timothy 2:3, 2 Timothy 2:4). Cf. Wisd. 5:17-20, a book with which St Paul seems to have been familiar. The metaphor would be natural enough, even if the Apostle had not had frequent experience of Roman soldiers. Here it has special point, if he is rebutting a charge of cowardice; and he is certainly beginning to carry war into his opponents’ camp. Durandus (Rationale Divinorum Officiorum, iv. 16), after saying that “ when the Epistle is read we do not kneel but sit,” adds that “ Soldiers, however, are accustomed to stand when the Epistles of Paul are read, in honour of him, because he was a soldier.” See V. Staley, Studies in Ceremonial, p. 80. 4. In form this verse is a parenthesis to confirm the truth of the preceding statement, and καθαιροῦντες in v. 5 goes back in grammatical constr. to στρατευόμεθα in v. 3. But in idea καθαιροῦντες is obviously connected with πρὸςκαθαίρεσιν in v. 4, and the const. of v. 3 seems to be forgotten. τὰγὰρὅπλατῆςστρατείαςἡμῶν . ‘ For the weapons of our campaign are not fleshly.’ He probably refers to the artifices which his critics said that he employed in gaining converts. Adopting στρατιᾶς as the right spelling (see below), we must treat it as equivalent to στρατείας , ‘ campaign,’ , not στρατιᾶς , ‘ army’ . “ It is really superfluous to collect proofs of the fact that στρατεία could also be written στρατία ’ (Deissmann, Bib. St. p. 132). For σαρκικά see on 1:2; for ὅπλα , on 6:7. δυνατὰτῷΘεῷ . It is the idea of power that is wanted in opposition to the weakness of the flesh. The extraordinary effectiveness of the weapons is evidence that there is something more than mere human force in them; and hence perhaps the use of δυνατά rather than πνευματικά , the common antithesis to σαρκικά . The force of the dat. is uncertain; either ‘ for God,’ ‘ in God’ s service’ (dat. com.), or ‘ before God,’ ‘ in His eyes’ (RV). From the latter the transition would be easy to the Hebraistic use for ‘ exceeding,’ as in ἀστεῖοςτῳΘεῷ , ‘ exceeding fair’ (Acts 7:20). Erasmus has afflatu Dei, Beza divinitus, ‘ divinely powerful.’ πρὸςκαθαίρεσινὀχυρωμάτων . ‘ To the demolition of strongholds,’ the fortresses which hinder the success of the campaign, i.e. all the prejudices and evil practices which resist the influence of the Gospel. In 70, esp. in Maccabees (cf. 1 Macc. 5:65), ὀχύρωμα is freq., but occurs nowhere else in N.T., and possibly St Paul is thinking of Pro 21:22; πόλειςὀχυρὰςἐπέβησοφὸςκαὶκαθειλετὸὀχύρωμαἐφ ʼ ᾧἐπεποίθησανοἱἀσεβεῖς . Thackeray (St Paul and Jewish Thought, p. 239) quotes πρόςγετὴντοῦὀχυρώματοςτούτουκαθαίρεσιν from Philo, De Confus. Ling. 26. There is probably no special reference to the “ fences about the Law,” or the Law itself, although the Law was often a great obstacle to the success of Christian missionaries. It is difficult to decide between στρατίας (א C D G) and στρατείας (B). 5. λογισμοὺςκαθαιροῦντες . The constr. is doubtful. We can take it back to περιπατοῦντες and στρατευόμεθα , making v. 4 a parenthesis (AV, RV., WH.); but St Paul so frequently has nominative participles without any regular connexion (θλιβόμενοι , 7:5; στελλόμενοι , 8:20; πλουτιζόμενοι , 9:11), that it is likely that we have a similar feature here; ‘ Seeing that we demolish seducing reasonings,’ i.e., sophistries and plausible fallacies with which Jews and Gentiles evaded the teaching of the Apostles. Cf. Proverbs 21:30. There is nothing personal in the warfare which the Apostles wage. They assail arguments and ideas in order to win over those who hold them. They do not attempt to destroy the reasoners in order to stop the arguments. And in demolishing reasonings St Paul did not use πιθοῖςσοφίαςλόγοις , thought some missionaries did according to their ability; the spiritual power with which he was endowed sufficed. It is not likely that λογισμούς is meant to refer to λογιζομένους , and in translating the one we need not consider the other. These specious and arrogant λογισμοί belong to a class of which he goes on to speak. Cf. Romans 2:15, the only other passage in which λογισμός is found in N.T. πᾶνὕψωμαἐπαιρόμενον . ‘ Every high thing that is lifting itself up.’ In 11:20 ἐπαιρ is midd., and so it probably is here. The metaphor is from walls and towers standing defiantly, rather than barriers hastily thrown up to check progress; but the pass, is possible, that is ‘ erected,’ ‘ set up,’ as a towering obstacle. κατὰτῆςλνώσεωςτοῦΘεοῦ . ‘ In opposition to the knowledge of God,’ that true knowledge of Him which comes through acquaintance with One who was the image of God (4:4). St Paul is sure that he possesses this. Cf. τὸγνωστὸντοῦΘεοῦ (Romans 1:19), and πλανᾶσθαιπερὶτήντοῦΘεοῦγνῶσιν (Wisd. 14:22). St Paul’ s acquaintance with the Book of Wisdom has been already noted. See on v. 4 and v. 1. αἰχμαλωτίζοντες . Military metaphors still continue, and in N.T. this metaphor of ‘ making prisoners’ or ‘ taking captive’ is peculiar to St Paul (Romans 7:23; 2 Timothy 3:6). In Luke 21:24 there is no metaphor. These two military expressions are found in conjunction 1 Macc. 8:10; ᾐχμαλώτισαντὰςγυναῖκαςαὐτῶν , … καὶκαθεῖλοντὰὀχυρώματααὐτῶν . Cf. τὸκάλλοςαὐτῆςᾐμαλώτισεψυχῆναὐτοῦ (Judith 16:9). In Ephesians 4:8 we have αἰχμαλωτεύω , from Ezekiel 12:3. Both forms of the verb are very freq. in 70; αἰχμαλωτίζω is used by Josephus, Plutarch, Arrian, etc. πᾶννόημα . ‘ Every device’ ; see on 2:11. Neither here, where Luther’ s alle Venrunft has led some people astray, nor 1 Corinthians 4:4, where AV has done the like, does St Paul express disapproval of human reasoning, or deny the right to think for oneself. It is those λοψισμοί and νοήματα which oppose or corrupt the truth to which he here declares hostility. But θαρρῶεἰςὑμᾶς (v. 1) does not justify our taking εἰςτὴνὑπακοήν with πᾶννόημα , ‘ every device against the obedience’ ; for this we should have had κατὰ , as in κατὰτῆςγνώσεως . εἰςτὴνὑπακοὴντοῦχριστοῦ . These words go with αἰχμαλωτίζοντες , ‘ taking every opposing design prisoner and bringing it into the condition of submissive obedience to the Christ.’ * Cf. Luke 21:24. Submission to Christ is the new land into which they are carried captive; 1 Kings 8:46; Judith 5:18; Tobit 1:10. That the imagery of the passage was suggested by the wars of Pompey against Mithridates and the Pirates (Stanley) is less likely than that the wars of the Maccabees were in the Apostle’ s mind. But no actual campaign is needed to suggest the metaphors. Cf. Romans 1:5. 6. καὶἐνἑτοίμῳἔχοντεςἐκδικῆσαικ .τ .λ . ‘ And being quite prepared to avenge all disobedience, whenever your obedience shall have been completed.’ This reads oddly after 7:4, 16. There he is enthusiastic about them; here their obedience is still incomplete. See also 8:7. The ὑμῶν is emphatic; he fully expects that, after the interval which he means to allow, the Corinthian Church will be found to be obedient to Christ and submissive to His Apostle. But there may be exceptions, and with such cases he is prepared to deal severely. We have ἑτοίμωςἔχω , 12:14, and ἐνἑτοίμῳἔχω is found in Philo, Polybius, etc. See Wetstein. Such expressions, like δύναμαι , are usually followed by the aor. infin. (12:14; Acts 21:13, Acts 23:15, etc.).* The legal expression, ἐκδικῆσαι , ‘ to do justice,’ may be compared with those in 1:22, 2:6, 8, 7:11, 12. The play on words between καθαιροῦντες and ἐπαιρόμενον and between ὑπακοή and παρακοή may be compared with those noted in 1:13, 3:2, 4:8, 6:10, 7:10, 8:22. Note also the emphatic repetition in πᾶν … πᾶσαν , and the alliteration in ἔχότεςἐκδικῆσαι and πᾶσανπαρακοήν . Alliteration with π is specially freq. (9:8, 11). In LXX παρακοή is not found, and in N.T. it occurs only here, Romans 5:19, and Hebrews 2:2, and St Paul would probably have used ἀπειθία (Romans 11:30, Romans 11:32; Ephesians 2:2, Ephesians 2:5:6; Colossians 3:6) here had he not wished to make a verbal antithesis to ὑπακοή , for παρακοή , ‘ failing to listen’ or ‘ listening amiss,’ implies less deliberate disobedience than ἀπειθία .† These two verses exhibit the Apostle’ s severity and consideration, and his authority is manifest in both. The threat of severity anticipates 12:20— 13:1, and if these four chapters are part of the lost letter which was sent before 2 Cor. 1-9., then 2:9 may refer to this passage. The claim to a Divine commission and to the power to decide what is contrary to the knowledge of God is conspicuous here as in 2:14, 4:6, 5:18. In what way he will punish those who still oppose him when he comes is not stated. He is probably thinking of the Judaistic teachers, anticipating that those whom they have misled will submit and return to their allegiance, but that these alien teachers will not do so.‡ He passes on to deal with some of the sneers which they had employed in order to undermine his authority, and some of the claims which they had made in order to establish their own. Some of the latter may have been true enough. They came from the country of the Messiah and from the primitive Christian congregation. They had personal acquaintance with some of the Twelve and with James, the Lord’ s brother. That they had known Christ Himself is less probable. 10:7-11. Reply to the Charge of Weakness My Apostolic Authority will be found to be as effective in fact as it looks on paper. 7 It is at the outward appearance of things that you look. There may be a certain person who is convinced in himself that he is Christ’ s man. Well then, let him, on second thoughts, be persuaded of this with himself, that just as truly as he is Christ’ s, so also are we. 8 That is no idle boast; for even supposing that I glory somewhat extravagantly about our authority, which was given me by the Lord for your upbuilding and not for your demolition, I shall not be put to shame as an impostor when I come to Corinth. 9 I will not say more than that, that I may not seem (as it were) to terrify you by means of my letters. 10 For I know what people say; ‘ Oh, yes, his letters are impressive and forcible enough; but his personal appearance is weak, and his manner of speaking is worth nothing.’ 11 Let the man who talks in this manner be persuaded of this, that such as we are in word by means of letters, when we are absent, just such also, when we are present, are we in act. Our words and our conduct exactly correspond. 7. Τὰκατὰπρόσωπονβλέπετε . It is impossible to decide with any certainty whether βλέπετε is imperative or indicative (cf. John 5:39, John 5:14:1; 1 John 2:27, 1 John 2:29, 1 John 2:4:2), and, if we decide for the indicative, whether it is interrogative or categorical (cf. 12:5, 11:19; 1 Corinthians 6:4, 1 Corinthians 6:6, 1 Corinthians 6:7:18, 21, 27). All three renderings, ‘ Ye look’ (RV), ‘ Do ye look?’ (AV, RV. marg.), and ‘ Look ye’ (Vulg. videte), make good sense. Wiclif, Tyndale, and the Genevan agree with the last, and commentators, both ancient and modern, are much divided. If βλέπετε were imperative, it would probably have come first; but this is not decisive. Let us follow RV. ‘ It is at the things which lie before your face that you are looking.’ They ought to take a more comprehensive view, and also try to see a little below the surface. If self— commendation, plausibility, and adroitness suffice, then the Corinthians are quite right in accepting the Judaizers, but they ought to look to more solid things than that. One can get much the same meaning, if βλέπετε is imperative, ‘ Look at the facts; not what these teachers say, but what you all can see. Das, was vor Augen liegt— ja das fasst ins Auge (Bachmann). εἴτιςπέποιθενἑαυτῷ , ‘ If any man trusteth in himself that he is Christ’ s, let him count (v. 2) this again, with himself, that even as he is Christ’ s, so also are we.’ It is ‘ in himself,’ ‘ in his own mind,’ that he has his confidence, and just there he ought also to make his reckoning. The vague τις , like the vague τινας (v. 2), points to the Apostle’ s opponents, but the sing. τις is no proof that he is now thinking of a particular individual. Cf. 11:4, 20. It is scarcely possible that Χριστοῦεἶναι has any reference to the Christ party (1 Corinthians 1:12). St Paul would not use language which would almost inevitably be understood to mean that he was a member of the ‘ Christ’ party. These parties seem to have died out; for there is no mention of them in 2 Cor., not even in 12:20, where he speaks of strifes and factions. We may conclude that the rebukes in 1 Cor. proved effectual. Χριστοῦεἶναι here means being Christ’ s man, servant, or minister. With πάλιν comp. 1 Corinthians 12:21, and with ἐθ ʼ ἑαυτοῦ , 1 Corinthians 6:1. D E F G, d e f g add δοῦλος after the first Χριστοῦἐφ ʼ ἑαυτοῦ (א B L, Latt. intra se) rather than ἀφ ʼ ἑαυτοῦ (C D E G K P). Χριστοῦ after ἡμεῖς (D3 E K L, Copt.) is probably not genuine; א B C D* F G P, Latt. omit. 8. ἐάντεγὰρ … Confirmatory evidence that he is Christ’ s minister in as true a sense as his opponents are. Cf. Romans 14:8. He begins with an ‘ if,’ but he ends with a confident assertion. Even if he should use stronger language than he has done about his authority, there is not the least prospect that he will be put to shame as a convicted impostor. There will be ample justification of his claims. It is not certain that περισσότερον refers to vv. 3-6, ‘ more abundantly than I have just done’ : it may mean no more than ‘ somewhat abundantly.’ In any case we notice here his abstention from denying that his opponents are in any sense Christ’ s ministers. All he says is that he can give ample evidence that he is a minister of Christ, invested with His authority. Contrast 11:13-15. In this verse we have the transition from the plur. to the sing. It is still ‘ our authority,’ but the glorying is his own. The mixture of sing. and plur. continues for a while, and then in 11., 12., 13. the sing. prevails. ἧςἔδωκενὁκύριοςεἰςοἰκοδομὴνκαὶοὐκεἰςκαθαίρεσινὑμῷν . ‘ Which the Lord gave me for your up building and not for your demolition.’ We must have the same rendering of καθαίρ here and in vv. 4 and 5. Here ‘ building you up and not casting you down’ seems more effective; but we talk of ‘ demolishing’ arguments rather than of ‘ casting them down. Exactly the same expression is found again 13:10, and in both places it fits the context so well that there is no need to suspect an editorial insertion from either place to the other. The aor. refers to the commission given at Saul’ s conversion (Acts 9:6, Acts 9:15, Acts 9:22:15, Acts 9:26:16). The clause may intimate that his critics said that his teaching was destructive, or that he holds that theirs is destructive. But we cannot be sure of either; it may be a plain statement of fact. οὐκαἰσχυνθήσομαι . ‘ I shall not be put to shame,’ by being exposed as a pretentious boaster. The change from subjunctive to indicative marks his confidence. That will never happen. Some commentators here add, as to be understood, ‘ and I do not say anything stronger than this,’ in order to account for the ἵνα which follows. The constr., thought not quite regular, is intelligible enough. B G 17, Syr-Pesh. Copt. omit τε after ἐάν . We may safely omit καί before περισσότερον with (א B C D E G P, Latt. Copt. Syr-Hark. καυχήσωμαι (B C D F K) rather than καυχήσομαι (א L P). C P, Syr-Pesh. Copt. omit ἡμῶν after ἐξουσίας , perhaps as apparently out of harmony with the sing. verb. D3 E G K L ins. ἡμῖν after ὁκύριος , P before it; א B C D* 17, d e omit. Note the divergence between E and e, which usually agrees with d independently of the Greek of E. 9. ἵναμὴδόξωκ .τ .λ . This depends on v. 8 as a whole, not on any one clause or word. To make v. 10 a parenthesis and carry on ἵνα to v. 11 is an intolerable constr.; ‘ That I may not seem … let such a one, etc.’ But it is perhaps in order to ease such a connexion that Chrys. inserts δέ and Vulg. autem* after ἵνα , for if ἵνα has no connexion with v. 8, ἵναμὴδόξω is felt to be very abrupt. Ne videar without autem would be right. ὡςἂνἐκφοβεῖνὑμᾶς . ‘ As it were, to terrify you.’ The compound verb has a strong meaning, ‘ to scare you out of your senses,’ and to tone this down ὡςἄν is prefixed; quasi perterrefacere vos. It is freq. in LXX (Job 7:14, 33:16; Wisd. 11:19, 17:6, 19; etc.), esp. in the phrase οὐκἔσταιὁἐκφοβῶν (Leviticus 26:6; Deuteronomy 28:26; Micah 4:4; Zech. 3:13; Ezekiel 34:28, Ezekiel 39:26), but is found nowhere else in N.T. It is doubtful whether we ought to count this as a very rare instance of ἄν c. infin. We perhaps ought to write ὡσάν , which occurs in mod. Grk.; as also σάν , = ‘ as,’ ‘ like,’ or ‘ when.’ Moulton, p. 167. διὰτῶνἐπιστολῶν . ‘ By my letters.’ We know certainly of two letters, 1 Cor. and its predecessor (1 Corinthians 5:9). Unless these four chapters are part of the severe letter (1:23, 2:3, 9, 7:8), we know of three before these words were written, and there may have been others. But the strict injunctions about fornicators in the first letter (1 Corinthians 5:9), and the severe sentence on the incestuous person in 1 Cor. (1 Corinthians 5:3-5), would justify the expression ‘ terrifying by my letters,’ without the addition of another severe letter. 10. φησίν . It is difficult to decide between φησίν and φασίν (see below). The τις (v. 7) and ὁτοιοῦτος (v. 11) might cause φασίν to be corrected to φησίν . On the other hand, φησίν might be corrected to φασίν , because the context shows that this contemptuous criticism of the Apostle’ s letters was not confined to an individual. In either case we have interesting contemporary evidence of what some people thought of the Apostle’ s letters and of his personal effectiveness. Either φησίν or φασίν might be rendered ‘ it is said,’ on dit, man sagt. Winer, p. 655. βαρεῖαικαὶἰσχυραί . ‘ Weighty and powerful.’ * The truth of this is seen by the description of the effect of the severe letter in 7:8-11, a description which must be truthful, for it is sent to the Corinthians themselves, who knew the facts. His critics could not deny the solid and effective character of his letters. Βαρεῖαι probably does not mean ‘ burdensome,’ ‘ grievous’ (Matthew 23:4; Acts 20:29; 1 John 5:3), but ‘ weighty,’ ‘ impressive’ (Matthew 23:23 and perhaps Acts 25:7); yet the latter meaning is less common. Illustrations in Westein. Used for persons, βαρύς has commonly a bad signification, ‘ oppressive,’ ‘ cross— grained’ ; but it sometimes means ‘ dignified,’ ‘ grave,’ like σεμνός . Cf. 1 Thessalonians 2:6. Yet it is possible that the two epithets are not meant to be complimentary; they might mean that in his letters he was tyrannical and violent. ἡδὲπαρουσίατοῦσώματος . ‘ Bodily presence (AV, RV) can hardly be improved; but ‘ personal presence,’ ‘ personal appearance,’ ‘ personality’ have been suggested. There is chiasmus in the contrasted epithets, ἀσθενής being the antithesis of ἰσχυραί and ἐξουθενημένος of βαρεῖαι , and each pair helps to determine the meaning of the other. It is not certain that there is here any allusion to the personal appearance of the Apostle; that he was short and insignificant, “ an ugly little Jew,” and that he had revolting infirmities, such as ophtha’ mia and epilepsy. The contrast seems rather to be between the character of his letters and the character of the man himself. In his letters he was bold as a lion and firm as a rock; when he came face to face with you, he gave way at once, trying to please everybody (1 Corinthians 9:20), and what he said was not worth listening to (see on 1 Corinthians 2:3).* This looks like a reference to the intermediate and unsuccessful visit. ἐξουθενημένος . ‘ Despised,’ ‘ of no account’ (1 Corinthians 1:28, 1 Corinthians 1:6:4; Ecclesiastes 9:16; Malachi 2:9; Daniel 4:28; Dan_2 Macc. 1:27). No doubt the Apostle’ s powers were not always the same; his letters show that. At times his eloquence seemed godlike (Acts 14:8-12), but he had not the brilliancy of Apollos, and he did not keep Eutychus awake (Acts 20:9). Ramsay, St Paul, p. 84, Church in the Roman Empire, p. 57. “ A personality of such polar contrasts made a very different impression on different people. Seldom perhaps has any one been at once so ardently hated and so passionately loved as St Paul” (Deissmann, St Paul,. p. 70). As Bousset remarks, the personality of St Paul must have indeed been great, if, in spite of infirmities which would be specially distasteful to Greeks, he nevertheless was to them ‘ the Apostle.’ Of the descriptions which have come down to us of the personal appearance of the Apostle the only one which is at all likely to be based upon early tradition is the well-known one in the Acts of Paul and Thekla, a document which Ramsay (Church in Rom. Emp. xvi.) assigns to the first century. These Acta exist in Syriac, Latin, Greek, and Armenian, and the Syriac is believed to embody the earliest form of the story. The description in the Syriac is as follows; “ A man of middling size, and his hair was scanty, and his legs were a little crooked, and his knees were projecting (or far apart); and he had large eyes, and his eyebrows met, and his nose was somewhat long; and he was full of grace and mercy; at one time he seemed like a man, and at another he seemed like an angel.” The Armenian version says that he had blue eyes and crisp or curly hair. Later writers give him an aquiline nose. See. F. C. Conybeare, Monuments of Early Christianity, p. 62; Smith and Cheetham, D. of Chr. Ant. ii. p. 1622; Farrar, St Paul, exc. xi.; Kraus, Real. Enc. d. Christ. Alter. ii. pp. 608, 613. αἱἐπιστολαὶμέν (א * B, r) rather than αἱμὲνἐπ (א 3 D F G K L P, Latt.). φησίν (א D E F G K L P, d e Copt.) rather than φασίν (B, f g r Vulg. Syrr.). Note the divergence between F and f. 11. τοῦτολογιζέσθω . ‘ Count this.’ It is worth while to have the same rendering in vv. 2, 7, 11; RV. has ‘ count,’ ‘ consider,’ ‘ reckon.’ Τοῦτο is emphatic, ‘ just this.’ τοιοῦτος . Not ‘ the person in question,’ but ‘ such a one,’ ὁλόγος would include the thought as well as the expression. ‘ a person of this kind.’ The Apostle is not alluding to a definite individual, but quoting a current criticism. οἷοίἐσμεντῷλόγῳ . ‘ What we are in word by letters when we are absent, such are we also in act when we are present.’ Menzies and Moffatt follow AV in supplying ἐσόμεθα with τοιοῦτοι which confines the meaning to his intended visit to Corinth. RV. is almost certainly right in supplying ἐσμεν , which makes the statement apply to his whole character and conduct. He is not one in whom the inconsistency of writing forcibly and acting feebly is found. So Alford, Bachmann, Bernard, Lietzmann, McFadyen, Schmiedel. The antithesis between λόγῳ and ἔργῳ , so freq. in Thucydides, is found Romans 15:18; and Acts 7:22 we have δυνατὸςἐνλόγοιςκαὶἔργοιςαὐτοῦ . In the antithesis here, we again have chiasmus; τῷλόγͅἀπόντες , παρόντεςτῷἔργῳ : cf. 4:3, 6:8, 9:6, 13:3. Baljon needlessly suggests that δι ʼ ἐπιστολῶν is a gloss. 12-18. A passage, the difficulty of which was very early felt, and hence the variations in the text, some of which are obviously the result of efforts to make things clearer. That St Paul deliberately wrote obscurely in order to avoid making definite charges against his assailants (Theodoret) is not probable.* He is satirical, and we must beware of taking his irony literally. Under cover of mock humility he shows that he is a very different kind of person from those who criticize him from a pinnacle of assumed superiority. They say that at close quarters he is a coward. Well, he must own that he has not the courage which they possess. He does not venture to put himself on a level with people who sing their own praises and try to get themselves accepted at their own valuation. Conduct of that kind is folly. His glorying has limits not of his own choosing; they are the limits of the sphere assigned to him by God, who sent him to Corinth. And he was the first in the field there. He did not come after others had laboured there and take the credit of what they had done, although there are people who have tried to reap where he has sown. He hopes that as the Corinthians’ faith increases he will be able to enlarge his sphere of influence and carry the Gospel to regions farther West, always avoiding the fields of other men’ s labours, so as not to seem to plume himself on work which was not his own. The Western text (D F G, d e f g, Ambrst.) omits οὐσυνιᾶσιν , ἡμεῖςδέ , and then the sentence ἀλλὰαὐτοὶκ .τ .λ . runs; ‘ but we measuring ourselves by ourselves and comparing ourselves with ourselves are not going into spheres beyond our measure and glorying there, etc.’ This makes good sense and runs smoothly, with αὐτοί carrying on the constr. of οὐτολμῶμεν : and it may be an instance of what WH. call “ Western non-interpolations” (ii. pp. 175 ff.). But more probably the omission is an attempt to make the original text clearer. The Apostle is not likely to have declared that he made himself his standard of excellence. To adopt the reading συνιονσιν and make it a dat. agreeing with ἑαυτοῖς — ‘ compare ourselves with ourselves, unwise people, as they hold us to be’ — is objectionable for the same reason, and in that case we should have τοῖςμὴσυνιοῦσιν . We must retain ἡμεῖςδέ , and then αὐτοί refers, not to the Apostle, but to his critics. And we may safely reject the reading οὐσυνίσασιν (א *), which would mean that ‘ they compare themselves with themselves without being aware that they do so,’ which is very poor sense. 10:12-18. The Area of His Mission Includes Corinth Self-praise is worthless; but I do claim that Corinth lies in the sphere of work which God has assigned to me. 12 I am accused of being a coward. Well, I really cannot muster courage to pair myself or compare myself with certain persons who are distinguished by much self-commendation. They fix their own standard of excellence, and are lost in admiration of themselves and one another for conforming to it. That is really not very sagacious. 13 We, however, who do not fix our own standard, will not glory beyond our legitimate limits, but will keep within the limits of that sphere which God has assigned to us as a limit, and which certainly meant that we should extend our labours so as to include you. 14 For we are not, I repeat,— as would be the case if we had no commission to come as far as you,— we are not straining to exceed the limits of our province. Why, we pressed on even to you, and were the first to proclaim in Corinth the Glad-tidings of the Christ. 15 Our glorying does not go beyond legitimate limits, does not take credit for what other men have done. But we do cherish a hope that, as your faith goes on growing, we may through you get an enlargement of influence— still keeping to the sphere allotted to us— an enlargement on a great scale; 16 viz. to carry the Glad-tidings to the region beyond you, without glorying (as some people do) in another man’ s sphere of labour of things already done before we came. 17 But in any case there is only one right way of glorying; he who glories, let him glory in the Lord who alone can make work fruitful. 18 For he who, instead of giving all glory to God, commends himself, is not the man that is accepted; the only one who wins real approval is he whom the Lord commends. It will perhaps be as well to give a paraphrase of vv. 12 and 13 on the hypothesis that the Western text is correct, and it is preferred by some commentators. 12 You may call me a coward, for I really do not possess boldness enough to pair myself or compare myself with certain persons who are distinguished by much self-commendation. On the contrary, I fix my own standard and compare myself with it, 13 and so my glorying will never go beyond legitimate limits, but will keep, etc. 12. οὐγὰρτολμῶμενἐνκρῖναιἢσυνκρῖναιἑαυτοῖς . One suspects that for the sake of a play upon words the Apostle has used an expression which might otherwise have been clearer. ‘ For we have not the boldness (v. 2) to pair or to compare ourselves with some of those who commend themselves.’ The play on words is as obvious here as in vv. 5, 6, and the meaning of ἐνκρῖναι seems to be ‘ judge amongst,’ ‘ estimate amongst,’ ‘ class with,’ and it is stronger in meaning than συνκρῖναι , so that ‘ pair’ and ‘ compare’ fairly well preserves the similarity of sound and change of meaning. ‘ I could not venture to put myself in the same class with, or even compare myself with,’ is the sarcastic declaration. Vulg. gives the sense, without preserving any play of words; non enim audemus inserere aut comparare nos. Beza has nos adjungere ved conjungere, which sacrifices the sense in order to preserve the play. Bengel’ s aequiparare aut comparare is better than either this or inserere aut conserere. Cf. Wisd. 7:29; 1 Macc. 10:71. St Paul had been accused of singing his own praises (3:1); he here intimates that this is just what his critics are fond of doing. ἀλλὰαὐτοὶἐνἑαυτοῖςἑαυτοὺςμετροῦντες . If we retain ἡμεῖςδέ in v. 13, and it is best to do so, the αὐτοί must refer to the hostile critics; ‘ But they themselves measuring themselves by themselves.’ They are a “ mutual admiration and self-admiration society” (Waite). They set up their own conduct as a standard of excellence, and find their conformity to it eminently satisfactory and admirable. They are a community of Pecksniffs. Calvin takes the monks of his own time as an illustration; sibi enim intus plaudebant, non considerantes quibus virtutibus constaret vera laus. οὐσυνιᾶσιν . ‘ Are without understanding’ ; they are ἄφρονες (Ephesians 5:17), who are not intelligent enough to put two and two together. These self-satisfied critics, who have no external standard, but judge everything by comparison with their own practice, come very far short of wisdom. Non intelligent, says Augustine, adding neque quae loquuntur neque de quibus affirmant (from 1 Timothy 1:7). Others supply, ‘ how ridiculous they are,’ or ‘ what they are talking about,’ or ‘ what are the marks of a true Apostle.’ But οὐσυνιᾶσιν needs no supplement. Cf. οὔπωνοεῖτεοὐδὲσυνίετε ; (Mark 8:17). The spelling ἐνκρι . and συνκρι is supported by B D ; for the former G has κρῖναι . Naber’ s suspicion of dittography is not needed; the play on words is thoroughly Pauline. D E add ἑαυτούς after the first verb, while א omits ἐαυτούς before μετροῦντες . συνιᾶσιν (א 1 B 17) rather than συνιοῦσιν (D 3 D K L P or συνίσασιν (א *) D FG, d e f G oimit οὐσυν . ἠμεῖςδὲ , but the words should be retained with א B D 3 E K L P, 1 Syrr. Copt. Arm. Aeth. Goth. 13. ἡμεῖςδὲοὐκεἰςτὰἄμετρακαυχησόμεθα . ‘ But we will not glory beyond our measure’ . He does not fix his own standard, and he does not exceed the limits fixed for him; moreover, he has a settled determination never to exceed these limits. Εἰςτὰἄμετρα is indefinite; it may refer to the excessive self— admiration of his opponents, or it may mean ‘ in respect of things beyond our scope’ ; but this is less probable. Cf. εἰςτὰμάλιστα . ἀλλὰκατὰτὸμέτροντοῦκανόνοςκ .τ .λ . ‘ But according to the measure of the length which God apportioned to us as a measure, to reach as far as even you.’ RV. and other authorities render κανών ‘ province,’ and the rendering is so suitable to the context that we may perhaps regard it as admissible; a specified sphere, definitely marked out, is the meaning required, and ‘ province’ expresses this very well. But κανών is generally used of length, and τὸμέτροντοῦκανόνος would mean ‘ the length of one’ s tether,’ the length of the radius from one’ s centre. In this case it would mean the distance which God told the Apostle to go in his missionary work. But seeing that κανών means (1) the rod which measures, and (2) the amount which is measured, and seeing that fixing the bounds of territory may require measuring rods, it is possible that κανών may be used of the territory thus measured. Lightfoot on Galatians 6:16, the only other place in N.T. in which the word occurs, seems to take this as certain. There, however, the term is used of line, and not of surface; ‘ all those who shall guide their steps by this rule.’ * In Judith 13:6 it seems to, mean a bedpole. More akin to the use here Isa_4 Macc. 7:21, πρὸςὅλοντὸντῆςφιλοσοφίαςκανόναεὐσεβῶςφιλοσοφῶν , where κανόνα might be rendered ‘ sphere,’ or ‘ province,’ although ‘ rule’ may be better. Westcott, Canon of N.T., App. A, gives a history of the word. οὗἐμέρισενἡμῖνὁθεὸςμέτρου . ‘ Which God apportioned to us as our measure.’ St Paul did not determine his own province any more than his own standard of excellence. God did that. Cf. 1 Corinthians 7:17; Romans 12:3; Hebrews 7:2. Some editors bracket μέτρου as probably as gloss, but ἐμέρισενμέτρου is another alliteration, and St Paul is harping on the idea of ‘ measure.’ Vulg. omits; quam mensus est nobis Deus. Both οὖ and μέτρου are attracted in case to τοῦκανόνος . ἐφικέσδαιἄχρικαὶὑμῶν . This was what God intended; that his line should ‘ reach as far as even you’ ; pertingendi usque advos. This was indisputable. St Paul was the first to preach the Gospel in Corinth, and it was God who had turned him from a persecutor into a preacher. The verb is common enough in class. Grk., but it is found nowhere else in N.T., and perhaps nowhere in LXX. οὐκ (א B D G K L P) rather than οὐχι D3 E). εἰςτὰἄμετρα (א B D3 K L P) rather than εἰςτὸἄμετρον (D G) in immensum (Latt.). ἐφικέσθαι (א B G K L P) rather than ἀφικέσθαι ( D E F). 14. We again have several doubtful points to consider; text, arrangement, and punctuation are all uncertain. At the outset all these must be regarded as tentative. οὐγὰρὡςμή . Adopting this reading, we will treat the verse as not a mere parenthesis to explain v.13, and will connect v.15 with v. 14; moreover, we will regard no part of v. 14 as interrogative. ‘ For we are not overstretching ourselves, as (we should be doing) if we did not reach unto you, for as far as even you we were the first to come in the Gospel (8:18; Romans 1:9) of the Christ, not glorying beyond our measure, etc.’ Or, without supplying anything, we may take the first part of v. 14 thus; ‘ For we are not, as if we did not reach unto you, overstretching ourselves.’ If the reading ὡςγὰρμή is adopted, then the first part must be a question; ‘ For are we overstretching ourselves, as if we did not reach unto you’ ? ‘ Are we exceeding our commission in claiming authority in Corinth’ ? Facts speak for themselves; he founded the Church there. It is not certain that φθάνω here, as in 1 Thessalonians 4:15, retains its class. signification of ‘ come first,’ ‘ precede,’ ‘ anticipate.’ In later Greek it commonly means simply ‘ come’ (1 Thessalonians 2:16; Romans 9:31; Philippians 3:16); so in papyri and perhaps here (RV). Nevertheless, the fact that he not only came as far as Corinth with the Glad-tidings, but was the first to do so, has point. Unless v. 14 is treated as a parenthetical explanation of v. 13 (WH.), we need only a comma at the end of it. οὐγὰρὡςμή (א D F G K L M, Latt.) rather than ὡςγὰρμή (B and two cursives). 15, 16. These verses are connected with v. 14 rather than with v. 13. The clumsiness of expression is due to dictation, in which the sentence has become unduly prolonged. The Judaizing teachers had intruded into his province and taken credit for what was his work, and he aims at showing that he himself has done nothing of the kind. οὐκεἰςτὰἄμετρακ .τ .λ . ‘ Not glorying beyond our measure in other men’ s labours, but having hope that, as your faith grows, we shall be magnified in you according to our province unto still greater abundance, so as to preach the Gospel unto the regions beyond you, and not to glory in another man’ s province in respect of things ready to our hand.’ At present Corinth is the Western limit of his sphere of missionary work. When the Corinthian Church is more firmly established, he hopes to extend his labours still farther into Europe. 15. ἐνὑμῖν . The words are amphibolous, but they have more point if they are taken with μεγαλυνθῆναι . They are almost superfluous if taken with αὐξανομένης (Luther, Calvin); if their faith increases, it must increase in them and among them; but it is not superfluous to remind them that it lies in their power to make it quickly possible for him to extend his sphere of work. Both καυχώμενοι and ἔχοντες are participiabsoluta, of which St Paul makes freq. use. See on 8:20. With μεγαλυνδῆναι comp. Philippians 1:20, with περισσείαν , 8:2. 16. εἰςτὰὑπερέκειναὑμῶν . The expression may be coined for the occasion, for ὑπερέκεινα has been found nowhere else.* It may have been a current popular word which has not found its way into literature; ἐπέκεινα (Acts 7:43 and LXX) is classical. A little later St Paul had intentions of going to Rome and Spain (Romans 15:24, Romans 15:28), and such ideas may have been in his mind when he wrote this letter. Regarding Antioch as his original centre, he might vaguely describe such regions as τὰὑπερέκεινα in reference to Corinth. But, if these chapters are part of the severe letter written at Ephesus, ‘ the parts beyond Corinth’ would be a natural expression for Rome and Spain. See Introduction, p. xxxiii. εὐαγγελίσασθαι . In these verses (14-16) we have εὐαγγέλιον and εὐαγγελίζομαι , expressions and ideas which are in a high degree Pauline. The former occurs in all groups of the Epistles, 60 times in all, and indeed in every Epistle, excepting that to Titus. The latter is found chiefly in this group, but also in 1 Thess. and Eph., 20 times in all, and its usual meaning is ‘ preach the Gospel,’ whether εὐαγγέλιον be added (11:7) or not; but in a few passages it means simply ‘ preach,’ and hardly differs from κηρύσσω (Galatians 1:23; Ephesians 2:17, Ephesians 2:3:8; 1 Thessalonians 3:6). Εὐαγγέλιον more often than not has no defining adjective or genitive, as here and 8:18; contrast 2:12, 4:4, 9:13, 11:7; and seeing that the verb is a technical word to indicate the work of a Christian missionary, the noun indicates the substance or contents of mission preaching. In other words, it is “ God’ s plan of salvation, contained in the O.T. as a promise, and realized through Jesus Christ” (Harnack, Constitution and Law of the Church, pp. 292 f.). εἰςτὰἕτοιμακαυχήσασθαι . ‘ To glory in respect of things ready to our hand,’ i.e. ‘ done by other persons before we came on the scene and claimed the credit of it,’ a condensed expression, the meaning of which would be obscure without the context. The constr. κανχ . εἰς is found in Arist. Pol. v. x. 16. We know that St Paul on principle avoided centres where other missionaries had been working (Romans 15:20); he was commissioned to be always a pioneer, and he regarded his extraordinary success as a proof that he was commissioned by God. It was never his desire to find things ready to his hand, still less to claim the merit for what had been already done. Indeed there was no merit to be claimed even when, in the province apportioned to him, great results were produced. Therefore he again quotes (see on 1 Corinthians 1:31) an adaptation of Jer 9:24. 17. ὁδὲκαυχώμενος . ‘ But he that glorieth, in the Lord let him glory’ ; that is the only safe principle. If faith has been planted and made to grow, it is God who gives the increase. It is probable that ὁκύριος here means God rather than Christ. But it is remarkable with what readiness N.T. writers transfer what in O.T. is said of Jehovah to Jesus Christ, and this may be a case in point. See on 1 Corinthians 15:10; Romans 15:17; Ephesians 3:7; and cf. Galatians 2:8: in all these passages St Paul carefully disclaims merit for what he has been enabled to accomplish. 18. οὐγὰρὁἑαυτὸνσυνιστάνων , ἐκεῖνόςἐστινδόκιμος . ‘ For it is not the man who commends himself that is the one to be accepted’ as of sterling character. See on 1 Corinthians 9:27, 1 Corinthians 9:11:19; ἐκεῖνος as in Romans 14:14. St Paul had been forced by the attacks made on him to glory about himself, but it was not on this self-praise that he relied. The Corinthian Church was his letter of commendation, and over and above this there was the manifest blessing which God both in Corinth and elsewhere bestowed upon his work. His assailants had no such confirmation of the praise which they bestowed on themselves. Cf. ἐγκωμιαζέτωσεὁπέλαςκαὶμὴτὸσὸνστόμα , ἀλλότριοςκαὶμὴτὰσὰχείλη (Proverbs 27:2). Augustine (in Ps. cxliv. n. 7) says, Ecce inventum est, quomodo et to laudare possis et arrogans non sis. Deum in te lauda, non te; non quia to es talis, sed quia ille fecit te; non quia tu aliquid potes, sed quia potest ille in te et per te.* * Cassian expands thus: ‘ I whom you know to be an Apostle of Christ, whom you venerate with the utmost respect, whom you believe to be of the highest character and perfect, and one in whom Christ speaks.’ † Ἔμφασιςτῆςἀποσταλικῆςἀξίας (Thdrt.). There is something of defiance in the expression. א Ԡ א (Fourth century). Codex Sinaiticus; now at Petrograd, the only uncial MS. containing the whole N.T. * information respecting the commentator is to be found in the volume on the First Epistle, pp. lxvi f. B B (Fourth century). Codex Vaticanus. G G (Late ninth century). Codex Boernerianus; at Dresden. Interlined with the Latin (in minluscules). The Greek text is almost the same as that of F, but the Latin (g) shows Old Latin elements. P P (Ninth century). Codex Porfirianus Chiovensis, formerly possessed by Bishop Porfiri of Kiev, and now at Petrograd. 17 17. (Evan. 33, Act_13. Ninth century). Now at paris. “ The queen of the cursives” and the best for the Pauline Epistles; more than any other it preserves Pre-Syrian readings and agrees with B D L. C C (Fifth century). Codex Ephraemi, a Palimpsest; now at Paris, very defective. Of 2 Corinthians all from 10:8 onwards is wanting. D D (Sixth century). Codex Claromontanus; now at Paris. A Graeco-Latin MS. The Latin (d) is akin to the Old Latin. Many subsequent hands (sixth to ninth centuries) have corrected the MS. E E (Ninth century). At Petrograd. A copy of D, and unimportant K K (Ninth century). Codex Mosquensis; now at Moscow. L L (Ninth century). Codex Angelicus; now in the Angelica Library at Rome. * This is what Deissmann has called the “ mystic genitive,” where ‘ of Christ’ almost=‘ in Christ’ ; ef. 2 Thessalonians 2:5; Ephesians 3:19. Ephesians 3:5:21; Colossians 3:15 (St Paul, p. 141). * ἑτοιμόταταἔχω and ἐξἑτοίμουἔμω , followed by infin., are found in papyri. † Lachmann’ s proposal to put a full stop after παρακοήν , and take ὅταν … ἡιυπακοή with what follows, is extraordinary. ‘ whenever your onbedience shall have been completed, look at what lies before your eyes’ is scarcely sense; and the usua; punctuation makes excellent sense. ‡ If this is correct, then these verses were written before 3:1, which seems to imply that the Judaizing teachers had left Corinth. F F (Late ninth century). Codex Augiensis (from Reichenau); now at Trinity College, Cambridge. d d The Latin companion of D e d The Latin companion of E f d The Latin companion of F g d The Latin companion of G * Ut autem non existimer tamquam terrer dos per epistolas. * German rederings vary cosiderably: gewichlig and gewaltig (Bachmann): schwer and wuchtig (Bousset); wuchtig and kraftvall (Lietzmann); gewichtig and stark (Heinrici— Meyer). * ὸλὸγος would include the thought as will as the expression. r r (Sixth century). Codex Frisingensis; at Munich. Fragments. * ἀσαδῶςἅπαντὸχώρηματοῦτογέγραφεν , ἐναργε͂ςἐλέγξαιτοὺςαἰτίουςοὐβουλόμενος . * Bousset takes the opposite view; that οὐσυνιᾶσιν · ἡμεῖςδέ is an insertion to ease the sense, oin Notbehalf. * We use ‘ line’ in a similar sense. To be the Apostle of the Gentiles was St Paul’ s ‘ line,’ and it extended to Corinth. M M (Ninth century). Codex Ruber, in bright red letters; two leaves in the British Museum contain 2 Corinthians 10:13-5. * Thomas Magister condemns it as a vulgarism used only by οἱσύρφακες . * “ Two feelings are compounded all through this passage; an intense sympathy with the purpose of God that the Gospel should be preached to evey creature; and an intense scorn for the spirit that sneaks and poaches on another’ s ground, and is more anxious that some men should be good sectarians than that all men should be good disciples” (Denney, p.309) 11:1-6. The Folly of Glorying and the Reason for It Forgive my foolish boasting, which is caused by anxious affection. I fear lest these self-asserting impostors should seduce you from Christ. 1 I wish that you could bear with me in a little somewhat of folly. (It is, of course, foolish to boast; but you stand a good deal of it from other people.) Well, I know that you do bear with me. 2 The truth is that I am jealous over you with God’ s own jealousy; for I betrothed you to one husband exclusively. My aim was to present the Church of Corinth as a pure virginbride to the Christ. 3 But I am sadly afraid lest somehow, as the serpent utterly deceived Eve by his craftiness, so your thoughts should be corrupted and led astray from the singleminded devotion and pure fidelity which should be observed towards Christ. 4 And my fear is not groundless, for if the intruding alien (and I hear that there are such people) is proclaiming another kind of Jesus such as we did not proclaim, or you are receiving a different kind of spirit such as you did not receive from us, or a different kind of Gospel such as you did not accept at our hand,— then you bear with a person of this kind with quite beautiful toleration! 5 I ask you to be equally tolerant towards me; for I am persuaded that in nothing have I been inferior to those pre— eminent apostles of yours. 6 Granted that, as compared with them, I am untrained in speech, yet in the knowledge that is worth having I am not untrained. No; in all things we have made that plain among all men in our relations with you. 1. Ὄφελονἀνείχεσθέμουμικρόντιἀφροσύνης . ‘ Would that ye bore with me in a little somewhat of folly.’ The sudden outburst looks like the beginning of a new topic, but, as has been shown above, the connexion with what precedes is close. He is again guarding himself against the charge of vanity and self-praise. The unaugmented 2nd aor. ὄφελον in late Greek is a mere particle, hardly more than ‘ Oh,’ expressing a wish as to what might happen, but is almost too good to come true, as here, or what might have been the case, but was not. Here and Revelation 3:15 it is followed by imperf, indic.; in Galatians 5:12 by fut. indic., where, as here, there is a touch of irony; in 1 Corinthians 4:8 by aor. indic. and there also there may be irony. The aor. indic. is freq. in LXX, esp. in the phrase ὄφελονἀπεθάνομεν (Exodus 16:3; Job 14:13; Numbers 14:2, Numbers 20:3). In 2 Kings 5:3 no verb is expressed. In class. Grk. the augmented ὤφελον is usually followed by the infin. The meaning here is ‘ would that ye bore,’ or ‘ Oh that ye could bear,’ not ‘ would that ye had borne’ (Calvin). Blass. § 63. 5. We have ἀφροσύνη , vv. 17, 21; Mark 7:22; in 1 Cor. we have μωρία (1:18, 21, 23, 2:14, 3:19). The constr. of the two genitives is disputed. In Bibl. Grk. ἀνέχομαι commonly has gen. of either person or thing, but the acc. is sometimes found, as in class. Grk. Here the ἀνέχεσθεμου in the next clause makes it almost certain that the first μου is the gen. after ἀνείχεσθε , and then ἀφροσύνης is the gen. after μικρόντι , which is the acc. of reference. But it is possible to take μικρόντι as the acc. after ἀνείχεσθε and make both genitives depend upon μικόντι .* This, however, is clumsy and improbable. ἀλλὰκαὶἀνέχεσδέμου . As in 10:7, we are in doubt as to whether the verb is indicative or imperative, and most English Versions decide for the latter, as if the Apostle were repeating his wish in the form of a prayer. ‘ I wish you would— nay, do.’ In either case the ἀλλά corrects what has just been said, while καί emphasizes what is now said, and one gets more of a correction and as much room for emphasis if one takes ἀνέχεσθε as indicative. He has just expressed a wish as if it were not very likely to be fulfilled, and then he corrects himself; ‘ Well, I ought not to speak like that; you do bear with me’ ; or, ‘ But there is no need to wish; of course you do bear with me.’ Blass, § 77. 13, prefers the other alternative. ὄφελον (א B M P) rather than ὤφελον (D3 F G K L). ἀνείχεσθε (א B D F G K L M P) rather than ἠνείχεσθε (some cursives.) τιἀφροσύνης (א B D E M 17) rather than τῇἀφροσύνῃ (K L) or ἀφροσύνης without τι (P). 2. ζηλῶγὰρὑμᾶςΘεοῦζήλῳ . ‘ For I am jealous over you with a divine jealousy.’ The exact meaning of Θεοῦ is uncertain, but it implies that the honour of God is involved in the matter. Something will depend on the meaning which we give to ζηλῶ and ζήλῳ whether ‘ am zealous with zeal’ or ‘ am jealous with jealousy.’ Such renderings as ‘ zeal for God’ s glory,’ or ‘ zeal such as God loves,’ or ‘ very great zeal’ (cf. τοῦΘεοῦ , 1:12, and τῷΘεῷ , 10:4) are unsatisfactory, and ‘ I love you with very great love’ is impossible. Lightfoot on Galatians 4:17 suggests that ‘ I take interest in you with a divine interest’ is the meaning here; but what follows indicates that jealousy rather than zeal is meant, jealousy in the higher sense, as when we are jealous about our own or another person’ s honour. St Paul assumes for himself the part of the person who has arranged the betrothal, and who watched jealously over the bride’ s conduct in the interval before the marriage, which is to take place when Christ returns at the παρουσία .† In O.T. Israel is represented as the spouse of Jehovah, who is jealous of anything like unfaithfulness (Isaiah 54:5, Isaiah 54:6, 62:5; Jeremiah 3:1; Ezekiel 16:23-33); but there is no third person who is concerned with this relationship. In most cases it was the parents who arranged the betrothal, and St Paul is here regarding himself as the parent of the Corinthian Church (12:14; 1 Corinthians 4:17). In Hosea 2:19, Hosea 2:20 the relationship between Jehovah and Israel is represented as betrothal rather than marriage, but again there is no third person; Jehovah acts for Himself, just as in Ephesians 5:27 Christ presents the Church to Himself, without the intervention of any Apostle. ἡρμοσάμηνγὰρὑμᾶςἑνὶἀνδρι . ‘ For I betrothed you to one husband.’ In class. Grk. the midd. would be used of the man betrothing himself, and in Proverbs 19:14 it is used of the woman, παρὰδὲκυρίουἁρμόζεταιψυνὴἀνδρί : the act. would be used of betrothing another person, either ἀνδρὶτήνθυγατέρα (Hdt. ix. 108) or κόρᾳἄνδρα (Pind. Pyth. ix. 207). In the Testaments (Iss. 1:10) Rachel says to Leah, Μὴκαυχῶμηδὲδόξαζεσεαυτήν , ὅτιἐμὲπρότερόνσουἡρμόσατο in accordance with classical usage. But here the context fixes the meaning (Winer, p. 323), and the midd. may indicate the Apostle’ s interest in the matter; as προμνήστωρκαὶγάμουμεσίτης (Thdrt.) he was jealously anxious that nothing should interfere with the marriage. The betrothed woman must devote herself exclusively to her destined Husband, and must not allow her thoughts to be diverted to any other. The ἑνί implies this, and is probably aimed at those who were distracting the Corinthians from their loyatly to the Christ preached by St Paul. Bachmann with Beza and Bengel takes ἑνὶἀνδρί with παραστῆσαι , ‘ to present a pure virgin to one husband, viz. the Christ’ ; but that leaves ἡρμοσάμην without anything to fix its meaning, and it would inevitably mean, ‘ I betrothed you to myself.’ See Hastings, DB. and DCG. artt. ‘ Bride’ and ‘ Bridegroom.’ παρθένονἁγνὴνπαραστῆσαιτῷΧριστιῷ .‘ To present a pure (7:11; Philippians 4:8; 1 Timothy 5:22) virgin to the Christ. Neither AV nor RV. put ‘ you’ after ‘ present’ in italics; it is not required in English any more than in the Greek. Here again, as in the concluding verses of 10., it is clear that St Paul is addressing the whole Church of Corinth, and not the rebellious minority. Cf. vv. 7-11. The statement that in 1-9. the loyal Corinthians are addressed, and in 10-13. the disloyal, and that this explains the extraordinary change of tone, is not in harmony with the facts. 3. φοβοῦμαιδὲμήπως . Timeo autem ne forte. He does not express either complete trust or complete distrust. Cf. 12:20; Galatians 4:11. He has just expressed his own share and interest in their relationship to the Christ. Of course it must and will be maintained; but there are perils about which he has misgivings. ὡςὁὄφιςἐξηπάτησενΕὔαν . ‘ As the serpent deceived Eve.’ The compound verb is strong in meaning, and perhaps justifies the insertion of ‘ utterly’ or ‘ completely.’ In 1 Timothy 2:14 the compound marks a distinction between Adam and Eve; she was ‘ entirely deceived,’ but he was not even ‘ deceived’ ; what he did, he did to please himself and his wife. Nowhere else in N.T. is Eve mentioned. In LXX the compound is very rare, and in Genesis 3:13 we have ὁὄφιςἠπάτησένμε . In N.T. it is confined to St Paul (1 Corinthians 3:18; Romans 7:11, Romans 7:16:18; 2 Thessalonians 2:3; 1 Timothy 2:14), who is fond of compounds withἐκ (10:9, 11:12, 33, 12:15; 7, 13, 14, 15:34; ect.). In N.T. ἀπατάω is rare (Ephesians 5:6.; 1 Timothy 2:14; James 1:26). Thackeray (Relation of St Paul to Contemporary Jewish Thought, p. 55) perhaps goes too far in saying that in these verses (3-15) we have “ very strong reasons for presuming an acquaintance on the part of St Paul with the Rabbinical legend found in the Apocalypse of Moses and elsewhere, that the serpent seduced Eve to unchastity and that Cain was their child; also that Satan, after having first taken the form of a serpent, afterwards took that of an angel.” Menzies regards it as certain that “ Paul knew a Haggadah or legend of this kind.” Heinrici in Meyer gives reasons for doubting this. Had St Paul said τῇἐπιθυμίᾳαὐτοῦ and expressed what follows with more resemblance to the legend, his acquaintance with it would have been more certain.* Assuming that he knew it, there is no evidence that he believed it. He uses legends as illustrations of truth; see on 1 Corinthians 10:4. ἐντῇπανουργίᾳαὐτοῦ . ‘ In his craftiness’ (see on 4:2). ‘ Subtilty’ (AV) is no doubt meant to connect this with ‘ the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field’ (Genesis 3:1); but there LXX has φρονιμώτατος .† The legend says that it was because the serpent was the wisest animal that Satan took its form. The identification of the serpent with Satan is not found earlier than Wisd. 2:24, and it is not certain that it is found there. ‘ By the envy of the devil death entered into the world,’ may refer to Cain’ s envy leading him to kill Abel. Clement of Rome (Cor. 3) takes it so; as does Theophilus (Ad Autol. ii. 29). Cf. 1 John 3:12. See Gregg on Wisd. 2:24. φθαρῇτὰνοήματαὑμῶνἀπὸτῆςἁπλότητος . ‘ Your thoughts’ (2:11, 3:14, 4:4, 10:5) should be corrupted (7:2; 1 Corinthians 15:33; Ephesians 4:22) from the simplicity (8:2, 9:11, 13) and the purity (6:6 only) that is toward (8:22) the Christ.’ Note that it is the Christian community as a whole, and not any individual Christian, that is the spouse of the Christ. The Apostle’ s fear that the community will be seduced is very strange after the satisfaction expressed in the first seven chapters. The ἀπό implies that the corruption issues in seduction and separation; cf. Romans 7:2, Romans 9:3. If κοὶτῆςἁγνότητος is genuine, it refers to the chaste conduct of the παρθένοςἁγνή during the interval between betrothal and marriage. Like the serpent, the false teachers were promising enlightenment as the reward of disloyalty and disobedience. See Denney, p. 323. א B D G P 17, d e g r, Copt. omit οὕτω before φθαρῇ , and neither οὕτω (D2 and 3 E K L M, f Vulg. Syrr.) nor φθάρει (K L P) is likely to be original. καὶτῆςἁγνότητος after ἁπλότητος (א B F G 17, g Goth. Aeth.) is strongly attested. But א 3 D3 K L M P, f Vulg. Syrr., Clem. Alex. omit, and D* E d e have τῆςἁγνότητοςκαὶτῆςἁπλότητος , which suggests that the words may be a gloss inserted in two different places. Note the divergence of f from F א G M omit τόν before Χριστόν . 4. εἰμὲνγὰρὁἐρχόενοςἄλλονἸησοῦνκηρύσσει . ‘ For if indeed the intruder is preaching another Jesus, whom we did not preach, and ye are receiving a different spirit which ye did not receive, or a different gospel which ye did not accept, ye bear with him quite beautifully.’ Cf. Mark 7:9. The concluding words are sarcastic, and for this the μέν at the outset prepares us. ‘ If indeed a person of the following description presents himself, then your toleration of his vagaries is quite lovely. Don’ t you think that you might show a little toleration to one who has proved to you that he is an Apostle of Christ?’ The wording is obscure, because we do not know the exact character of the teaching to which St Paul alludes; but what is suggested as rendering and meaning makes good sense. It is rash to insist on allusion to some prominent individual; like τις and τοιοῦτος (10:7, 10), the sing. is generic. Cf. Galatians 5:10; Matthew 18:17. ‘ People who act in this way’ is the meaning, and in ὁἐρχόμενος there is probably no allusion to the familiar title of Messiah (Matthew 11:3; Luke 7:19, Luke 7:20; John 6:14; etc.). St Paul goes great lengths in his sarcasms, but he is not insinuating that the Judaizers claimed Messianic authority. By ὁἐρχόμενος is meant qui suis ipsius auspiciis tamquam magister venit, quicunque ille est (Cornely). We may reasonably conjecture that Ἰησοῦς , πνεῦμα , εὐαγγέλιον , which are a somewhat strange triplet, were leading terms in the teaching of the Judaizers. Ἰησοῦς rather than Χριστός , for Judaizers would not use Χριστός as a proper name. The aorists, ἐκηρύξαμεν , ἐλάβετε , ἐδέξασθε , refer to the time when the Apostle converted the Corinthians, and they should be rendered as aorists. And ἐδέξασθε , ‘ accepted,’ which is necessarily a voluntary act, should be distinguished from ἐλάβετε , ‘ received,’ which is not necessarily such. Vulg. has accepistis and recepistis, which may serve. It is possible that not much difference is intended by the change from ἄλλον to ἕτερον , yet the change should be marked in translation; and this neither Vulg. nor AV does, either here or Galatians 1:6, Galatians 1:7, where see Lightfoot. The change here may be caused by the change from a person to what is regarded as impersonal. Thus Acts 4:12, οὐκἔστινἐνἄλλῳοὐδενὶἡσωτηρία · οὐδὲγὰρὄνομάἐστινἕτερονκ .τ .λ . There are passages, and this is one of them, in which it is not easy to decide what St Paul means by πνεῦμα . Sometimes we are not sure whether he is speaking of the human spirit or of the Divine Spirit; and when he is speaking of the Divine Spirit, it is not always clear how far he regards the Spirit as personal. A qualifying epithet or genitive often decides the first question, but not always the second; and where neither is found the first question may remain open. This is specially the case in the expression ἐνπνεύματι (Ephesians 2:22, Ephesians 2:3:5, Ephesians 2:5:18, Ephesians 2:6:18; Colossians 1:8). The distinction between personal and impersonal was less distinctly drawn than it is now, and it is safer not to make the Apostle’ s language more definite than he makes it himself. On the human side he has no definite scheme of psychology; on the Divine side no theological system like the Quicunque vult. As to the πνεῦμαἕτερον here we may say that what he offered to the Corinthians was the spirit of freedom (3:17; Galatians 5:1, Galatians 5:15) and of joy (1 Thessalonians 1:6; Galatians 5:22; Romans 14:17), and that what the Judaizers offered was a spirit of bondage (Galatians 4:24; Romans 8:15) and of fear (Romans 8:15).* The general question is well handled by Headlam, St Paul and Christianity, pp. 95-115; Abbott, Johannine Grammar, p. 518. καλῶςἀνέχεσθε . ‘ You bear with him quite beautifully’ ; an ironical statement. Cf. Mark 7:9. If ἀνείχεσθε is the right reading, then we must translate, ‘ If he preaches … you would bear with him’ ; and in that case St Paul has changed his constr. in order to make the conclusion less harsh, for ἀνείχεσθε implies that εἰἐκήουσσεν has preceded; and it is possible that ἀνείχεσθε has been corrected to ἀνέχεσθε to agree with εἰκηρύσσει . But neither ἀνείχεσθε nor ἀνέχεσθε justifies ‘ ye might well bear with him’ (AV). Winer, p. 383. Some would make the sentence interrogative, and in that case there is no sarcasm, but the καλῶς is understood literally. ‘ If people come and behave in this way, is it seemly that you should tolerate them? in putting up with them do you act καλῶς You are pledged to Christ and His cause, and people come and try to disturb your fidelity; can you listen to them without dishonour?’ Cf. καλῶς in 1 Corinthians 7:37, 1 Corinthians 7:38. This makes good sense; but there is so much irony in this part of the Epistle, that to make the sentence categorical and καλῶς sarcastic is more in harmony with the general tone of the context: pseudoapostolis nihil non permittebant (Calvin). Ἰησοῦν (א B D E F K L M P and most versions) rather than Χριστόν (G, f g Vulg.). We should probably read ἀνέχεσθε (B D* 17) rather than ἀνείχεσθε (א D3 E G K L M P) or ἠνείχεσθε (some cursives). 5. λογίζομαιγὰρμηδὲνὑστερηκέναιτῶνὑπερλίανἀποστόλων . ‘ For I count (10:7, 11) that I am not a whit behind those preeminent apostles.’ The γάρ looks back to the appeal just made; ‘ You tolerate these people; you surely can tolerate me; for I am at least as good as they are.’ The very unusual expression οἱὑπερλίανἀπόστολοι has been explained in two very different ways, and the rendering of the rate adv. ὑπερλίαν varies according to the interpretation of the whole phrase. Baur and many others have supposed that this is a hit at the leaders among the Twelve, that such as the ‘ pillar-Apostles’ of Galatians 2:9 are meant, and that we have here a powerful piece of evidence in support of the theory that in the Apostolic Age there was strong opposition between Petrine and Pauline influences. On this hypothesis such renderings as ‘ pre-eminent,’ ‘ very chiefest,’ ‘ supreme,’ are preferred.* Protestant controversialists have used this interpretation as an argument against the supremacy of St Peter, to whom St Paul is supposed to claim to be in every point an equal; and Romanists, instead of showing that the interpretation is erroneous, have accepted it and argued that, although St Paul claims equality in gifts, yet he says nothing about jurisdiction. It is improbable that St Paul would use such an expression as οἱὑπερλίανἀπόστολοι of any of the Twelve. Baur’ s hypothesis about the conflict between Petrine and Pauline tendencies in the Apostolic Age is now almost everywhere abandoned, and there is little doubt that the phrase in question is a sarcastic description of the Judaizing leaders, who claimed to be acting with the authority of the Twelve against one who had no such authority. St Paul speaks of them as ‘ superlative,’ ‘ superfine,’ ‘ superextra,’ ‘ overmuch’ apostles. ‘ These precious apostles of yours’ might represent the contemptuous tone of the words. It is possible that ὑπερλίαν was current in colloquial language, but the Apostle may have coined it for himself; cf. ὑπεράγαν (2 Macc. 8:35, 10:34, 13:25) and the classical ὑπεράνω (Arist., Polyb.) and ὑπέρευ .* He is fond of compounds of ὑπέρ , as this letter shows; ὑπεραίρομαι , ὑπερβάλλω , ὑπερβαλλόντως , ὑπερέκεινα , ὑπερπερισσεύω . The suggestion that he is here using a phrase coined by his opponents, and turning it against them, is not wholly incredible; but it does not seem probable that they would employ such an expression to designate any of the Twelve, or that, if they did, he would borrow it.† That he should frame it as a mock-heroic description of his unscrupulous critics is more probable. Galatians 2:6-9 is not parallel, and is not evidence that St Paul sometimes spoke disparagingly of the Twelve. ‘ Preeminent.’ may serve as a neutral rendering, which does not at once commit one to either interpretation. Vulg. renders ὑστερέω in a variety of ways; here minus facio, xii. II minus sum, elsewhere desum, egeo, deficio (Index IV.). The perf. here, as in Hebrews 4:1, indicates past and continuing inferiority. ‘ Being inferior to’ and ‘ coming short of’ must involve the idea of comparison, and hence the gen.; cf. Romans 3:23. For γάρ B has δέ , perhaps to correspond with μέν in v. 4. D* E, d e r add ἐνὑμῖν after ὑστερηκέναι . 6. εἰδὲκαὶἰδιώτηςτῷλόγῷ . The Apostle at once makes an admission that in one particular it may be the case that he is inferior to the Judaizing teachers. Here εἰκαί , as distinct from καὶεἰ , represents the possibility as a fact (4:3, 5:16, 12:11; 1 Corinthians 4:7), although it is not certain that St Paul always observes this distinction. ‘ But though I am untrained in oratory, yet in knowledge I am not so.’ Ἰδιώτης (1 Corinthians 14:16, 1 Corinthians 14:23, 1 Corinthians 14:24; Acts 4:13) means one who confines himself to his own affairs, τὰἴδια , and takes no part in public life; and such a person was regarded by Greeks as wanting in education and likely to be unpractical and gauche. The word also came to mean one who had no technical or professional training, with regard to some particular art or science; unskilled, a layman or amateur, as distinct from an expert or professional. And that is the meaning here; the Apostle admits that he is not a trained rhetorician, not a professional orator, and he perhaps implies that some of his opponents have this advantage. That any of them were causidici, accustomed, like Tertullus (Acts 24:1), to plead in court, is not probable; but they may have pointed out to the Corinthians, who highly valued gifts of speech, that a true Apostle would be likely to possess more power in that particular than he exhibited (10:10). See Knowling on Acts 4:13; Wetstein on 1 Corinthians 14:16; Suicer, Thesaurus, s.v.; Trench, Syn. § lxxix. ἀλλ ʼ οὐτῇγνώσει . He might be a poor speaker, but he knew what he was talking about. He did not profess to teach them things of which he himself was ignorant. As regards the mysteries of revelation, the essential truths of the Gospel, and their relation to human life here and hereafter, he was no selfmade smatterer, but an expert and a specialist, trained and inspired by the Lord Himself. This γνῶσις is prima dos apostoli (Beng.). With the constr. comp. 1 Corinthians 4:15. ἀλλ ʼ ἐνπαντὶφανερώσαντεςἐνπᾶσινεἰςὑμᾶς . ‘ But in all things we made it manifest among all men to you-ward.’ Ἐνπαντί is specially freq. in the first nine chapters of this letter (4:8, 6:4, 7:5, 16, 8:7, 9:8, 11); elsewhere it is rare (v. 11, 1 Thessalonians 5:18). It means ‘ in every particular,’ ‘ in every respect.’ It is not likely that ἐνπᾶσιν is neut., which would make it a mere repetition of ἐνπαντί , although some take it so; ‘ in all things … among all men’ is the meaning. His teaching has been public; there has been no secrecy about it, and anyone can form an opinion of its character and of the Apostle’ s relation to his hearers. He has a Divine commission to manifest the truth to every man’ s conscience (4:2). In that he is no ἰδιώτης . Here again we have a participle used absolutely, without any regular constr., as in 1:7, 7:5, 8:20, 24, 9:11, 13; and it is not clear what it is that is made manifest, but probably τὴνγνῶσιν is to be understood; what has been revealed to him has been passed on to them. D, d e f g omit δέ between εἰ and καί D E d e g add εἰμι after ἰδιώτης . φανερώσαντες (א B F G 17, g) rather than φανερωθέντες (א 3 D3 E K L P, r Syrr. Copt.) or φανερωθείς (D*, d e f). F G, f g r Vulg. Syr-Pesh. omit. ἐνπᾶσιν , as superfluous, if neut. In different directions corruptions in the text are suspected. Some would omit εἰδὲκαὶ … γνώσει as a gloss. Others would expand what follows; ἐνπαντὶπάνταφανερώσαντεςἐνπᾶσινκαὶεἰςὑμᾶς : cf. 9:8, 11; 1 Corinthians 9:22, 1 Corinthians 10:33, 1 Corinthians 12:6. The text is quite intelligible without either of these conjectural emendations. It is not quite clear what text is followed in AV; perhaps ἀλλ ʼ ἐνπαντὶφανερωθέντεςεἰςὑμᾶς , but εἰςὑμᾶς can hardly mean ‘ among you.’ The reading φανερωφείς is an evident attempt to make the participle agree with ἰδιώτης , and the addition of ἑαυτούς after φανερώσαντες (M) is a correction of a transitive participle without an object expressed. There is no difficulty, however, in supplying τὴνγνῶσιν from the previous clause. The meaning is not intricate; ‘ Though I lack eloquence, I do not lack knowledge; on the contrary, I was always able to impart knowledge publicly to you.’ 11:7-15. Glorying About Refusing Maintenance ; The Contrast with His Critics I had good reasons for refusing maintenance. This was one of many points of contrast between me and the false apostles. 7 Or did I commit a sin in degrading myself by working for my bread with my hands to raise you up from the degradation of idolatry, in that without cost to yourselves no less a thing than God’ s inestimable Gospel was preached to you by me? 8 I actually took from other Churches the cost of my maintenance— it seemed like robbery— in order to be able to minister gratuitously to you. 9 And when I was staying with you at Corinth and my resources failed, even then I ‘ sponged’ on no one. No Corinthian was squeezed to maintain me, for my necessities were fully supplied by the brethren who came from Macedonia. That was only one instance. In every emergency during my stay I kept myself from being burdensome to you, and I mean to continue to do so. 10 It is the truth of Christ that speaks in me when I say that from being able to glory in preaching without payment I will never allow myself to be barred in any region of Achaia. 11 Why have I formed this resolution? Do you think that it is because I care nothing about you? God knows whether that is true or not. 12 But I shall persist in acting just as I am acting now about this, in order to cut the ground from under those who desire to have a ground for hoping that in the apostolate which they boastfully claim they may be found working on the same terms as we do, both of us accepting maintenance. 13 I will give them no such opening, for such teachers are sham apostles, whose whole work is a fraud, while they put on the appearance of Apostles of Christ. 14 And no wonder; for Satan himself, the arch-deceiver, puts on the appearance of an angel of light. 15 It is no amazing thing, therefore, if his ministers also put on an appearance as being ministers of what they call righteousness. Such professions will not profit them. Their doom will be in accordance with their acts. 7. Ἤἁμαρτίανἐποίησα … ὑμῖν ; ‘ Or did I commit a sin in abasing myself that you might be exalted, because I preached to you God’ s Gospel for nothing?’ This use of ἤ to emphasize a question is not rare (1 Corinthians 6:2; Romans 2:4, Romans 3:29, Romans 6:3); it introduces an alternative which those who are addressed are not likely to accept. ‘ If you do not admit what I have just stated, are you prepared to assert this?’ The extreme expression, ‘ commit a sin’ (found nowhere else in Paul), is, of course, ironical; it is used without irony 1 Peter 2:22; 1 John 3:9; see Westcott on 1 John 3:4 on the difference between ἁμαρτ . ποιέω and τὴνἁμαρτ : ποιέω . He uses this strong language because his refusing to accept maintenance had been made a charge against him.* He states his reasons for refusing, 1 Corinthians 9:6-16 (see notes there); but his enemies may have said that the real reason was that he was too proud to do as other Apostles did, or that he refused, because he knew that he was not really an Apostle. We know from Didache xi. that the right of missionaries to maintenance for a short time was generally recognized c. a.d. 100, in accordance with Christ’ s directions (Matthew 10:10; Luke 10:7). But St Paul always insisted on supporting himself by the handicraft which was so common in his Cilician home of making cilicium, a fabric of goats’ hair, used for making tents (Acts 18:3) and other coverings (1 Thessalonians 2:9; 2 Thessalonians 3:8; 2 Corinthians 12:14-18). In his speech at Ephesus (Acts 20:34) he may have held up ‘ these hands’ to show how hardened they were by his habitual handiwork. We must remember that nearly all his first converts were poor (1 Corinthians 1:26), and that few were in a condition to give prolonged hospitality to a missionary. But not until he writes 2 Cor. does the Apostle intimate that anyone found fault with him for this habitual independence. At Corinth it would be easy to rouse prejudice against it. Greek sentiment would not allow a free citizen to undertake manual labour for anything less than dire necessity (Arist. Pol. iii. 5); and there was also a general feeling that teachers ought to be paid. The professional teachers of philosophy in Greece took large fees, and for this turning of instruction into a trade and selling wisdom for money, Socrates (Xen. Mem. I. vi. 1), Plato (Gorg. 520; Rev_20), and Aristotle (Eth. Nic. IX. i. 5-7) condemned them. The Sophists replied that those who taught gratuitously did so because they knew that their teaching was worth nothing. It is likely enough that the Judaizers uttered similar sneers against St Paul. Hence his asking if this practice of his was a ‘ sin’ in the eyes of the Corinthians. ἐμαυτὸνταπεινῶνἵναὑμεῖςὑψωθῆτε . They might think it an undignified thing for an Apostle to ‘ work night and day’ (1 Thessalonians 2:9) with his hands at a rough craft; but he was only following the example of the Carpenter (Mark 6:3), and humbling himself in accordance with His admonitions (Matthew 18:4, Matthew 18:23:12; Luke 14:11, Luke 18:14). Yet he humbled himself, not with a view to his own subsequent exaltation, but ‘ in order that ye might be exalted,’ by being raised from the death of heathen sins to the life of righteousness. Acting in this way can hardly be stigmatized as ἁμαρτίανποιῶν . ‘ Be exalted’ means a great deal more than ‘ be made superior to other Churches.’ δωρεὰντὸτοῦΘεοῦεὐαγγέλιον . Emphatic juxtaposition; ‘ God’ s Gospel, that most precious thing,— for nothing!’ Elsewhere we have τὸεὐαγγέλιοντοῦΘεοῦ (1 Thessalonians 2:2, 1 Thessalonians 2:8, 1 Thessalonians 2:9; Romans 15:16) and τὸεὐ . τοῦΧριστοῦ (2:12, 9:13, 14; 1 Corinthians 9:12; etc.); but here, as in 1 Peter 4:17, τοῦΘεοῦ is emphatic by position. The Judaizers preach what is not God’ s Gospel, and take maintenance for so doing; he gives God’ s Gospel gratis. See on 10:16. F G, f g r Vulg. (aut numquid peccatum fece) have ἢμὴἁμαρτ . ἐπ ., but most Latin texts have an or numquid. ἐμαυτόν (א B K M) rather than ἑαυτόν (D F G L P). Exaltaremini (Aug.) is preferable to exaltemini (Vulg.). 8. ἄλλαςἐκκλησίαςἐσύλησα . He again uses extreme expressions; ‘ Other churches I robbed’ — ‘ you may say that it looked like that.’ It is not likely that his critics said that he plundered Philippi, while refusing maintenance at Corinth; that would rather have marred their argument. His crime was that he declined to be treated as other Apostles were treated, and to have mentioned the subsidies sent by the Philippians would have lessened the crime (Philippians 4:15). The verb is common enough in class. Grk., esp. of stripping a fallen foe of his armour, but it is very rare in Bibl. Grk.; here and Ep. Jer_18 only.* In Romans 2:22 we have ἱεροσυλεῖς , and Colossians 2:8 ὁσυλαγωγῶν . The word may be used here in order to mark the contrast between the conduct of the Philippians and that of the Corinthians. He does not blame the Corinthians for allowing him to have his way in working for nothing; but in striking language he indicates what the Macedonian Churches did. The language is saved from being extravagant by being immediately explained. λαβὼνὀψώνιονπρὸςτὴνὑμῶνδιακονίαν . (This is where the robbery comes in;) ‘ by taking wages of them for my ministry unto you.’ The ὑμῶν , like τοῦΘεοῦ in v. 7, is emphatic. The Corinthians got his services, and he allowed other Christians to pay him. From ὄψον , ‘ cooked food,’ and ὠνέομαι , ‘ I buy,’ we get ὀψώνιον , ‘ rations’ or ‘ ration-money,’ and hence pay of any kind, ‘ wages.’ * See on 1 Corinthians 9:7, on Romans 6:23, and on Luke 3:14. The word occurs in 1 Macc. and often in Polybius in the sense of pay. Still earlier it is found several times, and always in the sing., in an inscription of about b.c. 265 which records an agreement between King Eumenes 1. and his mercenaries. Deissmann, Bib. St. p. 266. The word fits well with the Apostle’ s description of his missionary labours as warfare, στρατευόμεθα (10:3), and no one στρατεύεται without being furnished with the necessary supplies (1 Corinthians 9:7). He rigidly abstained from aking supplies from the Corinthians. It is possible that he brought some supplies with him from Macedonia; but these, even when supplemented by the work of his own hands, did not suffice; and then it was Macedonia that came to the rescue. There is doubt here as to the division of the verses. Vulg., AV, RV., and other versions assign what follows to v. 9; but Alford, WH., and many other editors retain καὶπαρὼν … οὐθενός as part of v. 8. There is similar doubt at 1:6, 7, 2:10, 11, 2:12, 13, 5:14, 15. 9. καὶπαρὼνπρὸςὑμῦςκαὶὑστερηθείς . ‘ And when I was staying with you and found myself in want’ ; tense and mood imply that he ran short and felt it. For the mood, comp. Philippians 4:12; Luke 15:14. οὐκατενάρκησαοὐθενός . ‘ I put pressure on no man,’ ‘ did not squeeze him till he was numb.’ Verbs compounded with κατά often take a gen., as καταγελάω , καταγινώσκω , καταδυναστεύω , κατακυριεύω , καταλαλέω , κ .τ .λ . This compound is found nowhere in Greek literature, excepting here, 12:13, 14, and once in Hippocrates (Art. 816 C), who uses the passive of ‘ being numbed,’ a meaning which ναρκάω has in the active. Ναρκάω is used of the cramping or numbing of the sinew of Jacob’ s thigh (Gen. 32:25-33), and in LXX of two other passages of doubtful reading and meaning; πλῆθοςὀστῶναὐτοῦἐνάρκησεν (Job 33:19), and ὁβραχίωναὐτοῦναρκήσει (Daniel 11:6). The compound verb used here may be medical. It must have been in fairly common use, for neither Chrysostom nor Theodoret think it necessary to give any explanation. Hesychius gives ἐβάρυνα and κατεβάρησα as equivalents, which agrees with Vulg. onorosus fui. In his letter to the Gallic Lady Algesia (Ep. 121) Jerome uses gravavi, and he adds, quibus et aliis multis verbis usque hodie utuntur Cilices. Nec hoc miremur in Apostolo, si utatur ejus linguae consuetudine, in qua natus est et nutritus. It may have been current in the medical school at Tarsus. Galen explains νάρκη as much the same as ἀναισθησία . The meaning here seems to be ‘ I crippled no man by sponging on him,’ i.e. by draining him dry. * τὸγὰρὑστέρημάμου . ‘ For my want the brethren, when they came from Macedonia, relieved with a further supply.’ The compound, προσανεπλήρωσαν , implies something in addition, and this probably refers to the previous gifts of the generous Macedonians; but it might mean in addition to what St Paul earned by his handicraft. AV obliterates the manifest connexion between ὑστερηθείς and ὑστέρημα by changing from ‘ wanted’ to ‘ was lacking,’ as also does Vulg. with agerem and deerat. It is probable that these brethren who came from Macedonia were Silas and Timothy (Acts 18:5), which would give a coincidence between this passage and 1:19. Apparently they had both joined St Paul at Athens and had thence been sent back into Macedonia, and had finally joined the Apostle at Corinth. Milligan. Thessalonians, p. 30. At first sight St Paul seems to be very inconsistent in ostentatiously refusing maintenance from the Corinthians, and yet making no secret of receiving maintenance from the Macedonians. We are nowhere told that he accepted anything for himself from the Philippians, while he was at Philippi, or from the Thessalonians, while he was at Thessalonica. His main object was to avoid all possibility of suspicion that in his preaching he was influenced by the thought that he must say what would please the people who housed and fed him. He must be free to rebuke and exhort, without fear or desire of losing or gaining favour, and without being open to the charge of seeking popularity for the sake of gain. His independence as a preacher must be complete and unassailable. It no way interfered with this that, while he was preaching in Corinth, he accepted supplies from Philippi. ἐνπαντὶἀβαρῆἐμαυτὸνὑμῖνἐτήρησα . ‘ In everything (see on 5:6) I kept myself from being burdensome.’ The aor. refers to the year and a half that he stayed in Corinth, and it should be retained in translation. Cf. πρὸςτὸμὴἐπιβαρῆσαὶτιναὑμῶν (1 Thessalonians 2:9; 2 Thessalonians 3:8); also οὐκἔχειτιςκαυχήσασθαιοὔταλάθραοὔτεφανερῶς , ὅτιἐβάρησάτιναἐνμικρῷἤἐνμεγάλῳ (Ign. Philad. 6.), and 2 Samuel 12:3. Ἀβυρής seems to occur first in Arist. De Coelo, 1. viii.16, τὸμὲνγὰρἀβαρὲς , τὸδ ʼ ἔχονβὰρος . It occurs nowhere else in Bibl. Grk. καὶτηρήσω . He has no misgivings as to the wisdom of this practice, and has no intention of changing it. We may assume that the Judaizing teachers claimed, or at any rate accepted, maintenance, and they wanted to taunt St Paul into following this ‘ Apostolic’ custom. They saw that in this matter they were at a disadvantage as compared with him. οὐθενός (א B M P 17). rather than οὐδενός (D E G K L). ἐμαυτὸνὑμῖν (א * B M P, d e f Vulg.) rather than ὑμῖνἐμαυτόν (א 3 D E F G L); note the divergence between D E F and d e f. 10. ἔστινἀλήθειαΧριστοῦἐνἐμοί . He elsewhere claims that the νοῦςΧριστοῦ (1 Corinthians 2:16) and the πνεῦμαΧριστοῦ (Romans 8:9) abides in him. This is a guarantee against conscious deceitfulness and empty boasting. Cf. 2:17, 12:19, 13:3; Romans 9:1. ‘ You have not my word only, but the truthfulness of Christ, to assure you that.’ * With this use of ὅτι comp. ζῇἡΨυχήσουὅτιοὐδαπανήσειἡδούλησουκ .τ .λ . (Judith 12:4). See on 1:18. ἡκαύχησιςαὕτηοὐφραγήσεταιεἰςἐμέ . ‘ This glorying shall not be stopped with regard to me,’ or ‘ so far as I am concerned.’ Chrysostom derives the metaphor from the damming of rivers; ὥσπερεἴτιςπηγὴνφράσσοι (Proverbs 25:26), and τὸπλῆθοςαὐτῶνἐνέφραξενχειμάρρους (Judith 16:3). More probably it comes from barricading a road; φράσσωτὴνὁδὸναὐτῆςἐνσκόλοψιν (Hosea 2:6), and ἀνῳκοδόμησενὁδούςμου , ἐνέφραξεντρίβουςμου (Lamentations 3:9). The stopping of the mouth (Romans 3:19; Hebrews 11:33) might come from either, but more easily from blocking a road; and there is no personification of καὐχησις in either case. ἐντοιςκλίμασιτῆςἈχαίας . Κλίμα is rare in N.T. (Galatians 1:21; Romans 15:23), and perhaps is not found in LXX at all; Judges 20:2 is doubtful. His opponents had probably not confined their operations to the city of Corinth. See on 1:1. The σφραγίσεται of T.R. is possibly a conjecture, ‘ seal’ in the rare sense of ‘ limit.’ A few cursives have σφραγήσεται . 11. διὰτί ; ‘ Why am I so determined never to accept sustenance from you Corinthians? Is it because I care too little about you to accept anything from you or to place myself under any obligation to you?’ Perhaps his enemies had suggested this. ὁΘεὸςοἶδεν . God knows whether he cares for them or not, and He knows what the real reason for his not accepting sustenance is. To God he has always been made manifest (5:11). Cf. Harum sententiarum quae vera sit, deus aliqui viderit (Cic. Tusc. Disp. I. xi. 23). 12. Ὃδὲποιῶκαὶποιήσω , ἵναἐκκόψωτὴνἀφορμὴντῶνθελόντωνἀφορμήν . ‘ But what I do, that will I also continue to do, that I may cut off the occasion of those who wish for an occasion.’ He is not going to give an opening to those who are on the look out for an opening against him; he will checkmate them by persisting in refusing remuneration from the Corinthians. His opponents pretended that his refusal showed that he was not an Apostle, and that their taking pay was evidence of their superiority. They saw that the Corinthians might have a simpler explanation, viz. that they were grasping, and that the Apostle was not; and they hoped to get him to do as they did. He means to retain his advantage. Elsewhere in N.T. ἐκκόπτω is used of actual severing, as of branches (Romans 11:22, Romans 11:24; Matthew 3:10, Matthew 7:19) or limbs (Matthew 5:30, Matthew 18:8), and in LXX the figurative sense is rare; ἐξέκοψεὥσπερδένδροντὴνἐλπίδαμου (Job 19:10), and thrice in 4 Macc. 3:2-4, where we have ἐπιθυμίαν and θυμόν and κακοήθειαν after ἐκκόψαι . ἵναἐνᾧκαυχῶνταιεὑρεθῶσινκαθὼςκαὶἡμεῖς . This is one of many passages in 2 Cor. which is rendered obscure by our ignorance of the exact state of affairs in Corinth, and there has been much discussion both as to the constr. of the sentence and as to its probable meaning. To set forth all the proposals would not be repaying; the following interpretation is offered as tenable and possibly correct. The second ἵνα is not parallel with the first; it does not depend upon ποιήσω . It is improbable that St Paul’ s aim was to place his opponents on a level with himself, either in general, or in the matter of refusing maintenance. What advantage would it be to him to force them to equality with himself in any particular? And what likelihood was there that they would abandon the maintenance which they had accepted, and apparently claimed as an Apostolic privilege, in order to be even with St Paul? It is clear from v. 20, and might be conjectured from 1 Corinthians 9:12, that the Judaizing teachers did accept maintenance, and they could not have criticized St Paul for refusing it, unless they accepted it themselves. The second ἵνα depends upon τῶνθελόντωνἀφορμήν , thus; ‘ who wish for an occasion of being found, in the matter wherein they glory, on a level with us.’ The matter in which they gloried was the dignity of being Apostolic missionaries, and it was as the possessors of this dignity that they allowed or constrained the Corinthians to support them. They saw plainly that in this particular they were at a disadvantage as compared with St Paul. In spite of all their protestations that it was a mark of Apostolic dignity to be supported by the congregation, and that Paul refused to be supported because he knew that he was not an Apostle, yet the plain fact remained, that they were a burden to the Corinthians and that he was not. It sufficed for their purpose that he had refused maintenance; that showed that he did not believe in his own Apostleship. His accepting maintenance afterwards would not alter that evidence; but it would put an end to the damaging comparison which the Corinthians made between the generosity of St Paul in working for nothing and the greed of the Judaizers in taking all that they could get. Their aim was to get him, by some means or other, to accept maintenance; then they would be found to be no more burdensome to the community that he was. Εὑρεθῶσιν is not a mere substitute for ὦσιν : it expresses the quality, not as it exists in itself, but as it is recognized. Cf. 5:3; 1 Corinthians 4:2; Philippians 3:9. Lightfoot (on Galatians 2:17) says that it “ involves more or less prominently the idea of a surprise,” and that its frequent use is due to the influence of Aramaic. Winer doubts the latter point (p. 769). Other ways of taking the clause are found in Alford, Beet, Meyer, and Stanley. For ἵνα depending on a previous clause introduced by ἵνα , cf. John 1:7. 13. οἱγὰρτοιοῦτοιψευδαπόστολοι , ἐργάταιδόλιοι . ‘ I must beware of allowing them any advantage, for persons of this kind are spurious apostles, deceitful workers.’ Nunc tandem scapham scapham dicit (Beng.). Both the Sixtine and the Clementine Vulg. have nam ejusmodi pseudoapostoli sunt operarii subdoli, making ψευδαπόστολοι part of the subject, which is certainly wrong, and the best MSS. show that the sunt is an interpolation. Luther goes further into error by including ἐργάταιδόλιοι in the subject; ‘ for such false apostles and deceitful workers fashion themselves into Apostles of Christ.’ Cf. of οἱγὰρτοιοῦτοιτῷΚυρίῳἡμῶνΧριστῷοὐδουλεύουσιν , ἀλλὰτῇἑαυτῶνκοιλίᾳ (Romans 16:18), which means that, like the Judaizers at Corinth, they worked for their own advantage. Cf. τοὺςλέγονταςἑαυτοὺςἀποστόλους , καὶοὐκεἰσίν (Revelation 2:2). In v. 26 we have ψευδάδελφοι , and Mark 13:22 ψευδόχριστοικαὶψευδοπροφῆται . Such compounds are freq. in late Greek, but not in classical ψενδόμαντις occurs in Hdt., Aesch., Soph., Eur., and ψευδοπάρθενος in Hdt. Δόλιος , freq. in LXX, esp. in Psalms and Proverbs, but found nowhere else in N.T., is in class. Grk. mosily poetical. The epithet explains ψευδαπόστολοι . Workers they certainly were, and they did an immense amount of mischief, but their devotion to the cause of Christ was a sham; what they really worked for was their own profit. See on 2:17. Apotolus enim ejus agit negotium a quo missus est, isti suis commodis serviunt (Erasmus). Contrast ἐργάτηνἁνεπαίσχυντον . ὀρθοτομοῦντατὸνλόγοντῆςἀληθείας (2 Timothy 2:15); also ἀπόστολοιἐκκλησιῶν , δόξαΧριστοῦ (8:23), where we have a similar asyndeton. μετασχηματιζόμενοιεἰςἀποστόλουςΧριστοῦ . ‘ Fashioning themselves into Apostles of Christ.’ They change their appearance, they masquerade as such. In 70 the verb occurs once (4 Macc. 9:22), in N.T. three times, all in Paul, and in each place with a different meaning; here of sham apostles fashioning themselves into genuine Apostles, as the devil fashions himself into an Angel of light; in Philippians 3:21 of the glorious change of our body of humiliation; and in 1 Corinthians 4:6 in quite another sense (see note there). ‘ Transform’ implies a greater change than is meant here, and ‘ transfigure’ should be kept for μεταμορφόομαι (see on 3:18), the verb used in connexion with the Transfiguration. See on Romans 12:2 and Philippians 2:7; Trench, Syn. § lxx.; Lightfoot, Philippians, pp. 127 f. Συνσχηματίζομας (Romans 12:2; 1 Peter 1:14) means ‘ acquire an outward form in accordance with.’ 14. καὶοὐθαῦμα . Both this and the v.l. θαυμαστόν are classical in this conversational use; τὸμέντοιμὴπείθεσθαιτοῖςλεγομένοιςτοὺςπολλοὺςθαῦμαοὐδέν (Plato, Rep. 49 E D) ; ἐρᾷς · τὶτοῦτοθαῦμὰσὺνπολλοῖςβροτῶν (Eur. Hipp. 439); also Aristoph. Plut. 99). Non mirum (Vulg.) is similarly used in Latin; but miraculo est, not miraculum. Epictetus several times has καὶτίθαυμαστόν ; αὐτὸςγὰρὁΣατανᾶς . “ Like master, like man.” If the prince of darkness can masquerade as an Angel of light, what wonder that his ministers masquerade as ministers of Christ? There is no necessity to suppose that St Paul is here alluding to some Rabbinical legend, similar to the one about Eve and the serpent, in which Satan is said to have taken the fashion of an Angel. According to some interpretations, the Angel who wrestled with Jacob was Satan. In the Prologue to the Book of Job, Satan takes no such appearance. St Paul may have known the story of our Lord’ s temptation in a form which might suggest this comparison. But his own experience must have taught him how specious and plausible temptations to what is known to be wrong can be made to look, so that sin may at last look meritorious. The pres. μετασχηματίζεται points to what Satan habitually does rather than to any particular occasion. This the Corinthians, very few of whom were Jews, could understand. That those of them who were Jews knew of a legend in which Satan assumed the appearance of an Angel, is unlikely; and St Paul certainly expects to be understood in what he says here. As regards the subtlety of temptations the experience of the Corinthians would be much the same as his own.* To say that “ the reference must be to some apocalyptic tale” is a great deal too strong; and Schmiedel does not lay much stress on the suggestion that there may be an allusion to heathen theophanies. Would anyone regard them as instances of Satan fashioning himself as an Angel of light? For Σατανᾶς see on 2:11; for ἄγγ . φωτός , cf. ἄγγ . ἐξοὐρανοῦ (Galatians 1:8). οὐθαῦμα (א B D* F G P R 17) rather than οὐθαυμαστόν (D 2 and 3 E K L M). Both in LXX and N.T. θαῦμα is very rare, whereas θαυμαστός is very freq. in LXX and not rare in N.T. Hence the change. D d e m have ὡςἄγγελος . 15. οὐμέγαοὖνεἰ . The expression is found nowhere else in N.T. excepting 1 Corinthians 9:11.Cf. μέγαμοίἐστινεἰἔτιὁυἱόςμουἸωσὴφζῇ (Genesis 45:28). ‘ It is no great thing therefore if his ministers (cf. Matthew 25:41; Revelation 12:7) also fashion themselves as ministers of righteousness.’ As in v. 13 before ‘ Apostles,’ so here before ‘ ministers,’ AV inserts the article. ‘ Righteousness’ is probably to be understood in its wider sense, as that on which Satan and his minions are ever making war. It was one of the charges brought against St Paul that his doctrine of Christian freedom was an encouragement to heathen licentiousness: the Judaizers professed to be upholders of ‘ righteousness’ against such pestilent teaching. But, in spite of their professions, their real motive was the promotion of their own personal interests and the interests of their own party in the Church; and they were unscrupulous in the means which they employed. We should perhaps place a colon after δικαιοσύνης (RV) and make what follows an independent sentence. Cf. ὧντὸκρίμαἔνδικόνἐστιν (Romans 3:8): ἀποδώσειαὐτῷὁκύριοςκατὰτὰἔργααὐτοῦ (2 Timothy 4:14). But ὧντὸτέλοςἀπώλεια (Philippians 3:19) tells the other way, and here WH. place only a comma. See on v. 10. At the Judgment it is not what they have looked like or what they have professed to be that will count, but what they have done. Cf. ὃςἀποδίδωσινἐκάστῳκατὰτὰἔργααὐτοῦ (Proverbs 24:12). Whether we regard it as an independent sentence or not, the terse statement comes at the end of the invective with considerable effect, as in Romans 3:8 and 2 Timothy 4:14. But this statement tells us nothing as to St Paul’ s belief respecting the final condition of the wicked. St Paul has been somewhat severely criticized for the bitter controversial style of this denunciation of his opponents, but we do not know enough about the intensity of the provocation to pronounce judgment. It is hardly more severe than συναγωγὴτοῦΣατανᾶ (Revelation 2:9, Revelation 3:9) and ὐμεῖςἐκτοῦπατρὸςτοῦδιαβόλουἐστέ (John 8:44). Cf. Matthew 23:15, Matthew 23:33. We must remember not only the venomous personal attacks that had been made upon his character and antecedents, but also the widespread mischief that had been done among the converts at Corinth. Even those who do not believe in the intermediate visit can see that the mischief was great, in the unsettlement of belief and in the weakening of the Apostle’ s authority. But those who are convinced that such a visit was paid, and that during it St Paul was grossly insulted to such an extent that he left Corinth a defeated man, will be slow to condemn him for the fierce language which he uses in vv. 3-15, and especially in the concluding sentences. Bousset, who says that Paul’ s mode of fighting is not less passionate than that of his assailants, and that he is no saint, any more than Luther, admits that he had reason for his wrath, and that his fierce onset in the heat of the great conflict is only too intelligible. If the intruders had done nothing worse than meanly claim the credit for the crop, which he and Apollos, with the blessing of heaven, had patiently and laboriously raised, St Paul might have let a passing rebuke or sarcasm suffice for such conduct. But these new-comers had done their utmost to ruin the crop altogether, and they had employed methods which would have been hateful in any cause. We need to know more about their motives, their work, and its effects, before deciding that the severe language of the Apostle is unjustifiable. But it is the Corinthians that he cares about. From this outberst of indignation his thoughts return to them. He must convince them, however unpleasing the work may be, that he is not inferior to these seductive teachers. That means that he must go on glorying about himself, and, like the first six verses of the chapter, the next seven are a declaration of the folly of glorying and an explanation of the reason for it. They introduce a new subject for glorying. 11:16-33. Glorying About His Services and Sufferings It seems foolish for an Apostle to be glorying, but I have no choice about it; and so I glory about my nationality, my heavy work, and my hardships. 16 I repeat what I said before; let no one think me a fool for uttering what sounds like folly: or, if you must think me one, at any rate listen to me patiently as such, that I may have my little boast as well as other people. 17 In talking to you in this way I do not profess to be the Lord’ s mouthpiece; in this proud confidence of glorying I speak as a fool in his folly. 18 Seeing that many glory from their low worldly point of view, I mean to do the like. 19 For you can afford to bear with fools and do so with pleasure: you are so wise yourselves. 20 Why, in your sublime tolerance you bear with any of these impostors, no matter what he does; if he makes slaves of you, if he devours your substance, if he entraps you, if he gives himself airs, if he strikes you in the face. 21 It may be a disgraceful confession to make, but I really have not been equal to acting in that way. Yet, wherever real courage is exhibited (remember, it is in folly that I say this), there I have courage too. 22 Let us look at nationality. Are the Hebrews, Israelites, descendants of Abraham? There we are equal, for so am I. 23 Let us look at service. Are they ministers of Christ? (I am talking like a madman.) Let us grant that they are His ministers. I am more than their equal there, for I have suffered far more in His service;— with labours far exceeding theirs, with stripes far exceeding theirs, with imprisonments beyond comparison, with risk of life again and again;— 24 from the Jews I five times received the severest scourging that is allowed, 25 three times I was beaten with rods by the Romans, once I was stoned, thrice I suffered shipwreck, a night and a day I have drifted on the open sea. 26 I have served Him in journeyings again and again;— in perils of rivers, in perils of robbers, in perils from my own people, in perils from the Gentiles, in perils in the city, in perils in the wilderness, in perils on the sea, in perils among false brethren. 27 I have served Him in labour and travail;— with watchings often, with hunger and thirst, with fastings often, with cold and nakedness; 28 besides other things which I pass over, there is that which presses on me daily, my anxiety for all the Churches. 29 What brother is weak in faith or life, and I do not feel his weakness? What brother is enticed into sin, and I am not in a furnace of distress? 30 If there must be glorying, my principle is to glory of the things which concern my weakness, for they show my likeness to the Lord Jesus Christ. 31 The God and Father of the Lord Jesus Christ, He who is blessed for ever, knows that I am not lying. 32 At Damascus the ethnarch of King Aretas posted guards at the gates of the city to arrest me; 33 but through an opening I was let down in a basket through the city wall, and thus clean escaped his hands. 16. Πάλινλέγω , μήτίςμεδόξῃἄφροναεἶναι . The πάλινλέγω looks back to v. 1, where he makes a similar request; yet it is only similar to this extent, that in both passages he begs them not to refuse to listen to him because he is guilty of the folly of glorying about himself. But not only is the wording different, the meaning of the words is not the same. There he says, ‘ Bear with me in my folly,’ here, ‘ Don’ t think me a fool’ ; there he almost retracts his request, ‘ I know that you do bear with me,’ here, he hardly expects it to be granted, ‘ At any rate give me as much attention as you would give to a fool.’ In both passages he is anxious that the Corinthians should be aware that he recognizes the foolishness of self-praise, and that it is not his fault that he is guilty of it. He is not indulging his own vanity; he is sinking his self-respect in order to rescue them from the machinations of seducing teachers. For the present all that he asks is to be listened to with patience. It is like The mistocles’ s ‘ Strike, but hear me.’ The Apostle says, ‘ Think me a fool, but hear me.’ The full constr. would be δέξασθέμε , καὶἐὰνὡςἄφροναδέξησθέμε . Blass, § 80. 2. In 1 Cor., St Paul uses μωρός and μωρία repeatedly, only once ἄφρων (15:36), and nowhere ἀφροσύνη : in 2 Cor. he uses ἄφρων and ἀφροσύνη repeatedly, and nowhere either μωρός or μωρία . In speaking of his own conduct he naturally employs the stronger term; he is anxious to show his detestation of what he is compelled to do— he has to act as if he were demented. He elsewhere uses ἀνόητος (Galatians 3:1, Galatians 3:3; Romans 1:14; 1 Timothy 6:9; Titus 3:3), and once ἄσοφος (Ephesians 5:15). For ἄφρων , Vulg. generally has in the Epistles insipiens, but sometimes inprudens; in the Gospels stultus. For μωρός Vulg. has in the Epistles stultus; in the Gospels fatuus and stultus. For ἀνόητος , insipiens, insensatus, stultus, inutilis (four different words in five places !); for ἄσοφος , insipiens. εἰδὲμήγε . ‘ But if you do otherwise,’ i.e. ‘ if you must think me a fool.’ Luke is especially fond of εἰδὲμήγε which Paul has nowhere else, and neither of them has the less strong εἰδὲμή . Burton, § 275; Blass, § 77. 4. See on Luke 5:36. ‘ In any case, however, even though it be as a fool, accept me, give me a hearing.’ ἵνακἀγὼμικρόντικαυχήσωμαι . ‘ That I also may glory a little.’ He is anxious that they should remember that he did not start this stupid rivalry in glorying. His opponents began it, and the Corinthians listened to them; now it is his turn, and he must go through with it. The μικρόντι may mean that his opponents called their glorying μικρόντι * Everywhere in the Epistles κἀγώ , and not καὶἐγώ , is right, Gregory, Prolegomena, p. 96. D* has εἰδὲμή for εἰδὲμήγε . κἀγὼμικρόντι (all uncials) rather than μίκρόντικἀγώ (a few cursives and Syr-Hark.). καυχήσωμαι (א B F G M) rather than καυχήσομαι (D E K L P R). This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/iccnt/ 12:1-10. Glorying About Revelations to His Soul and a Thorn for His Flesh I have received two sublime revelations, and also, to preserve me from vanity respecting this great favour, a humiliating infirmity. 1 This glorying is forced upon me. I have indeed nothing to gain by it, for myself or for the good of the Church; but I will pass on to a worthier subject, viz. visions and revelations granted to me by the Lord Jesus Christ. They have been called delusions or inventions, but they are sober fact. 2 I can tell you of a man who was in ecstasy with Christ fourteen years ago— it was Christ’ s doing and no credit to the man: whether he was still in the body, I cannot tell, or whether he was in rapture away from the body. I cannot tell; that is known to God alone: he was caught up, this man of whom I speak, even to the third heaven. 3 I can tell you also that this man of whom I speak, either in the body or apart from the body (God knows which), 4 was caught up into the Paradise where God dwells, and there listened to utterances unutterable, such as no human being is allowed to repeat. 5 Of such a man as this, not knowing his own condition and yet so honoured, I am prepared to glory; but of myself personally, such as you know me, I am not prepared to glory, except as regards what I have called my weaknesses. 6 I am not bound to abstain in this way, for if I choose to glory about other things, I shall not be a fool in so doing, for I shall only be saying what is true; but I do abstain, because I do not want anyone to form a higher estimate of me than that which he can gather from what he sees me do or hears me say. 7 And then there is the exceeding greatness of the revelations. Therefore, in order that I should not be exalted overmuch about these, there was given to me a painful malady, like a stake driven into my flesh, a messenger of Satan to buffet me, that I should not be exalted overmuch. 8 About this affliction I three times made supplication to the Lord, praying Him to remove it from me. 9 And this was His reply; “ It is sufficient for thee that thou hast received grace to become My Apostle and to convert the nations; for it is when man’ s strength fails that My power is brought to perfection.” Most gladly, therefore, I shall prefer glorying in all my weaknesses to asking the Lord to free me from them, so that the power of Christ may spread a sheltering cover over me. 10 That is why I am so well pleased with weaknesses, such as wanton injuries, dire hardships, persecutions, and desperate straits, when they are endured for Christ’ s sake. For it is just when, in myself I am utterly weak that in Him I am truly strong. 1. καυχᾶσθαιδεῖοὐσυμφέρονμέν , ἐλεύσομαιδὲκ .τ .λ . Owing probably to accidental mistakes in copying and conjectural emendations by puzzled scribes, the text of this verse is so confused that it is impossible to disentangle the original text with certainty; but on the whole this wording is likely to be right, or nearly so; ‘ I must needs glory: it is not indeed expedient, but I will come to visions, etc.’ It is however possible that καυχᾶσθαιδὲοὐσυμφέρονμέν , ἐλεύσομαιδὲκ .τ .λ . may be what the Apostle dictated; ‘ Now to glory is not indeed expedient, but I will come to visions, etc.’ The difference between these two is not very important. * What is clear is that, before passing from the great peril at Damascus to experiences of a very different kind, he cannot refrain from remarking once more that all this foolish glorying is forced upon him; he knows that it is not profitable, that it may lower his self-respect and the respect which others have for him, but he has no choice about it; ὑμεῖςμεἠναλκάσατε (v. 11). Συμφέρον is used in a wide sense; ‘ likely to be edifying to other Christians or to myself’ (8:10; 1 Corinthians 6:12, 1 Corinthians 6:7:35, 1 Corinthians 6:10:23, 33, 1 Corinthians 6:12:7). ὁπτασίαςκαὶἀποκαλύΨειςκυρίου . Seeing that κυρίου belongs to both substantives, the genitive is probably subjective; ‘ visions and revelations which proceed from the Lord,’ rather than those in which the Lord is seen and revealed; cf. δι ʼ ἀποκαλύψεωςἸησοῦΧριστοῦ (Galatians 1:12). But where either objective or subjective makes good sense, it is sometimes difficult to see on which side the balance of probability lies; e.g. in the phrase τὸεὐαγγέλιοντοῦΘεοῦ or ἸησοῦΧριστοῦ . ‘ Vsions and revelations’ is a cross division, for some, but not all, visions reveal something, and some, but not all, revelations are made without anything being visible. † In this case, however, all the ‘ visions’ would reveal something, for they proceed from the Lord , who sends them for the very purpose of making something known. It is perhaps true to say that, except in the Apocrypha (Ecclus. 43:2, 16; addition to Esther 4:3), ὀπτασία always means a vision that reveals something (Luke 1:22, Luke 1:24:23; Acts 26:19; Malachi 3:2; Daniel 9:23, Daniel 9:10:1, Daniel 9:10:7, Daniel 9:8, Daniel 9:16 [Theod.], where LXX has ὅρασις or ὅραμα ). The word was probably colloquial before it became Biblical. The incidents to which this verse forms an introduction, like that of the flight from Damascus, had probably been used as a means of attacking St Paul. People may easily have said that these ecstatic experiences, which he claimed to have had, proved that he was a deluded enthusiast, if not actually crazy. If they were not deliberate inventions, they were the outcome of vivid and unrestrained imagination. He had thought about them till he believed that they had taken place. It is possible that this view survives here and there in the Clementine Homilies and Recognitions, the Judaizing writers of which now and again, under cover of Simon Magus, make an attack on St Paul. In particular they deride the ‘ visions’ of Simon Magus.“ Simon said, Visions and dreams, being God-sent, do not speak falsely in regard to those things which they have to tell. And Peter said, You were right in saying that being God-sent they do not speak falsely. But it is uncertain whether he who sees has seen a God-sent dream” (Clem. Hom. xvii. 15; cf. Hom. xi. 5, ii. 17, 18; Recog. ii. 55, iii. 49, iv. 35). See Hort, Clem. Recog. pp. 120 ff.; Hastings, DB. iv. p. 524; JTS., Oct. 1901, p. 53. It is not likely that εἰ before καυχᾶσθαι (א 3 39, f Vulg.) is original. καυχᾶσθαιδεῖ (B D 3 F G L P,; d f g Vulg. Syrr. Goth.) is probably to be preferred to καυχᾶσθαιδέ (א D Copt.) or καυχ . δή (K M, Aeth.). But in MSS. the confusion between ει and ε is very freq., and δέ may be original. The various readings in 1 Corinthians 6:20 illustrate the confusion between δεῖ and δή . οὐσυμφέρον (א B G 17, 67 ) rather than οὐσυμφέρει (D K L P); Gregory (preleg. p.75) shows that συμφέρον has better authority than συνφέρον . μέν (א B G P 17,67 f Vulg. Copt.) rather than μοι (D3 K L m,Syr-Hark., Chrys.); but D Aeth. Goth have neither μέν nor μοι . B 213 have ἐλευσὁμαιδὲκαί . The variations in the text of this verse do not justify its exclusion as an interpolation. See above on 11:32, 33. 2-5. In solemn and subdued but rhythmical language, which reads as if it were the outcome of much meditation, and which suggests a good deal more than it states, St Paul affirms the reality of his mysterious experiences. * Reluctantly, and only for a moment, he lifts the veil which usually covers the details of the most sacred moments of his life and allows the Corinthians to see enough to convince them that the revelations of which he has claimed to be the recipient were intensely and supremely real. He could doubt his own identity with the recipient rather than doubt the reality of the revelations, and he speaks of them as if they had been experienced by some one who during those mysterious times was other than himself. But, whatever these experiences were, they could not be classed as ‘ weaknesses,’ and we must admit that for the moment he has ceased to think of τὰτῆςἀσθενείας , for he cannot have regarded them as such, whatever his critics may have done. † It has been suggested that these revelations are mentioned simply in order to explain the ‘ weakness’ caused by the ‘ stake for the flesh’ (v. 7), so that in reality there is no break in the catalogue of τὰτῆςἀσθενείαςμον . The context is against this view. The revelations are mentioned independently of their consequences; and it would be more true to say that the σκόλοψ is an appendix to the ἀποκαλύψεις than that the ἀποκαλύψεις are a preface to the σκόλοψ . It is “ because he is going to pass to another kind of glorying, which to the many seems to set him off in brighter colours” (Chrys.), that he writes what we have here. Bousset shows that among the Jews the belief in the fact of translation to heaven was not confined to the cases of primitive saints and heroes, such as Enoch and Elijah. Historical persons of a much later date were believed to have had this experience. In the Babylonian Talmud, Chagiga, 14b (Goldschmidt, 3:834 ff.), we are told that four Rabbis had had this experience. Ben Azai beheld the glory and died. Ben Soma beheld and was stricken (went mad). Acher, who ranks as a heretic among famous teachers, cut up the young plants (ruined the garden of truth with his disastrous doctrine). Of R. Akiba alone is it said that in peace he ascended and in peace he came back. The Angels would have sent even him away, but the Holy One, who is blessed for ever, said to them, “ Suffer this old man, for he is worthy, to enjoy My honour and glory.” But we are going beyond what this evidence warrants, if we infer from it that a series of younger Rabbinical contemporaries of St Paul had had ecstatic experiences similar to his, and that he had brought this strange form of piety over from his Rabbinical past into Christianity. Granting that what is told us of these four Rabbis is historically true,-and that may be granting a great deal,— how can we tell that their experiences were similar to those of St Paul, or that he knew anything of such things before he met the Lord on the way to Damascus? 2. οἶδαἄνθρωπονἐνΧριστῷπρὸἐτῶνδεκατεσσάρων … ἁρπαγέντα . ‘ I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago was caught up.’ Not, ‘ I knew (AV) such a person fourteen years ago.’ St Paul knows him intimately at the time of writing, but not until v. 7 does he show that he is speaking of himself. The meaning of ἐνΧριστῷ is not clear. It is not to be taken with δἶδα , as if he were speaking in Christ’ s name; it belongs to ἄνθρωπόἁρπαλέντα , and it is probably inserted in order to disclaim all credit for the glorious experience, in which he was not active but passive, being under Divine influence; it was ‘ in the power of Christ’ that he was caught up. * The mention of the fourteen years is natural enough. In telling of a remarkable incident of one’ s life it is natural to begin with the date, if one remembers it. The Prophets do so repeatedly with regard to thier spiritual experiences, and Amos (4:7) does so in a manner parallel to this, πρὸτριῶνμηνῶντοῦτρυγητοῦ . Cf. Hosea 1:1; Zechariah 1:1, Zechariah 1:7:1; Zechariah 6:1; Jeremiah 1:2, 26:1, 42:7; Ezekiel 1:1, Ezekiel 3:16. The date in this case shows that it was after St Paul had been a Christian for about seven years that this event took place. But there is nothing to show that during these fourteen years he had never mentioned to any person the fact of these revelations until the Corinthians compelled him to break silence (Chrys., Thdrt., and some moderns). The context rather implies that the bare fact was known; i.e. it was known that he said that he had received communications direct from heaven. There is nothing in Acts that can be identified with these experiences. The trance in 22:17 is very different; he is not caught up to the Lord, but the Lord comes to him, and he repeats what was said to him, as he does with regard to what was said to him on the road to Damascus. That he was caught up to heaven when he was lying apparently dead, after being stoned at Lystra (Acts 14:19), is a surprising hypothesis. Even more surprising is the supposition that St Paul was one of the prophets who went down from Jerusalem to Antioch and foretold the great famine (Acts 11:27, Acts 11:28), and that it was when he was in the third heaven that the coming of the famine was revealed to him! With less improbability Zahn (Intr. to N.T iii. p. 462) connects this revelation with the momentous change of preaching to Gentiles, which was made at Antioch about a.d. 43 (Acts 11:25, Acts 11:26). But if that were correct, would not St Paul have declared that he had Divine authority for this step? Conjectural connexions of this kind are not of much value. For other visions cf. Acts 16:9, Acts 16:18:9, Acts 16:23:11, Acts 16:27:23; and for ἁρπαγέντα cf. Acts 8:39; 1 Thessalonians 4:17; 12:5. The use of ἀνελήμφθη is similar (appendix to Mk. 26. v. 19; Acts 1:2, Acts 1:1:11, Acts 1:22, 1 Timothy 3:16; 2 Kings 2:11). Ἡρπάγην for ἡρπάσθην is late Greek. The psychological phenomenon of ecstasy is found in other religions and philosophies, notably in Buddhism and Neoplatonism. Porphyry (Vita Plotini, ii. 23) tells us that, while he was with him. Plotinus four times attained to that oneness with God which was his τέλοςκαὶσκοπός , and that he accomplished this Ἐνεργείᾳἀρρήτῳ . This is very different from what the Apostle tells us about himself. In his case there is no ambitious struggle, often without success, for ecstatic union with the Deity. ‘ In the power of Christ’ he is caught up into glory. There is another marked contrast when we compare the elaborate details given us about the experience of Enouch and others when translated to heaven with the brief and restrained statements made by the Apostle in these few verses. He does not tell us what he saw in the third heaven, still what he saw in the first and second, while on his way to the third.* He does not even tell us that he was conscious of passing through other celestial regions. The condensed intensity of the narrative leaves little room for the play of fancy or exaggeration. εἴτεἐνσώματιοὐκοἶδα , εἴτεἐκτὸςτοῦσώματο͂ςοὐκοἶδα . He is quite clear about what he knows and what he does not know. He knows that he was caught up even to the third heaven; about that there is no possibility of delusion. He was conscious of the transfer, and he vividly remembers that for a time he was in heaven. But he is not sure of the relation in which his spirit was to his body during this experience; about that his memory tells him nothing. His body may have been caught up to heaven, or it may have remained, bereft of consciousness, on earth. “ That he was in the third heaven he was not ignorant, but the manner he knew not clearly” (Chrys.). This shows that he was alone at the time; if others had been with him, he would inevitably have solved this doubt by asking whether his body had disappeared. Jewish beliefs respecting Enoch and Eliajah, Baruch and Ezra, and perhaps also Jeremiah (Matthew 16:14; Mat_2 Esdr. 2:18; 2 Macc 15:13, 14) had made the notion of bodily translation to heaven a commonplace. Such a translation may be difficult to believe, but in imagination it is easily realized, whereas disembodied spirit cannot be represented in thought. This idea of bodily translation would be familiar to St Paul, and he thought it possible that it might have taken place in his own case. With εἴτε … εἴτε (see on 1:6) he places the two alternatives on an equality. In the apocryphal Revelation or Vision of Paul (Visio Pauli) it is assumed that he was caught up in the body. On the other hand, in the Assumption of Moses, the soul is carried away without the body, and Philo (De somn. i. p. 626, Mang.) says that there was a tradition that Moses was freed from the body while he listened to the Divine utterances on the mount, ὧνἀκροατὴνΜωϋσῆνἁσώματονγενόμενονλόλοςἔχει . But we are not told what became of his body during the forty days on Sinai. We may suppose that in St Paul’ s case the ecstasy was experienced in a form which was conditioned by his existing beliefs respecting such subjects. We do not make our dreams, and they come to us independently of our wills; but they are conditioned by the materials with which we are familiar, when we are awake (Bousset, p. 211). Ἐνσώματι is a colloquial expression and is equivalent to an adverb. For this reason it has no art., like ἐνοἴκͅ , ‘ indoors, at home’ (1 Corinthians 11:34, 1 Corinthians 11:14:35; Mark 2:1);* Where it is not thus we have ἐντῷς (4:10, 5:6), just as here we have ἐκτὸςτοῦσώματος , which is not a colloquial expression. The omission of the art. before τρίτου and other ordinals is also colloquial (Acts 2:15, Acts 2:23:23; Matthew 26:44; Mark 14:72; ect.) ἕωςτρίτουοὐρανοῦ The ἕως does not prove that St Paul regarded the third heaven as the highest of all, but certainly ‘ even to the third heaven’ would be more naturally used if the third heaven were the highest, than if there were four other heavens above it. We know from the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (Lev_2. and 3.) and from the Book of the Secrets of Enoch that some Jews about the time of St Paul distinguished seven heavens, an idea in which they have been followed by the Valentinians and by the Mahometans. The Secrets of Enoch is not very clear in its account of the seven heavens, but in one place it would seem that paradise either is the third heaven or is in the third heaven (8:1-3, 42:3). In the Testaments the heavens and paradise seem to be different (Leviticus 18:5, Leviticus 18:6, Leviticus 18:10). It is by no means certain that St Paul was familiar with these ideas, and it is not probable that he is alluding to them here.† He is using language which was to be understood by the Corinthians, and it is not likely that he expected them to know about seven heavens; whereas ‘ even to the third heaven’ might convey to any one the idea of the most sublime condition that is conceivable. Irenaeus (II. xxx. 7) has good sense on his side when, in arguing against the Valentinians, he rejects the notion that the Apostle was raised only to the third heaven in a series of seven, leaving the four highest heavens still beyond him. Bengel’ s suggestion may be right, that St Paul’ s three heavens are the heaven of the clouds, the heaven of the sun and stars, and the heaven in which God dwells; but that of Calvin seems to be preferable; numerus ternarius κατ ʼ ἐξοχήν positus est prosummo et perfectissimo. Where seven heavens are counted, the third is a very inferiod region, with somewhat earthly characteristics. 3. καὶοἶδατὸντοιοῦτονἄνθρωπον . ‘ I know also that the man of whom I speak.rs; We have to decide whether this is a repetion of v. 2 or the record of a second experience. That ἁρπάλομαι is used in both places is no sign that vv. 3, 4 simply repeat v. 2 with an additional fact; in each case, if two cases are meant, he was ‘ caught up’ from the earth. The change from ‘ third heaven’ to ‘ paradise’ is no evidence either way; for ‘ paradise’ may mean the ‘ third heaven’ or some portion of it, and if it is a mere synonym, there may have been two occasions of rapture to the same region of heaven. Again, the plural in v. 1 is no evidence either way. It may mean more than one vision and revelation, or it may simply indicate a class of which one example is to be given. Moreover, even if vv. 3 and 4 are a repetition of v. 2, we still have two revelations, for the Divine communication in v. 9 is a revelation. See below on v. 7. But the καί at the beginning of v. 3 is rather strongly in favour of the view that we have two revelations without counting the Divine utterance in v. 9; for the καί is almost awkwardly superfluous if what follows simply repeats v. 2. On the whole, patristic writers seem to be mostly in favour of either two raptures, or one rapture in two stages, first to the third heaven and thence to paradise. The language of some of them would fit either of these hypotheses (Irenaeus, 11. xxx. 7; Tertullian, De Praes. Haer. 24; Cyril of Jerusalem, Cat. Lect. xiv. 26); but Clement of Alexandria (Strom. v. 12, p. 693, ed. Potter) is plainly for the latter; “ caught up even to the third heaven and thence into paradise.” * In this he is followed by few moderns, who for the most part adopt the view that St Paul is speaking throughout of only one experience, and that ‘ paradise’ is equivalent to the ‘ third heaven.’ Bengel, however, is confident that vv. 3, 4 duplex rei momentum exprimunt. So also Bousset with somewhat less confidence; so werden wir schwerlich verstehen sollen, dass Paradies und dritter Himmel dasselbe seien, dass er sich also in seiner Aussage nur wiederhole (p. 209). McFadyen finds it “ hard to say, but perhaps the second statement is intended to suggest a second experience, similar but higher.” The Fathers are loose in their quotations of the passage. They sometimes say that the Apostle heard unutterable words in the third heaven, which is no proof that they identify paradise with the third heaven; and they sometimes say that he saw things of which it is not lawful to speak. χωρὶςτοῦσώματος . ‘ Apart from the body.’ The change from ἐκτός to χωρίς should be marked in translation. Many texts in this verse read ἐκτός , and Vulg. has extra corpus in both places, but χωρίς (B D E ) is doubtless original. 4. εἰςτὸνπαράδεισον . See on Luke 23:43 and Sewte on Revelation 2:7, the only other passages in N.T. in which παράδεισος occurs; also Hastings, DB. ii. pp. 668 f., DCG. ii. p. 318; Salmond, Christ. Doct. of Immortality, pp. 346 f. The word tells us little about the nature of the unseen world. In the O.T. it is used either of the Garden of Eden (Genesis 2:9, Genesis 2:2:10, Genesis 2:15, etc.) or of a park or pleasure-ground (Son 4:13; Ecclesiastes 2:5; Joe 2:3; etc.); but it represents three or four different Hebrew words. We must leave open the question as to whether St Paul regards paradise and the third heaven as identical, or as quite different, or as one containing the other, for there is no clue to the answer. See Int. Journal of Apocrypha, July 1914, pp. 74 f. ἤκουσενἄρρηταῥήματα . ‘ He heard unutterable utterances.’ The verbal contradiction may be accidental, but it is probably another instance of playing upon words of which St Paul is fond (1:13, 3:2, 4:8, 5:4, 6:10, 7:10, 10:5, 6, 12).* Neither ‘ unspeakable words’ (AV, RV) nor arcana verba (Vulg.) exactly reproduces the Greek. The latter might be effata ineffabilia. Cf. ἀλάλουςλαλεῖν (Mark 7:37). Ἄρρητος is used in class. Grk. of things which cannot be expressed in words (cf. στεναγμοῖςἀλαλήτοις , Romans 8:26); but more often of things which are either too sacred or too horrible to be mentioned, nefanda. What follows shows what is the meaning here, the only place in Bibl. Grk. in which the word occurs. ἃοὐκἐξὸνἀνθρώπͅλαλῆσαι . No doubt ἀνθρώπῳ is to be taken with ἐξόν rather than with λαλῆσαι : ‘ which it is not lawful (Matthew 12:4; Acts 2:29) for a man to speak,’ rather than ‘ not lawful to say to a man’ : non licet homini loqui (Vulg.) will fit either interpretation, but the difference between the two is not very great. That he heard the voices of the heavenly choir, and similar conjectures, are not very wise. The question, what was the use of the revelation, if the Apostle might not make known what was revealed? can be answered. It was a source of strength to the Apostle himself in his overwhelming trials, and thus a source of strength also to the millions whom he has encouraged. Cf. 10:4, where the seer is told not to write down what he heard. See Abbott, Johannine Grammar, p. 305. 5. ὑπὲρτοῦτοιούτουκαυχήσομαι . No doubt τοῦτοιούτου is masc, as is shown by T.T. ἄνθρωπον (v. 3) and by the contrast with ἐμαυτοῦ . He speaks as if there were two Pauls, one about whom he could glory, and another about whom he would not do so. And in a sense there were two; for, as Origen remarks, “ He who was caught up to the third heaven and heard unspeakable words is a different Paul from him who said, Of such a one I will glory.” To a person who has been in ecstasy that experience may seem to belong to a person other than his everyday self. And it is only as having been bestowed upon a person different from his ordinary self that the Apostle will glory of the unspeakable favours bestowed in these raptures. They were not to his credit; for he was entirely passive throughout; all was ‘ of the Lord’ and ‘ in Christ.’ As to his own conduct, he returns to what was said in 11:30, he will glory, not of the things which he has achieved, but of the things which he has suffered, the things in which he has been weak and the Lord strong. He returns to these in v. 7. After ταῖςἀσθενείαις א D 3 E G K L M P, f g Vulg. Aeth. Goth. add μου : B D * 17 67, d e Syrr. Copt. Arm. omit. Cf. 11:30. Such insertions for completeness are common; see vv. 9, 10; Ephesians 3:6, Ephesians 3:5:31; Philippians 4:23. 6. ἐὰνγὰρθελήσωκαυχήσασθαι . ‘ For if I should desire to glory of revelations which I am allowed to disclose, or of things in which I was active and achieved something, I shall not be foolish in so doing (11:1, 16), for I shall be saying what is true’ (5:11). If θελήσω is fut. indic., it may imply that he does desire to do so; but it is probably aor. subjunct. Blass, § 65. 5, holds that in N.T. there is no certain example of ἐάν with fut. indic.; but Luke 19:40 and Acts 8:31 are hardly doubtful, and ἐάνπερἐκπληρώσουσιν occurs in a papyrus of 2nd cent. b.c.. Winer, p. 369; Burton, § 254; J. H. Moulton, p. 168. The timeless aor. infin. after such verbs as θέλω , βούλομαι , δύναμαι , ἐλπίζω is normal; 2:7, 5:4; 1 Corinthians 14:19, 1 Corinthians 14:16:7; etc. Burton, § 113. φείδομαιδέ . We have this absolute use of φείδομαι again 13:2: cf. Isaiah 54:2. In N.T. it is elsewhere followed by a gen., in LXX by a prep., ἀπό , περί , ὑπέρ , ἐπί . μήτιςεἰςἐμὲλογίσηται . ‘ Lest any man should count of me, form an estimate of me.’ The constr. is unusual, but it probably does not mean ‘ lay to my credit,’ which would almost require ἐμοί . In Hosea 7:15 εἰςἐμὲἐλογίσαντοπονηρά means ‘ they imagined mischief against me.’ ὑπὲρὃβλέπειμεἢἀκούειἐξἐμου . ‘ Above that which he seeth in me or heareth from me.’ He wishes to be judged, not by what he tells them respecting his exceptional privileges, but by what their own experience of him tells them, by his conduct, preaching, and letters. ‘ Of me’ for ἐξἐμοῦ (AV) is misleading: he does not desire to be judged by what people say of him; it is the words that come from him that count. In 2 Timothy 1:13, 2 Timothy 2:2 we have παρ ʼ ἐμοῦἠκούσας . After ἀκούει א 3 D E K L P, d e f Vulg. Goth. Syr-Hark. add τις : א * B D3 F G 17 67, g Copt. Arm. Aeth. omit. It is probably an interpolation. Divergence of F from f 7. Text and punctuation of this verse are in dispute, and no certainty is attainable. There is probably some original error of dictation or of writing. But the meaning of the verse is certain and simple, however we reach it. The extraordinary revelations granted to him might have caused the Apostle to think too highly of himself; to prevent this, severe and humiliating bodily suffering was laid upon him. καὶτῇὑπερβολῇτῶνἀποκαλύψεων . The plur. is some confirmation of the view that v. 2 and vv. 3, 4 give us two cases of rapture, for ‘ the revelations’ naturally refers to those just mentioned; but Acts tells us of several others (16:6-10, 18:9, 23:11, 27:23), and he may be including some of these here. Lachmann’ s proposal to take these words with the conclusion of v. 5 and make v. 6 a parenthesis, is barely possible; ‘ I will not glory, save in my weaknesses (for if I should desire … hear from me) and in the exceeding greatness of the revelations.’ WH. propose to take these words with the conclusion of v. 6; ‘ but I forbear, lest any man should … , and by reason of the greatness of the revelation.’ This means that he has two reasons for forbearing, fear of being overrated and the greatness of the revelations. It is hard to believe that either arrangement was in the Apostle’ s mind. The best attested text comes out thus, and it is possible that something like this was the result of incoherent dictation; ‘ And by reason of the exceeding greatness (4:7) of the revelations— wherefore, that I should not be exalted overmuch (2 Thessalonians 2:4) there was given to me a stake for the flesh, a messenger of Satan to buffet me, that I should not be exalted overmuch.’ St Paul begins with what is the basis of what follows,— the greatness of the revelations. Having mentioned this with emphasis, he begins a new constr. with διό and finishes with yet another constr., repeating ἵναμὴὑπεραίρωμαι either through forgetfulness, or (more probably) because he wishes his readers not to forget the purpose of the σκόλοψ . For other possibilities see Meyer. To get rid of διό would be a great help, but it is indefinitely more probable that it has been omitted from some texts because of its difficulty than that it has been inserted in such good texts without authority. See ὑπερβολή , Index IV. Ὑπεραίρομαι is found in N.T. only here and in 2 Thessalonians 2:4, where it occurs in the description of ὁἄνθρωποςτῆςἀνομίας . St Paul is rather fond of such compounds; ὑπεραυξάνω , ὑπερβαίνω , ὑπερντυγχάνω , ὑπερνικάω , ὑπερεκτείνω (10:14), ὑπερπλεονάζω , ὑπερυψόω , all of which are ἅπαξλεγόμενα in N.T. See also on ὑπερλίαν (11:5), p. 299. ἐδόθημοι . Of course by God, as ἵναμὴὑπεραίρωμαι shows. It was sent to preserve the Apostle from spiritual pride. See Aug. De. Nat. et Grat. 27; also the Reply to Faustus, xxii. 20 This, however, does not prevent Meyer from saying that the σκόλοψ was given by Satan. Satan is regarded as an instrument for effecting the Divine purpose, as Judas in the case of the Atonement. See on 1 Corinthians 5:5, also J. H. Bernard on 1 Timothy 1:20. Satan is ever ready to inflict suffering, and is sometimes made to be instrumental when suffering is needed for the discipline of souls. This idea prevails in the prologue to the Book of Job. But if St Paul had meant that it was Satan who was the agent in this case, he would have used a less gracious word than ἑδόθη which he often has of the bestowal of Divine favours; e.g. Galatians 3:21; Ephesians 3:8, Ephesians 3:6:19; 1 Timothy 4:14; cf. 1:22, 5:5, 8:1, 16, 10:8, 13:10; etc. etc. Some such verb as ἐπιτίθημι (Luke 10:30, Luke 10:23:26; Acts 26:23), or Βάλλω (Revelation 2:24), Or ἐπιΒάλλω (1 Corinthians 7:35), would have been more suitable. Gregory of Nazianzum in his Panegyric of Basil (Or. xliii. 82) speaks of a malady of his own as τὸνδεδομένονἡμῖνπαρὰΘεοῦσκόλοπα . σκόλοΨτῇσαρκί . These three words raise three questions, two of translation and one of interpretation, which have elicited a very large amount of discussion; and, when all has been said, no certain answer to any one of the three can be given. What is the exact force of the dative? What is the right translation of σκόλοψ What form of suffering is meant by the metaphor? 1. ‘ For the flesh’ is on the whole more probable than ‘ in the flesh’ (AV, RV). Why omit ἐν if ‘ in the flesh’ is intended? Earlier English Versions differ. Wiclif and the Rhemish follow the ambiguous stimulus carnis adopted in the Vulgate from Cyprian (Test. iii. 6, De Mortal. 13) and the translator of Irenaeus (5:1. 3:1); they have ‘ pricke of my flesh.’ Between these come Tyndale ‘ unquyetnes of the flesshe,’ Coverdale ‘ warnynge geven unto my flesh,’ Cranmer ‘ unquyetnes thorow the flesshe,’ and the Genevan ‘ pricke in the fleshe.’ No one now would adopt either ‘ of’ or ‘ through,’ but ‘ unto’ is not very different from ‘ for.’ See Winer, p. 276, and Waite, ad loc. 2. For the translation of σκόλοψ we are offered ‘ stake,’ ‘ spike,’ ‘ splinter,’ and ‘ thorn.’ The choice really lies between ‘ stake’ and ‘ thorn,’ i.e. between a very large and a comparatively small cause of bodily pain. In class. Grk. the common meaning of σκόλοψ is ‘ stake,’ either for palisading or impaling, and a stake for impalement is a very vivid metaphor for intense physical suffering. Hence σκόλοψ was sometimes used of the cross (Orig. c. Cels. ii. 68) and ἀνασκολοπίζω of crucifixion (Eus. H.E. ii. 25). Tertullian twice has sudes as a translation (De Fuga in Pro_2; De Pudic. 13). Luther has Pfahl ins Fleish, Beza surculus infixus carni. In his essay at the end of Gal. 4., Lightfoot interprets the expression as “ a stake driven through the flesh.” Stanley (ad loc.) and Ramsay (St Paul, p. 97) decide for ‘ stake’ rather than ‘ thorn’ ; and Beet, Emmet, Klö pper, Massie, A. T. Robertson, Waite, Way, Weymouth adopt this rendering. But Alford, Bachmann, Bousset, Conybeare and Howson, Cornely, Field, Findlay, Heinrici, Krenkel, Lietzmann, McFadyen, Menzies, Meyer, F. W. Robertson, Schaff, and Schmiedel abide by the usual rendering, ‘ thorn.’ Farrar (St Paul, i. p. 221) tries to keep both; “ impalement … by this wounding splinter.” In LXX σκόλοψ occurs four times, σκόλοπεςἐντοῖςὀφθαλμοῖςὑμῶνκαὶβολίδεςἐνταῖςπλευραῖςὑμῶν (Numbers 33:55). οὐκἔσονταιοὐκέτιἐνὄκῳτοῦἸσραὴλσκόλοψπικρίαςκαὶἄκανθαὀδύνης (Ezekiel 28:24). ἐγὼφράσσωτὴνὁδὸναὐτῆςἐνσκόλοψιν (Hosea 2:6). καὶπάχνηνὡςἅλαἐπὶγῆςχέει , καὶπαγεῖσαγίνεταισκολόπωνἄκρα (Ecclus. 43:19). ‘ Thorn’ or ‘ splinter’ seems to be the meaning in all four passages, but ‘ stake’ might be the meaning in Hosea 2:6. Yet we cannot be sure that one and the same rendering is right in all four places, for, in the first three, σκόλοψ represents three different Hebrew words. It is not impossible that Numbers 33:55 is the source of St Paul’ s expression, and in that case we have an answer to the objection urged against ‘ thorn,’ that it is not so suitable as ‘ stake’ to represent intense pain.* But in all the renderings, it is the idea of acuteness that seems to be primary, and a thorn or a splinter or a spike may be sharper than a stake. 3. It is over the third question that there has been most discussion, with as much disagreement about the answer as in the other two cases. But the attempt to answer this question raises a fourth, which can be decided with considerable probability, yet, as in the other cases, without certainty. The σκόλοψτῇσαρκί is a metaphor for some kind of suffering. Is it the same as the ἀσθένειατῆςσαρκός and the πειρασμὸςὑμῶνἐντῆσαρκίμου of Galatians 4:13, Galatians 4:14? It is commonly assumed that it is the same, and this view has much to commend it. But nothing approaching to proof is possible, and of the numerous conjectures as to what the form of this suffering was, one may be true of the σκόλοψ , while something quite different may be true of the ἀσθένεια . Unfortunately we have to confess that in neither case can we be at all certain as to what is true. Nevertheless, some negative results may be confidently maintained. The Apostle is not referring to any individual, who was a ‘ thorn in his side’ to him, whether Alexander the coppersmith (2 Timothy 4:14), as Ephraem Syrus thought, or anyone else, (11:15), as Chrysostom. That he is referring to sufferings caused by persecution is given by various Greek Fathers and one or two Latins as the explanation of the σκόλοψ . But it cannot be right. Others besides St Paul suffered greatly from persecution, and the σκόλοψ was something specially bestowed by God for his personal benefit, to counteract temptations that might be provoked by the special revelations. Moreover, he would not have prayed to be freed from persecutions. This theory continued to be held by a writer here and there, but it was at last driven from the field by an equally erroneous explanation. When a knowledge of Greek became rare in the West, the N.T., was studied in the Vulgate, in which Jerome had left stimulus carnis uncorrected. He understood the σκόλοψ to mean bodily pain, but stimulus catnis suggested to others temptations to impurity. The explanation about persecutions may have been fostered by the fact that all Christendom had been suffering from the horrors of the Diocletian persecution; and it is evident that the theory about carnal desires having been the Apostle’ s great trial spread widely at a time when monasticism accentuated the danger of temptations of the flesh. In each case men supposed that St Paul’ s special affliction was akin to what was a special trouble to themselves. This view of the stimulus carnis became almost universal in the West, until Cornelius a Lapide (d. 1637) says that it is communis fidelium sensus. Luther’ s passionate rejection of it is well known, and Calvin condemns it as ridiculous. St Paul tells us that the ἴδιονχάρισμαἐκΘεοῦ which he received was being able to do without marriage; see on 1 Corinthians 7:7-9. And if it had been otherwise, he would not have regarded sexual desire as a ‘ weakness’ in which he could glory. No Greek Father adopts this view, and it is doubtful whether any Latin writer of the first six centuries does. The statement that Jerome, Augustine, and Salvian do so is erroneous. Jerome says bodily pain, Augustine persecution, and Salvian nothing; he nowhere quotes or explains the passage. Since the Reformation, spiritual trials, such as temptations to unbelief or despair, have been a favourite hypothesis. But they fit this passage badly, and Galatians 4:13, Galatians 4:14 not at all. St Paul nowhere hints at such difficulties, nor would he have gloried in them from any point of view. It is those who have themselves been tormented by such things that have imagined them as the special trial of the Apostle. Of these three lines of thought we may say that St Paul would not have prayed to be freed from persecutions, and that he would not have been told to cease to pray against evil concupiscence or unbelief. Modern writers generally go back to the earliest tradition that the σκόλοψ was some acute malady, so painful and such a hindrance to the spread of the Gospel as to be regarded as the work of the devil. But it was sent by God at intervals as a disciplinary reminder, to preserve His Apostle from spiritual pride. It was in this aspect that Jerome compared it to the slave behind the victorious commander in his triumphal chariot, whispering at intervals, Hominem to esse memento (Ep. xxxix. 2). Thus much we learn from this passage about the σκόλοψτῆσαρκί . From Galatians 4:13, Galatians 4:14, we gather that the ἀσθενείατὴςσαρκός which kept St Paul in Galatia was such as to tempt the Galatians to regard him with contempt and disgust, a temptation which they triumphantly overcame, treating him with the utmost consideration and affection. Any acute and recurrent malady will suit 2 Corinthians 12:7, but for Galatians 4:13, Galatians 4:14, we require something likely to inspire those who witness it with repulsion. The conjectures which fit Galatians 4:13, Galatians 4:14 well, and might also be true of 2 Corinthians 12:7, are epilepsy, acute ophthalmia, malarial fever, and some forms of hysteria.* Epilepsy has the support of Lightfoot, Schaff, Findlay, Bousset, Hofmann, Holsten, Klö pper, and others. Since Max Krenkel’ s Essay in his Beiträ ge zur Aufhellung der Geschichte and der Briefe des Apostels Paulus, 1890, this conjecture of K. L. Ziegler in Theologische Abhandlungen, 1804, has become widespread. The objection that epilepsy commonly produces mental deterioration is not wholly disposed of by the cases of Julius Caesar, Mahomet, Cromwell, and Napoleon, for we are not certain that the attacks from which they occasionally suffered were epileptic. A more serious objection is that such attacks are not acutely painful. Ophthalmia is adopted by Farrar, Lewin, Plumptre; malarial fever by Ramsay and Emmet; hysteria by Lombard. When all the arguments for and against these and other guesses have been considered, the fact remains that we still do not know, for the evidence is insufficient. See Enc. Bib. iii. 3620; Zahn, Int. to N.T. i. p. 171; Lietzmann, ad loc. ἄγγελοςΣατανᾶ . ‘ A messenger of Satan’ or ‘ an angel of Satan.’ The σκόλοψ is here personified. Wiclif and the Rhemish have ‘ angel,’ other English Versions, including AV and RV., have ‘ messenger.’ That Stan has angels was a common belief among the Jews (Revelation 12:7-9; cf. Matthew 9:34, Matthew 9:12: 24 = Luke 11:15), and it is not disturbed by Christ (Matthew 25:41). In the Ep. of Barnabas (18:1) ἄγγελοιτοῦΘεοῦ are opposed by ἄγγελοιτοῦΣατανᾶ . Cf. Enoch 3:3; Jubilees 10:2. That what was the will of God for good purposes might be done by Satan for evil purposes is an idea that is also found among the Jews, as in Job 1:12, Job 2:6, and in 2 Samuel 24:1, when compared with 1 Chronicles 21:1; also that Satan may be a cause of physical suffering, a belief which is not disturbed by Christ; see on Luke 13:11, Luke 13:16.* With the reading Σατάν (see below), which is indeclinable and amy be nom. or gen., some would translate ‘ the angel Satan,’ but that would require ὃἄγγελοςΣ . Others would translate ‘ a hostile angel,’ which is grammatically possible, but not probable, for in N.T. Satan is always a proper name. In LXX σατάν is sometimes ‘ an adversary’ ; e.g. ἤγειρενΚύριοςσατὰντῷΣαλωμὼντὸνἈδὲρτὸνἸδυμαῖον (1 Kings 11:14); but the reading σατάν here is to be rejected. ἵναμεκολαφίζη . ‘ In order that he (the messenger) may buffet me.’ The present tense, as Chrysostom and Theodoret point out, implies freq. attacks. The fact that ἄγγελος immediately precedes this clause saves us from mixture of metaphors; a stake or thorn cannot ‘ strike with the first,’ but a messenger can. Κόλαφος is said to be the Doric equivalent of the Attic κόνδυλος . The verb is said to be the Doric equivalent of the Attic κόνδυλος . The verb is late Greek and perhaps colloquial; see on 1 Corinthians 4:11 and cf. Mark 14:65; Matthew 26:67; 1 Peter 2:20; also Index IV.† ἵναμὴὑπεραίρωμαι . Emphatic repetition of the purpose of the σκόλοψ , which must be remembered side by side with Satan’ s share in the mater. In both cases we have pres. subjunct. of what was continually going on: there was ferq. buffeting to counteract freq. temptation. But this does not imply that the revelations were freq. One revelation might occasion many temptations. Contrast the aorists in Revelation 18:4; ἵναμή is specially freq. in 1 and 2 Cor. Baljon proposes to omit καὶτῇὑπερβολῇτῶνἀποκαλύψεων as a gloss, but no witnesses omit the words. Nor can the perplexing διό be omitted, although D E K P L, Latt. Syrr., Iren. Aug. moit, for it is found in א A B F G 17. The omission is “ a characteristic Werstern attempt to deal with a difficulty by excision” (WH.).There is more to be said for the excision of the second ἵναμὴὑπεραίρωμαι , which א A D E G 17, Latt. Aeth., Iren. Tert. Aug. omit; but the omission is probably another attempt at simplifying the text. Σατανᾶ (א A B D F G 17, 67 , Latt. Copt., Orig.) rather than Σατάν (א 3 A D2 and 3 E K L P), which is rare in LXX and is found nowhere in N.T. 8. ὑπὲρτούτου … ἵναἀποστῇ . ‘ Concerning this foe … that he might depart from me.’ The personification still continues, as is shown by ἀποσῇ , the nom. to which is not σκόλοψ but ἄγγελοςΣατανᾶ . Ἀφίστημι in N.T. is always used of persons; 1 Timothy 4:1; 2 Timothy 2:19; Hebrews 3:12; and very often in Lk. and Acts. Cf. esp. ὁδιάβολοςἀπέστηἀπ ʼ αὐτοῦ (Luke 4:13), and ἀπέστηὁἄγγελοςἀπ ʼ αὐτοῦ (Acts 12:10), and ἀπέστησανἀπ ʼ αὐτοῦοἱμέλλοντεςαὐτὸνἀνετάζειν (Acts 22:29). Following the Vulg. propter quod, Beza super quod, and Luther Dafü r, both AV and RV have ‘ this thing’ for τούτου , and neither has ‘ thing’ in italics. This use of ὑπέρ , in which the meaning ‘ in the interest of,’ ‘ in behalf of’ (1:6, 11, 5:15, etc.) disappears, occurs several times in 2 Cor. (1:8, 7:4, 14, 8:23, 24, 9:2, 3, 12:5); cf. 1 Thessalonians 2:1. The Latin equivalent is super with the abl.; multa super Priamo rogitans, super Hectore multa (Virg. Aen. i . 750), and mitte civiles super urbe curas (Hor. Od. III. viii. 17). τρὶςτὸνκύριονπαρεκάλεσα . Such expressions as τρὶςμάκαρεςκαὶτετράκις , terque quaterque beati, do not justify us in following Chrysostom and Calvin, who take τρίς as meaning ‘ often’ Why not say πολλάκις (8:22, 9:23, 26, 27)? It is more natural to understand τρίς literally, and with Bengel to compare our Lord’ s three prayers in Gethsemane. In each case the great trouble was not removed, but strength to bear it was given. It is fanciful to connect Acts 16:6, Acts 16:7, Acts 16:9 with these three petitions. As in the case of the ‘ visions and revelations,’ we have no means of knowing how to fit them into the narrative in Acts. ‘ The Lord’ no doubt means Christ, as is shown by ἡδύναμιςτοῦΧριστοῦ (v. 9); and this use of παρακαλέω is analogous to the freq. use in the Gospels of those who besought Christ for help (Mark 1:40, Mark 1:5:18, Mark 1:23, Mark 1:6:56, Mark 1:7:32, Mark 1:8:22; etc.). Elsewhere it is freq. of beseeching or exhorting men (2:8, 6:1, 8:6, 9:5, etc.), but not of prayer to God, though Josephus so uses it (Ant. vi. ii. 2). St Paul is not intimating that Christ is man and not God, but he may be implying that on these occasions there was personal communication with the Lord (Stanley). How the communication was made, it is impossible to know; neque magnopere refert (Calvin). Deissmann (Light from Ant. East, p. 311) gives an interesting parallel. M. Julius Apellas states on a marble stele how he was several times cured at the shrine of Aesculapius in Epidaurus, and concerning one of his maladies he says, καὶπερὶτούτουπαρεκαίλεσατὸνθεόν . But it is a large inference to draw from this that St Paul “ clothes’ what he tells us here “ in the style of the ancient texts relating to healing.” Was there any fixed style in such things? If so, did St Paul know it? If so, did it influence him here? The influence of the Gospel narratives is more probable. 9. καἰεἴρηκένμοι . ‘ And He hath said to me.’ He said it then and the answer still stands, it holds good. It is frequently used of the Divine utterances; Acts 13:34; Hebrews 1:13, Hebrews 1:4:3, Hebrews 1:4, Hebrews 1:10:9, Hebrews 1:13, Hebrews 1:13:5. Cf. γέγραπται , ‘ it stands written.’ See on ἐγήγερται , 1 Corinthians 15:4. Ἀρκεῖσοιἡχάριςμου . The thing prayed for is refused, but something much better is bestowed. See on χάρις 1 Corinthians 15:10. This Divine gift is perpetually sufficient, good for his whole life. We have here another example of chiasmus; cf. 2:16, 4:3, 6:8, 9:6, 10:12. In connexion with what follows see on 4:10. ἡγὰρδύναμιςἐνἀσθενείᾳτελεῖται . ‘ Where there is weakness, strength reaches completeness.’ Where human strength abounds, the effects of Divine power may be overlooked. It is easy to forget Providence in reading history, but we do not obtain a more scientific view by leaving God out of the account. Where it is manifest that man was powerless, God’ s power becomes, not more real, but more evident; 4:7, 13:4; see on 1 Corinthians 1:25, 1 Corinthians 1:2:3, 1 Corinthians 1:4. Bede shows how this truth was illustrated in the cases of Ethelberga and Hilda (H.E. ix. 9, 21). * Gratia esse potest, etiam ubi maximus doloris sensus est (Beng.); but the χάρις does not mean the χάρισμαἰμάτων , so that, though he was not healed himself, he was allowed the power of healing others (Chrys.). On the refusal of such requests; frequenter Quae putamus prosperaobsunt: ideo non conceduntur Deo melius providente (Pseudo— Primasius on Romans 8:26). The Lord’ s reply convinced the Apostle that this grievous affliction would not hinder his work; he may even have been convinced that it was a condition of success. That it was the Lord’ s doing, and not his, showed that he might glory in it. How the Lord conveyed this reply to him, we are not told; but to St Paul it was real, and it is not extravagant to believe that, as on the road to Damascus, Christ conversed with him. Here the verse should end; see on 1 Corinthians 12:23 for a similarly unfortunate division. In this Epistle most of the earlier chapters are badly divided. Ἥδισταοὗνμᾶλλονκαυχήσομαιἐνταῖςἀσθενείαις . Most gladly therefore (because of the Lord’ s reply) will I rather glory in my weaknesses (than pray that they may be removed). The order of the words is important. We have not got μᾶλλονἐνταῖςἀσθενείαιςκαυχ ., and we must not interpret ‘ will I glory in my weaknesses rather than in the revelations granted to me.’ Nor must we make μᾶλλον strengthen ἥδιστα : μᾶλλον may strengthen comparatives (Philippians 1:23), but not superlatives. Blass, § 44:5; Winer, p. 300. ἵναἐπισκηνώσῃἐπ ʼ ἐμὲἡδύναμιςτοῦΧριστοῦ . A bold metaphor, which may possibly be intended to suggest the Shechinah (see on Luke 9:34); ‘ That the strength of the Christ may tabernacle upon me.’ Κατασκνηνόω is very freq. in LXX, but ἐπισκηνόω is found nowhere else in Bibl. Grk. The translations of δύναμις in this verse and of δυνατός in v. 10 should be uniform. AV has ‘ strength,’ ‘ power,’ ‘ strong’ ; RV. has ‘ power,’ ‘ strength’ ‘ strong’ ; better, ‘ strength’ ‘ strength,’ ‘ strong.’ Vulg. has virtus, virtus, potens; Beza has potentia, potentia, potens. ἡγὰρδύναμις (א A B D G, Latt.) rather than ἡγὰρδύναμίςμου (א 3 A2 D2 and 3 E K L P, Syrr. Copt.): τελειοῦται (א A B D* G) rather than τελειοῦται (א 3. D3 K L1 P). Both verbs are freq. in LXX and translate the same Heb, words; both occur in John 19:28, and both are fairly common in N,T. B 67**, Syr.Hark. Copt. Arm., Iren. omit μου after ἀσθενείαις , and insertion is more probable than omission. 10. διὸεὐδοκῶἐνἀσθενείαις . ‘ Wherefore I am well pleased in weaknesses,’ because it is precisely in them that the strength of Christ is conspicuous. Polybius and other secular authors write εὐδοκῶτινι . In LXX and N.T. we commonly have εὐδ . ἐν , but the simple dat. occurs 2 Thessalonians 2:12 (according to the best texts); 1 Macc. 1:43; 1 Esdr. 4:39; cf. Romans 1:32. See Abbott, Johannine Grammar, p. 387. In Matthew 12:18 and Hebrews 10:6 we have the acc. Now follow four kinds of ‘ weaknesses.’ ἰνὕβρεσιν . In LXX, as in class. Grk., the word is freq.; in N.T. only here and Acts 27:10, Acts 27:12. The plur. is comparatively rare; in LXX, only Ecclus. 10:8; ‘ Sovereignty is transferred from one nation to another διὰὕβρεις .’ The word implies wanton injury, insolent maltreatment, and therefore it is occasionally used of the apparently wanton damage done by storms, as in Acts. Josephus (Ant. III. vi. 4) says that the Tabernacle was protected by coverings against τὴνἀπὸτῶνὄμΒρωνὕΒριν . For στενοωρίαις see on 6:4; in Romans 8:35, as here, the word is connected with διωγμός . ὑπὲρχριστοῦ . It is for Christ’ s sake (v. 20) that he is well pleased in weaknesses. This is better than taking ὑπὲρΧριστοῦ with each of the four datives, although the difference in meaning is not great. When he knows that it is not the Lord’ s will that he should be freed from his afflictions, he not only does not grieve, but for Christ’ s sake is well pleased. ὅτανγὰρἀσθενῳτότεδυνατόςεἰμι . ‘ For whenever I am weak, then I am strong.’ Cf. βοῶσατοῖςἐνσνμφοραῖς , Μὴἀναπίπτετε , τόἀσθενὲςὑμῶνδύναμίςἐστιν (Philo, Vita Moys. i. 13, p. 92, Mang.). The γάρ introduces the reason why he rejoices in his weaknesses. In his letter to Eustochium (Ep. cviii. 19), Jerome writes; quando infirmor tunc fortior sum. With this paradoxical outburst of triumph this paragraph closes. Experience has taught him, and has taught those who have been witnesses of his work, how much he can accomplish when he is apparently disabled by his infirmities and afflictions; that shows how amply the Divine declaration is justified, Ἀρκεῖσοιἡχάριςμου . To glory in these things is to glory in the strength of Christ. F, Vulg, but not f, insert μου after ἀσθενείαις , as these and other authorities do in v. 5, and some in v. 9. ἐνἀνάλκαις rather than καὶἀναλ . (א , Orig.); but καὶστενοχωρίαις (א * B) rather than ἐνστεν . (א 3 D E G K L P, Latt.). A omits ἐνδιωγμοῖς . 12:11-18. The Credentials of an Apostle; Exceptional Signs and Exceptional Love That I have become a fool by glorying is your fault; for you have not been loyal to one whom you might know to be an Apostle by the mighty works and the exceeding love which he showed to you. 11I have been making a fool of myself by writing in this glorying fashion. but I am not to blame for it. It was you who drove me to do it; for you gave support to my opponents, when you ought loyally to have commended me. I had a right to expect this from you for in no single thing was I inferior to those pre-eminent apostles of yours, although as a matter of fact I am nothing. 12 The signs, yes, the signs which mark the true Apostle, were wrought out in your midst,— and the endurance of all that they cost me never failed,— in works of significance, works of wonder, and works of power. 13You think that I have treated you badly. Well, in what respect were you put in a position of inferiority to my other Churches, except it be that I myself did not ‘ sponge’ on you? Of your generosity, pray forgive me this dreadful wrong! 14Behold that I am ready to come to you now for the third time; and you will find that, as on the two former visits, I shall not ‘ sponge’ on you. For what I am seeking is not your possessions for myself, but yourselves for Christ. Do you ask why I refuse your possessions? Because you are my children, and there is no such obligation on children to provide for their parents as on parents to provide for their children.15That is generally admitted; but as for myself, most gladly will I spend what I have, and be utterly spent myself, for the good of your souls. Then, if my love for you exceeds that of fathers, am I to be loved less? That would indeed be a strange requital. 16 But you say, “ We let that pass.” You admit that I did not myself come down on you for maintenance, but you insinuate that, like the cunning knave that I am always supposed to be, I entrapped you in other ways by the crafty employment of agents. 17Did I? By means of any of those whom I sent to you did I take unfair advantage of you? 18I asked Titus to visit you, and with him I sent the brother whom you know. Did Titus take any unfair advantage of you? No one would venture to insinuate that. And was there any difference between his guiding principle and mine? Was there any difference between his conduct and mine? 11. Γέγοναἄφρων . There is a pause in the flow of impassioned language. The Apostle stops a moment in his dictation and reflects on what he has just been saying. He had warned the Corinthians that in praising himself he would be acting like a fool; they must make allowance for that, or at least allow him as much consideration as they would allow to a fool (11:1, 16). He now says emphatically, ‘ I verily am become a fool.’ He is not sarcastically quoting Corinthian criticism; he is seriously making a criticism on himself. Γέγονα is emphatic, and as in Rev_17 and 21:6 ονγέγόαν ), means that what was expected or predicted has come to pass. The sentence is not a question. He admits the folly, but at once throws the responsibility for it on the Corinthians. In the next two clauses all the pronouns are emphatic, excepting the enclitic με . ὑμεῖςμεἠναγκάσατε · ἐγὼγὰρὤφειλονὑφ ʼ ὑμῶνσυνίστασθαι . ‘ It was you who compelled me, for I ought to have been commended by you.’ If the Corinthians had shown a decent appreciation of the Apostle’ s work among them, they would never have tolerated the sneers and insinuations which the Judaizers used in discrediting him; they would have testified strongly in his favour. Instead of that, they commended the people who attacked him. He was thereby compelled, greatly against his will, to commend himself, in order to free the Corinthians from the malign influence of his detractors. But for this reason, he would never have stooped to such folly. Cf. Livy, xxxviii. 29; Mihi, quaeso, ita ignoscatis, Patres Conscripti, silongiorem orationem non eupiditas gloriandi de me, sed necessaria criminum defensio facit. In 3:2 he told the Corinthians that they themselves were his commendatory letter, known and read by all men. How strange that he should now say that they had failed even to speak in his favour, when his enemies assailed him! If this severe charge was made in an earlier letter, and the high praise of 3:2 f. was written in a latter letter, after he and the Corinthians had become reconciled, all runs smoothly. ὤφειλον … συνίστασφαι . ‘ I had a right to commendation; it was a debt owed to me by you.’ Contrast δεῖ (11:30.), ‘ he must glory,’ not because it is his duty, but because circumstances force him to do so; and also v. 10, where ‘ must’ depends upon Divine decree. οὐδὲνγὰρὑστέρησα . ‘ You might have commended me with a good conscience, for in nothing was I inferior to your precious apostles.’ The aor. refers to the time when he was living at Corinth. See on 11:5; here it is even more clear than there that St. Paul is not speaking of the Twelve, but of the Judaizing missionaries. Οὐδέν is emphatic; ‘ in no single thing.’ εἰκαίοὐδένεἰμι . Chrysostom takes this clause as introductory to v. 12; so also Tyndale and Coverdale, and Hofmann among moderns. But Vulg., the Reformers, and almost all English Versions take it as the conclusion of v. 11. The μέν . and the very awkward asyndeton which arises if εἰκαί is prefixed to v. 12, are decisive against this arrangement. Chrys. seems to have had no μέν in his text. The words are an appropriate conclusion to v. 11. ‘ There is no bragging in saying that one is not inferior to such people; even a nobody may do that; and, apart from what Christ does in him, he is a nobody.’ Cf. 1 Corinthians 3:7, 1 Corinthians 13:2, 1 Corinthians 15:9. L P, Syrr. Goth. add κανχώμενος after ἄφρων . א A B D E G K, Latt. omit. 12. τὰμὲνσημεῖατοῦἀποστόλουκατειργάσθηἐνὑμῖν . ‘ Truly the signs of an Apostle were wrought out (4:17, 5:15, 7:10, 9:11) among you.’ The change to the passive is to be noted. He does not say that he wrought them, for he was only God’ s instrument. ὑπομονή (see on 1:6) was his, but the especial testimony to the reality of his Apostleship came from God. See on 6:4 and on Luke 21:19; Lightfoot on Colossians 1:11, Colossians 1:3:12; Westcott on Hebrews 6:12. What special form of suffering gave the opportunity for this ὑπομονή Did the σημεῖα provoke persecution? Or did the working of extraordinary acts of healing cause great physical exhaustion? The latter would seem to be appropriate, but discouragements and difficulties of various kinds may be in his mind. On ‘ the Signs of an Apostle’ see Lightfoot, Galatians, p. 99. In English we must say ‘ an Apostle,’ for the art. is generic, as in Matthew 18:17. Winer, pp. 132, 217. In the true text there is no ἐν before σημείοις and therefore we must not connect ἐνπάσῃὑπομονῇ with σημείοις . ἐνὑμῖν . Of all his converts the Corinthians had the best assurance that he was a true Apostle; 1 Corinthians 9:2. They knew what they had been as heathen and what his teaching had made them. Moreover, Christ had commissioned the Twelve to work miracles, and St Paul had worked miracles at Corinth. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/iccnt/ 13:1-10. The warnings connected with his approaching visit are continued, but there is not much more to be said, and he says it concisely. His concluding charges are given with Apostolic firmness and decision. He explains to them what they may expect from him (1-4), what they must do themselves (5-9), and why he writes before coming (10). 1. Τρίτοντοῦτοἔρχομαιπρὸςὑμᾶς . ‘ For the third time I am now coming to you,’ or, ‘ This is the third time I am coming to you’ ; cf. 12:14. It is possible to understand the words otherwise, for some eminent scholars do so, but the only natural meaning is that he has already paid two visits to Corinth (the long one, when he founded the Church, and the short one, when its members treated him so badly), and that he is about to pay a third. Lightfooot finds 12:14 and 13:1, 2 “ inexplicable under any other hypothesis.” Alford says that “ had not chronological theories intervened, no one would ever have thought of any other rendering.” See on 12:14. ἐπὶστόματοςδύομαρτύρωνκαὶτριῶν . The citation is slightly abbreviated; in Deuteronomy 19:15 the words after καί run ἐπὶστόματοςτριῶνμαρτύρωνστήσεταιπᾶνπ̔ῆμα . In 1 Timothy 5:19 we have ἤ for καί , and some texts have ἤ here, but the sense is much the same whichever reading we adopt. Logically ‘ three’ should come first; ‘ three witnesses, and (or) two, if three are not to be had’ ; but it is natural to put ‘ two’ before ‘ three.’ It is more important, and less easy, to decide why St Paul introduces this quotation. He may mean that he is going to hold a formal investigation, in which everything will be conducted according to the law which he quotes. The accused will not be condemned unless the accusation is proved to be true on adequate testimony. He may also mean that he is not going to claim to have received revelations about the Corinthians’ conduct; he will act upon human testimony, which can be sifted. But is it likely that he was about to hold a court in which charges of misconduct could be made by one Corinthian Christian against another? Would he give facilities for any such proceedings? The sins with which he is about to deal are flagrant sins, which those who committed them did not conceal, because (as they claimed) they were not sins, but acts which the emancipated Christian was free to commit, if they pleased him. There was no need of witnesses; Corinthians who gloried in their shame would be condemned out of their own mouth, and there would be no room for an Inquisition. Again, καὶτριῶν appears to have a definite relation to τρίτοντοῦτο , and the hypothesis of an Inquisition gives no link between the two. To avoid these difficulties, Chrysostom and Theodoret, with Calvin and some moderns, suggest that the visits to Corinth, two paid and one about to be paid, are the three witnesses. On the previous occasions he has found much that he was obliged to condemn, and he fears that during the third visit he may find a great deal of the same kind. That will amount to threefold testimony against them. True that it is the testimony of only one witness, but it is not mere repetition of the same evidence, for he bears witness to three different groups of fact. This is not a very attractive interpretation, but St Paul’ s manner of using Scripture is sometimes so free that we can hardly reject this interpretation as unworthy of him. Nevertheless, if we accept it, we need not suppose with Bousset that St Paul makes the suggestion that three visits are equivalent to three witnesses ‘ humorously.’ The Apostle is speaking with the utmost seriousness and gravity. Hence the impressive asyndeton of the opening sentences. But with regard to the rival interpretations of the Apostle’ s meaning we must be content to remain in doubt. πᾶνῥῆμα . In the original text (Deuteronomy 19:15) either rendering may be right, ‘ shall a matter be established’ or ‘ shall a word be confirmed,’ i.e. regarded as valid (Numbers 30:5). In the quotation in Matthew 18:16, ‘ every word may be established’ (AV, RV), is douthetless correct, and it may be correct here (AV, RV); but ‘ matter’ or ‘ thing’ makes equally good sense, although there is no alternative rendering in either margin. It is better to avoid a translation which implies that the Apostle is about to hold a tribunal in which Corinthians will bring charges against their fellow-Christians. He is going to pronounce sentence on those whose conduct is notorious and is not denied. 2. προείρηκακαὶπρολέγωὡςπαρὼντὸδεύτερονκαὶἀπὼννῦν . In order to make quite clear the balance between προείρηκα and προλέγω , and between παρὼντὸδεύτερον and ἀπὼννῦν , the Apostle dovetails the two clauses. He says, ‘ I have said, before, and I do say before, as when I was present the second time, so now being absent’ ; meaning, ‘ When I was present the second time, I gave a warning which still holds good (perf. as in 12:9); and now that I am absent, I repeat the warning.’ Both here and 11:9 παρών is imperf. participle. Those who deny the second visit adopt the grammatically possible, but pointless and improbable rendering, ‘ I have forewarned, and do now forewarn, as though I were present the second time, although I am now absent.’ We may ask with Denney, Who would ever say ‘ I tell you as if I were present with you a second time, although in point of fact I am absent’ ? Such mention of the absence is so needless as to be grotesque. τοῖςπροημαρτηκόσινκαὶτοῖςλοιποῖςπᾶσιν . ‘ To those who continued in sin before (during my second visit, as in 12:21) and to all the rest, viz., all those who have lapsed into sin since that visit.’ St Paul is fond of stringing together words compounded with the same preposition, esp. πρό . Cf. 9:5; Galatians 5:21; Romans 8:29; 1 Timothy 1:18, 1 Timothy 1:5:24; 2 Timothy 3:4; κατά , 11:20; 1 Corinthians 11:4, 1 Corinthians 11:5; μετά , 7:10; παρά , 1 Timothy 1:18; ὑπέρ see on ὑπεραίρομαι ; 12:7. ἐὰνἔλθωεἰςτὸπάλινοὐφείσομαι . ‘ If I come for the third time, I will not spare.’ Εἰςτὸπάλιν seems to be a unique expression; but ἐςτὸὕστερον occurs Thuc. ii. 20. It is amphibolous here, but must be taken with what precedes. There is no hint of hesitation in the ἐάν (cf. 1 Corinthians 16:10; 1 John 2:1; 3 John 1:10). In such cases ‘ if’ is almost equivalent to ‘ when,’ but the possibility of an unexpected hindrance is recognized. But St Paul may be quoting what he said at the unfruitful second visit; ‘ If I come back again, I shall not spare.’ οὐφείσομαι . He may have been too lenient previously; but there will be nothing of the kind now. We have no means of knowing what manner of punishment he intends to inflict, but may conjecture public censure, degradation in public worship, and excommunication. That he would employ supernatural power to inflict bodily sickness and suffering is also possible; see on 1 Corinthians 5:5 and 1 Timothy 1:20. νῦν ( , Latt.) rather than νῦνγράφω (D 3 , Syrr. Arm. Goth.) or νῦνλέγω (Copt. Aeth.). Some later Latin texts corrupted the bis after ut praesens into vobis, then vobis was struck out as having no authority, and thus bis is omitted in the Clem. Vulg. 3. ἐπεὶδοκιμὴνζητεῖτε . This is closely connected with what precedes, and there should be at most a semicolon (RV) at the end of v. 2. He will not spare, because the Corinthians themselves have made it impossible for him to do so; ‘ seeing that ye are seeking a proof (2:9, 8:2, 9:13) of the Christ that speaketh in me’ . They demanded that the Apostle should give some convincing sign that Christ was working in him. Christ ought to manifest His power in him. That made it necessary for St Paul to show how severely Christ condemned such sins as theirs, when there was no repentance. This seems to point to the supernatural infliction of suffering. There is perhaps something of irony in this. ‘ You want a proof that the power of Christ is in me. You shall have it,— in a form that will not please you.’ εἰςὑμᾶςοὐκἀσθενεῖἀλλὰδυνατεῖἐνὑμῖν . Chiasmus once more, as in 12:9, 20, etc.; ‘ Who to youward is not weak, but is powerful in you.’ Δυνατέω is peculiar to Paul in Bibl. Grk., who uses it always of Divine power. When he wants a contrast to human weakness, he uses δυνατόςεἰμι (v. 9, 12:10); but this may be accidental. Neither towards the Corinthians nor among them had Christ shown Himself to be wanting in power. There was the amazing fact of ‘ saints’ in such a city as Corinth. There were the spiritual gifts which had been so richly bestowed upon many members of the Church, and of which some of them had been so proud. And there were the σημεῖάτεκαὶτέρατακαὶδυνάμεις wrought by the Apostle himself (12:12). Scepticism in the case of men who had had these experiences was wilful scepticism; they did not wish to be convinced. But when he comes they shall have evidence which they cannot resist. 4. καὶγὰρἐσταυρώθηἐξἀσθενείας . ‘ For it is quite true that He was crucified through weakness.’ This explains v. 3, as v. 3 explains v. 2, and in each case there should not be more than a semicolon between the verses. To those who were on the broad way that leads to destruction the doctrine of a crucified Christ was, of course, foolishness (1 Corinthians 1:18), and St Paul is here anticipating the objection that there could not be much power in a Christ who could not save Himself from crucifixion. He admits that in a sense it was through weakness that Christ was crucified; His father and He willed that He should submit to an infamous death. But that took place once for all (aor.), and now through the power of God He is alive for evermore. The ἐκ in each case marks the source; cf. 11:26. With ἐξἀσθενείας cf. Philippians 2:7, Philippians 2:8; Hebrews 5:8; with ἐκδυνάμεωςΘεοῦ cf. Romans 6:4, Romans 6:8:11; Philippians 2:9. καὶγὰρἡμεῖςἀσθενοῦμενἐναὐτῷ . Another explanation of what immediately precedes. The fact that both weakness and power have been exhibited in the case of Christ is all the more credible, because the very same surprising change is found to take place in those who have such real union with Him; ‘ For we also are weak in Him, yet we shall live with Him through the power of God toward you.’ Incidentally we here see how intensely real to St Paul was his union with Christ. In this he is ever a mystic. He is again referring to vigorous action during the remainder of his life, especially to what will be manifested in his impending visit to Corinth. Even if εἰςὑμᾶς is not original, ἡμεῖς probably means ‘ we Apostles’ rather than ‘ we Christians.’ The Corinthians have to deal with a Christ who was raised from death to power, and with Christ’ s Apostle who has been saved from many deaths to do work for Him. St Paul uses both the classical fut. of ζάω as well as the later form ζήσομαι , but the latter occurs mostly in quotations from LXX. The εἰ before ἐσταυρὡθη (א 3 A D3 E L, Vulg. Syrr.) may be omitted with א B D G K P , Memph. After ἀσθενοῦμεν it is difficult to decide between ἐν B D E K L P, d e Vulg.) and σύν (א A G, f g Copt.). ζήσομεν (א A B D* 17) rather than ζήσωμεν (G) or ζησόμεθα (D3 E K L). B D3 E, Arm., Chrys. (twice) omit εἰςὑμᾶς , which Vulg. renders in vobis, as if we had ἐνὑμῖν , as in v. 3. 5. ἑαυτοὺςπειράζετε … ἑαυτοὺςδοκιμάζετε . The pronouns are very emphatic; ‘ It is your own selves that you must continually test, … your own selves that you must continually prove’ (pres. imperat.). The Corinthians thought that it was their business to test him, whether he was an Apostle speaking with the authority of Christ (v. 3). He is prepared to give them proof of this; but what they ought to be doing is testing themselves, whether they are in the faith and Christ is in them. Πειράζω here, as often, has the neutral meaning of ‘ test’ or ‘ try,’ without any notion of tempting to evil; see Swete on Revelation 2:2 and Hort on 1 Peter 1:7, and cf. John 6:6; James 1:2. The testing would be self-examination in accordance with Matthew 7:16; ‘ By their fruits ye shall know them’ ; were they living Christian lives? Δοκιμάζω is never used in the sense of tempting to evil; it may be neutral (Luke 12:56, Luke 14:19), but it commonly means ‘ proving in the expectation of approving’ (8:22; 1 Corinthians 11:28; Romans 2:18, Romans 2:14:22; Ephesians 5:10; 1 Thessalonians 2:4). This may be the reason why St Paul adds it after πειράζετε : ‘ Test yourselves; and I sincerely hope that you will stand the test.’ More probably he adds the word in order to prepare the way for ἀδόκιμοι and δόκιμοι . The three words give an opportunity for playing on words of similar formation, such as St Paul delights in; cf. 1:13, 3:2, 4:8, etc.; also Romans 1:28. ἐντῇπίστει . An expression of comprehensive meaning, ‘ the principles of the new spiritual life.’ On the hypothesis of the integrity of 2 Corinthians it is difficult to understand how the Apostle could tell them to test themselves as to whether they are in the faith after having assured them that τῇπίστειἑστήκατε (1:24) and ἑπαντὶπερισσεύετε , καὶλογῳκ .τ .λ . If he first told them to test themselves, and in a later letter assured them that he was quite satisfied, all runs quite naturally. ἢοὐκἐπιγινώσκετεἑαυτούς ; ‘ Or know ye not as to your own selves, that Jesus Christ is in you?’ The interrogative ἤ is not rare; 1 Corinthians 6:16; Romans 6:3, Romans 6:9:21; Matthew 7:4, Matthew 7:9. As in 1 Corinthians 13:12, the compound verb probably implies complete knowledge; he thinks that they must be quite sure that Christ is in them,— unless, of course, they are leading utterly unChristian lives. εἰμήτιἀδόκιμοίἐστε . ‘ Unless perhaps ye be reprobates,’ i.e. are not accepted because you cannot stand the δοκιμασία . He is allowing for the distressing possibility that they may be disqualified. Both ἀδόκιμος and δόκιμος are mainly Pauline in N.T. (see on 1 Corinthians 9:27; Romans 1:28), and in LXX ἀδόκιμος is very rare. Here the terms have a different meaning as applied to the Apostle and as applied to the Corinthians. Was the former a genuine Apostle? Were all the latter genuine Christians? We ought perhaps to prefer ἸησοῦςΧριστός (B D E K L, d e Syrr. Goth.) to χρ . Ἰης . א A F G P, f g Vulg. Copt. Arm.); see on 1:1. B D, Aeth. omit ἐστιν after ἐνὑμῖν . 6. ʼ λπίζωδὲὅτιγνώσεσθε . ‘ But I hope that you will come to know that we are not reprobate.’ This might mean one of two things; ‘ I anticipate that experience will teach you that Christ is in us with power to inflict punishment’ ; or, ‘ I trust that your testing of yourselves will show that you are sound, and then you are sure to see that we are sound.’ It is the spiritual who can judge with sureness of the spiritual. That ἐλπίζω may mean ‘ expect’ rather than ‘ hope’ is clear from 8:5; but St Paul is not likely to have meant that he expected to be obliged to punish; he certainly hoped that no such proof of his power would be needed. The rapid changes between 1 sing. (vv. 2, 6) and 1 plur. (vv. 4, 7) should be noted. In all these cases he probably means himself only. 7. εὐχόμεθαδὲπρὸςτὸνΘεόν . ‘ But we pray unto God that you may do nothing evil.’ He has no desire to have any opportunity for proving his Apostolic power by inflicting punishment. He would rather that his Apostleship should be undemonstrated than that it should be demonstrated owing to their misconduct. That they should do what is noble is worth far more to him than that he should be able to give them proof of his being an Apostle of Christ. Εὔχομαιπρός occurs several times in LXX; Numbers 11:2, Numbers 11:21:7; 2 Kings 20:2; Job 22:27; Job_2 Macc. 15:27, which is just what we have here. The ἵνα here gives the purpose rather than the contents of his petition; the latter has been already expressed by acc. and infin. Τὸκαλόν implies that the act is seen to be morally beautiful, and in Bibl. Grk. τὸκαλὸνποιέω is peculiar to Paul (Galatians 6:9; Romans 7:21). Like αὐτάρκεια , ἐπιείκεια , πραότης , προαιρέομαι , and φαῦλος , it may be evidence of St Paul’ s acquaintance with Greek philosophical language. ὡςἀδόκιμοι . The ὡς means that he would in that case seem to be disqualified. He would not have stood the test; not because he had failed when tested, but because the test had never been applied to him. He could not exhibit his power of punishing, because there was no one who deserved punishment. He would welcome such a happy state of things, however much it might tell against himself. εὐχὸμεθα (א A B D* G P 17, Latt.) is doubtless to be preferred to εὔχομαι (D3 E K L, Goth.). 8. οὐγὰρδυνάμεθα . He does not mean that no one can be successful in opposing the truth; magna est veritas et praevalet; a principle which has no special point here. He means that it would be utterly at variance with his character to take sides against the truth. Such a thing is morally impossible for him. All his life through he has been an ardent supporter of what he believed to be true, and what, since he became illuminated as a chosen Apostle of Christ, he knows to be true. This he can continue to be, and will. To rejoice in iniquity, because it gives him an advantage, is impossible for him. He cannot desire that they should be found to be doing wrong, in order that he may be proved to be right. 9. χαίρομενγὰρὅτανἡμεῖςἀσθενῶμεν . ‘ For we are not merely content, we rejoice whenever we are weak, through not being able to manifest our power, and ye are strong, through doing nothing that requires punishment or censure.’ Jonah was angry because the repentance of the Ninevites caused his prediction of their overthrow to be unfulfilled; but the Apostle is delighted whenever his Corinthians repent, or prove themselves to be in no need of repentance, and thus cause his promised demonstration of Apostolic power (vv. 3, 4) to be unfulfilled. The γάρ indicates that this verse is a confirmation of v. 8. τοῦτοκαὶεὐχόμεθα , τὴνὑμῶνκατάρτισιν . ‘ This is an additional thing that we pray for, even your perfecting.’ To pray that they may go on to perfection is a great deal more than merely praying that they may do nothing evil (v. 7). AV mars the effect by translating εὔχομαι first ‘ pray’ and then ‘ wish.’ RV. is more accurate in having ‘ pray’ in both places, and also in rendering κατάρτισις ‘ perfecting’ rather than ‘ perfection’ ; it is the growth in holiness that is meant. Cf. καταρτισμός (Ephesians 4:12). Neither noun is found elsewhere in Bibl. Grk., but the verb καταρτίζω (v. 11) is common enough. The original idea is that of ‘ fitting together,’ whether of setting bones or reconciling parties, and hence in N.T. the verb is often used of setting right what has previously gone wrong, rectifying and restoring, rather than merely bringing onwards to perfection. See Lightfoot on 1 Thessalonians 3:10 and J. A. Robinson on Ephesians 4:12. Such a word is admirably suited to the context; it suggests, without necessarily implying, that at present things are wrong and that a process of rectification is needed. See on 1:6 for the Pauline usage of placing ὑμῶν between the art. and the substantive. τοῦτοκαί (א A B D P 17, Latt.) rather than τοῦτοδὲκαί א 3 D3 E K L). 10. Διὰτοῦτο . ‘ For this cause,’ as 4:1, 7:13; 1 Corinthians 4:17, etc. ‘ Therefore’ (AV) may be kept for οὖν (1:17, 3:12, 5:6, 11:20, etc.), and ‘ wherefore’ for διό (1:20, 2:8, 4:13, etc.). It is because he desires their restoration and perfecting that he sends this letter before coming himself. But διὰτοῦτο may possible anticipate ἵνα and refer to what follows. ταῦταἀπὼνγράφω , ἵναπαρὼνμὴἀποτόμωςχρήσωμαι . ‘ When absent I write these things, that when present I may not deal sharply.’ The rare adverb (Titus 1:13; Wisd. 5:22) reflects its meaning upon ταῦτα : he writes sharply, that he may not have to act sharply. Ἀπότομος occurs Wisd. 5:20, 6:5, 11:10, 12:9, 18:15, and nowhere else in Bibl. Grk. This is further evidence (see on 4:4, 5:1, 5:9, 6:3, 6, 7, 8:20, 10:3, 5) that St Paul knew the Book of Wisdom. Χράομαι with an adv. and no dat. occurs Job 34:20 ; Isaiah 28:21 ; Daniel 8:7 ; Esther 1:19, Esther 9:27 . κατὰτὴνἐξουσίανἣνὁκύριοςἔδωκεν . This depends upon μὴἀποτόμωςχρ . He desires to be able to abstain from dealing sharply ‘ in accordance with the authority which the Lord gave me for building up and not for casting down’ (10:4, 8). Chastisement, if needed, would, of course, be for their building up; but at the moment it would look like demolition. Throughout the passage the Apostle’ s mind hovers between hope and fear, hope that the condition of the Corinthian Church may be better than he has been led to believe, and fear that he may have to use very drastic measures. There has been wrongdoing; of that there can be no doubt; he witnessed it himself during his second visit. But they may have repented, and there may have been no recurrence of grievous evils. On the other hand, the wrongdoers may be still impenitent, and others may be following their bad examples. He has no prejudice against any of them, and it will be a great delight to him to find that his misgivings are now baseless. But it is fair to them to declare plainly, that there will be a thorough investigation, and that impenitent transgressors, if they exist, will be severely dealt with. That unwelcome thought is now dismissed, and with a few affectionate sentences the Apostle brings his storm-tossed letter into a haven of love and peace. 13:11-13. , , AND If we adopt the hypothesis that the last four chapters are part of a letter written and sent before the first nine chapters, we need not, as some do, stop short at 13:10 as the end of the earlier fragment. Beyond reasonable doubt these remaining verses are the conclusion of the earlier letter, and from 10:1 to 13:13 (14) is all one piece. The change to an affectionate tone here, after the vehemence and severity of 10:1-8:10, is as natural and intelligible as the change in the opposite direction between chapters 9. and 10. is unnatural and perplexing. Secondly, there are fairly conspicuous links between these concluding verses and those which immediately precede them; καταρτίζεσθε recalls τὴνὑμῶνκατάρτισιν , while τὸαὐτὸφρονεῖτε , εἰρηνεύετε looks like a direct reference to his dread of finding ἔρις , ζῆλος , θυμοίκ .τ .λ . (12:20), rampant among them. There is nothing of the same kind between these concluding verses and the latter part of 9. Moreover, the hypothesis that the whole of the last portion of an earlier letter has become united with the whole of the first portion of a later one is not a violently improbable conjecture. That a section of the earlier letter has been inserted between the main portion and the conclusion of the later letter is much less easy to believe. See p. 385. 11. Λοιπόν . ‘ Finally’ ; lit. ‘ as to what remains’ (1 Corinthians 1:16, 1 Corinthians 1:4:2; 1 Thessalonians 4:1; 2 Timothy 4:8). Perhaps more colloquial than τὸλοιπόν (2 Thessalonians 3:1). See Lightfoot on Philippians 3:1, and on 1 Thessalonians 4:1. ἀδελφοί . Freq. in 1 Cor., rare in 2 Cor. 1— 9., and here only in 2 Cor. 10-13. They are still his brothers. χαίρετε . “ Neither ‘ farewell’ alone, nor ‘ rejoice’ alone” (Lightfoot on Philippians 4:4); but here the meaning ‘ farewell’ certainly prevails. ‘ Rejoice’ would be rather incongruous after οὐφείσομαι . Note the pres. imperat. in all the verbs; the good points indicated are to be lasting. ‘ Continue to do all these things.’ There must be a considerable process day by day to bring about complete spiritual restoration. καταρτίζεσθε . This seems clearly to refer to τὴνὑμῶνκατάρτισιν (v. 9). ‘ Work your way onwards to perfection.’ See on κατηρτισμένοι , 1 Corinthians 1:10, which is similar in meaning, and see the illustrations in Wetstein on Matthew 4:21. There is much that requires to be amended; many deficiencies remain to be made good, even if those who have been in sin are now penitent. παρακαλεῖσθε . This might mean ‘ be of good comfort’ (AV) or ‘ be comforted’ (RV), but more probably it means ‘ be exhorted,’ exhortamini (Vulg.), i.e. ‘ listen to my exhortations and entreaties.’ For ‘ comfort one another’ we should probably have παρακαλεῖτεἀλλήλους , as in 1 Thessalonians 4:18, 1 Thessalonians 5:11, or ἑαυτούς (cf. v. 5). τὸαὐτὸφρονεῖτε . ‘ Be of the same mind,’ ‘ Be harmonious in thought and aim.’ All Churches needed this exhortation (Romans 12:16, Romans 12:15:5; Philippians 2:2, Philippians 4:2), but no Church more than that of Corinth. This fits on well to the renderings given above; ‘ Farewell. Go on to perfection; follow my exhortations; be of the same mind.’ But such a sequence as ‘ Rejoice; be perfected; be comforted; be of the same mind,’ is rather disjointed. εἰρηνεύετε . ‘ Live in peace’ (1 Thessalonians 5:13; Romans 12:18; Mark 9:50). In LXX the verb is specially freq. in Job and Ecclus., but nowhere is there the exhortation εἰρηνεύετε . It is the natural result of τὸαὐτὸφρονεῖν . But there is a more momentous result, which is the crown of all. καὶὁΘεὸςτῆςἀγάπηςκαὶεἰρήνηςἔσταιμεθ ʼ ὑμῶν . This corresponds to the two preceding exhortations, τῆςἀγάπης to τὸαὐτὸφρονεῖτε , and εἰρήνης to εἰρηνεύετε . Cf. Luke 10:6. Vulg. usually has caritas for ἀγάπη , but here, although there is no diligo to influence the rendering, it has dilectio. ‘ The God of Peace’ is an expression which St Paul has elsewhere; Romans 15:33, Romans 15:16:20; Philippians 4:9; cf. 1 Corinthians 14:33; 2 Thessalonians 3:16; Hebrews 13:20. ‘ The God of love’ is used nowhere else. Even if the two preceding exhortations had not suggested the order, St Paul would probably have put ἀγάπη before εἰρήνη (Galatians 5:22). Some texts here change the order (D E L, d e Goth. Arm.), probably influenced by the passages in which ὁΘεὸςτῆςεἰρήνης occurs. 12. Ἀσπάσασθεἀλλήλους … ἀσπάζονταιὑμᾶςοἱἅγιοιπάντες . Salutations at the close of the letter are found in all four groups of the Pauline Epistles; those in 1 Corinthians 16:19-21 are specially full; still more so those in Romans 16:3-23. Cf. 1 Thessalonians 5:26; Colossians 4:10-15; Philemon 1:23; Titus 3:15; 2 Timothy 4:19-21. Papyri show that such salutations at the close of a letter were a common feature in ordinary correspondence, and ἀσπάζομαι is commonly the verb used. As in 1 Corinthians 16:20, the πάντες comes at the end with emphasis. The Apostle is sure that all the Christians with whom he is in touch in Macedonia will desire to “ send their love” to their brethren in Corinth. ἐνἁγίῳφιλήματι . We must follow א B D E K P, d e in reading thus here. No doubt the order ἐνφιλ . ἁγίῳ has been adopted in A F G L, f g Vulg. to make this passage agree with 1 Corinthians 16:20; 1 Thessalonians 5:26; Romans 16:16. See the notes on all three of these passages respecting the φίλημαἅλιον , and also Enc. Bibl. 4254, and Enc. Brit. art. ‘ Pax.’ The suggestion that the ‘ kiss of concord’ was already an institution in the synagogue has received confirmation from what seem to be Armenian quotations from Philo; and, if that is accepted, the view that the holy kiss in the Christian Church was never promiscuous, is confirmed. That the kiss given to a Rabbi suggested it is less probable. The sexes being separated in the synagogues, the men would kiss men, and the women would kiss women, and Christian assemblies would follow the same practice as a security that the φίλημα was ἅγιον . Nowhere in N.T. is the holy kiss connected with public worship. Justin (Apol. 1:65) connects it with the Eucharist, Tertullian (De Orat. 18) with all prayers, and he seems to imply that the kiss in some cases had become promiscuous; thus (Ad Uxor. 2:4) Quis in carcerem ad osculanda vincula martyris reptare patietur? Jam vero alicui fratrum ad osculum convenire? and (De virg. vel. 14) dum inter amplexus et oscula assidua concalescit. But it is not clear that these passages refer to the liturgical kiss. Express prohibition of the sexes kissing one another in public worship is found in the Apostolic Constitutions (2:57, 8:11). In the East, the kiss seems to have taken place before the consecration of the bread and wine; in the West, after it. Cyril of Jerusalem says of it; “ Think not that this kiss ranks with those given in public by common friends. It is not such; this kiss blends souls one with another, and solicits for them entire forgiveness. Therefore this kiss is the sign that our souls are mingled together and have banished all remembrance of wrong (Matthew 5:23). The kiss therefore is reconciliation, and for this reason is holy” (Catech. xxiii. 3). The substitution of a ‘ pax-bred’ (pax-board), which was kissed first by the clergy and then passed round to the congregation, is said to have been introduced in England by Archbishop Walter of York in 1250 and to have spread to other Churches. Disputes about precedence caused the congregational use of these tablets to be abandoned. The British Museum possesses richly ornamented examples of them. In the Greek Church the ‘ holy kiss’ seems to be represented by the priest’ s kissing ‘ the holy things’ (paten, chalice, and table) and by the deacon’ s kissing his orarion, where the figure of the cross is (J. N. W. B. Robertson, The Divine Liturgies, pp. 290-292). While ἁγίῳ has special point, being added in order to distinguish this kiss from the kisses of ordinary affection or respect, no special meaning is to be found in of οἰἅγιοι , as if they were to be distinguished from other believers who were not ἅγιοι . It has the usual meaning of ‘ Christians,’ those who by baptism had been ‘ consecrated’ to the service of God. Cf. 1:1, 8:4, 9:1, 12; etc. The πάντες comes last with emphasis; but Theodoret exaggerates its meaning when he suggests that St Paul is sending a salutation from the whole of Christendom. All the converts in Macedonia who knew that the Apostle was sending a letter to Corinth wished him to include a kind message from themselves. No salutations to individuals are needed, because St Paul is so soon coming himself. RV. and AV follow earlier English Versions in taking ἀσπάζονταιὑμᾶςοἱἅγιοιπάντες as a separate verse, v. 13, making the benediction which follows it to be v. 14. Gregory (Prolegomena, pp. 173 ff.) has collected a number of instances in which editions differ as to the divisions between verses. 13. ἩχάριςτοῦκυρίουἸησοῦ . The conjectures that this benediction, which is the fullest in wording and in meaning of all the benedictions in the Pauline Epistles, was written by the Apostle with his own hand (Hoffmann), and was already a formula current in the Churches which he had founded (Lietzmann), are interesting rather than probable. If the latter were correct, we should expect to find the same formula used in the benedictions at the close of later Epistles; whereas this triple form is unique. Evidently the simple form was the one which was usual with the Apostle himself. There are slight variations in wording, as to the insertion or omission of ἡμῶν , of Χριστοῦ (as by B here), of πάντων , and of τοῦπνεύματος before ὑμῶν , but it is only the ‘ Grace of the Lord Jesus’ that is mentioned. In no other benediction are ἡἀγάπητοῦΘεοῦ and ἡκοινωνίατοῦἁγίουπνεύματος expressed. And it is the fact that this simple form is the Apostle’ s usual form which accounts for the order here, ‘ the Lord Jesus Christ’ coming before ‘ God’ and ‘ the Holy Spirit.’ St Paul began to write according to the type found in his earlier (1 Thessalonians 5:28; 2 Thessalonians 3:18; Galatians 6:18; 1 Corinthians 16:23) and later (Philippians 4:23; Philemon 1:25) letters, and then for some reason made the benediction more full. The reason may have been either a wish to show that the severe passages which he has just dictated do not mean any abatement in his affection or in his desire for their spiritual advancement, or the thought that a community in which there had been so much party-spirit and contention required an abundant outpouring of the love of God and of the fellowship of the Holy Spirit. This is a more probable explanation of the order of the Divine Names than the suggestion that it is through the grace of Christ that we come to the love of God (Bengel). From different points of view either may be placed first. ‘ No man can come to Me, except the Father which sent Me draw him’ (John 6:44); and ‘ No one cometh unto the Father but by Me’ (John 14:6). The shortest forms of benediction are found in Colossians 4:18; 1 Timothy 6:21; 2 Timothy 4:22; Titus 3:15. The only one which comes near to this in fulness is Ephesians 6:23, Ephesians 6:24, but in that there is no mention of the Holy Spirit. Ἡχάρις is everywhere followed by μετά : it is the Pauline amplification of the ordinary conclusion of letters, ἔρρωσο or ἔρρωσθε , ἐρρῶσθαίσεεὔχομαι or ἐρρῶσθαιὑμᾶςεὔχομαι . Acts 15:29 we have Ἔρρωσθο , but Acts 23:30 must not be quoted for Ἔρρωσο , which is an interpolation. From 2 Thessalonians 3:17 we learn that this χάρις was σημεῖονἐνπάσῃἐπιστολῇ , and it is probable that he usually, if not invariably, wrote it with his own hand. See on 1 Cor. 6:21, 23. On the whole, it is safest to regard all three genitives as subjective; the grace which comes from the Lord Jesus Christ, the love which God inspires in the hearts of His children (cf. v. 11), the sense of membership which the Holy Spirit imparts to those who are united in one Body. But in either the second or the third case the genitive may be objective; love towards God, communion with the Spirit. “ No exegetical skill,” as Lietzmann remarks, can give us certainty as to the exact meaning of ἡκοινωνίατοῦἁγίονπνεύματος . See Bousset, ad loc. μετὰπάντωνὑμῶν . No one is excluded. He has had to say stern and sharp things to some of them; but to every one of them, even to those who have been his bitterest opponents, he sends his blessing. The πἀντων is exceptional in these benediction; cf. 2 Thessalonians 3:18. See Stanley, ad loc. This verse “ suggests beyond a doubt that beneath the religious life of the Apostolic age there lay a profound, though as yet unformulated faith in the tripersonality of God” (Swete, The Holy Spirit in the N.T. p. 198); in other words, “ that St Paul and the Church of his day thought of the Supreme Source of spiritual blessing as not single but threefold— threefold in essence, and not only in a manner of speech” (Sanday in Hastings, DB. 2. p. 213). It is egregium de ss. Trinitate testimonium (Bengel), for it reveals the background of the Apostle’ s thought, and shows that he was able to expect that language of this kind would be understood in so young a Church as that of Corinth. In 1 Corinthians 12:4-6 we have similar evidence of a sense of the threefold nature of the Source of all good; ‘ the same Spirit … the same Lord … the same God.’ But it is all undogmatic and undeveloped. Forty years later Clement of Rome (Cor. 46:3, 58:2) is more definite; “ one God and one Christ and one Spirit of grace” ; and “ as God liveth, and the Lord Jesus Christ liveth, and the Holy Spirit.” In both places he has the usual order, whereas St Paul has it in neither. Ephesians 4:4-6 ought not to be quoted as exactly parallel, the meaning of πνεῦμα being different. The Apostle frequently distinguishes between Jesus Christ as Κύριος and the Father as Θεός (1:3, 11:31; 1 Thessalonians 1:1; 2 Thessalonians 1:1, 2 Thessalonians 1:2, 2 Thessalonians 1:12, 2 Thessalonians 1:2:16, etc.). That he was acquainted with the tradition respecting the baptismal formula preserved in Matthew 28:19 cannot be inferred from this verse. Indeed, if he had been acquainted with it, we might here have had a nearer approach to the formula. Cf. Ephesians 2:18, 3:Ephesians 2:14-17; Hebrews 6:4-6; 1 John 3:23. 1 John 3:24, 1 John 3:4:2; Revelation 1:4, Revelation 1:5; Jude 1:20, Jude 1:21; and see Plummer, S. Matthew, pp. 432 ff. The triple benediction in Numbers 4:24-26 may be compared; ‘ Jehovah bless thee, and guard thee; Jehovah cause His face to shine upon thee, and show thee favour; Jehovah lift up His face towards thee, and appoint thee welfare.’ But there it is only the gifts that are distinguished, the Giver being the same throughout. See Gray, ad loc. B omits Χριστοῦ , but it may be retained. א * A B F G, 17 f g, etc., omit Ἀμήν , which here, as in most other places, is a liturgical addition at the end of the Epistles. The hypothesis that the last portion of one letter has been accidentally joined to the first portion of another letter is supported by the fact that this very thing has happened in the case of other documents belonging to primitive Christian literature. The true text of the Epistle to Diognetus ends abruptly at the tenth chapter. “ The two remaining chapters belong to some different work, which has been accidentally attached to it, just as in most of the extant MSS. the latter part of the Epistle of Polycarp is attached to the former part of the Epistle of Barnabas, so as to form in appearance one work” (Lightfoot, The Apostolic Fathers, p. 488). These MSS. “ are nine in number, and all belong to the same family, as appears from the fact that the Epistle of Polycarp runs on continuously into the Epistle of Barnabas without any break, the mutilated ending of Polycarp, § 9, ἀποθανόντακαὶδι ʼ ἠμᾶςὑπὸ , the mutilated ending of Polycarp, being followed by the mutilated beginning of Barnabas, § 5, τὸνλαὸνκαινὸνκ .τ .λ .” ibid. pp. 166 f.). See also Lightfoot, S. Clement of Rome, i. p. 5. The subscription, πρὸςΚορινθίουςδευτέραἐγράφηἀπὸΦιλίππωντῆςΜακεδονίαςδιὰΤίτουκαὶΛουκᾶ , has very little authority, although it is found in K, many cursives, Syr-Hark. and Copt. L omits ‘ of Macedonia’ ; Syr-Pesh. omits Luke; a few cursives add Barnabas. Philippi may be pure conjecture; Titus and Luke come from 8:18. The best authorities, א A B 17, have simply πρὸςΚορινθίουςβ . Cf. Plato, Phaedo, 63 E., δὶςκαὶτρὶςπίνειν .. “ When he arrives, he will proceed at once to hold a judicial investigation, and will carry it through with legal stringency” (Denney). As Erasmus puts it, quisquis delatus fuerit, is duorum out trium hominum testimonio vel absolvetur vel damnabitur. Cf. “ Judge not alone, for none may judge alone save One” (Pirqe Aboth, iv. 12). If this threat is referred to in 1:23, then this passage must have been written before that. See Rendall, p. 39. א (Fourth century). Codex Sinaiticus; now at Petrograd, the only uncial MS. containing the whole N.T. (Fifth century). Codex Alexandrinus, now in the British Museum. All of 2 Corinthians from ἐπίστευσα 4:13 to ἐξἐμοῦ 12:6 is wanting. B (Fourth century). Codex Vaticanus. D (Sixth century). Codex Claromontanus; now at Paris. A Graeco-Latin MS. The Latin (d) is akin to the Old Latin. Many subsequent hands (sixth to ninth centuries) have corrected the MS. information respecting the commentator is to be found in the volume on the First Epistle, pp. lxvi f. G (Late ninth century). Codex Boernerianus; at Dresden. Interlined with the Latin (in minluscules). The Greek text is almost the same as that of F, but the Latin (g) shows Old Latin elements. E (Ninth century). At Petrograd. A copy of D, and unimportant K (Ninth century). Codex Mosquensis; now at Moscow. L (Ninth century). Codex Angelicus; now in the Angelica Library at Rome. P (Ninth century). Codex Porfirianus Chiovensis, formerly possessed by Bishop Porfiri of Kiev, and now at Petrograd. d The Latin companion of F 17. (Evan. 33, Act_13. Ninth century). Now at paris. “ The queen of the cursives” and the best for the Pauline Epistles; more than any other it preserves Pre-Syrian readings and agrees with B D L. d The Latin companion of D d The Latin companion of E d The Latin companion of G F (Late ninth century). Codex Augiensis (from Reichenau); now at Trinity College, Cambridge. There is a similar change from sternness to gentleness between 2 Thessalonians 3:10-15 and 16-18. “ It is through the grace of Jesus (cf. 8:9) that Paul has learned of the love of God, and therefore the name of Jesus is significantly put first.” (McFadyen). Cf. Ephesians 2:18, which gives some support to this. C (Fifth century). Codex Ephraemi, a Palimpsest; now at Paris, very defective. Of 2 Corinthians all from 10:8 onwards is wanting.