7/11/02 
 LIBRARY OF THE THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY 
 
 PRINCETON, N. J. 
 
 From tne library of 
 PROF. WILLIAM HEIIRY GREEN 
 
 Division LJt O K.Lo (O 
 
 Section '....n^O I 
 
 Co 
 
 fi 
 
AN EXPOSITION 
 
 SECOi^D EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, 
 
 BY, 
 
 CHAELES HODGE, D.D., 
 
 PROFESSOR IN THE THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY, PRINCETON, N. J. 
 
 *l'*i!li!--^ 
 
 ;./ 
 
 NEW yOEK: 
 ROBERT CARTER & BROTHERS, 
 
 630 BROADWAY. 
 1860. 
 
Entered according to act of Congress, in the year 1S59, by 
 
 ROBEET CARTER & BROTHERS, 
 
 In the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the United States for the Southern District 
 
 of New York. 
 
 JOHN F. TROW, 
 
 PRINTER, 8TEKEOTYPER, AND EI-ECTROTTPER, 
 
 377 & 379 Broadway, cor. White-st. 
 
II. CORINTHIANS. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 The Salutation, vs. 1. 2. Thanksgiving to God for the deliverance and cou- 
 olation which the writer had experienced, vs. 3-11. Defence of himself 
 gainst the charge of inconstancy and inconsistency, vs. 12-24. 
 
 PauVs gratitude for the deliverance and consolation irJiich he 
 had experienced. Vs. 1-11. 
 
 After the apostle had written his former letter to the Cor- 
 inthians, and had sent Titus, either as the bearer of the letter 
 or immediately after its having been sent by other hands, to 
 ascertain the effect which it produced, he seems to have been 
 in a state of unusual depression and anxiety. The persecu- 
 tions to which he had been exposed in Asia placed him in 
 continued danger of death, 1, 8; and his solicitude about the 
 church in Corinth allowed him no inward peace, 7, 5. After 
 leaving Ephesus he went to Troas ; but although the most 
 promising prospects of usefulness there presented themselves, 
 he could not rest, but passed over into Macedonia in hopes of 
 meeting Titus and obtaining from him intelligence from Cor- 
 inth, 2, 12. 23. This letter is the outpouring of his heart oc- 
 casioned by the information which he received. More than 
 any other of Paul's epistles, it bears the impress of the strong 
 feelings under the influence of which it was written. That 
 the Corinthians had received his former letter with a proper 
 spirit, that it brought them to repentance, led them to ex- 
 communicate the incestuous person, and called forth, on the 
 
2 II. CORINTHIANS 1. 
 
 part of the larger portion of the congregation, the manifesta- 
 tion of the warmest afiection for the apostle, relieved his 
 mind from a load of anxiety, and filled his heart with grati- 
 tude to God. On the other hand, the increased boldness and 
 intiiience of the false teachers, the perverting errors Avhich 
 they inculcated, and the frivolous and calumnious charges 
 which they brought against himself, tilled him with indigna- 
 tion. This accounts for the abrupt transitions from one sub- 
 ject to another, the sudden changes of tone and manner which 
 characterize this epistle. When writing to the Corinthians as 
 a church obedient, aifectionate, and penitent, there is no limit 
 to his tenderness and love. His great desire seems to be to 
 heal the temporary breach which had occurred between them, 
 and to assure his readers that aU was forgiven and forgotten, 
 and that his heart was entirely theirs. But v/hen he turns to 
 the wicked, designing corrupters of the truth among them, 
 there is a tone of severity to be found in no other of his writ- 
 ings, not even in his epistle to the Galatians. Erasmus com- 
 pares this epistle to a river which sometimes flows in a gentle 
 stream, sometimes rushes down as a torrent bearing all before 
 it ; sometimes spreading out like a placid lake ; sometimes 
 losing itself, as it were, in the sand, and breaking out in 
 its fulness in some unexpected place. Though perhaps the 
 least methodical of Paul's writings, it is among the most in- 
 teresting of his letters as bringing out the man before the 
 reader and revealing his intimate relations to the people for 
 whom he laboured. The remark must be borne in mind 
 (often made before), that the full play allowed to the pecuh- 
 arities of mind and feeling of the sacred writers, is in no way 
 inconsistent Avith their plenary inspiration. The grace of 
 God in conversion does not change the natural character of 
 its subjects, but accommodates itself to all their peculiarities 
 of disposition and temperament. And the same is true with 
 regard to the influence of the Spirit in inspiration. 
 
 The salutation in this epistle is nearly in the same words 
 as in the former letter, vs. 1. 2. Here also as there, the intro- 
 duction is a thanksgiving. As these expressions of gratitude 
 are not mere forms, but genuine efl'usions of the heart, they 
 vary according to the circumstances under which each epistle 
 was written. Here the thanksgiving was for consolation. 
 Paul blesses God as the God of all mercy for the consolation 
 which he had experienced. He associates, or rather identifies 
 himself with the Corinthians ; representing his afflictions as 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 1, 1.2. 3 
 
 theirs and his consolation also as belonging to them, vs. 3-7. 
 He refers to the afflictions which came upon him in Asia, so 
 that he desj^aired of life, but through their prayers God who 
 had dehvered, still delivered, and he was assured, would con- 
 tinue to deliver him, vs. 8-11. 
 
 1. 2. Paul, an apostle of Jesus Cluist by the 
 Avill of God, and Timothy (om-) brother, unto the 
 church of God which is at Corinth, with all the saints 
 which are in all Achaia : Grace (be) to you, and peace, 
 from God our Pather, and (from) our Lord Jesus 
 Christ. 
 
 The sense in which the word apostle is to be here taken, 
 the force of the expression hy the icill of Gocl^ the scriptural 
 meaning of the words church and saints^ are all stated in the 
 remarks on the first verse of the former epistle. In the first 
 epistle Paul associates Sosthenes with himself in the saluta- 
 tion ; here it is Timothy who is mentioned. In neither case 
 is there any community of ofiice or authority implied. On 
 the contrary, a marked distinction is made between Paul the 
 apostle and Sosthenes or Timothy the brother, i. e. the Chris- 
 tian companion of the apostle. From 1 Cor. 4, 17 it appears 
 that Timothy was in Macedonia, on his way to Corinth, when 
 the first epistle was written. From the form of expression 
 (if Timothy come) in 1 Cor. 16, 10, and from the absence of 
 any intimation in this epistle that Paul had received from him 
 the information from Corinth which he was so desirous to ob- 
 tain, it is doubtful whether Timothy had been able to reach 
 that city. At any rate he was now with the apostle at Ni- 
 copoUs or some other city in Macedonia. With all the saints 
 ichich are in all Achaia. This epistle was not intended ex- 
 clusively for the Christians in Corinth, but also for all the be- 
 lievers scattered through the province who were connected 
 with the church in Corinth. These believers were probably 
 not collected into separate congregations, otherwise the apos- 
 tle would have used the plural form, as when writing to the 
 churches of Galatia, Gal. 1, 3. Achaia was originally the 
 name of the northern part of the Peloponnesus including Cor- 
 intli and its isthmus. Augustus divided the whole country 
 into the two provinces, Macedonia and Achaia; the former 
 included Macedonia proper, Illyricum, Epirus and Thessaly ; 
 
4 II. CORINTHIANS 1, 2.3. 
 
 and the latter all the southern part of Greece. It is in this 
 wide sense Achaia is always nsed in the New Testament. 
 From this it aj^pears that the converts to Christianity in 
 Greece were at this time very few out of Corinth, as they 
 were all members of the church ui that city. Grace and 
 2)eace^ the favour of God and its fruits, comprehend all the 
 benefits of redemption. The apostle's j^rayer is not only that 
 believers may be the objects of the love of God our Father 
 and of Jesus Christ our Lord, but that they may have the 
 assurance of that love. He knew that the sense of the love 
 of God would keep their hearts in perfect peace. God is our 
 Father, Jesus Christ is our Lord. Every one feels the dis- 
 tinction in this relationship, whether he reduces it to clear 
 conceptions in his own mind or not. God, as God, is our 
 father because he is the father of all spirits, and because, if 
 believers, we are born agam by his Spirit, and adopted as his 
 children, made the objects of his love and the heirs of his 
 kingdom. Jesus Christ, the eternal Son of God clothed in 
 our nature^ is our Lord, for two reasons : first, because as 
 God he is our absolute sovereign ; and secondly, because as 
 Redeemer he has purchased us by his own most precious 
 blood. To him, therefore, as God and Redeemer, our alle- 
 giance as Christians is specially due. 
 
 3. Blessed (be) God, even the Father of our Lord 
 Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies, and God of all 
 comfort. 
 
 This richness and variety of designations for the object of 
 his reverence and gratitude, shows how full was the apostle's 
 heart, and how it yearned after fellowship with God, to whom 
 he places himself in every possible connection by thus multi- 
 plying the terms expressive of the relations which God bears 
 to his redeemed people. Blessed. The word ^vkoy-qro^ 
 (blessed) is used in the New Testament only of God. (In 
 Luke 1,28, where the Virgin Mary is spoken of, ivXoyqixiirq is 
 used.) It expresses at once gratitude and adoration. Adored 
 be God ! is the expression of the highest veneration and 
 thankfulness. It is not God merely as God, but as the Father 
 of our Lord Jesus Christ who is the object of the apostle's 
 adoration and gratitude. The cxjn-ession does not refer to 
 the miraculous conception of our Lord, but the person ad- 
 dressed is he whose eternal Son assumed our nature, who, as 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 1, 4. 6 
 
 invested with that nature, is our Lord Jesus Christ. It is he 
 who so loved the world that he gave his only-begotten Son, 
 that whoso believeth in him might not perish but have 
 everlasting life. It is therefore the peculiar, characteristic 
 Christian designation of God, as it presents him as the God 
 of redemption. Rom. 15,6. 2 Cor. 11, 31. Col. 1, 3. I Pet. 1, 3. 
 This God who has revealed himself as the God of love in 
 sending his Son for our redemption, the apostle still further 
 designates as the Fcither of mercies, i. e. the most merciful 
 Father ; he whose characteristic is mercy. Comp. Ps. 86, 5. 15, 
 Dan. 9, 9. Micah 7, 18. The explanation which makes the 
 expression mean the author of mercies is inconsistent with the 
 signification of the word oIktip/xos, which 151 ways means mercy 
 as a feeling. Tfie God of all comfort, ''^his most merciful 
 Father is the God, i. e. the author of all, i. e. of all possible, 
 consolation. God is the author of consolation not only by 
 delivering us from evil, or by ordering our external circum- 
 stances, but also, and chiefly, by his inward influence on the 
 mind itself, assuaging its tumults and filling it with joy and 
 peace in believing. Rom. 15, 13. 
 
 4. Who comforteth us in all our tribulation, that 
 we may be able to comfort them which are in any 
 trouble, by the comfort wherewith we ourselves are 
 comforted of God. 
 
 Us here refers to the apostle himself. Throughout this 
 chapter. he is speaking of his own personal trials and consola- 
 tions. He blessed God as the author of comfort, because he 
 had experienced his consolations. And the design, he adds, 
 of God m afllicting and in consoling was to quahfy him for 
 the office of a consoler of the afflicted. In this design Paul 
 acquiesced ; he was wilhng to be thus afflicted in order to be 
 the bearer of consolation to others. A life of ease is com- 
 monly stagnant. It is those who suffer much and who expe- 
 rience much of the comfort of the Holy Ghost, who live 
 much. Their fife is rich in experience and in resources. In 
 all our trihulation, i. e. on account of (eVt). His tribulation 
 was the ground or reason why God comforted him. The 
 apostle was one of the most afflicted of men. He suffered 
 from hunger, cold, nakedness, stripes, imprisonment, from 
 perils by sea and land, from robbers, from the Jews, from the 
 
6 II. CORINTHIANS 1, 5. 
 
 heathen, so that his life was a continued death, or, as he ex- 
 pressed it, he died daily. Besides these external afflictions 
 he was overwhelmed with cares and anxiety for the churches. 
 And as though all this were not enough, he had " a thorn in 
 the flesh, a messenger of Satan," to buffet him. See 11, 24-30, 
 and 12, 1. In the midst of all these trials God not only sus- 
 tained him, but filled him with such a heroic spirit that he 
 actually rejoiced in being thus afflicted. " I take pleasure," 
 he says, " in infirmities, in reproaches, in necessities, in perse- 
 cutions, in distresses for Christ's sake ; for when I am weak, 
 then am I strong," 12, 10. This state of mind can be experi- 
 enced only l)y tliose^vdio are so tilled with the love of Christ, 
 that they r e j oic^ifr*^ very thing, however painful to them- 
 selves, whereby history is pi'bmoted. And where this state 
 of mind exists, no afflictions can equal the consolations by 
 which they are attended, and therefore the apostle adds, that 
 he was enabled to comfort those who were in any kind of 
 affliction by the comfort wherewith he was comforted of God. 
 
 5. Tor as the sufferings of Christ abound in us, so 
 our consolation aboundeth by Christ. 
 
 This is a confirmation of what precedes. 'We are able to 
 comfort others, foi' our consolations are equal to our suffer- 
 ings.' The sufferings of Christy do not mean 'sufierings 
 on account of Christ,' which the force of the genitive case 
 does not admit ; nor sufferings which Christ endures in his 
 own members; but such sufferings as Christ suffered, and 
 which his people are called upon to endure in virtue of 
 their union with him and in order to be like him. Our Lord 
 said to his disciples, " Ye shall indeed drink of my cup, and 
 be baptized with the baptism wherewith I am baptized with," 
 Matt. 20, 23. Paul speaks of his felloicsJiip^ or participation 
 in the suffermgs of Christ, Phil. 3, 10; and the apostle Peter 
 calls upon believers to rejoice, inasmuch as they are " par- 
 takers of Christ's sufferings," 1 Peter 4, 24. Comp. Rom. 8, 
 17. Col. 1, 24. Gal. 6, 17. In many other passages it is taught 
 that believers must share in the sufferings, if they are to be 
 partakers of the glory of Christ. >S'o, i. e. in equal measure, 
 our consolation aboundeth through Christ. As union with 
 Christ was the source of the afflictions which Paul endured, 
 so it was the source of the abundant consolation which he en- 
 joyed. This makes the great difference between the sorrows 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 1, 6.7. f 
 
 of believers and those of unbelievers. Alienation from Christ 
 does not secure freedom from suffering, but it cuts us off 
 from the only source of consolation. Therefore the sorrow 
 of the world worketh death. 
 
 6, 7, And whether we be afflicted, (it is) for your 
 consolation and salvation, which is effectual to the en- 
 during of the same sufferings which we also suffer : or 
 whether we be comforted, (it is) for your consolation 
 and salvation. And our hope of you (is) stedfast, 
 knowing that as ye are partakers of the sufferings, so 
 (shall ye be) also of the consolation. 
 
 Although the ancient manuscripts differ very much in the 
 order in which the several clauses of these verses are ar- 
 ranged, yet the sense expressed in all is substantially the 
 same. The text adopted by Beza, Griesbach, Kuapp, Meyer, 
 <fec., on the authority of the manuscripts A, C, and several of 
 the ancient versions, reads thus, " Whether we be afiiicted, 
 (it is) for your consolation and salvation ; whether we are 
 comforted, (it is) for your consolation, which is effectual in 
 enduring the same sufferings which we also suffer ; and our 
 hope of you is stedfast, knowing that as ye are partakers of 
 the suffering, so also (shall ye be) of the consolation." The 
 reading adopted by Lachmann, Tischendorf, Riickert and oth- 
 ers, differs from the common text in placing the clause oicr 
 hope of you is stedfast, immediately after the first member 
 of the sentence, and before the words, ichether we are com- 
 forted. For this arrangement are the MSS. B, D, E, F, G, I. 
 The reading of Beza gives the text in its simplest and most 
 perspicuous form. In either way the main idea is, ' Whether 
 we be afflicted, it is for your good ; or whether we be com- 
 forted, it is for your good.' All the rest is subordinate. The 
 relation in which the apostle stood to the Corinthians was 
 such that he felt assured that they would share both in his 
 sufferings and in his consolation, and therefore experience 
 the benefit of both. It was not that Paul's constancy in su^ 
 fering set them a good example ; nor simply that Paul suf- 
 fered in behalf of the Gospel, and therefore for the benefit of 
 others ; nor does he mean merely that the experience of the 
 Corinthians would correspond to his, if they were similarly 
 
8 II. CORINTHIANS 1, 6.7. 
 
 afflicted, they would be similarly comforted; but the main 
 idea is that such was the intimate bond between them and 
 him that he had a firm hope they would be partakers both of 
 his affliction and of his consolation. Though this appears to 
 be the primary idea of the passage, the others are not to be 
 excluded. Paul no doubt felt, and intended to intimate, that 
 his diversified experience would redound to their advantage 
 by qualifying him more abundantly for his work, and especial- 
 ly for the office of consoling them in the afflictions which they, 
 as well as he, would be called to endure. Whether we he af- 
 flicted (it is) for your consolation and salvation ; i. e. my 
 afflictions will contribute to your consolation and salvation. 
 To the former, because those whom God afflicts, or, who suf- 
 fer for Christ's sake and with Christ's people, God never tails 
 to console ; to the latter, because suffering and sah^ation are 
 so intimately connected. " If we suffer with him we shall also 
 be glorified together," Rom. 8, 17. It is not of suffering as 
 suffering that the apostle here speaks. There is no tendency 
 in pain to produce holiness. It is only of Christian suffering 
 and of the sufferings of Christians, that is, of suffering endured 
 for Christ and in a Christian manner, that the apostle says it 
 is connected with salvation, or that it tends to work out for 
 those "who suffer an eternal weight of glory. Or lohether we 
 be comforted it is for your consolation. That is, our consola- 
 tion is also yours. If we are consoled, so are you. If we suf- 
 fer together, we rejoice together. Or, if you suffer as I do, 
 you will enjoy similar consolation. My being consoled ena- 
 bles me to console you. According to the common text the 
 reading here is, " your consolation and salvation.^^ But the 
 repetition of the words a?id salvatlo7i is not sustained by some 
 of the oldest manuscripts, and they do not cohere so well with 
 the following clause ; as it can hardly be said that " salva- 
 tion is effectual in enduring affliction." On these grounds, as 
 before remarked, Beza and many other editors omit the words 
 in question. Which is effectual ; that is, which consolation 
 is operative or efficacious, not to the enduring, as in our ver- 
 sion, but in the enduring {Iv xnrofxovrj). This consolation 
 shows its efficacy in the patient endurance of suffering. Ac- 
 cording to another interpretation €V€pyovfx€vr]<; is taken passive- 
 ly, which is wroufjJtt out. The sense would then be good, 
 * This consolation is wrought out or experienced in patient 
 endurance.' But as Paul always uses this word actively, the 
 rendering adopted in our version is generally and properly 
 
II. CORINTHIAISrS 1, 8. 9 
 
 preferred. The same sufferings ichich I also suffer. The 
 sufferings of the Corinthians were the same with those of the 
 apostle, because they sympathized in his afflictions, because 
 they in a measure suffered as he did, and because their suffer- 
 ings were " the sufferings of Christ," in the same sense that 
 his were. They were not only such sufferings as Christ en- 
 dured, but they were incurred because those who suffered 
 were Christians. And our hope of you is stedfast. That is, 
 ' we have a stedfast hope that you ^^ill be partakers of our 
 consolation.' Knowing^ i. e. because we know, that as ye are 
 partakers of the sufferings^ so also of the consolation. The 
 two go together. Those who share in our sorrows, share in 
 our joys. There are two ideas apparently united here as in 
 the preceding context. The one is that the sufferings of the 
 apostle were also the sufferings of the Corinthians because of 
 the union between them. The other is, that his readers were 
 in their measure exposed to the same kind of sufferings. In 
 this twofold sense they were the Kotvcovot, the communicants 
 or joint-partakers of his joys and sorrows. 
 
 8. For we would not, brethren, have you ignorant 
 of our trouble, which came to us m Asia, that we were 
 pressed out of measiu-e, above strength, insomuch that 
 we despaired even of life. 
 
 The apostle confirms from the facts of his recent history, 
 what he had said of his afflictions. Asia is probably to be 
 understood here in reference to proconsular Asia, which com- 
 prehended the western provinces of Asia Minor, viz., Mysia, 
 Lydia, Caria, and part of Phrygia. What afflictions and dan- 
 gers the apostle here refers to is uncertain. It is generally 
 assumed that he alludes to the uproar in Ephesus, of which 
 mention is made in Acts 19, 23-41. But to this it is objected 
 that Paul does not appear to have been in personal danger 
 during that tumult ; that instead of saying in Asia he would 
 probably have said m Ephesus^ had he referred to that special 
 event ; and that the language used seems obviously to imjDly 
 a succession and continuance of severe trials. Others think 
 that the reference is to some severe iUness. But there is 
 nothing in the context to indicate that particular form of af- 
 fliction. Neither could illness naturally be included under 
 the " afflictions of Christ," under which head the apostle com- 
 
10 II. CORINTHIANS 1,9. 
 
 prehends all the afflictions to which in this connection he re- 
 fers. The probability is that he alludes to trials of different 
 kinds, and especially to plots and attempts against his life. 
 He was surrounded by enemies, Jews and heathen, who thirst- 
 ed for his blood. And we know, as remarked above, that the 
 Acts of the Apostles contains the record of only a small por- 
 tion of his afflictions. That we were pressed^ e/Jap^^T^/xcv, ice 
 loere burdened. The allusion is to a wearied animal that sinks 
 in despair under a burden beyond its strength. Out of meas- 
 ure^ nbove strength ; if thus separated, the former of these 
 phrases refers to the character of his afflictions in themselves, 
 'they were excessive ; ' and the latter, expresses their relation 
 to his abiUty to bear them. Absolutely, they were too great, 
 relatively, they were above his strength. Many commenta- 
 tors make the former qualify the latter, " We were burdened 
 far beyond our strength" (Ka^' vTrepjSoXrjv v-n-ep hvvafjuv). Inso- 
 much that ice desjmired even of life. The expression is in- 
 tensive, i^aTTopyj'^rjvaL, to be Utterly/ at a loss, or, absolutely 
 without a way {-Tropos) of escape. It seemed impossible to the 
 apostle that he could escape from the enemies who beset him 
 on every side. These enemies were not only men, but perils 
 and trials of all kinds. 
 
 9. But we had the sentence of death m ourselves, 
 that we should not trust in ourselves, but in God who 
 raiseth the dead. 
 
 So far from expecting to live, the apostle says, on the con- 
 trary {oKXa) he had in himself the senteiice of death. This 
 may mean that he was as one who was actually condemned to 
 die. God appeared to have passed upon him the sentence of 
 death, from which there could be no reprieve. This supposes 
 dTTOKpt/xa to liave the sense of KaraKpt/xa. This meaning of the 
 word is very doubtful. It jiroperly signifies response^ answer. 
 ' We had in ourselves the answer of death.' That is, when lie 
 put to himself the question, Avhether lite or death was to be 
 the issue of his conHicts, the answer was. Death ! In other 
 words, he did not expect to escape with his life. God brought 
 him into these straits in order that he might not trust in him- 
 self, but in God who raiseth the dead. Tliese two things are 
 BO connected that the f)rmer is the necessary condition of the 
 latter. There is no such thing as implicit conlidencc or reli- 
 
II. CORII^THIANS 1, 10.11. 11 
 
 ance on God, until we renounce all confidence in ourself. 
 When Paul was convinced that no wisdom nor eftbrts of his 
 own could deliver him from death, then he was forced to rely 
 on the power of God. God is here described as he icho rais- 
 eth the clead^ because the apostle's deliverance was a deliver- 
 ance from death. It was only that Being who could call 
 the dead to life who could rescue him from fhe imminent peril 
 hi which he was placed. So when Abraham's faith was put 
 to the severe trial of belie\T[ng what was apparently impossi- 
 ble, it is said, " He believed God who quickeneth the dead, 
 and calleth those things which be not as though they were," 
 Rom. 4, 17. Comp. Heb. 11, 19. No man until he is tried 
 knows how essential the omnipotence of God is as a ground 
 of confidence to his people. They are often placed in circum- 
 stances where nothmg short of an almighty helper can give 
 them peace. 
 
 10. Who delivered us from so great a death, and 
 doth dehver : in whom we trust that he will yet de- 
 liver (us). 
 
 Paul's trust in God was not disappointed. He did deliver 
 him from such a death^ i. e. one so fearful and apparently so 
 inevitable. It is evident from the whole context that the 
 apostle had not only been in immuient peril, but exposed to a 
 more than ordinarily painful death. Whether this was from 
 disease or from enemies is a matter of conjecture. The latter 
 is the more probable. Though he had been delivered from 
 the instant and fearful death with which he was threatened, 
 the danger was not over. The machinations of his enemies 
 followed him wherever he went. He therefore says that God 
 had not only delivered, but that he continued to dehver him. 
 He was still beset with danger. He was however confident 
 for the future. For he adds, in lohom ice trusty ets ov rjXTTLKafxev, 
 on lohom v:e have j^^ciced our hope that he loill also henceforth 
 deliver. He did, he does, he will, deliver, ippvaaro, pverat, 
 pvo-erai. The experience of past deliverances and mercies is 
 the ground of present peace and of confidence for the future. 
 These words of Paul sound continually in the ears of the peo- 
 ple of God in all times of emergency. 
 
 11. Ye also helping together by prayer for us, that 
 
12 II. CORINTHIANS ], 11. 
 
 for the gift (bestowed) upon us by the means of many 
 persons, thanks may be given by many on our behalf. 
 
 Intercessory prayer has great power, otherwise Paul 
 would not so often solicit it on his own behalf, and enjoin the 
 duty on his readers. His confidence in his safety for the fu- 
 ture was not founded simply on the experience of God's past 
 mercy, but also on the prayers of Christians in his behalf. 
 God will yet deliver me, he says, you also helping together hy 
 prayer. That is, provided you join your prayers with those 
 of others for my safety. Helping together probably refers to 
 their co-operation in the work of intercession with other 
 churches, rather than with the apostle himself. The design 
 of God in thus uniting his peoi:)le in praying for each other 
 when in affliction or danger, is that the deliverance may be 
 matter of common gratulation and praise. Thus all hearts 
 are drawn out to God and Christian fellowship is promoted. 
 This is expressed in the latter part of this verse ; that^ i. e. in 
 order that the gift being hestoiced on us hy rneans of many 
 (8ta TToWZiv) thanks may he rendered hy m^any (Ik ttoWCjv). 
 In the Greek it is ck ttoAAwv TrpocrcoTrajv, which most commenta- 
 tors render as our translators do, hy many persons. The 
 word Trpoo-wTTov, however, always elsewhere in the New Testa- 
 ment means face or presence^ which sense many retain here. 
 ' That thanks may be rendered from many (upturned) faces.' 
 According to the interpretation given above, the words 8ta 
 iroXXiov are connected with to xap^cr/xa, " the favour to us by 
 means of many;" and ck ttoXAojv Trpoo-wTrwv with cuxapco-^T-/, 
 'thanks maybe rendered by many persons (or faces).' This 
 gives a good sense, and is perhaps better suited to the force 
 of the prepositions €< and 8ia. It is more correct to say that 
 the ' favour was {Std) by means of many,' i. e. by means of 
 their prayer, than that it ' was (cV) out of or %,' as express- 
 ing the efficient cause. The order of the clauses, however, 
 favours the connection adopted by our translators. ' The fa- 
 vour was by many persons, and the thanks to be rendered by 
 means of many.' This construction of the sentence is also 
 sanctioned by the majority of commentators. 
 
 77ie apfOstWs defence agai^ist the charge of inconstancy 
 Vs. 12-24. 
 
 Paul had informed the Corinthians that it was his purpose 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 1, 12. 13 
 
 to go direct from Ephesus to Corinth, thence into Macedonia, 
 and back again to Corinth, y. 16. This plan he had been in- 
 duced to modify before the former epistle was sent, as in 
 1 Cor. 16, 5 he tells them he would not visit them until he 
 had passed through Macedonia. On this slight ground his 
 enemies in Corinth represented him as saying one thing and 
 meaning another. They seem also to have made this an oc- 
 casion for charging him with like inconsistency in doctrine. 
 If his word could not be depended on in small matters, what 
 dependence could be placed on his preaching ? Paul shows 
 there was no levity or insincerity involved in this change of 
 his plans, and no inconsistency in his preaching ; but that to 
 spare them he had deferred his visit to Corinth, vs. 12-24. 
 
 12. For our rejoicing is this, the testimony of our 
 conscience, that in simplicity and godly sincerity, not 
 in fleshly wisdom, but by the grace of God, we have 
 had our conversation in the world, and more abundant- 
 ly to you-ward. 
 
 The connection between this verse and what precedes, as 
 indicated by the particle /br, is, ' I look for your sympathy in 
 my afflictions, and for your prayers in my behalf, for my con- 
 science bears testimony to the simplicity and sincerity of my 
 conversation among you.' Unless we are conscious of integri- 
 ty towards others, we cannot be assured of their confidence in 
 us. Our rejoicing^ says Paul, is this, the testhnoJiy of our 
 conscience. This may mean that the testimony of conscience 
 was the ground oi\i\^ rejoicing. This assumes a metonymical 
 sense of the KavxqfTi^;, a meaning which is often attributed to 
 the word. But as the word may express the inward feeling 
 of exultation as well as the outvrard expression of it, which 
 latter is its proper sense, the meaning may be (without assum- 
 ing any metonomy), 'My joyful confidence consists in the 
 consciousness of sincerity.' The testimony of the conscience 
 is consciousness ; and that of which Paul was conscious was 
 integrity. And that consciousness sustained and elevated 
 him. It was in its nature a joy. What follows is explanato- 
 ry. His conscience testified that in simplicity and godly sin- 
 cerity, &G. The word a-n-XoTrj^ means singleness of mind, the 
 opposite of dupUcity. The ancient manuscripts A, B, C, read 
 
U II. CORINTHIANS 1, 12. 
 
 ayioTT/?, purity or sanctity^ which the recent editors generally 
 adopt. The former word is much more common in Paul's 
 writings, and is better suited to the following term, ciXtKptVeta, 
 w^hich means translucence, clearness, sincerity of mind. It is 
 called the sincerity of God^ which our translators exj^Iain as 
 meaning godly sincerity, either in the sense of religious, as 
 distinguished from mere natural sincerity as a moral virtue ; 
 or in the sense of divine, what comes from God. The latter 
 is the true explanation. It is the sincerity which God gives.. 
 The Bible often uses such expressions as " the peace of God," 
 "joy of the Spirit," &c., meaning the peace or joy of which 
 God or the Spirit is the author. There is a specific diiference 
 between moral virtues and spiritual graces, although they are 
 called by the same names. Simplicity, sincerity, meekness, 
 long-suffering, when the fruits of the Spirit differ from the 
 moral virtues designated by those terms, as many external 
 things, though similar in appearance, often differ in their in- 
 ward nature. A religious man and a moral man may be very 
 much alike in the eyes of men, though the inward life of the 
 latter is human, and that of the former is divine. What Paul 
 means here to say is, that the virtues which distinguished his 
 deportment in Corinth were not merely forms of his own ex- 
 cellence, but forms of the divine life ; modes in which the 
 Spirit of God which dwelt in him manifested itself. This is 
 expressed more clearly in what follows. N'ot in fleshly wis- 
 dom, that is, not in that w^isdom which has its origin in our 
 own nature. The familiar meaning of the word fl.esh in the 
 New Testament, especially in the writings of St. Paul, is hu- 
 man nature as it now is, as distinguished from the Sjjirit of 
 God. " Ye are not in the flesh," says this apostle, " but in 
 the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you," Rom. 
 8, 9. As our nature is corru2)t, natural or fleshly necessarily 
 involves more or less the idea of corruption. The natural 
 man, carnal mind, fleshly wsdom, all imi)ly that idea more or 
 less, according to the context. Fleshly wisdom, therefore, is 
 that kind of wisdom which unrenewed men arc wont to ex- 
 hibit, wisdom guided by principles of self-interest or expedi- 
 ency. It stands opposed to the yrace of God. Paul was not 
 guided by the fofmer, but by the latter. The grace of God 
 controlled his conduct ; and by grace is here meant, as sg 
 often elsewhere, the gracious influences of the Spirit. We 
 have liad our conversation ; avccrTpd(}i7]ix(v, tee moved about, m'c 
 conducted ourselves. The expression includes all the mani- 
 
II. CORINTHIAlSrS 1, 13. 14. 15 
 
 festations of his inward life. In the worlds i. e. amonj^ mon 
 generally; and more especially to yoii-icard. That is, the 
 evidence of my sincerity is much more abundant to you than 
 to others. The Corinthians had enjoyed more opportunities 
 of learning the character of the apostle, and of seeing his sim- 
 plicity and integrity, than the world, or men outside of the 
 church, had possessed. He could therefore the more confi- 
 dently assume that they confided in him. 
 
 13. 14. Tor we write none other things unto you, 
 than what ye read or acknowledge, and I trust ye shall 
 acknowledge even to the end; as also ye have ac- 
 knowledged us m part, that we are your rejoicing, 
 even as ye also (are) ours in the day of the Lord 
 Jesus. 
 
 The same sincerity and honesty marked his correspond- 
 ence that characterized his life. He never wrote one thing 
 and meant another. The connection with the preceding verse 
 is, ' We are perfectly honest, for we Avrite none other things 
 than what ye read.* The simple, obvious meaning of my let- 
 ter, is the true meaning. I write^ i. e. I mean none other 
 things than what you understand me to intend when you 
 read my letters, or know from other sources. The word 
 cTTiytvcoo-KeTe may be rendered as in our version, ye aclcnowl- 
 edge. The sense would then be, 'I mean nothing else but 
 what you read or acknowledge to be my meaning.' But this 
 is not so clear. The design of the apostle is to show that his 
 purposes really were what his letters indicated, or what the 
 Corinthians, by other means, had been led to understand them 
 to be. The words are, " Ye read, or also (rj Kai) know," and 
 I trust ye shall acknoicledge to the end. This clause may be 
 connected with what precedes. ' I mean what you know, and 
 I trust shall continue to acknowledge, to be my meaning.' 
 That is, ' I have confidence that you will not misunderstand 
 or misinterpret my intentions until we all come to the end ; ' 
 €ws TcXovs, to the end., either of life, or of the world. A much 
 better sense is obtained by connecting this clause with what 
 follows, so that the clause (ort Kavxqfxa vjxoiv iafxev), that v:e are 
 your rejoicing., is the object of the verb (cTriyi'wo-co-Je) ye shall 
 
16 II. CORINTHIANS 1, 15.16. 
 
 acknowledge. *I trust ye shall acknowledge unto the end 
 (as ye have acknowledged us in part), that we are your re- 
 joicing.' The verb cTrtytvcoo-Kcti/ combines the ideas of recog- 
 nition and of complete knowledge. The words in part are 
 most naturally referred to the Corinthians, ye in part^ i. e. a 
 part of you. Paul knew that there were some in Corinth 
 who did not rejoice in him. Others understand them to 
 qualify the verb. It was only a partial recognition of him 
 that the Corinthians had as yet manifested. Compare 1 Cor. 
 13, 12, "I know in part." This, however, would give a tone 
 of reproach to the language which is foreign to the charac- 
 ter of the passage. TFe are your rejoicing^ i. e. the ground 
 of your exultation and delight. As ye also ours, in the day 
 of the Lord, Jesus. Paul believed that in the day of the Lord 
 Jesus the Corinthians would rejoice over him as he would re- 
 joice over them. In that day they w^ould appreciate the 
 blessedness of having had him for their teacher, as he would 
 rejoice in having had them for his converts. The joy, how- 
 ever, which he anticipated in its fulness \vhen Christ should 
 come, was in a measure already theirs. 'We are, and shall 
 be, your rejoicing, as ye are and shall be ours, in the day of 
 the Lord Jesus.' Instead of rendering ort in the above clause 
 that many commentators render it because. This gives a dif- 
 ferent sense to the whole passage. ' We hope you will ac- 
 knowledge — because we are your rejoicing, as ye are ours.' 
 This, however, leaves the verb acknowledge without an object. 
 What w^ere they to acknowledge ? We may indeed supply 
 from the context the words our sincerity, but it is more natural 
 so to construe the passage as to avoid the necessity of supply- 
 ing any thing. The sense also is better according to the com- 
 mon interpretation. Paul does not design to prove that the 
 Corinthians confided in him because he was their rejoicing, 
 which would be to prove a thing by itself. 
 
 15. 16. And in this confidence I was minded to 
 come to you before that ye might have a second bene- 
 fit ; to pass by you into Alacedonia, and to come again 
 out of Macedonia unto you, and of you to be brought 
 on my way to Judea. 
 
 And in this confidence, that is, in the confidence that wo 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 1, 17. 17 
 
 are your rejoicing, Paul was not afraid to go to Corinth. 
 He did not doubt that the great majority of the church would 
 receive him with confidence and affection. The change in the 
 plan of his journey arose, as he afterwards states, from very 
 different motives. Paul says he xoas minded^ i. e. intended to 
 come to them before^ i. e. before going to Macedonia ; that ye 
 might have a second benefit^ i. e. the benefit of peeing me 
 twice, once before going to Macedonia, and again after my 
 return. The other explanation of this passage is, that second 
 here refers to his first visit to Corinth. The first benefit was 
 their conversion, the second Avould be the good eflects to be 
 anticij^ated from another visit. But it appears from 12, 14 
 and other passages that Paul had already been twice in 
 Corinth, and therefore he could not speak of his intended 
 visit as the second ; and the word second here evidently 
 refers to the word before. He was to see them before and 
 after going to Macedonia. Senefit^ X^P*-^? grace^ a term 
 generally in the New Testament used of rehgious blessings. 
 The word sometimes signifies joy^ so the sense here may 
 be, 'That ye might have the pleasure of seeing me twice.' 
 The former explanation is not only better suited to the com- 
 mon use of the word, but also gives a higher sense. And 
 of yoxi to be brought on my loay to Judea. UpoTreixSrjvaL, 
 to be brought on my icay^ i. e. to be aided in ray journey. 
 The word often, and perhaps most frequently, means to escort 
 on a journey, or to furnish with the means of travelling. 
 Acts 15, 3. 20, 38. &c. In ancient times when there were no 
 established modes of travelling, it was customary for the 
 friends of the traveller in one city to send him forward to the 
 next, or at least to escort him on his w^ay. This office of 
 friendship Paul was willing and desirous to receive at the 
 hands of the Corinthians. He was not alienated from them. 
 And his purpose to seek this kindness from them was a proof 
 of his confidence in their affection for him. 
 
 17. When therefore I was thus minded did I use 
 lightness ? or the things that I purpose, do I purpose 
 according to the flesh, that Avith me there should be 
 yea, yea, and nay, nay ? 
 
 Paul did not execute the plan of his journey above indi 
 cated. His having changed his purpose was made the ground 
 
18 II. CORINTHIANS 1, 17. 
 
 of a twofold charge against him ; first, of levity, and secondly, 
 of inconsistency ; saying one thing, and doing another ; or 
 saying one thing at one time, and the ojoposite at another, so 
 that he was utterly untrustworthy either as a man or as a 
 teacher. This was indeed a slight foundation on which to 
 rest such a charge. It is no wonder therefore that it excited 
 the apostle's indignation. The first charge is that he used 
 lightness^ i. e. that in purposing to visit Corinth and in an- 
 nouncing his pur^DOse he had no serious intention of doing 
 what he promised. It was a careless, inconsiderate avowal 
 such as none but a man of levity would make. In the Greek 
 the article is used (r^ cA,a<^pta) the lightness, which may mean, 
 tJie lightness with which they charged him ; or that which 
 belongs to our nature ; or it may have no more force than 
 when used in other cases before abstract nouns. Or the things 
 that I puiyose^ do I purpose according to the flesh? The 
 first charge related to the past, did I use lightness? This 
 relates to his general character. ' Am I habitually governed 
 in my plans by the flesh,' i. e. am I influenced and controlled 
 by those considerations which govern ordinary men, who have 
 nothing to guide them but their own corrupt nature ? The 
 word flesh here, as in v. 12, stands for our Avhole nature, con- 
 sidered as distinguished from the Spirit of God. All who are 
 not spiritual (governed by the Spirit) are, according to the 
 Scripture, carnal (governed by the flesh). What Paul there- 
 fore intends to deny in these two questions, is that his original 
 purpose of visiting Corinth was formed in levity, and second- 
 ly, that his plans in general were controlled by worldly or 
 selfish considerations. That with 7ne there shoidd be yea^ yea^ 
 and nay^ nay. TJiat (tVa) hei-e expresses the result, not the 
 design. ' Do I so act after the flesh that the consequence 
 is,' &c. The repetition of the particles yea, yea^ and nay^ ticiy^ 
 is shnply intensive, as in Matthew 5, 37, "Let your communi- 
 cation be yea, yea, and nay, nay." The meaning, therefore, 
 is, 'Do I aflirm and deny the same thing? Do I say both 
 yes and no at the same time and in reference to the same 
 subject ? Is no dependence to be placed on my word ? ' This 
 is the common interpretation and the one demanded by the 
 context. Many commentators from Chrysostoni downwards 
 give a very difl'erent view of the passage. They understand 
 the apostle to defend himself for his change of plan by saying 
 that he was not like men of the world who obstinately ad- 
 liered to their purposes, without regard to the manifested will 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 1, 18. 19 
 
 of God, so that with huu a yea should be yea, and a nay, nay, 
 let what would be the consequence. But in the 18th v. this 
 interpretation is impossible, because it is there simply " yea 
 and nay." That verse therefore determines the meaning of 
 this. Besides, what he goes on to defend himself against is 
 not a charge of obstinacy, but of saying first one thing and 
 then another. Luther's translation assumes still another in- 
 terpretation. "Are my purposes carnal? N^ot so^ but my 
 yea is yea, and my nay is nay." But this arbitrarily intro- 
 duces into the text what is not expressed, and thus changes 
 the whole sense. 
 
 18. But as God is true, our word towards you was 
 not yea and nay. 
 
 That is, * My preaching, or the doctrine which I preached, 
 was not inconsistent and contradictory. I did not preach first 
 one thing and then another.' This sudden transition from the 
 question as to his veracity as a man to his consistency as a 
 l^reacher, shows two things; first, that his enemies had 
 brought both charges against him, founding the latter on the 
 former ; and secondly, that Paul was much more concerned 
 for the gospel than for his o^ti reputation. They might ac- 
 cuse him, if they pleased, of breaking his word; but when 
 they charged him with denying Christ, that was a very differ- 
 ent affair. He therefore drops the first charge and turns ab- 
 ruptly to the second. ' AYhatever you may think of my ve- 
 racity as a man, as God is true, my preaching was not yea and 
 nay,' i. e. unworthy of confidence. As God is true. The 
 words are, God is faithful^ that^ &c. Comp. 1 Cor. 1, 9. 10, 
 13. 1 Thess. 5, 24. They may be understood as an appeal to 
 the fidelity of God as the ground and evidence of the truth 
 and rehableness of his preaching. 'God is faithful, that our 
 preaching is not yea and nay.' That is, his fidelity secures 
 the trustworthiness of the gospel. It is his word and there- 
 fore is unchangeably true. It abideth forever. ' If,' says the 
 apostle, ' there is no dependence to be placed on my word, 
 God is trustworthy. My preaching, which is his word, is to 
 be relied upon. That is not yea and nay, but firm and true.' 
 It must be admitted, however, that this interpretation is con- 
 strained; it is not the simple meaning of the words. The 
 passage must be paraphrased to get this sense out of it. It is 
 
20 II. CORINTHIANS 1, 18. 
 
 perhaps better with our translators, after Calvin, Beza, and 
 many other commentators, ancient and modern, to take the 
 words as an asseveration. So true as God is faithful, so true 
 is it, that, &G. Comp. 11, 10, ca-nv r) dX^^cta XptcrTOu Iv i/moL, 
 oTi. Rom. 14, 11, ^w eyw — on, as J live — evert/ knee shall bow 
 to me. Judith 12, 4, ^17 rj \pvxr) arov — oTt. It is therefore ac- 
 cording to the usage of the language to understand Tncrro^ 6 
 -^eos — OTt as an oath, and the sense given is much more natu- 
 ral. An oath is an act of worship. To predict that men shall 
 everywhere swear by the name of Jehovah, Is. 65, 16, is to 
 predict that Jehovah shall everywhere be worshipped. Men 
 may, therefore, appeal to God for the truth of what they say 
 on any solemn occasion, if they do it devoutly as an act of 
 worship. It is a formal recognition of his being, of his om- 
 niscience, of his holiness and power, and of his moral govern- 
 ment. Our Lord himself did not refuse to answer when put 
 upon his oath, Matt. 27, 63 ; and the apostles often call on 
 God to witness the truth of their declarations. When, there- 
 fore, our Saviour commands us, " Swear not at all," he must 
 be understood to forbid profane swearing, that is, calling on 
 God in an irreverent manner and on trivial occasions. That 
 our word towards you was not yea and na,y ; 6 Xdyos rjfxwv. 
 This may mean our preaching, 1 Cor. 1, 17. 2, 1. 4, and often; 
 or, our word generally, i. e. what I said. The apostle may be 
 understood to assert the truth and consistency of his instruc- 
 tions as a teacher, or the trustworthiness of his declarations 
 and promises as a man. The decision depends on the context. 
 In favour of the latter it is urged that the charge against him, 
 as intimated in v. 17, was that of breaking his promise, and 
 therefore to make this verse refer to his preaching is to make 
 him evade the point entirely. But the following verses, which 
 are intimately connected with the one before us, clearly refer 
 to matters of doctrine, and therefore this verse must have the 
 same reference. The sudden transition from the charge of 
 levity in v. 17, to that of false doctrine in v. 18, as before re- 
 marked, is sufficiently accounted for from the association of 
 the two charges in the minds of his enemies. They said he 
 was not to be depended upon as a preacher, because he had 
 shown himself to be untrustworthy as a man. " As God is 
 true, my })reaching is true." The one is as true as tlie other. 
 Hence in Gal. 1, 8 he pronounces an angel accursed should he 
 preach another gospel. Paul's confidence in the truth of the 
 gospel as he preached it was one and the same with his confi- 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 1, 19. 21 
 
 dence in God. To tell him that his preaching "was not to be 
 depended upon, was in his mind the same as to say that God 
 was not to be believed ; for he knew that he was the infallible 
 organ of God in all his teaching. 1 John 5, 10. 
 
 19. For the Son of God, Jesus Christ, who was 
 preached among you by us, (even) by me and Silvanus 
 and Timotheus, was not yea and nay, but in him was yea. 
 
 My preaching is true, for Christ is true. There is no con- 
 tradiction, no yea and nay, in him, therefore there is no con- 
 tradiction in my doctrine. There was no room in Paul's mind 
 for doubt as to his preaching being a trustworthy exhibition 
 of the person and work of Christ, and therefore if Christ be 
 one and the same, i. e. self-consistent truth, so was his doc- 
 trine or teaching. With such self-evidencing light and irre- 
 sistible comdction does the Spirit attend his communications 
 to the human mind. Even in ordinary religious experience, 
 the testimony of the Spirit becomes the testimony of conscious- 
 ness. Much more was this the case when plenary inspiration 
 was combined T\ith the sanctifying power of the truth. The 
 Soti of God, Jesus Christ ; that is, Christ, who is the Son of 
 God, the same in nature with the eternal Father, and because 
 he is the Son, and, therefore, eternally and immutably true, 
 was not yea and nay. There was nothing in him contradicto- 
 ry or untrustworthy. This Christ loas preached in Corinth 
 by Paul, Silvanus and Timotheus. These persons are men- 
 tioned because the apostle probably refers to his first visit to 
 Corinth when they were his companions. Acts 18, 5. His 
 appeal is to the experience of his readers. They had found 
 Christ to be the way, the truth and the life. He had been 
 made unto them wisdom, righteousness, sanctification and re- 
 demption. 1 Cor. 1, 32. By Christ here the apostle does 
 not mean the doctrine of Christ. He does not intend to as- 
 sert simply that there was perfect consistency in his own 
 preaching, and that it agreed with the preaching of his associ- 
 ates. The truth asserted is that Christ, the Son of God, had 
 not been manifested among them, or experienced by them to 
 be unsatisfpng or uncertain, but in him was yea. That is, 
 he was simple truth. In him, i. e. in Christ, was truth. He 
 proved himself to be all that was affirmed of him. He was 
 and continued to be (yeyovcv) all that they had been led to 
 
22 II. CORINTHIANS 1, 20. 
 
 expect. Let, therefore, what will become of me and of my 
 reputation for veracity, Christ is the same yesterday, to-day, 
 and forever. 
 
 20. Por all the promises of God in liim are yea, 
 and in him amen, unto the glory of God by us. 
 
 This verse is the confirmation of what precedes. Christ 
 was, and is, not yea and nay, not uncertam and inconsistent, 
 for in him all the promises of God were fuliilled. All that 
 God had promised relative to the salvation of man met its full 
 accomplishment in him. Instead of, all the promises^ the 
 Greek is, as many promises. That is, as many promises as 
 had from the beginning been made as to what the Messiah 
 was to be and to do. In him toetx the yea. That is, in him 
 they found their affirmation or accomplishment. The article 
 (to vat), the yea, has reference to the promises. Christ, as re- 
 gards the promises of God, was the yea, i. e. their affirmation 
 and accomplishment. A?id in him the Ame?i. This is say- 
 ing in Hebrew what had just been said in Greek; Amen be- 
 ing equivalent to yea. It is not unusual with the sacred 
 writers to give solemn or impressive formulas m both lan- 
 guages. The promises of God are amen in Christ, because he 
 is the sum and substance of them. He says in a sense which 
 includes the idea here expressed, "I am the truth," John 14, 
 6 ; and in Rev. 3, 1 he is designated as " He that is true ; " 
 and in Rev. 3, 14 he is called, "The Amen, the faithful and 
 true witness." The common text, Avhich is expressed in our 
 version, has the support of the manuscripts D, E, I, K, which 
 read koX iv aurw, a7id in him. A, B, C, F, G have Sl6 koL 8t 
 avTov, loherefore also through Mm the Amen. This reading, 
 which most recent editions adopt, was preferred by Calvin, 
 who renders the passage, quare et per ipsmn sit Amen. Tlie 
 Vulgate has the same reading, ideo et p>er ipsvm Ame?i. The 
 sense thus expressed is certainly better and fuller. The verse 
 then teaches not only that the promises of God receive their 
 confirmation in Christ, but also that we experience and assent 
 to tlieir truth. We say Amen, it is even so, to all God had 
 promised, wlien we come to know Christ. To the glory of 
 God by us. As these words are commonly 2)ointed the natu- 
 ral interpretation is, that by us, i. e. by the preaching of the 
 apostles, men are brought thus to say Amen to the divine 
 promises, to the glory of God. God is glorified by the faith 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 1, 21.22. 23 
 
 in his promises thus expressed. The words, however, admit 
 of a different construction. By us may be connected with 
 the first part of the clause. ' The Amen is said by us to the 
 glory of God.' This may mean, ' We Christians render a glad 
 assent to the promises thus ratified in Christ.' But us in the 
 immediate context refers to the apostles, and therefore cannot 
 be naturally here made to refer to Christians generally. Or, 
 the meaning may be, ' By us apostles testimony is given to the 
 truth of the promises, to the glory of God.' This last-men- 
 tioned interpretation, however, is mconsistent with the scrip- 
 tural use of the expression " to say Amen,'' which means sim- 
 ply to assent to, or to sanction. 1 Cor. 14, 16. The apostles 
 did not say Amen to the promises by preaching the gospel ; 
 but through their preaching men were brought to say Amen ; 
 that is, they were led to the joyful experience and avowal of 
 faith in what God had promised. In Christ, therefore, the 
 promises were fulfilled ; and in him also men were brought, 
 through the apostles, joyfully to assent to them. Bengel's 
 pithy comment on this verse is : Nae respectu Dei promitten- 
 tis, amen respectu credentium. " He that hath received his 
 testimony, hath set to his seal that God is true." John 3, 33. 
 1 John 5, 9. 10. To receive God's testimony concerning his 
 Son, to say Amen, and to believe, all mean the same thing. 
 
 21. 22. Now lie which stabUsheth us witk you in 
 Christ, and hath anointed us, (is) God ; who hath also 
 sealed us, and given the earnest of the Spirit in our 
 hearts. 
 
 In the preceding verse the apostle had spoken of Christ as 
 the truth and substance of all the divine promises, and of the 
 cordial assent which behevers gave to those promises ; he here 
 brings into view God as the author and preserver of their 
 faith, who would assuredly grant them the salvation of which 
 he had already given them the foretaste and the pledge. Noio 
 ne ; or, hut he who stabUsheth us with you in Christ. The 
 word is o ySe/Jatoji/, who renders firm or stedfasi ; i. e. who 
 causes us with you to stand firm, ets Xpio-rov, in reference to 
 Christ, so that we adhere to him with unshaken constancy. 
 As by the pronouns %oe and us^ in what precedes, the apostle 
 had meant himself and Silas and Timothy, here Avhere he has 
 2 
 
24 II. CORINTHIANS 1, 21.22. 
 
 reference to all believers he unites them with liiinself, us with 
 you. The constancy in faith which God gave was not a gift 
 peculiar to teachers, but common to all true Christians. And 
 hath anointed us. Kings, prophets, and priests were anointed 
 when inaugurated in their several offices ; to anoint may there- 
 fore mean to qualify by divine influence, and thereby to au- 
 thorize any one to discharge the duties of any office. In 
 Luke 4, 18 our Lord applies to himself the language of Isaiah 
 61, 1, "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath 
 anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor.'- Acts 4, 27. 
 10,38. "God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy 
 Ghost." In like manner Christians are spoken of as anointed, 
 because by the Spirit they are consecrated to God and quali- 
 fied for his service. 1 John 2, 20. 27. AVhen Paul says here, 
 hath anointed us, he means by us all Christians, and of course 
 the anointing to which he refers is that Avhich is common to 
 all believers. This is plain, 1. Because the object of the two 
 participles, (B^ftaimv and xp^aas, here used, must be the same ; 
 ' who establisheth us, and hath anointed 2is.- But with the 
 former Paul expressly associates the Corinthians. He says, 
 us icith you. They as well as he Avere the subjects of the 
 confirmation, and therefore also of the anointing. 2. What 
 follows of sealing and receiving the earnest of the Spirit, can- 
 not with any propriety be restricted to ministers. 3. In the 
 New Testament official anointing is spoken of only in relation 
 to Christ, never of apostles or preachers ; whereas believers 
 are said to receive the unction of the Holy Spirit. The de- 
 sign of the apostle is not, as some of the later commentators 
 say, to assert that God had given to him the assurance of the 
 Spirit as to his fidelity in preaching the gospel ; but to show 
 that behevers were indebted to God for their faitli, and that he 
 would certainly cause them to persevere. Is God ; God it is 
 who confirms and anoints his people. Comp. 5, 5 for a simi- 
 larly constructed passage. This is the common and natural 
 explanation. Billi'oth and Olshausen render it thus : ' God, 
 who establishes and anointed us, also sealed us.' But this 
 makes the first part of the verse too subordinate ; the sealing 
 is not the dominant idea. It is only one of the several bene- 
 fits specified. It is God who establishes, anoints, seals and 
 gives the earnest of the Spirit. Who also hath sealed us. A 
 seal is used, 1. To indicate proprietorship. 2. To authenti- 
 cate or prove to be genuine. 3. To preserve safe or inviolate. 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 1, 22. 25 
 
 The Holy Spirit, wliicli in one view is an unction, in another 
 view is a seal. He marks those in whom he dwells as belong- 
 ing to God. They bear the seal of God upon them. Rev. 7, 
 2. 2 Tim. 2, 19. Act. Thoin. § 26, 6 ^eos Ota t>}5 a.vrov atfypayl- 
 8o? l-myivdio-Ku to. tSia TrpojSara, God Jcnoics by his seal his own 
 sheep. He also bears witness in the hearts of believers that 
 they are the children of God. He authenticates them to 
 themselves and others as genuine believers. And he effectu- 
 ally secures them from apostasy and perdition. Eph. 1,3. 4, 
 30. This last idea is amplified in the next clause ; and hath 
 given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts. The Holy 
 Spirit is itself the earliest^ i. e. at once the foretaste and pledge 
 of redemption. The word dppa^ojv, p)ledge^ is a Hebrew word, 
 which passed as a mercantile term, probably from the Pheni- 
 cian, into the Greek and Latin. It is properly that part of 
 the purchase money paid in advance, as a security for the re- 
 mainder. The indwelling of the Holy Spirit in the hearts of 
 his people, is that part of the blessings of redemption, which 
 God gives them as a pledge of their full and final salvation. 
 So certain, therefore, as the Spirit dwells in us, so certain is 
 our final salvation. " If any man have not the Spirit of Christ, 
 he is none of his. . . But if the Spirit of him that raised up 
 Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ 
 from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his 
 Spirit that dwelleth in you," Rom.* 8, 9-11. The indwelling 
 of the Spirit is therefore called the first-fruits of redeniiDtion. 
 Rom. 8, 23. Comp. Eph. 1, 14. 2 Cor. 5, 5. There is but one 
 thing stated in these verses, and that is that God establishes 
 or renders his people firm and secure in their union with 
 Christ, and in their participation of the benefits of redemption. 
 How he does this, and the evidence that he does it, is ex- 
 pressed or presented by saying he hath anointed, sealed, and 
 given us the earnest of the Spirit. The indwelling of the 
 Spirit, therefore, renders the believer secure and steadfast ; it 
 is his anointing ; it is the seal of God impressed upon the soul, 
 and therefore the pledge of redemption. The fruits of the 
 Spirit are the only evidence of his presence ; so that while 
 those who experience and manifest those fruits may rejoice in 
 the certainty of salvation, those vrho are destitute of them 
 have no right to appropriate to themselves the consolation of 
 this and similar declarations of the word of God. The perse- 
 verance of the saints is a perseverance in holiness. 
 
26 II. CORINTHIANS 1, 23.24. 
 
 23. Moreover, I call God for a record upon my 
 soul, that to spare you I came not as yet unto Corinth. 
 
 Paul here returns to the original charge. The complaint 
 against him for not having executed his purpose of going at 
 once from Ephesus to Corinth, he had left on one side to meet 
 the more serious charge of inconsistency in his teaching. 
 Having answered that accusation, he here says, JBut I sparing 
 yoii^ i. e. for the sake of avoiding giving you pain, ccone not 
 again to Corinth. The obvious implication is, that such was 
 the state of things in Corinth that had he gone there immedi- 
 ately on leaving Ephesus, as he had originally intended, he 
 would have been obliged to appear among them with a rod. 
 1 Cor. 4, 21. It was to avoid that necessity, and to give them 
 the opportunity to correct abuses before he came, that he had 
 deferred his visit. As there was no available testimony by 
 which the apostle could prove that such was his motive, he 
 confirms it by an oath. I invoke God as a witness^ i. e. I 
 call upon the omniscient God, who is the avenger of all perju- 
 ry, to bear testimony to the truth of what I say. " An oath 
 for confirmation is the end of all strife," Heb. 6, 16. All the 
 bonds of society are loosened, and all security of life and prop- 
 erty is lost, if men are not to be believed upon their oaths. 
 This shows that human society depends on the sanctity of 
 an oath ; and as the oath derives all its sacredness from faith 
 in God, as the providential and moral governor of the world, 
 it is obvious that society cannot exist without religion. Su- 
 perstition and false religion, although great evils, are fiir bet- 
 ter than atheism. The words cVt rrjv ifiyv v/zx^x^^? rendered on 
 my soiil^ may mean against my soul ; or, I summon God to 
 me as a witness. The latter idea includes the former, for, as 
 Calvin says, " He Avho uses God as a witness, cites the punish- 
 er of falsehood." 
 
 24. Not for that we have dommion over your faith, 
 but are helpers of your joy : for by faith ye stand. 
 
 This is intended to moderate and explain what precedes. 
 ' When I speak of sparing you, I do not wish to intimate that I 
 consider myself tlie lord over your faitli.' Not for that^ ovx on, 
 equivalent to, I do not sag that we have dominion over your 
 faith. Some say faith is here used for believers, (the abstract 
 for tlie concrete,) we have not dominion over believers; or, as 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 1, 24. 27 
 
 St. Peter says, are not lords over God's heritage. 1 Pet. 5, 3. 
 Others say faith here means faith-hfe; we have not dominion 
 over yonr Christian hfe. Both of these interpretations are 
 unnatural and unnecessary. The word is to be taken in its 
 ordmary sense. Paul disclaims all authority over their faith, 
 either as a man or as an apostle. It was not for him, and if 
 not for him, surely for no other man or set of men, to deter- 
 mine what they should believe. He called upon the Galatians 
 to denounce him, or even an angel from heaven, as accursed, 
 if he preached another gospel. Gal. 1, 8. Faith rests not on 
 the testimony of man, but on the testimony of God. When 
 we believe the Scriptures, it is not man, but God whom we 
 believe. Therefore faith is subject not to man but to God 
 alone. This is perfectly consistent with the plenary inspira- 
 tion of the apostles, and with our confidence in them as the 
 infallible witnesses of the truth. When a man speaks through 
 a trumpet, it is the man and not the trumpet that we beUeve, 
 Or when we read a printed page, we have confidence in the 
 trustworthiness of the words as symbols of thought, but it is 
 the mind expressed by those symbols with which we are in 
 communion. So the apostles were but the organs of the Holy 
 Ghost ; what they spoke as such, they could not recall or 
 modify. "What they should communicate was not under their 
 control ; they were not the lords, so to speak, of the gospel, 
 so that they could make it what they pleased. Not at all ; 
 they were as much subject to the communication which they 
 received, and as much bound to believe what they were made 
 the instruments of teaching, as other men. Paul therefore 
 places himself alongside of his brethren, not over them as a 
 lord, but as a joint-believer with them in the gospel which he 
 preached, and a helper of their joy. That is, his office was to 
 co-operate with them in the promotion of their spiritual wel- 
 fare. It was not the end of the apostleship to give pain or to 
 inflict punishment, but to promote the real happiness of the 
 people. For hy faith ye stand. The meaning of this clause 
 is doubtful. Taken by themselves the words may mean, ' Ye 
 stand firm or independently as to faith.' This would suit the 
 connection as indicated hj for. ' We are not lords over your 
 faith, but merely helpers, for you stand independently as to 
 faith.' Or the meaning may be what is expressed in our ver- 
 sion, ' Ye stand by faith.' Then the connection, as explained 
 by Calvin, is, ' Since it is the effect and nature of faith to sus- 
 tain or cause you to stand, it is absurd that it should be sub- 
 
28 II. CORINTHIANS 1, 24. 
 
 ject to man, or that we should have dominion over your 
 faith.' This, however, is rather an obscure argument. Ac- 
 cording to Meyer the connection is with the immediately pre- 
 ceding words, ' We are helpers of your joy, because ye are 
 steadtast as to faith,' That is, steadfastness in faith is necessa- 
 ry to joy. The most natural interpretation probably is that 
 given by Erasmus : fidei nomine nullum habemus in vos domi- 
 nium, in qua perseveratis ; sed est in vita quod in vobis cor- 
 rectum volebam. ' Over your faith I have no dominion, for in 
 that ye stand ; but, when I speak of not sparing, I had refer- 
 ence to your conduct.' He had authority in matters of dis- 
 cipline, but not in matters of laith. As to the latter, he and 
 they were equally under subjection to the revelation of God. 
 He indeed, as the organ of the Spirit, could declai-e infallibly 
 what that revelation was, but he could not go counter to it, 
 and was to be judged by it. If the inspired apostles recog- 
 nised not only their subjection to the word of God, but also 
 the right of the people to judge whether their teachings were 
 in accordance with the supreme standard, it is most evident 
 that no church authority can make any thing contrary to 
 Scripture obligatory on believers, and that the ultimate right 
 to decide whether ecclesiastical decisions are in accordance 
 with the word of God, rests with the people. In other words, 
 Paul recognises, even in reference to himself, the right of pri- 
 vate judgment. He allowed any man to pronounce him 
 anathema, if he did not preach the gospel as it had been re- 
 vealed and authenticated to the church. Quum eorum iidei 
 dominaii se negat, signilicat injustam banc esse et minime 
 tolerandam potestatem, imo tyrannidem in ecclesia. Fides 
 enim prorsus ab hominum jugo soluta, liberrimaque esse debet. 
 Notandum autem, quis loquatur : nam siquis omnino sit mor- 
 talium qui jus habeat tale dominium sibi vindicandi, Paulus 
 certe dignus liac prierogativa fuit, fatetur autem sibi non 
 competere. Itaque colligimus, fidem non aliam subjectionem 
 agnoscere, quam verbi Dei: hominum imperio minime esse 
 obnoxiam. Calvin. 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 2, 1. 29 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 The first paragraph, vs. 1-4, relates to the change of his plan of going im- 
 mediately to Corinth. In vs. 5-11 he refers to the case of discipline 
 mentioned in his former letter. In vs. 12-14 he states why he did not 
 remain in Troas. And in vs. 14—17 he pours out his heart in gratitude 
 to God for the continued triumph of the gospel. 
 
 The true reason ichy the apostle did not go immediately to 
 Corinth^ and his views in reference to the offender ichose 
 excommunication he had insisted upon in his former letter. 
 
 Theee is no change of subject in this chapter. The apostle 
 after defending himself from the charge of levity in conduct 
 and inconsistency in doctrine, had said, in v. 23 of the pre- 
 cedmg chapter, that he did not go to Corinth before giving 
 the church time to comply with the injunctions contained in 
 his former letter, because he did not wish to appear among 
 them as a judge. He here says, in amplification, that he had 
 determined not again to visit Corinth under circumstances 
 which could only give pain to the Corinthians and to himself. 
 He knew that he could not give them sorrow without being 
 himself grieved, and he was assured that if he was happy they 
 would share in his joy, vs. 1-4. The sorrow occasioned by 
 the incestuous person was not confined to the apostle, but 
 shared by the church. He was satisfied with the course 
 which the church had pursued in reference to that case, and 
 was willing the offender should be restored to their fellowship 
 if they were, vs. 5-11. His anxiety about them was so great 
 that not finding Titus, from whom he expected to receive 
 intelligence, he was unable to remain at Troas, but passed 
 over into Macedonia to meet him on his way, vs. 12. 13. The 
 intelligence which he received from Titus being favourable, 
 the apostle expresses in strong terms his gratitude to God 
 who always caused him to triumph, vs. 15-17. 
 
 1 . But I detenninecl this with myself, that I would 
 not come again to you in heaviness. 
 
 The connection is with what immediately precedes. 'I 
 deferred my visit in order to spare you, not that I assume to 
 be a lord over your faith, but a helper of your joy. But the 
 true reason for my not coming was that I did not wish to 
 
dO II. CORINTHIANS 2, 2. 
 
 come with heaviness.' The words €Kpiva e/iavroJ, rendered J 
 deterTnined with myself^ may mean simply I determine as to 
 myself. I had made up my mind; or, 'I determined /br my- 
 selj\^ i. e. for my own sake. This perhaps is to be j^referred. 
 The apostle thus delicately intimates that it was not merely to 
 spare them, but also himself, that he put ofi* his visit. The 
 word this refers to the purpose which the apostle had formed, 
 and which is explained by the following infinitive, jxr) iX^elv, 
 not to come. Two explanations are given of the following 
 clause. According to the one, the meaning is, ' I determined 
 that my second visit should not be with sorrow ; ' according 
 to the other, ' I determined not a second time to visit you in 
 sorrow.' In the one case the implication is that Paul had, at 
 this time, been only once in Corinth ; in the other, the passage 
 implies that he had already (i. e. after his first visit) been to 
 Corinth under circumstances painful to himself and to the 
 church. There are two reasons for preferring this latter view. 
 The first is, that according to the position of the words, as 
 given in all the older manuscripts, (/x^ iraXiv iv Xvttt} Trpos v/xas 
 eX^eiv,) the TTcxXti/, again^ belongs to the whole clause and not 
 exclusively to IX^dv. The sense, therefore, is that he deter- 
 mined not a second time to come with sorrow, (he had done 
 that once.) The other reason is, that there is evidence from 
 other passages that Paul had been twice to Corinth before 
 this letter was written. See 12, 14. 21. 13, 1. That there is 
 no mention in the Acts of this intermediate journey, is no suf- 
 ficient reason for denying it, as the passages referred to are so 
 explicit. To make the second visit one by letter, as Calvin 
 (venerat enim semel per epistolam) and others have done, is 
 evidently unnatural. Having gone once to correct abuses and 
 to exercise severity, he was anxious not to have a second pain- 
 ful interview of the same kind, and therefore, instead ot" going 
 to them, as he had intended, directly from Corinth, he waited 
 to learn through Titus what had been the efifcct of his letter. 
 With hecminess^ kv kv-rrr)^ loith sorroio^ i. e. causing sorrow to 
 you. This explanation is required by the following verse, 
 otherwise the meaning would more naturally be in sorroio, 
 i. e. in a sorrowful state of mind, as the woi'd Ai;7r>; everywhere 
 else with Paul means a state of grief. 
 
 2. For if I make you sorry, who is lie that maketh 
 me glad, but the same that is made sorry by me ? 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 2, 3. 31 
 
 This is the reason why he did not wish to come bringing 
 sorrow with him ; ' For if,' says he, ' I make you sorry, who is 
 there to make me glad ? How can I be happy, if you are 
 afflicted ? Unless my visit cause you joy, it can bring no joy 
 to me.' As inspiration leaves full play to all the characteristic 
 peculiarities of its subject, in reading the writings of inspired 
 men we learn not only the mind of the Spirit, but also the 
 personal character of the writers. The urbanity of the apostle 
 Paul, his refinement and courtesy, are just as plainly revealed 
 in his epistles as his intellectual power and moral courage. 
 The passage before us is one of many illustrations of the truth 
 of this remark, furnished by this epistle. Who is he that 
 maJceth me glad^ but the same that is made sorry by me. The 
 singular is used, not because a particular individual, much less 
 because the incestuous person, is specially referred to, but be- 
 cause the case is stated in the form of a general proposition. 
 'I cannot expect joy from one to whom I bring sorrow.' 
 Such was the apostle's love for the Corinthians that unless 
 they were happy he could not be happy. This is the natural 
 and commonly received interpretation of the passage. Chry- 
 sostom, and many of the ancient commentators, and some also 
 of the moderns, give a different view of its meaning. ' Who 
 gives me joy, but he who allows himself (A.t)7roi;/xevos as middle 
 and not passive) to be grieved by me.' That is, no one causes 
 me so much joy as he who is brought to repentance by me. 
 But this is obviously inconsistent with the context. The 
 verse, as thus explained, gives no reason why Paul did not 
 wish to go to Corinth bringing sorrow. On the contrary, the 
 more of that kind of sorrow he brought with him, or was oc- 
 casioned by his visit, the better. This interpretation would 
 make the apostle say, ' I will not come with sorrow, for noth- 
 ing gives me so much pleasure as to cause (godly) sorrow.' 
 To avoid this incongruity Olshausen says the connection is to 
 be thus understood : Paul determined that he would not come 
 with sorrow, because he feared that few of the Corinthians 
 would give him the happiness of seeing that they had been 
 made sorry by his former reproofs. But this makes the pas- 
 sage itself a reproof, an insinuation that they had not profited 
 by his first letter. This is contrary to the whole spirit of the 
 passage, which is overflowing with confidence and affection. 
 
 3. And I wrote tliis same unto you, lest, when I 
 
 2* 
 
32 II. CORINTHIANS 2, 3. 
 
 came, I should have sorrow from them of whom I 
 ought to rejoice ; having confidence in you all that my 
 joy is (the joy) of you all. 
 
 Having said that his motive for not coming at once to Cor- 
 inth Avas to avoid giving them sorrow, he here adds, 'And I 
 wrote what I did in my former letter that, when I came, I 
 might not have sorrow.' Instead of going in person to cor- 
 rect the evils which existed in the church of Corinth, he wrote 
 to them that those evils might be corrected before he came, 
 and thus his coming would be a source of joy to both parties. 
 It is evident from the preceding context, and from vs. 4 and 
 9, that £ypai//a here refers not to this epistle, but to the former 
 one. This scmie^ tovto avro, that very thing, that is, the very 
 thing which I did write respecting the incestuous person. 
 The expi-ession seems to have special reference to that case, 
 because that is evidently the case to which the following 
 verses relate. It appears that the point about which the 
 apostle was most anxious was, how the Corinthians would act 
 in regard to his command, 1 Cor. 5, 13, to put away from 
 among them " that wicked person." He seems to have feared 
 that his enemies might have had influence enough with the 
 church, to prevent their executing his command. He there- 
 fore waited in painful suspense to learn the issue. And when 
 Titus, on his return from Corinth, informed him that they had 
 not only promptly obeyed his directions, but that the offender 
 himself and the whole church had been brought to deep and 
 genuine repentance, his heart was filled with gratitude to God, 
 and with love to the people who had manifested such a Chris- 
 tian spirit. All this is plain from what is said in ch. V. Eras- 
 mus and several other commentators render tovto avTo hac 
 eadem de causa, for this very reason. The sense would then 
 be, ' I determined I would not come to you with sorrow, and 
 for that very reason I wrote to you that I might not.' 
 This, although it suits the preceding context, is not so con- 
 sistent with what follows as the common interpretation ; for 
 in the following verses the apostle states the reasons for his 
 writing as he liad done in his former letter. 
 
 Lest wJien I came I should Jiave sorrow from them of 
 whom I ought to rejoice. Tiiat is, 'I wrote what I did that I 
 might not have sorrow from those, who should be to me a 
 source of joy.' He wished all jjainful questions settled before 
 lie came, llaving confidence in you all that my joy is the joy 
 
EI. CORINTHIANS 2, 4. 33 
 
 of you all. Paul in saying that he wished all causes of painiiil 
 collision might be removed out of the way before he went to 
 Corinth, did not isolate himself from the people, as though 
 concerned only for his own peace of mind, but was satisfied 
 that what made him happy would make them happy. My joy 
 will be the joy of you all. This does not mean merely that it 
 would give them pleasure to see him happy, but also that obe- 
 dience on their part, and the consequent purity and prosperity 
 of the church, were as necessary to their happiness as to his. 
 Paul says he had this confidence in them all^ although it is 
 abundantly evident that there were men among them who 
 were his bitter opponents. These latter he here leaves out of 
 view, and speaks of the majority, probably the great body, of 
 the church as thouo-h it were the whole. 
 
 4. For out of much affliction and anguish of heart 
 I wrote unto you with many tears ; not that ye should 
 be grieved, but that ye may know the love which I 
 have the more abundantly towards you. 
 
 The connection is either with the immediately preceding 
 clause, ' I have confidence in you, for otherwise it would not 
 have given me so much pain to write as I did ; ' or, what is 
 more natural because more direct, the reference is to the mo- 
 tives which dictated his letter. ' I was influenced by the de- 
 sire of j^romoting your happiness, for to me it was a most 
 painful duty.' Out of {Ik) indicates the source. His letter 
 flowed from a broken heart. Affliction and anguish refer to 
 his inward feelings, not to his outward circumstances, for both 
 are qualified by the word heart. It was out of an afflicted, an 
 oppressed heart, that he wrote. W^ith many tears^ (Sta,) 
 through many tears. The union of fidelity and love which 
 renders parental discipline peculiarly eflective, gives also pe- 
 culiar power to ecclesiastical censures. When the ofiender is 
 made to feel that, while his sin is punished, he himself is loved ; 
 and that the end aimed at is not his sufiermg but his good, 
 he is the more likely to be brought to repentance. Every 
 pastor must see in the apostle's love for the Corinthians, and 
 in the extreme sorrow with which he exercised discipline in 
 the case of ofi"enders, an instructive example for his imitation. 
 Kot that ye should he grieved^ my object in writing was not 
 to cause you sorrow, hut that ye may know the love that I 
 
34 II. CORINTHIANS 2, 5. 
 
 have the more abundantly towards you. The ends which the 
 apostle desired to accomplish by his former letter were numer- 
 ous, and he therefore sometimes specifies one, and sometimes 
 another. Here, he says, it was to manifest his love ; in v. 9 
 he says it was to test their obedience ; in ch. 7 he says it was 
 to bring them to repentance. These are not incompatible ends, 
 and therefore there is no inconsistency between these several 
 statements. The love which I have the more ahundaMly 
 towards you. This naturally means the special love which I 
 have for you. His love for them was more abundant, or 
 greater, than that which he had for any other church. This 
 view is borne out by numerous other passages in these two 
 epistles, which go to show that Paul's love for the Corinthian 
 church was, for some reason, peculiarly strong. As vs. 5-1 1 
 have direct reference to the case of the incestuous person, it is 
 the more probable that all that he says in the preceding verses 
 as to his reasons for not coming sooner to Corinth, and as to 
 the sorrow and anxiety which he felt about the state of the 
 church there, had s^^ecial reference to that case. 
 
 5. But if any have caused grief, he hath not grieved 
 me, but in part, that I may not overcharge you all. 
 
 The connection between this paragraph, vs. 5-11, and 
 what precedes is natural and obvious. Paul had been speak- 
 ing of his motives for writing his former letter. It was not 
 intended to give them sorrow. If sorrow had been occasioned, 
 it had not come from him. This led him to speak more par- 
 ticularly of the case which had occasioned so much distress. 
 The proper interpretation of this particular verse is, however, 
 a matter of great doubt. The translation is of necessity, in 
 this case, an exposition, and therefore the grounds of doubt 
 do not appear to the English reader. Our translators, after 
 Luther, assume that omo ixipov<;^ i?i part^ are to be connected 
 with the preceding clause, and 7ra.vTa<: v/xas, yo2i all, with eVt- 
 ^ttpo), overcharge. Thus construed the sense can only be, 
 ' If any one has caused grief, he has not grieved me, but in 
 part, that is, I am not the only person aggrieved. I say this, 
 lest I should bear hard upon you all. It would be a severe 
 reflection on you to say that you did not feel any sorrow for 
 the ofience in question.' According to this view, the design 
 of the passage is to guard against the impression that he 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 2, 6. 35 
 
 meant to charge them with mdifFerence. But to this it is ob- 
 jected that to express this sense et /xrj, and not dAAa, would be 
 required. " He hath not grieved me except in part." And 
 secondly, that the idea thus expressed is not suited to the 
 context. The main idea evidently is, ' He hath not grieved 
 me but you.' The subordinate words and clauses therefore 
 must be accommodated to that idea. Hence aSX airo [xepov^ 
 must be connected with what follows, and Travra? v/xas with 
 AeA.v7r7/K€v. Then the sense will be, ' He hath not grieved me, 
 but in part, or, to a certain extent, (lest I should bear too 
 hard oji him^) you all.' The design of the passage, according 
 to this view, is to soften the charge against the penitent of- 
 tender of having been the cause of sorrow. This the apostle 
 does, first, by saying, " he did not grieve me," i. e. it was no 
 personal oflence against me that he committed ; and second, 
 that all the Corinthians were not afflicted, it was not a uni- 
 versal sorrow that he caused. This substantially is the inter- 
 pretation given by Calvin after Chrysostom, and is the one 
 adopted by the great majority of modern commentators. It 
 has thie advantage of being not only suited to the meaning of 
 the words, but to the whole tone of the following context, 
 which is eminently mild and conciliatory. The apostle's heart 
 was overflowing with the tenderest feelings towards his Co- 
 rinthian brethren, and he was evidently solicitous to heal the 
 salutary wounds inflicted by his former letter. There is still 
 another view of the jDassage which should be mentioned. It 
 may be pointed so as to read thus : ' He hath not grieved me, 
 but in part (that I may not overcharge all) you.' This, how- 
 ever, unnaturally separates the words -n-avras v/ta?, yoif all. 
 
 6. Sufficient to such a man is this punishment, 
 which (was inflicted) of many. 
 
 I do not wish to be severe towards him, for the punish- 
 ment which he has received is sufiicient. The word rj cVtTi/xta, 
 rendered pimishment^ occurs only in Wisdom 3, 10 in this 
 sense, and therefore many assume that it here does not mean 
 punishment, but reproof. The word rendered sufficient., iKaj/w, 
 is used substantively. " This punishment is a sulHciency, or a 
 satisfaction." Comp. Matt. 6, 34 for a similar construction. 
 Paul says the punishment or reproof was administered vtto rZiv 
 -n-A-etdvcov, hy the majority., intimating that all did not concur in 
 
36 II. CORINTHIANS 2, 6. 
 
 it. This, however, is not a necessary inference, because ot 
 TrAeioVes may mean the many^ the whole body considered as 
 many, because composed of many members. There are three 
 views taken of this verse in connection with what follows. In 
 his former letter the apostle had not only commanded the 
 church to excommunicate the person here referred to, but de- 
 clared his OAvn determination to deliver him to Satan for the 
 destruction of the flesh. 1 Cor. 5, 5. Grotius supposes that 
 in consequence of that judgment he was seized with some 
 bodily malady, for delivery from which Paul, in this connec- 
 tion, declares his willingness that the Corinthians should pray. 
 Of this, however, the passage gives no intimation. A second 
 view is that the sentence of excommunication had not been 
 carried into effect, but as the reproof administered by many 
 had had the effect of leading the offender to repentance, the 
 apostle here intimates his satisfaction with what the church 
 had done, although his injunctions had not been fully complied 
 with. This is the view of Calvin, Beza, and of many others. In 
 favour of this explanation it is urged that the expression " this 
 punishment " naturally refers to that punishment or reproof 
 which the Corinthians had administered as distinguished from 
 that which he had enjoined; and his saying ^^ this punish- 
 ment," of which he had heard, was enough, implies that he 
 did not wish them to proceed any furtlKir, but rather that 
 they Khould console the penitent by the assurance of their 
 love. On the other hand, however, v. 9 (as well as ch. 1) 
 clearly intimates that the church had rendered a prompt obe- 
 dience to the apostle's directions. The great majority of 
 commentators, therefore, understand the passage to mean that 
 Paul did not wish the excommunication to be continued any 
 longer. As it had produced its desired effect, he was willing 
 that the offender should be restored to the communion of the 
 church. The whole passage indicates that Paul was more 
 lenient than the church, for he exhorts his readers not to be 
 too severe in their treatment of their offending brother. A 
 passage, says Calvin, himself a severe disciplinarian, well to be 
 observed, as it teaches with what equity and clemency the dis- 
 cipline of the church is to be attemjiered ; qua mquitate et 
 dementia temperanda sit disciplina ecclesim. Paul, he adds, 
 was satisfied with the repentance of the offender ; whereas the 
 ancient bishops gave forth their canons requiring a penance 
 of three, or seven years, or even for a life-time, without regard 
 to the contrition of the unhappy victims of their severity. 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 2, 7.8. 37 
 
 7. So that contrariwise ye (ought) rather to forgive 
 (him) and comfort (liim), lest perhaps such a one should 
 be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow. 
 
 The consequence of what is expressed in v. 8 is indicated 
 by the words so that. ' The punishment being sufficient, the 
 consequence is that, instead of its being increased or continued, 
 you should forgive and comfort the offender.' As the apostle 
 seems to indicate what ought to be done, most commentators 
 supply before the infinitives xa-piaraa-^ai koI TrapaKokio-at the 
 word hd or Setv, ' it is necessary to forgive and comfort.' The 
 infinitive itself, however, often expresses, after verbs of saying, 
 and the like, not what is, but what should be, e. g. Xeyovres 
 TrepiTifxvea^aL^ saying you ought to he circumcised. Acts 15, 
 24. 21, 4. 21. Winer., p. 371, says that neither of these 
 modes of explanation is necessary, as the infinitives may be 
 connected immediately with tKavoV, ' The reproof is sufficient 
 — in order to your pardoning and comforting him.' The deli- 
 cacy of the apostle towards this offender is indicated by his 
 abstaining either from naming him, or designating him as he 
 had before done, 1 Cor. 5, 13, as that toicked person. He re- 
 fers to him simply as such an one., without any appellation 
 which could wound his feelings. The apostle combined, there- 
 fore, the strictest fidelity with the greatest tenderness. As 
 long as the offender was impenitent and persisted in his ot- 
 fence, Paul insisted upon the se^'erest punishment. As soon 
 as he acknowledged and forsook his sin, he became his earnest 
 advocate. Lest he should be swalloioed tip icith overmuch 
 sorroio^ that is, lest he should be driven to despair and thus 
 destroyed. Undue severity is as much to be avoided as undue 
 leniency. The character which Paul here exhibits reflects the 
 image of our heavenly Father. His word is filled with de- 
 nunciations against impenitent sinners, and at the same time 
 with assurances of unbounded j^ity and tenderness towards 
 the penitent. He never breaks the bruised reed or quenches 
 the smoking flax. 
 
 8. Wherefore I beseech you that ye would confirm 
 (}^our) love towards him. 
 
 The connection is either with v. 6, ' His punishment is suf- 
 ficient — wherefore confirm your love towards him ; ' or with 
 what immediately precedes. ' There is danger of his being 
 
38 II. CORINTHIANS 2, 0. 
 
 swallowed up with overmuch sorrow unless you forgive him, 
 wherefore confirm your love to hira.' The latter method is 
 to be preferred, though the sense is substantially the same. 
 I beseech you, TrapaKaAco, the same word which in the preced- 
 ing verse is used in the sense of consoling. Paul not unfre- 
 quently uses the same word in the immediate connection in 
 different senses. 1 Cor. 3, 17. 11, 23. That ye looulcl coiv- 
 firm, literally, to confirm, Kvpdcrai. The word properly means 
 to ratify with authority by some public or formal act. Gal. 
 3, 15. And this sense is generally adopted here. The apostle 
 is understood to call upon them by a formal act to reinstate 
 the offender in the communion of the church, to assure him 
 of their love, so that he might not have to infer it merely 
 from their treatment of him. The word, however, may mean 
 nothing more than is expressed in our version. ' I exhort you 
 to make your love towards him a matter of certainty.' But 
 as the im23lication is that they had already begun to manifest 
 their brotherly affection for him, the probability is that the 
 apostle wished them to give their love a formal ratification. 
 
 9. Por to this end also did I write, that I might 
 know the proof of you, whether ye be obedient in all 
 things. 
 
 Verses 9 and 10 are sometimes regarded as a parenthesis, 
 so as to connect the 11th verse Avith the 8th. ' Confirm your 
 love towards him, lest Satan get an advantage over us.' But 
 a parenthesis is never to be assumed Avhere the grammatical 
 construction continues unbroken, and the logical connection is 
 uninterrupted. The 11th verse is naturally connected with 
 the 10th, and the 9th with the 8th. 'Confirm your love to 
 him, for the object of my writing to you to exclude him from 
 your fellowship, has been accomplished.' To this end means 
 the end specified in the latter part of the verse. I icrote, 
 eypaxj/a, a form of the verb which is often in the epistolary style 
 used of the letter in the process of being written. Rom. 15, 
 15. 1 Cor. 9, 15. 1 Pet. 5, 12, &c. The whole context, how- 
 ever, shows that Paid refers to his former letter. See vs. 3. 4. 
 He did not write this letter to test their obedience, though 
 that was one of the objects of his former epistle. Paul says, 
 'I also wrote.' This also may indicate that it was the object 
 of his former letter as well as of the exhortation which he had 
 just given them, to test their ol^edience. But such was not 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 2, 10. 39 
 
 the object of that exhortation. It is better therefore to un- 
 derstand the (/cat) also^ as simply intended to give j^i'oniinence 
 to the words Iiorote^ as something additional to other things 
 which he had done with the same general object. ' To this 
 end I also wrote, as well as did many other things,' &c. The 
 end (althongh not the only one), which the apostle had in view 
 in enjoining on the chnrch the excommunication of the person 
 here referred to, was, as he says, that I might know the ^woof 
 of you. The word used is hoKtixiq^ which means trials 8, 2, 
 "trial of affliction ; " or, proof test^ 13, 3, "As ye seek a proof 
 of Christ speaking in me ; " or, the result of trial, what is ap- 
 proved, integrity that has been tested. Phil. 2, 22, "Ye know 
 his tried integrity." The last meaning is the best suited to 
 this place. ' That I might know your integrity, i. e. your true 
 Christian temper.' This is explained by saying he wished to 
 see whether they would be obedient in all things^ eh Travra, 
 in reference to all things. These latter words stand first, 
 ' Whether as to all things ye are obedient,' which is more em- 
 phatic. Obedience to legitimate authority is one of the fruits 
 and evidences of Christian sincerity. A rebellious, self-willed, 
 disobedient spirit is a strong indication of an unsanctified 
 heart. As the Corinthians had proved themselves obedient 
 to the apostle's directions, and as the offender was truly peni- 
 tent, the object of his letter, both as it related to them and to 
 him, had been attained, and therefore there was no reason for 
 the continuance of the punishment. 
 
 10. To whom ye forgive any thing, I (forgive) also : 
 for if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave (it),* for 
 your sakes (forgave I it) in the person of Christ. 
 
 The apostle having exhorted the Corinthians to forgive 
 their repentant brother, says he was ready to join in that for- 
 giveness. To ichom ye forgive any thing ^ I also. Although 
 this is stated generally, as though he meant to say that he 
 would forgive any one whom they were ready to forgive, yet 
 it is obvious from the context that he intended to be under- 
 
 * The received text here reads koI yap iyw e? rt k^x^-P'-'^P-''-'-^ V f exi^f '""MO'. 
 for also I if I have forgiven any thiiirj, to ichom I forgave. Griesbach, Lach- 
 manu, Tischendorf, Ruckert, Meyer, and others, after the majority of ancient 
 MSS. read, kuX yap iyu o /cexapj(r/xaj, d Ti KexapiSfMai, for also I what I have 
 forgiven, if I have forgiven any thing. 
 
40 II. CORINTIIIAISrS 2, 10. 
 
 stood as referring to that particular case. He was satisfied 
 with their course, and also with the evidence of the repentance 
 of the offender, and therefore he was ready to sanction his 
 restoration to their communion. His reason for this is stated 
 in what follows, he did it for their sake. His forgiving, how- 
 ever, was suspended upon theirs. He would not interfere to 
 restore the person in question unless they were satisfied to re- 
 ceive him. He therefore says, If I have forgiven any thincj^ 
 that is, if the forgiveness expressed in the foregoing clause is 
 to take effect and to bo considered as already done, I have 
 done it for your sake. He was influenced by no personal con- 
 sideration either in the censure originally pronounced, or in 
 his present course, but solely by a desire to promote their 
 best interests. In the person of Christy or, in the jyresence of 
 Christ. This latter interpretation is the more consistent with 
 usage, and is generally adopted. The meaning is that he act- 
 ed in this matter as in the presence of Christ, i. e. as though 
 Christ were looking on. The other explanation, which is pre- 
 ferred by Luther and many others, is consistent with the 
 meaning of the words, and gives a good sense. He acted in 
 the person of Christ, i. e. as his representative and by his au- 
 thority. This idea, however, is commonly expressed by the 
 phrase in the name of Christ. 1 Cor. 5, 4. Calvin prefers 
 the former view, and adds, Christ is to be placed before us, or 
 we " are to act as in his presence, for nothing is better adapt- 
 ed to incline us to mercy." No man can be severe in his 
 judgment who feels that the mild eyes of Christ are fixed 
 upon him. 
 
 The word xapt^o^ai, rendered to forgive in this verse, is a 
 deponent verb, but is, in several of its forms, used in a passive 
 sense. It is so taken here by Riickert and Meyer, who give 
 an entirely different explanation of the passage. They adopt 
 the reading of Griesbach, given in the margin, and render it 
 thus : ' I forgive — for what I have been forgiven, if I have 
 been forgiven anything, it is for your sake.' That is, if God 
 has really pardoned my great sin in persecuting Christ, it was 
 for your sake. Comp. 1 Tim. 1, ]6. But this interpretation 
 is inconsistent with the common use of the word, with the 
 whole context, and with I*auPs manner of speaking. His hu- 
 mihty manifested itself in deep remorse and repentance for his 
 past conduct, but not in doubting wliether he had been for- 
 given. Besides, this interpretation v.ould require a very un- 
 natural explanation of the following clause. ' If I have been 
 
" II. CORINTHIANS 2, 11-13. 41 
 
 forgiven for your sake in the presence of Christy that is, 
 Christ is the witness of my being forgiven. Tliis is contrary 
 to all scriptural representations. God is said to forgive for 
 Christ's sake ; and Christ is said to forgive, but he is never 
 represented as the mere witness or spectator of our for- 
 giveness. 
 
 11. Lest Satan should get an advantage of us : for 
 we are not ignorant of his devices. 
 
 This verse, as above remarked, is by some made to depend 
 on V. 8, the vs. 9 and 10 being parenthetical. 'Confirm your 
 love towards him — lest Satan should get an advantage of us.' 
 Others make it depend on the preceding words, ' We should 
 act (or, I was pardoned) in the presence of Christ, lest,' <fec. 
 The most natural connection is with the first clause of v. 10, 
 which contains the main idea of the context. ' I will join you 
 in pardoning the ofi:ender lest Satan get an advantage of us,' 
 i. e. make a gain of us. The expression is /xt) TrAeovcKrr^^oj/xei/ 
 vTTo Tov o-arai'a, lest ice should be made gain of or defrauded^ by 
 Satan. It was a gain to Satan if either an individual soul 
 could be driven to despair, or the peace of the church could 
 be disturbed. Both of these evils were to be apprehended if 
 discipline were carried too far. This dread of Satan was not 
 chimerical or unreasonable, for he really does seek to turn 
 every thing to the disadvantage of Christ and his kingdom. 
 We are not ignorant^ says the apostle, of his devices. This 
 and similar passages of the Word of God teach that Satan is 
 a personal beuig; that he exerts great influence over the 
 minds of men ; that although finite, and, therefore, not ubiqui- 
 tous, he is nevertheless represented as operating on the minds 
 of men generally, and not merely on those in any one place. 
 His powers of intelligence and agency therefore must be great 
 beyond our conceptions. No individual and no community 
 can ever be sure that he is not plotting their destruction. 
 Paul might have said to the Romans or the Ephesians, as he 
 did to the Corinthians, that they must take heed lest Satan 
 make a gain of them, and in some way secure them as his own. 
 
 12. 13. Purthermore, when I came to Troas to 
 (preach) Christ's gospel, and a door was opened to me 
 of the Lord, I had no rest in my spirit because I found 
 
42 II. CORINTHIANS 2, 12.13. 
 
 not Titus my brother ; but taking my leave of them, 1 
 went from thence into Macedonia. 
 
 Furthermore^ when I came ; literally, Bat having come. 
 The particle 8e [hut) serves to resume the connection broken 
 by the digression, vs. 5-11. In v. 4 he said he had written 
 liis former letter in great anguish and distress of heart, to 
 manifest his love for them. And as a still further jDroof of 
 the deep interest ^\ hich he took in their welflire, he refers to 
 the incident mentioned in tliese verses. In execution of his 
 plan of going from Ephesus through Macedonia to Corinth, 1 
 Cor, 16, 5, Paul came to Troas^ literally, to the Troad (eis Tr)v 
 TpwaSa), a name given to the whole district around the site of 
 ancient Troy. The city itself was on the coast of Mysia oppo- 
 site to the island of Tenedos. It had been made a Roman 
 colony by Augustus, and was a place of considerable impor- 
 tance, in constant commercial intercourse with the cities of 
 Macedonia and Greece. Paul did not intend to make a rapid 
 journey to Corinth, but a regular missionary tour ; he there- 
 lore says he came to Troas to preach Ghrlsfs gospel., i. e. the 
 gospel of which Christ is the author. It is also called the 
 gospel of God, and Paul speaks of it as his gospel, i. e. the 
 gospel Avhich he preached. When spoken of as the gospel 
 of the kingdom of God., Matt. 4, 23, the gospel of salvation^ 
 Eph. 1, 13, of peace., Eph. 6, 15, the genitive expresses either 
 the subject of w^iich the gospel treats or the eifects which it 
 produces. And a door icas opened to me., i. e. a way of ac- 
 cess, an opening to labour with eifect. Of the Lord., accord- 
 ing to this interpretation the words, eV Kvptw, are to be connect- 
 ed with the immediately preceding participle, " door opened 
 by the Lord." See 1 Cor. 15, 58. "Gal. 5, 10. Eph. 2, 21. It 
 is, however, more in accordance with Paul's style, who so 
 frequently uses these words in such expressions as ' Avork in 
 the Lord,' ' temple in the Lord,' ' fellow-labourer in the Lord,' 
 to refer them to the whole clause. "There was an open door 
 in the Lord." The kind of door is thus indicated, or the 
 sphere of labour pointed out. It was an oj^portunity for la- 
 bouring successfully in the Lord's service. Though the pros- 
 pects were so favourable, Paul says, I had no rest in my 
 spirit f Tw TTvcvfxaTi fjLov^ for iny spirit. The word spirit is 
 liere used because it is the highest term to designate the soul, 
 Rom. 8, 16, and the anxiety or distress which the apostle ex- 
 perienced concerned the highest feelings of his nature. jBe- 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 2, 14. 43 
 
 cause T found not Titus my brother. He calls Titus his broth- 
 er, both because of his relation to him as a fellow-Christian, 
 and because he was a joint labourer with him in the gospel. 
 He expected to meet Titus at Troas, and to learn from him the 
 state of things in Corinth, and especially the effect produced 
 by his former letter. It seems that he regarded this as a 
 turning point in the history of that church. If they submitted 
 to his authority and corrected the abuses which he had point- 
 ed out, and especially if they excommunicated the member 
 guilty of the unheard-of offence so often referred to in this 
 chapter, then he had hopes of their stabiUty in faith and prog- 
 ress in holiness. But if they refused to regard his injunctions, 
 and persisted in the course on which they had entered, then he 
 foresaw their speedy destruction. So much was at stake that 
 he could not endure the state of suspense which he was in ; 
 and therefore, taking leave of them., that is, of the brethren in 
 Troas, he passed over into Macedonia. On his first visit to this 
 city, Paul was prevented from remaining by a vision, from wdiich 
 he gathered that the Lord called him to preach the gospel in 
 Macedonia. Acts 16, 8. And on his return from his present 
 journey, it is said, he sailed from Philippi and came in five days 
 to Troas, and abode there seven days. Acts 20, 6. From the 
 circumstances connected with this last visit it is evident that 
 there was an established church at that time in Troas. The 
 word (XTroTacrcro/xac, to take leave of means to separate oneself 
 from, to bid farewell to. Luke 16, 61. Acts 18, 18. 21. 1 
 went from thence into Macedonia ; e^XSov, I loent forth. 
 He crossed over the northeastern corner of the Mediterranean 
 sea to one of the ports of Macedonia ; the same voyage which 
 he made on his return, which then required five days. As 
 Titus was to return from Corinth through Macedonia to Troas, 
 Paul thus went to meet him on his journey. 
 
 14. Now thanks (be) unto God, which always caus- 
 eth us to triumph m Christ, and maketh manifest the 
 savour of his knowledge by us in every place. 
 
 Agreeably to the impulsive character of this epistle, in- 
 stead of stating what was the intelligence which he received 
 from Titus, the apostle breaks out into a thanksgiving to God, 
 which assumes a Ibrm which might be taken for selt-commen- 
 dation, which he, however, disclaims, and humbly acknowl- 
 edges that all his qualifications for his work, and all his success 
 
44 II. CORINTHIANS 2, 14. 
 
 in it, are to be attributed to God. This leads him to speak 
 of the ministry of the gos^^el, -which he contrasts with that of 
 the law, and himself with Moses, so that it is not until the 
 seventh chapter that he pauses, as it were, to take breath, and 
 resumes the narrative here broken off. The thing for which 
 the apostle gives thanks is his success; w^hich inchides both 
 his triumph over obstacles and enemies, and his efficiency in 
 spreading abroad the knowledge of the truth. The word 
 ■^piajx/Sivuv, rendered here to cause to triianjjh^ means to tri- 
 iimph ovei\ to lead in triumph. This is its uniform sense in 
 the classics, and it is so used by Paul in Col. 2, 5. Meyer 
 and others so render the word here. ' Thanks be to God who 
 triumphs over us,' i. e. who disappoints our fears and puts our 
 anxieties to shame. But this is evidently incongruous. Paul 
 does not represent himself as humbled and conquered, but just 
 the reverse. Calvin and others retain the literal meaning of 
 the word, and say the sense is, ' Thanks be to God who leads 
 us in triumph, not as captives, but as sharers of his victory.' 
 This gives a suitable meaning, but is not so consistent with 
 the use of the word, which means to triimiph ovei\ not, to 
 make one a sharer in our triumph. The great majority of 
 commentators therefore modify the sense of the word as is 
 done by our translators. This they justify by referring to the 
 fact that many verbs which in ordinary Greek are neuter, in 
 tlie Hellenistic dialect are used in a causative sense ( Winer, 
 ]). 304), as ixa^rjTcvuv, to be a disciple, in Matt. 28, 19 and else- 
 where, means to make disciples j ^amXiveiv, to reign, in 1 Sam. 
 8, 22, and often in the Septuagint, means to cause to reign ; 
 and thus '^ptafxfSevetv, to triumph, may in obedience to the con- 
 text be fairly rendered, to cause to triumph. In Christ, in virtue 
 of union wdth Christ, or, as united to him. These words de- 
 termine the nature of the triumph of which the apostle speaks. 
 It was the triumph of a Christian minister in the service of 
 Christ. 
 
 And maheth manifest the savour of his knowledge, i. e. 
 diffuses or spreads abroad his knowledge, wliicli is compared 
 to the savour of a sacriiice (Gen. 8, 21. Eph. 5, 2. Phil. 4, 18), 
 or to incense. His knowledge ; the pronoun his is commonly 
 referred to God, but as thin clause is explanatory of the for- 
 mer, or an ann)lification of the idea therein expressed, it is 
 }K'rh:ips better to refer it to Christ. ' He causes us to triumph 
 in Christ, and to spread abroad the savour of his knowledge,* 
 i. e. th(^ knowledge of Christ. Tiiat Christ should be known 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 2, 15. 45 
 
 was the great end of Paul's mission, and is of all tliins^s the 
 most acceptable to God. Knowledge here, as so often else- 
 where in Scripture, means not merely intellectual cognition, 
 but spiritual apprehension and recognition. That men should 
 know the Lord Jesus Christ in the sense of recognizing, loving 
 and worshipping him as God manifest in the flesh, is the con- 
 summation of redemption ; the sum of all blessedness aiid ex- 
 cellence. In every place. Wherever Paul went, there the 
 knowledge of Christ was sj)read abroad. Comp. Rom. 15, 19. 
 Can this be said of us ? 
 
 15. For we are unto God a sweet savour of Christ, 
 in them that are saved, and in them that perish. 
 
 We as ministers, and our work of preaching Christ, are ac- 
 ceptable to God, Avhatever may be the result of our labours. 
 This idea is connected M'ith the preceding as an amplification 
 and confirmation. 'God by us diffuses the knowledge of 
 Christ everywhere as a savour ; ^/o?* (on, because) it is well 
 pleasing to God whatever be the effect which it produces.' 
 There is, as is so common in Paul's epistles, a slight change in 
 the figure. In v. 14 the knowlpdge of Christ is declared to 
 be a savour as of incense, here the apostle is the sweet savour. 
 But it is the apostle not as a man, not the purity or devotion 
 of his life ; but the apostle as a preacher of the gospel, and 
 therefore the gospel which he preached; so that the thought 
 remains the same. In both verses the diffusion of the knowl- 
 edge of Christ is said to be well pleasing to God. Savour of 
 Christ., does not mean a savour of which Christ is the author. 
 The idea is not that Christ rendered Paul or his life accepta- 
 ble to God. That indeed is true, but it is not what is intend- 
 ed. When we speak of the perfume of the rose, or of the vio- 
 let, we mean that perfume which the rose or the violet emits 
 and which is characteristic of it. When Paul says, " We are 
 a sweet smelling savour of Christ," he means we are the means 
 of diffusing the knowledge of Christ. When a man's garments 
 are perfumed with myrrh or frankincense, he fills with the fra- 
 grance every place he enters. So Paul, wherever he went, 
 diffused abroad the fragrance of the name of Christ, and that 
 was acceptable to God. In them., i. e. among them, that are 
 saved ; and in (among) them that perish. This does not mean 
 among them predestined to be saved, and those predestined 
 to perish. The idea of predestination is not included. The 
 
4G II. CORINTHIANS 2, 16. 
 
 two classes are designated ah eventu. The gospel and those 
 who preach it are well pleasing to God, whether men receive 
 it and are saved, or reject it and are lost. The light is inesti- 
 mably precious, whether the eye rejoices in it, or through dis- 
 ease is destroyed by it. Comp. 1 Cor. 1, 18. 2 Thess. 2, 10. 
 
 IG. To the one (we are) the savour of death unto 
 death; to the other the savour of Hfe unto hfe. And 
 who is sufficient for these things ? 
 
 The words loe are are not in the text, but are necessarily 
 implied. The apostle and all faithful ministers are to God an 
 eucoSta, a sweet savour^ to men an oa-fx-q^ a savour, salutary or 
 destructive according to circumstances. We are, i. e. we as 
 preachers. The idea is the same whether we say that preach- 
 ers of the gospel, or the gospel itself, or Christ, are the cause 
 of life to some, and of death to others. As Christ is to some 
 a tried corner stone, elect and precious, the rock of their sal- 
 vation, to others he is a stone of offence. 1 Pet. 2, 7. 8. So 
 the gospel and its ministers are the cause of lite to some, and 
 of death to others, and to all they are either the one or the 
 other. The word of God is quick and powerful either to save 
 or to destroy. It cannot be neutral. If it does not save, it 
 destroys. '' This is the condemnation, that light is come into 
 the world, and men loved darkness rather than light," John 
 3, 19. "If I had not come and spoken unto them they had 
 not had sin," John 15, 22. If a man rejects the gospel, it had 
 been far better for him never to have heard it. It will be 
 more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrah hi the day of judg- 
 ment than for him. This, which is the doctrine of the Bible, 
 is plainly the doctrine of this passage. The gospel and those 
 who preach it, are either a savour of life or a savour of death. 
 If not the one, they must be the other. In the phrase "a 
 savour of death unto death," of death expresses the quality, 
 imto death, the etfect. It is a deadly savour, and it produces 
 death. And so of the corresponding clause, " a savour of life 
 unto life," is a salutary savour i)roducing life. The Rabbins 
 often use a similar expression in reference to the Law, which 
 they say is either an odour of hfe or of death. 
 
 On the authority of two of the older MSS. (A and C), and 
 several of the more modern ones, Lachmann, Tischendorf and 
 Meyer read Ik Savdrov and cV liuyq instead of the simple geui- 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 2, 17. 47 
 
 tive. It is then not a savour of death or of Ufe^ but a savour 
 arising from death, and a savour arising from life. To the 
 one class Christ is dead and yields only a savour of death ; to 
 the other, he is alive, and yields a savour of life. According 
 to either reading the main idea is the same. Christ and his 
 gospel, and therefore his ministers, are to behevers the source 
 of life, and to unbehevers the source of death. See Matt. 21, 
 44. Luke 2, 34. John 9, 39. The common text has more ex- 
 ternal authority, and certainly gives a simpler sense, and is 
 therefore preferred by the majority of editors. 
 
 And who is sufficient for these things f Kat {and) before 
 a question often indicates a consequence of what precedes. 
 It is frequently in our version in such cases rendered then. 
 " Who then can be saved ? » Mark 10, 26. " How is he then 
 David's son ? " Luke 20, 44. So here, Who then is sufficient 
 for these things ? If the work is so great, if eternal life or 
 eternal death must follow the preaching of the gospel, who 
 then is sufficient (tKavos) for so responsible a calhng? The 
 most natural answer to this question would seem to be, ' No 
 one in himself.' The following verse, however, which begins 
 with (yap) fo)\ and is designed to confirm the implied answer, 
 requires that answer to be, " I am." ' I am sufficient for this 
 work, for I do not handle the word of God deceitfully.' 
 "My sufficiency," however, the apostle immediately adds, 3, 
 5, " is of God." Of himself he vvas not fit or able to do any 
 thing. There is, as Calvin remarks, an imphed antithesis. 
 *The object of preaching is the difiusion of the knowledge of 
 Christ ; the effiect of that dift\ision is life to some and death to 
 others. Who then is competent to this work? Not your 
 false teachers who corrupt the word of God, but I and others 
 who preach the pure gospel from pure motives.' This view is 
 sustained by what follows, for the apostle immediately pro- 
 ceeds to vindicate his claim to this sufficiency or fitness, which 
 he denies to the false teachers. 
 
 17. For we are not as many, which corrupt the 
 word of God ; but as of sincerity, but as of God, as in 
 the sight of God, speak we in Christ. 
 
 The connection indicated by for is ob™us. ' We are 
 competent to this work, for we are not like the fiilse teachers, 
 but are sincere.' We are not as many^ ol TroXkot, the many. 
 3 
 
48 II. CORINTHIANS 2, 17. 
 
 This some understand to mean the mass or majority of those 
 who preach the gospel. The apostle would thus be made to 
 condemn, as corrupters of the faith, the great body of the min- 
 isters of the apostolic church. This, however, is unnecessary. 
 The many, means the definite many known to the Corinthians 
 as false teachers, to whom in the course of this epistle the 
 apostle so often refers. Which corrupt the word of God. 
 The word used is KaTTT^Xevo), to be a huckster^ and then to act 
 as one. Paul says, We do not act as hucksters in reference 
 to the word of God. The word is frequently used in the 
 Greek writers in a figurative sense, to express the ideas of adul- 
 terating, and of makmg merchandise of any thing for the sake of 
 gain. Both ideas may be united, for both are included in the 
 disclaimer of the apostle. He neither adulterated the word 
 of God, by mixing it with Judaism or false philosophy (i. e. 
 with his own speculations), nor did he use it for any selfish or 
 mercenary j^urpose. JBut as of sincerity. The ((is) as, is not 
 redundant. The meaning is, 'We speak as those who are 
 sincere,' i. e. those whose characteristic is ctXtKptVcia, transpar- 
 ent purity, or integrity ; who can bear being looked through 
 and through; all whose motives will sustain inspection. As 
 of God, not merely sent of God, but godly, influenced by 
 God, and belonging to God, and therefore like him. Our 
 Lord said to the Jews, " He which is of God, heareth God's 
 words: ye therefore hear them not because ye are not of 
 God," John 8, 47. As in the sight of God, i. e. as in his 
 presence and conscious of his inspection. We speak in Christ ; 
 not of Christ, nor, according to Christ, but in communion with 
 him, as a member of his body and actuated by his Spirit. We 
 have here then Paul's description of a faithful minister, of one 
 who is (tKttvos) sufficient, or qualified for the fearful responsi- 
 bility of being a savour of life or of death. He does not cor- 
 rupt the word of God by any foreign admixtures, nor use it as 
 a means of his own advancement by dispensing it so as to please 
 men ; but he is governed by pure motives, is of God, and 
 speaks as in the presence of God, and as a true Christian 
 man. 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 3, 1. 49 
 
 CHAPTER IH. 
 
 The apostle shows that he does not need to commend himself or to be com- 
 mended by the Corinthians ; that God had qualified him for the work of 
 a minister of the new, and not of the old covenant, vs. 1-11. He ex- 
 ercised his ministry in accordance with the peculiar character of the new 
 dispensation, vs. 12-18. 
 
 Proof of the Apostle's fitness for his icorJc^ and its nature. 
 
 Vs. 1-11. 
 
 Although the concluding paragraph of the preceding chap- 
 ter contained a strong assertion of the integrity and fidelity 
 of the apostle, he says, it was not written for the purpose of 
 self-commendation. Pie needed no commendation from any 
 source, v. 1. The Corinthians themselves were his commen- 
 dation. Their conversion was an epistle of Christ authenti- 
 cating his mission and his fidelity, w^hich all men could read, 
 vs. 2. 3. His fitness or sufficiency for his work was due in no 
 measure to himself, but to God, who had endowed him with 
 the qualifications of a minister of the new covenant, vs. 4-6. 
 This covenant and its ministry are far superior to the old 
 covenant and the ministry of Moses, because the one was a 
 ministry of death, the other of life ; the one was of condemna- 
 tion, the other of righteousness ; the glory of the one was 
 transient, the glory of the other is abiding, vs. 7-11. 
 
 1. Do we begin again to commend om*selves? or 
 need we, as some (others), epistles of commendation to 
 you, or (letters) of commendation from you ? 
 
 Many of the pecuharities of this epistle are due to the fact 
 that at the time of writing it the apostle's mind was filled 
 with conflicting feelings. On the one hand, he was filled with 
 gratitude to God and love to the Corinthians on account of 
 their repentance and ready obedience ; and on the other, with 
 feelings of indignation at the perverse and wicked course 
 adopted by the false teachers in Corinth. Hence even in the 
 expression of the former class of feelings, he is interrupted or 
 turned aside by the thought that his opponents were on the 
 watch to turn every thing to his disadvantage. Thus although 
 there Avas nothing of a spirit of self-commendation in his thank- 
 
60 II. CORINTHIANS 3, 2. 
 
 ing God for causing liiin to triumph, or in tlie assertion of his 
 sincerity, in 1, 15-17, yet he knew that his enemies would put 
 that construction on what he had said. He seems to hear 
 til em say, ' He is commending himself again.' It is plain from 
 the use of the word agairi in this connection, that the charge 
 of praising himself had before been made against the apostle, 
 whether founded on his former epistle or what he said on 
 other occasions, is uncertain and unimportant. 
 
 The authorities are divided as to whether r] {xtj or d fxr] is 
 the true reading in the following clause. If the former, the 
 sense is, "Or do we need," <fcc. ; if the latter, "Unless we 
 need," &g. The latter gives an ironical turn to the passage. 
 The apostle sets it forth as certain that his apostolic mission 
 and authority were so authenticated, that he did not need, as 
 certain people did, letters of commendation either to them or 
 from them. These false teachers had no doubt gained access 
 to Corinth on the strength of certain letters of recommenda- 
 tion. They were so little known and had so Httle character, 
 that when *they went elsewhere, they would need to be com- 
 mended by the Corinthians. With Paul the case was dif- 
 ferent. 
 
 2. Ye are our epistle written in our hearts, knoAvn 
 and read of all men. 
 
 Ye are our einstle^ etc., or, The epistle ichich we have ye 
 are. You as Christians, your conversion is, as it were, a letter 
 from Christ himself authenticating our mission and fidelity. 
 'Writteii in our hearts. The plural form, our hearts^ may be 
 explained either on the assumption that the apostle is speak- 
 ing of Timothy as well as of himself; or on the ground that 
 he says hearts instead of heart for the same reason that ho 
 says We instead of jT/ or that the word is used figuratively 
 for the affections. It is not Paul's manner to make his asso- 
 ciates the joint authors of his letters, and in no one of his 
 epistles docs he speak more out of the fulness of his personal 
 feelings than he does in this. It was not Timothy who w^as 
 accused of self-commendation, who needed no letters of com- 
 mendation, and it was not of Timothy's mission that the con- 
 version of the Corinthians was tlie authentication, and there- 
 fore it was not in Timothy's lieart tliat the epistle referred to 
 was Vv^ritten. Paul is speaking ot liimself. A thing is said to 
 be written in the lieart when it is a matter of consciousness; 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 3, 3. 51 
 
 when it is a matter of subjective, as distinguished from ob- 
 jective knowledge. Thus the law of God is said to be written 
 on the heart when the knowledge of it is inward and not 
 merely outward. Jer. 31, 33. Heb. 8, 10. Rom. 2, 15. Any 
 thing of which a man is certain, or of which he has a convic- 
 tion founded upon his inward experience, may be said to be 
 written on his heart. That the Corinthians were his epistle 
 was to the apostle a matter of consciousness. It was a letter 
 written on his heart which he could neither misunderstand 
 nor be ignorant of. Comp. Rom. 10, 8. Any thing also that 
 is very dear to us is said to be written on the heart, or to be 
 in the heart. So Paul says to the Corinthians, " Ye are in our 
 hearts," 7, 3. The apostle therefore may be understood to 
 mean either that he was perfectly certain that the conversion 
 of the Corinthians was for him a letter of commendation ; or 
 that it was most dear to him. A letter cherished in his heart. 
 The context is in favour of making the former idea the promi- 
 nent one. This letter, however, was not only well known to 
 the apostle, it was known and read of all men. It was a pal- 
 jDable evidence of his divine mission, which no one could be 
 ignorant of, and which no one could gainsay. Men could not 
 doubt its genuineness, nor could they question its import. 
 He expresses the same idea when he says, " The seal of my 
 apostleship are ye in the Lord," 1 Cor. 9, 2. 
 
 3. (Forasmucli as ye are) manifestly declared to be 
 tlie epistle of Christ ministered by us, wiitten not with 
 ink, but with the Spirit of the living God ; not in ta- 
 bles of stone, but in fleshly tables of the heart. 
 
 The fact that the Corinthians were to Paul an epistle of 
 commendation, is here confirmed ; i^/xets — ^av^povjx^voi otl la-ri^ 
 ye are consincuous or publidy known as the ejnstle of Christ. 
 That is, an epistle of which Christ is the author. Ministered 
 hy us. The conversion of the Corinthians was the work of 
 Christ, effected by the ministry of Paul. Considered as a let- 
 ter, they were a letter of Christ written by the hand of Paul 
 as Christ's instrument. The importance or superior worth of 
 this epistle is set forth in what follows by a twofold contrast 
 or com'parison. First, it was not a letter written with ink, 
 but by the Spirit of the livmg God. Any man could write 
 with ink; Christ alone can write with the Spuit of God. 
 
62 II. CORINTHIANS 3, 4. 
 
 This is a figurative way of expressing the idea that the con- 
 version of the Corinthians was a divine, supernatural work, 
 and therefore an irrefi-agable proof that Paul, by whose in- 
 strumentality the work was etfected, was the minister of 
 Christ. Tliis was a letter, therefore, infinitely above any or- 
 dinary letter written with ink. Secondly, it was not an out- 
 ward, but an inward, spiritual work. The decalogue, written 
 on tables of stone by the finger of God, was indeed a divine 
 work, and proved the divine mission of Moses; but what 
 was that to writing the law upon the fleshly tables of the 
 heart ! The work of regeneration and sanctification is always 
 represented in the Scripture as a much higher manifestation 
 of divine power and grace than any mere external miracle. 
 In predicting the new dispensation in contrast with the old, 
 God says, " Behold the days come when I will make a new 
 covenant with the house of Israel — not according to the cove- 
 nant that I made with their fathers, — but I will put my law 
 in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts," Jeremiah 
 31, 31-33. To this the apostle evidently refers to show that 
 the evidence of his mission was of a higher character than 
 that of Moses, and that his ministry was far more exalted and 
 glorious. 
 
 Instead of the genitive, Kap8ta§, the great body of ancient 
 MSS. have the dative, KapSiats ; on tables tohic/i are hearts of 
 fleshy instead of fleshly tables of the heart. The majority of 
 editors adhere to the common text on the authority of the 
 Greek fathers. The sense is the same. 
 
 4. And such trust have we through Christ to 
 God-ward. 
 
 This confidence in the divinity and glory of his mission, 
 and in his sufliciency for the apostleship he had from Christ 
 and in the presence of God. It was a confidence so strong 
 (and yet so humble) that it did not quail even under the eye 
 of God; much less therefore under the scrutiny of the bleared 
 eyes of his opponents. Such confidence., not merely confi- 
 dence in the fact that the Corinthians were to him a letter of 
 commendation, but the confidence expressed in the whole 
 context, and especially in 2, 15-17. This confidence he had 
 through Christ. It was not self confidence. It was not the 
 consciousness of superior excellence ; but a conviction of tlie 
 truth of the gosi^el and of the reality of that vocation which 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 3, 5. 53 
 
 he had received from Christ. This confidence of the apostle 
 that he was what God had called him to be, an able or fit 
 minister of the gospel, was not a trait of natural character ; 
 it was not a conclusion from his inward and outward experi- 
 ence ; it was one of the forms in which the Spirit of God 
 which was in him manifested itself; just as that Spirit mani- 
 fested itself in his humihty, faith, courage, or constancy. It 
 is easy to determine whether such confidence is self-infiation, 
 or the strength of God in the soul. If the former, it has its 
 natural concomitants of pride, arrogance, indifi:erence, con- 
 tempt of others. If the lattei-, it is attended by self-abhor- 
 rence, meekness, long-suflfering, a willingness to be the least 
 and lowest, and by all other graces of the Spirit. To God- 
 ward., 7rpo9 Tov 0€oi/. This may mean in reference to God, i. e. 
 a confidence exercised toward God as its object. Or, Trpos 
 may be used here as in Rom. 4, 2. Abraham, it is there said, 
 had no Kavxr//>ta, ground of boasting., Trpos ©eoV, before God ; 
 that is, none that could stand his inspection. Paul says he 
 had a confidence before God ; that is, one which could endure 
 in his siojht. 
 
 5. Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think 
 any thing as of ourselves ; but our sufficiency (is) of 
 God. 
 
 The apostle had strongly asserted his sufficiency or fitness 
 for his work. He here tells us what was not, and then what 
 was, the source of his sufficiency. N'ot that., i. e. I do not say, 
 or, I do not mean, that we are sufficient of ourselves. In most 
 of the older MSS. the words d<^' eavrtov, of ourselves., stand 
 after Xoyit^aa-^ai rt, " sufficient to think any thing of ourselves," 
 instead of, as in the common text, ' sufficient of ourselves to 
 think any thing.' The former order of the words has greater 
 authority, and gives perhaps the better sense. There is a dif- 
 ference in the prepositions in Greek which is not expressed in 
 the English. Paul says his sufficiency or ability to thhik any 
 thing was not a<^' kavTiiiv ws e| kavToiv., not from himself as out 
 of himself. He was not the source of this sufficiency either 
 remotely or immediately. We should express much the same 
 idea by saying, 'Our sufficiency is not in or of ourselves.' 
 Comp. Gal. 1, 1. What he disclaims is sufficiency or ability 
 to think any thing j the implication is any thing right or 
 
54 II. CORINTHIANS 3, 6. 
 
 good. He had no power of himself to accomplish any thing. 
 His iitness for his work, whether consisting in knowledge, or 
 grace, or fidelity, or efficiency, did not arise out of any thing 
 he was in or of himself The word XoyCi^aa^ai docs not here 
 mean to judge^ or to tliinh out or determbie. The idea is not 
 that Paul was of himself unable to judge what Avas best and 
 right, i. e. to think out the means of rendering his ministry 
 successful. The word is to be taken in its simplest sense, to 
 think. Thought is the lowest form of our efficiency, in so far 
 as it is much easier to think good, than either to will or to do 
 it. Paul means to say that s© far as the subject in hand is 
 concerned, he could do nothing, not even think. He was in 
 himself absolutely empty and powerless. Ow sufficiency is 
 of God. All our fitness for our work — all our knowledge, 
 holiness and power are of God. They are neither self-acquired 
 nor self-sustained. I am nothing, the apostle would say ; God 
 in me is every thing. The same truth and feeling are ex- 
 j)ressed in 1 Cor. 15, 10. 
 
 6. Who also hath made us able ministers of the 
 new testament ; not of the letter, but of the spirit : 
 for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth hfe. 
 
 This verse is a confirmation of the preceding. The relative 
 OS is here used as in Luke 8, 13, and elsewhere, as implying 
 the cause or reason. Our sufficiency is of God, loho ; equiva- 
 lent to /or he hath made us able ministers. The same radical 
 word is retained, tKaycocre, hath rendered us iKavoi;?, sufficient^ 
 able, well qualified, ministers of the new testament., Kati/^s 
 Sta^^^KT/ff, of the new covenant., as the word Sca-h^Kr) always 
 means in the New Testament, unless Ileb 9, 16 be an excep- 
 tion. The covenant formed between God and the Hebrews 
 at Mount Sinai is called the Old Covenant ; the gospel dis- 
 pensation as distinguished from the Mosaic is called the New 
 Covenant. Matt. 26, 28. 1 Cor. 11, 25. Heb. 8, 8. 9, 15. &c. 
 As, however, the promises of the gospel, and especially the 
 great promise of redemption by the blood of Christ, underlay 
 both the patriarchal and Mosaic dispensations, the plan of 
 salvation or the covenant of grace, is also called the New 
 Covenant, although older than the Mosaic covenant, to dis- 
 tinguish it i'rom the covenant of works formed with Adam. 
 This gives rise to no little obscurity. It is not always easy to 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 3, 0. 55 
 
 determine whether the words " new covenant " refer to the 
 gospel dispensation introduced by Christ, or to the covenant 
 of grace inaugurated in the first promise made to our fallen 
 parents. And in like manner it is not easy always to decide 
 whether the words the " old covenant " designate the Mosaic 
 covenant or the covenant of works. The context must in 
 every case be our guide in deciding these questions. In the 
 present case it is plam that by the New Covenant the apostle 
 means the gospel as distinguished from the Law, — the Chris- 
 tian as distinguished from the Mosaic dispensation. It was of 
 that he was made a minister, and it is that which he contrasts 
 with the Old Testament economy. Kot of the letter^ hut of 
 the spirit. These words admit of two constructions. They 
 may depend on the word covenant. ' Covenant not of the 
 letter, but of the spirit.' They thus determine the nature of 
 the New Covenant as being not of the letter but of the spirit. 
 This is the construction adopted by perhaps the majority of 
 modern commentators. The older interpreters, followed by 
 our translators, make the words in question depend on minis- 
 ters. " Ministers not of the letter, but of the spirit." This 
 latter is not only more familiar to the readers of the English 
 version, but is favoured by the whole context. Paul contrasts 
 two dispensations ; one he calls the letter, the other the spirit. 
 He says he is minister of the one, not of the other, and after- 
 wards, vs. 7. 8, he speaks of the mmistry of death and min- 
 istry of the spirit; the ministry of condemnation and the 
 ministry of righteousness. That the words letter and spirit as 
 here used mean the law and the gospel is plain, first, because 
 it is the law and the gospel which he proceeds to compare in 
 the following verses ; and secondly, because these are terms 
 which he- elsewhere uses in the same sense. Thus in Rom. 7, 
 6 he speaks of the oldness of the letter and newness of the 
 spirit. In Rom. 2, 27 he characterizes the Jew as being of 
 the letter, i. e. as having the law. Comp. also Gal. 3, 3. If 
 it be asked what is the ground of these designations, why the 
 law is called letter, and the gospel spirit, it may be answered 
 in the first place, that the law is called ypa/^/xa, lette?\ for the 
 same reason that it is called ypa^"*?, scrij^ture. It was some- 
 thing written. Not only was the decalogue, the kernel of the 
 Mosaic economy, originally written on stones, but the whole 
 law was a volume known as the icritings. And in the second 
 place, the law as written was something external and object- 
 ive. It was addressed to the eye, to the ear, to the under- 
 
66 II. CORINTHIANS 3, 6. 
 
 standing. It was not an inward principle or power. It held 
 up the rule of duty to which men were to be conformed, but 
 it could not impart the disposition or ability to obey. It was, 
 as it were, a mere writing or book. On the other hand, the 
 gospel is spiritual, as distinguished from what was external 
 and ritual. It is the power of God, Rom. 1,6; the organ 
 throuj^h ^diich the Spirit works in giving life to the^ soul. 
 These^ words therefore express concisely the characteristic dif- 
 ference between the law and the gospel. The one was exter- 
 nal, the other spiritual ; the one was an outward precept, the 
 other an inward power. In the one case the law was written 
 on stone, in the other on the heart. The one therefore was 
 letter^ the other sjnrit. 
 
 For the letter (i. e. the law) Jcilleth^ but the spirit (i. e. the 
 gospel) giveth life. This is the reason why God hath made 
 Paul the minister of the spirit. ' God had made us able min- 
 isters not of the law but of the gospel, for the law kills, but 
 the gospel gives life.' This passage and the following context 
 present two important questions. First, in what sense does 
 the law kill ? And second, How is it that the apostle attrib- 
 utes to the Mosaic system this purely legal character, when 
 he elsewhere so plainly teaches that the gospel was witnessed 
 or taught both in the law and the prophets ? As to the for- 
 mer of these questions, the answer furnished by the Scriptures 
 is plain. The law demands perfect obedience. It says, " Do 
 this and live," Rom. 10, 5. Gal. 3, 12, and "Cursed is every 
 one who continueth not in all things written in the book of 
 the law to do them," Gal. 3, 10. As no man renders this 
 perfect obedience, the law condemns him. It pronounces on 
 him the sentence of death. This is one way in which it kills. 
 In the second place, it produces the knowledge or conscious- 
 ness of shi, and of course of guilt, that is, of just exposure to 
 the wrath of God. Thus again it slays. And thirdly, by pre- 
 senting the perfect standard of duty, which cannot be seen 
 without awakening the sense of obligation to be conformed to 
 it, while it imparts no disposition or power to obey, it exasper- 
 ates the soul and tims again it brings forth fruit unto death. 
 All these effects of the law are systematically presented by 
 the apostle in the 6th and Vth chapters of his epistle to the 
 Romans, and in the 3d chapter of the epistle to the Galatians. 
 The second question is more difficult. Every reader of 
 the New Testament must be struck with the fact that the 
 apostle often speaks of the Mosaic law as he does of the moral 
 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 3, 6. 5-7 
 
 law considered as a covenant of works ; that is, presenting the 
 promise of life on the condition of perfect obedience. He 
 represents it as saying, Do this and Hve ; as requiring Avorks, 
 and not faith, as the condition of acceptance. Rom. 10, 5-10. 
 Gal. 3, 10-12. He calls it a ministration of death and con- 
 demnation. He denies that it can give life. Gal. 3, 21. He 
 tells those who are of the law (that is, Judaizers) that they 
 had fallen from grace ; that is, had renounced the gratuitous 
 method of salvation, and that Christ should profit them noth- 
 ing. Gal. 5, 2. 4. In short, when he uses the word law, and 
 says that by the law is the knowledge of sin, that it can only 
 condemn, that by its works no flesh can be justified, he in- 
 cludes the Mosaic law ; and in the epistle to the Galatians all 
 these things are said with special reference to the law of Mo- 
 ses. On the other hand, however, he teaches that the plan 
 of salvation has been the same from the beginning; that 
 Christ was the propitiation for the sins committed under the 
 old covenant ; that men were saved then as now by faith in 
 Christ ; that this mode of salvation was revealed to Abraham 
 and understood by him, and taught by Moses and the prophets. 
 This view is presented repeatedly in Paul's epistles, and is ar- 
 gued out in due form in Rom. 3, 21-31. Rom. 4, and Gal. 3. 
 To reconcile these apparently conflicting representations it 
 must be remembered that the Mosaic economy was designed 
 to accomplish difierent objects, and is therefore presented in 
 Scripture under diflerent aspects. What, therefore, is true of 
 it under one aspect, is not true under another. 1. The law 
 of Moses was, in the first place, a re-enactment of the covenant 
 of works. A covenant is simply a promise suspended upon a 
 condition. The covenant of works, therefore, is nothing more 
 than the promise of life suspended on the condition of perfect 
 obedience. The phrase is used as a concise and convenient 
 expression of the eternal principles of justice on which God 
 deals with rational creatures, and which underlie all dispensa- 
 tions, the Adamic, Abrahamic, Mosaic and Christian. Our 
 Lord said to the lawyer who asked w^hat he should do to in- 
 herit eternal life, " What is written in the law ? How readest 
 thou ? And he answ^ering said. Thou shalt love the Lord thy 
 God A\dth all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy 
 strength, and with afl thy mind ; and thy neighbour as thy- 
 self And he said unto him, Thou hast answ^ered right, this 
 do and thou shalt live," Luke 10, 26-28. This is the covenant 
 of works. It is an immutable principle that where there is no 
 
58 II. CORINTHIANS 3, 6. 
 
 sin there is no concle]nn.'itioii, and wliere tliere is sin there is 
 death. This is all that tliose who reject the gospel have to 
 fall back upon. It is this principle which is rendered so 
 prominent in the Mosaic economy as to give it its character 
 of law. Viewed under this aspect it is the ministration of 
 condemnation and death. 2. The Mosaic economy was also a 
 national covenant ; that is, it presented national promises on 
 the condition of national obedience. Under this aspect also it 
 was purely legal. But 3, as the gospel contains a renewed 
 revelation of the law, so the law of Moses contained a revela- 
 tion of the gospel. It presented in its priesthood and sacri- 
 fices, as types of the office and work of Christ, tlie gratuitous 
 method of salvation through a Redeemer. This necessarily 
 supposes that faith and not works was the condition of salva- 
 tion. It was those who trusted, not those free from sin, who 
 were saved. Thus Moses wrote of Christ, John 5, 46 ; and 
 thus the law and the prophets witnessed of a righteousness of 
 faith, Rom. 3, 21. When therefore the apostle spoke of the 
 old covenant under its legal aspect, and especially when speak- 
 ing to those who rejected the gospel and clung to the law of 
 Moses as law, then he says, it kills, or is the ministration of 
 condemnation. But when viewing it, and especially when 
 speaking of those who viewed it as setting forth the great 
 doctrine of redemption through the blood of Christ, he repre- 
 sented it as teaching his own doctrine. The law, in every 
 form, moral or Mosaic, natural or revealed, kills. In demand- 
 ing works as the condition of salvation, it must condemn all 
 sinners. But the gospel, whether as revealed in the promise 
 to Adam after his fall, or in the promise to Abraham, or in 
 the writings of Moses, or in its full clearness in the New Tes- 
 tament, gives life. As the old covenant revealed both the law 
 and the gospel, it either killed or gave life, according to the 
 light in Av^iich it was vicAved. And therefore Paul sometimes 
 says it does the one, and sometimes the other. But the spirit 
 givcth life. The spirit, or the gospel, gives life in a sense cor- 
 relative to that in which the letter (i. e. the law) kills. 1. By 
 revealing a righteousness adequate to our justification, and 
 thus delivering us from the sentence of death. 2. By pro- 
 ducing the assurance of God's love and the hope of his glory 
 in the jjlace of a dread of his wrath. 3. By beconnng, through 
 the agency of the Holy Spirit, an inward principle or power 
 transforming us into the image of God; instead of a mere out- 
 ward command. 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 3, 7.8. 59 
 
 7.8. But if the ministration of death, written (and) 
 engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children 
 of Israel could not steadfastly behold the face of Moses 
 for the glory of his countenance ; wdiich (glory) was to 
 be done away : how shall not the ministration of the 
 Sphit be rather glorious ? 
 
 It was tlie design and effect of the law to kill. This is 
 true, so far as the work of salvation is concerned, of the law 
 in all its forms, whether the moral law as revealed in the 
 Scriptures, or as written in the heart, or as the Mosaic law. 
 In all these forms it was designed to bring men to the knowl- 
 edge of sin and helplessness ; to produce a sense of guilt and 
 misery, and a longing for redemption, and thus be a school- 
 master to bring men to Christ. Gal. 3, 24. This was a neces- 
 sary office, and therefore glorious. But how can it compare 
 with the gospel ? How can that which only makes us know 
 that we are sinful and condemned, be compared with that 
 which delivers us from sin and condemnation ? This is the 
 idea which the apostle expands, and, as it were with exulta- 
 tion, turns over as though he could not let it go, in vs. 7-11. 
 But if the tninistration of deaths icritten (and) graven in 
 stones. The Greek is, et 8e 7} StaKOVia tov ^o^vdrov iu ypajXfxaaiv 
 €.vT€Tv-iT0)iJi€V7] Iv A.t^ots, but if t/ie mlnistratioii of death in letters 
 engraven in stones. The simplest interpretation of these 
 words is that the ministration of death was in letters, i. e. by 
 means of letters, engraven on stone ; which is the sense ex- 
 pressed by the free translation given in our common version. 
 According to this view Iv ypdfxfjiacnv are connected with what 
 follows. But more commonly they are connected with what 
 precedes ; the oninistration of death in letters^ which Luther 
 makes to mean, " the ministration which by means of letters 
 (i. e. the Avritten law) produces death," This certainly gives 
 a good sense and consistent with the context ; but it is not so 
 simple or natural as the one first mentioned. It will be ob- 
 served that Paul says that the ministration was engraven on 
 stone. It was, however, of course not the ministration (the 
 office of a minister) but the law itself that was thus engraven. 
 There are two things here stated. First, that Moses was the 
 minister of a covenant that produced death ; and secondly, 
 tljat that covenant was an external economy or system. 
 These two ideas are combmed at the expense of mere verbal 
 
60 II. CORINTHIANS 3, 7.8. 
 
 accuracy in a single clause. The word StaKovta^ ministratioti^ 
 means either the service^ i. e. the act of ministering, or the 
 office of a hLaKovo<s or minister. Commonly the former. In 
 what sense the ministry of the law was a ministry of death, 
 and the reason why the law is described as engraven on stone, 
 have already been stated. The law is thus exhibited as exter- 
 nal, as opi^osed to what is spiritual. 
 
 Was glorious^ iyevq^rj Iv S6$a, existed in glory y was sur- 
 rounded, as it were, by a halo. The reference here is only 
 indirectly to the brightness of Moses's face, which was but a 
 symbol of the glory of his ministration. The glory which per- 
 tained to the old dispensation was not the illumination of the 
 countenance of Moses, Avhich was merely an incident. It was 
 of the same kind, though less in degree, as the glory of the 
 gospel. The one dispensation was indeed glorious, but the 
 other was more so. So that the children of Israel could not 
 steadfastly behold the face of Jfoses. The whole service was 
 so glorious that even the face of Moses was so bright that the 
 people could not look upon it. This brightness of the face of 
 Moses was in two respects a symbol of the glory of the old 
 dispensation. In the lii-st place, it was an outward brightness. 
 So too the glory of the Mosaic dispensation was derived in 
 large measure from its pompous ritual, its temple, its priest- 
 hood, its sacrifice, and, above all, its Shekinah, or visible sym- 
 bol of the divine presence. But what was all this to the glory 
 of the gospel? What was a bright cloud overhanging the 
 cherubim, to the light of God's presence filling the soul? 
 And secondly, the brightness of the face of Moses was tran- 
 sient. The particij^le Karapyovixiv-qv may be taken as imperfect 
 — They could not behold it as it was va7iishing away ; or as 
 present, which is evanescent^ ov perishable. It was in its own 
 nature a mere transient brightness, analogous to the tempora- 
 ry splendour of the service committed to him. How shall not 
 the ministration of the Spirit be rather glorious ? If the one 
 Avas glorious, how much more the other ! The future shall is 
 not to be understood in reference to the future world. The 
 idea is not that hereafter, when Christ's kingdom is consum- 
 mated, the ministration of the gospel shall be found more glo- 
 rious than that of the law. The future expresses the certain 
 sequence. If the ministration of death was glorious, the min- 
 istration of the Spirit shall assuredly, if rightly considered, be 
 regarded as glorious. This is plain from the fact that the 
 things compared are the ministration committed to Moses and 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 3, 9. 61 
 
 the ministration committed to Paul ; and also from the reason 
 assigned for the superiority of the latter, which is not what is 
 to be realized in the future, but what is experienced in the 
 present. It was because it is the ministration of the spirit 
 that it is more glorious than the ministration of death. The 
 ideas of life and life-giving are inseparable from that of spirit. 
 Hence the Holy Gliost in the ancient creeds of the church is 
 designated as to Trvev/xa to aycov, to Kvpiov, to ^(dottolov. And 
 hence the gospel as the source of life is called spirit. It is 
 doubtful, however, whether the word spirit here refers to the 
 Holy Spirit, or to the gospel. Luther renders the phrase y 
 SiaKovta Tov Trvev/xaros, das Amt, clcis den Geist gieht^ i. e. the of- 
 fice which gives the Spirit ; because it is by the ministration 
 of the gospel the Holy Sj^irit is imparted to men. This view 
 is perhaps commonly adopted. But as in v. 6, sjnrit, as op- 
 posed to letter^ evidently means the gospel as opposed to the 
 law, and as the things compared are the law and gospel, or 
 the ministry of the one and the ministry of the other, the prob- 
 ability is that Paul intended tlie word to be so understood 
 here. The gospel is spirit because it is the source of life. 
 Instead of being something external and powerless, it is in- 
 ward and saving ; and this is the ground of its superiority to 
 the law. 
 
 9. For if the ministration of condemnation (be) 
 glory, much more doth the ministration of righteous- 
 ness exceed in glory. 
 
 This verse is a confirmation of the preceding. The gospel 
 is more glorious than the law, for the ministration of righteous- 
 ness is more glorious than the ministration of condemnation. 
 The mi7iistration of condemnation is that ministration which 
 brings men into a state of conscious condemnation ; that is, 
 which makes them know and feel that they are condemned. 
 The ministration of righteousness is that ministration which 
 reveals a righteousness by which men are justified, and thus 
 freed from the condemnation pronounced upon them by the 
 law. As much better therefore as justification is than con- 
 demnation to eternal death, so much better is the gospel than 
 the law. Although the words KaraKptort?, condemnation^ and 
 hiKo.iocrm'y]^ righteousness^ are here in antithesis, it does not fol- 
 low that the latter means justification^ which is a sense it 
 
62 II. CORINTIIIAlSrS 3, 10. 
 
 never has in the ISTew Testament. It retains its proper mean- 
 ing, righteousness^ i. e. that which the law demands. It is 
 not justification, but the ground of it ; that on account of 
 which a man is justified or pronounced righteous. Tiie gos- 
 pel, being the ministration of the spirit, is the ministration of 
 righteousness, because as what is spirit is life-giving, the gos- 
 pel must reveal a righteousness which satisfies the demands 
 of the laAV, and thus free us from judicial death, or it could 
 not be the source of life. It is true that the life of which the 
 gospel is the source is more than mere justification ; but as 
 justification is the necessary condition of spiritual life, Paul 
 here exalts the gospel by making it the means of securing 
 that righteousness which is necessary to sanctification and in- 
 separable from it. The use of the present tense, TTeptaa-evu, 
 doth abound^ in this verse, serves to confirm the explanation 
 given of V. 8. Paul in both instances is speaking of the glory 
 which now belongs to the ministry of the gospel, not of what 
 is to be hereafter. 
 
 10. For even that wliicli was made glorious liatli 
 no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that 
 excelleth. 
 
 For even, koX yap, for moreover. Too little was said in 
 simply asserting that the gosj^el excelled the law. The law, 
 though glorious in itself, ceased to be glorious in the presence 
 of the gospel, as the moon loses its brightness in the presence 
 of the sun. That laJiich toas made glorious, to SeSo^acr/xeVor, 
 that icJiich loas and is glorious, viz. the ministry of Moses, and, 
 by implication, the law or dispensation of which he was the 
 minister. Hath no glory, ov SeSo^'aorai, is not glorious, iu 
 rovTco TO) /xepet, i?i this particular. This is explained by what 
 follows. Because of the glory that excelleth. The ministry 
 of the gospel so much excels the ministry of the law, that the 
 latter ceases in the comparison to be glorious at all. This is 
 the common and natural interpretation of the text. Two other 
 explanations have been proposed. First, the words Iv tot;tw 
 Tw /xcpet are connected Avith S^So^aafxivov, that ichich was glori- 
 ous (viz. the ministry of Moses), in this particular, viz. that the 
 face of Moses was rendered luminous. This gives a very in- 
 significant sense. Tlie shining of the face of Moses was not 
 the glory of his ministry or of the old economy. It was but 
 
II. COKIKTHIANS 3, 11. 63 
 
 a symbol of it. Second, Meyer and others, retaining the ordi- 
 nary construction of the passage, make the apostle say, that 
 the general truth that the lesser glory is eclipsed by the 
 greater, was illustrated in this case, i. e. in the case of Moses 
 and his ministry. This brings out the same sense as that 
 given by the ordinary interpretation, but in a less natural 
 way. That ichich loas made glorious, to SeSo^ao-fteVov, natu- 
 rally refers to the definite subject of which the context treats, 
 which is the ministry of Moses. 
 
 11. Por if that whicli was done away (was) glorious, 
 much more that which remaineth (is) glorious. 
 
 A new ground of superiority. The old dispensation and 
 its ministry were temporary, the new is permanent. There is 
 nothing to intervene, no new revelation, no new economy, be- 
 tween the gospel and its ministry, and the final consummation. 
 Whoever are to be converted, whatever nations are to be 
 brought in, it must be by the preaching of the gospel, ichich 
 remaineth, or is to continue, according to Christ's promise, 
 until the end of the world. In the former clause the apostle 
 says the law was Sia 8o^s, loitli glory, in the latter, that the 
 gospel was Iv ^o^rj, m glory. This is a mere variation of ex- 
 pression without any difference of meaning. Comj). Rom. 3, 
 30. 5, 10. That the binding authority of the law ceased on 
 the introduction of the gospel, is a doctrine which the apostle 
 had to sustain against the Judaizing tendency of the early 
 Christians, on many occasions. To this point the epistles to 
 the Galatians and to the Hebrews are principally directed. 
 As Paul's opponents in Corinth were of this class, there is 
 little doubt that what he here says of the inferiority and tem- 
 porary character of the old economy had a special reference 
 to them ; while his strong assertion of his divine mission, of 
 the dignity and superiority of the ministry which he had re- 
 ceived, was intended to counteract the influence of their in- 
 vidious attacks upon his authority. jSTo less clear is the incul- 
 cation of the other great truth here presented. The gospel 
 did away the law, but is itself never to be superseded. These 
 are "the last times," the last dispensation, which is to con- 
 tinue until the consummation of all things. 
 
64 II. CORINTHIANS 3, 12. 
 
 The clearness and freedom of the Gospel as contrasted with 
 the ohscurity of the Law. Vs. 12-18. 
 
 The apostle having referred to the transient brightness of 
 Moses's face, as a symbol of the passing glory of his ministry, 
 here employs the fact that Moses veiled his face as a twofold 
 illustration. In the first place, it is symbolical of the obscuri- 
 ty of the revelation made under the old dispensation. As the 
 brightness of Moses's face was covered, so spiritual or evan- 
 gelical truth was of old covered under the tyj^es and shadows 
 of the Mosaic economy. In the second place, it is symbolical 
 of the blindness which rested on the minds of the Jew^s, which 
 prevented their seeing the true import of their o^^ti institu- 
 tions, vs. 12-15. Nevertheless, as Moses removed the veil 
 from his face when he turned to the Lord, so both the ob- 
 scurity which rests on the law, and the blindness which rests 
 upon the mind of the Jew, are dispelled when he turns 
 towards Christ. The vision of his glory transforms the soul 
 into his likeness, vs. 16-18. 
 
 12. Seeing tlien that we have such hope, we use 
 "great plainness of speech. 
 
 Seeing then that we have such hope^ literally. Having then 
 such hope^ i. e. because we have it. The hope to which he refers 
 must be that mentioned in the context, v. 14, that the gospel 
 and its ministry were, and would j)rove themselves to be, far 
 superior to the law and to the ministry of Moses. What in 
 V. 4 he calls TreTrot^r^o-t?, confidence^ he here calls eA.7rts, hope^ 
 because the confidence which he felt had reference not only to 
 the present, but also to the future. TFe tise great plainness 
 of speech^ i. e. Trapprjata^ outspo/cenness. This stands opposed 
 to all concealment, whether from timidity or from a desire to 
 deceive ; and also to all fear of consequences. It is a frank, 
 open, courageous manner of speech. Paul therefore says that 
 in his case it was the result of his firm conviction of his divine 
 mission and of tlie truth and glory of the gospel which he 
 preached, that he proclaimed it fully, intelligibly, and with- 
 out regard to consequences. Its being to the Greeks foolish- 
 ness, and to the Jews a stumblingblock, did not prevent his 
 declaring the whole counsel of God. The same cause will 
 ever produce the same effect. If Paul's experience of the 
 truth and excellence of the gospel led him to declare it with- 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 3, 13. 65 
 
 out reserve, a similar experience mil produce a similar open- 
 ness and boldness in other ministers of the gospel. This in- 
 deed is one of the glories of Christianity. It is characteristic 
 of error to practise reserve and to seek concealment. In all 
 the religions of antiquity there was an esoteric and exoteric 
 doctrine ; one for the people and the other of the initiated. 
 They all had mysteries carefully concealed from the public 
 eye. So in the Romish church, just in proportion as it is in- 
 fected with the sx)irit of heathenism the doctrine of reserve is 
 avowed and practised. The gospel is not preached with 
 openness, so that all may understand it. The people are kept 
 in ignorance. They are told they need not know ; that faith 
 without knowledge, a blind confidence in rites which they do 
 not understand, is all-sufficient. But if a man in a church has 
 the conviction that the gospel is of God, that it is unspeakably 
 glorious, adapted to all and needed by all in order to salva- 
 tion, then the word will be preached ojjenly and without 
 reserve. 
 
 13. And not as Moses, (whicli) put a veil over his 
 face, that the children of Israel could not steadfastly 
 look to the end of that which is abolished. 
 
 And not as 3Ioses^ that is, we do not do what Moses did. 
 Paul had just said that he used great plainness of speech, that 
 he practised no concealment or reserve. Of course he means 
 that Moses did the reverse. He did use concealment and 
 practise reserve. This is no impeachment of the character 
 of Moses. Paul is not speaking of his personal character, but 
 of the nature of his office. The truth concernmg man's re- 
 demption was not " in other ages made known unto the sons 
 of men as it is now revealed unto the holy apostles and 
 prophets by the Spirit," Eph. 3, 5. It was not consistent 
 with the nature of the ministry of Moses to use the Trapprja-ta, 
 the openness, in communicating the doctrines of redemption, 
 which it is the glory of the Christian ministry to be permitted 
 to employ. He was sent to speak in parables and in types, to 
 set forth truth in the form of significant rites and ceremonies. 
 He put a veil over the glory, not to hide it entirely from 
 view, but to obscure its brightness. The people saw the 
 Hght, but only occasionally and imperfectly. Paul had alrea- 
 dy spoken of the brightness of Moses's face as a symbol of his 
 
6Q II. CORINTHIANS 3, 13. 
 
 ministry, and therefore lie represents him as veiling himself, 
 to express the idea that he communicated the truth obscurely. 
 Paul was sent to let the truth shine forth clearly ; he did not 
 put a veil over it as Moses did, and was commanded to do. 
 That the children of Israel coulfd not steadfastly look to the end 
 of that ichich is abolished. That is, to prevent their seeing the 
 end or fiding away of the brightness of his face. The Avord 
 KaTapyov^aevos (that ichich is abolished) is used, v. V, in refer- 
 ence to the glory of the face of Moses, and v. 11 in reference 
 to his ministry and the dispensation to which it belonged. 
 Here the reference is to the former, because his face is spoken 
 of, and its brightness was veiled, and therefore, it was the 
 brightness the end of which the Israelites were prevented 
 from seeing. If this be so, then rk\o<;^ the end^ must mean the 
 termination, and not the design or scope. In Rom. 10, 4, 
 Christ is said to be the end of the law, not only as abrogating 
 it, but as being the object towards which it tended. He was 
 that v;hich it was intended to reveal. Those commentators 
 who make KaTapyovfxevov [that ivhich is abolished) refer to the 
 old law and its ministry, give re'Aos the sense of end or object. 
 They understand the apostle to say that Moses put a veil over 
 his face to prevent the children of Israel seeing Christ, who was 
 the end of the law. But this gives a most incongruous mean- 
 ing. How could Moses's veiling his face prevent the Israel- 
 ites seeing Christ? The first part of the verse cannot be 
 taken literally, and the latter part iiguratively. If the veiling 
 was a literal covering of the face, that which the veil hid must 
 be something which a literal veil could cover. The majority 
 of commentators, therefore, understand the words, that which 
 is abolished^ to refer to the visible brightness of the fxce of 
 Moses, and the end to mean the termination of that brightness. 
 The whole clause therefore means that Moses veiled his face 
 in order to prevent the Israelites seeing how soon its bright- 
 ness faded. But what has this to do with the point in hand ? 
 In answering this question it must be remembered that the 
 apostle had referred to the brightness of the face of Moses as 
 a fit symbol of his ministry, inasmuch as it was externa] and 
 transient. To say, therefore, that Moses veiled his face that 
 the people might not see the end of its brightness, is a figura- 
 tive way of saying that Moses hid the light, or taught ob- 
 scurely, that the i)eoi)le might not understand the true nature 
 and intent of his ministry. But how is it consistent with the 
 character of God that he should commission Moses to teach 
 
{ 
 
 II. CORINTHIANS S, 13. 67 
 
 obscurely in order that he might not be understood ? Some 
 endeavour to obviate this difficulty by saying that -n-pos rb /xr) 
 drc^to-at expresses the result and not the design. ' He put a 
 veil over his face, so that (not, m order that) the children of 
 Israel did not see the end of that which is abolished.' Or, to 
 drop the figure, ' He taught obscurely, so that the people did 
 not understand him.' This explanation, however, is forbidden 
 by the force of the preposition Trpd?, which in such connections 
 properly expresses the design or intention. There is no spe- 
 cial difficulty in the matter. Whatever is, God intended 
 should be. If Moses taught obscurely or in types, God in- 
 tended that he should do so. If, in point of fact, the Jews 
 misunderstood the nature of their own economy, regarding as 
 ultimate and permanent what was in fact preparatory and 
 temporary, this was included in the divine purpose. It was 
 evidently the plan of God to make the revelation of the 
 scheme of redemption gradually. The whole was by slow 
 degrees evolved from the original promise made to our first 
 parents. Perhaps the object of their faith was the simple 
 promise of redemption. To Abraham it was revealed that 
 the Redeemer was to be one of his descendants. To Moses it 
 was made known that he was to be a prophet like himself, and 
 the nature of his work was obscurely set forth in the priest- 
 hood and sacrifices which he ordained. This was enough for 
 salvation, so long as nothing more had been revealed. It was 
 in accordance with this plan that Moses spoke in such a way 
 that the people did not understand the full import of his 
 teaching, God having purposed " that they without us should 
 not be made perfect," Heb. 11, 40. The passage before us is 
 parallel, in a measure, to Mark 4, 11, where our Lord says, 
 '' Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom 
 of God ; but unto them that are without all these things are 
 done in parables ; that seeing they may see, and not per- 
 ceive." There is, therefore, as just remarked, no special diffi- 
 culty m this passage, even if it is understood to teach that 
 Moses was commissioned so to veil his teachings that they 
 should not be clearly understood. There is another difficulty 
 connected with this verse. It does not seem to agree with 
 Exodus 34, 30. There it is said that the people were afraid 
 to approach Moses on account of the brightness of his face, 
 and the implication (according to the English version, at least) 
 is, that it was to calm their fears he put on a veil. Whereas 
 here it is said that he put a veil over his face that tlie people 
 
68 II. COKINTHIANS 3, 14. 
 
 might not see the transient nature of that brightness. There 
 is no inconsistency between the two accounts. The veiling 
 had both eifects ; it cabned the fears of the people, and it pre- 
 vented their seeing how fleeting the brightness was. As both 
 effects followed, both were intended. Paul in this epistle as- 
 signs in different places three or four reasons why he com- 
 manded the Corinthians to excommunicate the incestuous 
 member of their church. That it was meant as a test of their 
 obedience, 2, 9, is not incompatible with its being a proof of 
 his care for them, 7, 12. There is, however, not even the ap- 
 pearance of discrepancy between what the apostle here says 
 and Exodus 34, 30-33, as it is rendered both in the Septuagint 
 and Vulgate. The English version of that passage is, " And 
 when Aaron and all the children of Israel saw Moses, behold, 
 the skin of his face shone ; and they were afraid to come nigh 
 him. And Moses called unto them ; and Aaron and all the 
 rulers of the congregation returned unto him: and Moses 
 talked with them. . . . And till Moses had done speaking 
 with them, he put a veil on his face." According to this 
 Moses put a veil over his face when he vSpoke to the people, 
 and the implication is that he did it because they were afraid 
 on account of the brightness of his countenance. But the 
 Hebrew, in v. 33, is simply, " Moses ceased to speak with 
 them, and put a veil over his face." The natural meaning of 
 which is that he did not veil his face until he had ceased 
 speaking. The Septuagint therefore renders the passage, 
 " And when he ceased speaking with them, he put a veil over 
 his face." And the Vulgate, impletisque sermonihus^ posuit 
 velamen super faciem suam. It appears from the following 
 verses that when Moses went in before the Lord, he removed 
 the veil ; and when he came out his face shone, and he spake 
 to the people, and again resumed tlie veil. According to this 
 interpretation of the original, the object of putting on the veil 
 was not to calm the fear of the people, but, as Paul says, to 
 prevent their seeing how tho brightness of his face vanished. 
 
 14. But their minds were blinded ; for until this 
 day remaineth the same veil untaken away in the read- 
 ing of the Old Testament ; which (veil) is done away 
 in Christ. 
 
 In the preceding verse Paul was speaking of his ministry ; 
 
II. COniNTHIANS 3, 14. 60 
 
 the same subject is resumed in the following chapter. Verses 
 14-18 are therefore a digression, although intimately con- 
 nected with what precedes and follows. The particle dAAa 
 either introduces something just the reverse of what pre- 
 cedes, and means on the contrary^ or simply something 
 different, and is to be rendered but. This verse admits 
 of two modes of connection with what precedes. 'The Jcavs 
 did not understand the ministry of Moses, o)i the contrary^ 
 their minds were blinded.' Or, the connection may be with 
 the main idea of the preceding context. ' We use great plain- 
 ness of speech, but their minds are blinded.' That is, not- 
 withstanding the clearness with which the gospel is presented 
 as the substance and true meaning of the old economy, still 
 the Jews were so blinded they did not perceive it. In either 
 way the sense is good. But as it is so much the habit of the 
 apostle to connect what follows with what immediately pre- 
 cedes, and as the figure of the veil, which is not mentioned in 
 V. 12, is continued in v. 14, it is most natural to make the con- 
 nection with V. 13, where that figure is introduced, especially 
 as Paul's immediate object in v. 12 is not to exhibit his plain- 
 ness of speech in opposition to the hebetude of the Jews. It 
 is the general fact that under the new dispensation the truth 
 is exhibited plainly which he asserts. The blindness of the 
 Jews is only incidentally introduced. Their minds^ vorjfxaTa, 
 thoughts, affections. It means the whole inner man. Were 
 blinded, iTnapdi^y), properly icere rendered hard or callous. The 
 word is used both of the understanding and of the feelings. 
 It expresses an inaptitude both of seeing and feehng. They 
 neither understood nor felt the power of the truth. For un- 
 til this day remaineth untaken aicay the same veil. This is a 
 confirmation derived from experience of the fact previously 
 stated. That the minds of the Israelites were thus blinded 
 and hardened, is proved from the fact that until this day they 
 do not understand the law. The same veil, i. e. the same ob- 
 scurity. A veil was thrown over the truth as first revealed 
 by Moses, and that same veil is there still. The Israelites of 
 Paul's day miderstood their Scriptures as little as their fathers 
 did. They remained satisfied with the external, ritual and 
 ceremonial, without penetrating to what was beneath, or ask- 
 ino- the real import of the types and shadows of the old econo- 
 my. In the reading of the Old Testament, that is, when the 
 Old Testament (covenant) is read. This metonymical use of 
 the word covenant for the books in wdiich that covenant is 
 
10 II. CORINTHIANS 3, 14. 
 
 contained, is perfectly familiar to our ears, as we are accus- 
 tomed to call the two great divisions of the Scriptures the Old 
 and New Testaments or covenants ; but this is the only in- 
 stance of this use of the word in the New Testament. The 
 English version does not in this passage follow the order of 
 the Greek, which reads, " For until this day the same veil in 
 the reading of the old covenant remains." Here the sense is 
 
 complete. The following clause, fxr] avaKaXyrvTOfJievov OTi cV 
 
 Xpio-Tw KarapyetTat, admits of three interj^retations. 1. The 
 first is that adopted by our translators ; jxr] dvaKaXvTrTOjxa'ov is 
 referred to the preceding clause [o^emains untaken aicay)^ 
 and ort {because, or that) is read as two words, o rt, xcliich, i. e. 
 which veil is done away in Clirist. So Luther, in his free 
 translation : Denn bis auf den heutigen Tag bleibet dicselbige 
 Decke unaufgedeckt iiber das Alten Testament vv^enn sie es 
 lesen, welche in Christo aufhoret. The great majority of 
 editors, however, read ort. 2. The word dvaKaAvTrrd/xei/ov, un- 
 tahen aioay, is, as before, referred to KaXv/x/xa, veil, and on is 
 rendered ^ecaws6. 'The veil remains untaken fx,\Y2ij, because 
 it is removed (only) in Christ.' 3. avaKokvinoixivov is taken 
 absolutely, and ort is rendered tJiat. ' The veil remains, it be- 
 ing unrevealed tJiat it (viz. the old covenant) is done away 
 in Christ.' In favour of this last-mentioned interpretation it is 
 urged, that the old covenant was in fact done away in Christ, 
 and that ignorance of that fact prevented the Jews under- 
 standing their own Scriptures. The sense therefore is good. 
 Besides, the vv^ord Kara/iyctrat, is done away, is the proper term 
 to express the abrogation of the law, but not so suitable to 
 express the idea of the removal of a veil, for which, in v. IG, 
 Paul uses the word TrsptatpetTat, is removed. The word Karap- 
 yioi is used in verses V. 11 and 13, to express the joassing av/ay 
 of the brightness of the face of Moses, and of his ministry and 
 dispensation, of which that brightness was the symbol, and 
 therefore it is the more probable that it has the same refer- 
 ence here. On the other hand, however, it must be admitted 
 that dvaKaA.v7rroyuL€vov naturally agrees with KaXv/x/xa, the veil re- 
 mains untaken away, and that avaKoXv-Kna, to uncover or un- 
 veil, is not the common word to express the idea of making 
 known or revealing. See v. 18, dmKaXvTrro/xsVo) Trpoo-wTra), with 
 unveiled face. The second interpretation, therefore, above 
 mentioned, is on the whole to be preferred. ' The veil which 
 hid the meaning of the Old Testament remained unremoved, 
 because it is done away in Christ, whom the Jews rejected.' 
 
TI. CORINTHIANS 3, 15.16. 71 
 
 The Old Testament Scriptures are intelligible only when un- 
 derstood as predicting and prefiguring Christ. The present 
 Karapydrat {is done aicciy) is used as expressing the certain 
 consequence. The knowledge of Christ, as a matter of fact 
 and as a matter of course, removes the veil from the Old 
 Testament. 
 
 15. But even unto this day, when Moses is read, 
 the veil is upon their heart. 
 
 But, dAAa, 071 the contrary, i. e. so fiir from being taken 
 away, the veil remains until this day. When Moses is read. 
 The word 7]VLKa, when, is used in the New Testament only 
 here and in v. 16. As it occurs often in the Septuagint, and 
 is used in Exodus 34, 34, it is the more probable that the lan- 
 guage of that version was before the apostle's mind, and de- 
 termined the mode in which he presents the incident of Moses 
 veiling his face, which, as shown above, accords better with 
 the view which the Septuagint gives of the original than with 
 that presented in the English version. In Acts 15, 21, Moses, 
 it is said, was read every sabbath day in the synagogues. 
 The veil, or, as the article is wanting, a veil, was, however, 
 over his face. The apostle presents the idea that the Jews 
 did not understand their Scriptures in two forms. He says, 
 in V. 14, that a veil rests on the Old Testament, and here that 
 a veil was over the hearts of the Jews. The true source of 
 the Avant of knowledge was subjective. The revelation of 
 Christ, even in the writings of the Old Testament, though ob- 
 scure when compared with that contained in the writings of 
 the apostles, was sufficiently clear to be understood if the 
 Jews had only been in a right state of mind. Hence our Lord 
 upbraided his disciples, saying, " O fools and slow of heart to 
 believe all that the prophets have spoken," Luke 24, 25. Com- 
 pare Acts 13, 27-29. The darkness was not so much in the 
 Scriptures, as in their minds. 
 
 16. Nevertheless, when it shall turn to the Lord, 
 the veil sbaU be taken away. 
 
 According to the narrative in Ex. 34, 29-35, as understood 
 
 by the Septuagint, and as expounded by the apostle, the face 
 
 of Moses was made to shine by speaking with the Lord ; when 
 
 among the people (except when delivering his message) he 
 
 4 
 
72 II. CORINTHIANS 3, 17. 
 
 wore a veil ; when he turned to the Lord he removed the 
 veil. To this allusion seems to be here made. So long as the 
 peojDle were turned from the Lord, the veil was on their heart ; 
 they could not understand the Scriptures; as soon as they 
 turn to the Lord, the veil is removed, and all is bright and 
 intelligible. W/ie?i it shall turn to the Lord ; rjvLKa 8' av cVtcr- 
 T/)€i/7/, lohen it has turned^ i. e. when that conversion is accom- 
 plished, and as often as it occurs. The most natural subject 
 of the verb iTricrrpi^r) {turned) is KapUa [heart). A veil is on 
 the heart, but vrhen it turns to the Lord, the veil is removed. 
 As, however, the apostle is speaking of the heart of the Jews, 
 and as the turning of their heart is their turning, so the sense 
 is the same if the word Israel be supplied. The veil is on the 
 heart of the people, but when the people turn to the Lord the 
 veil is taken away. Calvm and others supply 3Ioses as the 
 nominative. By Moses, however, Calvin understands the 
 Law. ' When Moses is read, a veil is on the heart of the 
 Jews ; but when he, i. e. the law, is directed to Christ, who is 
 the end of the law, then the veil is removed.' That is, as 
 soon as the Jews see that their law relates to Christ, then 
 they understand it. This, however, is obviously an unnatural 
 interpretation, as c-n-Lo-TpGij/r) expresses the turning of the heart 
 or of the people to God, and not giving the law a particular 
 interpretation. Stanley, who also says that 3foses must be 
 the nominative of the verb, makes him, however, the repre- 
 sentative, not of the law, but of the people. ' When Moses 
 turns to the Lord he strips off the veil.' The word Treptaipctrat 
 he gives an active sense, according to its common use in the 
 Septuagint. This too is less simple and natural than the com- 
 mon interpretation given above. The veil was on the heart 
 of the people, and when it, i. e. their heart, turns to the Lord, 
 it is stri2jped offj ?reptatpetTat is the word used in Ex. 34, 34. 
 By Lord here, as the context shows, we are to understand 
 Christ. He is the Lord whom Moses saw face to lace on 
 Mount Sinai, and to whom the Jews and all others must turn 
 if they would enjoy the light of salvation. 
 
 17. Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the 
 Spirit of the Lord (is), there (is) hberty. 
 
 The first point to be determined with regard to this diffi- 
 cult passage, is the relation in which it stands to what pre- 
 cedes. It may be either an explanation or an inference. If 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 3, 17. 13 
 
 the former, then it is designed to show why turning to the 
 Lord secures the removal of the veil from the heart. It is 
 because the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit is, there 
 is liberty, freedom from the law, from its bondage and ob- 
 scurities. If the latter, then the idea is, that since the veil is 
 removed by turning to the Lord, it follows as a further conse- 
 quence that by thus turning we have liberty. The force of 
 the particle 8c, which so often introduces an explanation, and 
 the Avhole structure of the passage is in fivour of the first in- 
 terpretation. 2. It is plain that the Lord here means Christ. 
 This is clear not only because the word Lord., as a general 
 rule, in the New Testament, refers to Christ, but also because 
 the context in this case demands that reference. In v. 14 it 
 is said that the veil is done away in Christ, and in v. 16 that it 
 is removed when the heart turns to the Lord, and here that 
 the Lord is the Spirit. The main idea of the whole context 
 is, that the recognition of Jesus Christ as Lord, or Jehovah, is 
 the key to the Old Testament. It opens all its mysteries, or, 
 to use the figure of the apostle, it removes the veil which bid 
 from the Jews the true meaning of their own Scriptures. As 
 soon as they turn to the Lord, i. e. as soon as they recog- 
 nize Jesus Christ as their Jehovah, then every thing becomes 
 bright and clear. It is plain, therefore, that the Lord spoken 
 of is ChristT) This also determines another point, viz. that 
 "^^Lord is here^the subject, and Spirit the predicate. Paul says 
 that " The Lord is the Spirit," and not " The Spirit is the 
 Lord." The latter view of the passage is taken by many of 
 the Fathers, who regard it as a direct assertion of the divinity 
 of the Holy Ghost. Although the words would admit of this 
 interpretation, it is evidently inconsistent with the context. 
 It also follows from the fact that " Lord " here means Christ, 
 that it must designate his person and not his doctrine. The 
 apostle does not mean to say that the doctrine of Christ, or 
 the gospel, or new covenant, is the Spirit. It is true that in 
 V. 6, when contrasting the law and the gospel, he calls the one 
 the letter and the other the spirit ; but this does not authorize 
 us to make Lord mean the gospel because the Lord is said to 
 be the Spirit. As in the preceding verses Christ and Lord 
 refer to Christ as a person ; the word Lord must have the 
 same reference here. 3. When Paul says " The Lord is the 
 Spirit," he does not mean to say that ' the Lord is a spirit,' 
 agreeably to the analogy of John 4, 24, where it is said " God 
 is a spirit." This is not only opposed to the force of the arti- 
 
U II. CORINTHIANS 3, 17. 
 
 cle TO before Tn^cv/xa, the Spirit, but also to the connection, as 
 Paul is speaking of Christ's office rather than of his na- 
 ture. It is not his object to say that Christ is a spii'itual be- 
 ing. Neither is the idea that he is replenished with the Holy 
 Spirit, so as to be in that sense and on that account called the 
 Spirit. This is not the meaning of the words, nor is the idea 
 demanded by the context. The two interpretations which 
 the words admit are either, first, that which our translators 
 probably intended to indicate when they rendered rb Trvevfxa 
 that /Spirit. "The Lord is that Spirit,"" that is, the spirit 
 spoken of in v. 6 ; the spirit which stands oj^j^osed to the let- 
 ter, that which gives life and righteousness ; the inner sense 
 of the law, the saving truth and power hidden under the types 
 and forms of the Mosaic economy. Christ, says Calvin, is the 
 life of the law. Accedat anima ad corpus ; et fit vivus homo, 
 prseditus intelligentia et sensu, ad vitales actiones idoneus: 
 tollatur anima a corpore, et restabit inutile cadaver, omnique 
 sensu vacuum. Thus if Christ is present in the Mosaic law, 
 it is living and life-giving ; if he is absent from it, it is dead and 
 death-dispensing. Christ is therefore that spirit which ani- 
 mates the law or institutions of Moses, and when this is recog- 
 nized, the veil which hides their meaning is removed. True 
 as all this is, it can hardly be expressed by the simple words 
 6 KvpLos TO TTvevfxd iaTL, the Lord is the jSpirit. The words to 
 TTi/eD/xa, " the Spirit," have in the New Testament a fixed and 
 definite meaning, which is not to be departed from unless the 
 context renders such departure necessary. Besides, this in- 
 terpretation requires that " the Spirit " should mean one thing, 
 and " the Spirit of the Lord " another, in the same verse. 
 This, however, can hardly be admitted. If " the Spirit of the 
 Lord," in the last clause, means the Holy Spirit, which will 
 not be questioned, " the Spirit," in the first clause, must have 
 the same meaning. The other interpretation, therefore, must 
 be adopted. " The Lord is the Spirit," that is, Christ is the 
 Holy Spirit ; they are one and the same. Not one and the 
 same person, but one and the same Being, in the same sense 
 in which our Lord says, " I and the Father are one." It is an 
 identity of essence and of power. Christ is the Holy Spirit, 
 because, being the same in substance, where Christ is, there 
 the Spirit is, and where the Spirit is, there is Christ. There- 
 fore this same apostle interchanges the three forms of expres- 
 sion as synonymous, "the Spirit of Christ," "Christ," and 
 "the Spirit." Uom. 8, 0. 10. The Holy Ghost is everywhere 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 3, 17. 15 
 
 in the Bible recognized as the source of all life, truth, power, 
 holiness, blessedness and glory. The apostle, however, had 
 in the context sjDoken of Christ as the source of life, as deliver- 
 ing from the death and bondage of the law. He is and does 
 this because he and the Spirit are one ; and therefor^ wher- ' 
 ever Christ is, or in other word^wherever the Spirit of Christ -.a^" 
 is, or in other words still, wherever the Spirit is, there is liber- 
 ty/. By turning unto Christ we become partakers of the Holy 
 Spirit, the living and hfe-giving, because he and the Spirit are 
 one, and Christ dwells in his people, redeeming them from the 
 law and making them the children of God, by his SpiritTj The 
 /Spirit of the Lord^ as a designation of the Holy Ghost,'shows 
 that the Spirit stands in the same relation to the Son that he 
 does to the Father. Therefore he is called the "Spirit of 
 Christ," Rom. 8, 10, and " Spirit of His Son," Gal. 4, 6. And, 
 therefore, also the Son is said to send and give the Spirit. 
 John 16, 7. All this of course supposes the supreme divinity 
 of our Lord. ^iTJie liberty of which the apostle here speaks, 
 must be that liberty which is consequent on the indwelling of 
 the Holy Spirit, that is, which flows from the application to us 
 of the redemption purchased by Christ. . We have not re- 
 ceived, says the apostle, the Spirit of bondage again to fear, 
 but the Spirit of adoption. Rom. 8, 15. The Hberty here in- 
 tended is the glorious hberty of the children of God. Rom. 
 8, 21. It is the liberty wherewith Christ has made us free. 
 Gal. 5, 1. This includes, 1. Freedom from the law in all its 
 forms. Mosaic and moral, Rom. 6, 14. 7, 4, i. e. freedom from 
 the obligation to fulfil the law as the condition of our justifica- 
 tion before God ; which involves freedom from condemnation 
 and from a legal, slavish spirit. 2. Freedom from the dominion 
 of sin, Rom. 7, 6, and from the power of Satan. Heb. 2, 14. 15. 
 3. Freedom from the bondage of corruption, not only as to 
 the soul, but as to the body. Rom. 8, 21-23. This liberty, 
 therefore, includes all that is involved in being the sons of 
 God. Incidental to this liberty is freedom from all ignorance 
 and error, and all subjection to the authority of men, except 
 so far as it represents the authority of Christ, and therefore 
 Hberty of conscience or freedom from all authority in matters 
 of religion other than that of the Spirit of God. There is not 
 only no reason for restricting the idea of the liberty of which 
 the apostle speaks to any one of these forms, but the context 
 requires that it should include all that liberty of which the 
 presence of the Spiiit is the source and the assurance. As no 
 
16 II. CORINTHIAKS 3, 18. 
 
 man in this life is perfectly and at all times filled with the 
 Spirit of Christ, he is never in this life a partaker of the full 
 liberty of which Christ is the author. 
 
 18. But we all, with open face beholding as in a 
 glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same 
 image from glory to glory, (even) as by the Spirit of 
 the Lord. 
 
 This verse is connected with the preceding by the simple 
 particle of transition Se, but. The natural consequence of the 
 liberty mentioned in v. 17 is what is here stated. We all, i. e. 
 all whom the indwelling of the Spirit of the Lord has made 
 free. They are delivered from the bondage of the law, the 
 veil has been removed from their face, and being turned to 
 the Lord, they behold his glory icith open face, cti/aKeKaXv/x/xeVw 
 Trpoo-coTTw, i. e. with a face which has been, and which remains 
 unveiled. The darkness arising from alienation, ignorance, 
 misconception and prejudice has been dissipated, so that we 
 can see clearly. Beholding as in a glass or mirror. This is 
 l^robably the proper interpretation of the word here used. 
 KaroTTTptCw, in the active voice, means to shoio in a mirror, 
 and in the middle, (the form here used,) it generally means, 
 to see one'^s self in a mirror. This is its constant use in the 
 classics. But in Philo it is used to express the idea of seeing 
 by means of a mirror. As this sense is perfectly suited to this 
 passage it is generally adopted by commentators, because the 
 other exi^lanations given to the word are either contrary to 
 usage or to the context. Some render it simply beholding. 
 But to this it is objected that it overlooks the special etymo- 
 logical signification of the ^rord, and that drci/t^o), which occurs 
 twice in this chapter, vs. 7 and 13, is the proper term for that 
 idea. Besides, this interpretation loses sight of the figure in- 
 volved in the passage. It is an image we see, and therefore 
 we see, as it were, by reflection, or as in a glass. Luther, 
 after Chrysostom, renders the word, reflecting as in a mirror. 
 This explanation is adopted by Bengel, Billroth, Olshausen 
 and others. They understand the apostle to say that Chris- 
 tians reflect, with an unveiled face, the glory of the Lord. 
 They suppose that allusion is had to the glory of God as re- 
 flected from the face of Moses, which was transient and veiled ; 
 whereas, in the case of Christians, the glory of the Lord is 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 3, IS. 77 
 
 constantly and clearly manifested in them and by them. 
 They reflect his image wherever they go. But, in the first 
 place, this explanation is inconsistent with the signification of 
 the word, which never means to reflect ; secondly, it is con- 
 trary to the context. The contrast is not between Moses and 
 Christians, but between the Jews, or the unconverted, and 
 Christians. The former were bhnded by a veil, the latter see 
 with an unveiled face. The one see and the others do not. 
 This is obviously the antithesis implied, and not that the one 
 class do, and the other do not reflect the glory of the Lord. 
 In the third place, the relation in which this verse stands to 
 the preceding forbids this interpretation. We have here the 
 efiect of turning to the Lord. We are delivered from the 
 law, we are made free, w^e are introduced into the presence of 
 the Lord, and enabled to behold his glory. And, finally, this 
 interpretation overlooks the causal relation between the two 
 clauses of this verse. We are transformed into the image of 
 the Lord by beholding it, not by reflecting it. The common 
 interpretation is therefore to be preferred ; beholding as i?i a 
 9ni7Tor. Though in comparison Avith the unconverted those 
 who are turned to the Lord see clearly, or with an unveiled 
 face, still it is only as in a mirror. 1 Cor. 13, 12. It is not 
 the immediate, beatific vision of the glory of the Lord, which 
 is only enjoyed in heaven, but it is that manifestation of his 
 glory which is made in his word and by his Spirit, whose office 
 it is to glorify Christ by revealing him to us. John 16, 14. 
 
 The object which we behold is the glory of the Lord^ i. e. 
 as the context evidently demands, of Christ. The glory of 
 Christ is his divine excellence. The believer is enabled to see 
 that Jesus is the Son of God, or God manifested in the flesh. 
 This is conversion. Whoever shall confess that Jesus is the 
 Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God. 1 John 4, 15. 
 The turning unto the Lord mentioned in the preceding verse 
 is recognizing Christ as Jehovah. This is not only conversion, 
 it is rehgion. It is the highest state of the human soul. It is 
 eternal life. John 17, 3. Hence our Lord prays that his dis- 
 ciples may behold his glory, as the consummation of their 
 blessedness. John 17, 24. And the apostle John says of all 
 who received Christ, that they beheld " his glory as of the 
 only begotten of the Father," John 1, 14. The idea here pre- 
 sented is more fully unfolded in the beginning of the follow- 
 ing chapter. 
 
 Beholding his glory we are changed into the same image ; 
 
18 II. CORINTHIAKS 3, 18. 
 
 T'J^v avTr]v elKova ixcTaiJiop(f)ov}X€^a^ toe are transformed into the 
 same image. The verb is commonly construed with ck, 
 into^ or Kara, after ^ but sometimes, as here, with the simple 
 accusative. 2he same image^ that is, the same w^hich we are 
 by the Spirit enabled to behold. ' Beholding we are trans- 
 formed ; ' there is a causal relation between the one and the 
 other. This is a truth everywhere recognized in the word 
 of God. While, on the one hand, it is taught that the natu- 
 ral man cannot see the things of the Spirit, because they are 
 spiritually discerned, 1 Cor. 2, 14, and that this blindness is 
 the cause of alienation and pollution, Eph. 4,18; on the other 
 hand, it is no less clearly taught that knowledge is the 
 source of holiness, Eph. 5, 9 ; that si^iritual discernment 
 imiDhes and produces congeniality. We shall be like Christ, 
 because w^e shall see him as he is. 1 John 3, 2. The conformi- 
 ty to the image of Christ, as it arises from beholding his glory, 
 must of course begin here. It is the vision of that glory, al- 
 though only as in a glass, which has this transforming power. 
 As the vision is imperfect, so the transformation is imperfect ; 
 when the vision is perfect, the conformity will be perfect. 
 Rom. 8, 29. 1 John 3, 2. Only they are Christians, who are 
 like Christ. The conformity of which the apostle speaks, al- 
 though it is spiritual, as here presented, is not confined to the 
 soul. Of the body it is said, since we have borne the image 
 of the earthy, we shall bear the image of the heavenly. 1 Cor. 
 15, 49. Phil. 3, 21. From glory to glory. This may mean 
 that the transformation proceeds from glory (i. e. from the 
 glory of Christ as apprehended by us), and results in glory. 
 This explanation is adopted by the Greek fathers. Or the ex- 
 pression indicates progression from one stage of glory to 
 another. Comp. Ps. 84, 7, "They go from strength to 
 strength." This is the common and most natural mterpre- 
 tation. The transformation is carried forward without inter- 
 mission, from the first scarce discernible resemblance, to full 
 conformity to the image of Christ, both as to soul and body. 
 As hy the Spirit of the Lord. -4s, i. e. as might be expected 
 from such an agent. It is a work which corresponds to the 
 nature of its author. By ; the preposition is dTro, from., as 
 indicating the source whence this glorious effect flows. The 
 Spirit of the Lord. The Greek is Kvptov Trvtv/xaros, which the 
 Vulgate renders Do7ni?ii Sj?iritu, an explanation which is 
 adopted by Augustin, Calvin and many others, as well as by 
 our translators. But this inverts the order of the words, and 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 3, 18. 79 
 
 is the more unnatural here because in the immediately pre- 
 ceding verse the apostle had said to irvevfjia Kvptov, /Spirit of the 
 Lord ; he would therefore hardly express the same idea in the 
 same connection by Kv^iiov Trvci'/xaros. Others render the words 
 the Lord Spirit^ i. e. the Spirit who is Lord. We have in tlie 
 Old Testament and in the apocalypse the familiar phrase, " the 
 Lord God;" but this is only the translation of d^pVx rnh^. Je- 
 hovah Elohim, Jehovah who is God, which the Septuagint ren- 
 der Kvpio<i 6 ^€os, the Vulgate Dominus Deus, and the English, 
 " Lord God." More analogous to the passage in the text is the 
 Hebrew nin.-j •'biN, which the Septuagint render Kvptos Kvptos, 
 the Vulgate Doniinus Deus, and the English Lord God. In 
 Joshua 22, 22, we have the imusual combination, n^rr^ c^^p^Ji?. Vx; 
 Septuagint, 6 Se6<; Seos kvpl6<; ian ; and immediately after 6 
 ^eos Seos ; Vulgate, Fortissimus Deus Dominus ; the English, 
 "The Lord God of gods." As then in Hebrew nin-^ "^i-tN, in 
 Greek Kvpto? Kuptos (or Kvptos 6 ^^cos)^ in Latin, Dominus Deus, 
 and in English, Lord God, all meaning God icho is Lord^ so 
 Kvpio<i TTvcvfjia may mean the Spirit icho is Lord, i. e. the divine 
 Spirit. Tliis is the explanation adopted by Chrysostom, The- 
 odoret and some of the moderns, in accordance with the in- 
 terpretation which they give of the first clause of v. 17, which, 
 as stated above, they understand to mean, the Spirit is Lord, 
 Trpo? TO Ylvevfxa imaTpeffnov, Trpos Kt'ptov CTTicrrpec^ciS /ct'ptos yap to 
 Uvevjxay Kol ofMod^povov, oiw7rpo(TKvvy]TOv kol ofjcoovcrtov llarpl kol vtoJ. 
 But as in v. 17 Paul does not say the Spirit is the Lord, but 
 on the contrary that the Lord is the Spirit, so it would be 
 unnatural to make him here say we are transformed by the 
 Spirit icho is the Lord. 1£ Lord is the subject in the one 
 case, it must be in the other. According to otliers, the phrase 
 in question should be rendered Xorc? of the Spirit, i. e. Christ, 
 who may be said to be Lord of the Spirit, in a sense analogous 
 to that in which God is said to be the God of Christ. That 
 is, as God sent Christ, and was revealed by him, so Christ 
 sends the Spirit and is revealed by him. This is the interpre- 
 tation of Billroth, Olshausen, Meyer and otliers. But the 
 " Lord of the Spirit " is an expression without any scriptural 
 authority or analogy. It is only of the incarnate Son of God 
 that the Father is said to be his God. There is no grammati- 
 cal necessity for this interpretation, and it does not accord 
 with V. 17. Luther, Beza and others render the phrase ctTro 
 KvpLov TTvivfjiaTos, the Lord toho is the Spirit. In favour of this 
 interpretation is, first, the analogy of such expressions as airb 
 4* 
 
80 II. CORINTHIANS 4. 
 
 ^€ov irarpo^^ from Gocl who is Father^ Gal. 1, 3 ; and secondly, 
 the authority of v. 17. There the apostle had said, ' The Lord 
 is the Spirit,' and here he says, the transforming power by 
 which we are made like Christ flows from ' the Lord who is 
 the Spirit.' The former passage determines the meaning of 
 the latter. The Lord who is the Spirit means, the Lord who 
 is one with the Spirit, the same in substance, equal in power 
 and glory; who is where the Spirit is, and does what the 
 Spirit does. 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 la vs. 1-6 the apostle resumes the theme of 3, 12, viz. the open and faithful 
 manner in which he preached the gospel. In vs. 7-15 he shows that his 
 own personal insufficiency and suffering served to manifest more clearly 
 the power of God, who rendered such a feeble instrument the means of 
 producing so great effects. Therefore, vs. lG-18, he was not discour- 
 aged or faint-hearted, but exultingly looked above the things seen to 
 those unseen. 
 
 As Paul had been made a minister of the new covenant, in- 
 trusted with the ministration of righteousness and life, he 
 acted as became his high commission. He was neither timid 
 nor deceitful. He doubted not the truth, the power, or the 
 success of the gospel which he preached ; nor did he in any 
 way corrupt or conceal the truth, but by its open proclama- 
 tion commended himself to every man's conscience, vs. 1. 2. 
 If, notwithstanding this clear exhibition of the truth, the gos- 
 pel still remained hid, that could only be accounted for by 
 the god of this w^orld blinding the eyes of men. Nothing 
 short of this can account for the fact; for, says the apostle, we 
 preach Christ and not ourselves, and Christ is the image of 
 God. In him there is a revelation of the glory of God to 
 which there is nothing analogous but the original creation of 
 light out of darkness, vs. 3-6. This treasure, however, is in 
 earthen vessels. The gospel is the revelation of God. It is 
 to do for the w^orld what the creation of light did for the cha- 
 otic earth. But we ministers are to have none of the glory 
 of the work. We are nothing. The whole power is of God; 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 4, 1. 81 
 
 who so orders events as to niake his power apjDarent. I am 
 so perplexed, persecuted, down-trodden and exposed to death, 
 as to render it evident that a divine power is exercised in my 
 preservation and continued efficiency. My continuing to Hve 
 and labour with success is a proof that Jesus lives. This he 
 tells the Corinthians is for their benefit, vs. 7-12. Having the 
 same faith that David had, he spoke with equal confidence, 
 assured that God, who raised up Christ, would not only pre- 
 serve him while in this world, but also raise him hereafter 
 from the dead. As all Paul endured and did was for the 
 benefit of the Church, thanks would be rendered by the peo- 
 ple of God for his preservation and success, vs. 13-15. There- 
 fore, adds this great apostle, I do not faint ; although my out- 
 ward man perishes, my inward man is renewed day by day ; 
 for I know that my present afflictions are not only temporary, 
 but that they are to be succeeded by an eternal weight of 
 glory, vs. 16-18. 
 
 1. Therefore, seeing we have this ministry, as we 
 have received mercy, we faint not. 
 
 Therefore^ i. e. on this account. This is explained by what 
 follows; seeing we have this ministry^ that is, because we 
 have it. In the former chapter he had proclaimed himself a 
 minister of the new coA'enant, not of the letter, but of the 
 spu'it, 3, 6 ; a ministry far more glorious than that of the law, 
 inasmuch as the law could only condemn, whereas the gospel 
 conveys righteousness and life. The possession of such an of- 
 fice he assigns as the reason why he does not faint ; ovk Ikko.- 
 Kovfxev, ice do not turn out had^ or prove recreant. That is, 
 we do not fail in the discharge of duty, either through weari- 
 ness or cowardice. As loe have received mercy. The position 
 of these words in the text admits of their being connected 
 either with what precedes or with what follows. In the for- 
 mer case, the sense is, having through the mercy of God ob- 
 tained this ministry ; in the latter, the meanmg would be, as 
 we have obtained mercy we faint not. The former is almost 
 universally preferred, both because his not fainting is referred 
 to his having so glorious an office, and because he so often re- 
 fers to his call to the apostleship as a signal manifestation of 
 the mercy and grace of God. Rom. 15, 15. 16. 1 Cor. 15, 
 9.10. Eph. 3, 8. 'Having through the mercy of God ob- 
 tained such a ministry, we famt not.' 
 
82 II. CORINTHIANS 4, 2. 
 
 2. But have renounced the hidden things of dis- 
 honesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handhng the 
 word of God deceitfully ; but by manifestation of the 
 truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience 
 in the sight of God. 
 
 JBut^ aXkd^ on the contrary^ i. e. so far from proving recre- 
 ant to his duty as a minister of the new covenant he acted in 
 the manner set forth in this verse. The apostle in the de- 
 scription which he here gives of his official conduct, evidently 
 intends to describe the false teachers in Corinth. What he de- 
 nies of himself he impliedly affirms of them. First, Paul says, 
 we have renounced^ declared off from, the hidden things of dls- 
 honesty^ to, KpvTTTa Trj<s alcrxvv'i]'^. The word ala-xvy^ (from alcrxpos, 
 ugly), means either shame as a feeling, or the cause of shame, 
 any thing disgraceful or scandalous. The above phrase there- 
 fore may mean either those things which men conceal, or do in 
 secret, because they are ashamed of them, or, secret scandals or 
 crimes. It may be taken in a general sense, as including any 
 course of conduct which men conceal from fear of being dis- 
 graced ; or in a specific sense for secret immoralities, or for 
 secret machinations and manoeuvres. The last is probably the 
 true view, because the emphasis is rather on secret than shame. 
 It was secrecy or concealment, the opposite of openness and 
 honest frankness, that the apostle charges on his opponents. 
 In the preceding context he had spoken of his openness of 
 speech and conduct, and in the latter part of tliis verse he 
 speaks of the manifestation of the truth, i. e. of its open proc- 
 lamation. What therefore he says he renounced, that ^\hich 
 he represents as characteristic of talse teachers, is the want of 
 openness, adopting secret methods of accomplishing their 
 ends, which they would be ashamed to avow openly -^puden- 
 das latebras, as Beza says, mmhne C07ivenlentes Us, qui tantm 
 dignitatis ministeritim tractant. Not xcalking in craftiness, 
 this is an amplification of what precedes. A Travoupyos is a 
 man who can do every thing, and is willing to do any thing to 
 accomplish his ends ; and hence Travovpyia includes the ideas 
 of shrewdness or acuteness in seeing how things can be done, 
 and unscrupulousness as to the character of the means to be 
 employed. It is the quality manifested by Satan when he be- 
 guiled Eve, 2 Cor. 11, 3; which the Jews exhibited when 
 they endeavoured to entrap our Lord, Luke 20, 23 ; and 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 4, 3. 83 
 
 which false teachers are wont to exercise when they would 
 seduce the unwary into heresy. Eph. 4, 14. All such cunning, 
 all such sly and secret ways of accomplishing his purposes Paul 
 renounced. Kor handling the icord of God deceitfully. The 
 word SoXoo) means not only to deceive^ but also to falsify. The 
 latter is its meaning here. Not falsifying or corrupting the 
 word of God, i. e. not adulterating it with the doctrines or 
 traditions of men. Comp. 2, 17. The gospel which Paul 
 preached was the word of God ; something divinely revealed, 
 having therefore a divine, and not merely human authority. 
 The apostles always thus speak with the consciousness of be- 
 ing the mouth of God or organs of the Spirit, so that we can- 
 not deny their inspiration without denying not only their au- 
 thority but their integrity. But hy the manifestation of the 
 truth. This stands opposed to the preceding clauses. In- 
 stead of availing ourselves of secret and cunning arts, and 
 corrupting the word of God, we declared it openly and pure- 
 ly. The truths therefore, here is not moral truth or integrity, 
 nor truth in general, but revealed truth, i. e. the word of God. 
 Commending ourselves to every maji's conscience. Paul's op- 
 ponents endeavoured to recommend themselves and to secure 
 the confidence of others by cunning, and by corrupting the 
 gospel ; but he relied simply on the manifestation of the truth. 
 He knew that the truth had such a self evidencing power that 
 even where it was rejected and hated it commended itself to 
 the conscience as true. And those ministers who are humble 
 and sincere, who are not wise in their own conceit, but simply 
 declare the truth as God has revealed it, commend themselves 
 to the consciences of men. That is, they secure the testimony 
 of the conscience even of wicked men in their favour. In the 
 sight of God., that is, he acted thus in the sight of God. 
 This is an assertion of the parity of the motives which gov- 
 erned his official conduct. He acted as in the sight of that 
 God before whose eye nothing unholy or selfish could stand. 
 The assertion of conscious integrity is not self-praise. 
 
 3. But if our gospel be hid, it is liid to them that 
 
 are lost. 
 
 Although the gospel is thus glorious in itself, and although 
 it was clearly set forth, yet to some it remained hid. That is, 
 its true character and excellence as a revelation from God and 
 of God was not apprehended or recognized. The reason or 
 
84 II. CORINTHIANS 4, 4 
 
 cause of this fact was not to be sought either in the nature of 
 the gospel, or in the mode of its exhibition, but in the state 
 and character of those who rejected it. The sun does not 
 cease to be the sun although the blind do not see it. And if 
 any man cannot see the sun on a clear day at noon, he must 
 be blind. So Paul does not hesitate to say that if any man 
 does not receive the gospel when clearly presented, he is lost. 
 If our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost, iv rots 
 aTToXXv/AcVots, among, or before them who are lost, ^^^ee 1 Cor. 
 1, 18, where it is said that the gospel is foolishness to them 
 that perish. ) The lost are those who are in a state of perdition 
 and who are certain (if they continue to reject the gospel) to 
 perish forever. Nothing can be plainer than the doctrine of 
 this passage. A man's faith is not a matter of indifference. 
 He cannot be an atheist and yet be saved. He cannot reject 
 the gospel and yet go to heaven when he dies. This is not an 
 arbitrary decision. There is and must be an adequate ground 
 for it. Atheism implies spiritual death, the absence of all that 
 constitutes the true life of the soul, of all its highest and best 
 aspirations, instincts and feelings. The rejection of the gospel 
 is as clear a proof of moral depravity, as inability to see the 
 light of the sun at noon is a proof of blindness. Such is the 
 teaching of the Bible, and such has ever been the faith of the 
 church. Men of the world cry out against this doctrine. 
 They insist that a man is not accountable for his opinions. 
 He is, however, accountable for the character by wliich those 
 opinions are determined. If he has such a character, such an 
 inward moral state, as permits and decides him to beUeve that 
 there is no God, that murder, adultery, theft and violence are 
 right and good, then that inward state which constitutes his 
 character, and for which he is responsible, (according to the 
 intuitive perception and universal judgment of men,) is repro- 
 bate. A good infidel is, according to the Bible, as much a 
 contradiction as good wickedness or sweet bitterness. It is 
 not for nothing that infinite truth and love, in the person of 
 our Lord, said, *' He that believeth not shall be damned."(^ 
 
 4. In whom the god of this world hath bUnded the 
 minds of them which beheve not, lest the light of the 
 glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, 
 should shine unto them. 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 4, 4. 85 
 
 In this verse the apostle assigns the reason why those who 
 are lost do not see the truth and excellence of the gospel. It 
 is that the god of this world hath blinded their minds. In 
 ichoni (iv oh). The relative is used here as implying a cause 
 or reason. ' Our gospel is hid to them who are lost, because 
 in them,' &g. See 3, 6. • The god of this worlds i. e. Satan, 
 who is called the god of this world because of the power 
 which he exercises over the men of the world, and because of 
 the servile obedience which they render to him. They are 
 taken captive by him at his will. 2 Tim. 2, 26. It is not 
 necessary in order that men should serve Satan, and even 
 worship him, that they should intend to do so, or even that 
 they should know that such a being exists. 1 Cor. 10, 20. It 
 is enough that he actually controls them, and that they fulfil 
 his purposes as implicitly as the good fulfil the will of God. 
 Not to serve God, is to serve Satan. There is no help for it. 
 If Jehovah be not our God, Satan is. He is therefore called 
 the prince of this world. , John 12, 31. 14, 30. Comp. Matt. 
 4,8.9. Eph. 2, 2. 6,12. ^ This was one of the designations 
 which the Rabbins applied to Satan. The true God, they said, 
 is Deus primus, Satan, Deus secundus. Or as old Calovius 
 said, Dlabolus est simia Dei. As the Arians argued from the 
 fact that Satan is called god of this world, that Christ's 
 being called God is no proof of his true divinity ; and as the 
 Manicheans quoted the passage in favour of their doctrine of 
 two eternal principles, the one good and the other evil, 
 many of the fathers, including even Chrysostom and Augus- 
 tine, in violation of its obvious construction, make it to mean, 
 " God hath bUnded the minds of this world, i. e. of unbeliev- 
 ers." On which Calvin remarks, We see how far the spirit of 
 controversy can lead men in perverting Scripture. The word 
 god may be used figuratively as well as literally. That we 
 say mammon is the god of the world, or that Paul said of cer- 
 tain men, " their belly is their god," does not prove that call- 
 ing Jehovah God is no assertion of his divinity. And as to 
 the Manichean argument, unless it can be shown that when 
 Baal is called god of the Syrians, eternity and self-existence 
 are ascribed to him, it cannot be inferred that these attributes 
 belong to Satan because he is called the god of this world. 
 Satan is said to blind the riiinds of those that believe not / that 
 is, he exerts such an influence over them as prevents their ap- 
 prehending the glory of the gospel. This control of Satan 
 over the human mind, although so effectual, is analogous to 
 
86 II. CORINTHIAN'S 4, 4. 
 
 the influence of one created intellect over another in other 
 cases, and therefore is perfectly consistent with free agency 
 and responsibility. It should, however, make us feel our dan- 
 ger and need of divine assistance, seeing that we have to con- 
 tend not only against the influence of evil men, but against 
 the far more powerful influence of the rulers of darkness ; the 
 pantocrators of this world. Eph. 6, 12. The grammatical 
 construction of this clause is somewhat doubtful. The words 
 are ev oTs irv^fiXwae ra vor]ixara twv aTrtWcor. The common ex- 
 planation makes the genitive, tu)v dTrio-rcoi/, virtually in apposi- 
 tion with iv oh. ' In whom, i. e. in unbelievers, he had blind- 
 ed the minds.' The simple meaning then is, ' The gospel is 
 hid to them who are lost, because Satan hath blinded then* 
 eyes.' The lost and the imhelieving are identical. According 
 to this view unbelief is the effect of the blinding. The same 
 idea is expressed if, according to Fritzsche and Billroth, tSv 
 a-KLo-Twv be taken proleptically. 'Whose minds Satan hath 
 blinded so that they believe not.' Comp. 1 Thess. 3, 13, "To 
 establish your hearts unblamable," i. e. so that they may be 
 unblamable; and Phil. 3, 21, (according to the corrected 
 text,) " changed like," i. e. changed so as to be like. Accord- 
 ing to Meyer this would require the accusative, ra vorfjxara 
 oLTj-to-ra, as the genitive of adjectives taken substantively is 
 never thus proleptically used. His explanation is, ' Blinding 
 the eyes of unbelievers is the business of Satan, and this he 
 has done in them who are lost.' According to this view, 
 bUndness does not precede, but follows unbelief. Those who 
 will not believe, Satan blinds so that they cannot see. Comp. 
 Rom. 1, 21, "Their foolish heart was darkened." Their inex- 
 cusable folly was the ground of their judicial blindness. The 
 doctrine thus taught is one clearly recognised in Scripture. 
 Those who resist the truth, God gives up to a reprobate mind. 
 Rom. 1, 24. 28. The logical connection, however, is here oi> 
 posed to this interpretation. Paul had said that the gospel 
 was hid to the lost. This he accounts for by saying that Sa- 
 tan had blinded their minds. The bUndness therefore jjre- 
 cedes the unbelief and is the cause of it. 
 
 Lest the licjht of the glorious gospel of Christy who is the 
 image of God, should shi?ie unto them. This is both the de- 
 sign and effect of the blindness spoken of. Satan intends by 
 the darkness which he spreads over the minds of men, to pre- 
 vent their seeing the glory of Clirist. Lest the light, (f}(DTiaix6<5, 
 a Avord which does not occur in common Greek, but is used 
 
II. CORINTJIIANS 1, 5. 87 
 
 in the Septuagint, Ps. 44, 3, in the phrase rendered, " in the 
 light of thy countenance," and Ps. 78, 14, "He led them all 
 night Avith a light of fire." The word therefore signifies the 
 brightness emitted by a radiant body. Of the glorious gospel 
 of Christy literally, the gospel of the glory of Christy i. e. that 
 gospel "which reveals the glory of Christ. The word h6^^^ 
 glory^ is not to be taken as a merely qualifying genitive of 
 cmyyeXtov, gospel. It is the genitive of the object. The glory 
 of Christ is the sum of all the divine and human excellence 
 which is centred in his person, and makes him the radiant 
 point in the universe, the clearest manifestation of God to his 
 creatures, the object of supreme admiration, adoration and 
 love, to all intelligent beings, and especially to his saints. To 
 see this glory is to be saved ; for we are thereby transformed 
 into his likeness from glory to glory, 3, 18. Therefore it is 
 that Satan, the great adversary, directs all his energy to pre- 
 vent men becoming the subjects of that illumination of which 
 the gospel, as the revelation of the glory of Christ, is the 
 source. Who is the image of God^ i. e. who being God rep- 
 resents God, so that he who hath seen the Son hath seen the 
 Father also. John 14, 9. 12, 45. Christ, as to his divine na- 
 ture, or as the Logos, is declared to be the brightness of the 
 Father's glory, Heb. 1, 3, to be in the form of God and equal 
 with God, Phil. 2, (3, and perhaps also Col. 1, 15 ; but here it 
 is the incarnate Logos, the exalted Son of God clothed in our 
 nature, who is declared to be the image of God, because in him 
 dwells the fulness of the Godhead bodily. Col. 2, 9. 
 
 5. For we preacli not ourselves, but Christ Jesus 
 the Lord ; and ourselves your servants for Jesus' sake. 
 
 The connection indicated by the particle for is with the 
 main idea of the preceding verse. ' Oar gospel,' says Paul, 
 ' is the gospel of the glory of Christ, for we do not preach 
 ourselves, but him.' To preach one's self is to make self the 
 end of preacliing ; that is, preaching with the design to at- 
 tract to ourselves the admiration, the confidence or homage 
 of men. This Paul declares he did not do, but he preached 
 Christ Jesus the Lord. His obj 9ct in preaching was to bring 
 men to recognize Jesus the son of Mary as Christ, i. e. as him 
 whom Moses and the prophets designated as the Messiah, 
 and consequently that this Jesus was, had done, is doing, and 
 would hereafter do, all that had been asserted or predicted of 
 
88 II. CORINTHIANS 4 
 
 the Messiah ; and further that he is Lord in that sense in 
 which every tongue in heaven, and on earth, and under the 
 earth shall confess that he is Lord. The great end of Paul's 
 preaching, therefore, was to bring men to receive and ac- 
 knowledge Jesus of Nazareth as the Messiah and as the su- 
 preme Lord, the maker of heaven and earth. This is the 
 only proper end of preaching. It is the only way by which 
 men can be made either virtuous or religious. It is the only 
 way in which either the true interests of society or the salva- 
 tion of souls can be secured. To make the end of preaching 
 the inculcation of virtue, to render men honest, sober, benevo- 
 lent and faithful, is part and j^arcel of that wisdom of the 
 world that is foolishness with God. It is attempting to raise 
 fruit without trees. When a man is brought to recognize 
 Jesus Christ as Lord, and to love and worship him as such, 
 then he becomes like Christ. What more can the morahst 
 want ? Paul cared little for the clamour of the Greeks that he 
 should preach wisdom and virtue. He knew that by preach- 
 ing Christ he was adopting the only means by which men can 
 be made wise and virtuous here and blessed hereafter. 
 
 And ourselves your servajits (slaves) for Jesus'* sake. 
 Paul presented Christ as Lord; himself as a servant. A 
 servant is one who labours, not for himself, but for another. 
 Paul did not labour for himself, but for the Corinthians. For 
 Jesus'* sake. The motive which influenced him to devote him- 
 self to the service of the Corinthians was the love of Christ. 
 Here again the wisdom of the world would say the proper 
 motive would be a desire for their good. Paul always puts 
 God before man. A regard for the glory of Christ is a far 
 higher motive than regard for the good of men ; and the for- 
 mer is the only true source of the latter. The ideal of a 
 Christian minister, as presented in this pregnant passage, is, 
 that he is a preacher of Christ, and a servant of the church, 
 governed and animated by the love of Jesus. 
 
 G. For God, who commanded the light to shine out 
 of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to (give) the 
 hght of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face 
 of Jesus Christ. 
 
 There are two different views taken of the meaning of this 
 verse. First, it may be understood to assign the reason why 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 4, 6. 89 
 
 Paul was the servant of the Corinthians. He devoted himself 
 to their service, because God had revealed to him the knowl- 
 edge of Christ, in order that he might communicate that 
 knowledge to others. According to this view the connection 
 is with the last clause of v. 5. "I am your servant, on, &e- 
 cai<S6," &c. ; " in our hearts," means in Paul's heart ; and 
 TTpo? (fxDTio-fjiov (for the light) is equivalent to 7rpo9 t6 ^oort'Cetv, 
 to diffuse the light. Second, it may be understood to state 
 the reason why Paul preached Christ. ' We preach not our- 
 selves, but Christ Jesus the Lord, ort, because in him is re- 
 vealed the glory of God.' In this case the connection is with 
 the first clause of v. 5, and not with the last ; " in our hearts " 
 means in the hearts of believers; and Trpos cftomcriJiov (for light) 
 means, as our version expresses it, to give us the light. The 
 end or design of God's shining into our hearts is that we 
 should apprehend the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ. 
 The latter of these interpretations is adopted by Calvin, the 
 former by Luther and by almost all the modern commenta- 
 tors. With regard to the former it must be admitted that 
 the sense is good and consistent with the meaning of the 
 words. It accords also with Gal. 1, 16, where the apostle 
 says that God had revealed his Son in him that he might 
 preach him among the Gentiles. The following considera- 
 tions, however, are in favour of the other view of the passage. 
 1. The connection is better. The main idea of the context is 
 that Paul preached Christ, and therefore it is more natural to 
 understand him to give the reason for so doing, than why he 
 served the Corinthians, which is a subordinate matter. 2. 
 The phrase " in our hearts " is much more naturally under- 
 stood to mean " in the hearts of believers " than in Paul's own 
 heart. It is indeed possible that here, as in 3, 2, the plural 
 (hearts) may be used in reference to the apostle himself. 
 Still this is admissible only when the context requires it. Had 
 Paul meant himself he would probably have said "in our 
 heart," as in the parallel passage in Galatians 1, 16 he says, ev 
 ifjLOL, 171 me. To explain the plural form here by assuming 
 that Paul means himself and Timothy is contrary to his uni- 
 form habit of speaking for himself. His epistles are his and 
 not Timothy's. 3. The former interpretation supposes cfioma-- 
 /xds to have a different meaning here from what it has in v. 4. 
 There it means lights here it is made to mean the act of com- 
 municating light. But if cficoTLarixo? tov evayyeAtov means the 
 light which flows from the gospel (or the gospel itself as lumi- 
 
90 II. CORINTHIANS 4, 6; 
 
 nous), then <ji(iiTL(Tix6<: t?)? yvwa-cco? means tlie light of which the 
 knowledge of Christ is the source, (or that knowledge as 
 light.) In V. 4, it is said that Satan hath blinded the eyes of 
 unbelievers so that they cannot see the hght of the gospel of 
 the glory of Christ. Here it is said that God has enlightened 
 us so that we do see it. In Test. XII. Patr. p. 578, it is said, 
 TO <fiu)<; Tov Kocrjxov, to So^ev ev vfuv Trpos ^cortcrftoi/ Trai/ros dv-^pojTrov, 
 the light of the icorld deposited in you^ for the (subjective) il- 
 lumination of every man. 4. It is an additional reason in fa- 
 vour of this interpretation that it suits the antithesis between 
 vs. 4 and 6. The gospel is hid to one class of men, but God 
 has opened the eyes of another class to see its glory. Here, 
 as elsewhere, particularly in 1 Cor. 2, 14, the apostle recog- 
 nizes a twofold illumination, the one external by the word, to 
 which Satan renders unbelievers blind ; and the other internal 
 by the Spirit, Avhereby we are enabled to see the glory which 
 is objectively revealed. 
 
 The literal translation of this passage is, ' God who com- 
 manded the light to shine out of darkness, who sinned into 
 our hearts.' Something must be supplied to complete the 
 sense. We may read either ' It is God who commanded, &c., 
 who shined into our hearts ; ' or, ' God who commanded the 
 light to shine out of darkness, is he who shined,' &c. There 
 is an obvious reference to the work of creation as recorded in 
 Genesis. Darkness originally brooded over chaos, until God 
 said, Let there be light. So spiritual darkness broods over 
 tho minds of men, until God shines into their hearts. Shined 
 into our hearts. The word Xa/xTrw, means either, to he lumi- 
 nons ; or as here, to iUimiinate., or cause light^ as the analogy 
 with the physical creation, just referred to, requires. The 
 idea is not that God becomes luminous in us, but that he pro- 
 duces light in our hearts. The design of this inward illumina- 
 tion is expressed by the words Trpos (fywrca-ixov t?)? yvwo-cw?, which, 
 according to the former of the two interpretations mentioned 
 above, means, to the shining abroad of the knowledge^ &c. 
 lie illuminates us that we may diffuse light, and thus illumi- 
 nate others. According to the second interpretation, the 
 meaning is, to give us the light of the knowledge . God illu- 
 minates our minds so that we apprehend that light which 
 flows from the knowledge of the glory of God^ or whicli con- 
 sists in that knowledge. ]]y tJie glory of God is of course 
 meant the divine majesty or excellence, which is the proper 
 object of admiration and adoration. Iii the face of Jesus 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 4, T. 91 
 
 Christ ; the position of these words and the sense require 
 that they should be connected with the word glory^ notwith- 
 standing the omission in the Greek of the connecting article 
 (t^s). It is the glory of God as revealed in Christ that men 
 are by the illumination of the Holy Ghost enabled to see. 
 There are two important truths involved in this statement. 
 First, that God becomes in Christ the object of knowledge. 
 The clearest revelation of the fact that God is, and what he is, 
 is made in the person of Christ, so that those who refuse to 
 see God in Christ lose all true knowledge of him. " No man 
 hath seen God at any time ; the only begotten Son, who is in 
 the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him," John 1, 18. 
 '* Neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he 
 to whomsoever the Son will reveal him," Matt. 11, 27. 
 '' "Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father," 
 1 John 2, 23. 2 John 9. John 15, 23. Insignis locus, says 
 Calvin, unde discimus Deum in sua altitudine non esse investi- 
 gandum (habitat enim lucem inaccessibilem), sed cognoscen- 
 dum quatenus se in Christo patefacit. Proinde quicquid extra 
 Christum de Deo cognoscere appetunt homines, evanidum est, 
 vagantur enim extra viam. . . . Nobis utiUus est Deum con- 
 spicere, qualis apparet in Filio unigenito, quam arcanam ejus 
 essentiam investigare. The other truth here taught is, that 
 this knowledge of God in Christ is not a mere matter of intel- 
 lectual apprehension, which one man may communicate to an- 
 other. It is a spiritual discernment, to be derived only from 
 the Spirit of God. God must shine into our hearts to give us 
 this knowledge. Matt. 16, 17. Gal. 1, 16. 1 Cor. 2, 10. 14. 
 As the glory of God is spiritual, it must be spiritually dis- 
 cerned. It is therefore easy to see why the Scriptures make 
 true religion to consist in the knowledge of Christ, and why 
 they make the denial of Christ, or want of faith in him as God 
 manifest in the flesh, a soul-destroying sin. If Christ is God, 
 to know him, is to know God ; and to deny him, is to deny 
 God. 
 
 7. But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, 
 that the excellency of the power may be of God, and 
 not of us. 
 
 This treasure is not the light or inward illumination spoken 
 of in V. 6, but the ministry of the gospel which Paul had re- 
 
92 II. CORINTHIANS 4, 8.9. 
 
 ceived, and of which he had spoken in such exalted terms. It 
 was a ministration of life, of power, and of glory. It revealed 
 the grandest truths. It produced the most astonishing effects. 
 It freed men from the condemnation and power of sin; it 
 transformed them into the image of Christ ; it delivered them 
 from the power of the god of this world, and made them par- 
 takers of eternal life. These are effects which infinitely tran- 
 scend all human power ; and to render this fact conspicuous 
 God had committed this treasure to earthen vessels. By 
 earthen vessels is not meant frail bodies, but weak, suffering, 
 perishing men, because it is not on account of the frailty of 
 the body merely that ministers are so incompetent to produce 
 the effects which flow from their ministrations. The apostle 
 means to present the utter disproportion between the visible 
 means and the effects produced, as proof that the real efficien- 
 cy is not in man, but in God. The excellency of the power^ 
 i. e. the exceedingly great power, the wonderful efiiciency of 
 the gospel. 3Iay 6e, i. e. may be known and acknowledged 
 to be, of God^ i. e. to flow from him as its source, and not 
 from us. Although what the apostle here says is true of all 
 ministers, yet he had, no doubt, special reference to himself 
 and to his own peculiar circumstances. He had magnified in 
 the highest degree his oflSce, but he himself was a poor, weak, 
 persecuted, down-trodden man. This, he says, only renders 
 the power of God the more conspicuous, not only in the suc- 
 cess of my ministry, but in my preservation in the midst of 
 dangers and sufferings which it seems impossible any man 
 could either escape or bear. It is to show, on the one hand, 
 how weak he is, how truly a mere earthen vessel, and, on the 
 other, how great and manifest God's power is, that in the fol- 
 lowing verses he contrasts his trials and his deliverances. 
 
 8. 9. (We are) troubled on every side, yet not dis- 
 tressed ; (we are) perplexed, but not in despair ; per- 
 secuted, but not forsaken ; cast down, but not de- 
 stroyed. 
 
 Our version supplies the words we are^ turning the parti- 
 ci])les into verbs, which, in the Greek, are all connected with 
 the verb Ixo/xtj/ [ice have) in the preceding verse. 'We, 
 troubled, perplexed, persecuted and cast down, have, &c.' 
 On every side, iv Trarrt, in every way and on every occasion. 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 4, 10. 93 
 
 These words belong to aU the clauses, and not merely to the 
 first. He was not only troubled, but perplexed and persecut- 
 ed, ev Trai/Tt, in every icay. Trouhled^ but not distressed^ ^Xi- 
 (36jxevoL, aXX ov (TTcvoxoipovixevoL, " pressed for room, but still 
 having room." The figure is that of a combatant sore pressed 
 by his antagonist, but still finding room to turn himself J*er' 
 plexed^ but not in despair^ constantly doubtful what way to 
 take, and yet always finding some way open. The word aTro- 
 pe'o) (ttTTopos ci/xt) means to be at a loss what to say or do ; c^a- 
 TTopew is intensive, to be absolutely shut up so as to have no 
 way or means available. Persecuted^ but not forsaken ; that 
 is, although God allowed men to persecute him, and seek to 
 destroy his life and usefulness, yet he never deserted him or 
 gave him up to the power of those who thus followed him. 
 Cast doion^ but not destroyed. The allusion is still to a com- 
 bat. Paul was not only persecuted or pursued by his enemies, 
 but actually overtaken by them and cast to the ground, but 
 not killed. When they seemed to have him in their power, 
 God delivered him. This occurred so often, and in cases so 
 extreme, as to make it manifest that the power of God was 
 exerted on his behalf No man from his own resources could 
 have endured or escaped so much. There is in these verses 
 an evident climax, which reaches its culmination in the next 
 succeeding sentence. He compares himself to a combatant, 
 first hardly pressed, then hemmed in, then pursued, then ac- 
 tually cast down. Tliis was not an occasional experience, but 
 his hfe was like that of Christ, an uninterruj^ted succession of 
 indignities and suffering. 
 
 10. Always bearing about in the body the dying 
 of the Lord Jesus, that the Kfe also of Jesus might be 
 made manifest in our body. 
 
 We constantly illustrate in our person the sufferings of 
 Christ. We are treated as he was treated; neglected, de- 
 famed, despised, maltreated; oppressed with hunger and 
 thirst, and constantly exposed to death. Ahoays bearing 
 about. Wherever he went, among Jews or Gentiles, in Jeru- 
 salem and Ephesus ; in all his journeyings, he met every- 
 where, from all classes of persons, the same kind of treatment 
 which Christ himself had received. In his body. This is 
 said because the reference is to his external trials and sufter- 
 
94 II. CORINTHIANS 4, 10. 
 
 ings, and not to his internal anxieties and sorrows. The dy- 
 ing of [the L#rd] Jesus. The word KvpLov, of the JOord, is 
 not found in the majority of the ancient manuscripts, and is 
 therefore omitted in the later editions of the Greek Testa- 
 ment. If this word be left out, the two clauses more nearly 
 correspond. The dyiyig of Jesus then answers to the life of 
 Jesus in the folloAA'ing clause. The word veKpwa-Ls is used 
 figuratively in Rom. 4, 19, "the deadness of Sarah's womb." 
 Here it is to be taken literally. It means proj^erly a slaying 
 or putti7ig to deaths and then violent death, or simply death. 
 The death of Jesus does not mean death on his account ; but 
 such death as he suffered. Comp. 1, 5. Though the reference 
 is principally to the dying of Christ, and the climax begun in 
 the preceding verse is here reached, yet his other suflerings 
 are not to be excluded. " The mortification of Jesus," says 
 Calvin, " includes every thing which rendered him (i. e. Paul) 
 despicable before men." Paul elsewhere refers to his con- 
 stant exposure to death in terms as strong as those which he 
 here uses. In Rom. 8, 36 he says, " We are killed all the day 
 long," and 1 Cor. 15, 31, "I die daily." Compare also 1 Cor. 
 4, 9- 2 Cor. 11, 23. The death or sufierings of Christ were 
 constantly, as it were, reproduced in the experience of the 
 apostle. In the use of another figure he expresses the same 
 idea in Gal. 6, 17. "I bear in my body the marks of the 
 Lord Jesus." The scars which I bear in my body mark me as 
 the soldier of Christ, and as belonging to him as my divine 
 Master, and as suifering in his cause. 
 
 lliat the life also of Jesus might he made manifest in our 
 body. This expresses the design of God in allowing Paul to 
 be thus persecuted and involved in the constant danger of 
 death. The treasure of the gospel was committed not to an 
 angel, but to Paul, an earthen vessel, and he was pressed, 
 persecuted, cast down, and beset with deadly perils, in order 
 that his preservation, his wonderful efficiency and astonishing 
 success, should be a constant j^roof that Jesus lives, and not 
 only exercises a providential care over his servants, delivering 
 them out of all their perils, but also attends their labours with 
 his own divine efficiency. Paul's deliverances, and the eftects 
 of his preaching, made it manifest that Jesus lives. In Rom. 
 15, 18 the apostle says, "I will not dare to speak of those 
 things which Christ hath not wrought by me, to make the 
 Gentiles obedient, by word and deed;" and in Gal. 2, 8, "He 
 that wrought efiectually in Peter to tlie apostlcship of the cir- 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 4, 11. 95 
 
 ciimcision, the same was mighty in me towards the Gentiles." 
 As the hfe of every believer is a manifestation of the life of 
 Christ, (for it is not we that live, but Christ liveth in us, Gal. 
 2, 20,) so also was the apostolic life of Paul. As the life of 
 Christ, however, is not only manifested in the spiritual life of 
 his followers, and in the deliverance and success of his minis- 
 ters, as it is not only made known in rescuing them from 
 deadly perils, but is hereafter to be more conspicuously re- 
 vealed in delivering them from death itself, it seems from v. 
 14 that Paul includes the resurrection in the manifestation of 
 the life of Jesus of which he here speaks. We die (daily, and 
 at last, literally) in order that the life of Christ may be re- 
 vealed. This passage is thus brought into unison with Rom. 
 8, 1 7, " If so be that we suffer mth him, that we may be also 
 glorified together;" and with 2 Tim. 2, 11, "If we be dead 
 with him, we shall live with him." See 1 Peter 4, 13. 14. 
 Rom. 6, 8. 9. John 14, 19, "Because I live, ye shall live also." 
 The association is natural between deliverance from the dan- 
 ger of death, and the ultimate deliverance from death itself. 
 The following verses show that this association actually exist- 
 ed in the apostle's mind, and that both were regarded as 
 manifestations of the life of Christ, and therefore proofs that 
 he still lives. In our body ; this does not mean simply in me. 
 A special reference is made to the body, because Paul was 
 speaking of bodily sufferings and death. 
 
 11. For we which Uve are ah^ays dehvered unto 
 death for Jesus' sake, that the hfe also of Jesus might 
 be made manifest in our mortal flesh. 
 
 This is a confirmation and explanation of what precedes. 
 Paul constantly bore about the dying of Jesus, for he was al- 
 ways delivered to death for Jesus' sake. He was, as he says 
 1 Cor. 4, 9, ws eTTt^avarto?, as one condemned^ and constantly 
 expecting death. TFe ichich are alive j rjixels ol ^wvtcs, we the 
 living, i. e. although living, and therefore, it might seem, not 
 the subjects of death. Death and life are opposed to each 
 other, and yet in our case they are united. Though living we 
 die daily. The words in this connection do not mean ' as long 
 as we live,' or, ' we who are alive,' as in 1 Thess. 4, 1 7, where 
 they designates the living as a class distinguished from the 
 dead. They mark the peculiarity of Paul's condition as living 
 although constantly delivered to death. 
 5 
 
96 II. CORINTHIANS 4, 12.13. 
 
 That the life also of Jesus might he made m^anifest in our 
 mortal flesh. The only variation between this and the cor- 
 responding clause of the preceding verse is, that here the 
 phrase in our mortal flesh is substituted for in our body. The 
 word body does not of itself involve the idea of weakness and 
 mortality, but the word flesh does. Hereafter we are to be 
 clothed with bodies, but not with flesh and blood. The con- 
 trast, therefore, between the power of the life of Christ, and 
 the feebleness of the instrument or organ through which that 
 life is revealed, is enhanced by saying it was manifested in our 
 mortal flesh. In himself Paul was utter weakness ; in Christ 
 he could do and sufi^er all things. 
 
 12. So then death worketh in us, but Hfe in you. 
 
 This verse expresses the conclusion or the result of the 
 preceding exhibitions. So then I have the sufiering and you 
 the benefit. I am constantly dying, but the life of Jesus 
 manifested in me is operative for your good. The death and 
 life here spoken of must be the same as in vs. 10. 11. The 
 death is Paul's sufl'erings and dying ; the life is not his physi- 
 cal life and activity by which the life of Christ is represented, 
 but the divine life and efficiency of Jesus. Death and life are 
 personified. The one is represented as operative in Paul ; the 
 other in the Corinthians. The di\'ine power manifested in the 
 support of the apostle, and in rendering his labours so success- 
 ful, was not primarily and principally for his benefit, but for 
 the benefit of those to whom he preached. It was, however, 
 to him and to them a consolation that his labours were not in 
 vain. There is no analogy between this passage and 1 Cor. 4, 
 8-10, where the apostle in a tone of irony contrasts his own 
 condition with that of the Corinthians, "Now ye are full, now 
 ye are rich, ye have reigned as kings without us," &c., and 
 therefore there is no propriety in understanding the apostle 
 here to represent the Corinthians as living at their ease while 
 he was persecuted and afflicted. According to this view, life 
 here signifies a state of enjoyment and prosperity, and death 
 the oj^posite. But it is plain from the connection that the 
 life spoken of is " the life of Jesus " which was manifested in 
 the apostle, the fruits of which the Corinthians enjoyed. 
 
 13. We having the same spirit of faith, according 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 4, 13. 97 
 
 as it is written, I believed, and therefore have I spoken ; 
 we also believe, and therefore speak. 
 
 The afflictions and dangers to which the apostle was ex- 
 posed, were adapted to discourage and even to drive him to 
 desj^air. He, however, was not discouraged ; but ha^ ing the 
 same faith which of old animated the Psalmist, he also, as Da- 
 vid did, proclaimed his confidence in God. Our version omits 
 the connecting particle, 8e, which expresses the contrast be^ 
 t ween what follows and what precedes. 'We are delivered 
 unto death, hut having,' &c. The same spirit of faith. " The 
 spirit of faith " may be a peri^^hrase for faith itself; or the 
 word spirit may refer to the human spirit, and the whole mean 
 ' having the same believing spirit.' It is more in accordance 
 with scriptural usage, and especially with Paul's manner, to 
 make spirit refer to the Holy Spirit, who is so often designat- 
 ed from the effects which he produces. He is called the 
 Spirit of adoption, Rom. 8, 15 ; the Spirit of wisdom, Eph. 1, 
 17 ; Spirit of grace, Heb. 10, 29 ; Spirit of glory, 1 Pet. 4, 14. 
 The apostle means to say that the same blessed Spirit which 
 was the author of faith in David he also possessed. Accord- 
 ing as it is icritten^ i. e. the same faith that is expressed in 
 the passage where it is written, ' I believed, therefore have I 
 spoken.' "This is the language of David in Ps. 116, 10. The 
 Psalmist was greatly afflicted; the sorrows of death com- 
 passed him, the pains of hell gat hold of him, but he did not 
 despair. He called on the Lord, and he helped him. He de- 
 livered his soul from death, his eyes from tears, and his feet 
 from falling. David's faith did not fail. He believed, and 
 therefore, in the midst of his afflictions, he proclaimed his 
 confidence and recounted the goodness of the Lord. Paul's 
 experience was the same. He also was sorely tried. He also 
 retained his confidence, and continued to rely on the promises 
 of God. The apostle follows the Septuao-int in the passage 
 quoted. The Hebrew expresses the same idea in a rather dif- 
 ferent form. " I beheved/or I speak." In either way, speaJc- 
 ing is represented as the effect and proof of faith. See Alex- 
 ander on the Psalms. 
 
 We also believe^ therefore we also speak. As Paul's faith 
 was the same, its effect was the same. The faith of David 
 made him proclaim the fidelity and goodness of God. The 
 iiiith of Paul made him, despite ail the suffering it brought 
 upon him, proclaim the gospel with full assurance of its truth 
 
98 II. CORINTHIANS 4, 14. 
 
 and of his own participation of its benefits. This clause, "we 
 also believe," depends on the participle at the beginning of 
 the verse. ' Having the Holy Spirit, the author of faith, we 
 speak.' The interpretation here given of this passage is the 
 common one. Calvin and many other commentators take a 
 very different view. They say that by the same faith is to be 
 understood, not the same the Psalmist had, but the same that 
 the Corinthians had. Paul, says Calvin, is to be understood 
 as saying, ' Although there is a great difference between my 
 circumstances and yours; although God deals gently with 
 you and severely with me, yet, notwithstanding this difference, 
 w^e have the same faith ; and where the faith is the same, the 
 inheritance is the same.' But this supposes that the design 
 of the preceding part of the chapter is to contrast the exter- 
 nal condition of Paul with that of the Corinthians ; and it 
 supposes that by we is meant ice Christians, whereas the apos- 
 tle evidently means himself. ' We are persecuted, cast down, 
 and delivered to death, but we, having the same faith with 
 David, do as he did. We retain our confidence and continue 
 to confess and to proclaim the gospel.' It is liis own experi- 
 ence and conduct, and not those of the Corinthians, that Paul 
 is exhibitinjr. 
 
 14. Knowing, that he which raised up the Lord 
 Jesus, shall raise up us also by Jesus, and shall present 
 (us) with you. 
 
 That this is to be understood of the literal resurrection, 
 and not of a mere deliverance from dangers, is evident, 1 . Be- 
 cause wherever a figurative sense is preferred to the literal 
 meaning of a word or proposition, the context or nature of 
 the passage must justify or demand it. Such is not the case 
 here. There is nothing to forbid, but every thing to tavour 
 the literal interpretation. 2. Because the figurative interpre- 
 tation cannot be carried through without doing violence to 
 the passage and to the analogy of Scripture. "To present us 
 with you " cannot be made to mean, ' to exhibit us with you 
 as rescued from danger.' 3. The figurative interpretation 
 rests on false assumptions. It assumes that Paul confidently 
 expected to survive the second coming of Christ, and there- 
 fore could not say he expected to be raised from the dead. 
 In this very connection, however, he says he longs to be ab- 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 4, 14. 99 
 
 sent fi'om the body and to be present with the Lord ; as he 
 said to the Philippians, at a later period of his career, that he 
 had a desire to depart and to be with Christ. Again, it is 
 said that according to the true reading of the passage, Paul 
 says he knows we shall be raised up xcith (not hy) Christ, and 
 therefore he cannot refer to the literal resurrection. But ad- 
 mitting the reading to be as assumed, to be raised up with 
 Christ does not mean to be raised contemporaneously with 
 him, but in fellowship with him, and in virtue of union with 
 him. This figurative mterpretation, therefore, although at 
 first adopted by Beza and advocated by many of the most dis- 
 tinguished modern commentators, is generally and properly 
 rejected. 
 
 The apostle here indicates the ground of the confidence 
 expressed in the preceding verse. He continued to sj^eak, 
 i. e. to preach the gospel, notwithstanding his persecutions, 
 hnoicing^ i. e. because he was sure that he and his fellow- 
 behevers should share in its glorious consummation. The 
 word to Jcnoio is often used in the sense of being convinced or 
 sure of. Rom. 5, 3. 1 Cor. 15, 58. It is assumed as a fact 
 which no Christian did or could doubt, that God had raised 
 up Jesus from the dead. "VYhat Paul was fully persuaded of 
 is, that God would raise us (i. e. him, for he is speaking of him- 
 self) icith or hy Jesus. The majority of the ancient manu- 
 scripts and versions here read cruV, icith^ instead of 8ta, 5y, and 
 that reading is adopted in most critical editions. Both forms 
 of representation occur in Scripture. Believers are said to be 
 raised up by Christ and icith Christ. Our Lord often says, 
 "I will raise him up at the last day;" and in 1 Cor. 15, 21, 
 the resurrection is said to be (8ta) hy man, i. e. hy Christ. 
 On the other hand, believers are said to be raised up icith oi 
 in him. 1 Cor. 15, 22. Eph. 2, 6. Col. 3, 3. 4. 1 Thess. 5, 10. 
 The two modes of statement are nearly coincident in meaning 
 The believer is united to Christ, as a member of his body, and 
 therefore a partaker of his life. It is in virtue of this union, 
 or of this participation of life, which, the apostle expressly 
 teaches, extends to the body as well as to the soul, Rom. 8, 
 8-11. 1 Cor. 6, 13-20. 15, 21. 22, that our bodies are raised 
 from the dead. It is therefore immaterial whether we say we 
 are raised by him, i. e. by the power of his life, or, we are 
 raised with, i. e. in union with him, and in virtue of that 
 union. As our resurrection is due to this community of life, 
 our bodies shall be like his glorious body. Phil. 3, 21. And 
 
100 II. CORINTHIANS 4, 14. 
 
 this congenidity and conformity are included in the idea 
 which is expressed by saying, we shall be raised up with him, 
 i. e. in his fellowship and likeness. The resurrection, there- 
 fore, was the one great, all-absorbing object of anticipation 
 and desire to the early Christians, and should be to us. It is 
 then that we shall be introduced hito the glorious liberty of 
 the sons of God ; it is then that the work of redemption shall 
 be consummated, and Christ be admired in his saints. And 
 2)r€seiit us together with you. To present, irapiaT-qixi^ is to 
 cause to stand near or by, to offer to. We are required to 
 present our members (Rom. 6, 13,) or our bodies (Rom. 12, 1,) 
 unto God ; Paul says he desired to present the Corinthians as 
 a chaste virgin unto Christ, 11, 2 ; God is said to have recon- 
 ciled us to present us holy in his sight. Col. 1, 22 ; and Jude 
 (v. 24) gives thanks to him who is able to present us faultless 
 before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy. This is 
 the idea here. It is true that in the following chapter it is 
 said that we must all appear before the judgment seat of 
 Christ, whence many suppose that the apostle means here that 
 having been raised ^from the dead, believers shall be presented 
 before the tribunal of the final judge. But tlie idea of judg- 
 ment is foreign from the connection. It is a fearful thing to 
 stand before the judgment seat of Christ, even with the cer- 
 tainty of acquittal. The apostle is here exulting in the assur- 
 ance that, however persecuted and down-trodden here, God, 
 who had raised up Jesus, would raise him up and present him 
 with all other believers before the presence of his glory with 
 exceeding joy. This it was that sustained him, and has sus- 
 tained so many others of the afflicted of God's people, and 
 given them a peace w^hich passes all understanding. 
 
 The resurrection of Christ here, as in other passages, is 
 represented as the pledge of the resurrection of his people. 
 " He that raised Christ from the dead shall also quicken your 
 mortal bodies," Rom. 8, 11. "God hath both raised up the 
 Lord, and will also raise us up by his own power," 1 Cor. 6, 
 14. " Christ is risen from the dead and become the first fruits 
 of them that slept ; for ... in Christ shall all be made alive," 
 15, 19-22. " For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, 
 even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with 
 hiin," 1 Tliess. 4, 14. See also John 11,25. Eph. 2,0. Col. 
 2/ 12. In the view of the sacred writers, theretbre, the glori- 
 ous resurrection of believers is as certain as the resurrection 
 of Christ, and that not simply because God who has raised up 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 4, 15. 101 
 
 Jesus has promised to raise his followers, but because of the 
 union between him and them. They are in him in such a 
 sense as to be partakers of his life, so that his life of necessity- 
 secures theirs. If he lives, they shall live also. Now as the 
 fact of Christ's resurrection was no more doubted by the 
 apostles, who had seen and heard and even handled him after 
 he rose from the dead, than their own existence, we may see 
 how assured was their confidence of their own resurrection to 
 eternal life. And as to us no event in the history of the world 
 is better authenticated than the fact that Christ rose from the 
 dead, we too have the same ground of assurance of the resur- 
 rection of those who are Christ's at his coming. Had we only 
 the faith of the apostle, we should have his constancy and his 
 joy even in the midst of the greatest afflictions. 
 
 15. For all things (are) for your sakes, that the 
 abundant grace might through the thanksgiving of 
 many redound to the glory of God. 
 
 In the preceding verse Paul had expressed his confident 
 hope of being delivered even from the grave and presented 
 before God in glory with his Corinthian brethren, for all 
 things are for your sakes. They were to be partakers of the 
 salvation which he proclaimed and for which he suffered. All 
 he did and all he suffered was for them. According to this 
 interpretation the all things are limited to all things of Avhich 
 he had been speaking, viz. his sufferings, his constancy, and 
 his deliverance. In 1 Cor. 3, 21, however, he says in a much 
 more comprehensive sense, 'AH things are yours, whether 
 things present or things to come.' Hence some understand 
 the expression with the same latitude in this passage : ' I ex- 
 pect to be presented with you^ for all things are for your 
 sakes.' But this does not agree with the latter part of the 
 verse. He evidently means all that he did, and sufifered, and 
 experienced. ' They are for your sake, that {ha, in order that) 
 the abundant grace or favour manifested to me, might, 
 through the thanksgi\dng of many, i. e. through your grati- 
 tude, called forth by your experience of the blessings flowing 
 from my labour and suff'erings, as well as from my deliverance, 
 redound to the glory of God.' This is the sense of the pas- 
 sage, according to the construction of the origmal, adopted 
 by our translators. Paul says that the favour shown him re- 
 
102 II. CORINTHIANS 4, 16. 
 
 dounds the more to the glory of God, because others besides 
 himself are led to giv^e thanks for it. This supposes that in 
 the Greek, 8ta tmv ttX^lovwv, k.t.X. are to be connected with 
 TTcpLcrcrevcrr], might aboimcl through. Those words, however, 
 may be connected with TrXeovacrao-a, the grace rendered ahund- 
 ant hy many. This may mean either that the favour shown 
 the apostle was the more abundant because so many interced- 
 ed in his behalf. Comj^. 1, 11, and Phil. 1, 19. "I know that 
 this shall turn to my salvation through your prayer." Or the 
 meaning may be, ' The favour shown me, rendered abundant, 
 or greatly multiplied, through the j^articipation of many.' In 
 the one case, Paul says the grace was the greater because so 
 many prayed for him ; in the other, it was the greater because 
 so many enjoyed the fruits of it. The passage admits of either 
 of these constructions and explanations ; and whichever is pre- 
 ferred the general idea is the same. The church is one. If 
 one member be honoured, all the members rejoice with it. 
 If Paul was redeemed from his enemies, all the church gave 
 thanks to God. A favour shown to him was a favour shown 
 to all, and was thereby multiplied a thousand-fold and ren- 
 dered a thousand-fold more prolific of thanksgiving unto God. 
 Whichever construction be adopted, Treptcrcrevcn; is to be taken 
 transitively, as in Eph. 1, 8. 1 Thess. 3, 12. 'Grace causes 
 thanksgiving to abound.' 
 
 16. For which cause we faint not ; but though our 
 outward man perish, yet the inward (man) is renewed 
 day by day. 
 
 For which cause., that is, because we are sure of a glorious 
 resurrection, and are satisfied that our present sufferings and 
 labours will advance the glory of God. We faint not^ Ave do 
 not become discouraged and give up the conflict. On the 
 contrary, though his outward man, his Avhole physical consti- 
 tution, perish., Sta^^ctperat, be utterly worn out and wasted 
 away by constant sufiering and labour, yet the inward man., 
 the spiritual nature, is renewed, i. e. receives new life and 
 vigour, day by day. By 'inward man' is not meant simply 
 the soul as distinguished from the body, but his higher nature 
 — his soul as the subject of the divine Ufe. Kom. 7, 22. 
 Eph. 3, 16. Of no unholy man could it be said in the sense 
 of the apostle that his inward man was daily renewed. It is 
 
 I 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 4, 17. 103 
 
 not of renewed supplies of animal spirits or of intellectual 
 vigour that the apostle speaks, but of the renewal of spiritual 
 strengjth to do and suffer. This constant renewal of streno^th 
 is opposed to fainting. ' We faint not, but are renewed day 
 hy day^ W^P^ '^^' W^P^' This is a Hebraism, Gen. 39, 10. 
 Ps. 68, 19, familiar to our ears but foreign to Greek usage. 
 The supplies of strength came without fail and as they were 
 needed. 
 
 17. For our light affliction, which is but for a mo- 
 ment, worketh for us a far more exceeding (and) eter- 
 nal weight of glory. 
 
 This is the reason why we faint not. Our afflictions are 
 light, they are momentary, and they secure eternal glory. 
 Every thing depends upon the standard of judgment. 
 Viewed absolutely, or in comparison with the sufferings of 
 other men, Paul's afflictions were exceedingly great. He 
 was poor, often without food or clothing ; his body was weak 
 and sickly ; he was homeless ; he was beset by cruel enemies ; 
 he was repeatedly scourged, he was stoned, he was impris- 
 oned, he was shipwrecked, robbed, and counted as the off- 
 scouring of the earth ; he was beyond measure harassed by 
 anxieties and cares, and by the opposition of false teachers, 
 and the corruption of the churches which he had planted at 
 such expense of time and labour. See 1 Cor. 4, 9-13, and 2 
 Cor. 11, 23-29. These afflictions m themselves, and as they 
 affected Paul's consciousness, were exceedingly great ; for he 
 says himself he was pressed out of measure, above strength, 
 so that he despaired even of life. 1, 8. He did not regard 
 these afflictions as trifles, nor did he bear them with stoical 
 indifference. He felt their full force and pressure. When 
 five times scourged by the Jews and thrice beaten with rods, 
 his physical torture was as keen as that which any other man 
 w^ould have suffered under similar inflictions. He was not in- 
 sensible to hunger, and thirst, and cold, and contempt, and 
 ingratitude. His afflictions were not light in the sense of giv- 
 ing little pain. The Bible does not teach, either by precept 
 or example, that Christians are to bear pain as though it were 
 not pain, or bereavements as though they caused no sorrow. 
 Unless afflictions prove real sorrows, they will not produce the 
 fruits of sorrow. It was only by bringing these sufferings 
 5* 
 
104 II. CORINTHIANS 4, 17. 
 
 into comparison with eternal glory that they dwindled into 
 insignificance. So also when the apostle says that his afflic- 
 tions were for a moment, it is only when compared with eter- 
 nity. They were not momentary so far as the present life 
 was concerned. They lasted from his conversion to his mar- 
 tyrdom. His Christian life was a protracted dying. But 
 what is the longest life to everlasting ages ? Less than a sin- 
 gle second to threescore years. The third source of consola- 
 tion to the apostle was that his afflictions would secure for 
 him eternal glory, i. e. the eternal and inconceivable excel- 
 lence and blessedness of heaven. This is all the words Karep- 
 ya^erat rjixtv express. Afflictions are the cause of eternal glory. 
 Not the meritorious cause, but still the procuring cause. God 
 has seen fit to reveal his purpose not only to reward with ex- 
 ceeding joy the afflictions of his people, but to make those 
 afflictions the means of working out that joy. This doctrine 
 is taught in many passages of Scripture. Matt. 19, 29. Rom. 
 8,17. 2 Tim. 2, 12. 13. 1 Pet. 1, 6. 4,13. Rev. 7, 14. It is 
 not, however, suffering in itself considered which has this ef- 
 fect ; and therefore not all suffering ; not self-infflcted suffer- 
 ing, not punishment, but only such sufierings which are either 
 endured for Christ's sake, or which when imposed for the trial 
 of our faith are sustained Avith a Christian spirit. We are, 
 therefore, not to seek afflictions, but when God sends them 
 we should rejoice in them as the divinely appointed means of 
 securing for us an eternal weight of glory. Our Lord calls on 
 those Avho were persecuted to rejoice and be exceeding glad. 
 Matt. 5, 12 ; so does the apostle Peter, 4, 13 ; and Paul often 
 asserts that he gloried or rejoiced in his afflictions. Phil. 2, 17. 
 Col. 1, 24. 
 
 The expression ro irapavTUa eXa<fipov T7J<; .^Xii/zecjs, the mo- 
 mentary/ lightness of affliction^ exhibits the adverb {TrapavTiKo.) 
 used as an adjective, and the adjective (ekaippou) used as a sub- 
 stantive. Comp. 8, 8. 1 Cor. 1, 25. AYetstein and other col- 
 lectors furnish abundant illustrations of this usage from the 
 Greek writers. In this carefully balanced sentence, ekacftpov^ 
 Ught^ stands opposed to ySapos, iceight^ and TrapavrUa^ momen- 
 tary^ to ai(oi/toi/, eternal. In Hebrew the same word signifies 
 to be heavy^ and to he glorious^ and the literal meaning of the 
 Hebrew word for glory is weighty which may have suggested 
 the peculiar expression " weight of glory." The words ko.^^ 
 v-rrepjSoXijv ets virepfSoXyv^ accorcliiig to excess unto excess, in the 
 sense of exceeding exceedingly, (one of Paul's struggles with 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 4, 18. 105 
 
 the impotency of language to express his conceptions,) may- 
 be taken as an adjective qualification of ySapos 60^179, weight of 
 glory. This is the explanation acloj^ted by our translators, 
 who render the phrase, "far more exceeding, and eternal 
 weight of glory." There is, however, no Kai {cmd) in the 
 text. If this view be adopted, it would be better therefore 
 to take " eternal v/eight of glory " as one idea. The eternal 
 glory exceeds all limits. The words in question, however, 
 may be connected adverbially with Karepya^erat, as proposed 
 by Meyer and De Wette. ' Our light afflictions work exceed- 
 ingly, i. e. are beyond measure efficacious in securing or pro- 
 ducing an eternal weight of glory.' 
 
 18. While we look not at the things which are 
 seen, but at the things which are not seen ; for the 
 things which are seen (are) temporal ; but the things 
 which are not seen (are) eternal. 
 
 The participial clause with which this verse begins (/a^ 
 a■Ko■^■ovvT^Jiv rj^iov) may have a causal force. ' Our light afflic- 
 tions are thus efficacious because we look not at the things 
 w^hich are temporal.' This, how^ever, is hardly true. The 
 afflictions of Christians do not work out for them eternal 
 glory, because their hearts are turned heavenward. It is 
 therefore better to understand the apostle as simply express- 
 ing the condition imder which the effect spoken of in v. 17 is 
 produced. This is the idea expressed in our version by the 
 word while. Afflictions have this salutary operation while 
 (i. e. provided that) v/e look at the things which are eternal. 
 This clause thus serves to designate the class of persons to 
 whom even the severest afflictions are light, and for whom 
 they secure eternal glory. It is not for the worldly, but for 
 those whose hearts are set on things above.^ The word trans- 
 lated look, cTKOTreco, is derived from o-kottos (scopus^ scojye), 
 meaning the mark or goal on which the eye is fixed, as in 
 Phil. 3, 14, Kara o-KOTTOj/ 8twKw, I press toward the mark. 
 Therefore looking here means makmg things unseen the goal 
 on which our eyes are fixed, the end toward w^hich the atten- 
 tion, desires and efforts are directed. As is usual with the 
 apostle, he states both what is not, and what is, the absorb- 
 ing object of the believer's attention. Not the visible^ but the 
 invisible; i. e. not the world and the thuigs of the world, but 
 
106 II. CORINTHIANS 5. 
 
 the things which pertain to that state which is to us now in- 
 visible. The reason why the latter, and not the former class 
 of objects do thus engross the believer, is that the things seen 
 are temporal^ or rather, temporary^ lasting only for a time ; 
 whereas the things unseen are eternal. Few passages in 
 Paul's writings exhibit so clearly his inward exercises in the 
 midst of sufferings and under the near prospect of death. He 
 was, when he wrote what is here written, in great affliction. 
 He felt that his life was in constant and imminent danger, and 
 that even if delivered from the violence of his enemies, his 
 strength was gradually wearing away under the uninterrupted 
 trials to which he was subjected. IJnder these circumstances 
 we see him exhibiting great sensibiUty to suffering and sor- 
 row; a keen susceptibility in reference to the conduct and 
 feelings of others towards him; a just appreciation of his dan- 
 ger, and yet unshaken confidence in his ultimate triumph ; a 
 firm determination not to yield either to opposition or to suf- 
 fering, but to persevere in the faithful and energetic discharge 
 of the duty which had brought on him all his trials, and a he- 
 roic exultation in those very afflictions by which he was so 
 sorely tried. He was sustained by the assurance that the life 
 of Christ secured his life ; that if Jesus rose, he should rise 
 also ; and by the firm conviction that the more he suffered for 
 the sake of Christ, or in such a way as to honour his divine 
 master, the more glorious he would be through all eternity. 
 Suffering, therefore, became to him not merely endurable, but 
 a ground of exceeding joy. 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 The confidence expressed in the preceding chapter is justified by showing 
 that the apostle was assured of a habitation in heaven, even if his earthly 
 tabernacle should be destroyed, vs. 1-10. His object in what he had 
 said of himself was not sclf-cominendation. lie laboured only for the 
 good of the church, impelled by the love of Christ, whose ambassador 
 he was, in exhorting men to be reconciled to God, vs. 11-21. 
 
 Tlie state of believers after death. Vs. 1-10. 
 
 Paul did not faint in the midst of his sufferings, because he 
 knew that even if his earthly house should be destroyed, he 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 5, 1. 107 
 
 had a house in heaven — not like the present perishable taber- 
 nacle, but one not made with hands, and eternal, v. 1. He 
 looked forward to the things unseen, because in his present 
 tabernacle he groaned, desiring to enter his heavenly habita- 
 tion. He longed to be unclothed that he might be clothed 
 upon with his house which is from heaven, vs. 2-4. This con- 
 fidence he owed to God, who had given him the Holy Spirit 
 as a pledge of his salvation, v. 5. Having this indwelling of 
 the Spirit he was always in good courage, knowing that as 
 soon as he should be absent from the body, he would be pres- 
 ent with the Lord, vs. 6-8. Therefore his great desire was to 
 please him, before whose tribunal he and all other men were 
 to appear to receive according to their works, vs. 9. 10. 
 
 1. For we know that if our eartlilj house of (this) 
 tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, 
 a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens. 
 
 The connection between this passage and the preceding 
 chapter is plain. Our light afiiictions, Paul had said, Avork 
 out for us an eternal weight of glory, for we know that even 
 if our earthly house perishes, we have an everlasting habita- 
 tion in heaven. The general sense also of the whole of the 
 following paragraph is clear. The apostle expresses the as- 
 surance that a blessed state of existence awaited him after 
 death. There is, however, no little difficulty in determining 
 the precise meaning of the figurative language here employed. 
 Few passages in Paul's writings have awakened a deeper or 
 more general interest, because it treats of the state of the soul 
 after death; a subject about which every man feels the liveli- 
 est concern, not only for himself, but in behalf of those dear 
 to him. Where are those who sleep in Jesus before the resur- 
 rection ? What is the condition of a redeemed soul when it 
 leaves the body ? These are questions about which no Chris- 
 tian can be indifferent. If Paul here answers those inquiries, 
 the passage must have peculiar value to all the people of God. 
 This, however, is the very point about which the greatest dif- 
 ficulty exists. There are three views taken of the passage ; 
 that is, three different answers are given to the question. 
 What is that building into which the soul enters when the 
 present body is dissolved? 1. The first answer is, that the 
 house not made with hands is heaven itself. 2. That it is the 
 
108 II. CORINTHIANS 5, 1. 
 
 resurrection body. If this be the correct view, then the pas- 
 sage throws no light on the state of the soul between death 
 and the resurrection. It treats solely of what is to happen 
 after Christ's second coming. 3. The third opinion is, that 
 the house into which the soul enters at death is, so to speak, an 
 intermediate body ; that is, a body prepared for it and adapt- 
 ed to its condition during the state intermediate between 
 death and the resurrection. This, however, is not a scriptu- 
 ral doctrine. Many philosoi^hers indeed teach that the soul 
 can neither perceive nor act unless in connection with a body ; 
 nay, that an individual man is nothing but a revelation of the 
 general principle of humanity m connection with a given cor- 
 poreal organism, as a tree is the manifestation of the prmcijole 
 of vegetable life through a specific material organization. As 
 therefore vegetable life is, or exists, only in connection with 
 vegetable forms, so the soul exists only in connection with a 
 body. Thus Olshausen in his Commentary, 1 Cor. 15, 42-44, 
 says, Wie ohne Leib keine Seele, so ohne Leiblichkeit keine 
 Seligkeit ; Leiblichkeit und die dadurch bedingte Personlich- 
 keit ist das Ende der Werke Gottes. " As without body 
 there is no soul, so without a corporeal organization there can 
 be no salvation; a corporeal organization, as the necessary 
 condition of personality, is the end of God'^s work." Still 
 more explicitly, when commenting on verses 19 and 20 of the 
 same chapter, he says, Ein Fortleben als reiner Geist ohne 
 korperliches Organ erkennt der Apostle gar nicht als Moghch- 
 keit an ; die Lehre von der Unsterblichkeit der Seele ist der 
 ganzen Bibel, cbenso wie der Name, frcmd — und zwar mit 
 vollem Recht, indem ein personliches Bewusstseyn ini ge- 
 schaffenen Wesen die Schranken des Leibes nothwcndig vor- 
 aussetzt. "The continued existence of the soul as a pure 
 spirit without a body is to the apostle an impossibility. The 
 Bible knows nothing of the doctrine of the immortality of the 
 soul ; the very expression is strange to it. And no wonder, 
 for self consciousness in a created being necessarily supposes 
 the limitation of a bodily organization." Of course all angels 
 must have bodies, and of course also if the soul exists between 
 death and the resurrection it must have a body. Strange to 
 say, however, Olshausen, despite his maxim, "no body no 
 soul," admits the existence of the soul during the interval be- 
 tween death and the resurrection, and yet denies that it has 
 a body. His utterly unsatisfactory attempt to reconcile this 
 contradiction in his theory is, first, that self-consciousness in 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 5, 1. 109 
 
 departed sj^irits is very obscure — a mere dreamy state of ex- 
 istence ; and secondly, that it must be assumed that a relation 
 continues between the soul and the elements of its decaying 
 body in the grave. This is a perfect collapse of the theory. 
 If it involves either of these consequences, that the soul is un- 
 conscious after death, or that its life is in connection with its 
 disorganized body, and conditioned by that connection, then 
 it comes in direct conflict with the Scripture, and is exploded 
 as a mere product of the imagination. If the Bible teaches or 
 assumes that a body is necessary to the self-consciousness of 
 the soul, or even to its power to perceive and to express, to 
 act and to be acted upon, then it would be not only natural 
 but necessary to understand the apostle to teach in this pas- 
 sage that the moment the soul leaves its present body it en- 
 ters into another. Then it would follow either that the only 
 resurrection of which the Scri2)tures speak takes place at the 
 moment of death, or that there is a body specially fitted for 
 the intermediate state, differing both from the one which we 
 now have, and from that which we are to have at the resur- 
 rection. The former of these suppositions contradicts the 
 plain doctrine of the Bible that the resurrection is a future 
 event, to take place at the second advent of Christ ; and the 
 latter contradicts this very passage, for Paul says that the 
 house on which ^Ye enter at death is eternal. Besides, the 
 Bible knows nothing of any body except the aco/xa iJ/vxi-kou, the 
 natural hody^ which we have now, and the croj/xa -kv^vilo-tikov^ 
 the spiritual hody^ which we are to receive at the resurrection. 
 We are therefore reduced to the choice between the first and 
 second of the three interpretations mentioned above. The 
 building of which the apostle here speaks must be either a 
 house in heaven, or the resurrection body. If the latter, then 
 Paul teaches, not what is to happen immediately after death, 
 but what is to take place at the second coming of Christ. In 
 opposition to this view, and in favour of the opinion that the 
 house here mentioned is heaven itself, it may be argued, 1. 
 Heaven is often in Scripture compared to a house in which 
 there are many mansions, John 14, 2 ; or to a city in which 
 there are many houses, Heb. 11, 10. 14. 13, 14. Rev. 21, 10 ; or 
 more generally to a habitation, Luke 16, 9. 2. The figure in 
 this case is peculiarly appropriate. The body is compared to 
 a house in which the soul now dwells, heaven is the house mto 
 which it enters when this earthly house is dissolved. Our 
 Lord told his sorrowing disciples that they should soon be 
 
no II. CORINTHIANS 5, 1. 
 
 with liim, that in his Father's house, whither he went, there 
 were many mansions, and that he would receive them unto 
 himself. 3. The description here given of the house of which 
 the apostle speaks agrees with the descriptions elsewhere 
 given of heaven. It is a building of God; compare Heb. 11, 
 10, where heaven is said to be a city whose builder and maker 
 is God. It is not made with hands, i. e. not of human work- 
 manship or belonging to the present order of things. In the 
 same sense the true tabernacle in heaven is said to be " not 
 made with hands," Heb. 9, 11. It is eternal, because the state 
 on which the soul enters at death is imchanging. And finally, 
 this house is said to be " in heaven," or, we are said to have 
 it " in heaven." This last clause is not consistent with the 
 assumption that the house spoken of is the resurrection body. 
 That body is not now in heaven awaiting our arrival there, 
 nor is it to be brought down to us from heaven. But the 
 mansion w^hich Christ has gone to prepare for his people is in 
 heaven ; and therefore the apostle in raising his eyes heaven- 
 ward could appropriately say, * If this tabernacle be dissolved 
 I have a house in heaven.' 4. The principal argument in fa- 
 vour of this interj^retation is that the house spoken of is one 
 on which the soul enters immediately after death. This is 
 plain because Paul says, that if our earthly house be dissolved 
 xi^e have^ i. e. we have at once, a house in heaven. The whole 
 context requires this explanation to be given to 9(o/xer, loe 
 have. The apostle is speaking of the grounds of consolation 
 in the immediate prospect of death, lie says in effect that 
 the dissolution of the body does not destroy the soul or de- 
 prive it of a home. His consolation was that if unclothed 
 he would not be found naked. While at home in the body 
 he was absent from the Lord, but as soon as he was absent 
 from the body he would be present with the Lord. It is so 
 obvious that the apostle is here speaking of what takes 
 place at death, that those who maintain that the building re- 
 ferred to is the resurrection body, propose various methods 
 of getting over the difficulty. Some, as Usteri, assume that 
 Paul, when he wrote the first epistle to the Corinthians, be- 
 lieved that the resurrection was not to take place until the 
 second advent of Christ, but changed his view and here teaches 
 that it takes place at death. That is, that the soul when it 
 leaves the present body is furnislied with that spiritual body 
 which in the former epistle he taught was not to be received 
 until Christ comes tlic second time. To those who proceed 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 5, 1. Ill 
 
 on the assumption of the inspiration of Scripture, this unnatu- 
 ral explanation needs no refutation. In his epistle to the 
 PhilipiDians, written still later, he teaches the same doctrine 
 that we find in First Corinthians. He must, therefore, have 
 reverted to his former view. Paul was not thus driven about 
 by every wind of doctrine. Even those who deny his inspira- 
 tion must admit his consistency. Others say that as the apos- 
 tle confidently expected to survive the second advent, he here 
 speaks of what he anticipated in his own case. He believed 
 he would not die, but be changed at once as described in 
 1 Cor. 15, 61. 52. But even admitting that Paul at this time 
 did expect to survive the coming of the Lord, that is not the 
 expectation here expressed. On the contrary, he is speaking 
 of what would take place (idv) even in case he should die. If, 
 worn out by his suflferings, his earthly house should be dis- 
 solved before Christ came, still he knew he should have a 
 I house in heaven. Others again say that the interval between 
 death and the resurrection is not taken into account, but that 
 the apostle, after the manner of the prophets, speaks of events 
 as chronologically coincident which in fact are separated by a 
 long period of time. But this does not meet the difliculty. 
 As the apostle is speaking of the ground of consolation in the 
 prospect of death, he must be understood to refer, not to what 
 might be expected at an indefinite period after that event, but 
 to its immediate consequence. He did not glory in his afflic- 
 ktions because when his earthly house should be dissolved he 
 Avould sink into a state of unconsciousness until the resurrec- 
 tion; but because he would have another and unspeakably 
 I' better habitation. This is evident, because he speaks of his 
 being absent from the body as the immediate antecedent of 
 his being present with the Lord ; which is only another form 
 of saying he would be clothed upon with his house which is 
 .; from heaven. 5. A fifth consideration in favour of the inter- 
 : pretation in question, is derived from the analogy of Scripture. 
 - The Bible in other places teaches that the souls of believers do 
 at their death immediately pass into glory. Our Lord in re- 
 l futing the Sadducees, who denied the existence of spirits, 
 said, " Have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by 
 
 I God, sa}dng, I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and 
 the God of Jacob ? God is not the God of the dead, but of 
 the living," Matt. 22, 32. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob there- 
 fore are living, and not in a dreamy state of semi-conscious 
 existence. In the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, we 
 
112 II. CORINTHIANS 5, 1. 
 
 are told that when Lazarus died he was carried by angels into 
 Abraham's bosom, i. e. to heaven. On the mount of trans- 
 figuration, Moses and Elias appeared talking with Christ. 
 Our Lord said to the dying thief, "This day shalt thou be 
 with me in paradise," and paradise, as we learn from 2 Cor. 
 12, 2 and 4, is the third heaven. In Phil. 1, 22-24, Paul says 
 that although he had a desire to depart and be with Christ, 
 yet his abiding in the flesh was more needful for them. This 
 clearly implies that as soon as he dej^arted from the flesh he 
 expected to be present with the Lord. This flows from the 
 perfection of Christ's work. As his blood cleanses from all 
 sin, there is no process of expiation or purification to be en- 
 dured or experienced by believers after death. And as we 
 know, as our Lord ^ays, that they still five, they must enter 
 on the blessedness secured by his merits. Accordingly the 
 apostle says that the saints on earth and the saints in heaven 
 form one communion. " We are come unto Mount Zion — and 
 unto the spirits of just men made perfect," Heb. 12, 23. 
 
 The considerations above presented appear decisive in fa- 
 vour of understanding the apostle to mean by the house not 
 made with hands, a mansion in heaven into which believers 
 enter as soon as their earthly tabernacle is dissolved. It is, 
 however, objected to this view of the passage, that as the 
 earthly house is the present body, the heavenly house must 
 also be a body. This, however, does not follow. The com- 
 parison is not of one body with another ; but of one house 
 with another. We dwell now in an earthly tabernacle ; after 
 death, we shall dwell in a heavenly house. This is all that the 
 figure demands. In the second place, it is urged that in v. 2 
 it is said our house is " from heaven," and if from heaven it is 
 not heaven itself. But our resurrection body is not from 
 heaven in the local sense. It is from heaven only in the gen- 
 eral sense of being heavenly, and in this sense our house is of 
 heaven. It is not of the earth, does not belong to the present 
 state of existence, but to that on which we enter in heaven. 
 Besides, it is not heaven considered as a state, nor even as a 
 jolace, (in the wide sense of the word heaven,) that is our 
 house, but the mansion which the Lord has gone to prepare 
 for his people in heaven. The simple idea is that the soul, 
 when it leaves its earthly tabernacle, will not be lost in im- 
 mensity, nor driven away houseless and homeless, but will find 
 a house and home in lieaven. This is the consoling doctrine 
 here taught. The soul of the believer does not cease to exist 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 5, 1. 113 
 
 at death. It does not sink into a state of unconsciousness. 
 It does not go into purgatory ; but, being made perfect in ho- 
 liness, it does immediately pass into glory. As soon as it is 
 absent from the body, it is present with the Lord. This is all 
 that is revealed, and this is enough. What Paul learnt more 
 than this when he T\'as caught up into the third heaven, he 
 was not permitted to make known. 
 
 As Paul is speaking of himself in this whole connection, 
 when he says ice knoio^ he does not refer to a knowledge com- 
 mon to all men, nor to other Christians, but he expresses his 
 personal conviction — I Joioio. That if^ idv, if as it may ; 
 (not althougli). The aj^ostle is speaking of his afflictions, 
 which were wearing away his strength ; and says, ' Even if 
 my suiferings should prove fatal, and my earthly house 
 be dissolved, I have another habitation.' Our earthly house 
 of this tabernacle^ i. e. our earthly house which is a tabernacle, 
 6 (TK^vos, a frail, temporary abode, as opposed to a stable, per- 
 manent building. See 2 Peter 1, 13. 14. Is dissolved^ i. e. 
 its component j^arts separated either by violence or decay, so 
 that it tails in pieces. We have^ i. e. I have, as he is speaking 
 of himself. The present tense, cx^/aci^, is used because the one 
 event immediately follows the other ; there is no perceptible 
 interval between the dissolution of the earthly tabernacle and 
 entering on the heavenly house. As soon as the soul leaves 
 the body it is in heaven. A building of God^ olKoSofX7]v Ik 
 ^cov, a building from God, one provided by him, and of which 
 he is the builder and maker, Heb. 11, 10, and therefore is 
 said to be not made with hands, i. e. not like the buildings 
 erected by man. Comp. Heb. 9, 11 and Col. 2, 11. The lat- 
 ter i)assage refers to the circumcision of the heart as the im- 
 mediate work of God ; it is therefore said to be dxetpoTrotT^ros. 
 The soul therefore at death enters a house whose builder is 
 God. This is said to exalt to the utmost our conceptions of 
 its glory and excellence. Being made by God it is eternal. 
 It is to last forever ; and we are never to leave it. We dwell 
 in our present bodies only for a little while, as in a tent ; but 
 heaven is an abode which, once entered, is retained forever. 
 The words m the heavens may be connected with house, in 
 the sense of heavenly, i. e. a celestial house. This construc- 
 tion is assumed in our version where the words " eternal in 
 the heavens " are made to qualify or describe the house spoken 
 of. The natural connection of the words, however, is with 
 
114 II. CORINTHIANS 5, 2. 
 
 (exo/xev) ice have. * If our earthly house be dissolved, we have 
 in heaven a house of God, not made with hands, and eternal.' 
 
 2. For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be 
 clothed upon with our house which is from heaven. 
 
 This verse must, from the force of the connecting particle 
 (yap) for, be a confirmation of what precedes, but whether of 
 what is said in v. 1, or at close of preceding chapter, is doubt- 
 ful. The words koI ydp may mean either /br also, or for eve?!. 
 If the former, this verse is condinate with v. 1, and assigns an 
 additional reason why the apostle looked at the things unseen 
 and eternal. He thus looked for he knew he had in heaven a 
 house not made with hands, and because he earnestly desired 
 to enter that house. If the latter explanation of the particles 
 be preferred, the sense is, ' I know I have a house in heaven, 
 for even in this I groan, desiring to be clothed with my house 
 which is from heaven.' In this case the argument would be, 
 ' There is such a house, for I long for it.' This, however, is 
 hardly a scriptural argument. Paul's confidence in a state of 
 blessedness beyond the grave was not founded on the obscure 
 aspirations of his nature, but on express revelation from God. 
 Rom. 8, 22 is not parallel, for there the groaning of the creation 
 is presented, not as a proof of future blessedness, but to show 
 that the creature is subject to vanity, 9iot loilllngly nor finally. 
 In this, i. e. in this tabernacle, as the word o-ktjvos is used in v. 1, 
 and also v. 4. We groan earnestly desiring, i. e. we groan be- 
 cause we desire. The groaning is the expression of this long- 
 ing after his heavenly home ; and not, as in v. 4, of suffering 
 caused by afflictions. The liri in iTmro^vvTes is either inten- 
 sive, earnestly desiring, or it expresses the tendency of the de- 
 sire. The word and its cognates are always used in the New 
 Testament to express strong desire or longing. What the 
 apostle thus longed for was, eTrevSuVao-^at, to he clothed upon, 
 i. e. to put on over, as an outer garment. With our house 
 which is from heaven. As the body is familiarly compared 
 sometimes to a house in which the soul dwells, and sometimes 
 to a garment with which it is clothed, the two figures are 
 here combined, and the apostle speaks of putting on a house 
 as though it were a garment. Both are a covering and a pro- 
 tection. Our house, olK-qriqpiov, i. e. dicelling, more sj^ecific 
 than the general term oIkIo., a building. Which is from 
 heaven, ii ovpavov, i. e. heavenly, as distinguished from a 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 5, 2. 115 
 
 dwelling which is c/c yr}?, of the earth. 1 Cor. 15, 47. It is not 
 "of this building," rauVr^s t^s KTt(T€w<;, Heb. 9, 11. Those who 
 understand this whole passage to treat of the change which is 
 to take place in those believers who shall be alive when the 
 Lord comes, and which is described in 1 Cor. 15, 51-54, lay- 
 special stress on this verse. They urge that this house being 
 from heaven cannot be heaven ; and that the verb iTrevSv^o^ 
 meaning to 2)ut o?i over, evidently refers to the putting on of 
 the new body, as it were, over the old one ; and therefore can 
 be understood only of those who, being in the body when 
 Christ comes, are thus clothed tq)on without being unclothed. 
 It has already been remarked that there is no force in the for- 
 mer of these arguments, because the new body is not from 
 heaven. It is k^ ovpavov only in the sense of being heavenly, 
 and in that sense the expression suits the idea of a building as 
 well as that of a body. As to the second argument, it may be 
 admitted, that if the context demanded, or even naturally ad- 
 mitted of our understanding "the house not made with 
 hands " to be the resurrection body, there would be a pecu- 
 liar propriety in the use of the word iirevSva-acrSaL^ (to be 
 clothed upon^) instead of the simple verb kvhvaaa-^ai^ to he 
 clothed. But the use of this word is not sufficient to deter- 
 mine the interpretation of the whole passage. 1. Because 
 nothing is more common than the use of compound verbs in 
 the same sense as the correspondmg simple ones. 2. Because 
 in 1 Cor. 15, 53. 54, Paul uses the simple verb (eVSuo-ao-^ai) four 
 times to express the very thing which it is here urged he must 
 refer to because he uses the compound c7rev8uo-ao--^at. That is, 
 he uses the two words in the same sense. He makes no dif- 
 ference between "putting on" and being "clothed upon:'' 
 We are not required, therefore, by the use of the latter ex- 
 pression, to infer that the apostle speaks of the change which 
 those who are in the body should experience at the coming of 
 Christ. This view, as remarked above, is out of keeping with 
 the whole context. Paul was daily exposed to death, his out- 
 ward man was perishing. His consolation was that if his 
 earthly tabernacle were dissolved, he had a better house in 
 heaven. He earnestly longed for that house ; to be absent 
 from the body and to be present with the Lord. All he says 
 is said on the hypothesis of his dying, and therefore he cannot 
 say he earnestly desired to escape death. What he longed 
 for was, not that he might be alive when Christ came, and 
 thus escape the pains of dissolution, but that he might quit 
 
116 II. CORINTHIANS 5, 3. 
 
 his mud hovel and enter in that house not made with hands, 
 eternal in the heavens. 
 
 3. If SO be that being clothed we shall not be 
 
 found naked. 
 
 Few verses in this epistle have been more variously ex- 
 plained than this. In the first place the reading is doubtful. 
 The received text has ctye, which the great majority of the 
 critical editions also adopt ; Lachmann, on the authority of 
 the manuscripts, B, D, E, F, G, reacl^ dircp. The latter {if so 
 be, 2^^ovided) expresses doubt; the former (since) expresses 
 certainty. This distinction, however, is not strictly observed 
 in Paul's writings. See 1 Cor. 8, 5. Gal. 3, 4. Col. 1, 23. 2 
 Thess. 1,6. A more important diversity is that several ancient 
 manuscripts and most of the Fathers read cKSucra/xcvot (un- 
 clothed) instead of hSvadfievoL (clothed). The former renders 
 the passage much plainer. * We earnestly desire to be clothed 
 with our house from heaven, since (or, even if) being unclothed 
 we shall not be found naked.' That is, ' Although despoiled 
 of our earthly tabernacle we shall not be found houseless.' 
 Mill, Semler and Riickert prefer this reading, but the weight 
 o^authonty is in flivoiir of the received text. There are three 
 general modes of explaining this passage which have been 
 adopted. 1. Calvin among the older commentators, and Us- 
 teri and Olshausen among the moderns, say that the words 
 clothed and nciked must be understood to refer to the moral 
 or spiritual state of the soul ; to its being clothed with right- 
 eousness or being destitute of that robe. Calvin says the 
 apostle's design is to Hmit the blessedness spoken of in the 
 preceding verses to the righteous. The wicked are to be de- 
 spoiled of their bodies and will appear naked before God ; but 
 believers, being clothed in the righteousness of Christ, will 
 stand before him in the glorious vesture of immortality. 
 There are two garments, therefore, he says, referred to ; the 
 one, the righteousness of Christ, received in this life; the oth- 
 er, immortal glory, received at death. The former is the 
 cause and necessary condition of the latter. Calvin lays 
 special stress on the Kat, cdso, which is inserted for the sake 
 of ami)lilication, as though Paul had said, 'A new garment shall 
 be prei)ared for believers at death if also (or already) in this 
 life they were clothed.' This interpretation, however, is evi- 
 dently out of keei)ing with the context. It is very unnatural 
 
 I 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 5, 3. 117 
 
 to make the same words have such different meanings in the 
 same connection. In v. 2 we are said to be clothed with our 
 house from heaven ; in v. 3 we are so clothed as not to be 
 found naked, and in v. 4 Paul speaks of being unclothed. If 
 in vs. 2 and 4 the word refers to a body or house, in v. 3 it 
 cannot refer to the robe of righteousness. Being unclothed 
 is evidently the opposite of being clothed. As the former re- 
 fers to laying aside the earthly tabernacle, the latter must re- 
 fer to our being invested with the house from heaven. Be- 
 sides, any such distinction between the righteous and the 
 wicked, or any caution that the unrighteous are not to be 
 received into heaven, as this interjDretation supposes, is for- 
 eign to the design of the passage. Paul is not speaking of 
 the general destiny of men after death, but of his own per- 
 sonal experience and conviction. ' I know,' he says, ' that if 
 I die I have a house in heaven, and being clothed with that 
 house I shall not be found naked.' There is no room here for 
 a warning to the unrighteous. They are not at all brought 
 into view. 
 
 2. The second general view of this passage is founded on 
 the assumption that v. 2 speaks of the change to be effected 
 in those who shall be alive when Christ comes. According to 
 Grotuis the meaning is, ' We shall be clothed upon (i. e. in- 
 vested with a new body over the jjresent one), if so be that 
 day shall find us clothed (i. e. in the body) and not naked 
 (i. e. bodiless spirits).' That is, we shall experience the 
 change mentioned in v. 2, provided we are aUve when Christ 
 comes. To this, however, it is objected, first, that as the 
 event of Paul's being alive at that time was entirely uncertain, 
 and is here so presented, the appropriate particle would be 
 ctTrep {if so he) and not ctyc (?*/", as is sure to be the case) ; and 
 second, that this interpretation is inconsistent with the force 
 of the aorist participle cVSucra/xevot. The sense given to the 
 passage would require the perfect erScSu/xeVoi, being then 
 clothed. According to Meyer the meaning is, ' If, as is certain 
 to be the case, we in fact '(KaT)' shall be found clothed, and not 
 naked.' That is, ' K clothed upon with our house from heaven 
 (i. e. the new body) we shall not be found bodiless v»hen 
 Christ comes.' This interpretation suits the words, but not 
 the connection. As before remarked, the whole passage pro- 
 ceeds on the hypothesis of death. * If I die,' says the apostle, 
 ' so and so will happen.' This being the case, he cannot be 
 understood to state what would happen if he did not die, but 
 
118 II. CORINTHIANS 5 
 
 survived the coming of the Lord. Besides, the whole basis of 
 this interpretation is unsound. Paul did not expect to survive 
 the second advent, as is plain from 2 Thess. 2, 1-6. See the 
 comment on 1 Cor. 15, 51. 
 
 3. The third interpretation assumes that the apostle refers 
 not to the spiritual body but to a mansion in heaven. In the 
 preceding verse he said that he earnestly desired to be clothed 
 upon with his house from heaven, " since," he adds, " being 
 clothed, we shall not be found (i. e. shall not be) naked." As 
 the house from heaven is spoken of as a garment, being house- 
 less is expressed by the word naked. This interpretation 
 gives the same translation of the words as the preceding, but 
 a different exposition of their meaning ; and it has the advan- 
 tage of agreeing logically with the context and with the ele- 
 vated tone of the whole passage. ' If I die,' says Paul, ' I 
 know I have a home in heaven, and I earnestly desire to enter 
 on that heavenly house, since when driven from this earthly 
 tabernacle I shall not be houseless and homeless.' According 
 to this view the object of his desire was the glory and bless- 
 edness of heaven ; according to the other, it was that he might 
 live until Christ came, and thus escape the pain of dying. 
 This was an object comjjaratively insignificant, and utterly 
 out of keeping with the heroic spirit which pervades the 
 whole context. 
 
 4. For we that are in (this) tabernacle do groan, 
 being burdened : not for that we would be unclothed, 
 but clothed upon, that mortality might be swallowed 
 up of life. 
 
 This Averse gives the reason of the desire expressed in v. 2. 
 ' We desire our house which is from heaven, for in this we 
 groan, <fec.' The words ot wrcs mean tee who are^ not ' whilst 
 we are,' which would require the simj^le ovt€^ Avithout the ar- 
 ticle. 1)1 this tabernacle^ Iv tw o-kt/i/ci, literally, in tlie taberna- 
 cle, i. e. the tabernacle mentioned in v. 1, and implied in v. 2. 
 Do groa7i being burdened^ i. e. because burdened. The bur- 
 den meant may be the affliction by which Paul was over- 
 whelmed ; or the body itself; or the longhig after a better 
 world. As this passage is intimately connected with the pre- 
 ceding chapter, in which the apostle had spoken so freely of 
 his sufferings, and as his experience in view of death was de- 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 5, 5. 119 
 
 termined by those sufferings, it is perfectly natural to under- 
 stand him to refer to the burden of sorrow. It was because 
 he suffered so much that he groaned to be delivered, i. e. to 
 be absent from the body and present with the Lord. Not 
 that vne would he unclothed. The words are €<^' w, which in 
 Rom. 5,12 mean propterea quod^ * because that;* but here 
 they more naturally mean quare^ 'wherefore.' They intro- 
 duce the reason of what follows, not of what precedes. ' On 
 which account,' i. e. because we are thus burdened we desire, 
 &c. If l<i> w be taken in the sense of because that the sense is 
 just the opposite. Then this clause states the nature of the 
 burden under which the apostle groaned. 'We groan be- 
 cause that we do not wish to be unclothed.' It was then the 
 dread of death, or the desire to be glorified without the ne- 
 cessity of dyuig, that was the object of the apostle's intense 
 desire. This is altogether unworthy of the man and incon- 
 sistent with the context. Paul says, ' We groan being bur- 
 dened, icherefore^ i. e. because thus burdened, we do not wish 
 to die ; death is not that for which we long, but that which 
 comes after death. It is not mere exemption from the bur- 
 den of life, from its duties, its labours or its sufierings, which 
 is the object of desire, but to be in heaven.' The passage is 
 in its spirit and meaning altogether parallel with v. 8. " Will- 
 ing rather to be absent from the body and present with the 
 Lord." To he unclothed means to lay aside our earthly taber- 
 nacle. To he clothed upon means to enter the house not made 
 with hands. As the earthly house is compared to a garment, 
 so is the heavenly house. That mortality (to Svyjtov, that 
 ichich is mortal) may he swallowed iqy of life^ i. e. absorbed 
 by it so that the one ceases to appear and the other becomes 
 dominant. Comp. 1 Cor. 15, 53. 54. This is the elevated ob- 
 ject of the apostle's longing desire. It was not death, not 
 annihilation, nor mere exemption from suffering ; but to be 
 raised to that higher state of existence m which all that was 
 mortal, earthly and corrupt about him should be absorbed in 
 the life of God, that divine and eternal life arising from the 
 beatific vision of God, and consisting in perfect knowledge, 
 holiness and blessedness. 
 
 5. Now, he that hath wrought us for the selfsame 
 
 thing (is) God, who also hath given unto us the earnest 
 
 of the Spirit. 
 
 6 
 
120 II. CORINTHIANS 5, 6. 
 
 It was sometliing very heroic and grand for a poor, perse- 
 cuted man to stand thus erect in the presence of his enemies 
 and in the immediate prospect of death, and avow such supe- 
 riority to all suifering, and such confidence of a glorious im- 
 mortality. The apostle, therefore, adds that neither the 
 elevated feelings which he expressed, nor his preparation for 
 the exalted state of existence which he so confidently expect- 
 ed, was due to himself. He, icho hath wrought us for the 
 selfsame thing is God. The w^ords ets auro rovro^ to this very 
 thing., naturally refers to what immediately precedes, the 
 being clothed upon so that mortality should be swallowed up 
 of life. For this elevated destiny God had prepared him ; 
 not created him, but (6 Karepyao-a/^ievos) made him fit by giving 
 the requisite qualifications. He was, as a believer, looking 
 forward with joyful expectation to his home in heaven, the 
 workmanship of God. Who also hath given unto us the 
 earnest of the /Sjm'it. God had not only prepared him for 
 future glory, but had given him the assurance of a blessed 
 immortality, of which the indwelling of the Holy Ghost 
 was the earnest, i. e. a foretaste and pledge. 1, 22. Eph. 1, 
 13. 14. Rom. 5, 5. 8, 10. Accordhig to the view given 
 above of the context, the object of the apostle's desire Avas 
 not the resurrection, nor the change which the living be- 
 liever is to experience at Christ's coming, but the state of 
 glory immediately subsequent to death. It is therefore of 
 that the Holy Spirit is here declared to be the earnest. Else- 
 where, as in Rom. 8, 11, the indwelling of the Spirit is repre- 
 sented as the pledge of the future life of the body, because he 
 is the source of that life which the believer derives from 
 Christ, and which pertains to the body as well as to the soul. 
 Comp. 1 Cor. 6, 1 9. All therefore in whom the Spirit dwells, 
 i. e. manifests his i:)ermanent presence by producing within 
 them the Christian graces, have the pledge of immediate ad- 
 mission into heaven when they die, and of a glorious resurrec- 
 tion when the Lord comes. 
 
 G. Therefore (we are) always confident, knowing 
 that, whilst we are at home in the body, we arc absent 
 from the Lord. 
 
 The grammjatical construction in this and the following 
 verse, 8, is interrupted and irregular, which our translators 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 5, 7. 121 
 
 liave helped out by inserting the words ice are^ thus turning 
 the i3artieiple ^appowre? into a verb. The unfinished sentence 
 in y. 6 is resumed and completed in v. 8. Omitting the words 
 of resumption in \. 8, the whole sentence stands thus : " Being 
 confident and knowing that whilst at home in the body, we 
 are absent from the Lord, we are desirous (eL-SoKov/aev) rather 
 to be absent from the body and present with the Lord." This 
 verse is introduced as a consequence of what precedes. ' Hav- 
 ing the earnest of the Spirit, therefore we are confident.' 
 This confidence is not a mere temporary feeling due to some 
 transient excitement ; but a permanent state of mind. Being 
 always^ Travrorc, on all occasions and under all circumstances, 
 even in the midst of dangers and discouragements which, were 
 it not for divine support, would produce despair. The ground 
 of the boldness and confidence expressed by the word Sappovv- 
 res is not any thing in the believer ; it is not his natural 
 courage, not the strength of his convictions ; but it is a state 
 of mind produced by the indwelling of the Spirit, and the 
 natural consequence of his presence. JBebig confident and 
 knowing ; both these particles are grammatically constructed 
 with the verb ice are willing^ ^vhoKovjx^v^ in v. 8, and together 
 express the ground of the apostle's desire to be absent from 
 the body. Knowing that^ ichilst tee are at home in the hodg^ 
 we are ahsent from the Lord. The words ivS-qjxeo), to be at 
 home (literally, among one's people), and cKSv^/xeco are opposed 
 to each other. The figure is slightly changed from that used 
 in the preceding verses. There it was a house, here a city, at 
 least ^rjfxos, people, naturally sucygests that idea. Comp. Phil. 
 3,20. Heb. 11, 13. 13, 14. 
 
 7. (For we walk by faith, not by sight.) 
 
 This is a passing, parenthetical remark, intended as a con- 
 firmation of the preceding declaration. ' We are absent from 
 the Lord, for we now, in this life, walk by faith.' The passage 
 is parallel to Rom. 8, 24, "We are saved by hope (or in hope, 
 i. e. in prospect)." Salvation is not a present, but a future 
 good. ,So here, presence with the Lord is now a matter of 
 faith, not of fruition. The condition of our present state of 
 being is that of believing. The faith which is the evidence of 
 things not seen and the substance (or assurance) of things 
 hoped for, is the element in which we live, so long as we are 
 not present with those things. Being the objects of faith they 
 
122 II. CORINTIIIAIsrS 5, 8. 
 
 are of course absent. The prei^osition, 8ia, may have its ordi- 
 nary force, " We walk hy means of faith ; " it is by faith we 
 regulate our walk through life. Or it may be used here as in 
 Rom. 8, 25. Heb. 12, 1, and elsewhere, to mark the attending 
 circumstances, "we wait icith patience," "let us run with 
 patience," "we walk with faith." A^id not hy sight. The 
 word €tSo5 does not mean the sense of sight, but the thing 
 seen, form, appearance, that which is the object of sight. In 
 Luke 3, 22, the Spirit is said to have descended o-wjaariKw ctSct, 
 in a hoclily shai:>e ; in 9, 29 it is said of our Lord that the 
 €t8os tot) Trpoo-wTTov O-VTOV^ tlic fttsMou of his face was changed ; 
 and in John 5, 37- our Lord tells the Jews, speaking of the 
 Father, "Ye have never heard his voice or seen his (etSos) 
 shape." If tliis, the proper signification of the word, be re- 
 tained, then Ci^o% is the object of faith, the form and fashion 
 of the tilings believed. Loco rei verho acqidescimus^ as 
 Calvin expresses it. "VVe are conversant with the report of 
 heavenly things, not with the things themselves. We are 
 absent, not present with them. In this case 8ta means with. 
 ' We are not surrounded with the forms of things in heaven.' 
 It is no objection to this interpretation that the preposition 
 8ta has a diiferent force given to it in the second clause, from 
 that commonly given to it in the first clause of the verse. 
 'We walk hy faith, and not icith^ or in presence o/the objects 
 of our faith.' This change in the force of the same preposi- 
 tion in the same sentence is not unusual. See Heb. 9, 11. 12. 
 10, 20. The majority of commentators, however, depart from 
 the proper signification of the word cISos and take it in the 
 sense of oi//ts, because this agrees best with the antithesis to 
 TTto-Tts {faitJi) and with the force of the preposition. " We 
 walk by faith, not by sight ; " we believe, but do not see 
 things which govern our life. This, no doubt, is the idea 
 which the apostle intended, although not precisely the form 
 in which he has expressed it. 
 
 8. We are confident, (I say,) and willing rather to 
 be absent from the body, and to be present with the 
 Lord. 
 
 The sentence begun and left incomplete in v. G is here 
 resumed and carried out. ©ap/joG/xcr Se, we are of good courage. 
 The particle hi may either serve to indicate the resumption of 
 what he had begun to say in v. 0, or be taken adversativcly in 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 5, 9. 123 
 
 reference to v. 1. ' We walk by faith, not by sight, neverthe- 
 less we are not discouraged.' We are not only not despond- 
 ing, but are so confident as to j^refer to be absent from the 
 body. Death is not an object of dread, but of desire. That 
 the phrase " to be absent from the body " means to die is evi- 
 dent, not only from the import of the expression and from 
 the parallel passage in Phil;JLL23, but also from the whole 
 context, which treats of the apostle's experience in view of 
 death. He was surrounded by dangers; he could scarcely 
 bear up imder the load of his sufferings ; he was every day 
 exposed to a violent death, vrhich he had escaped hitherto 
 only, as it were, by miracle ; still he was not cast do^^m. He 
 sustained his courage, and even desired to die. There can be 
 no doubt that this verse is parallel with v. 4, wliere the apostle 
 saj^s he desired to be clothed upon, i, e. with his house Avhich 
 is from heaven. The object of desire is the same in both. 
 It is also plain that in this verse it is absence from the body 
 and presence with the Lord, not the being changed from cor- 
 ruptible to incorruptible without dying, that he earnestly 
 longed for ; and therefore this Axrse shows that the subject 
 treated of in the context is the change which the believer 
 experiences at death, and not that which those who are alive 
 shall experience at Christ's second coming. The words ckSt;- 
 /xew and evS7^/xe(o, here used as in v. 6, are best rendered ' from 
 home ' and ' at home.' ' We would be from home as to the 
 body, and at home with the Lord.' The Lord is of course 
 Christ, the supreme Lord, who in virtue of the fulness of the 
 Godhead is the rightful sovereign and possessor of the uni- 
 verse, and in virtue of his d}ing for the redemption of his 
 people, in a peculiar sense the sovereign and possessor of be- 
 lievers. The Christian's heaven is to be with Christ, for we 
 shall be like him when we see him as he is. Into his presence 
 the believer passes as soon as he is absent from the body, and 
 into his likeness the soul is at death immediately transformed ; 
 and when at the resurrection, the body is made like unto his 
 glorious body, the work of redemption is consummated. 
 Awaiting this consummation, it is an inestimable blessing to 
 be assured that behevers, as soon as they are absent from the 
 body, are present with the Loed. 
 
 9. Wherefore we labour, that, whether present or 
 absent, we may be accepted of him. 
 
124 II. CORINTHIANS 5, 10. 
 
 Wherefore^ Scb kul, wherefore also, i. e. because we desire to 
 be with the Lord. Longing after communion with him pro- 
 duces the desire and secures the effort to be found acceptable 
 to him. Those who have this hope purify themselves as he is 
 pure. 1 John 3, 3. It is impossible that those who regard the 
 presence of Christ, or being w^ith him, as heaven, should not 
 desire and labour to be j^leasing to him, by living in obedience 
 to his commandments. We labour. The word </)iXoTi/xctor.^at 
 means more than to labour. It signifies literally, to love hon- 
 our, to be ambitious ; and then to make any thing a point of 
 honour, or to set one's honour in doing or attaining something. 
 So Paul says, he made it a point of honour not to build on 
 another man's foundation. Rom. 15, 20. And here he intends 
 to say that as ambitious men desire and strive after fame, so 
 Christians long and labour to be acceptable to Christ. Love 
 to him, the desire to please him, and to be pleasing to him, 
 animates their hearts and governs their lives, and makes them 
 do and suffer what heroes do for glory. Whether present or 
 absent. These words may be variously explained. 1. The 
 sense may be, ' Whether 23resent in the body, or absent from 
 the body,'' i. e. whether living or dying. Comp. Rom. 14, 8, 
 " Whether we live, we live unto the Lord ; or whether we 
 die, we die unto the Lord." 1 Thess, 5, 10, "Whether we 
 wake or sleep, we live together with him." The connection 
 is then either with ^iXoTt/xot'/xe^a, ' we strive whether in the 
 body or out of the body; i. e. the desire in question is active 
 as well in the living as the dead ; ' or, as is better, with cwpecr- 
 Toi dvai, ' we strive to be accej^table whether in the body or 
 absent from it.' 2. The sense may be, ' Whether present loith 
 the Lord, or absent from the Lord.'' This is only expressing 
 the same idea in a different form. Whether living or dead, 
 as in Rom. 14, 8. 3. Meyer takes the words literally, 
 'Whether at home or abroad.' But this is utterly incon- 
 sistent with the context. The objection to the first interpre- 
 tation, that the desire to be acceptable to the Lord when 
 actually saved, must cease, inasmuch as the object is attained, 
 is of no force. The thing desired, to ^-qrovfjiivov, as Chrysostom 
 says, is that we may be pleasing to Christ whether here or 
 there, whether in this world or the next. 
 
 10. For we iirast all appear before the judgment- 
 seat of Clirist ; that every one may receive the things 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 5, 10. 125 
 
 (done) in (liis) body, according to tliat he hath done, 
 whether (it be) good or bad. 
 
 In what precedes Paul had been speaking of himself. It 
 was his own sufferings, hopes, and efforts which the occasion 
 called upon him to exhibit. In all this, however, he spoke as 
 a Christian, and therefore in the name of other Christians. 
 In this verse he exj^ressly comprehends others, and all others. 
 ' I strive to be acceptable to the Lord, for we must all (I as 
 well as all behevers, and even all men) must, c%c.' As Christ 
 is to decide upon our eternal destiny, it is of infinite moment 
 that we should be acceptable, or well-pleasing, in his sight. 
 We 'must all appear^ cjiavepw&rjvai. This means either nothing 
 more than a judicial appearance, as when any one is said to 
 appear in court before a judge; or, as Bengel explains it, 
 manifestos fieri cum occultis nostris, ' we must all stand re- 
 vealed in our true character before the judgment-seat of 
 Christ.' 1 Cor. 4, 5. Col. 3, 4. As there can be no disguise, 
 no deception before an omniscient judge, Paul was assiduous 
 in his efforts to be prepared to stand the scrutiny of an all- 
 seeing eye. The judgment-^eat of CJirist ; l^w^^ literally, 
 stej), then a raised platform, or seat ; most frequently used of 
 the elevated seat on which the Roman magistrates sat to ad- 
 minister justice, an object of reverence and fear to all the 
 people. As Christ is to be the judge, as all men are to appear 
 before him, as the secrets of the heart are to be the grounds 
 of judgment, it is obvious that the sacred writers beheved 
 Christ to be a di"VT.ne person, for nothing less than omniscience 
 could qualify any one for the office here ascribed to our Lord. 
 That evei'^Qiie may receive^ Koixi^tM^ A\hich in the active form 
 means to take up^ in the middle, as here, to take for one's self 
 properly to take or receive what is one's due, or what on 
 some ground one is entitled to. Matt. 25, 27. Col. 3, 25. 
 2 Pet. 2, 13. The punishment which men are to receive will 
 be what they have jearned, and therefore what is in justice due 
 to them. HDhg^xeward of the righteous, although a matter of 
 grace and not of justice, yet being, agreeably to the tenor of 
 the covenant of grace, according to their works, it is of the 
 nature of. a reward. The pay of a faithful soldier is a matter 
 of debt, titles and estates are matters of favour. ' There is no 
 inconsistency, therefore, in the Scrij^tures denying all merit to 
 believers, and yet teaching that they shall be rewarded ac- 
 cording to their works. We are said to receive the tilings 
 
126 II. CORINTHIANS 5, 10. 
 
 do7ie 171 the hochj^ because the matter is conceived of, or is 
 here represented as an investment. - Our acts are treasures 
 laid up for the future, whether treasures of wrath,^or treasures 
 in heaven ; and these (Ko/xt^oyae^a) ice receive hack. ) "i^he words 
 TO. 8ta, Tov o-w/xaros may mean tilings (done) through or hy the 
 body. Then bodily acts are taken for acts of all kinds. Com- 
 pare Rom. 8, 13. Or the 8ta may be taken as in v. 7, (accord- 
 ing to one interpretation of that verse,) as indicating the at- 
 tending circumstance — loith the body, i. e. while clothed with 
 the body. This is the sense expressed in our version, which 
 renders the clause "things (done) in the body," although 8ta 
 of course does not mean m. According to that he hath done^ 
 TTpos a cTrpa^ei/, indicating the rule according to which the 
 retributions of the final judgments are to be administered. 
 Both Avith regard to the wicked and the righteous, there is to 
 be a great distinction in the recompense, which difi:erent mem- 
 bers of each class are to receive! Some will be beaten with 
 few stripes, and some with many. It will be more tolerable 
 in that day for Tyre and Sidon than for those who reject the 
 gospel; and on the other hand, those believers who suffer 
 most, will love most and be most blessed. Whether good or 
 evil^ i. e. whether he did good or evil. Each shall receive 
 according to his deeds whether good or bad. -(It is from such 
 passages as this that some American theologians have inferred 
 that the only benefit which the beUever receives from Christ 
 is the forgiveness of sin, and that being pardoned he is dealt 
 with according to the principles of justice. Others, especially 
 in Germany, have drawn from the same source the conclusion 
 that the doctrine of Paul is that the merit of Christ cleanses 
 only from the sins committed before conversion. ~> If a Jew or 
 Gentile became a Christian his sins were blotted out, and then 
 he was rewarded or punished, saved or lost, according to his 
 works. The merit of Christ availed nothing for the pardon 
 of sin after conversion. And this again is very much the 
 ancient doctrine that there is no forgiveness for post-baptismal 
 sins. The benefits of Christ's work, according to many of the 
 ancients, are conveyed to the soul in baptism, but if once for- 
 feited by sin can never be reapplied. This gloomy doctrine, 
 which belonged to the transition period which preceded the 
 full development of the theology of the Papal church, hasrbeen 
 revived by the inchoate Romanists of the present clay. \ But 
 according to the Scriptures and the doctrine of all Protestant 
 churches, the blood of Jesus Christ cleanses from all sin, 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 5, 10. 127 
 
 whether committed before or after baptism or conversion.; 
 It is a fountain, to which we may clailj come for cleansing. 
 He is a"'j5riest whomever lives to ~ma"E:e intercession for us, and 
 who ever presents before God the merit of his sacrifice as a 
 perpetual offering, typified by the morning and evening sacri- 
 fice under the law. .According to the anti-scriptural views 
 mentioned above, when a man first comes to Christ his sins 
 are forgiven, and he then commences anew under the cove- 
 nant of works, and stands in the same relation to God that 
 Adam did before the fall. The condition of salvation is to 
 him as it was to our first parent^ " Do this and live." Christ 
 henceforth profits him nothing. / Bh^ according to the apostle 
 we are not under the law, but under grace. Rom. 6, 14. /"On 
 the ground of the one oftering of Christ, by which those who 
 believe are forever sanctified, (i. e. atoned for,) God does not 
 impute to the j^enitent believer his sins unto condemnation./ 
 He is not judged by the law or treated according to its prin- 
 ciples, for then no man could be saved. But he is treated as 
 one for all whose sins, past, present, and future, an infinite 
 satisfaction has been made, and who has a perpetual claim to 
 that satisfaction so long as he is united to Christ by fiiith and 
 the indwelling of his Spirit. Hence the Scriptures are filled 
 with exhortations not merely to the unconverted, to Jews and 
 Pagans, but to baptized Christians, to repent of sin and to 
 beheve in the Lord Jesus Christ ; that is, to exercise trust in 
 the merit of his sacrifice and the prevalence of his intercession 
 for the pardon of their daily and manifold transgressions and 
 shortcomings. The sacrifice of Christ avails for the sins com- 
 mitted from the foundation of the world to the final consum- 
 mation. It aifords a permanent and all-sufiicient reason why 
 God can be just and yet justify the ungodly. 
 
 Paul's defence of himself against the charge of self com- 
 mendation. Vs. 11-21, 
 
 He declares that he acted under a solemn sense of his 
 responsibility to God, v. 11. This was not said with the view 
 of commending himself; but rather to aftbrd them the means 
 of vindicating his character, v. 12. Whether his way of 
 speaking of himself was extravagant or moderate, sane or in- 
 sane, his motive in doing as he did was a sincere regard to 
 the glory of God and the good of his church, v. 13. For the 
 love of Christ constrained him to live, not for himself, but for 
 6* 
 
128 II. CORINTHIANS 5, 11. 
 
 him who died for him and rose again, vs, 14. 15. Acting un- 
 der the control of this elevated principle, he was raised above 
 the inllucnce of external things. He did not judge of men by 
 their external condition. He was a new creature in virtue of 
 his union with Christ, vs. 16. 17. This great change which he 
 had experienced was not self- wrought ; it was of God, who is 
 the author of the whole scheme of redemption. He is recon- 
 ciled unto the world through Jesus Christ, and he has com- 
 missioned his ministers to proclaim this great truth to all 
 men, vs. 18. 19. Therefore, th*2 apostle, as an ambassador of 
 God, exhorted men to accept of this ofler of reconciUation, for 
 which the most abundant provision had been made, in that 
 God had made Christ to be sin for us, in order that we might 
 be made the righteousness of God in him, vs. 20. 21. 
 
 11. Knowing therefore the terror of the Lord, we 
 persuade men; but we are made manifest unto God; 
 and I trust also are made manifest in your consciences. 
 
 This verse is an inference from what precedes, as is indi- 
 cated by the particle [om) therefore. Paul had asserted his 
 earnest desire to be acceptable to the Lord, and, therefore, 
 Jcnowiiig the terror of the Lord., &c. In this version of the 
 clause, rov 4>6Bov tov Kvptov^ the genitive is taken as the geni- 
 tive of the subject. It is the terror which belongs to the 
 Lord. 'Knowing how terrible the Lord is.' But this is 
 contrary to the constant use of the phrase. The fear of the 
 Lord is that fear or reverence which tlie Lord excites, or of 
 which he is the object. Hence it so often stands in Scripture 
 for true religion. "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of 
 wisdom." So in Acts 9,31, "Walking in the fear of the 
 Lord." Rom. 3, 18, "The fear of God is not before their 
 eyes ; " and in 7, 1 of this epistle, " perfecting holiness in the 
 fear of God." See also Eph. 5, 21, "Submitting yourselves 
 one to another in the fear of Christ." In all these cases 
 (<f>6(3o<:) fear means j^ious reverence. There is no reason for 
 departing from that sense in this place. Knowing, i. e. feel- 
 ing or experiencing, the pious reverence for Christ, the ear- 
 nest desire to meet his approbation, asserted in the context, 
 the apostle acted under tlie influence of that sentiment, and 
 not from selfish or unworthy motives, in all his conduct as a 
 man and as a minister. As the expression " fear of the Lord " 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 5, 11. 129 
 
 is so uniformly used to express that reverence and submission 
 which are due only to God, it is clear from this and analogous 
 passages that Christ was to the apostles the object of the 
 religious affections; and that they felt themselves to be re- 
 sponsible to him for their moral character and conduct. The 
 evidence of the divinity of the Lord is thus seen to pervade 
 the New Testament, and is not confined to a few isolated 
 passages. Influenced, says the apostle, by the fear of the 
 Lord, I persuade men. What this means is somewhat doubt- 
 ful. The word 7^€t^^etv expresses the endeavour to convince, 
 as in Acts 18, 4, "He persuaded the Jews," i. e. endeavoured 
 to convince them of the truth, and in Acts 28, 23, "Persuad- 
 ing them concerning Jesus." The apostle therefore may here 
 mean that he endeavoured to convince men of the truth of 
 the gospel, i. e. to convert them, or bring them to the obedi- 
 ence of faith. Or, he may mean that he endeavoured to con- 
 vince them of his mtegrity, or that he was really governed by 
 the fear of Christ, and was therefore sincere and honest, which 
 hi Corinth had been so unjustly called in question. This latter 
 explanation is generally preferred, both because it suits the 
 context, and because the following clause seems to require 
 this idea. ' We seek to convince men of our integrity, but 
 God we need not convince, to him our inmost soul is manifest.' 
 The word (Trct^eci/), however, also signifies to conciliate^ to seek 
 to please, as in Gal. 1, 10, "Do we persuade (i. e. seek to 
 please) men, or God." Matt. 28, 14. Acts 12, 20. 1 John 3, 
 19. Many prefer that sense here. Luther, in his idiomatic 
 style, renders the clause, fahren icir schon niit den Leuten, 
 The apostle is supposed to refer to the fact that he accommo- 
 dated himself to all classes, and became all things to all men, 
 that he might save some. 1 Cor. 9, 22. Though he thus acted 
 still he was manifest unto God ; i. e. God knew the purity of 
 his motives. This, however, is an idea foreign to the connec- 
 tion. His accommodating himself to others was not the spe- 
 cific objection made against him by his enemies in Corinth, 
 but, as appears from the previous chapters, his " lightness " 
 or instabihty of purpose, and his consequent untrustworthiness 
 as a man and as a teacher. Others again, take Tret^etv in a bad 
 sense. 'We deceive men, (as our enemies say,) but are mani- 
 fest to God.' But this is utterly incongruous. How could 
 Paul say in such a solemn connection, ' I deceive men,' and 
 leave the saving clause, as my enemies say^ to be supplied by 
 the reader. The most natm-al interpretation is that given 
 
130 II. CORINTHIANS 5, 12. 
 
 above. ' Under the influence of the fear of the Lord, we en- 
 deavour to convince men, i. e. as he had said in 4, 2, to com- 
 mend himself to every man's conscience, and whether success- 
 ful in this or not he was at least known to God.' Made 
 manifest u7ito God^ i. e. to God I am (c^avepo?) apparent^ my 
 true character is known. And I trust also are made manifest 
 in your conscience. Although misunderstood and defamed 
 by others, he trusted that the Corinthian Christians as a body 
 had an inward conviction of his integrity. The evidence of 
 his sincerity was his moral excellence, and therefore it ad- 
 dressed itself to their consciences. There may be many re- 
 ports against a good man which we cannot contradict ; many 
 charges which we cannot refute ; and yet the self-evidencing 
 light of goodness will produce the conviction of his integrity 
 in the consciences even of wicked men, and much more in the 
 hearts of the good. 
 
 12. Por we commend not om'selves again mi to 
 you, but give you occasion to glory on our behalf, that 
 ye may have somewhat to (answer) them which glory 
 in appearance, and not in heart. 
 
 His object in thus speaking of himself was not self-praise, 
 nor to secure the confidence of the Corinthians, w^hich he al- 
 ready possessed ; but to give them materials for a vindication 
 of his character against the aspersions of his enemies. The 
 connection, as indicated by /or, is with the preceding verse, 
 of which this is a confirmation. ' I am assured of your confi- 
 dence, for the object of my self-commendation is not to re- 
 commend myself to you, but, &c.' In chapter 3, 1, Paul had 
 had occasion to repel the charge of self-laudation, and hence 
 he says, he was not about to commend himself again^ as some 
 said he had before done. Mut give you^ literally, giving 
 (8i8ovTes), and therefore a verb must be supplied, ' Giving you 
 occasion loe say these things? An occasion of glorying in 
 our behalf a(^op/>t^i/ KavxyfJ-o.TO'; ; KavxqfJia being taken in the 
 sense of Kavxncns. On our behalf virlp ry/xoiv, not simply over 
 us, or about us, but for our benefit. That is, for our vindica- 
 tion. Some commentators suppose that there is somethhig 
 ironical in this whole passage. As though the apostle de- 
 signed to taunt the Corinthians witli their readiness to listen 
 to the false representations of his opponents, and with the 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 5, 13. 131 
 
 plea that they needed not the disposition, but the ability to 
 defend him. This view, however, is inconsistent with the 
 connection and with the whole drift of the epistle. In the 
 immediately preceding verse he had expressed his assurance 
 of their confidence in his integrity, and throughout the epistle 
 his overflowing love for the faithful in Cormth is mingled with 
 his severe denunciations of the false teachers and their follow- 
 ers. That ye may have. There is no object expressed to the 
 verb («x^T6), ye may have. We may supply (tc) something^ 
 and insert the words to answer^ as is done by our translators; 
 or we may borrow from the context the word Kavxrjfxa ; " That 
 ye may have some groioid of boasting.'^'* Against those loho 
 glory in appearance and not in heart. This is evidently de- 
 scriptive of the false teachers. The words Iv Trpoo-coTro), inface^ 
 may, from the antithesis to cv KapUa^ in heart., be taken, as in 
 our version, for what is external as opposed to what is inward. 
 Then the expression refers to the tact that those teachers 
 gloried in their Hebrew descent, in their circumcision, their 
 external religious privileges, their churchmanship, &c. It 
 was in these things they placed their confidence, and of them 
 they made their boast. Or the words may be taken literally, 
 and according to their uniform use in other passages. Then 
 the expression describes the sanctimoniousness and hypocrisy 
 of the false teachers. They gloried, says Meyer, in the holi- 
 ness, the zeal, and devotion which expressed themselves in the 
 face. They wished to appear unto men to fast, to wear the 
 look of sanctity, while their hearts, as our Lord describes the 
 same class of men, were full of all uncleanness. The former 
 explanation is commonly adopted, and is probably the true 
 one, because regard for externals is elsewhere in this epistle 
 represented as the prominent characteristic of Paul's oppo- 
 nents in Corinth. Their great boast was that they belonged 
 to the true church or theocracy, and that Paul and his follow- 
 ers were dissenters and schismatics. 
 
 13. For whether we be beside ourselves, (it is) to 
 God : or whether we be sober, (it is) for your cause. 
 
 This verse again is a confirmation of the preceding. 'You 
 have good reason to glory on my behalf, /or, &c.' Whether 
 we he beside ourselves. The word iico-rrjfxi, to be out of o?ie''s 
 mind, and other words of like signification, are used either in 
 their strict sense to express insanity or madness, or in a wider 
 
132 II. CORINTHIANS 5, 14. 
 
 sense, to express undue excitement or extravaGjance. When 
 Festns, Acts 26, 24, said to the apostle, " Paul, thou art beside 
 thyself; much learning doth make thee mad," he did not 
 mean that he was really insane. And when our Lord's zeal 
 provoked his friends to say of him, "He is beside himself," 
 Mark 3, 21, they certainly did not intend to charge him with 
 insanity. There is therefore no necessity for taking the word 
 here in its strict sense, and assuming that Paul's enemies had 
 accused him of being out of his mind. It is the more natural 
 to take the word in a wider sense here, because the opposite 
 term, aaxfypovew, (to be soher^ or scme^) and its cognates, are 
 much more frequently used to express moderation and discre- 
 tion than sanity in the strict sense of that word. The apostle 
 means to say that whether he was extravagant or moderate, 
 whether he exceeded the bounds of discretion, as his enemies 
 asserted, or whether he was sober and discreet, it was not for 
 himself; he had in view only the glory of God and the good 
 of his church, and therefore the Corinthians niight safely 
 boast of him, i. e. vindicate him from the aspersions of the 
 false teachers. Whether the extravagance or insanity here 
 referred to, consisted in his sell-commendation, or in his zeal 
 and devotion, is matter of dispute. The former is the more 
 probable, both because in the immediate context he had been 
 speaking of that subject, and because in chai)ters 11 and 12 
 he speaks so much at large of his commending himself, al- 
 though forced upon him, as a kind of folly or insanity. In 
 those chapters the acjipoavvT]^ (the icant of mhul.) of which he 
 accuses himself, was selt-praise ; and the a(D(f>poavvr] [sobemess 
 or sanity) which he desired to exhibit was moderation in 
 speaking of himself and of his labours. Paul, therefore, in 
 this passage, is most naturally understood to mean, that 
 whether he praised himself or whether he did not, whether 
 the manner in which he had spoken of himself be considered 
 as acfipoa-vvr] or aiixfipoavvr], as insanity or sobriety, he spoke not 
 for himself, but for God and his people. 
 
 14. For the love of Christ constrameth us; be- 
 cause we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were 
 all dead. 
 
 ' In whatever I do,' says the apostle, ' I act for God and 
 his church, for the love of Christ constraineth me.' The con- 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 5, 14. 133 
 
 nection is thus plain. The love of Christ here means Christ's 
 love for us, not the love of which he is tlie object. This is 
 obvious, because the apostle goes on to illustrate the great- 
 ness of Christ's love to us, and not of our love to him. Com}). 
 Gal. 2, 20, -where the same idea is expressed by the words 
 " who loved me." See Rom. 8, 35. Eph. 3, 19. Constraineth 
 lis, i. e. controls and governs us. The word (rvvexo) means also 
 to restrain, a sense which many adopt here. 'The love of 
 Christ restrains me from acting for myself' This is a more 
 limited sense, and is not required by the usage of the word, 
 whi(.h is often used to express the idea of being pressed as by a 
 crowd, or figuratively, by calamity or sorrow. There is no 
 better version for it in this passage than that adopted by our 
 translators. ' The love of Christ constraineth us.' It coerces, 
 or presses, and therefore impels. It is the governing influ- 
 ence which controls the life. This is a trait of Paul's experi- 
 ence as a Christian, and is therefore common to all Christians. 
 It is not benevolence which makes a man a Christian, for then 
 all philanthropists would be Christians. Nor is it mere piety, 
 in the sense of reverence for God, which makes a man a 
 Christian, for then all devout Mussulmans and Jews would be 
 Christians. Morality does not make us religious, but religion 
 makes us moral. In hke manner benevolence and piety (in 
 the wide sense) do not make men Christians, but Christianity 
 makes them benevolent and devout. A Christian is one who 
 recognizes Jesus as the Christ, the Son of the living God, as 
 God manifested in the flesh, loving us and dying for our re- 
 demption ; and who is so afl'ected by a sense of the love of 
 this incarnate God as to be constrained to make the will of 
 Christ the rule of his obedience, and the glory of Christ the 
 great end for \\iiich he lives. The man who does this per- 
 fectly, is a perfect Christian. The man who does it imper- 
 fectly, yet with the sincere desire to be entirely devoted to 
 Christ, is a sincere Christian. On the other hand, the man 
 who lives supremely for himself, for his family, for science, for 
 the world, for mankind, whatever else he may be, is not a 
 Christian. Whosoever loveth father or mother, son or 
 daughter, more than me, saith our Lord, is not worthy of 
 me. Matt. 10, 37. He that hateth not his own life, cannot be 
 my disciple, Luke 14, 26. The great question is, What con- 
 stitutes a Christian? It is being so constrained by a sense of 
 the love of our divine Lord to us, that we consecrate our 
 lives to him. Hence faith in his divhiity, faith in his love. 
 
134 II. COUINTIIIANS 5, 14. 
 
 fjiitlj in lilrt li.'ivin.f^ died for ns, is the principle or source of ilio 
 (christian life. And this is the only form in wliich true re- 
 liujion cnn now exist. Thjit is, the only tnie relit^ion now 
 ])<)ssil)le is the worship, love, und service of the Lord .Jesus 
 Christ. It is inij)ossible i'or ;i ni;in to turti his l).'i(tk on Christ 
 and worshij) the (iod of n:iture or the (Jod of the Jews. 
 Should :i ni.'ui rcive.'il himself to us iirst jis jm acqu:iint;mce, 
 then :is ji fi-i(Mid, and then as a iiither, iilial reverence and de- 
 votion would l)e the only form in Avhich sincere and true 
 regard for him could (ixist. To deny him as father, would be 
 to reject him as a frien<l and ac(|uaintaiice. Since, therefore, 
 the same God wlio reveah'd himself first in nature, and then 
 as the Jehovah of the Hebrews, lias nn'ealed himself in the 
 ilesh, loving us and <lyin_<i; i'or our redemption, to deny him in 
 this the cleiirest revelation of his l)eing and perfection, is to 
 (l(;ny ]\\\n altogether. " Whoso denieth the Son, the same 
 Iiath not the T ather," 1 John 2, 23. It is the practical or ex- 
 j)erimental iorm of this great truth, which is presented in this 
 2)assMge. 
 
 JicA'anae 'tne thits pfdge. This clause assigns the reason 
 why the love of (/hrist exerted the constraining power re- 
 ferred to. It was because the aposth; judged that the death 
 of C/lirist tor his peoi)le not only place(( tlu^m under the 
 strongest ()l)ligation to devote themselves to his service, but 
 it secured this devotion, ^fhey died in him. Jiom. 0, 4. 5. 
 As t lu^ ])articii)l(^ [KpLuavra^) is in the aorist, it would be more 
 sli-ictly reiuleied, hcnrKse v^c puhjed. That is, *I live for 
 ('lirist, because when I became a (Miristiim I regarded his 
 dying for me as involving the obligation and necessity of my 
 living for him.' This Avas the as])ect under which he em- 
 braced C'hi-istianity ; the judgment which he formed of it 
 from the beginning. That if one died for all. The contrast 
 ])resented, esix'cially in the epistle to tlie Hebrews, between 
 th(^ priest and sacriHces of th(^ old economy on the one hand, 
 and the high ])riest and sacriilce of the gospel on the other, 
 is that those were many, these are one. The ancient priests 
 could not continue by reason of death. Our high ])riest, be- 
 ing a divine i)erson, and therefore^ ])ossessed of an endless life, 
 ever lives to save. The sacrilices of the law were daily re- 
 j>eated, because it was impossible that tlu^y should take away 
 sin; Christ by the ollering up of himself hatii forever perfect- 
 ed them that are sanctillcMl. Jlis blood cleanses from all sin. 
 The a})ostle here ])resents him as the one priest and the one 
 
II. COUINTIIIANS 5, 14. 135 
 
 sficrifico. Died for (ill. Tlio words jircj v-n^^ TravTow. '^Plio 
 pro))()!sili()n v7rc/>, iiiMy lirivo the gtiiuM-jiI Ho.uHi\/or the IjcncjU 
 of\ in, heli(tlf <>/\ or tlu; stricter sense, in the pliiee oJ\ .'is in v. 
 20 of'tliis (;}»:ij)t(!r. ]*liilem. 113. Ki)]i. 0, 20. In many places 
 the choice between these senses depends on the context. h\ 
 all those ])assatrc's in which one person is said to die for an- 
 other, as Jtoin. 5, G. 7. 8. 14,15. iThess. 5, 10. Heb. 2, 9. 
 Comp. Luke 22, 19. 1 Tim. 2, fl. Titus 2, 14. cfec, t^c, or in 
 wliich the reference is to a sacrifice, the idea of substitution is 
 clearly expressed. The arjijument does not rest on the force 
 of the ])rej)osition, but on the nature of tlu; (;ase. The only 
 way in which the death of tlu; victim benefited the offci-er, 
 was by substitution. When, tiierc^fore, (Jhrist is said to die 
 as a sacrifice fur us, tlu^ m(!aiiint( is, he dicid in our stead. His 
 death is takcin in th(! j)lM('e of ours so as to save us from death. 
 Tliat tlu; preposition vttc/), in this and similar ])assai^es, does 
 mean instead oj\ is a<lmitted by the great ])o<ly of even Uji- 
 tionalistic conunentators. See ])e Wette, Jliickert, tfec. 
 Christ, it is said, <li<'d for «//, i. e. for all the subjcM'ts of re- 
 demption. This limitation is not an arbitrary one, but aris(!S 
 of necessity out of the nature of the (;ase, and is admitted 
 almost universally. He did not die for all (creatures; nor for 
 all rational creatures; iu)r for all ajjostate rational creatures. 
 The all is of n(fc(!ssity limited by wdiat the Scrii)tures teach 
 of the design of his death. If his death was nujrely didactic, 
 intended to reveal and confirm some truth, then he may be 
 paid to have died for all benefited by that revelation, and 
 therefore for angels as well as www. If designed to make it 
 consistent with the interests of (iod's moral government for 
 him to ])ardon the sins of men, then lie may be said to have 
 died e([ually for all men. J5ut if his death was intendcMl to 
 save his ]>eople, then it had a reference to them whi(;h it had 
 not to others. The true design of tlu; death of Christ is to bo 
 learned from express assertions of Scripture, and irom its 
 effects. It is so obvious that the; death ofCiiiist was designed 
 to save those for whom it was offered, that many of the r(;c(!nt 
 as well as anci(!nt coimnentators justify their explaining wc/; 
 -n-dvT(j)v ;is meaning all men, by attributing to Paul th(; beli(!f 
 that all men are to be saved. This is an admission that the 
 all for whom he died, are the all who are saved by his death. 
 One of its effects is stated in the following (;laus(! ; 77t.c/t 'mere 
 all dead., or, Then all died. The word is uTrcVJai/oi/. It is the 
 same verb, and in the same tense. ' If one died, (a7r€^9a^'CI/,) 
 
136 II. CORINTHIANS 5, 14. 
 
 then all died, (aTre^avoi/).' The word must have the same 
 sense in both clauses. It cannot mean were dead, because 
 that is inconsistent with the force of the aorist. All^ (hteral- 
 ly, the all, oX iravTcs^) i. e. the all for whom the one died. His 
 death involved, or secured their death. This was its design 
 and eifect, and, therefore, this clause limits the extent of the 
 word all in the preceding clause. Christ died for the all who 
 died when he died. The meaning of this expression has, how- 
 ever, been variously explained. 1. It is made to mean, ' Then 
 all died to themselves and sin.' His dying literally, secured 
 their dying figuratively. 2. Others say the true meaning is, 
 ' Then all ought to die.' But this is not included in the words. 
 The aorist does not express obligation. 3. Chrysostom, The- 
 odoret, Beza and others, give the same explanation which is 
 implied in our version, ' If one died for all, then were all sub- 
 ject to death.' That is, the vicarious death of Christ proves 
 that those for whom he died Avere in a state of condemnation. 
 But this suits neither the meaning of the word nor the context. 
 It was not to Paul's purpose to prove that men were in a state 
 of death. It was not what they tcere, but what the death of 
 Christ caused them to become, that he evidently intended to 
 express. 4. The simj)le meaning of the passage is, that the 
 death of one was the death of all. If one died for all, the all 
 died. The Scriptures teach that the relation between Christ 
 and his people is analogous to that between Adam and his 
 posterity. Rom. 5, 12-21. 1 Cor. 15, 21. 22. The apostasy 
 of Adam was the apostasy of all united to him ; the work of 
 Christ Avas the Avork of all united to him. In the one, all 
 died ; in the other, all are made alive. As the sin of Adam 
 Avas legally and etfectively the sin of his race ; so the death 
 of Christ Avas legally and effectively the death of his people. 
 This doctrine underlies the Avhole scheme of redemption. It 
 is, so to speak, the generic idea of the Epistle to the Romans. 
 The apostle shows that man, ruined by the sin of Adam, is 
 restored by the work of Christ. His people are so united to 
 him that his death is their death, and his life is their life. 
 " K Ave be dead AA^th him, Ave shall also live Avith him," Rom. 
 6, 8. Hence believers are said to be crucified Avitli Christ, to 
 rise Avith him, to reign Avith him. Gal. 2, 20. Eph. 2, 5. 6. 
 The simple meaning of the Avords, "If one died for all, then all 
 died," therefore is, that Christ's death Avas the death of his 
 peoi)le. This as Ave have seen is according to the analogy 
 -if Scripture ; and is also entirely pertinent to the design of 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 5, 15. 137 
 
 this passage. The apostle denied that he Hved for himself. 
 He asserts that he lived for God and his people. For, he 
 adds, I died in Christ. This is precisely the argument which 
 he uses in Rom. 6. Shall we continue m sin that grace may 
 abound ? Far from it, he says. How shall they who have 
 died on account of sin live any longer therein ? If united to 
 Christ in his death, we must be united to him in his life. 
 Another consideration in favour of this interpretation is that 
 it comprehends the others. They are objectionable, not be- 
 cause they are erroneous, but because they are defective. 
 Death on account of sin, is death to sin. Dying with Christ, 
 involves death to self and sin ; and of course includes the ob- 
 ligation so to die. The death of Christ reconciles us to God ; 
 and reconciliation to God secures a life of devotion to his ser- 
 vice. This is the doctrine set forth in the Epistle to the 
 Romans, ch. 7. 
 
 15. And (that) he died for all, that they which live 
 should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto 
 him which died for them, and rose again. 
 
 This is a continuation of the preceding sentence, and is 
 designed to express more fully the judgment or conviction 
 (KptVavras) which the apostle had formed of his relation to 
 Christ. He judged that the death of Christ was the death of 
 his people, and that the design with which he died for them 
 was that they might live for him. This idea is expressed in 
 various forms in the word of God. Sometimes our Lord is 
 said to have died, the just for the unjust, to bring us near to 
 God, 1 Pet. 3, 18 ; or, that w^e, being dead to sins, should live 
 unto righteousness, 1 Pet. 2, 26 ; or, to purify to himself a pe- 
 culiar people, zealous of good works, Titus 2, 14. In Rom. 
 14, 9, the mode of statement is exactly parallel to the passage 
 before us. " To this end Christ both died and rose that he 
 might be the Lord both of the dead and living." To say 
 that Christ died that he might be the Lord of his people, is to 
 say that he died that they might be his servants, i. e. belong 
 to him and be devoted to him. The proximate design and 
 effect of the death of Christ is the expiation of sm and recon- 
 ciliation with God, and the design and effect of reconciliation 
 with God are devotion to his service. Hence the death of 
 Christ is sometimes presented in reference to its proximate, 
 
13S II. CORINTHIANS 5, 16. 
 
 sometimes in reference to its ultimate design ; i. e, sometimes 
 he is said to have died to make a propitiation for sin, and 
 sometimes, to bring ns near to God. Here it is the latter. 
 He died that they which live should not henceforth live tmto 
 themselves. " Those who hve," ot C^vrc?, not, those loho sur- 
 vive his death ; nor, those loho are spiritually living ; nor, 
 the happy or blessed^ but, those who, although they died in 
 Christ, are still liying. Their death in him ia not inconsistent 
 with their being alive, for they died in one sense and they 
 live in another. Those lor whom Christ died, and on whom 
 his death takes eifect, thenceforth, i. e. from the time they 
 apprehend their relation to him, and feel the power of his vi- 
 carious death, do 7iot live unto themselves^ i. e. self is not the 
 object for which they live. This is the negative description 
 of the Christian. He is a man who does not live unto himself. 
 This is what he is not. The positive descrij^tion is given in 
 the next clause. He lives for him who died for him and rose 
 agaiii. This presents both the object and the ground of the 
 Christian's devotion. He lives for "him who died for him, and 
 because he died for him. He is not a Christian who is simply 
 unselfish, i. e. who lives for some object out of himself. He 
 only is a Christian who lives for Christ. Many persons think 
 they can be Christians on easier terms than these. They 
 think it is enough to trust in Christ while they do not live for 
 him. But the "Bible teaches us that if we are partakers of 
 Christ's death, we are also partakers of his life ; if we have 
 any such appreciation of his love in dying for us as to lead us 
 to confide in the merit of his death, we shall be constrained to 
 consecrate our lives to his service. And this is the only evi- 
 dence of the genuineness of our faith. And rose again. ^ We 
 do not serve a dead Saviour. The resurrection of Christ is 
 as essential to redemption as his death. He died for our sins 
 and rose again for our justification. And it is to this risen 
 Saviour, seated at the right hand of God, to whom all power 
 in heaven and earth has been committed, and who ever lives 
 to make intercession for us, who is the object of the supreme 
 love of the believer, to whose service and glory the Christian 
 consecrates his life. 
 
 16. Wherefore henceforth know we no man after 
 the flesh : yea, though we have known Christ after the 
 flesh, yet now henceforth know we (him) no more. 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 5, 16. 139 
 
 This is an inference, ((Sore, so (hat). 'Such is the nature 
 of the change which I have exj)erienced through the appre- 
 hension of the love of Christ, as just described, that I no 
 longer see or judge of things according to the flesh.' The ice 
 refers primarily to the apostle himself, as he is still engaged 
 in self-vindication. He was acting from pure motives, he says, 
 for a sense of the love of Christ constrained him not to live for 
 himself but for Christ, and therefore he no longer judged of 
 persons or things as he had been accustomed to do. Paul's ex- 
 perience, however, was his experience as a Christian, and there- 
 fore not peculiar to himself. It is true of all Christians that 
 they do not know (i. e. estimate, judge, feel in reference to) 
 a?iy man according to the flesh. This may mean, that the 
 judgment is not regulated or determined by a regard to 
 what is external. It is not a man's outv/ard circumstances, 
 his birth, his station, his being rich or poor, Jew or Gentile, 
 that determines our estimate of him. Or the meaning may 
 be, that the judgment was not determined by carnal or selfish 
 considerations. Paul was not led to approve or disapprove, 
 love or hate any man from selfish or corrupt motives. This 
 latter view would suit the context, for the apostle, had just 
 said that he lived not for himself but for Christ, and therefore 
 his judgments of men were not determined by a regard to 
 himself. It is also consistent with the usage of the word ; for 
 crap^ means corrupt nature^ as well as what is outward. The 
 following part of the verse, however, is decisivety in favour of 
 the former interpretation. Comp. 11, 18. John 8, 15. Phil. 
 8, 4. Paul evidently contrasts himself as he now was (avro rov 
 vvv) with \^'hat he was before his conversion ; and also himself 
 with his Judaizing opponents in Corinth. Yea^ though ice 
 have hnoimi Christ after the flesh. The words d hi Kat, hut 
 even ifl are concessive. Paul admits that he had once done 
 what he here condemns. He had known or estimated Christ 
 after the flesh. Of course this does not mean that he had 
 known Christ while in the flesh, as Olshausen supposes, be- 
 cause that would be saying nothing to the purpose, and be- 
 cause there is no evidence of Paul's ever having seen our 
 Lord before his resurrection. Olshausen's idea is, that as he 
 formerly regarded men as men, but now only as Christians, 
 i. e. had reference only to what was spiritual, so also he no 
 longer thinks of Christ as he once knew him on earth, but as 
 he is glorified in heaven. But this does not suit the connec- 
 tion nor the facts of the case. The words Kara adpKa must 
 
140 II. CORINTHIANS 5, 17. 
 
 have the same sense in both parts of the verse ; and in the 
 former they do not designate the life before conversion, and 
 therefore when spoken in reference to Christ are not to be 
 understood of his earthly as opposed to his heavenly life. 
 Paul had known Christ after the llesh in the sense of estimat- 
 ing him entirely according to the outward appearance of 
 things. Christ does not here mean the Messiah, but is the 
 historical designation of our Lord as an individual. Paul had 
 despised and hated him because he judged him only according 
 to his outward appearance as a poor suifering man, yet claim- 
 ing to be the Christ the Son of the living God. His JcAvish 
 notions of what the Messiah was to be led him to regard with 
 indignation the claims of Jesus to be the Christ. Yet now 
 henceforth knoic ice {him) no more. The order of the words 
 in the original shows that the words Kara a-dpKa are to be con- 
 nected with the verb and not with its object ; ct Se koI iyvo)Ka- 
 fiev Kara adpKa XpccrTov. That is, we no longer judge after the 
 flesh concerning Christ ; w^e no longer estimate him according 
 to appearance, but know him to be the Son of God, who loved 
 us and gave himself for us. Gal. 2, 20. 
 
 17. Therefore, if any man (be) in Christ, (he is) a 
 new creature : old things are passed away ; behold, all 
 things are become new. 
 
 A further inference from what precedes. What was true 
 in Paul's case, must be true in all analogous cases. If the 
 revelation of Christ, the apprehension of his glory and love, 
 had wrought such a change in him, the same illumination 
 must produce a like change in others. He therefore says, If 
 (my man he in Christ he is a new creature. The proposition 
 is general ; it ai^plies to every man. To be in Christ is the 
 common scriptural phrase to express the saving connection or 
 union between him and his people. They are in him by cove- 
 nant, as all men were in Adam ; they are in him as members 
 of his body, through the indwelling of his Spirit ; and they 
 are in him by faith, which lays hold of and appropriates him 
 as the life and portion of the soul. Rom. 8, 1. 9. Gal. 5, G, &c. 
 This union is transforming. It imparts a new life. It effects 
 a new creation. This expression indicates not only the great- 
 ness and radical nature of the change effected, but also its 
 divine origin. It is a divine work, i. e. one due to the mighty 
 power of God. It is therefore called a creation, the com- 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 5, 17. 141 
 
 umencement of a new state of being. Eph. 1, 19. In Gal. 6, 15. 
 Rom. 8, 9, and elsewhere, the same effects are ascribed to 
 union with Christ. If we are miited to him so as to be inter- 
 ested in the merits of his death, we must also be partakers of 
 his life. This is the foundation on which the apostle builds 
 his whole doctrine of sanctification as developed ii;i the sixth 
 and seventh chapter of his epistle to the Romans. The word • 
 /catvo's, new^ unimpaired^ uncontaniinated^ is an epithet of ex- 
 cellence ; a new song, a new name, new heavens, new earth, 
 the new Jerusalem, the new man, a new creature, are scrip- 
 tural expressions which will occur to every reader. In the 
 margin of the English Bible this clause is rendered. Let him 
 he a new creature. This is in accordance with Calvin's view 
 of the passage. "If any man would be in Christ, i. e. if he 
 would be of consequence in Christ's kingdom, let him become 
 a new creature." He supposes that the apostle refers to the 
 ambition of the false teachers, whom he tells that if they wish 
 to attain the influence to which they aspire, they must like 
 him be entirely changed from selfishness to devotion to Christ. 
 There is nothing in the words to require this, and every thing 
 in the context is opposed to it. The apostle is detailing his 
 own experience, unfolding the principles on which he acted, 
 and showing the effect which the apprehension of the love of 
 Christ had on him and must have on others. K any man is in 
 Christ he is thereby made a new creature. In the Old Testa- 
 ment, Is. 43, 18. 19. 65, 17, the effects to be produced by the 
 coming of the Messiah are described as a making all things 
 new. The final consummation of the Redeemer's kingdom in 
 heaven is described. Rev. 21, 5, in the same terms. "He that 
 sat upon the throne said. Behold, I make all things new." 
 The inward spiritual change in every believer is set forth in 
 the same words, because it is the type and necessary condition 
 of this great cosmical change. What would avail any con- 
 ceivable change in things external, if the heart remained a 
 cage of unclean birds ? The apostle therefore says that if any 
 man is in Christ he experiences a change analogous to that 
 l^redicted by the prophets, and like to that which we still an- 
 ticipate when earth shall become heaven. " Old things are 
 passed away; behold, aU things have become new." Old 
 opinions, views, plans, desires, principles and afifections are 
 passed away ; new views of truth, new principles, new appre- 
 hensions of the destiny of man, and new feeUngs and purposes 
 fill and govern the soul. 
 
142 II. CORINTHIANS 5, 18. 
 
 18. And all things (are) of God, who hath recon- 
 ciled ns to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to 
 us the ministry of reconciliation. 
 
 All things are of God y' this is not spoken of the universe 
 as proceeding from God as its author ; nor does it refer to 
 the providential agency of God, by which all events are con- 
 
 * trolled. The meaning of ra Se iravTa here is, but all is of Gqd^ 
 i. e. the entire change of which he had been speaking. The 
 new creation experienced by those who are in Christ is Ik tov 
 ©€ov, is out of God, proceeds from him as its efficient cause. 
 It is his work. God effects this great moral and spiritual 
 
 •. revolution by reconciling us unto himself. The word %ts\s> 
 not to be limited to the apostle, first, because the reconciliation 
 spoken of is not peculiar to him ; and secondly, because the 
 change or new creation effected by this reconciliation belongs 
 to all who are in Christ. ?7s, therefore, must include all who 
 are in Christ. The objection to this interpretation that to us 
 in the next clause of the verse must refer to the apostle, is 
 not a serious one, because the passage is perfectly perspicuous 
 even supposing -j^z-ta?, us^ to refer to all believers, and ^)/w,ti^, to 
 us^ to the apostle himself / To reconcile is to remove enmity 
 
 I between parties at variance Avith each other. In this case 
 
 ' God is the reconciler. Man never makes reconciliation. It 
 is what he experiences or embraces, not what he does. The 
 enmity between God and man, the barrier which separated 
 them, is removed by the act of God. This is plain, 1. Because 
 it is said to be effected by Jesus Christy that is, by his death. 
 The death of Christ, however, is always represented as recon- 
 ciling us to God as a sacrifice ; the design and nature of a 
 sacrifice are to propitiate and not to reform. 2. In the paral- 
 lel passage, Rom. 5, 9. 10, being "reconciled by the death of 
 the Son," is interchanged as equivalent with " being justified 
 by his blood," which proves that the reconcihation intended 
 consists in the satislaction of the divine justice by the sacrifice 
 of Christ. 3. In this case our reconciliation to God is made 
 the source and cause of our new creation, i. e. of our regene- 
 ration and holiness. God's reconciliation to us must precede 
 our reconciliation to him. This, as remarked above, is tHe 
 
 -i great doctrine of the Bible. So long as we are under the 
 wrath and curse of God, due to us for shi, we arc aliens and 
 enemies, cut off from his favour and fellowship, which are the 
 life of the soul. Thercibrc until God's wrath and curse are 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 5, 19. 143 
 
 removed, there is no possibility of holiness and love. It is 
 vain to attempt to secure the favom- of God by being holy; 
 we must enjoy his favour before we can be holy. See Rom. 
 7, 56. As the apostle here ascribes our holiness to our being 
 reconciled to God, he must of necessity refer to the reconciha- 
 tion of God to us ; i. e. to his being propitious, ready to re- 
 ceive us into his favour and to manifest to us liis love. And 
 hath given to us^ i. e. to the apostle and to other preachers of 
 the gospel, for the thing given was not something peculiar to 
 the apostles but common to all preachers, viz., the ministry 
 of reconciliation^ i. e. the office and duty of announcing this 
 reconciliation. It is therefore the peculiar duty or special' 
 design of the ministry to proclaim to men that God, justly 
 offended by their sins, can be just and yet justify those who 
 come to him by Jesus Christ. This is the cmyycAtov, or glad 
 tidings, which our blessed Lord has commissioned his disciples 
 to announce to erery creature under heaven. 
 
 19. To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciUng the 
 world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto 
 them ; and hath committed unto us the word of recon- 
 ciliation. 
 
 This verse is an explanation and confirmation of what pre- 
 cedes. According to our version, and to the common inter- 
 pretation, it is an explanation of the last clause of v. 18, i. e. 
 of the " reconciliation " there spoken of. ' He hath given to 
 us the ministry of reconciUation — because God was reconciling 
 the world unto himself, &c.' To this it is objected by Meyer 
 and others, that the position of the word ^ed? {God) requires 
 the emphasis to be thrown on that word ; and secondly, that 
 the two following clauses must, in that case, explain the mode 
 of that reconciUation. Paul would then say, ' God was recon- 
 ciling the world unto himself, having committed to us the 
 word of reconciliation.' But our reconciliation to God is not 
 the ministry of reconciliation. The former does not consist 
 in the latter ; nor is the first the consequence of the second. 
 This verse therefore is referred to the first clause of v. 18. 
 ' All things are of God, &c., because God was reconciling, &c.' 
 The words ys on, rendered to iceY, mean here seeing that^ or 
 because. They are equivalent to the simple on. The expres- 
 sioh'is explained either as a pleonasm, or as the mixture of 
 two constructions, w? -S^coO ovro^ and on ^cds kan. 
 
144 II. CORINTHIANS 5, 19. 
 
 The principal difference among interpreters in the explana- 
 tion of this verse relates to the question whether (^i^ was is 
 to be referred to (ei/ Xpto-rai) in Christy or to (KaraAAacrcrcov) 
 reconciling. Our version favours the former mode of con- 
 struction, which is adopted both by Luther and Calvin. The 
 sense then is, 'God was in Christ, when he reconciled the 
 world unto himself;' or, as Luther renders it, "God was in 
 Christ, and reconciled the world with himself, and imputed 
 not to them their sins, &c." This breaks up the verse into 
 distinct propositions, tui-ning all the participles into verbs. 
 Calvin says that by God we are not to understand the divine 
 nature, or "the fulness of the Godhead," but God the Father; 
 and refers to John 10, 38, "The father is in me," as a parallel 
 expression. He thinks the design of the apostle is to assure 
 believers that in having Christ, they have the Father also ; 
 that Christ is the true Immanuel, whose advent is the ap- 
 proximation of God to man. *But all this is foreign to the 
 context. What follows is no proof that " God was in Christ," 
 but it is a proof of his being engaged, so to speak, in the 
 great work of reconciling the Avorld unto himself. Mo-st inter- 
 preters, therefore, adopt the other construction, 'God was 
 reconciling the world unto himself in Christ.' As in v. 18 it 
 is said that God reconciled us to himself 8ia Xpto-rov [through 
 Christ)^ here it is said to be Iv ILpia-rQ [in Christ). The im- 
 perfect ^v KaraXXao-crcoj/, tvcis reconcili?ig, expresses either con- 
 temporary or continuous action. 'The sense may be, ' God 
 was, when Christ died, reconciling the world unto himself; ' 
 that was what he was doing and designed to do when he gave 
 his Son up for us all. So Meyer and others. . Or, the refer- 
 ence is to what follows ; ' Pie reconciled the world, not imput- 
 ing unto men their sins, etc' That is, ' While not imputing, 
 &c.» But this is impossible, because the next clause, ' and 
 given to us the word of reconciUation,' cannot express what 
 was contemporaneous with the reconciling. Others say that 
 the imperfect is used for the aorist. The first explanation is 
 to be preferred. God was reconciling the world unto himself^ 
 means God was making atonement for the sins of the world. 
 He set Christ forth as a propitiation. Theodoret explains ijv 
 KaraXXdaa-iDV by KaraXAayas iiroL-^aaTo. By the ir-rrf'J f'/ocr/^o?, 
 without the article) is meant 77ian^ mankind, 'i rence 
 
 or statement is perfectly indefinite ; it merely hhuciucs the 
 class of beings towards whom God was manifesting lumsclf as 
 propitious. In the same sense our Lord is called tht; Sa\ ioiir 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 5, 20. 145 
 
 of the TTorld, or, the Saviour of men, Jesus Salvator Hommum. 
 To reconcile unto hhnsfJJ\ docs not mean to convert, or to 
 render friendly to himself. This is plain first, because this re- 
 conciliation is said to be e ffecte d by the death of Christ as 
 a sacrifice ; and secondly, because what follows is not a proof 
 of God's converting the world, but it is a proof of his being 
 propitious. The proof that God was reconciling the world to 
 himself in Christ (i. e. in his death) is that he does not impute 
 to men their trespasses, and that he has established the minis- 
 try of reconciliation. The forgiveness of sin and the institu- 
 tion of the ministry are clear evidence that God is propitious. 
 Not to impute sin, is to forgive it. Rom. 4, 5. 2 Tim. 4, 16. 
 In Col. 2, 3 3, the same idea is expressed by saying, ''*hath 
 forgiven you all trespasses." The participle /a^ A-oyt^ojaevog, 
 not hniniting^ is in the present because continuous action is 
 intended ; whereas in the next clause, ^e/xevos, having com- 
 mitted^ is a past participle, because the institution of the min- 
 istry was done once for all. To them^ i. e. to men, as included 
 in the K6(TfJio<;, loorld. When God is said to forgive men it of 
 course does not mean that all men, penitent and impenitent, 
 believing and unbelieving, are forgiven ; but here, as before, 
 the class of beings is indicated towards whom forgiveness is 
 exercised. God is propitious to men, as is manifest by his 
 forgiving their trespasses. And hath committed unto iis^ koL 
 Sc/ji€vo<i iv yjiJuv, i. e. having deposited in us. This may mean, 
 ' having put within us,' i. e. in our souls. Or the idea may be, 
 'having placed upon us.' If the former, then the following- 
 words, Tov Xoyov TTJ^ KaraAAay)}?, must mean ' the doctrine of 
 reconcihation.' That is, God hath instructed us apostles in 
 the doctrine of reconciliation. If the latter, then the clause 
 just quoted means, 'the word of reconcihation,' i. e. the 
 jji-eaching of reconciliation, as in 1 Cor. 1, 18, 6 Aoyog tov o-rav- 
 pov means ' the preaching of the cross.' This latter view is to 
 be preferred. The evidence that the death of Christ has been 
 accepted as an expiation for sin, of infinite value and efficiency, 
 is the fact that God hath commissioned his ministers to an- 
 nounce to all men that God is reconciled and ready to forgive, 
 so that whosoever will may turn unto him and live. 
 
 20. Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as 
 though God did beseech (you) by us -. we pray (you) 
 in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God. 
 
146 II. CORINTHIANS 5, 20. 
 
 This is an inference from what precedes. Noio then (ow, 
 therefore). ' Seeing that God in Christ is reconciled, and that 
 he has commissioned us to make known this great truth, it 
 follows that we, as preachers of the gospel, are ambassadors 
 of Christ.' An ambassador is at once a messenger and a 
 representative. He does not speak in his own name. He 
 does not act on his own authority. What he communi- 
 cates is not his o^ti opinions or demands, but simply what he 
 has been told or commissioned to say. His message derives 
 no part of its importance or trustworthiness from him. 
 At the same time he is more than a mere messenger. He 
 represents his sovereign. He speaks with authority, as ac- 
 credited to act in the name of his master. Any neglect, con- 
 tempt or injury done to him in his official character, is Bot a 
 personal offence, but an offetfce to the sovereign or state by 
 whom he is commissioned. All this is true of ministers. 
 They are messengers. They communicate what they have re- 
 ceived, not their own speculations or doctrines. What they 
 announce derives its importance not from them, but from him 
 who sends them. Nevertheless, as they speak in Christ's 
 name and by his authority, as he hath ordained the ministry 
 and calls men by his Spirit into the sacred office, the rejec- 
 tion of their message is the rejection of Christ, and any injury 
 done unto them as ministers is done unto him. 
 
 J^or Christ, vrrkp XpLo-Tov, this may mean either ' in Christ's 
 stead,' as his substitute and representative ; or, ' in Christ's 
 behalf,' for his sake, to promote his interests by furthering the 
 accomplishment of the object for which he died ; as in Eph. 
 6, 20, the apostle, speaking of the gospel, says, v-n-ep ov 7rpco-/5ci;a>, 
 for which I act as cm ambassador. The latter sense is good, 
 and is in accordance with the common force of the preposition. 
 The former, however, is better suited to the context. To act 
 as an ambassador for any one, is to act in his name or as his 
 representative. And in the following explanatory clause it is 
 said, ' God beseeches you by us,' where the idea of substitu- 
 tion is clearly expressed. The clause, as thoucjh God did be- 
 seech you by us, is commonly connected with what precedes. 
 'We are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech 
 you by us.' That is, ' We are the ambassadors of Christ, be- 
 cause it is God that speaks through us ; or, we speak in his 
 name.' Beza and others connect the words Avith the follow 
 ing clause. ' We are the ambassadors of Christ,' here is the 
 pause, and then follows as one clause, 'As thougli God did 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 5, 21. 147 
 
 beseech you by ns we pray, &c.' This is the more natural, 
 because the latter words express the prayer, so to speak, 
 which God through the ministry addresses to sinners. It will 
 be noticed that to be an ambassador for Christ, and that God 
 speaks through us, mean the same thing. Redemption is as 
 much the work of the Father as of the Son. God reconciles 
 the workl unto himself in Christ. God gives us the word of 
 reconciliation. We are acting for God, or in his name, when 
 Ave appear as the ambassadors of Christ. We pray you in 
 Ckrisfs stead. Here again vTzlp Xfuo-rov may be either in 
 Chris fs steadf or, for Chris fs sake. The former is to be pre- 
 ferred as better suited to the uniformity of the passage. De 
 ye reconciled unto God ; this does not mean, 'Reconcile your- 
 selves unto God.' The word, KaraAAay^re, is passive. Be 
 reconciled., that is, embrace the offer of reconciliation. The 
 reconciliation is effected by the death of Christ. God is now 
 jDropitious. He can now be just, and yet justify the ungodly. 
 All we have to do is not to refuse the offered love of God. 
 Calvin remarks that this exhortation is not directed exclusive- 
 ly to the unconverted. The believer needs daily, and is al- 
 lowed whenever he needs, to avail himself of the offer of peace 
 with God through Jesus Christ. It is not the doctrine of the 
 Scriptures that the merits of Christ avail only for the forgive- 
 ness of sins committed before conversion, while for post-bap- 
 tismal sins, as they Avere called, there is no satisfaction but in 
 the penances of the offender. Christ ever lives to make inter- 
 cession for us, and for every short-coming and renewed offence 
 there is offered to the penitent believer, renewed application 
 of that blood Avhich cleanses from all sin. 
 
 21. For he hatli made liim (to be) sin for us, who 
 knew no sin ; that we might be made the righteousness 
 of God in him. 
 
 This verse is designed to enforce the preceding. ' Be re- 
 conciled to God, for an abundant and trustworthy provision 
 has been made for your reconciliation and acceptance.' It is 
 indeed doubtful whether yap, for., belongs to the text, as it is 
 omitted in many of the oldest manuscripts. Its omission only 
 renders the transition more abrupt, the relation of the passage 
 remains the same. The apostle states in this verse what God 
 has done for the justification of men. The passage, therefore, 
 
148 II. CORINTHIANS 5, 21. 
 
 is of special interest, as presenting in a concise form the testi- 
 mony of the Spirit on that all important subject. lie made 
 him icho hnew no sin to he sin for us. The Greek here is, 
 Tov fx-q yvovTa afxapriav vTrep rjfxCjv afxapTLav CTrotT^crev. Our Lord 
 is presented as one whom God contemplated as free from sin 
 and yet he made him sin. Others understand the fxrj yvovra as 
 referring to Christ himself, as one having no consciousness of 
 sin. Others again, to the necessary judgment of believers, he 
 whom we know was free from sin. One or the other of these 
 modes of interpretation is supposed to be necessary, as the 
 apostle uses fXYj and not ov ; the one being, as the grammarians 
 say, the subjective, the other the objective particle of nega- 
 tion ; the one denying a thing as it appears to the mind, the 
 other denying it simply as a fact. In either case the thing 
 here asserted is that Christ was without sin. This was one of 
 the indispensable conditions of his being made sin for us. 
 Had he not been free from sin, he could not have taken the 
 place of sinners. Under the old dispensation the sacrifices 
 were required to be without blemish, in order to teach the 
 necessity of freedom from all sin in him who was to bear the 
 sins of the world. See Ileb. 4, 15. 1 Pet. 2, 22. Ijohn 3, 5. 
 He was made sin^ may mean either, he was made a sin-offering, 
 or, the abstract being used for the concrete, he was made a 
 sinner. Many of the older commentators prefer the former 
 explanation; Calvin, and almost all the moderns adopt the 
 latter. The meaning in either case is the same ; foi* the only 
 sense in which Christ was made sin, is that he bore the guilt 
 of sin; and in this sense every sin offering was made sin. 
 Hence in the Hebrew Scriptures the same word is used both 
 for sin and a sin-offering. This is the principal ground on 
 which the explanation of d/xaprta here in the sense of a sacri- 
 fice for sin is defended. The reasons, however, against this 
 explanation are decisive. 1. In the Scptuagint the Hebrew 
 word for sin, when it means a sin-offering, is always rendered 
 by d/xaprta in the genitive. It is always " of sin," or " for sin," 
 {iv^pX d/xapTtas), Lev. 5, 9. 14, 19. Num. 8, 8, and never simply 
 " sin," as here. 2. The use of the word in the ordinary sense 
 in this same clause, ' He made him to be sin who knew no sin.' 
 It must have the same meaning in both cases. 3. The antithe- 
 sis between " sin " and '' righteousness." He was made sin, 
 we are made " lighteousness." The only sense in which we 
 are made the righteousness of God is that we are in Christ re- 
 garded and treated as righteous, and therefore the sense in 
 
II. CORINTHIAXS 5, 21. U9 
 
 which he was made sm, is that he was regarded and treated 
 as a sinner. His being made sin is consistent with his being 
 in himself free from sin ; and our being made righteous is con- 
 sistent with our being in ourselves ungodly. In other words, 
 our sins were imputed to Christ, and his righteousness is im- 
 puted to us. Justitia hie non pro qualitate aut habitu, says 
 Calvin, sed pro imputatione accipitur, eo quod accepta nobis 
 fertur Christi justitia. Quod e converso peccatum? reatus 
 
 quo in Dei judicio obstringimur Personam enim nos- 
 
 tram quodammodo suscepit, ut reus nostro nomine fieret, et 
 tanquam peccator judicaretur, non propriis, sed aUenis deHctis, 
 quum purus foret ipse et immunis ab omni culpa, poenamque 
 subiret nobis, non sibi debitam. Ita scilicit nunc justi sumus 
 in ipso : non quia operibus propriis satisfacianius judicio Dei, 
 sed quoniam censimur Christi justitia, quam tide induimus, ut 
 nostra fiat. In Gal. 3, 13, the apostle says that "Christ was 
 made a curse for us," which is equivalent to saying that he 
 was made sin for us. In both cases the idea is that he bore 
 the punishment of our sins. God laid on him the iniquities 
 of us all. His sufferings and death were penal, because inflict- 
 ed and endured in satisfaction of justice. And in virtue of 
 the infinite dignity of his person they were a perfect satisfac- 
 tion ; that is, a full equivalent for all the law's demands. In 
 Rom. 8, 3, it is said, " What the law could not do, in that it 
 was weak through the flesh, God, sending his own Son in the 
 likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh." 
 Here again we have precisely the same doctrine. What in 
 one passage is expressed by saying that Christ was made sin, 
 in the other is expressed by saying, he was sent " for sin," i. e. 
 as a sin-offering (Trcpt afxapTLaq). 
 
 The apostle says Christ was made sin for us^ vrrlp rj/jiiov^ 
 i. e. in our stead, because the idea of substitution is involved 
 in the very nature of the transaction. The victim was the 
 substitute for the offender. It was put in his place. So 
 Christ was our substitute, or, was put in our place. This is 
 the more apparent from the following clause, which teaches 
 the design of this substitution. He w^as made sin, that we 
 might be made righteous. He was condemned, that we 
 might be justified. The very idea of substitution is that Avhat 
 is done by one in the j^hice of another, avails as though that 
 other had done it himself. The victim was the substitute of 
 the offerer, because its death took the place of his death. K 
 both died there was no substitution. So if Christ's being 
 
150 II. CORINTHIANS 5, 21. 
 
 made sin does not secure our being made righteonsness, he 
 was not our substitute. Righteousness does not here mean 
 inward rectitude, or moral excellence. It is true that the 
 word often has this sense ; and it is true that the work of 
 Christ does secure the holiness of his people, and was designed 
 to produce that effect, as is often asserted in Scripture. But 
 this was neither its only, nor its proximate design. Its imme- 
 diate end was to reconcile us to God ; to propitiate him, by 
 the satisfaction of justice, so that he can be just and yet justi- 
 fy the ungodly. As the apostle is here speaking of the sacri- 
 ficial effect of Christ's death, that is, of the proximate effect 
 of his being made sin for us, the word righteousness must be 
 understood in its forensic sense. It expresses our relation to 
 the law, not our inward moral state. It is that which justifies, 
 or satisfies the demands of the law. Those who have this 
 hcKoxoavvt) are 8t/catot, just in the sight of the law, in the sense 
 that the law or justice is satisfied as concerns them. It is 
 called the righteousness of God^ either because it is from him 
 as its author ; or, because it renders us righteous in his sight. 
 Those who possess this righteousness are StKatot -n-apk tw ^eoj, 
 i. e. righteous before God. The former is the more common 
 representation in Paul's writings. Rom. 1, 17. 3, 22. 10, 3. 
 Phil. 3, 9, wliere "the righteousness of God," is explained by 
 *' the righteousness which is of God." In this view of the 
 meaning of the phrase, the sense of the clause " we become 
 the righteousness of God," is that we become divinely right- 
 eous. We are righteous with the righteousness of God, not 
 with our own which is but as a filthy rag, but with that which 
 he has provided and which consists in the infinitely meritori- 
 ous righteousness of his own dear Son. All this is true ; but 
 the context here favours the other mode of representation. 
 Christ was treated as a sinner, i. e. condemned, that we might 
 be justified, i. e. regarded as just before God. The apostle 
 uses the present tense, ytvw/xe^a, loe become righteous, because 
 this justification is continuous. We are introduced into a jus- 
 tified state. Ill him^ that is, in Christ. It is by virtue of our 
 union with Christ, and only as we are in him by faith, that we 
 are righteous before God. 
 
 Tliere is probably no passage in the Scriptures in whicli 
 tlie doctrine of justification is more concisely or clearly stated 
 than in this. Our sins were imputed to Christ, and his right- 
 eousness is imputed to us. He bore our sins ; we are clothed 
 in his righteousness. Imputation conveys neither pollution 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 6. 151 
 
 nor holiness. Christ's bearing our sins did not make him 
 morally a sinner, any more than the victim was morally defiled 
 which bore the sins of the people ; nor does Christ's righteous- 
 ness become subjectively ours, it is not the moral quality of 
 our souls. This is what is not meant. What is meant is 
 equally plain. Our sins were the judicial ground of the suf- 
 ferings of Christ, so that they were a satisfaction of justice ; 
 and his righteousness is the judicial ground of our acceptance 
 Avith God, so that our pardon is an act of justice. It is a 
 justification ; or, a declaration that justice is satisfied. We 
 are set free by no mere act of sovereignty, but by the judicial 
 decision of the infinitely just. As we, considered in ourselves, 
 are just as undeserving and hell-deserving as ever, this justifi- 
 cation is to us an act of infinite grace. The special considera- 
 tion, therefore, by which the apostle enforces the exhortation, 
 'Be ye reconciled to God,' is that God can be just in the justi- 
 fication of sinners. There is nothing in the perfection of his 
 character, nothing in the immutability of his law, nothing in 
 the interests of his moral government, that stands in the way 
 of our pardon. A full, complete, infinitely meritorious satis- 
 faction has been made for our sins, and therefore we may 
 come to God with the assurance of being accepted. This is a 
 ground of confidence which an enlightened conscience, bur- 
 dened with a sense of sin, absolutely needs. It is not mere 
 pardon, but justification alone, that gives us peace with God. 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 The apostle continues the vindication of himself, vs. 1-10. Asserts his 
 strong love for the Corinthians, and exhorts them to keep themselves 
 free from all contaminating alliances, vs. 11-18. 
 
 The apostle's fidelity and love. Vs. 1-18. 
 
 As the occasion of writing this epistle was the false accusa- 
 tions of his opponents, a strain of self- vindication runs through 
 the whole. In 5, 12 he said he spoke of himself to enable his 
 friends in Corinth to defend him ao-ainst his enemies. He was 
 
152 II. CORINTHIANS 6, 1. 
 
 governed by the love of Christ, and acted as his ambassador ; 
 as such he was a fellow-worker with God, and exhorted men 
 not to fail of the grace of God, vs. 1. 2. In the exercise of 
 this office he avoided all offence, v. 3, proving his sincerity 
 and fidelity as a minister of God, by the patient endurance of 
 all kinds of trials, vs. 4. 5 ; by the exercise of all the graces 
 and gifts of the Spirit, \s. 6. 7 ; and under all circumstances, 
 whether of honour or dishonour, prosperity or adversity, 
 whether understood or misunderstood by his fellow men, vs. 
 8-10. He thus unbosomed himself to the Corinthians, be- 
 cause his heart was enlarged. It was wide enough to take 
 them all in. Whatever there was of the ^^ ant of love or of 
 due appreciation between them and him, the fault was on 
 their side, not on his, vs. 11.12. He begs them to be as 
 large-hearted towards him as he was towards them, v. 13, and 
 not to allow themselves to be involved in any intimate alli- 
 ances with the wicked, vs. 13-18. 
 
 1. We then, (as) workers together (with him), be- 
 seech (joii) also that ye receive not the grace of God 
 in vain. 
 
 This verse is intimately connected with the preceding 
 chapter by the j^articles Sk kul, but also. He is still describ- 
 ing his manner of discharging his apostolic duties. He not 
 only announced that God had made Christ sin for us, that we 
 might become the righteousness of God in him, but also, as a 
 co-worker with God, he exhorted men not to receive the 
 grace of God in vain. In our version the apostle is made to 
 say, " I beseech you also." This is wrong ; the also belongs 
 to the verb — "I also beseech you." That the word awcp- 
 yowTc<7, co-02^erating^ refers to the apostle's co-operating with 
 God, is plain from the connection, and from the nature of the 
 work. He had just before, 5, 20, spoken of God's beseeching 
 them ; and now he says, Ave as co-workers beseech you. So 
 in 1 Cor. 3, 9, he says, " We are co-workers with God." In 
 the Vulgate the word is rendered adjuvantes, which favours 
 the idea that he was co-operating with them, assisting them 
 (i. e. the Corinthians) by his exhortations. Luther's version 
 suggests the same meaning ; Wir ermahen aber euch, als 
 Mithelfer, as joint-labourers or helpers we exhort you. Com- 
 pare 1, 24, where the apostle says, "We are helpers (a-w^pyoi) 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 6, 1. 153 
 
 of your joy." This view of the passage is given by many 
 commentators. It does not, however, so well, as just re- 
 marked, agree with the context; and it would require, to 
 prevent ambiguity, the insertion of vfjuv, with you. As an 
 apostle or minister of the gospel, Paul was a co-worker with 
 God. 
 
 That ye receive not the grace of God in vain. What is 
 it to receive the grace of God in vain ? Some say that the 
 meaning is to accept of the atonement of Christ, or reconcilia- 
 tion with God spoken of in the preceding chapter, and yet to 
 li\ e in sm. The favour of God is then accepted to no purpose. 
 But this is an unscriptural idea. Justification and sanctifica- 
 tion cannot be thus separated. A man cannot accept of recon- 
 ciliation with God and live in sin ; because the renunciation 
 of sin is involved in the acceptance of reconciliation. Paul 
 never assumes that men may accept one benefit of redemption, 
 and reject another. They cannot take pardon and refuse 
 sanctification. Others say that the apostle here exhorts his 
 readers to guard against " falling from grace ; " that having 
 been graciously pardoned they should not, by a relapse into 
 sin, forfeit the grace or favour which they had received. This 
 is a very common interpretation. Olshausen says, " It is un- 
 deniable that the apostle assumes that grace when once re- 
 ceived may be lost ; the Scriptures know nothing of the dan- 
 gerous error of the advocates of predestination, that grace 
 cannot be lost ; and experience stamps it as a He." But in 
 the first place, it is no argument in favour of this interpreta- 
 tion that the apostle uses the infinitive aorist (Se^ao-^ai), have 
 received^ because the aorist infinitive is very commonly used 
 for the present after verbs signif}ing to command or exhort. 
 See Rom. 12, 1. 15, 20. 2 Cor. 2, 8. Eph. 4, 1. Winer's Idioms 
 of the New Testament, p. 386. In the second place, the 
 " grace of God," here spoken of, does not mean the actual 
 forgiveness of sin, nor the renewing, sanctifying influence of 
 the Spirit, but the favour of which the apostle spoke in the 
 preceding chapter. It is the infinite grace or favour of having 
 made his Son sin for us, so that we may become the righteous- 
 ness of God in him. This is the grace of God of which the 
 apostle speaks. He exhorted men not to let it be in vain, as 
 it regarded them, that a satisfaction for sin suflScient for all, 
 and appropriate to all, had been made and offered to all who 
 hear the gospel. In precisely the same sense he says. Gal. 2, 
 21, "I do not frustrate the grace of God." That is, 'I do 
 
154 II. CORINTHIANS 6, 2. 
 
 not, by trusting to the works of the law, make it in vain that 
 God has provided a gratuitous method of salvation.' That 
 great grace or favour he did not make a thing of naught. In 
 Gal. 5, 4, he says, " Whosoever of you are justified by the law, 
 are fallen from grace." That is, ' ye have renounced the gra- 
 tuitous method of salvation, and are debtors to do the whole 
 law.' So in Kom. 6, 14, it is said, "We are not under law, 
 but under grace." In no one of these cases does " grace " 
 mean either the actual pardon of sin, or inward divine influ- 
 ence. It means the favour of God, and in this connection the 
 great favour of redemption. The Lord Jesus Christ having 
 died for our sins and procured eternal redemption for us, the 
 apostle was most earnest in exhorting men not to allow this 
 great favour, as regards them, to be in vain. It is the more 
 evident that such is the meaning of the passage because it is 
 not so much a direct exhortation to the Corinthians, as a 
 declaration of the method in which the apostle preached. He 
 announced the fact that God had made Christ who knew no sin 
 to be sin for us, and he exhorted all men not to receive the 
 grace of God in vain, that is, not to reject this great salvation. 
 And finally, this interpretation is required by the following 
 verse. " Behold, now is the accepted time ; now is the day 
 of salvation." This is appropriate as a motive to receive the 
 offer of pardon and acceptance with God, but it is not appro- 
 priate as a reason why a renewed and pardoned sinner should 
 not fall from grace. There is therefore no necessity to as- 
 sume, contrary to the whole analogy of Scripture, that the 
 apostle here teaches that those who have once made their 
 peace with God and experienced his renewing grace can fall 
 away unto j)erdition. If reconciled by the death of his Son, 
 much more shall they be saved by his life. Nothing can ever 
 separate them from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus. 
 Whom he calls, them he also glorifies. They are kept by the 
 mighty power of God through faith unto salvation. 
 
 2. (For he saith, I have heard thee in a time ac- 
 cepted, and in the day of salvation have I succoured 
 thee ; behold, now (is) the accepted time ; behold, now 
 (is) the day of salvation.) 
 
 The Scriptures ^ontain abundant evidence that inspiration 
 did not interfere with the natural i)lay of the powers of the 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 6, 2. 155 
 
 sacred writers. Although they spoke as they were moved by 
 the Holy Ghost, yet they were probably in most cases uncon- 
 scious of his influence, and acted as spontaneously as the be- 
 liever does under the power of the Spirit in all his holy exer- 
 cises. Hence we find that the sacred writings are constructed 
 according to the ordinary laws of mind, and that the writers 
 pass from subject to subject by the usual process of suggestion 
 and association. So here the use of the word Se^'acr^at brought 
 up to the apostle's mind the word SeKT<2^ as it occurs in the 
 beautiful passage, Is. 49, 8. Hence the quotation of that pas- 
 sage as it stands in the Greek version of the Old Testament. 
 I have heard thee in an accepted time. In the Hebrew it is, a 
 time of grace ; and to this answers the equivalent expression, 
 the day of salvation. It is on these expressions that the ap- 
 propriateness of the citation rests. The Old Testament speaks 
 of "a time of grace," and of "a day of salvation." That is, 
 of a time and a day in which grace and salvation may be 
 obtained. The apostle adds, by way of comment and applica- 
 tion, " Behold, now is the accepted time ; behold, now is the 
 day of salvation," The connection between this verse and 
 what precedes is thus clear. ' Receive not the grace of God 
 in vain, for there is a time of grace and a day of salvation, and 
 that day is now. Therefore, neglect not this great salvation.* 
 The 49th chapter of Isaiah, whence this passage is taken, is 
 addressed to the Messiah. He it was whom God chose to be 
 his servant to restore Israel and to be a light to the Gentiles. 
 He it was whom man desi:>ised and the nation abhorred, to 
 whom kings should rise and princes worship. It was he to 
 whom Jehovah said, " I have heard thee in an accepted time, 
 and in the day of salvation have I succoured thee." This be- 
 ing the case, the use which the apostle makes of the passage 
 may be explained either on the hypothesis adopted by Dr. J. 
 A. Alexander, in his comment on this chapter, that the ideal 
 person addressed is not the Messiah exclusively, but the Mes- 
 siah and his people as represented in him. Therefore a prom- 
 ise of grace and salvation to the Messiah was at the same time 
 a promise of grace and salvation to his people. This is the 
 view which Bengel adopts. " He saith, the Father to Messi- 
 ah, Is. 49, 8, embracing in him all believers." Or we may 
 assume, in strict accordance with scriptural usage, that the 
 apostle employs the language of the Old Testament to express 
 his own ideas, without regard to its origin?" application. God 
 had in many ways, and on many occasions, promised to save 
 
156 II. CORINTHIANS 6, 3. 
 
 sinners. To this promise the apostle appeals as a reason why- 
 men should accept the grace oifered to them in Christ Jesus. 
 He clothes this promise in scriptural language. He might 
 have expressed it in any other equivalent form. But the lan- 
 guage of the passage in Isaiah being brought to his mind by 
 the principle of association, he adopts the form there given, 
 without any intimation, expressed or implied, that the passage 
 had not in the original a different application. Thus in Rom. 
 10, 18 he might have expressed the idea of the general proclama- 
 tion of the gospel in his own words, but he chose to express it 
 in the words of the nineteenth Psalm, "Their sound went into 
 all the earth, and their Avords unto the ends of the world ; " 
 although that Psalm relates to an entirely different subject. 
 We are accustomed, without hesitation and almost uncon- 
 sciously, to make a similar use of scriptural language. 
 
 3. Giving no offence in any thing, that the ministry 
 be not blamed. 
 
 The preceding verse is parenthetical, so that the connec- 
 tion is with V. 1. " We beseech — giving, &c." This and the 
 following participles are all connected with the word (Trapa- 
 KaXovfjiev) we beseech, or exhort, and are designed to show how 
 the apostle discharged the duties of his office. This is his de- 
 fence. J7i nothinrj he gave offence. He so acted that no one 
 could fairly make his conduct a ground of rejecting the gos- 
 pel. The word TrpoaKoir-Q is properly the act of striking or 
 stumbling; then metonymically, that at which or against 
 which any one stumbles. In the figurative use of the word, 
 as here employed, it means an occasion of unbelief Paul, in 
 preaching the gospel to those to whom it was previously un- 
 known, and whose i:)rincipal means of judging of it was the 
 conduct of its preachers, was specially careful to avoid every 
 thing which could prove a stumblingblock to his hearers. 
 Although this motive has peculiar weight where the gospel is 
 new, as among the heathen, yet every one knows that the 
 moral power of a preacher depends almost entirely on the 
 conviction which the peo})le have of his sincerity and of the 
 purity of his motives. This is a source of power for which 
 neither learning nor talents can compensate. That the mmis- 
 try he not blamed ; or, as it is in many copies, our ministry, 
 which gives the passage a most specific reference to himself, 
 and is well suited to the whole connection. 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 6, 4. 5. 157 
 
 Although in the following verses the apostle, as is his wont, 
 gives his discourse free scope, allowing it, as it were, to flow 
 on in its own impetuous and majestic course, Avithout any at- 
 tempt to reduce it to logical arrangement, yet in his mind 
 order was so immanent that a certain method can always be 
 detected even in his most impassioned utterances. So here, 
 he first refers to the manifold trials, vs. 4. 5, then to the graces 
 and gifts, vs. 6. 7, by which his sincerity had been tested and 
 established ; and then to the diverse circumstances of evil and 
 of good report, under Avhich he had maintained his integrity, 
 vs. 8. 9. 10. Under these several heads there are the same 
 number of specifications, nine in each. Under the two former, 
 there is a ternary arrangement observable ; three divisions, 
 each with three specifications ; and under the last, nine pairs 
 of contrasts or antitheses, rising to that highest form of ora- 
 torical language, where truth is expressed in seeming contra- 
 dictions. " Having nothing, yet possessing all things." 
 
 4. 5. But in all (things) approving ourselves as the 
 ministers of God, in much patience, in afflictions, in 
 necessities, in distresses, in stripes, in imprisonments, 
 in tumults, in labours, in watchings, in fastings. 
 
 So far from causing the ministry to be blamed, Paul iii all 
 things^ (eV Travrt,) in every relation^ and on every occasion^ ap- 
 proved himself, i. e. commended himself, not by self-laudation, 
 but by so acting as to force the conviction of his sincerity on 
 all men. As the ministers of God^ i. e. as the ministers of 
 God commend themselves. This interpretation is required, as 
 Paul uses 8taKovot, not StaKoVovs. It was as a minister he com- 
 mended himself. In much patience^ i. e. by patient endur- 
 ance and constancy. Both ideas are expressed by the word 
 i'TTOfxov^. Paul proved himself to be a true minister of Christ 
 by the fortitude with which he endured sufierings, and by the 
 constancy with which he adhered to his master under all these 
 trials. In what follows in this and the next verse we have the 
 trials enumerated to which he was subjected. These are ar- 
 ranged, as Bengel remarks, in three classes. The first, are 
 general, afflictions^ necessities^ and distresses / the second are 
 specific, stripes^ imprisonments^ and tmnidts ; the third, vol- 
 untary, labours^ icatchings^ and fastings. His constancy was 
 exhibited in the cheerful endurance of all these kinds of trials. 
 
158 II. CORINTHIANS 6, 4. 5. 
 
 As to the first, the terms used are often interchanged and 
 often combined. ©Ati/^ct?, j^^'esstcres, from without or from 
 within ; including every thing which presses on the heart or 
 tries the power of endurance or resistance ; avayKat, necessities, 
 when a man is taxed to the utmost to knoAv what to do or 
 how to bear; crT^vo^oiptaL, straits, when one has no room to 
 stand or turn, and therefore escape seems hopeless. It is op- 
 posed to largeness of place. "He brought my feet into a 
 large place," as the Psalmist says. The preposition eV is to be 
 rendered hy before vtto/xoi/t}, and ^V^ before all the other novms 
 in these two verses. He commended himself hy patience, in 
 afflictions, in necessities, &c., <fec. In stripes. Paul, as we 
 learn from 11, 24. 25, had already, at this period of his history, 
 been eight times subjected to the ignominy and torture of the 
 lash, five times by the Jews and thrice by the heathen. In 
 imprisomnents. How often the apostle was in prison we 
 know not, as the Acts contain only a small part of his history. 
 He was a prisoner at Philipj^i, at Jerusalem, at Cesarea, and 
 at Rome ; and when a prisoner his feet were in the stocks, or 
 he was chained. The Holy Ghost testified that in every place 
 "bonds and afflictions" awaited him. In tumults. The 
 word is dKarao-raortttt, which may mean " tossings to and fro," 
 and refer to Paul's being constantly driven from one place to 
 another, so that he had no quiet abode. This he mentions as 
 one of his sore trials in 1 Cor. 4, 11. The word, however, in 
 the New Testament always elsewhere means either disorder 
 or tumultuous outbreaks. Luke 21,9. To these violent bursts 
 of popular feeling the apostle was frequently exposed, as at 
 Antioch in Pisidia, Acts 13, 50 ; at Lystra, 14, 19 ; at Philippi, 
 16, 19 ; at Ephesus, Acts 19, 29 ; at Jerusalem, 21, 30. Before 
 these manifestations of wrath and power the bravest men often 
 quail. Such tumults can neither be resisted by force, nor be 
 stilled by the voice. What can one man do before an infuri- 
 ated mob ? He could as well resist a tornado. Yet he can 
 be calm and adhere to his purpose. " It is often required," 
 says Calvin, "of ministers of the gospel, that while they strive 
 for peace, they should pass unbroken through tumults, and 
 never deiiect from the right course though heaven and earth 
 should be mixed." Besides these trials which came upon the 
 apostle against his will, or without his agency, there were 
 painful sacrifices which he made voluntarily, and which were 
 among the strongest proofs of his sincerity. These were his 
 Uthours, icatchings, and fastinys. By labours arc to be uu- 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 6, 6. 7. 159 
 
 derstood not only his working with his own hands to support 
 himself while he made the gospel of no expense, but also the 
 indefatigable exertions which he was constantly called to 
 make, in travelling, and preaching, and in caring for the sick, 
 the poor, and the interests of the church. Watchings^ the 
 sleepless nights which his constantly travelling, his anxieties 
 and labours caused him to pass. Fastings / this is often 
 understood to refer to his suflerinc: from huno^er. But the 
 word yr]crT€La is never used for involuntary abstinence from 
 food, and as it occurs here in connection with laboiu's and 
 watchings, both of which were voluntary acts of self-denial, 
 it is probably to be taken in its ordinary sense. Perhaps, 
 however, the reference is to those cases of abstinence which 
 were in a measure forced upon him, or which he chose to sub- 
 mit to rather than to omit some duty or to fail to take advan- 
 tage of some ojjportimity of usefulness. There is nothing in 
 the connection to demand a reference to rehgious fasting, as 
 when prayers and fasting are mentioned together. Here it is 
 labours and fastings. 
 
 6. 7. By pureness, by knowledge, by long-sufFer- 
 ing, by kindness, by the Holy Ghost, by love unfeigned, 
 by the word of truth, by the power of God, by the ar- 
 mour of righteousness on the right hand and on the 
 left. 
 
 As the apostle commended himself m the various trials 
 enumerated in the two preceding verses, so bg the graces and 
 gifts here specified, it was made manifest to all that he was a 
 true apostle and faithful minister of God. J^g 2nire?iess, both 
 of heart and life. This includes not merely freedom from the 
 23ollution of immoral acts, but disinterestedness and singleness 
 of motive. J]g knoicledge ; what kind or form of knowledge 
 is here indicated can only be gathered from the context. 
 SomiC say it is the knowledge of the fitness and propriety of 
 things, which exhibits itself as discretion. But as the apostle 
 is speaking of those things which commended him as a minis- 
 ter of God and preacher of the gospel, and as several of the 
 other specifications in these two verses, refer to gifts as dis- 
 tinguished from graces, it is more probable that the reference 
 is to evangelical knowledge ; that knowledge which he mani- 
 fested in his teaching. Comp. Eph. 3, 4, where he speaks of 
 
160 II. CORINTHIANS 6, 6. 7. 
 
 his knowledge of the mystery of Christ, as patent to all his 
 readers. And in Gal. 1, 12, et seq., he appeals to his possession 
 of this knowledge, without any human teaching, as an unde- 
 niable proof of his divine mission. J^i/ lo7ig-siiffering, i. e. 
 patiently submitting to injustice and undeserved injuries. Hy 
 kindness, i. e. -xprja-TOTrjs (from xp-qa-ros, useful) benevolence ; a 
 disposition to do good ; as God is said to be kind to the un- 
 thankful and the evil, Luke 6, 35. £i/ the Holy Ghost; 
 that is, by the manifestation of the Holy Ghost as dwelling in 
 me. It is the doctrine of the Scriptures, and specially of 
 Paul's writings, that the Spirit of God dwells in all believers, 
 and that besides those manifestations of his presence common 
 to all, there is given to each one his special gift, w^hether or- 
 dinary or extraordinary ; to one wisdom, to another knowl- 
 edge, to another the gift of teaching, to another the working 
 of miracles, &g. 1 Cor. 12, 7-11. In proof of his being a true 
 minister of God, Paul appeals to the evidence of the presence 
 of the Spirit in him, which evidence was to be found in those 
 graces and gifts of the Holy Ghost with w^hich he was replen- 
 ished ; and in the divine power which attended and rendered 
 successful his preaching. He could appeal to his converts and 
 say, *' Ye are the seal of my apostleship in the Lord," 1 Cor. 
 9, 2. J^y love unfeigned. As in the preceding clause he re- 
 ferred to kindness or benevolence, here love must be taken in 
 the restricted sense of Christian love — not that affection which 
 is exercised towards the just and the unjust, but that which 
 springs from the peculiar relations of the believer to God and 
 to bis brethren. It is brotherly love, or the love of the breth- 
 ren as such. Hy the icord of truth, that is, by the preaching 
 of the truth, or preaching the contents of which is truth. The 
 reference is not to veracity, but to the exhibition of the truth 
 in his jDreaching. In a previous chapter, 4, 2, he had said, 
 "By the manifestation of the truth I commend myself to 
 every man's conscience in the sight of God." By the poioer of 
 God. The power of God w^as manifested in various ways in 
 Paul's ministry. " He that wrought in Peter," he says, " to 
 the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in 
 me towards the Gentiles," Gal. 2, 8. By these various mani- 
 festations of divine power in his conversion, in his preparation 
 for liis work, and in the exercise of his apostleshi}), he was 
 proved to be a true servant of God. By the armour oj 
 righteousness. The word " righteousness " is used in Scrip- 
 ture in two senses. It means either rectitude, uprightness, 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 6, 8-10. 161 
 
 honesty, in the comprehensive sense of the terms ; or it means 
 justifying righteousness, the righteousness of faith, so often 
 called the righteousness of God. Calvin and many others 
 take it in the former sense here, and understand by the " ar- 
 mour of righteousness," that armour which integrity affords, or 
 those arms which are consistent with moral rectitude. Others 
 prefer the latter sense of the word, and understand the armour 
 of righteousness to be that which is secured by our justifica- 
 tion before God. This interpretation is not only more in 
 keeping with Paul's usage of the word, but more consistent 
 with the context. It was not Paul's honesty which was his 
 armour, or by which he established his claim to be a minister 
 of God, but the supernatural gifts and graces of the Spirit. 
 In Eph. 6, 14, he compares this righteousness to a breast- 
 plate ; here to the whole panoply, on the right hand and on 
 the left^ offensive and defensive, because he who is justified, or 
 clothed with the righteousness of Christ, has every thing at 
 command. He has the shield of faith, and the helniet of sal- 
 vation, and the sword of the Spirit. 
 
 8-10. By honour and dishonour, by evil report 
 and good report ; as deceivers, and (yet) true ; as un- 
 known, and (yet) well known ; as dying, and behold, 
 we live ; as chastened, and not killed ; as sorrowful, 
 yet always rejoicing ; as poor, yet making many rich ; 
 as having nothing, and (jxt) possessing all things. 
 
 These verses are intimately connected, forming a distinct 
 division of the apostle's discourse. In vs. 4. 5, we had the 
 preposition Iv in its local sense. Paul commended himself by 
 patience hi afflictions, in necessities, &c. In vs. 6. 7 the same 
 preposition is used in its instrumental sense, hy pureness, by 
 knowledge, &c. Here the preposition Sta has a local sense, 
 through^ in the midst of. He maintained his consistency and 
 integrity under all circumstances, through honour and dishon- 
 our, through evil report and good report. He was always 
 the same — preached the same doctrine, urged the same duties, 
 maintained the same principles, whether his preaching was 
 approved or disapproved, whether it secured for him admira- 
 tion or brought down upon him reproach. This is the com- 
 mon and most natural interpretation. Many, however, prefer 
 
162 II. CORINTHIANS 6, 8-10. 
 
 the instrumental sense of the preposition. ' By means of 
 honour which we receive from the friends of God, and by 
 means of the dishonour heaped upon us by our enemies.' 
 That the good honoured him, and the wicked defmied him, 
 was proof of his integrity. This requires too much to be sup- 
 2)hed in order to bring out the sense. The former interpreta- 
 tion is more simple, and gives a meaning quite as pertinent. 
 The figure which he uses is that of a road, along which he 
 marches to victory, through all obstacles, disregarding what 
 is said or thought by others. This last clause serves as the 
 transition to a new mode of representation. He no longer 
 speaks of w^hat he did, but of the judgment of others concern- 
 ing him. As decewers^ and yet true. These and the follow^- 
 ing adjectives and participles, as they are in Greek, though 
 translated in some cases as substantives, are parallel with 
 (TvvKTToiVTeq in V. 4. ' We beseech you, coynmendlng ourselves, 
 &c., and w^e beseech you, as deceivers^ yet true^ &c.' That is, 
 we go steadily on in the discharge of our duty wdiatever men 
 may think or say. As deceivers^ (-n-A-avoi,) not merely false 
 pretenders, but seducers, men w^ho lead others astray, and 
 themselves wander from the truth. Matt. 27, 63. 1 Tim. 4, 1. 
 2 John 7. It is here the opposite of aA-TyJets, in the sense of 
 truthful, loving and speaking the truth. Matt. 22, 16. Mark 
 12, 14. 'Regarded as seducers, we are the advocates of the 
 truth.' As xinknoimi^ yet icell Jcnoicn, (ws dyj/oov/xevot, koX liviyi- 
 vMaKGfxevoL,) regarded with contempt as obscure and ignoble, 
 yet recognised and famous. The antithesis is either that ex- 
 pressed in our version, between being unknow^n and being 
 well known, or, between being misunderstood and being duly 
 appreciated. The latter of the two w^ords used by the aj^ostle 
 may Avell exj^ress that sense, as iTnyivcjaKO) often means to 
 recognize, or acknowledge one to be wdiat he is, or professes 
 to be, 1, 13. 14. Matt. 17, 12, and although the Ibrmer word 
 does not elsew^here occur precisely in the sense of being mis- 
 understood, yet to be unknown and to be unrecognized are 
 ideas so nearly related, that it is not unnatural to take tlie 
 word in that sense here, if the antithesis and context require 
 it. Paul was unknow^n to the mass of the people ; he was 
 taken to be what he was not ; and yet he was duly appreciat- 
 ed, and recognized in his true character by others. As dy- 
 ing, i. e. regarded by others as certain to perish, and behold 
 we live. This is one interpretation. It is, however, more in 
 harmony with what follows to understand the apostle to refer 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 6, 8-10. 163 
 
 to actual facts. He was, as he says, 4, 11 and 1 Cor. 15, 31, 
 constantly exposed to death. He died daily, and yet he lived. 
 God always interposed to rescue him from destruction when 
 it seemed inevitable, and to sustain him under calamities 
 which to all appearance no man could bear. As chastened,, 
 hut not hilled. To chasten (7raiS€i;€6i/) is j^roperly to treat as a 
 child, and as children are often made to suffer by their pa- 
 rents for their good, to chasten is to correct by suffering. 
 The word, however, is often used to express simply the idea 
 of infliction of pain without any reference to the end of the 
 infliction. God never punishes his people. That is, their suf 
 ferings are never designed to satisfy justice; nor are they 
 always even chastisements in the proper sense of the word. 
 They are not in all cases sent to correct evils, to repress pride, 
 or to wean from the world. God often afilicts his people and 
 his church simply to enable them the better to glorify his 
 name. It is an unchristian disposition, therefore, which leads 
 us always to ask, when afllictions are sent upon ourselves or 
 others. Why is this? AVhat have we or they done to call 
 forth this expression of parental displeasure or solicitude? 
 What does God mean to rebuke ? It may be that our suffer- 
 ings are chastisements, that is, that they are designed to cor- 
 rect some evil of the heart or life, but this is not to be inferred 
 from the simple fact that they are sufferings. The greater 
 part of Paul's sufferings were not chastisements. They were 
 designed simply to show to all ages the power of the grace of 
 God ; to let men see what a man could cheerfully endure, and 
 rejoice that he was called upon to endure, for the sake of the 
 Lord Jesus. In this case chastened means simply afiiicted. 
 There is no reference to the design of God in sending the suf- 
 ferings which the apostle was called to endure. There is an- 
 other Aiew of the meaning of this passage, w*hich supposes the 
 words to be uttered from the stand-point of Paul's enemies. 
 " Chastised, but not killed." ' Regarded as an object of di- 
 vine displeasure, as smitten of God, (which may be true,) yet 
 I am not killed.' It is, however, more in keeping with what 
 follows to understand the apostle as referring to his actual ex- 
 perience. He was greatly afiiicted, but not killed ; cast down, 
 as he says in 4, 9, but not destroyed. Compare Ps. 118, 18, 
 " The Lord hath chastened me sore ; but he hath not dehv- 
 ered me over unto death." Let believers therefore regard 
 their afllictions, when they can, not as indications of God's 
 disapprobation, but rejoice in them as opportunities graciously 
 
164 II. CORINTHIANS 6, 11. 
 
 afforded them to glorify his name. As sorrotcful, yet always 
 rejoicing. This again may mean, ' Looked upon ag sorrowful, 
 yet in fact always rejoicing;' or, 'Although overwhelmed 
 with sorrow, yet full of joy.' The latter interpretation is to 
 be preferred. This is one of the paradoxes of Christian expe- 
 rience. The believer has more true joy in sorrow^ than the 
 world can ever afford. The sense of the love of God, assur- 
 ance of his support, confidence in future blessedness, and the 
 persuasion that his present light afflictions shall work out for 
 him a far more exceeding and an eternal weight of glory, 
 mingle with his sorrow^s, and give the suffering child of God 
 a peace which passes all understanding. He would not ex- 
 change his lot with that of the most i3rosperous of the children 
 of this world. As poor ^ yet making many rich. Poor in this 
 world's goods, yet imparting to many the true riches ; as hav- 
 ing nothing., i. e. of earthly treasure, yet possessing all things^ 
 in the sense in w^hich in 1 Cor. 3, 21, he tells the Corinthians, 
 " All things are yours." The real property in any thing vests 
 in him for whose benefit it is held and used. And as all 
 things, whether the world, or life or death, or things present 
 or things to come, are held and disposed by God for the bene- 
 fit of his people, for their present good and future glory, they 
 are the real proprietors of all things. Being joint heirs with 
 Christ, Rom. 8, 17, they possess all things. 
 
 11. O (ye) Corinthians, our mouth is open unto 
 you, our heart is enlarged. 
 
 This and the two following verses are an epilogue to the 
 preceding vindication of himself, and an introduction to the 
 following exhortations. Corinthians. This direct address 
 is unusual with the apostle, and is expressive of strong feeling. 
 Gal. 3, 1. Our mouth is open (uvewye, 2 perfect, as present 
 and intransitive, see John 1, 52.) To open the mouth is a 
 common scriptural expression, meaning to begin to speak, or, 
 to speak, as in Matt. 5, 2. Acts 8, 32. 35. Here, as the con- 
 text shows, it is used em])hatically, and means, to speak freely 
 and openly. Compare Eph. 6, 19. Our heart is enlarged. 
 See 1 Kings 4, 29. Ps. 119, 32. Is. GO, 5. Any joyful, gener- 
 ous feeling is said to enlarge the heart. A large-hearted man 
 is one of generous and warm affections. The apostle Jiad 
 poured out his heart to the Corinthians. He has spoken with 
 the utmost freedom and openness, and in doing so liis heart 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 6, 12-U. 165 
 
 was expanded towards them. He was ready to embrace them 
 all, and to take them to his arms as his dear children. 
 
 12. Ye are not straitened in us, but ye are strait- 
 ened in your own bowels. 
 
 The apostle abides by his figure. A large heart is one 
 expanded by love ; a straitened heart is one void of generous 
 affections. To be straitened (crvevoxoypeoi) is to want room; 
 (TT€voxo)pLa is want of room, straits, distress, anguish of mind. 
 Hence to enlarge, to give one a wide place, is to deliver, to 
 bless. Ps. 4, 1. 118, 5. Ye are not straitened in us, i. e. 
 there is no lack of room for you in our heart ; hut ye are 
 straitened i7i your oicn boicels, i. e. your heart is too narrow 
 to admit me. Straitened in your own hoicels, means, not that 
 you are inwardly afflicted, or that the cause of your trouble 
 is in yourselves, but, as the context requires, ' Your bowels 
 (hearts) are narrow or contracted.' There is not room in 
 them to receive me. Without a figure the meaning is, ' The 
 want of love is on your side, not on mine.' 
 
 13. Now for a recompense in the same, (I speak as 
 unto (my) cbildren,) be ye also enlarged. 
 
 The exhortation or request is, ' Be ye also enlarged, i. e. 
 open your hearts to receive me, which is only a proper recom- 
 pense for my love to you. I speak as to children, who are 
 expected to requite the love of their parents with filial aflTec- 
 tion.' The words Ty]v 8e aurr/v avri/xto-^tai/ are explained as a 
 concise expression for rh 8c avro^ o ia-nv avTiixia-^ia^ ' as to the 
 same thing, which is a recompense, be ye also enlarged.' The 
 accusative is the accusative absolute. 
 
 14. Be ye not unequally yoked together with un- 
 believers : for what fellowship hath righteousness with 
 unrighteousness? and what communion hath hght 
 with darkness ? 
 
 After the exhortation to requite his love by loving him, he 
 exhorts them to keep aloof from all intimate association with 
 the evil. The exhortation is general, and is not to be confined 
 to partaking of heathen sacrifices, nor to intermarriage with 
 
166 II. CORINTHIANS 6, 14. 
 
 the heatlien, much less to association with the opponents of 
 the apostle. It no doubt had a special reference or applica- 
 tion to the peculiar circumstances of the Corinthians, and was 
 intended to guard them against those entangling and danger- 
 ous associations with the unconverted around them, to which 
 they were specially exposed. And as we knoAv that their 
 special danger was from idolaters, (see 1 Cor. ch. 8, and 10, 
 14-33,) whose festivals they Avere constantly urged to attend, 
 it is to be presumed that it was from all association with the 
 heathen in their worship that the apostle intended to warn 
 them. But this is only one application of the principle here 
 laid down, viz., that intimate associations ought not to be 
 formed by the people of God with those who are not his peo- 
 ple. The same remark may be made in reference to the per- 
 sons here intended by imheUevers. It is no doubt true that 
 Iby unbehevers {ol a-LaToi) Paul meant the heathen. (See 1 
 Cor. 6, 6.) But it does not follow from this that intimate as- 
 sociation with the heathen is all that is here forbidden. The 
 principle applies to all the enemies of God and children of 
 darkness. It is intimate, voluntary association with the 
 wicked that is forbidden. The worse a man is, the more 
 openly he is opposed to Christ and his gospel, the greater the 
 danger and evil of connection with him. It is not so much 
 his profession as his real character and influence that is to be 
 taken into account. If it be asked whether the marriage of 
 professors of religion with non-professors, in the modern (or 
 American) sense of those terms, is here expressly prohibited ? 
 The answer must be in the negative. There were no such 
 classes of persons in the apostolic age, as professing and non- 
 professing Christians. The distinction was then between 
 Christians and heathens. Persons born within the pale of the 
 Christian Church, baptized in the name of Christ, and relig- 
 iously educated, do not belong to the same category as the 
 heathen. And the principle which applied to the latter there- 
 fore does not apply to the former. Still it is to be remem- 
 bered that it is the union of incongruous elements, of the 
 devout and undevout, of the spiritual and the worldly, of the 
 good and the evil, of the children of God and the children of 
 the evil one, that the apostle exhorts Christians to avoid. Be 
 not unequally yoked. The w^ord is £T€joo^t7ea>, to he yoked 
 heteroyeneously^ i. e. with an animal of another kind. The 
 allusion is evidently to the Mosaic law which forbade the 
 uniting animals of different kinds in the same yoke. Deut. 22, 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 6, 14. 167 
 
 10. In Lev. 19, 19, hepo^vyoq^ in the Septuagint, means an 
 animal of a different kind. It is the union of incons^ruous, un- 
 congenial elements or persons that is forbidden. With unbe- 
 lievers y as the dative, dTrto-Tois, cannot depend on the preced- 
 ing word, it is explained by resolving the concise phrase of 
 the apostle into the full form, /a^ ytVecr.^e ercpo^ir/. koX oi^tcos 6/ai- 
 ^vyowTcs d7rt(7Tot5. Winer, p. 252. By unbelievers, as above 
 remarked, are to be understood the heathen, those who did 
 not profess faith in the gospel. The exhortation is enforced 
 by the following questions, which are designed to show the 
 incongruity of such unions. For what fellowship hath right- 
 eousness icith imrighteousness f This is stronger than asking, 
 What fellowship have the righteous with the unrighteous ? 
 because there are many bonds of sympathy between good and 
 bad men, arising from the participation of a common nature, 
 and from the fact that in this life, the good are not wholly 
 good, nor the bad wholly bad. The apostle, therefore, con- 
 trasts the characteristic and opposing principles by which the 
 two classes are distinguished. By righteousness as opposed 
 to unrighteousness, (StKaioo-wT; to di/o/xia,) is meant goodness, 
 or moral excellence in general, conformity to the law of God 
 as opposed to opposition to that law. It does not mean justi- 
 fying righteousness, as though the contrast were, as some 
 explain it, between the justilied and the not justified. The 
 opposition intended is that which exists between the righteous 
 and the wicked. ys\i2X fellowship^ (/xerox>?,) partnership. That 
 is, what have they in common ? What bond of union or sym- 
 pathy is there between them? And lohat communion (kol- 
 vtovta), see Acts 2, 42. 1 Cor. 1, 9. 10, 16. Parties are said to 
 be in communion when they are so united that what belongs 
 to the one belongs to the other, or when what is true of the 
 one is true of the other. Believers are in communion, or have 
 fellowship one mth another, when they recognize each other 
 as having a joint interest in the benefits of redemption, and 
 are conscious that the mward experience of the one is that of 
 the other. Incongruous elements cannot be thus united, and 
 any attempt to combine them must destroy the character of 
 one or the other. Ilath light loith darkness. Light is the 
 common scriptural emblem of knowledge, holiness and blessed- 
 ness. Hence Christians are said to be the children of light. 
 Luke 16, 8. 1 Thess. 5, 5. Paul was sent "to turn men from 
 darkness to light," Acts 26, 18. Rom. 13, 12. Eph. 5, 8. 9. 
 Darkness^ on the otlier hand, is the emblem of error, sin and 
 
168 II. CORINTHIANS 6, 15, 
 
 misery. Satan's kingdom is called the kingdom of darkness, 
 and the wicked are the children of darkness ; and the state of 
 final perdition is " outer darkness." Nothing can he more in- 
 congruous than light and darkness, whether in the literal or 
 figurative meaning of the terms. The attempt, therefore, of 
 Christians to remain Christians and retain their inward state 
 as such, and yet to enter voluntarily into intimate fellowship 
 with the world, is as impossible as to combine light and dark- 
 ness, hohness and sin, happiness and misery. 
 
 15. And what concord liath Christ Avith Belial? 
 or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel ? 
 
 What concord, {(rvfjL(j>o)V7]aLs,) " harmony of voice." How 
 discordant or opposite are Christ and Belial ? How then can 
 their followers agree ? The proper orthography of the word 
 according to the Plebrew is Belial, as here in the received 
 text. Many MSS. read Beliar, (agreeably to a common 
 change of the 1 for r by the Jews w^io spoke Greek,) others 
 Beliam. The word is properly an abstract noun signifying 
 wo7'thless?iess, then toickedness. Hence the wdcked are called 
 " sons of Belial," i. e. worthless. It is used as a concrete noun 
 in 2 Sam. 23, 6. Job 34,18. "Wicked one," and hence, by 
 'way of eminence, for Satan, Avho is 6 TrovT^pd?, the evil one. 
 Compare 1 Cor. 10, 21, where the hnpossibility of uniting the 
 service of Christ and the service of Satan is presented in much 
 the same terms as it is here. Christ is God manifest in the 
 flesh ; Satan is the prince of darkness. How can they, or their 
 followers agree ? Or what part (fj^^pts, in the sense ot'j^artici- 
 2mti07i, felloivship. Col. 1, 12) hath he that believeth with an 
 infidel. In modern usage an unbeliever often means one des- 
 titute of saving faith ; and an ififidel one destitute even of 
 speculative fiiitli, one who denies tlie gospel to be a revelation 
 from God. This is a distinction unknown to the Bible. The 
 word here rendered infidel is in v. 14 rendered unbeliever. 
 In the apostolic age all who professed faith of any kind were 
 called believers, and unbelievers were infidels. It was as- 
 sumed that the faitli possessed was genuine ; and therefore it 
 was assumed that all believers were truly the children of God. 
 A mere speculative believer and an infidel may agree well 
 enough in their tastes, character and pursuits. There is no 
 such incompatibility or antipathy between them, as the apos- 
 tle assumes to exist between the (Trto-Tos and uTna-Tos) believer 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 6, 16. 169 
 
 and unbeliever. It is taken for granted that faith changes the 
 whole character; that it makes a man move in an entirely 
 different sphere, having different feelings, objects, and princi- 
 ples from those of unbelievers ; so that intimate union, com- 
 munion or sympathy between believers and unbelievers is as 
 impossible as fellowship between light and darkness, Christ 
 and Belial. And it must be so. They may indeed have many 
 things in common ; a common country, common kindred, com- 
 mon w orldly avocations, common natural affections, but the 
 interior life is entirely different ; not only incongruous, but 
 essentially opposed the one to the other. To the one, Christ 
 is God, the object of supreme reverence and love ; to the oth- 
 er, he is a mere man. To the one, the great object of Ufe is to 
 promote the glory of Christ and to secure his favour ; to the 
 other, these are objects of indifference. Elements so discord- 
 ant can never be united into a harmonious whole. 
 
 16. And wliat agreement liatli the temple of God 
 with idols ? for ye are the temple of the living God ; 
 as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in 
 (them) ; and I will be their God, and they shall be my 
 people. 
 
 In this and the following verses w^e have, 1. The assertion 
 of the incongruity between the temple of God and idols. 
 2. The reason assigned for presenting this incongruity, ''For 
 ye are the temple of God.' 3. The proof from Scripture that 
 believers are God's temple. 4. The duty which flows from 
 this intimate relation to God ; and 5. The gracious promise 
 made to all those who live in accordance with the relation 
 which they bear to God. What agreement (cn;yKaTa^eo-i9, see 
 Luke 23, 51,) hath the temple of God icith idols f A building 
 consecrated to the true God is no place for idols. Men can- 
 not combine the worship of God and the worship of devils. 
 Idolatry is everywhere in Scripture represented as the great- 
 est insult the creature can offer the Creator ; and the grossest 
 form of that insult is to erect idols in God's own temple. 
 Such w^as the indignity which those Corinthians offered to 
 God, who, while professing to be Christians, joined in the re- 
 ligious services of the heathen. And such, in its measure, is 
 the offence committed when the people of God become associ- 
 ated with the wricked in their inward and outward life. It is 
 
170 II. CORINTHIANS 6, 16. 
 
 the introduction of idols into God's temple. For ye are the 
 temple of the Iwing God. There would be no propriety in 
 the preceding illustration if believers were not God's temple. 
 This, therefore, the apostle first asserts and then proves. The 
 text is here uncertain. The majority of MSS. read with the 
 common text, v/xci?, ye ; Lachraann, Meyer and some other 
 editors, on the authority of a few MSS. and of the context, 
 read T7/x€ts, we. The sense is substantially the same. The 
 common text is to be preferred both on external and internal 
 grounds. The apostle is addressing the Corinthians, and prop- 
 erly therefore says. Ye are the temple of God. A temple is 
 not a building simply consecrated to God, but one in which 
 he dwells, as he dwelt by the visible manifestation of his glory 
 in the temple of old. Hence heaven, as God's dwelling place, 
 is called his temple. Ps. 11, 2. Habak. 2, 20. Christ's body 
 is called a temjole, because in him dwelt the fulness of the 
 Godhead. John 2, 19. Believers collectively, or the church, 
 is God's temple, because inhabited by his Spirit, Eph. 2, 21, 
 and for the same reason every individual believer, and every 
 believer's body is a temple of God. 1 Cor. 3, 16. 6, 19. To 
 prove that they were the temple of God, individually and col- 
 lectively, he therefore cites the declaration of the Scriptures 
 that God dwells in his people. " I will dwell in them and 
 walk in them." God is said to dwell wherever he specially 
 and permanently manifests his presence. And since he thus 
 specially and permanently manifests his presence in his people 
 collectively and individually, he is said to dwell in all and in 
 each. To walk in them is sim23ly a j3arallelism with the pre- 
 ceding clause, expressing the idea of the divine presence in 
 another form. The nearest approach to the words here cited 
 is Lev. 26, 11. 12, where the same thought is expressed, though 
 in somewhat different words. Instead of, "I will set my 
 tabernacle among you," the apostle expresses the same idea 
 by saying, "I will dwell in them." In them., is not simply 
 among tliem, because the presence of God by his Spirit is al- 
 ways represented as internal, in the heart. " If Christ be in 
 you," says the apostle, "the body is dead, &c." "If the 
 Spirit of Him who raised Christ from the dead dwell in you, 
 &c." Rom. 8, 10. 11. So of every believer our Lord says, 
 " If a man love me, he will keep my words, and my Father 
 will love him ; and we ^vill come unto him, and make our 
 abode with him," John 14, 23. Every thing is full of God. 
 An insect, a flower, is a constant manilcstation of his presence 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 6, 17. 171 
 
 and power. It is what it is because God is in it. So of the 
 human soul, it is said to be full of God when its inward state, 
 its affections and acts, are determined and controlled by him, 
 so as to be a constant manifestation of the divine presence. 
 Then the soul is pure, and glorious, and free, and blessed. 
 This is what God promises to accomplish in us, when he says, 
 " I will dwell in you and walk in you." It is only a variation 
 of form whem it is added, I will he their God^ and they shall 
 be my people. This is the great promise of the covenant with 
 Abraham and with all the true Israel. It is one of the most 
 comprehensive and frequently repeated promises of the Scrip- 
 tures. Gen. 17, 8. Deut. 29, 13. Jerem. 31, 33. Heb. 8, 10, 
 &c., &c. There is unspeakably more in the promises of God 
 than we are able to understand. The promise that the na- 
 tions should be blessed in the seed of Abraham, as unfolded in 
 the Xew Testament, is found to comprehend all the blessings 
 of redemption. So the promise, I will be their God, and they 
 shall be my people, contains more than it has ever entered 
 into the heart of man to conceive. How low are our concep- 
 tions of God ! Of necessity our conceptions of what it is to 
 have a God, and that God, Jehovah, must be entirely inade- 
 quate. It is not only to have an infinite protector and bene- 
 factor, but an infinite portion ; an infinite object of love and 
 confidence ; an infinite source of knowledge and holiness. It 
 is for God to be to us what he designed to be when he created 
 us after his image, and filled us with his fulness. His people, 
 are those whom he recognizes as his peculiar property, the 
 objects of his love, and the recipients of his favours. 
 
 17. Wherefore come out from among tliem, and 
 be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the un- 
 clean (thing) ; and I will receive you. 
 
 This is a free citation from Is. 52, 11. 12, where the same 
 exhortation to separate themselves from the wicked, and spe- 
 cially from the heathen, is addressed to the people of God. 
 The words and I will receive you have nothing to answer to 
 them in the passage in Isaiah, unless it be the words " God 
 shall be your rere-ward ; " literally, " he that gathereth you." 
 In Judges 19, 18 the same word is rendered to receive^ 
 " There is no one receiveth me to house." It is more proba- 
 ble, however, that they are borrowed from Ezekiel 20, 34, as 
 
172 II. CORINTHIANS 6, 18. 
 
 it is rendered in the Septuagint. The exhortation is founded 
 on the preceding passage. God is most intimately related to 
 liis people. They are his temple. He dwells in them. There- 
 fore they are bound to keep themselves unspotted from the 
 world. Their being God's temple, his presence in them, and 
 his regarding them as his people, depends upon their separa- 
 tion from the world. For if any man love the world, the love 
 of the Father is not in him. 1 John 2, 15. In this whole con- 
 text the apostle clothes his OAvn exhortation to the Corinthians 
 in the language of God himself, that they might see that what 
 he taught was indeed the word of God. 
 
 18. And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall 
 be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty. 
 
 This is a continuation of the promise commenced in the 
 preceding verse. God declares that he will not only receive 
 into his favour those who regard themselves as his temple and 
 'keep themselves aloof from all contaminating associations with 
 the wicked, but that he will be a father to them. It is not 
 with the favour of a master to a servant that he will regard 
 them, but with the favour which a father exercises to his sons 
 and daughters. This is the language of the Lord Almighty ; 
 of the omnipotent God. To be his sons and daughters is a 
 dignity and blessedness before which all earthly honours and 
 all worldly good disappear. It is doubtful what particular 
 passage of the Old Testament the apostle had in his mind in 
 this citation. Some think it was 2 Sam. 7, 14, but there 
 God merely says to David in reference to his promised seed, 
 " I will be his father, and he shall be my son." There is 
 too little similarity in form, and too remote an analogy of 
 sentiment, to render it probable that that passage was the 
 one referred to. Is. 43, 6 is more in point. " Bring my 
 sons from far, and ray daughters from the ends of the earth." 
 Here the people of God are said to be his sons and daughters ; 
 Avhich is all that the citation of the apostle asserts. The con- 
 cluding verses of this chapter are an instructive illustration of 
 the way in which the New Testament writers quote the Old. 
 1. They often quote a translation M'hich does not strictly ad- 
 here to the original. 2. They often quote according to the 
 sense and not according to the letter. 3. They often blend 
 together different passages of Scrii)ture, so as to give the sense 
 not of any one passage, but the combmed sense of several. 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 7. 173 
 
 4. They sometimes give the sense not of any particular pas- 
 sage or passages, but, so to speak, the general sense of Scrip- 
 ture. That is, they quote the Scriptures as saying what is no- 
 Avhere found in so many words, but what nevertheless the 
 Scriptures clearly teach. There is no such passage, for exam- 
 ple, as that contained in this verse in the Old Testament, but 
 the sentiment is often and clearly therein expressed. 5. They 
 never quote as of authority any but the canonical books of the 
 Old Testament. 
 
 CHAPTER VH. 
 
 An exhortation founded on what is said in the preceding chapter, v. 1. 
 Paul's consolation derived from the favourable account which he had 
 received from Corinth, vs. 2-16. 
 
 The effect produced 07i the church in Corinth by the apostle's 
 former letter^ and his consequent satisfaction and joy. 
 
 After in v. 1 exhorting them to live as became those to 
 whom such precious promises had been given as he had just 
 recited from the word of God, he in vs. 2. 3 repeats his desire 
 before expressed, 6, 13, that they would reciprocate his ardent 
 love. So far as he was concerned there was nothmg in the 
 way of this cordial reconciliation. He had not injured them, 
 nor was he alienated from them. He had great confidence in 
 them. His apprehensions and anxiety had been in a great 
 measure removed by the account which he had received from 
 Titus of the feelings of the Corinthians towards him, vs. 4-7. 
 It is true that he did at one time regret having written that 
 letter respecting the incestuous person ; but he no longer re- 
 gretted it, because be found that the sorrow which that letter 
 occasioned was the sorrow of true repentance, redounding not 
 to their injury, but to their good, vs. 8. 9. It was not the 
 sorrow of the world, but true godly sorrow, as was evident 
 from its effects, vs. 10-12. Therefore the apostle was com- 
 forted, and delighted to find how much Titus had been grati- 
 fied by Ms visit to Corinth. All that the apostle had told him 
 
174 II. CORINTHIANS V, 1. 
 
 of the good dispositions of the Corinthians had proved to be 
 true, vs. 13-16. 
 
 1. Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, 
 let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh 
 and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God. 
 
 This verse properly belongs to the preceding chapter. It 
 is the appropriate conclusion of the exposition there made. 
 The promises referred to are, 1st. Of the indwelling of God, 
 6, 16. 2d. Of his favour, v. 17. 3d. That they should be his 
 sons and daughters. Therefore^ says the apostle, having these 
 promises of intimate association with God, and this assurance 
 of his love, let us purify ourselves ; i. e. not merely keep our- 
 selves pure by avoiding contamination, but, as already defiled, 
 let us strive to become pure. Though the work of purifica- 
 tion is so often referred to God as its author. Acts 15, 9. Eph. 
 5, 26, this does not preclude the agency of his people. They 
 are to work out their own salvation, because it is God who 
 worketh in them both to will and to do. If God's agency in 
 sanctification does not arouse and direct ours ; if it does not 
 create the desire for holiness, and strenuous efforts to attain 
 it, we may be sure that we are not its subjects. He is leaving 
 us undisturbed in our sins. From all filthiness of the flesh 
 and spirit. All sin is a pollution. There are two classes of 
 sin here recognized ; those of the flesh, and those of the spirit. 
 By the former we are to understand those sins which defile 
 the body, as drunkenness and debauchery ; and by the latter 
 those which affect only the soul, as pride and malice. By 
 filthiness of the flesh, therefore, is not to be understood mere 
 ceremonial uncleanness, nor the participation of the body in 
 sinful acts, such as bowing down to an idol, or offering incense 
 to false gods, but the desecration of the body as the temple 
 of the Holy Ghost. See 1 Cor. 6, 19. Perfecting holiness. 
 This expresses or indicates the way in which we are to purify 
 ourselves. It is by perfecting holiness. The word tViTcAcw 
 does not here mean simply to practise^ but to complete, to 
 carry on to perfection. Comp. 8, 6. 11. Phil. 1, 6. It is only 
 by being completely or perfectly holy that we can attain tlie 
 purity required of us as the temples of God. JloUness (dyio>- 
 o-vVt;, Rom. 1,3. 1 Thess. 3, 10) includes not only the negative 
 idea of i)urity, or freedom from aU defilement, but also, posi- 
 tively, that of moral excellence. In the fear of God, This 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 7, 2. 175 
 
 is the motive which is to determine our endeavours to purify 
 ourselves. It is not regard to the good of others, nor our ovra 
 happiness, but reverence for God. We are to be holy, be- 
 cause he is holy. 
 
 2. Receive us ; we have wronged no man, we have 
 corrupted no man, we have defrauded no man. 
 
 deceive us ; literally, make room for ics, i. e. in your heart. 
 It is a repetition or resumption of the request, " Be ye also 
 enlarged," contained in 6, 13. Then follow the reasons, at 
 least those of a negative kind, why they should thus receive 
 the apostle. We have icroiiged no man^ {rjStK-qa-aixev^) ice have 
 treated no one unjustly. The expression is perfectly general. 
 It may refer either to his conduct as a man, or to the exercise 
 of his apostolical authority. There is nothing to limit it, or 
 to determine the kind of injustice which had been laid to his 
 charge, or which he here had specially in view. We have cor- 
 rupted no man. The word c^^eipw, rendered to corrupt^ means 
 to injure or destroy, either in a moral or physical sense. It is 
 used in a moral sense, 11, 3. 1 Cor. 15, 33. Eph. 4, 22, and in 
 1 Cor. 3, 17, it is used first in the one sense and then in the 
 other. *' If any defile the temple of God, him shall God de- 
 stroy." Which sense should be adopted here is uncertain. 
 Paul may mean to say that he had coi'rupted no one's morals 
 by his example or arts of seduction ; or that he had corrupted 
 no man's faith by his false teaching ; or that he had ruined no 
 man as to his estate. The only reason for preferring the lat- 
 ter interpretation is that the other words with which it is as- 
 sociated express external injuries. There is no ground for the 
 assumption that Paul refers to his former letter and intends to 
 vindicate himself from the charge of injustice or undue severi- 
 ty in his treatment of the incestuous person. That matter he 
 has not yet adverted to ; and the expressions here used are 
 too general, and the last (" we have defrauded no man ") is 
 inapplicable to that case. By defrauding he probably means 
 acting unfairly in pecuniary affairs. The word TrAeovcKrecu, in 
 the New Testament, means either to have or take advan- 
 tage of any one, 2, 11, or, to make gain of to defraud. The 
 usage of the word and of its cognates is in favour of the 
 latter sense. 12, 17. 18. 1 Cor. 5, 10. 6, 10. Paul was special- 
 ly careful to avoid all occasion of susj^icion as to the disposi- 
 tion of the money which he raised from the churches for the 
 8* 
 
176 II. CORINTHIANS 7, 3.4. 
 
 relief of the poor. 8, 19. 20, and no doubt his enemies were 
 ready enough to insinuate that he appropriated the money to 
 his own use. He had therefore occasion to show that he had 
 never made gain of them, that he had defrauded no man. 
 
 3. I speak not (this) to condemn (you) : for I have 
 said before, that ye are in our hearts to die and live 
 with (you). 
 
 I speaJc not this to condemii you ; i. e. In defending my- 
 self I do not mean to condemn you. This may mean either, 
 ' In saying that I have wronged no man, I do not intend to 
 imply that you have wronged me ; ' or, 'I do not mean to im- 
 ply that you think of me so unjustly as to suppose that I have 
 wronged, injured or defrauded any one.' In other words, 'I 
 do not mean to question your love.' For. AYhat follows as- 
 signs the reason or proof that he had no unkind feeling towards 
 them which would lead him to condemn them. I said before^ 
 viz., in 6, 12, that ye are in our hearts. That is, that I love 
 you. He had said that his heart was enlarged towards them, 
 which was proof enough that he did not now mean to upbraid 
 them. To die and live loith you^ ck t6 o-waTro^avuv koI o-v^rjv^ 
 so as to die and live together. That is, ' Ye are so rooted in 
 my heart that I would gladly live and die with you,' or, ' so 
 that neither death nor life can separate us.' As remarked 
 above, Paul's love for the Corinthians seems to have been ex- 
 traordinary, having something of the nature of a passion, be- 
 ing more ardent than either their good qualities or their 
 conduct towards him could account for. This is often the 
 case in men of warm and generous feeling, Avho have frequent- 
 ly to say, ' The more abundantly we love, the less we are 
 loved.' 
 
 4. Great (is) my boldness of speech toward you, 
 great (is) my glorying of you : I am filled with com- 
 fort, I am exceeding joyful in all our tribulation. 
 
 So far from having any disposition to upbraid or to re- 
 criminate, his heart was overflowing with far difterent feelings. 
 He had not only confidence in them, he was proud of them ; 
 he was not only comforted, he was filled with exceeding joy. 
 
II. CORINTHIANS T, 4. 177 
 
 There is a climax here, as Calvin says: Gradatim procedit 
 amplificando : plus enim est gloriari, quani secure et quieto 
 esse animo : liberari vero a moerore ex multis afflictionibus 
 concepto, utroque majus. His boasting of them was more 
 than having confidence in them ; and his rejoicing in the midst 
 of his afflictions was more than being comforted. Great is 
 my boldness of speech toicards you. The word is Trapp-qa-'ia^ 
 which here, as in many other places, Eph. 3, 12. Heb. 3, 6. 
 1 John 2, 28. 3, 21. 4, 17. 5, 14, instead of its primary sense 
 of freedom of speech, expresses the idea of joyful confidence ; 
 i. e. the state of mind from which freedom of utterance, or 
 boldness of speech, flows. Paul means to say that so far from 
 wishing to condemn the Corinthians he had joyful confidence 
 in them. And not only that, he adds, but. Great is my glo- 
 rying of you^ (Kavx^crt?,) i. c. my hoasting over you. The ac- 
 counts which the apostle had just received of the state of 
 things at Corinth, and especially of the efiect produced by his 
 former letter, had not only obliterated his feelings of anxiety 
 and doubt concerning them, but made him boast of them. 
 He gloried on their account. He was disposed to tell every 
 one how well his dear Corinthians had behaved. He thus, as 
 it were, unconsciously lays bare the throbbings of his warm 
 and generous heart. I am filled icith comfort^ literally, ' with 
 the comfort,' i. e. the comfort to which he afterwards refers ; 
 or the comfort which his situation specially demanded. Such 
 was the apostle's anxiety about the efiect of his former letter 
 that, as he says, 2, 12, "he had no rest in his spirit," and 
 therefore left Troas and hastened into Macedonia that he 
 might meet Titus on liis way back from Corinth. This anxie- 
 ty was now all gone. His mind was at rest. He was full of 
 consolation. I am exceedingly joyful^ (vvrepTi-eptcrcrevo/xat ry 
 Xttpa,) I more than abound in joy^ or the joy. Comp. Rom. 
 5, 20. He was more than merely comforted, he was overflow- 
 ing with joy, and that too in spite of all the troubles which 
 still pressed upon him, for he adds, hi all our tribulation. 
 The favourable accounts which Paul had received from Cor- 
 inth, although they had removed some of the causes of his 
 anxiety and sufiering, left others in their full force. So that 
 even when he wrote he was in great trouble. He therefore 
 uses the present tense. 'I am overflowing with joy in the 
 midst of tribulation.' Another proof that joy and sorrow may 
 coexist in the mind. The martyr at the stake, in the midst 
 of his agony, has often been fiUed with ecstatic joy. 
 
178 II. CORINTHIANS 7, 5. 6. 
 
 5. For, when we were come into Macedonia, our 
 flesli had no rest, but we were troubled on every side ; 
 without (were) fightings, within (were) fears. 
 
 The connection is with the last clause of the preceding 
 verse. I was comforted in tribulation, for also [koX ydp) hav- 
 ing come into Macedo7iia^ our flesh had no rest. Paul did 
 not leave his troubles behind him in Troas, 2, 12, but also 
 in Macedonia his flesh had no rest. 'Bj flesh he does not 
 mean his body, for the sufferings, which he immediately 
 specifies, were not corporeal, but mental. It stands for liis 
 whole sensitive nature considered as frail. It is equivalent 
 to saying, ' my feeble nature had no rest.' The same idea is 
 expressed in 2, 12 by saying, "I had no rest in my spirit." 
 Sut, so far from having rest, we loere troubled (^Xt/3o/xevoi, 
 either T^fxc^a is to be supplied, or a slight departure from the 
 regular construction is to be assumed) o?i every side., Iv TravTL, 
 in every way. This is amplified and explained by saying, 
 without (were) fightings^ loithin fears. Calvin and many 
 other commentators understand loithin and without to mean 
 within and without the church. Paul's troubles were partly 
 from his contentions with the Jews and heathen, and partly 
 from his anxieties about the conduct and welfare of Christians. 
 It is more common and natural to understand the distinction 
 to be between inward and outward troubles. He had to con- 
 tend with a-U kinds of outward difiiculties, and was oppressed 
 with an inward load of anxieties. Fears., painful apprehen- 
 sions lest his labours should be vain, lest his enemies should at 
 last prevail, lest his disciples should apostatize and perish, or 
 the peace and purity of the church be disturbed. 
 
 6. Nevertheless God, that comforteth those that 
 are cast down, comforted us by the coming of Titus. 
 
 The order of the words is inverted in the English version. 
 In the Greek the order is. He who comforteth those who are 
 cast down, comforted us, even God, by the coming of Titus. 
 The fact that it is the characteristic work of God, or, so to 
 speak, his oflice, to comfort the dejected, is thus made more 
 prominent. All the miserable are thus encouraged, because 
 they are miserable, to look to that God who proclaims himself 
 as the comforter. It is to be remarked that the objects of his 
 compassion, those who call forth the exercise of his power as 
 
II. CORINTHIANS T, 1. 179 
 
 a consoler, are described not by a term expressive of moral 
 excellence, but by a word which simply designates them as 
 sufferers. The Tair^woi are properly simply the low, those who 
 are in depressed circumstances. As, however, it is the ten- 
 dency of such circumstances to render men fearful, or meek, 
 or humble, the word often expresses one or the other of these 
 states of mind. In 10, 1 it means timid as opposed to hold ; 
 in 1 Pet. 5, 5, it is the opposite oi proud. Here, however, it 
 has its simple, proper sense — those who are low, i. e. cast 
 down by suffering so as to be the proper objects of compassion. 
 Luke 1, 52. James 1, 9. Ps. 18, 27. Paul says God comforted 
 him by the coming of Titus, whom he had sent to Corinth to 
 know the state of the church there. 
 
 7. And not by his coming only, but by the conso- 
 lation wherewith he was comforted in you, when he 
 told us your earnest desire, your mourning, your fer- 
 vent mind toward me ; so that I rejoiced the more. 
 
 It was not the pleasure of seeing Titus, so much as the in- 
 telligence which he brought, which comforted the apostle. 
 By the consolation wherewith he was comforted in you^ {i<j> 
 ■vjXLv,) in reference to, or, as concerns you. The fact that Ti- 
 tus was comforted in Corinth was a great consolation to the 
 apostle, and he was made to share in the comfort which Titus 
 had experienced, as the latter reported to him (avayyeAXetv, to 
 bring back word^ to recount^ Acts 14, 27. 16, 38,) your earnest 
 desire^ i. e. either your earnest desire to see me and to secure 
 my approbation ; or, your earnest desire to correct the evils 
 existing among you. The former is to be preferred, both on 
 account of the context and the signification of the word limro- 
 ^rjo-i^, which means strong affection. Your mourning^ (oSvp- 
 //.ds, i. e. wailing^ lamentation^ Matt. 2, 18,) either, mourning 
 on account of their sins, or on account of having offended and 
 pained the apostle. The latter is the more probable on ac- 
 count of what follows. Your fervent mind toioard me^ (C^Xos 
 virlp ifxov,) zeal for me, i. e. the great interest which you took 
 in me. Gal. 4, 17. 18. As the zeal of which the apostle 
 speaks is expressly said to be a zeal of which he was the ob- 
 ject, it is probable that the preceding words {earnest desire 
 and mourning) express their feehng and conduct in reference 
 to him. What was so specially gratifying to him was that in 
 
180 II. CORINTHIANS 7, 8. 
 
 a church in which he had met with so much opposition, and 
 in which the false teachers had exerted so great and so evil an 
 influence, the mass of the people proved themselves devoted 
 to him. Devotion to Paul, however, involved devotion to the 
 truth and holiness, just as zeal for the false teachers involved 
 the opposite. jSo that I rejoiced the more^ i. e. I had more 
 joy than the mere coming of Titus and the satisfaction which 
 he experienced in Corinth were able to impart. 
 
 8. For though I made you sorry with a letter, I 
 do not repent, though I did repent : for I perceive 
 that the same epistle hath made you sorry, though (it 
 were) but for a season. 
 
 This and the following verses assign the reason why he 
 rejoiced. It was because the letter which he had written 
 them, although it made them sorry, yet did them good. 
 Though I made you sorry (i. e. caused you grief) loith a letter, 
 rather, by the letter, i. e. the letter which related to the incest- 
 uous person. I do not repent, though I did repent. That is, 
 he regretted writing as he had done until he learned through 
 Titus the good effect his letter had produced. Calvin says 
 the word fxeTa/xekofxai must not be taken here to express re- 
 pentance, for that would imply that his former letter was 
 written under the influence of human feeling, and not by the 
 direction of the Holy Spirit. He thinks that all Paul meant 
 to say is, that he was grieved at having given the Corinthians 
 pain. This, however, is not the meaning of the word. See 
 Matt. 21, 29. 32. We must accommodate our theory of in- 
 spiration to the phenomena of Scripture, and not the phenome- 
 na to our theory. Inspiration simply rendered its subject in- 
 fallible in writing and speaking as the messenger of God. Paul 
 might doubt whether he had in a given instance made a wise 
 use of his infallibility, as he might doubt whether he had wise- 
 ly exercised his power of working miracles. He never doubt- 
 ed as to the truth of what he had written. There is another 
 thing to be taken into consideration. Inspiration did not re- 
 veal itself in the consciousness. It is perfectly conceivable 
 that a man might })e inspired without knowing it. Paul was 
 no doubt impelled by the Spirit to write his former epistle as 
 well as divinely guided in writing ; but all he was conscious 
 of was his own thoughts and feelings. The believer is not 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 7, 8. 181 
 
 conscious of the operations of grace, neither were the apostles 
 conscious of inspiration. As the believer, however, may know 
 that he is the subject of divine influence, so the apostles knew 
 that they were inspired. But as the believer may doubt the 
 wisdom of some of his holiest acts, so the apostles might 
 doubt the wisdom of acts done under divine guidance. Such 
 acts are always wise, but the agent may not always see their 
 wisdom. 
 
 For I perceive that the same epistle made you sorry . This 
 gives the reason why he at first regretted having written. He 
 knew that his letter had excited much feeling in Corinth, and 
 until he learned the nature and eflects of that feeling, he re- 
 pented having written. Though but for a season. That is, 
 although the sorrow which he had occasioned was only tem- 
 porary, yet it made him regret his former letter. This inter- 
 pretation supposes a different punctuation of the passage from 
 that found either in the common editions of the Greek text, 
 or in the Enghsh version. It supposes that the proper place 
 for the period or colon is after " I did not repent," and not 
 after the following clause, " I did repent." In this latter case 
 the whole sense is difterent, and the latter clause of the verse 
 [I^Xi-Kdi yd-p) is connected with the first clause, and is intended 
 to give the reason why he said he had made them sorry, and 
 not the reason why he regretted having done so. The sense 
 
 of the whole would then be, ' I made you sorry for I 
 
 perceive from what I hear from Titus, that my former letter 
 did, although only for a while, grieve you.' The next verse 
 then begins a new sentence. But this is an unnatural con- 
 struction ; it requires the verse to be paraphrased in order to 
 bring out the sense ; and after all it amounts to little to say, 
 ' I made you sorry, for I see I made you sorry.' The con- 
 struction is simpler and the sense better if we put a colon or 
 semi-colon after " I do not repent," and make v. 9 a part of 
 the same sentence. ' Though I made you sorry I do not re- 
 pent : although I did repent, (for I see that my letter made 
 you sorry, though only for a time,) I now rejoice.' The 
 meaning is, 'Though I did repent, I now rejoice.' Thus the 
 passage is printed in the Greek of Stiee and Thiele's Poly- 
 giott, and, so far as the pointing is concerned, (omitting the 
 marks of parenthesis,) in Tischendorfs Greek Testament. In 
 the Vulgate the same sense is expressed. " Quoniam etsi 
 contristavi vos in epistola, non me pcenitet ; et si pceniteret, 
 
182 II. CORINTHIAKS 7, 9. 10. 
 
 videns quod epistola ilia (etsi ad hofam) vos contristavit, nunc 
 gaudeo, &c." So also Luther. 
 
 9. Now I rejoice, not that ye were made sorry, but 
 that ye sorrowed to repentance : for ye were made sor- 
 ry after a godly manner, that ye might receive damage 
 by us in nothing. 
 
 He rejoiced, not in their grief, but that their grief led them 
 to repentance. A parent, when he sees a child mourning over 
 his sins, sincerely rejoices, however much he sympathizes in 
 his grief Sorrowed unto repentance^ (ets /xeravotav,) i. e. 
 change of mind, sometimes in the restricted sense of the word 
 mind, (or purpose,) as in Heb. 12, 17; generally, in the com- 
 prehensive sense of the word as including the principles and 
 affections, the whole soul, or inward life. Matt. 3, 8. Luke 5, 
 32. Acts 5, 31. Repentance, therefore, in its religious sense, 
 is not merely a change of purpose, but includes a change of 
 heart which leads to a turning from sin with grief and hatred 
 thereof unto God. Such is the repentance here intended, as 
 appears from what follows. For (this shows they sorrowed 
 unto repentance) they icere made sorry (they grieved) after a 
 godly so7% {Kara. -^eoV,) i. e. in a manner agreeable to the mind 
 and will of God ; so that God approved of their sorrow. He 
 saw that it arose from right views of their past conduct. 
 That, (tm, in order that,) as expressing the design of God in 
 making their sorrow a sorrow unto repentance. Ye might 
 receive damage by us i?i nothing, God had so ordered that 
 Paul's letter, instead of producing any mjury, had resulted in 
 the greatest spiritual good. 
 
 10. For godly sorrow worketh repentance to sal- 
 vation not to be repented of; but the sorrow of the 
 world worketh death. 
 
 The connection is with the last clause. ' Ye were not in- 
 jured by us, for the sorrow we occasioned worked repent- 
 ance.' Sorrow in itself is not repentance ; neither is remorse, 
 nor self-condemnation, nor self-loathing, nor external reforma- 
 tion. These all are its attendants or consequences ; but re- 
 pentance itself (^cTtti/ota) is a turning from sin to holiness, from 
 a state of sin to a holv state. It is a real change of heart. It 
 
II. CORINTHIANS V, 10. 183 
 
 is a change of views, feelings and purposes, resulting in a 
 change of life. Godly sorrow icorketh repentance, i. e. that 
 sorrow on account of sin, which arises from proper apprehen- 
 sions of God and of our relation to him, necessarily leads to 
 that entire change in the inward life which is expressed by 
 the word repentance, and which is connected with salvation. 
 It is not the ground of our salvation ; but it is a part of it and 
 a necessary condition of it. Those who repent are saved ; the 
 impenitent perish. Repentance therefore is unto salvation, 
 Comp. Acts 11, 18. It is that inward change in which salva- 
 tion largely consists. Never to he repented of. This may be- 
 long either to the repentance or to salvation. If to the latter, 
 the word a/x^TafjiiXrfTos maybe taken in the sense o^ unchange- 
 able. See Rom. 11, 29. So the Yulgate explains it, ad salutem 
 stabilem ; or it may mean not to he regretted. Repentance 
 leads to a salvation which no one ever will regret. So Luther 
 and many of the moderns. The position of the words is in 
 favour of connecting " not to be repented of" with " salva- 
 tion." Had Paul intended the other connection, he would 
 have probably said cts /xcravotai/ d/xeravoTyTov, and not have 
 chosen (djacTa/xcXr/Tov) a word of an entirely diiferent root. 
 Still, as " not to be repented of" seems to be an unsuitable epi- 
 thet when applied to salvation, the majority of commentators 
 prefer the other connection, and consider the apostle as desig- 
 nating true repentance as that which no one will regret not- 
 withstanding the sorrow w^ith which it is attended. But the 
 sorrow of the icorld worheth death. By the sorrow of the 
 world is not meant worldly sorrow, i. e. sorrow arising out of 
 worldly considerations, but the sorrow of men of the world. 
 In other words, koct/xov is the genitive of the subject, not a 
 qualifying genitive. ^' The world " means men, the mass of 
 mankind as distinguished from the church. 1 Cor. 1, 20. Gal. 
 4, 3. John 7, 7. 14, 7. &c. What therefore the apostle means 
 is the sorrow of unrenewed men, the sorrow of the unsanctified 
 heart. Of this sorrow, as opposed to godly sorrow, he says, 
 it works deaths not physical death, nor specifically eternal 
 death as opposed to salvation, but evil in the general sense 
 of the word. The effects of godly sorrow are salutary ; the 
 effects of worldly sorrow (the sorrow of worldly men) are evil. 
 It is a great mistake to suppose that the natural tendency of 
 pain and sorrow is to good. They tend rather to excite re- 
 bellion against God and all evil feelings. It is only when they 
 are sanctified, i. e. when they are experienced by the holy, and 
 
184 II. CORINTHIANS 7, 11. 
 
 are made by the Spirit of God to call into exercise the resig- 
 nation, patience and faith of the sufferer, that they bring forth 
 fruit unto righteousness. The natural element of holiness is 
 happiness, and misery is the natural element of sin. They 
 stand severally in the relation both of cause and effect. The 
 more miserable you make a bad man, the Avorse you make 
 him. The wicked are said to curse God while they gnaw 
 their tongues mth pain, and they repent not of their deeds. 
 Rev. 16, 10. 11. 
 
 11. Tor behold this self-same thing, that ye sor- 
 rowed after a godly sort, what carefulness it wrought 
 in you, yea, (what) clearing of yourselves, yea, (what) 
 indignation, yea, (what) fear, yea, (what) vehement de- 
 sire, yea, (what) zeal, yea, (what) revenge ! In all 
 (things) ye have approved yourselves to be clear in 
 this matter. 
 
 The question may be asked whether Paul means here to 
 describe the uniform effects of genuine rei^entance, so as to 
 furnish a rule by which each one may judge of his own expe- 
 rience. This, to say the least, is not the primary design of 
 the passage. If it affords such a rule it is only incidentally. 
 The passage is historical. It describes the effects which godly 
 sorrow produced in the Corinthian church. It shows how 
 the church felt and acted in reference to a specific offence, 
 when roused to a sense of its enormity. Foi\ behold! The 
 connection is with what precedes. ' Godly sorrow is salutary, 
 for, see what effects it wrought for you.' litis self-^ame 
 thing^ i. e. this very thing, viz., hemg sorry after a godly 
 sort. ^VJiat carefulness it wrought in you {vfjuv, for you, for 
 your advantage). Carefulness, (o-ttovSt/v',) literally, haste ; then 
 the inward feeling which leads to haste ; then any outward 
 manifestation of that earnestness of feeling. Here it means 
 earnest solicitude as opposed both to indifference and neglect. 
 The Corinthians had strangely allowed a grievous sin, com- 
 mitted by a church-member, to pass unnoticed, as a matter 
 of no importance. The first effect or manifestation of their 
 godly sorrow was an earnest solicitude on the subject, and a 
 desire to have the evil corrected ; the very oi)})Osite of their 
 former indifference. It is so in all cases of repentance. Sins 
 
11. CORINTHIANS V, 11. 185 
 
 which had been regarded as of little account, are apprehended 
 in their true character ; and deep feeling takes the place of 
 unconcern. Yea^ ichat clearing of yourselves. The particle 
 dAAa is here and through the verse rendered yea. It is used, 
 as in 1, 9, to indicate a gradation — still more. 'Not only so- 
 licitude, but moreover clearing of yourselves^'' (dTroAoytW.) 
 Their sorrow led them earnestly to apologize for the sin 
 which they had committed. Not to extenuate their guilt, but 
 to acknowledge it and to seek forgiveness. The apology for 
 sin to which repentance leads, includes acknowledgment and 
 deprecation. This apology was addressed to the apostle. 
 They endeavoured to regain his good opinion. Moreover, 
 indignation., either at the offence or at themselves that such 
 an offence should have been allowed. They felt angry at 
 themselves for their past misconduct. This is one of the most 
 marked experiences of every sincere penitent. The unreason- 
 ableness, the meanness, the wickedness of his conduct rouse 
 his indignation; he desires to seek vengeance on himself. 
 Bengel says the word ayavaKT-qcn^ is chosen with special pro- 
 priety, as it denotes a pain of which a man has the cause in 
 himself. What fear. Whether fearful apprehension of God's 
 displeasure, or fear of the apostle, depends on the context. 
 The idea is expressed indefinitely. Their repentance was at- 
 tended by fear of punishment. Doubtless the two sentiments 
 were mingled in the minds of the Corinthians. They had a 
 fear of the wrath of God, and at the same time a fear of the 
 apostle's coming among them displeased and armed with the 
 spiritual power which belonged to his office. The context is 
 in favour of making the latter the prominent idea. What ve- 
 hement desire^ either for the correction of the evil complained 
 of, or for the apostle's presence and approbation. In the lat- 
 ter case this clause is a modification of the preceding. It was 
 not so much fear of the apostle as an earnest and affectionate 
 desire towards and for him, that their godly sorrow had pro- 
 duced. As in V. 7 Titus had repeated to the apostle the 
 earnest desire (eViTrd^T/o-tv, the same word as here) of the Co- 
 rinthians for him, it is probable that the same is here meant. 
 What zeal. In v. 7 the zeal spoken of is hmited or explained 
 by the words (v^rep e/xov) for me. Without that addition they 
 may be so understood here ; zeal or zealous interest in behalf 
 of the apostle manifested by their taking sides with him. The 
 connection, however, with what follows favours the assump- 
 tion that here the zeal meant is that of which the offender was 
 
186 II. CORINTHIANS 7, 12. 
 
 the object. Zeal for liis reformation or punishment What 
 revenge, (cVStKryo-ts,) vincllcUve justice. One of the sentiments 
 which godly sorrow had aroused in them was the sense of 
 justice, the moral judgment that sin ought to be punished. 
 This is an instinctive feeling, one belonging to our moral con- 
 stitution, and therefore a revelation of the nature and will of 
 God. The ground of the punishment of sin is not expediency, 
 nor is it primarily the benefit of the offender, but the satisfac- 
 tion of justice, or the inherent evil of sin which from its own 
 nature, and apart from the evil consequences of impunity, de- 
 serves i^unishment. Of the six particulars introduced by 
 (dAAa) yea in this verse, according to Bengel, Meyer and 
 others, " clearing of yourselves " and " indignation " relate to 
 the feelings of the Corinthians towards themselves ; " fear " and 
 " vehement desire " to their feelings towards the apostle ; and 
 "zeal" and "revenge" to their feelings towards the offender. 
 According to Olshausen, the " apology " relates to their con- 
 duct ; the "indignation" to their feelings in view of the crime 
 which had been committed; the "fear" to God's displeasure ; 
 the "desire" and "zeal" to their feelings towards the apostle, 
 and " revenge " the consequence of all the preceding. 
 
 Jn all things, (Iv Trai/rt,) in every respect, or, in every 
 point of view. Ye have lyroved yourselves, (o-weo-rr/o-arc,) you 
 have set yourselves forth, shown yourselves to be (Gal. 2, 18) 
 clear, (ayi/ovs,) pure, free from guilt. In this matter, or, (with- 
 out the Iv, which the older MSS. omit,) as to the matter. The 
 Corinthians proved themselves to be free from the sin of ap- 
 proving or in any way countenancing the crime in question. 
 Their sin consisted in not more promptly excluding the of- 
 fender from their communion. This whole passage, however, 
 is instructive as presenting a clear exhibition of the intimate 
 nature of church fellowship. One member committed an of- 
 fence. The whole church repents. The godly sorrow which 
 the apostle describes was the sorrow of the church. The ef- 
 fects which that sorrow wrought were common to the church 
 as such. That believers are one body in Christ Jesus, and 
 "everyone members one of another," so that "if one member 
 suffers all the members suffer with it," is matter of actual 
 experience. 
 
 12. Wherefore, though I wrote unto you, (I did it) 
 not for his cause that had done the wrong, nor for his 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 7, 12. 187 
 
 cause that suffered wrong, but that our care for you in 
 the sight of God might appear unto you. 
 
 Wherefore. That is, because my letter has produced such 
 results. The eflects produced by his letter was the end he 
 had in view in writing it. Though I wrote to you, i. e. al- 
 though I interfered with your affairs. His motive in writing 
 he states first negatively and then positively. It was neither 
 for the sake of him who did wrong, nor for him who suffered 
 wrong. His primary object was neither to have the offender 
 punished, nor to secure justice being done to the injured 
 party, viz., the father whose wife the son had married. This 
 is the common and natural interpretation. As, however, 
 nothing is elsewhere said of the father, and as the form of ex- 
 pression in 1 Cor. 5, 1, {yvvaiKa ^x^iv, to marry,) seems to im- 
 ply that the father of the offender was dead, since otherwise, 
 it is said, there could have been no marriage in the case, vari- 
 ous other exj^lanations of this passage have been proposed. 
 Some say that he " who suffered wrong " was the apostle him- 
 self; others, as Bengel, say it was the Corinthians, the singu- 
 lar being taken for the plural. Others, as Neander, Billroth, 
 &c., say that dSt/cr^^eVro? is neuter, the icrong deed ; so that 
 the meaning is, ' Neither for the oflender nor for the offence.' 
 But these explanations are all unnatural and unnecessary. 
 The ordinary interpretation is the only one which the words 
 suggest, and what is said in 1 Cor. 5 is perfectly consistent 
 with the assumption that the father of the offender was still 
 alive. The positive statement of his object in writing is that 
 our care for you in the sight of God might ap^jear unto you. 
 The first question concerning this clause relates to the text. 
 Instead of i7/>tan/ {our), Lachmann, Meyer and others read v/xcijv 
 {your). This latter reading is followed by Calvin and Luther 
 as well as by many of the modern commentators. As the ex- 
 ternal authorities are nearly equally divided, the decision rests 
 mainly on internal evidence. In favour of the common text 
 is first, the consideration that the manifestation of his love or 
 care for them is elsewhere said to have been his motive in 
 writing his former letter, 2, 4 ; and, secondly, the words irpos 
 {»/xas are more easily explained. ' Our care for you might ap- 
 pear unto you,' is plain. But if ^/xcov is read these words give 
 difiiculty. They must be rendered {apud vos) "with you." 
 ' Your care for us might be manifest with (i, e. among) you.' 
 That is, that the zeal Avhich you have for us might be brought 
 
188 II. CORINTHIANS 1, 13. 
 
 out so as to be known by yourselves. This, however, would 
 be more naturally expressed by cv vfXLv or iv eavrot?, anio7ig 
 yourselves. Besides, the words " before God," as involving 
 an appeal to the divine omniscience, are more in place if he is 
 speaking of his own zeal, than if speaking of theirs. The im- 
 mediate context, it must be admitted, is in favour of this lat- 
 ter reading. The apostle had been describing the effects of 
 his letter, dwelhng w^ith great satisfaction on the feelings 
 towards himself which that letter had called forth. It was 
 natural for him therefore to say that his object in writing was 
 to bring out this manifestation, and thus reveal themselves to 
 themselves as wxll as to him. With this also agrees what he 
 says in 4, 9, " To this end also did I write, that I might know 
 the proof of you, whether ye be obedient in all things." Still 
 on the whole the common text gives the better sense. In 
 either case the words Trpos v'/x.as depend on ^avcpco^^i/at, " might 
 be manifest toioards (or among) you." So also do the words 
 Ivdi-mov rov ^eoO, " that our care for you might be manifested 
 before God^^^ i. e. in his sight, as what he could approve of. 
 In our version these words are connected with our care. 
 " Our care for you in the sight of God." The same sense is 
 expressed by the Vulgate ; " ad manifestandam soUicitudinem 
 nostram, quae habemus pro vobis coram Deo." According to 
 the Greek the natural construction is, " To manifest in the 
 sight of God our care for you." 
 
 13. Therefore we were comforted in your comfort : 
 yea, and exceedingly the more joyed we for the joy of 
 Titus, because his spirit was refreshed by you all. 
 
 Tlierefore^ i, e. because his letter had led them to repent- 
 ance. TFe loere comforted in your comfort., {l-m. rrj TrapaKkrjcr^L 
 v/xCjv^) on account of your consolation. This, however, does 
 not suit the state of the case. Paul was comforted by their 
 repentance, not by their consolation. To meet this difficulty 
 some make v/xcov the genitive of the source ; so that the sense 
 would be, ' We were comforted with the consolation derived 
 from you.' The great majority of modern editors read rifidv 
 instead of v/xajj/, and put a stop after irapaKiKXrjfxeSa. Tiiis 
 gives a far better sense. ' Therefore we have been comforted : 
 and besides (eVt ) our consolation, we have rejoiced exceeding- 
 ly in the joy of Titus.' Paul had not only the consolation de- 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 7, 14.15. 189 
 
 rived from their repentance, but in addition to that, he was 
 delighted to find Titus so full of joy. Compare v. 7. The 
 Vulgate has the same reading and pointing. Ideo consolati 
 sumus. In consolatione autem nostra abundantius magis ga- 
 visi sumus super gaudio Titi. Because his spirit icas re- 
 freshed by you all. This is the reason of his joy. Titus 
 rejoiced because his spirit was refreshed^ (drnTreVavTat,) derived 
 rest, according to the comprehensive scriptural sense of the 
 word "rest." 
 
 14. For if I have boasted any thing to him of you, 
 I am not ashamed ; but as we spake all things to you 
 in truth, even so our boasting, which (I made) before 
 Titus, is found a truth. 
 
 This is the reason why Paul was so rejoiced that Titus was 
 satisfied with what he saw in Corinth. Paul had boasted to 
 him of the Corinthians. He had predicted that he would find 
 them obedient, and ready to correct the evils adverted to in 
 his former letter. Had these predictions proved false, he 
 would have been mortified, — ashamed, as he says ; but as they 
 were more than fulfilled, he naturally rejoiced. JBut as ice 
 spake all things to you in truth. No doubt in allusion to the 
 charge of want of adherence to the truth made against him 
 by the false teachers, to which he refers above, 1, 17. 18. As 
 he spoke the truth to the Corinthians, so he spoke the truth 
 of them. We spake i7i truths {iv aX-q^eca^) truly. So our 
 boasting before Titus [r] iirl Tltov) is found a truths [aXi^Seta 
 iyevySr],) has become truth. Though it is done incidentally, 
 yet the revelation to the Corinthians that Paul had spoken of 
 them in terms of commendation must have convinced them 
 of his love. This was one of the objects, as appears from the 
 whole epistle, he had much at heart. 
 
 15. And his inward affection is more abundant 
 toward you, whilst he remembereth the obedience of 
 you all, how with fear and trembling ye received 
 him. 
 
 A continuation of the sentence begun in the former verse. 
 Paul informs the Corinthians that Titus's love for them was 
 
190 II. CORINTHIANS 7, 16. 
 
 greater now than when he was with them. The recollection 
 of their good conduct warmed his heart towards them. His 
 inward affection^ literally, his bowels, which in the Scriptures 
 is a figurative expression for love, compassion, or any other 
 tender affection. Whilst he rememhereth^ literally, remember- 
 ing^ i. e. because he remembers. Your obedience^ viz., towards 
 him, as appears from what follows. How with fear and trem- 
 bling ye received him. " Fear and trembling " is a common 
 scriptural expression for reverence, or solicitous anxiety lest 
 we should fail in doing all that is required of us. 1 Cor. 2, 8 
 Eph. 6, 5. 
 
 16. I rejoice, therefore, that I have confidence in 
 you in all (things). 
 
 This is the conclusion of the whole matter. The first seven 
 chapters of the epistle are intimately connected. They all re- 
 late to the state of the congregation at Corinth and to Paul's 
 relation to the people there. The eighth and ninth chapters 
 form a distinct division of the epistle. Here, therefore, we 
 have the conclusion of the Avhole preceding discussion. The 
 result of the long conflict of feeling in reference to the Corin- 
 thians as a church, was the full restoration of confidence. I 
 rejoice that I have confidence in you in all things, {Iv iravTi, iii 
 every thing). I have confidence in you., (^appC) cV vfj-lv,) I have 
 good courage, am full of hope and confidence. 5, 6. Heb. 13, 6. 
 As ^appeo) is not elsewhere constructed with cV, Meyer says 
 the meaning is, 'I am of good courage, through you.' If this 
 objection to the common explanation be considered of weight, 
 iv had better be rendered be/ore. ' I stand full of confidence 
 before you, i. e. in your presence.' 1 Cor. 14, 11. The sense, 
 however, expressed by the common interpretation is better. 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 8. 191 
 
 CHAPTER YHI. 
 
 The extraordinary liberality of the Macedonians, vs. 1-6. Exhortation to 
 the Corinthians to follow the example of their Macedonian brethren, vs. 
 7-16. Commendation of Titus for his zeal in promoting the collection 
 of contributions for the poor, and of tb^. other brethren who were to 
 accompany him to Corinth, \s, 17-24. 
 
 Exhortation to liberality to the poor. 
 
 To tMs subject the apostle devotes this and the following 
 chapter. He begins by setting before the Corinthians the 
 liberality of the churches in Macedonia. They, in the midst 
 of great affliction and of extreme poverty, had exceeded their 
 ability in the contributions which they had made for the 
 saints, vs. 1-3. And this not by constraint or in obedience to 
 earnest entreaties on the part of the apostle ; but on the con- 
 trary, it was they who besought him to receive and take 
 charge of their alms, v. 4. Liberality to the poor was only a 
 part of what they did ; they devoted themselves to the Lord, 
 V. 5. The conduct of the Macedonians led the apostle to ex- 
 hort Titus, as he had already begun the work, to carry it on 
 to completion in Corinth, v. 6. 
 
 He begs them, therefore, to add this to all their other 
 graces, v. 7. This was a matter of advice, not of command. 
 He was induced to give this exhortation because others had 
 evinced so much zeal in this matter, and because he desired 
 them to prove the sincerity of their love. What was all they 
 could do for others, compared to what Christ had done for 
 them, vs. 8. 9. The exercise of liberality was a good to them, 
 provided their feelings found expression in corresponding 
 acts, vs. 10. 11. The disposition, not the amount of their con- 
 tributions, was the main thing, v. 12. What the apostle 
 wished was that there might be some approximation to 
 equality among Christians, that the abundance of one may 
 supply the wants of another, vs. 13-15. 
 
 He thanks God who had inspired Titus with so much zeal 
 on this subject, vs. 16. 17. With him he had sent a brother 
 who had not only the approbation of the churches, but had 
 been chosen for the very purpose of taking charge of the con- 
 tributions in connection with the apostle, vs. 18. 19. Paul was 
 determined to avoid all occasion of reproach, and therefore he 
 associated others with himself in the charge of the money in- 
 . 9 
 
192 II. CORINTHIANS 8, 1. 2. 
 
 trusted to him, vs. 20. 21. With those akeady mentioned he 
 sent another brother of approved character and great zeal, v. 
 22. Therefore if any one inquired who Titus was, they might 
 answer. He was Paul's comi^anion and fellow-labourer ; or who 
 those brethren were, they might say, They were the messen- 
 gers of the churches, and the glory of Christ. Let the church 
 therefore prove their love and justify his boasting of them, 
 vs. 23. 24. 
 
 1. Moreover, brethren, we do you to wit of the 
 grace of God bestowed on the churches of Macedonia. 
 
 Moreover (Se) marks the transition to a new subject. We 
 do you to wit^ (yvwpt^o/xcv,) 'we cause you to know.' The 
 •word to icit^ (Anglo-Saxon, Witcm; German, Wisse7i,) to 
 know, and the cognate words. Wis and Wot, are nearly obso- 
 lete, although they occur frequently in our version. The 
 grace of God^ the divine favour. The liberality of the Corin- 
 thians was due to the operation of the grace of God. The 
 sacred writers constantly recognize the fact that the freest 
 and most spontaneous acts of men, their inward states and 
 the outward manifestations of those states, when good, are 
 due to the secret influence of the Spirit of God, which 
 eludes our consciousness. The believer is most truly self-de- 
 termined, when determined by the grace of God. Bestowed 
 0)1, [SSoixivrjv eV,) " given in," i. e. given so that it is in. See 
 1, 22. " Given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts." In v. 
 16 of this chapter, SlSovtl iv is rendered "jt:)i^^ m^o." The 
 churches of Macedonia. Under the Romans Macedonia in- 
 cluded the whole of the northern provinces of Greece. The 
 churches of that region founded by the apostle were those of 
 Philippi, Thessalonica, and Beroea. Of the extraordinary 
 liberality of those churches the epistles of Paul furnish numer- 
 ous intimations. 11, 9. Phil. 2, 25. 4, 15. 18. 
 
 2. How that, in a great trial of affliction, the abun- 
 dance of their joy, and their deep poverty, abounded 
 unto the riches of their Uberahty. 
 
 A somewhat condensed sentence, meaning, as some say, 
 that in the midst of their afilictions their joy, and in the midst 
 of their poverty, their liberality abounded. But this brings 
 into view two graces, joy in affliction, and liberality in poverty, 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 8, 2. 193 
 
 whereas the context calls for only one. The meaning rather 
 is, that notwithstanding their afflictions, their joy and their 
 poverty abounded to their liberality. This the grammatical 
 structure of the passage requires. IIoio that (on) ; the con- 
 nection is with the verb in the preceding verse, ' I cause you 
 to know that, &c.' In a great trial of affliction^ i. e. in afflic- 
 tions which were a great trial (8oKt/xr;), i. e. a test of their sin- 
 cerity and devotion. These afflictions were either those 
 which they shared in common with their fellow-citizens, aris- 
 ing out of their social condition, or they w^ere peculiar to them 
 as Christians, arising from persecution. In writing to the 
 Thessalonians, Paul reminds them that they had received the 
 word in much affliction. 1, 6. 2, 14. Comp. Acts 16, 20. 17, 5. 
 The abundance of their joy ; i. e. the joy arising from the 
 pardon of their sins and the favour of God, which in 1 Thess. 
 1, 6, he calls the joy of the Holy Ghost, was abvmdant. That 
 is, it rose above their sorrows, and produced in them the ef- 
 fect of which he afterwards speaks. And their deep poverty^ 
 [r] Kara /3dSov<i Trrcoxcta,) their abject poverty, or poverty down 
 to the depth. Ahounded iinto^ i. e. manifested itself as abun- 
 dant in relation to. The same verb (eTrepiWcuo-cv) belongs to 
 both the preceding nouns, "joy " and "poverty," but in a 
 somewhat different sense. Their joy abounded unto their 
 liberality, because it produced it. The eftect proved the joy 
 to be abundant. Their poverty abounded unto their liberali- 
 ty, because it was seen to be great in relation to it. Their 
 liberality made their poverty, by contrast, appear the greater. 
 Jj7ito the riches^ (ttAovtos,) a favourite word with Paul, which 
 he often uses in the sense of abundance. Rom. 2, 4, " Riches 
 of his goodness," for abundant goodness. Eph. 1, 7, "Riches 
 of his grace," for his abundant grace ; 1, 18, "Riches of his 
 glory," for abundant glory, &c. Of their liberality^ dTr/VoVr^?, 
 which is properly the opposite of duplicity, or double-rainded- 
 ness, and, therefore, singleness of heart, simplicity, sincerity. 
 Eph. 6, 5. Col. 3, 22. The Scriptures, how^ever, often use a 
 generic term for a specific one, as glory for wisdom, or mercy, 
 or power, which are different forms of the divine glory. So 
 here the general term for right-mindedness is put for liberali- 
 ty, w^iich is a specific form or manifestation of the generic 
 virtue. Comp. 9, 11. Rom. 12, 8. In reference to the pover- 
 ty of the Macedonian churches, Mr. Stanley, in his Commen- 
 tary on this Epistle, appropriately quotes a passage from Dr. 
 Arnold's Roman Commonwealtii, in which he says, "The 
 
194 II. CORINTHIANS 8, 3-5. 
 
 condition of Greece in the time of Augustus was one of deso- 
 lation and distress. It had suffered severely by being the 
 seat of the successive civil wars between Caesar and Pompey, 
 between the Triumvirs and Brutus and Cassius, and lastly, 
 between Augustus and Antonius. Besides, the country had 
 never recovered from the long series of miseries which had 
 succeeded and accompanied its conquest by the Romans : and 
 between those times and the civil contest between Pompey 
 and Ccesar, it had been again exposed to all the evils of war 
 when Sylla was disputing the possession of it with the general 
 of Mithridates. . . . The provinces of Macedonia and Achaia, 
 w^hen they petitioned for a diminution of their burdens, in the 
 reign of Tiberius, were considered so deserving of compassion 
 that they were transferred for a time from the jurisdiction of 
 the Senate to that of the Emperor, (as involving less heavy 
 taxation.) " 
 
 3-5. Yov to (their) power, I bear record, yea, and 
 beyond (their) power, (they were) wilhng of themselves ; 
 praying us with much entreaty, that we would receive 
 the gift, and (take upon us) the fellowship of the min- 
 istering to the saints. And (this they did,) not as we 
 hoped, but first gave their own selves to the Lord, and 
 unto us by the will of God. 
 
 These verses must be taken together on account of the 
 grammatical construction. Wherever the reader of the Eng- 
 lish version sees the frequent use of words in Italics, he may 
 conclude there is some difficulty or obscurity in the original, 
 which the translators endeavour to explain by additions to the 
 text. In these verses there are no less than live such interpo- 
 lations ; three of which materially affect the sense, viz., the 
 words, they were, take i(pon ics, and, this they did. The first 
 point is to determine the text. The words Se^W-^ai ly/^ias are 
 omitted in the great majority of the MSS. versions and 
 Fathers, and seem very much like an explanatory gloss, or an 
 interpolation analogous to tlie exi)lanations in Italics so com- 
 mon in our version. They are, therefore, rejected by Gries- 
 bach, and by almost all editors since his time. Their insertion 
 alters the sense materially. If these v/ords are read, Paul 
 represents the Macedonian Christians as begging him to re- 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 8, 3-5. 195 
 
 ceive tbeir contributions and to take upon him the distribution 
 of them. If they are omitted, the sense is, they begged to 
 be permitted to contribute. Granting, however, that these 
 "words should be omitted, the construction of the passage is 
 doubtfuh Stanley says it is " a sentence which has been en- 
 tirely shattered in passing through the apostle's mind." He 
 l^roposes to reduce it to order in the same way that Bengel 
 does, who, however, thinks that, so fir from the sentence be- 
 ing shattered, every thing is smooth and easy. He says the 
 word tScoKav sustains the structure of the whole passage ; 
 av^aipeTOL and Seo/xevoL are its nominatives ; x'^P'-^> Kotvoivtav and 
 cauTou? are its objects. The sense then is, ' Of their own ac- 
 cord, beyond their abiUty and with many prayers they gave 
 not their gifts only as a contribution to the saints, but them- 
 selves to the Lord and to us.' Any one, however, who looks 
 at the Greek sees that it is very unnatural to make x^P'-^ ^6- 
 pend on eSwKav; it belongs to Seo/xo/oi. The construction, 
 therefore, adopted by Fritzsche, Billroth, Meyer and others is, 
 at least as to that point, to be preferred. Meyer says that to 
 eSwKav there are four limiting or qualifying clauses attached. 
 T/ie7/ (/ave, 1. Beyond their power; 2. Of their own motion; 
 3. Praying to be allowed to give ; and 4. Not as wc expected, 
 but themselves. De Wette and many others relieve the 
 harshness of tliis construction so far as the last clause is con- 
 cerned by making the sentence end with the fourth Averse, and 
 supplying eSw/cav in v. 3. " They gave beyond their power, 
 of their own accord, begging to be allowed to take part in 
 the contribution to the saints. And beyond our expectation 
 they gave themselves to the Lord." 
 
 As to the connection, otl is evidently equivalent to yap, as 
 these verses are the proof of what is said in v. 2. The libe- 
 rality of the Macedonian churches was great, for to their 
 poice7\ (Kara Swa/xtv,) according to their ability, I bear testi- 
 mony, and heyond their poioer (vTrlp in the common text, in 
 the critical editions Trapa SuVa/xtv). Here the word eSw/cav is 
 implied. 'They gave beyond their ability,' ay^atperot, self- 
 moved, i. e. spontaneously, without any suggestion or excite- 
 ment from me.' From 9, 2, it appears that Paul had boasted 
 to the Macedonians that Achaia (the Corinthians) was ready 
 a year ago, and that this had excited their zeal. These two 
 representations are perfectly consistent. In detailing the suc- 
 cess of the gospel in Corinth the apostle would naturally refer 
 to the liberality of the disciples. It was the simple mention 
 
196 II. CORINTHIANS 8, 3-5. 
 
 of this fact which led the Macedonians, without any exhorta 
 tion from the apostle, but of their own accord, to make the 
 contribution of which he here speaks. Our translators by the 
 insertion of the words they were alter the sense of this verse. 
 They make the apostle say, ' They were willing beyond their 
 power.' Whereas what he says is, ' They gave spontaneously 
 beyond their power.' The word tSwKav, they gave^ though 
 not expressed until the end of the passage, is clearly implied 
 from the beginning. 
 
 Praying us with much entreaty. The thing for which the 
 Macedonians so earnestly prayed was, according to the re- 
 ceived text and our version, that the apostle would receive 
 their alms and take upon him the distribution of them. But 
 by common consent the words Se^^ao-^at i^/^as (tJiat we would 
 receive) should be omitted, and there is nothing in the Greek 
 to answer to the interpolated words taJx:e upon us. The 
 w^ords are, 8eo/xcvot ry/xojv r-qv x'^P^^ '^^^ '^'h^ KOLvoiVLav, begging of 
 us the favour and fellowship., (or participation,) i. e. the favour 
 of a particijoation. The latter word explains the former; the 
 favour they asked was that of taking part in the ministry to 
 the saints. The word StaKovta, ministry^ service., is often used 
 in the sense o^ aid ov relief . 9, 1. 13. Acts 6, 1. 11, 29. Here, 
 according to some, the sentence ends. The more common 
 interpretation supposes kuI ov Ka^ojs rjk-n-Laai.Lev to be a new 
 modification of the principal idea, "and not as we expected," 
 i. e. a moderate contribution, but they first gave their own. 
 selves to the Lord and to us. This does not mean that they 
 gave themselves before they gave their alms ; but they gave 
 themselves first to the Lord, then to us ; Trpwrov belongs to 
 KvpLia and not to cStoKav. First does not mean first in time, 
 but in importance and order. Compare Acts 15, 28. Ex- 
 odus 14, 31. The oftering was immediately and directly 
 to Christ, and subordinately to the apostle. By giving 
 themselves to the Lord the apostle means that not con- 
 tent with giving their money they had given themselves; 
 made an entire dedication of all they had and all they were 
 to their divine Master. This was far beyond his expec- 
 tations. To understand this expression as indicating that 
 devotion to Christ was the motive which determined their 
 liberality is inconsistent with the context. Their inward de- 
 votion to Christ was not a thing to take the apostle by sur- 
 prise ; that was involved in their profession of the gospel. 
 What surpassed his expectations was, that their liberality led 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 8, 6. 197 
 
 to the gift not of their money only but of themselves. Some 
 say that this means that they offered themselves to go to Cor- 
 inth or elsewhere to collect money for the poor. But the 
 sense is fuller and simpler as above explained. By the icill 
 of God. That is, the will of God was the cause of their giv- 
 ing themselves to the Lord, &c. It is (Sta ^eXrJ/xaTos, not Kara 
 S^eXrjfjLo) hy^ not according to^ the will of God. 
 
 6. Insoraucli that we desired Titus, tliat as he had 
 begun, so he would also finish in you the same grace 
 also. 
 
 Insomuch (eig to irapaKok.) SO that we were induced to ex- 
 hort Titus. Paul, 1 Cor. 16, 1, had urged the Corinthians to 
 make collections for the poor saints. Titus visited Corinth 
 after that letter was written and made a beginning in this 
 work. When Paul came to Macedonia and found how Hberally 
 the churches there had contributed, he urged Titus to return 
 to Corinth and complete what he had so successfully begun. 
 The exhortation therefore addressed to Titus, of which the 
 apostle here speaks, was not the exhortation given him before 
 the visit from which he had just returned, but that which he 
 gave him in reference to a renewed visit yet to be made. 
 Instead therefore of the rendering, I desired Titus., it would 
 would be plainer to translate, I have desired him. That (iva, 
 not in order that., according to the usual force of the particle, 
 but that^ as expressing the contents of the request), as he had 
 begun., (TTpocvrjp^aro, a word which occurs nowhere but in this 
 chapter,) hctd hegun before. This may mean, 'had already 
 begun,' i. e. begun before the time of Paul's writing ; or, had 
 begun before the Macedonians made their collections. The 
 latter is the more probable meaning, since, as appears from 
 V. 10, the Corinthians had commenced this work before the 
 Macedonian churches had moved in the business. So hi 
 would also finish., i. e. either in the sense of bringing a given 
 work to an end, Heb. 9, 6, or of perfectmg an inward grace, 
 7, 1. In you., ek v/xa?, in relation to, or, for you. Matt. 10, 10. 
 This grace also ; x^-P'-^ ^^7 l^^re mean either good work, or, 
 grace, in the ordinary sense of the word. The connection 
 with the following verse is in favour of understanding it in 
 the latter sense. It was a disposition of the mind that Titus 
 was exhorted to bring into full exercise among the Corinthi- 
 
198 II. CORHSTTHIANS 8, 7. 
 
 ans. The grace spoken of was sometliing ^^-liicli belongs to 
 the same category with faith, knowledge, and love. 
 
 7. Therefore, as ye abound in every (thing, in) 
 faith, and utterance, and knowledge, and (in) all dili- 
 gence, and (in) yoiu* love to us, (see) that ye abound in 
 this grace also. 
 
 From this verse onward to v. 16 the apostle urges on the 
 Corinthians the duty of liberality. 1. Because it was necessa- 
 ry to the completeness and harmony of their Christian charac- 
 ter ; 2. Because it would be a i^roof of their sincerity ; 3. Be- 
 cause Christ had become poor for their sake ; 4. Because it 
 would redound to their own advantage, inasmuch as consist- 
 ency required that having manifested the disposition, they 
 should carry it out in action; and 5. Because what was 
 required of them was perfectly reasonable. They were asked 
 to give only according to their means ; and what they were 
 called upon to do for others, others under like circumstances 
 would be required to do for them. Therefore is not a proper 
 translation of oKka. [hut). The word is often used to mark a 
 transition to a new subject, and specially where what follows 
 is an exhortation or command. Mark 16, 7. Acts 9, 6. 10, 20. 
 As ye abound^ i. e. have in abundance, or, have more than 
 others, i. e. excel. In every tiling^ (eV Travri,) limited of course 
 by the context, and explained by what follows, ' every gift 
 and grace.' The same testimony is borne in i'avour of the 
 Corinthians, 1 Cor. ], 5. 7. That the apostle sometimes 
 speaks so flivourably, and sometimes so unfavourably of the 
 church in Corinth, is to be accounted for by the fact that 
 some of the people were very good, probably the majority, 
 and some, especially among the teachers, very much the re- 
 verse. In faith. To abound in faith is to have a strong, 
 constant, operative faith, sustaining and controlling the Avliole 
 inward and outward life. In utterance and knoioledge^ (Aoyw 
 Ktti yvtuoret,) the same combination as in 1 Cor. 1, 5. Here and 
 there our translators have rendered Aoyos utterance ; in both 
 cases it may mean doctrine^ as it does in so many passages, 
 esiK'cially in such cases as "word of truth," "word of salva- 
 tion," "word of righteousness," "word of Christ." The 
 meaning, therefore, is either that they were enriched with the 
 gifts of utterance and knowledge, or doctrine and knowledge. 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 8, 8. 199 
 
 Aoyos is the Chiistian truth as preached, yvujo-is that truth as 
 apprehended or understood. In diligence^ (o-ttovS?;,) earnest- 
 ness^ a general term for the energy or vigour of their spiritual 
 life, of which their love was one manifestation. In your love 
 to us. The expression in Greek is peculiar, r^ i$ vfxujv iu rjfjuv 
 dya7i77, the love ichich is of you in us^ i. e. your love (to us) 
 which we cherish in our hearts. That is, which we so highly 
 estimate. Or, simply, amore a vohis profecto et in me collato. 
 That ye may ahound. The tW Trepttrcr. is most naturally ex- 
 23lained by supplying some word as in our version, >See that 
 ye abound. Compare Gal. 2, 10. In this grace also^ i. e. the 
 grace of hberality. Others here as in the precedmg verse 
 make x°-P^^ mean good icorTc. But this is not so consistent 
 with the context. Faith, knowledge, and love are not good 
 works so much as divine gifts, and so also is liberality. 
 
 8. I speak not by commandment, but by occasion 
 of the forwardness of others, and to prove the sincerity 
 of yom- love. 
 
 The apostle, agreeably to his usual manner, states first 
 negatively, and then affirmatively, his object in what he had 
 said. It was not of the nature of a command. It was not 
 obedience, but spontaneous liberality he desired. The latter 
 may be excited by the exhibition of appropriate motives, but 
 it cannot be yielded to authority. Almsgiving in obedience 
 to a command, or to satisfy conscience, is not an act of liber- 
 ality. What is not spontaneous is not liberal. Paul, there- 
 fore, would not coerce them by a command. His object was 
 to put the genuineness of their love to the test. The nature 
 of the test was suggested by the zeal of the Macedonians. So 
 it was by the occasion of the forwardness of others he was 
 led to put their love to that trial. The real test of the 
 genuineness of any inward affection is not so much the charac- 
 ter of the feeling as it reveals itself in our consciousness, as 
 the course of action to which it leads. Many persons, if they 
 judged themselves by their feelings, would regard themselves 
 as truly compassionate ; but a judgment founded on their acts 
 would lead to the opposite conclusion. So many suppose they 
 really love God because they are conscious of feelings which 
 they dignify with that name ; yet they do not obey him. It 
 is thereby by the fruits of feeling we must judge of its genu- 
 ineness both in ourselves and others. 
 
200 II. CORINTHIANS 8, 9. 
 
 9. For ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, 
 that though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became 
 poor, that ye through his poverty might be rich. 
 
 This verse is a joarenthesis, the sentence begun in v. 8 be- 
 ing continued in v. 10. Still the connection between this and 
 the preceding verse is intimate and immediate. There are 
 two things indicated and intended in this verse. That self- 
 sacrifice is the proper test of love. And second, that the 
 example of Christ, and the obligation under which we lie to 
 him, should lead us to do good to others. The apostle evi- 
 dently combines these two thoughts. 'I desire,' he says, 'to 
 put your love to the test of self-sacrifice, for ye know that 
 Christ's love was thus manifested ; ' and, ' You may well be 
 expected to sacrifice yourselves for others, since Christ gave 
 himself for you.' It is not only the example of Christ which 
 is held up for our imitation; but gratitude to Christ for the 
 infinite blessings we receive from him is presented as the mo- 
 tive to liberality. For ye Jcnoio. The fact referred to includ- 
 ing the highest mystery of the gospel, viz., the incarnation of 
 the Son of God, or, the manifestation of God in the flesh, and 
 the love therein manifested, is assumed to be known and 
 acknowledged by all who called themselves Christians. Ye 
 know, says Paul, as all Christians must know, the grace^ i. e. 
 the unmerited, spontaneous love of our Lord Jesus Christ. 
 A combination of the most endearing and exalted appella- 
 tions. Our Lord., i. e. the supreme and absolute Lord whom 
 we acknowledge to be our rightful sovereign and possessor, 
 and Avho is ours.^ belongs to us, in so fir as the care, protec- 
 tion, and support of his almighty power are by his love 
 pledged to us. Jesus Christ. lie who is our Lord is our 
 Saviour and the Christ, God's anointed, invested by Ilim with 
 supreme dominion. What belongs of right to the Logos in 
 virtue of his divinity, is constantly represented as given to the 
 Theanthropos. See Heb. 1, 2. That though^ &c. This clause 
 is explanatory of the former. ' Ye know the grace of our 
 Lord Jesus,' that is, ' Ye know that though he was rich, <fec.' 
 The grace consisted in, or was manifested by his becoming 
 poor for our sakes. Joeing rich., itkovaio^ wv, that is, either, 
 as in our version. Though he was rich, in the possession of the 
 glory which he liad witli the Father before the world was, 
 John 1 7, 5 ; or, JJeing rich in the actual and constant posses- 
 sion of all divine prerogatives. In the latter case, the idea is 
 
II. CORIjSTTHIANS 8, 10. 201 
 
 that our blessed Lord while here on earth, although he had 
 within liimself the fulness of the Godhead and the right and 
 power of possession over aU things, yet was poor. He did 
 ,not avail himself of his right and power to make himself rich, 
 but voluntarily submitted to all the privations of poverty. 
 The former interpretation is commonly and properly preferred. 
 The reference in iTrrwx^vcre, he hecame poor^ is not to what our 
 Lord did while he was on earth, but to what he did when he 
 came into the world. The passage is parallel to Phil. 2, 6. 
 "Being in the form of God, and equal to God, he emptied 
 (eVeVojo-e) himself." That is, he so far laid aside the glory of 
 his divine majesty, that he was to all appearance a man, and 
 even a servant, so that men refused to recognise him as God, 
 but despised, persecuted, and at last crucihed him, as a man. 
 He who was rich in the plenitude of all divine attributes and 
 prerogatives thus became poor, 8t v/xa?, on your account^ out 
 of love to you. The end to be accomplished by this humilia- 
 tion of the Son of God, was that, you through his poverty 
 might he rich. Believers are made rich in the possession of 
 that glory which Christ laid aside, or concealed. They are 
 made partakers of the divine nature, 2 Pet. 1, 4. That is, of 
 the divine holiness, exaltation and blessedness. This is divine 
 not only because of its source as coming from God, but be- 
 cause of its nature. So that our Lord says, " The glory which 
 thou gavest me, I have given them," John 17, 22. Hence 
 believers are said to be glorified with Christ and to reign with 
 him. Rom. 8, 17. The price of this exaltation and everlasting 
 blessedness of his people was his own poverty. It is by his 
 poverty that we are made rich. Unless he had submitted to 
 all the humiliation of his incarnation and death, we should for- 
 ever have remained poor, destitute of all holiness, happiness 
 and glory. It should be observed that moral duties, such as 
 almsgiving, are in the Xew Testament enforced not so much 
 on moral grounds as on grounds peculiarly Christian. No 
 man can enter into the meaning of this verse or feel its power, 
 without being thereby made willing to sacrifice himself for 
 others. And the apostle teaches here, what St. John also 
 teaches, 1 John 3, 17, that it is vain for any man to profess or 
 to imagine that he loves Christ, if he does not love the breth- 
 ren and is not liberal in relievinoj their wants. 
 
 10. And herein I give (my) advice : for this is ex- 
 
2©2 II. CORINTHIANS 8, 8. 
 
 pedient for you, who have begun before, not only to 
 do, but also to be forward a year ago. 
 
 The connection is witli v. 8. 'I do not command, I, in 
 this matter, viz., in making collections for the poor, irive my 
 mind ; ' yvw firjv, in the sense of opinion. Comp. 1 Cor. 7,6. 
 JFhr this is expedient for you. This admits of two interpreta- 
 tions. ' I advise you to make the collection, for this giving to 
 the poor is profitable to you. It not only promotes your own 
 moral growth, but it is demanded by consistency. Having 
 begun this work it would be an injury to yourselves to leave 
 it unfinished.' This is the common, and on the whole the 
 preferable explanation. It satisfies all the demands of the 
 context ; and it makes Iv rotJro) and tovto refer to the same 
 thing. ' In this matter (of giving) I express my opinion, for 
 this (giving) is profitable to you.' Meyer, Billroth and many 
 others make tovto refer to the immediately preceding words. 
 'I give my advice, for advising is better than commanding in 
 your case, seeing ye were willing a year ago.' This, however, 
 is not demanded by the context, and lowers the sense. The 
 former interpretation brings out a higher truth than the 
 second. It is for our own good to do good. Wlio^ otrtvc?, 
 (being such as those who.) ' It is expedient for you, because 
 ye began before not only to do (to Trot^o-at), but to be forward 
 {to ScXetv) a year ago. As the will precedes the deed, many 
 commentators assume an inversion in these words, and reverse 
 their order. ' Ye began not only to will, but to do.' This is 
 arbitrary and unnecessary. Others, as do our translators, 
 take the word ^e'Aetv in an emphatic sense, to be zealous in 
 doing. Luke 20, 48. John 8, 44. ' Ye began not only to do, 
 but to do with zeal.' This, however, does not agree with the 
 following verse, where ^kX^iv is used in its ordinary sense. 
 Others again understand TroLrjaai of the beginning of the work, 
 and the ^eAetv of the purpose to do more. But this requires 
 m.uch to be supplied Avhich is not in the text. Besides it does 
 not agree with the qualifying clause 'a year ago.' According to 
 this explanation the ^cActv does not express what had occurred 
 a year ago, but to the state of mind now assumed to exist and 
 subsequent to the doing begun the year before. De Wette, 
 Winer, and Meyer give a much more natural interpretation. 
 The word Trpoevrjp^ao-^e^ as in V. 6, refers to the Macedonian 
 churches. ' You anticipated the Macedonians not only in the 
 work but in the purpose.' That is, before tliey had begun to 
 
II. CORINTHIAI^S 8, 11. 12. 203 
 
 make a collection for the poor saints, you had begun ; and 
 before they thought of it, you had determined to do it. ' Hav- 
 ing thus been beforehand with them it would be to your dis- 
 advantage to leave your work half done, seeing that the mere 
 mention of your purpose, 9, 2, roused them to such self-deny- 
 ing liberality.' A year ago^ (avro Trepuo-t.) This does not 
 imply that a whole year had intervened, but is analogous to 
 our popular expression last year. If Paul, according to the 
 Jewish reckoning, began the year in October, he could prop- 
 erly speak, when writing in November, of an event which 
 happened in the spring, as having occurred last year. An in- 
 terval of little more than six months, according to this view, 
 from spring to fall, intervened betAveen the date of the first 
 and second epistles of Paul to the Corinthians. 
 
 11. Now therefore perform the domg (of it) : that 
 as (there was) a readiness to will, so (there may be) a 
 performance also out of that which ye have.. 
 
 JSFoio therefore^ i. e. as there has been the purpose and the 
 commencement, let there be also the completion of the work. 
 Literally, complete ye also the doing. That., (o-co?, in order 
 that,) as the readiness to will^ so also the completion. Con- 
 sistency required them to carry out their good intentions 
 openly expressed. Out of that ichich ye have, Ik rov tx^iv, ac- 
 cording to (your) property. The preposition Ik is not here to 
 be rendered out of, but it expresses the rule or standard. 
 Compare John 3, 34. The apostle was not desirous to urge 
 them either beyond their inclination, or beyond their ability. 
 What they gave, he wished them to give freely, and with due 
 regard to their resources. 
 
 12. For if there be first a willing mind, (it is) ac- 
 cepted according to that a man hath, (and) not accord- 
 ing to that he hath not. 
 
 The connection is evidently with the last words of v. 11. 
 They were to give according to their property, /or the stand- 
 ard of judgment with God is the disposition, not the amount 
 given. The same doctrine is taught by our Lord, Mark 12, 
 42. If there be first, literally, if there be present ; TrpoKctTaL 
 does not mean ^^riVs adest, but simply adest. A willing 
 
204 II. CORIISrTHIANS 8, 13. 
 
 mind^ rj TrpoSvfxta, the readiness^ or, disjyositio?!. It is ; that 
 is, the Tvpo^vixia (the disposition) is accepted^ euTrpoo-SeKro?, ac- 
 cejjtahle. It is often used in reference to offerings made to 
 God. Rom. 15, 16. 1 Pet. 2, 5. Some of the an'cient MSS. 
 introduce the indefinite pronoun rts, as the subject of the 
 verbs exxj and c'xei, so our translators insert man^ ' according 
 to that a man hath, and not according to that he hath not.' 
 The grammatical subject, however, of all the verbs in the 
 verse is vrpo^v/xta, which Paul, according to his custom, per- 
 sonifies, and therefore says. It is acceptable according to tliat 
 it inay have^ {tav ^XV-) ^^ i^ more or less ; not according to 
 that it hath not. This does not mean that the disposition is 
 not acceptable when it exceeds the ability to give, or leads to 
 extravagant gifts. This may be true, but it is not the idea 
 here intended. The meaning is simply that the disposition is 
 what God regards, and that disposition will be judged of ac- 
 cording to the resources at its command. A small gift may 
 manifest in one case much greater willingness to give, than a 
 much larger gift in another. 
 
 13. For (I mean) not that other men be eased, and 
 you burdened. 
 
 The reason why he did not Avish them to exceed their 
 ability in giving, is here stated negatively. The positive 
 statement follows in the next verse. The apostle did not 
 wish to throw an unequal burden upon the Corinthians. He 
 did not desire that others should be released from all obliga- 
 tion to give, and they oppressed by it. Not to others ai'ccrts 
 (relief), and to you ■!}X.2\j/l<; (oppression), is his concise expres- 
 sion. According to this view, by aXXois, others, we are to 
 understand other churches or Christians ; and by aveats, relief 
 from the obligation to give. But this is consistent neither 
 with what precedes nor with what follows. The equality 
 which he aims at, is not the equahty of the churches in giving, 
 but that which arises from the deficiency of one class being 
 made up by the abundance of another. By others, therefore, 
 we must understand the poor, and in this case, the poor saints 
 at Jerusalem, and by ai/eo-ts release from the pressure of 
 poverty, and by -^A.ti//ts the burden of indigence. The mean- 
 ing therefore is, that Paul did not desire that the Corinthians 
 should go beyond their ability in giving, for he had no wish 
 that others should be enriched, and they impoverished. It is 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 8, 14. 205 
 
 not obligatory on the rich to make themselves poor in order 
 that the poor may be rich. That is not the rale. 
 
 14. But by an equality, (that) now at this time 
 your abundance (may be a supply) for their want, that 
 then- abundance also may be (a supply) for your want : 
 that there may be equality. 
 
 The word Io-ottjs means here neither reciprocity nor equity, 
 but equaUty, as the illustration in v. 15 shows. The e/c, as in 
 T. 11, (cK Tov exetj/,) expresses the rule or standard m giving. 
 That rule is equality ; we must give so as to produce, or that 
 there may be, equality. This is not agrarianism, nor commu- 
 nity of goods. The New Testament teaches on this subject, 
 1. That all giving is voluntary. A man's property is his own. 
 It is in his own power to retain or to give away ; and if he 
 gives, it is his prerogative to decide whether it shall be much 
 or little. Acts 5, 4. This is the doctrine taught in this whole 
 connection. Giving must be voluntary. It is the fruit of 
 love. It is of course obligatory as a moral duty, and the in- 
 disposition to give is proof of the absence of the love of God. 
 1 John 3, 17. Still it is one of those duties the performance 
 of which others cannot enforce as a right belonging to them. 
 It must remain at our own discretion. 2. That the end to be 
 accomplished by giving is relieving the necessities of the poor. 
 The equality, therefore, aimed at, or intended, is not an 
 equality as to the amount of property, but equal relief from 
 the burden of want. This is taught in the remainder of this 
 verse. 'At the jDresent time,' says the apostle, 'let your 
 abundance be to {yiv-qTat €ts, extend to, be imparted to, Gal. 
 3, 14,) their want, in order that their abundance may be to 
 your Avant, that there may be equality ; ' that is, an equal 
 relief from want or destitution. 3. A third scriptural princi- 
 ple on this subject is, that while all men are brethren, and the 
 poor as poor, whether Christians or not, are the proper objects 
 of charity, yet there is a special obhgation resting on the 
 members of Christ to relieve the wants of their fellow-believ- 
 ers. We are to do good to all men, says the apostle, special- 
 ly to those who are of the household of faith. Gal. 6, 10. All 
 the directions in this and the following chapter have reference 
 to the duty of Christians to their fellow-believers. There are 
 two reasons for this. The one is the common relation of be- 
 
206 II. CORINTHIANS 8, 15. 16. 
 
 lievers to Christ as members of his body, so that what is done 
 to them is done to him ; and their consequent intimate relation 
 to each other as being one body in Christ Jesus. The other 
 is, the assurance that the good done to them is pure good. 
 There is no apprehension that the ahiis bestowed will encour- 
 age idleness or vice. 3. A fourth rule is designed to prevent 
 any abuse of the brotherhood of Christians. The poor have 
 no right to depend on the benefactions of the rich because 
 they are brethren. This same apostle says, "This we com- 
 manded you, that if any man would not work, neither should 
 he eat," 2 Thess. 3, 10. Thus do the Scriptures avoid, on the 
 one hand, the injustice and destructive evils of agrarian com- 
 munism, l3y recognising the right of pro])erty and making all 
 almsgiving optional ; and on the other, the heartless disregard 
 of the poor by inculcating the universal brotherhood of be- 
 lievers, and the consequent duty of each to contribute of his 
 abundance to relieve the necessities of the poor. At the same 
 time they inculcate on the poor the duty of self-support to the 
 extent of their ability. They are commanded " with quietness 
 to work, and to eat their own bread." Could these principles 
 be carried out there would be among Christians neither idle- 
 ness nor want. 
 
 15. As it is written, He that (had gathered) mucli 
 
 had nothing over; and he that (had gathered) httle' 
 
 had no lack. 
 
 The moral lesson taught in Exodus IC, 18, is that which 
 the apostle had just inculcated. There it is recorded that the 
 people, by the command of God, gathered of the manna an 
 omer for each person. Those who gathered more retained 
 only the allotted portion ; and those who gathered less had 
 their portion increased to the given standard. There was as 
 to the matter of necessary food an equality. If any one at- 
 tempted to hoard his portion, it spoiled upon his hands. The 
 lesson therefore taught in Exodus and by Paul is, that, among 
 the people of God, the superabundance of one sliould be em- 
 ployed in relieving the necessities of others ; and that any at- 
 tempt to countervail this law Avill result in shame and loss. 
 Property is like maima, it will not bear hoarding. 
 
 IG. But thanks (be) to God, which put the same 
 earnest care into the heart of Titus for you. 
 
II. corinthia:n^s s, 17. 207 
 
 From this verse to the end of the chapter the apostle 
 commends to the confidence of the Corinthians Titus and the 
 two brethren who were to accompany him on his return to 
 Corinth. The object of Titus's first visit was to ascertain the 
 state of the church, and specially the effect of Paul's former 
 epistle. The object of this mission was to bring to an end 
 the collection for the poor which the Corinthians had so long 
 under consideration. Titus had as much zeal in this matter 
 as Paul, and therefore the apostle thanks God irJuch put into 
 the heart of Titus ; tw IiIovti eV, 'Thanks to God giving in, 
 i. e. giving to be in, the heart of Titus.' The same earnest 
 care for you ; Tr\v avrrjv o-TrorS/yv, the same zeal, i. e. the same 
 zeal which I have for you. Titus felt the same interest in the 
 spiritual welfare of the Corinthians, and the same solicitude 
 that they should act consistently, that Paul had so warmly 
 expressed in the foregoing verses. Often, as the occasion of- 
 fers, it is still well to notice how uniformly the Scriptures take 
 for granted two great fundamental truths which human phi- 
 losophy finds it hard to comprehend or to admit. The one is 
 that God can and does control the inward acts and feelings of 
 men without interfering either ^Yith. their liberty or responsi- 
 bility. The zeal of Titus was the spontaneous effusion of his 
 own heart and was an index and element of his character. 
 Yet God put that zeal into his heart. This is not a figure of 
 speech. It was a simple and serious truth, a ground of solemn 
 thanksgiving to God. The other great truth is that the be- 
 liever is dependent on God for the continuance and exercise 
 of spiritual life. The Holy Spirit does not regenerate the soul 
 by implanting in it a new principle of life, and then leave that 
 principle to struggle in its own strength for existence and 
 growth. On the contrary, the new birth is the beginning of 
 a constant indwelling of God in the soul, so that both the 
 continuance and exercise of this new life are due to his pres- 
 ence. Yet so congenial and congruous is this divine influence 
 that the life of God in us is in the highest sense our own fife. 
 
 17. For indeed he accepted the exhortation; but 
 being more forward, of his own accord he went unto 
 you. 
 
 This is the proof of the zeal of Titus. Some commentators 
 assume that /xeV and 8e are here used instead of ov fxovov — aAAa, 
 ' Not only did he listen to our exhortation, but fulfilled it with 
 
208 II. CORINTHIANS 8, 18. 19. 
 
 greater zeal as he went forth willingly.' But Meyer gives a 
 better explanation. 'He accepted indeed our exhortation, 
 i. e. he modestly submitted himself to my direction, but being 
 too zealous (o-7roi;8aioT€pos) to need an exhortation, he went of 
 his own accord.' He did not require to be urged to go, al- 
 though in this, as in other matters, he was willing to do as I 
 wished. He went unto you. Titus was no doubt the bearer 
 of this epistle, and was with the apostle when it was written. 
 He had not yet gone forth. In epistolary style the writer 
 may use the tense suited to his own position, or to that of his 
 readers. Paul here, and in the following verses, uses the past 
 tense, because when his epistle came to hand the events re- 
 ferred to would be past. 
 
 18. And we have sent with him the brother, whose 
 praise (is) in the gospel throughout all the churches. 
 
 We have sent. The time is from the stand-point of the 
 reader, as before. TFe send icith him the hrother. As the 
 name is not given, and as no data are furnished by which to 
 determine who the brother here mentioned was, it is useless 
 to conjecture. It was some one subordinate to Titus sent 
 with him as a companion, some one well known throughout 
 the churches, and who had especially the confidence of the 
 Macedonian Christians, v. 19. But these conditions meet in 
 so many of the persons mentioned in the Acts or Paul's epis- 
 tles that they lead to no certain conclusion. Whether, there- 
 fore, it was Luke, Mark, Trophimus, or some one else, must be 
 left undecided. The question is hardly worth the trouble 
 which commentators have devoted to it. This brother's 
 praise is said to have been in the gospel. He was distin- 
 guished by his efforts in that sphere ; that is, by his zeal and 
 labour in promoting the gospel. Through all the churches. 
 If this be taken with the limitation of all the churches of 
 Macedonia, it still is evidence that the brother referred to was 
 specially entitled to the confidence of the Corinthians. 
 
 19. And not (that) only, but who was also chosen 
 of the churches to travel w^itli us with this grace, which 
 is administered by us to the glory of the same Lord, 
 and (declaration of) your ready mind. 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 8, 19. 209 
 
 This brother was entitled to confidence, and misfht safely 
 be intrusted with the contributions of the Corinthians, not 
 only on the ground of his general reputation, but also because 
 he had been elected for the very purpose of taking charge, 
 together with Paul, of the money collected for the saints. 
 Chosen, X€ipoTovr)Su<;, literally, chosen by the stretching out 
 the hand, therefore popularly. The word, however, is con- 
 stantly used for selection or appointment without reference to 
 the mode. Thus Josephus speaks of the king as having been 
 vTTo Tov -^€011 Ke)^€LpoTovr)ixei'o<;. Ant. vi. 4. 2. See Wetstein. Of 
 the churches, probably by the churches of Macedonia. To 
 travel icith us, o-wckSt^/xos t7/xcoj/, i. e. elected our travelling com- 
 panion. Acts 19, 29. With this grace. The word x^P^? means 
 either the disposition, or that which is its expression or mani- 
 festation, i. e. either kindness or a kindness. Any free gift is 
 therefore a grace. Here the grace intended is the alms col- 
 lected for the poor. Which is ministered by iis, i. e. of which 
 we are the administrators. Paul had undertaken to adminis- 
 ter the benefactions of the Gentile Christians among the 
 brethren at Jerusalem, and the brother referred to had been 
 chosen to travel with him and assist him in this service or 
 ministry. To the glory of the same Lord^ i. e. of our common 
 Lord. The natural construction of this clause is with the im- 
 mediately preceding words. ' This gift is administered by us 
 to the glory of the Lord.' The only objection to this is that 
 it requires the preposition Trpos to be taken as expressing dif- 
 ferent relations in the same sentence. 'Administered vrpos 
 8o^av .... Kttt TrpoSvfxiav v/xuiv (or, rjixdv), i. e. to promote the 
 glory of the Lord and to prove your readiness.' Meyer and 
 others therefore refer the clause to x^f-poTovrj&ei^ ; ' chosen that 
 by his co-operation Christ may be honoured and my (rjp-Cjv) 
 readiness to labour in the gospel, unincumbered by such cares, 
 may have free scope.' But this is unnatural, and supposes too 
 much to be supplied to make out the sense. If the common 
 text, which reads vfxwv, be retained, the sense is plain as ex- 
 pressed in our version. ' The ministration of this gift is for 
 the manifestation of the glory of Christ and of your readiness 
 or alacrity (in giving).' The oldest manuscripts as well as 
 the ancient versions, however, read rnxCjv, which almost all the 
 modern editors adopt. The sense then is, that the gift served 
 to promote the glory of Christ and to prove the apostle's will- 
 ingness to serve the poor. 
 
210 II. CORINTHIANS 8, 20-22. 
 
 20. Avoiding this, that no man should blame us in 
 this abundance which is administered by us. 
 
 The participle a-TeWofXivoL depends on the verb o-vveiriixxl/afjLeu 
 of the verse 18. 'We sent the brother with Titus, avoiding 
 this ; ' that is, in order to avoid. It was not, however, merely 
 the appointment of a brother to accompany Titus, but also 
 the designation of that brother to take part in the distribution 
 of the alms of the churches that Paul had determined upon in 
 order to prevent misrepresentation. The reference is there- 
 fore to the whole preceding sentence. The word areAXeti/, 
 literally, to place, means also to set in order, to prepare, a 
 sense which some adopt here. 'Preparmg for, taking care 
 with regard to, this.' The word also means to withdraw, to 
 contract, and hence to avoid, which best suits this place as 
 well as 2 Thess. 3, 6, where the word also occurs. JLest any 
 one should blame us. He was determined not to give any 
 one the opportunity to call his integrity into question. In 
 this cibundance lohich is administered hy us y i. e. in the dis- 
 position of the large sums of money committed to his charge. 
 The word ahpoT-q^ means ripeness, fulness, and then abundance ; 
 the nature of wliich is of course determined by the context. 
 
 21. Providing for honest things, not only in the 
 sight of the. Lord, but also in the sight of men. 
 
 This gives the reason for the precaution just mentioned. 
 It was not enough for the apostle to do right, he recognised 
 the importance of appearing right. It is a foolish pride ^^•hich 
 leads to a disregard of public opinion. We are bound to act 
 in such a way that not only God, Avho sees the heart and 
 knows all things, may approve our conduct, but also so that 
 men may be constrained to recognise our integrity. It is a 
 general principle regulating his whole life which the apostle 
 here announces. Upovoovfxevos, 2^'^ovidl7iff for in one''s oion be- 
 half. The apostle says. He took care beforehand tliat men us 
 well as God should see that he Avas honest. Compare Kora. 
 12, 17, and Prov. 3, 4, in the LXX. 
 
 22. And we have sent with them our brotlier, 
 whom we have oftentimes proved diligent in many 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 8, 23. 211 
 
 things, but now much more dihgent, upon the great 
 confidence which (I have) in you. 
 
 Who this second brother was whom Paul sent to accom- 
 pany Titus and his fellow-traveller, there is no means of deter- 
 mining. The apostle had proved him to be airovSalov^ earnest 
 or diligent, iv ttoAAois TroAAaKts, in many things many times. 
 J^ut noio^ i. e. on this occasion, micch 7nore diligent or earnest. 
 His zeal and alacrity was greatly excited hy the confidence 
 which he has in regard to you. He was so assured of success 
 that he entered on his mission with the greatest earnestness. 
 This interpretation, which most commentators adopt, and 
 which in our English Bibles is suggested in the margin, is 
 more natural than that preferred by Calvin, Beza and others. 
 They connect the word TreiroL^-qa-eL with orweTre/xi/^a/xer, 'We 
 sent the brother with them ; ... on account of the confidence 
 we have in you.' This, however, was not the reason for the 
 mission ; nor does it suit the context to say, ' we sent him with 
 confidence.' The position of the words is in favour of the 
 explanation first mentioned. 
 
 23. Whether (any do inquire) of Titus, (he is) my 
 partner and felloAv-helper concerning you : or our breth- 
 ren (be inquired of, they are) the messengers of the 
 churches, (and) the glory of Christ. 
 
 This is a recapitulation, or summary commendation. The 
 language in the original is very concise. Whether concerning 
 Titus^ i. e. whether I speak of Titus ; or. Whether any do in- 
 quire concerning Titus; or, without supplying any thing, 'As 
 to Titus.' lie is tny partner., koivwvo?, my associate, one who 
 has a part with me in a common ministry. And^ specially, 
 CIS concerns you my felloio-lahorer (o-vi/epyos). Whether our 
 brethren., (they are) the messengers {a-ocrrokoi) of the churches. 
 The word apostle is here obviously used in its hteral, and not 
 in its ofiicial sense. These men were surely not apostles in 
 the sense in which Paul was. In like manner, in Phil. 2, 25, 
 Epaphroditus is called the apostle of the Philippians, because 
 he was their messenger sent to minister to Paul at Rome. 
 Both the brethren, therefore, above mentioned, and not only 
 the one of whom it is said specially that he was chosen by the 
 churches, were delegated by the people. They are further 
 said to be the glory of Christ. As Christ alone, says Calvin, 
 
212 II. CORINTHIANS 9. 
 
 is the glory of believers, so he is glorified by tliem. They 
 reflect his glory. They by their holiness lead men to see the 
 excellence of Christ whose image they bear. 
 
 24. Wherefore shew ye to them, and before the 
 churches, the proof of your love, and of our boasting 
 on your behalf. 
 
 In conclusion the apostle exhorts the Corinthians to prove 
 to these messengers so worthy of their confidence their love, 
 and the truth of the favourable testimony which he had borne 
 to their liberality. Shoio the proof (r-qv eVSei^tv . . eVSct^aor^e) 
 of your love. This may mean, ' your love to me ; ' or, ' your 
 Christian love ; ' or, as is most natural, ' your love to them.' 
 Give them evidence of your love, i. e. receive them with aftec- 
 tionate confidence ; and let them see that my boasting of you 
 was true. Before the churches ; that is, so that the churches, 
 by whom these brethren were sent, may see the proof of your 
 love. Instead of the received text, which has the imperative 
 cVSet^ao-.^^c, Lachmann, Tischendorf, Meyer and others, after 
 the older MSS., read IvhuKvvjxevoi. ' Exhibiting the evidence 
 of your love, &c., (do it) in the presence of the churches.' 
 This whole chapter proves how intimately the early Christians 
 were bound together, not only from the intercourse here 
 shown to exist between the several churches, but from the 
 influence which they exerted over each other, from their 
 brotherly love and sympathy, and from the responsibility 
 which each is assumed to owe to the judgment of the others. 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 An exhortation to the Corinthians not to falsify his boastin;^ of their liberal- 
 ity, vs. 1-5. An exhortation to give not only liberally but cheerfully, 
 vs. 6-15. 
 
 Continuation of the discourse in the precedhig chapter on 
 making collections for the sai/Us. 
 
 Although aware of their readiness, the apostle sent the 
 brethren to bring the collection for the i)oor to an end, lest 
 when the Macedonians who were to accompany liini to Cor* 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 9, 1. 213 
 
 inth arrived, they should find them unprepared, not so much 
 to then- disgrace, as to his mortitication, vs. 1-4. He sent the 
 brethren, therefore, that every thing they intended to do 
 might be done in time, and be done cheerfully, v. 5. It was 
 not only liberality, but cheerfulness in giving that the Lord 
 required, vs. 6. 7. God who commanded them to give could 
 and would supply their wants, and increase their graces. 
 They would be the richer and the better for what they gave, 
 vs. 8-10. What he had at heart was not so much that the 
 temporal sufierings of the poor should be relieved, as that God 
 might be glorified by the gratitude and mutual love of believ- 
 ers, and by the exhibition of their Christian graces, vs. 10-14. 
 What are our gifts to the i^oor compared to the gift of Christ 
 to us? V. 15. 
 
 1. For as touching the ministering to the saints, it 
 is superfluous for me to write to you. 
 
 This is not a new paragraph, much less, as some have con- 
 jectured, a separate writing. It is intimately connected with 
 the preceding. In the last verse of chapter 8, he exhorted them 
 to receive the brethren with confidence, for indeed it is super- 
 fluous to write about the collection. He exhorted them to 
 show their love to the brethren who were to visit them, for 
 they needed no exhortation to liberality. This is another of 
 those exhibitions of urbanity and rhetorical skill with which 
 the epistles of Paul abounds. The 8e answering to the /neV ot 
 this verse is by some said to be found in verse 3. ' It is not 
 necessary indeed to write, hut I send, &c.' Or, if the connec- 
 tion between vs. 2 and 3 forbid this, the /xeV may be taken as 
 standing alone, as in 1 Cor. 5, 3. 11, 18. So De Wette. Con- 
 cerning the ministering (Trepl Trj<s SiaKovtas.) The word is often 
 used not only for the ministry of the word, but also for the 
 service rendered in the collection and distribution of alms. 
 Acts 6, 1. 12, 25. Rom. 15, 31. To the saints. All believers 
 are called aytot in the sense of sacred, i. e. separated from the 
 world and consecrated to God, and as inwardly renewed and 
 ' purified by the Holy Spirit. 8, 4. Acts 9, 13. Rom. 1,7. 8, 27. 
 The saints referred to were of course the poor believers in 
 Jerusalem for whose benefit Paul instituted this collection in 
 the several churches which he had founded. 1 Cor. 16, 1-3. 
 Jt is Siq^erfluolCS for rne {rr^pia-arov /xot Icrri) to icrite {to ypa</)eu', 
 
 the infinitive has the article because it is the subject of the 
 
214 II. CORINTHIANS 9, 2. 
 
 sentence) unto you. Paul had written and was about to write 
 still further on the subject ; so that this is to be understood as 
 only a polite intimation that his writing, so far as they were 
 concerned, was not necessary. They did not need urging. 
 
 2. Por I know the forwardness of your mind, for 
 wliich I boast of you to tliem of Macedonia, that Achaia 
 was ready a year ago ; and your zeal hath provoked 
 very many. 
 
 The reason why it was superfluous to write to them was 
 that they were disposed to act spontaneously. The apostle 
 says he knew their forwardness of niind^ {'jrpoSvf.uav,) their 
 readiness or disposition to give. I^or which I boast {rjv Kav- 
 Xw/^at, see 11, 30 for the same construction) of you {v-n-kp v/^wv, 
 for you, to your advantage). Their readiness to give was a 
 matter of which Paul at that time boasted to the Macedonians 
 among whom he then was. This does not imply that the 
 apostle regarded their liberal disposition an honour to himself, 
 as though it owed its existence to his agency. We are said 
 to boast of the good qualities of a friend when we proclaim 
 them to his honour and not our own. That Achaia teas 
 ready a year ago. This was Paul's boast. All the Christians 
 in Achaia belonged to the chui'ch in Corinth, although they 
 did not all reside in that city. See 1, 1. Was ready ^ i. e. to 
 take part in a collection for the saints. He does not mean 
 that the collection had already been completed, so that nothing 
 remained to be done. The context does not justify the dis- 
 paraging supposition that Paul, to excite the emulation of the 
 Macedonian Christians, had overstated the fact as to the Corin- 
 thians, representing them as having already a year ago made 
 their collection. IJie readiness to which he here refers is the 
 readiness of purpose. They were fully prepared to take part 
 in the work. Others say the apostle had told the Macedoni- 
 ans that the Corinthians had made their collection and were 
 ready to hand over the money. Those who have sufficient 
 respect for themselves not to speak disrespectfully of the 
 apostle, say that he truly believed this to be the fact, and was 
 now solicitous that the Corinthians should not falsify his asser- 
 tion by being unprepared. Others, however, as Kiickert, (and 
 in a measure De ^yette,) represent the apostle as dishonestly 
 tellin<2: to the Macedonians that the Corinthians had made 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 9, 3. 215 
 
 their collection, and now to save Ms credit, he begged the 
 latter to finish the work before he and his Macedonian friends 
 arrived. The whole body of Paul's epistles is a refutation of 
 this interpretation. No man who is capable of receiving the 
 true impress of his exalted character can suppose him guilty 
 of false statement or duplicity. What he told the Macedoni- 
 ans was simply that the Corinthians were prepared. What 
 preparation is meant is plain from the context. It consisted 
 in their Trpo^i^/xia, their alacrity of mind to take part in the 
 work. A year ago^ 8, 10. And your zeal^ i. e. your 7rpo^/Aia, 
 alacrity^ in this business. The words are 6 ki vjjlCjv ^rjXos, where 
 the iK may be considered redundant, as our translators have 
 assvmied it to be ; or, it may be omitted from the text, as by 
 Lachmann ; or, the meaning is, the zeal which emanated from 
 you. This last is to be preferred. Hath provohed. The 
 word ip€^L^€Lv means to excite, whether the feeling called into 
 exercise be good or bad. In Col. 3, 21, fathers are cautioned 
 not to provoke their children. Here the meanmg is that the 
 zeal of the Corinthians had excited the zeal of others. Very 
 many., toGs TvXdovaq^ the majority, the greater number. Acts 
 19, 32. It was not every individual of the Macedonian Chris- 
 tians, but the majority of them, whom the zeal of the Corin- 
 thians had excited. 
 
 3. Yet have I sent the brethren, lest our boastmg 
 of you should be in vain in this behalf; that, as I said, 
 ye may be ready. 
 
 If the connection is vaih. v. 1, the Se here answers to the 
 /xeV there. ' There is no need to write, hut I send, &c.' The 
 reference, however, may be to v. 2. 'I boasted of your prep- 
 aration, hut lest my boasting be falsified, I send, cfec' The 
 brethren^ viz., Titus and his two companions, who were about 
 to proceed to Corinth to attend to this matter. Lest our 
 boasting of you he in vain., kcvw^t;, be proved unfounded, 
 1 Cor. 9, 15, i. e. shown to be an empty boast. In this hehalf. 
 Paul did not fear that the good account which he had given 
 of the Corinthians in other matters should be contradicted by 
 the facts, but only in this one aifair of the collection for the 
 poor. That^ as I said ^ ye may he ready. This clause is par- 
 allel ^Wth the preceding. ' I sent the brethren that my boast- 
 ing be not found vain, i. e. I sent them that ye may be ready.' 
 10 
 
216 II. CORINTHIANS 9, 4. 
 
 It appears from 8, 10 that the Corinthians had avowed the 
 purpose to make a collection for the poor at Jerusalem, and 
 had actually begun the work a year ago. Paul had mentioned 
 this fact to the Macedonians, telling them that the Corinthi- 
 ans were ready to do their part in this business. He now 
 sends Titus and the brethren that the work may at once be 
 completed, and his boasting of them prove to be true. It is 
 plain that he could not have told the Macedonians that the 
 collection at Corinth had already been made, because he not 
 only knew that such was not the fact, but he in this very pas- 
 sage refers to the work as yet to be accomplished. He could 
 hardly say, ' I told the Macedonians you had made your col- 
 lection a year ago and had the money all ready to hand over,' 
 at the very moment he was urging them to collect it. The 
 simple fact is that he had said the Corinthians were ready to 
 do their part in this business, and he begged them to do at 
 once what they intended to do, lest his boasting of their 
 readiness (7rpo^v/xta) should prove to have been unfounded. 
 There is nothing in this inconsistent with perfect truthfulness 
 and open-hearted fairness. 
 
 4. Lest haply if they of Macedonia come with me, 
 and find you miprepared, Ave (that we say not, ye) 
 should be ashamed in this same confident boasting. 
 
 Paul was attended from city to city by travelling com- 
 panions, who conducted him on his way and ministered to 
 him. 1 Cor. 16, 6. Rom. 15, 24. Acts 17, 14. 15. &g. As he 
 was now in Macedonia it was in accordance with the usual 
 custom that Macedonians should attend liim to Corinth. 
 If they come loith me^ lav eX^coo-tv, sJiall have come, i. e. 'Lest 
 when they come and find you unjjrejKired, i. e. unprepared to 
 do what a year ago you professed your readiness to do, we 
 {that we say not, yoxi) should be ashamed. The failure would 
 indeed be a cause of shame to the Corinthians, but he delicate- 
 ly substitutes himself He appeals to their better feelings 
 when he calls upon them to save him from mortification, in- 
 stead of exhorting them to save themselves from disgrace. 
 Jn this same coiifident hoastmg. The words tt}? Kavx^/o-eco? are 
 omitted by almost all the recent editors from Griesbach down. 
 Tliey arc not found in the MSS. B, C, D, F, G, or tlie ancient 
 versions. They probably wore added by a transcriber from 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 9, 5. 217 
 
 11,17. These words being omitted, the text stands, iv rfj liroa-- 
 Ttto-et ravrr], in this covjidence, i. e. ashamed in relation to this 
 confidence. Comp. Heb. 3, 14. 11, 1. Others take the word 
 in the sense of 7iegotium^ " in this thing," which is not only 
 unnecessary, but contrary to usage. 
 
 5. Therefore I thought it necessary to exhort the 
 brethren, that they would go before unto you, and 
 make up beforehand your bounty, whereof ye had no- 
 tice before, that the same might be ready, as (a matter 
 of) bounty, and not as (of) covetousness. 
 
 TJierefore^ i. e. in order to avoid the mortification of his 
 boasting being proved vain. I thought it necessary to exhort 
 the brethren^ (Titus and his companions,) that they would go 
 before ; {-TrapaKaXecraL — tva, as in 8, 6, and often elsewhere, tVa 
 is used after verbs signifying to ask, exhort, &c., in the sense 
 of oTi.) Woidd go before, i. e. before Paul and his Macedoni- 
 an companions. And make up beforehand, TrpoKaTaprtVcuo-t, a 
 word not found in the Greek writers, and occurring in the 
 New Testament only in this passage. The simj^le verb means, 
 to put fully in order, to complete. This the brethren were to 
 do in reference to the collection, before Paul's arrival. ITour 
 bounty, tt]v €vXoytav vfjiCjv, your blessing. The word is used 
 m the sense both of benediction and benefaction. The latter 
 is clearly its meaning here, as perhaps also in Rom. 15, 29 ; 
 see also Eph. 1, 3, and in the LXX. Gen. 33, 11. Judges 1, 15. 
 1 Sam. 25, 27, &c. So in English, a blessing is either a prayer 
 for good, or the good itself. Whereof ye had notice before. 
 Here the reading is doubtful. The common text has irpoKa- 
 T-qyyeXfjievrjv, ayinounced beforehand. Not, however, as our 
 translation has it, announced to you, but to others. The 
 benefaction before spoken of, i. e. of which so much has been 
 said. Almost all the critical editions read Trpoe-n-tp/yeXiJiivrjv, 
 promised beforehand^ ' your promised benefaction,' And this 
 gives a better sense, as the apostle was urging them to do 
 what they had promised. Tliat the same might be ready as a 
 matter of bounty ; oiUrws ws ^vXoyiav, so as a blesshig, i. e. as 
 something worthy of the name. This may mean, ' worthy of 
 the name because the fruit of love ; ' or, because given freely ; 
 or, because rich, abundant. This last is to be preferred be- 
 cause of the antithesis between evXoyia and TrXeoue^La, because 
 
218 II. CORINTHIANS 9,6. 
 
 of the explanation in v. 6, and because cheerfulness in giving 
 is afterwards enforced. Atid 7iot as of covetoiiS7iess ; literally, 
 not as covetousness, i. e. not such a gift as betrays the avarice 
 of the giver. 
 
 6. But this (I say), He which soweth sparingly, 
 shall reap also sparingly ; and he which soweth bounti- 
 fully, shall reap also bountifully. 
 
 The words tovto 8e, hut this, are commonly and most natu- 
 rally exj^lained by supplying some such words as J say, or, 
 consider. Others take them as the accusative absolute ; ' as 
 to this, however.' Meyer unnaturally makes rovro the object 
 of o-Tretpcuv, ' He who sows this sparingly, &c.' That is, in oth- 
 er cases it may be different, but in this spiritual sowing, in 
 this seed of good deeds, the rule always holds good. Our 
 version gives a simple and suitable sense. The only question 
 of doubt in the verse is the meaning of the words lit euAoytai?, 
 which our translators have rendered adverbially, hountifidly. 
 ' He that sows bountifully, shall reap also bountifully.' This 
 undoubtedly is the meaning as determined by the antithesis, 
 ' He that sows ^etSo/^eVco? sparingly, and he that sows ctt' evAo- 
 ytais hountifidly? But the question is how to get that sense 
 out of the words, which literally mean vnth hlessings. * He 
 that sows with hlessings, shall reap loith hlessings? The force 
 of the preposition ctti with the dative in this place may be ex- 
 plained after the analogy of such passages as Rom. 4, 18. 
 1 Cor. 9, 10; ctt' eA-TriSt, tvith hope, as expressing the condition 
 under which any thing is done ; or after the analogy of such 
 places as Rom. 5, 14, cVt raJ o/xotw/aari, after the similitude, as 
 expressing the rule according to which it is done. In either 
 case the preposition and noun may express an adverbial quali- 
 fication. In this case therefore, tV cuAoytat?, ad normani hene- 
 ficiorum, as Wahl translates it, may, as the context requires, 
 mean kindly, freely, or bountifully. Here, as just stated, the 
 antithesis with i^eiSo/xcVw? requires the last, viz., bountifully. 
 The sentiment here expressed is the same as in Prov. 11, 24, 
 " There is that scattereth and yet increaseth ; and there is that 
 withlioldeth more than is meet, but it tcndeth to poverty." 
 It is comprehended also in the wider truth taught in Gal. 6, V. 
 Our Lord teaches the same doctrine, Luke 6, 38, " Give and it 
 shall be given unto you, etc." JMutt. 10, 41, and often else- 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 9, 1. 219 
 
 where. It is edifying to notice the difference between the 
 divine wisdom and the wisdom of men. As the proper motive 
 to acts of benevolence is a desire for the happiness of others 
 and a regard to the will of God, human wisdom says it is 
 wrong to appeal to any selfish motive. The wisdom of God, 
 while teaching the entire abnegation of self, and requiring a 
 man even to hate his own life when in conflict with the glory 
 of God, tells all who thus deny themselves that they thereby 
 most effectually promote their own interests. He that loses 
 his life shall save it. He that does not seek his own, shall best 
 secure his own. He that humbleth himself shall be exalted. 
 There can, however, be no hypocrisy in this matter. It is not 
 the man who pretends to deny himself, to humble himself, or 
 to seek the good of others rather than his own, while he acts 
 from a regard to self, who is to be thus rewarded. It is only 
 those who sincerely postpone themselves to others, who shall 
 be preferred before them. We may thence learn that it is 
 right to present to men the divinely ordained consequences of 
 their actions as motives to control their conduct. It is right 
 to tell men that obedience to God, devotion to his glory and 
 the good of others, will effectually promote their own welfare. 
 
 7. Every man according as he piu-posetli in liis 
 heart, (so let him give ;) not grudgingly, or of necessi- 
 ty : for God loveth a cheerful giver. 
 
 Though he wished them to giA^e bountifully, he desired 
 them to do it freely. Let each one give as he purposes in his 
 hearty i. e. as he cordially, or with the consent of the heart, 
 determines. This stands opposed to what follows, and, there- 
 fore, is explained by it. Not grudgingly^ U Xvirrjs, not out of 
 sorrow ; i. e. let not the gift proceed out of a reluctant state 
 of mind, grieving after what is given as so much lost. Or of 
 necessity, i. e. constrained by circumstances to give, when you 
 prefer not to do it. Many gifts are thus given sorrowfully, 
 where the giver is induced to give by a regard to public 
 opinion, or by stress of conscience. This reluctance spoils the 
 gift. It loses all its fragrance when the incense of a free and 
 joyful spirit is wanting. M)r God loveth a cheerful giv^r ; 
 IXapov SoT-qv, a joyful giver, one to whom giving is a delight, 
 who does it with hilarity. The passage is quoted from Pro v. 
 22, 9, where the Hebrew means, "A good eye shall be 
 
220 II. CORINTHIANS 9, 8. 
 
 blessed." The LXX. renders the words quoad sensinn^ avSpa 
 IXapov Koi SoTTjv evXoyet o Seo^ ; a version which Paul adopts for 
 substance. God blesses, loves, dehghls in, the joyous giver. 
 Let not, therefore, those Avho give reluctantly, or from stress 
 of circumstances, or to secure merit, imagine that mere giving 
 is acceptable to God. Unless we feel it is an honour and a 
 joy to give, God does not accept the offering. 
 
 8. And God (is) able to make all grace abound 
 toward you ; that ye, always having all sufficiency in 
 all (things), may abound to every good work. 
 
 From this verse to the 11th, the apostle assures them that 
 the liberal and cheerful giver will always have something to 
 give. God is able. The sacred writers often appeal to the 
 power of God as a ground of confidence to his people. Rom. 
 16, 25. Eph. 3, 20. Jude 24. This is done especially when 
 we are called upon to believe something which is contrary to 
 the natural course of things. Giving is, to the natural eye, 
 the way to lessen our store, not to increase it. The Bible 
 says it is the Avay to increase it. To believe this it is only 
 necessary to believe in the power, providence, and promise 
 of God. God is able to make the paradox, " he that scatter- 
 eth, increaseth," prove true. God is able to inahe all grace 
 abound j x^p^v-, fivour, gift, whether temporal or sj^iritual, or 
 both, depends on the context. Here the reference is clearly 
 to earthly good; that kind of good or favour is intended 
 which enables those who receive it to give abundantly. The 
 idea, therefore, obviously is, ' God is able to increase your 
 wealth.' That ye, having all sufficiency in all things. The 
 expression here is striking, eV iravrl ttolvtot^ Trao-ai/, m cdl things^ 
 always^ all. God is able so to enricli you that you shall have 
 in every respect, at all times, all kinds of sufficiency. The 
 word is avTdf)K€iav, which everywhere else means co?itentme?it. 
 This sense Grotius, Meyer and others retain here. * That hav- 
 ing full contentment,' i. e. being fully satisfied and not craving 
 more, you may, <&c. This, however, is not so well suited to 
 the context, and especially to the qualifying words, eV iravTi. 
 It is 'a competency in every thing' of wliich the apostle 
 speaks. 77iat ye may abound., TrepLo-aivrjTc^ may have abund- 
 ance. Phil. 4, 18. The word is used transitively in the first 
 clause of the verse and intransitively in the last. ' God is able 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 9, 9. 221 
 
 to cause your riches to abound, that ye may have abundance 
 to every good icork ;"> eis ttSv Ipyov aya^w, in reference to, so 
 as to be able to perform every good work. The logical con- 
 nection is not with the intermediate participial clause, 'that 
 having sufficiency, ye may have abundance,' but with the first 
 clause, ' God is able to cause your resources to abound, that 
 ye may have abundance.' The participial clause expresses 
 simply what, notwithstanding their liberaUty, would be the 
 result. Having (i. e. still having) a competency for yourselves, 
 ye will have abundance for every good work. There is an- 
 other interpretation of this passage which the Enghsh version 
 naturally suggests. 'That ye may abound in every good 
 work.' But this the Greek ^ill not admit ; because it is ct? 
 Trav, K.r.X., and not Iv TravTL, k.t.X. See 1 Cor. 15, 58. Besides, 
 the other interpretation is better suited to the context. 
 
 9. As it is written, He liath dispersed abroad ; he 
 hath given to the poor: his righteousness remaineth 
 forever. 
 
 The connection is with the last clause of the preceding 
 verse. Paul had said that he who gives shall have abundance 
 to give. This is precisely what is said in Psalm 112. Of the 
 man who fears God it is there said, " Wealth and riches shall 
 be in his house." " He showeth favour, and lendeth." " He 
 hath dispersed, he hath given to the poor ; his righteousness 
 endureth forever." The main idea the apostle designs to pre- 
 sent as having the sanction of the word of God is, that he who 
 is hberal, who disperses, scatters abroad his gifts with free- 
 handed generosity, as a man scatters seed, shall always have 
 abundance. And this the Psalmist exj^ressly asserts. It may 
 be said that this is not in accordance mth experience. We 
 do not always see liberality attended by riches. This is a 
 difficulty not peculiar to this case. The Bible is full of decla- 
 rations concerning the blessedness of the righteous, and of the 
 providential favours which attend their lot. This Psalm says, 
 " Wealth and riches," or, as the LXX. and Vulgate have it, 
 " Glory and riches shall be in their house ; " and our Lord 
 says, that those who forsake all for him shall in this life re- 
 ceive an hundred-fold, houses, lands, &c. Mark 10, 30. These 
 passages were not designed to be taken literally or applied 
 universally. They teach three things. 1st. The tendency of 
 things. It is the tendency of righteousness to produce bless- 
 
222 II. CORINTHIANS 9, 10. 
 
 eclness, as it is the tendency of evil to j^roduce misery. 2d. 
 The general course of divine providence. God in his provi- 
 dence does as a general rule prosper the diligent and bless 
 the righteous. Honesty is the best policy, is a maxim even 
 of worldly wisdom. 3d. Even in this life righteousness pro- 
 duces a hundred-fold m.ore good than unrighteousness does. 
 A righteous man is a hundred-fold more happy than a wicked 
 man, other things being equal. A good man is a hundred-fold 
 more happy in sickness, in poverty, in bereavement, than a 
 wicked man in the same circumstances. It is, therefore, ac- 
 cording to Scripture, a general law, that he that scattereth, 
 increaseth ; he that gives shall have wherewith to give. 
 
 His righteousness (i. e. the righteo\isness of the man who 
 gives to the poor) endureth forever. The word hiKaiofrvvq^ 
 righteousness^ in Scripture, is often used in a comprehensive 
 sense, including all moral excellence ; and often in a restricted 
 sense for rectitude or justice. When used in the comprehen- 
 sive sense, it depends on the context what particular form of 
 goodness is intended. To return a poor man's j^ledge is an 
 act of 8tKato(rw77, Deut. 24, 13; so is giving alms. Matt. 6, 1 
 (where the true reading is SiKatocruVr^v, and not iXcrjixoa-vvrjv) . 
 In like manner the "glory of God " may mean the sum of his 
 divine perfections, or his wisdom, power, or mercy, as special 
 forms of his glory, as the context requires. In this passage it 
 is plain that righteousness means general excellence or virtue, 
 as manifested in beneficence. And when it is said that his 
 beneficence shall continue forever, the implication is that he 
 shall always have wherewith to be beneficent. And this is 
 here the main idea. He shall always be prosperous ; or, as it 
 is expressed at tlie close of v. 8, he shall have abundance for 
 every good work. Forever is equivalent to always^ as cts tov 
 aiajm is often used for indefinite duration. Whether the 
 duration be absolutely without limit, or wdiethcr the limit be 
 unknown or undetermined, depends in each case on the nature 
 of the thing spoken of, and on the analogy of Scripture. 
 
 10. Now, he that ministereth seed to the sower, 
 both minister bread for (your) food, and multiply your 
 seed sown, and increase the fruits of your righteous- 
 ness. 
 
 Now ; 8e is continuativc. God is able to give you abund- 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 9, 10. 223 
 
 ance, and he will do it. This verse is a declaration, and not a 
 wish. Our translation, which makes it a prayer, is founded 
 on the Elzevir, or common text, which reads xopyy^^^ai^ ttXtj-^v- 
 vai, av^rjaat in the optative, instead of the futures x^PT/W^^^ 
 TrXTjSvvel, av^o-et, which are supported by a great preponder- 
 ance of authorities, and are adopted by Griesbach, Lachmann, 
 Tischendorf, and by the great majority of editors. The sense 
 expressed by the future forms is also better suited to the con- 
 text. Paul's desire was to produce the conviction in the 
 minds of the Corinthians, which he himself so strongly felt, 
 that no man is the poorer for being liberal. The ground of 
 this conviction was twofold ; the explicit promise of God, and 
 his character and general mode of dealing with men. He that 
 miiiistereth seed to the sower ; 6 i-Lxoprjyuiv, he whose preroga- 
 tive and wont it is to supply seed to the sower. Such being 
 the character and, so to speak, the office of God, Paul was 
 sure he would supply the necessities of his giving people. 
 The words koI aprov cl<; Ppihcriv our translators, after Calvin and 
 others, connect with the following clause, and render /cat both. 
 " Shall both minister bread for food, and multiply, &c." The 
 obviously natural construction is with the preceding clause, 
 * He that ministereth seed to the sower, and bread for eating.' 
 (The word is ^pwcrt?, eating^ and not ^pa>/xa,/bo<:?.) This connec- 
 tion is also in accordance with the passage in Is. 55, 10, which 
 was evidently in the apostle's mind, and where the words are, 
 " Seed to the sower, and bread to the eater." This bountiful 
 God iciU give and increase your seed. Your seed means your 
 resources, your wealth, that which you can scatter abroad in 
 acts of beneficence, as a sower scatters seed. He who fur- 
 nishes the husbandman seed for his harvest, will abundantly 
 supply you with seed for your harvest. And increase the 
 fruits of your righteousness. This is parallel with the pre- 
 ceding clause, and means the same thing. ' The fruits of your 
 righteousness,' are not the rewards of your righteousness, 
 either here or hereafter. But ' your works of righteousness,' 
 i. e. of beneficence ; the word StKatoo-vv-^ having the same sense 
 here as in the preceding clause. As in v. 9, the words " his 
 righteousness remaineth forever" mean that the righteous 
 shall always have the means of being beneficent ; so here to 
 increase " the fruits of your righteousness," means, ' will in- 
 crease your means of doing good.' This sense the context 
 demands, and the words, in their scriptural sense, readily ad- 
 mit. The other interpretation, however, according to which 
 10* 
 
224 II. CORINTHIANS 9, 11. 12. 
 
 " the fruits of your righteousness " mean the reward of your 
 righteousness, amounts substantially to the same thing; for 
 the reward of beneficence is, according to the context, the in- 
 crease of the means w^herewith to be beneficent. 
 
 11. Being enriched in every thing to all bountiful- 
 ness, which causeth through us thanksgiving to God. 
 
 In our version vs. 9 and 10 are regarded as a parenthesis, 
 and this verse is connected with v. 8. '' That ye may have 
 abundance for every good work — being enriched, &c." But 
 this is unnecessary and forbidden by the regular connection 
 of vs. 9 and 10 Avith v. 8. Others supply the substantive verb 
 " ye shall be enriched." Almost all the modern commenta- 
 tors assume the irregular construction of the participle of 
 which so many examples occur both in the New Testament 
 and in the classics. See Eph. 4, 2. 3, 17. Col. 2, 2. 3, 16. 
 Acts 15, 22, &G. The connection is therefore with what im- 
 mediately precedes. 'God will increase the fruits of your 
 righteousness, (i. e. your resources,) being enriched, i. e. so 
 that you shall be enriched, &c.' The reference is not to in- 
 ward or spiritual riches, but, as the whole context demands, 
 to worldly riches. 'If you are liberal, God will give you 
 abundance, so that you shall be rich to all hountifulness^ ets 
 iraaav aTrXoT-qra. The preposition (cts) expresses the design or 
 end for which they shall be enriched. JBoimtifulness or liber- 
 ality ; the word is airXor-q^^ which means sincerity, rightmind- 
 edness. Another example of a general term used in a specific 
 sense. See 8, 2. Rom. 15, 12. Which causes through iis, i. e. 
 by our ministry. Paul had been instrumental in exciting the 
 liberality of the Corinthians and in effecting the contribution 
 for the poor in Jerusalem, and therefore he could say that the 
 thanksgiving to God which Avas thus called forth was through 
 him. The good effect of the liberality of Christians was not 
 limited to the relief of the temporal necessities of their breth- 
 ren ; it had the higher effect of promoting gratitude to God. 
 On this idea the apostle enlarges in the following verses. 
 
 12. For the administration of this service not only 
 supplieth the want of the saints, but is abundant also 
 by many thanksgivings unto God. 
 
 Your liberality produces gratitude, for (otl)^ because, tho 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 9, 13. 225 
 
 administration of this service^ -fj SiaKovca t^s A.etToi;pyias rav-nys. 
 This may mean, ' The administration by me of this service of 
 yours, i. e. this benefaction of yours, which is a service ren- 
 dered to God and his people.' It is a X^novpyia ; properly a 
 public ser\ice, but always in the New Testament (except per- 
 haps Phil. 2, 30) a religious service such as was rendered by 
 the priests in the temple, Luke 1, 23. Heb. 8, 6. 9, 21 ; or by 
 the Christian ministry, Phil. 2, 17. Comp. Rom. 1, 9. Or, it 
 may mean, ' The service which you render by this benefaction.' 
 The BtaKovLa, ministry, or service, consisted in the X^irovpyia^ 
 the contribution. This suits better with v. 13, where htaKovia 
 is used for what the Corinthians did, not for what Paul did. 
 Not only supplieth. The Greek is somewhat peculiar; co-rt 
 "TTpoa-avaTrXrjpovora, it is not only fully compensatory . . . but it ia 
 (Trepta-crevova-a) overfloioing ; the participles being used as ad- 
 jectives expressing the quality of the thing spoken of. The 
 leant of the saints. Their necessities are not only supplied, 
 but your service overflows, or is abundantly productive of 
 good; by means of many thanksgivings to God ; t(3 ^ecj de- 
 pending on €v)(apL(TTLiov as in verse 11. 
 
 13. While by the experiment of this ministration 
 they glorify God for your professed subjection unto the 
 gospel of Christ, and for (your) liberal distribution unto 
 them, and unto all (men). 
 
 There is the same irregularity of grammatical construction 
 in this verse as in v. 11; the participle So^a^ovres here referring 
 to TToAAcoi/, as there TrXovrtt^oixevoi to v/xaii/. The sense is, ' Many 
 thank God, glorifying him (8ta t^s Soki/x^s ttJs StaKovtaq Taurry?) 
 on the occasion of the evidence offered by this service.' The 
 preposition 8ta here expresses the occasional, not the instru- 
 mental, or rational cause. It is neither through, nor, on ac- 
 count of but simply hy, i. e. occasioned by. The simplest 
 explanation of 8o/<t/x7^, in this passage, is proof, or evidence ; 
 and the genitive, StaKovtas, is the genitive of apposition. The 
 service was the proof. The thing proved by the service ren- 
 dered by the Corinthians to their poor brethren, is what is 
 mentioned in the sequel, viz., their obedience and their fellow- 
 ship with the saints. Meyer makes SoKcixrj mean indoles spec- 
 tata, the nature, or internal character. " From the nature of 
 this service," whereby it proved itself to be genuine, or what 
 
226 II. CORINTHIANS 9, 13. 
 
 the Christian spirit demanded. Calvin's explanation is, Speci- 
 men idoneum probandse Corinthiorum caritati, quod erga fra- 
 tres procul remotos tarn liberales erant ; which amounts very 
 much to what is impHed in the first interpretation mentioned. 
 They glorify God for your 2^rofessed subjection. The words 
 are, iin rfj vTrorayfj t>}s 6/xoA.oytas v/xoov ; on account of obedience 
 to your confession. 'O/xoAoyta is always in the New Testament 
 used for the profession, or confession, of Christianity. 1 Tim. 
 6, 12. Heb. 3, 1. 4, 14. 10, 23. Beza, whom our translators 
 follow, gives the genitive the force of the participle, professetl 
 obedience^ i. e. obedience which you profess. Others make it 
 the genitive of the source, " the obedience which flows from 
 your confession ; " others again make it the genitive of the 
 object, " obedience to your confession." This gives the best 
 sense, and agrees best with the analogous expression, " obedi- 
 ence of Christ," 10, 5. To the gospel of Christy eh e^ay. 
 These words, it is said, cannot properly be constructed either 
 with vTTOTayfj or with 6/xoAoytas, because neither vTroTacro-o) nor 
 ojaoAoyew is followed by ds. On this account Meyer connects 
 the clause in question with So^a^ovrc?, ' they praise God — in 
 reference to the gospel.' But this is forced, and does not 
 agree with the following clause ; as there, ets Travra?, if con- 
 nected with ho^dt,ovres, gives no definite sense. De Wette 
 connects cts cvay. with what precedes, ' Your confession — as it 
 concerns the gospel.' And for your liberal distributio7i unto 
 them^ and unto all. This is the second ground of praise to 
 God. The words are aTrXoT-qn ttjs Koii/covtas, the sincerity of 
 your felloiD ship. These general terms may, if the context re- 
 quired, be taken in the specific sense, " liberality of your con- 
 tribution," as is done by our translators ; or they may be 
 understood in their wider and more natural sense. The 
 ground on which the saints at Jerusalem would praise God 
 was the manifestation of the Christian fellowship which the 
 Cormthians cherished not only for them, but for all believers. 
 It was the consciousness of the communion of saints — the as- 
 surance that beUevers, however separated, or however distin- 
 guished as Jews and Gentiles, bond or free, are one body in 
 Chi'ist, that called forth their praise to God. And, therefore, 
 the apostle says it was the (Kotvwvta) fellowship of the Corinthi- 
 ans not only towards them, (the saints in Jerusalem,) but 
 towards all believers, that was the ground of their praise. 
 See Phil. 1, 5, for an example of Kotvtona followed by cts, as it 
 is in this verse. 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 9, 14.15. 227 
 
 14. And by their prayer for you, which long after 
 you, for the exceeding grace of God in you. 
 
 This verse admits of a threefold construction. It may be 
 connected with v. 12, Serycret being parallel with 8ta 7roXkC)v €vx. 
 'Your liberality is abundant, or overflowing, (-Treptcrcrcuovcra,) 
 through many thanksgivings — and by their prayer for you.' 
 That is, our liberality is j^roductive of abundant good, not 
 only by calling forth thanksgiving to God, but also by leading 
 the objects of your kindness to pray for you. This is a full 
 compensation. The prayers and blessings of the poor are 
 their benefactions to the rich, descending on them as the dew 
 on Hermon. Or the connection may be with So^a^ovre? in v. 
 13. 'They glorify God for your obedience, . . . and by their 
 prayer.' But in this case, the natural meaning would be, 
 (ScT/cret being co-ordinate with {'7roTayT7),,'They glorify God for 
 your subjection — and for their prayer.' This does not give a 
 good sense. Believers do not glorify God for their prayers. 
 Others, as Meyer, take a{Tcoi/ iirtTro^vvTiDv together as the 
 genitive absolute, and Kai, not as a?id^ but also. ' You (Co- 
 rinthians) manifest your fellowship for them — they also with 
 prayer for you earnestly longing for you.' This gives a perti- 
 nent sense. The first mentioned explanation is, however, 
 generally preferred. I^or the exceeding grace of God i?i you. 
 That is, on account of (Sta t^v x^P"'?) the surpassing grace, or 
 favour of God manifested towards or upon you (e</)' v\kIv) ; in 
 that he had rendered them so liberal, and so filled them with 
 a Christian spirit. 
 
 15. Thanks (be) unto God for his unspeakable 
 gift. 
 
 According to Calvin, and perhaps the majority of com- 
 mentators, the gift to which Paul refers, is that spoken of in 
 the context, viz., the grace bestowed on the Corinthians, or 
 the good effect anticipated from their liberality. Confident 
 that the Corinthians would be liberal, and that their liberality 
 would excite the gratitude of their suffering brethren, and 
 cement the union between the Jewish and Gentile converts, 
 the apostle breaks forth in this expression of thanksgiving to 
 God, for bringing about so haj^py a consummation. But the 
 language is too strong for this. God's unspeakable gift is his 
 Son. This, according to the analogy of Scripture, is that one 
 
228 II. CORINTHIANS 10. 
 
 great, supreme, all-comprehending gift, which is here intend- 
 ed. This is the more natural, because it is Paul's wont, when 
 speaking either of the feeble love, or trivial gifts of believers, 
 one to another, to refer in contrast to the infinite love and 
 unspeakable gift of God m Christ to us. 8, 9. Eph. 5, 1. It is 
 his habit also to introduce ejaculations of adoration or thanks- 
 giving into the midst, or at the close of his teachings or ex- 
 hortations. Rom. 1, 25. 9, 5. 1 Cor. 15, 17. 1 Tim. 1, 17. The 
 passage, therefore, ought to stand, as we doubt not the vast 
 majority of the readers of the Bible understand it, as an out- 
 burst of gratitude to God for the gift of liis Son. 
 
 CHAPTER X. 
 
 Paul deprecates the necessity of asserting his authority and of exercising his 
 power to punish the disobedient, vs. 1-6. He confronts his opposers 
 with the assertion of divinely derived power, vs. 9-11. He shows that 
 he claims authority only over those who were committed to his care, 
 vs. 12-18. 
 
 PauPs assertion of his authority and vindicatioii of his 
 ai^ostolic pi^erogatives. 
 
 The remarkable change in the whole tone and style of this 
 portion of the epistle, from the beginning of the 10th chapter 
 to near the end of the 13th, has attracted the attention of 
 every careful reader. The contrast between this and the pre- 
 ceding portions of the epistle is so great, that some have con- 
 cluded that they are separate letters, written at difierent 
 times and under different circumstances. There is no exter- 
 nal authority for this conjecture, and it is not only unneces- 
 sary, but inconsistent with the facts of the case. The same 
 topics are presented, and there is in 12, 18 reference to the 
 mission of Titus, spoken of in the earlier chapters. It is an 
 adequate explanation of the change in question, that in chs. 
 1-9, Paul had in his mind, and was really addressing, the 
 faithful and obedient portion of the church, whereas he has 
 here in view the unreasonable and wicked false teachers and 
 their adherents, who not only made Hght of his authority, but 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 10, 1. 229 
 
 corrupted the gospel, which he was appomted to propagate 
 and defend. He therefore naturally assumes a tone of author- 
 ity and severity. Satisfied of his divine mission, and conscious 
 of supernatural power, he cautioned them not to rely too much 
 on his forbearance. He was indeed as a man humble, and, if 
 they chose, insignificant ; but there was slumbering in his arm 
 an energy which they would do well not to provoke. He had 
 no desire to exercise in Corinth the authority with which 
 Christ had invested him for the purpose of bringing down all 
 opposition. He would give them a fair trial, and wait to see 
 how far they would be obedient, before he punished their dis- 
 obedience, vs. 1-6. They should not judge by appearance, 
 or set themselves up on the ground of their fancied advan- 
 tages, because whatever they had, he had in larger measure, 
 vs. 7. 8. He had no intention to frighten them by his epistles 
 — which they said were written in a tone he would not dare 
 to assume when present — for they would find that, when oc- 
 casion called for it, he could be as bold when present as when 
 he was absent, vs. 9-11. They were subject to his aj^ostoUc 
 authority. He usurped nothing in exercising the powers of 
 his oftice over the churches which he had himself founded. 
 He did not interfere with the jurisdiction of the other apos- 
 tles, or undertake the special oversight of churches founded 
 by others. Macedonia and Achaia were within the sphere of 
 his operations, and he hoped to preach the gospel far beyond 
 those hmits in regions where it had never been heard, vs. 
 12-16. His confidence was not self-confidence, but confidence 
 in God. His self-commendation amounted to nothing, unless 
 the Lord commended him. Paul constantly felt that in him- 
 self he could do nothin<r, but in the Lord he could do all 
 things, vs. 17. 18. 
 
 "05 
 
 1. Now I Paul myself beseecli you, by the meek- 
 ness and gentleness of Christ, who in presence (am) 
 base among you, but being absent am bold toward 
 you. 
 
 ■ He enters without any preamble or circunilocution on his 
 new subject, and places himself face to face with his unscrupu- 
 lous opponents. He says, I Paul myself. He usually em- 
 ploys the first person plural when speaking of himself. Here, 
 and throughout this context, he makes his individuality promi- 
 
230 II. CORINTHIANS 10, 1. 
 
 nent, in saying I. This is rendered the more emphatic by the 
 addition of the word myself; a^ros iyw, 1 7ny self the man whom 
 you so despise and calumniate. Comp. Gal. 5, 2. Eph. 3, 1. 
 Philemon, 19. In this case the expression is so emphatic that 
 many suppose that Paul here began to write with his own 
 hand ; as though he were so excited, that he seized the -pen 
 from his amanuensis, and says, ' I Paul myself now write to 
 you.' This, however, is unnecessary, and unsustained by any 
 thing in the context. Beseech you by the meekness and gen- 
 tleness of Christ. That is, the meekness and gentleness which 
 belonged to Christ, and which, therefore, his disciples are 
 bound to imitate. To beseech by (8ta), is to beseech on ac- 
 count of, or out of regard to. The request is enforced by a 
 reference to the obligation of Christians to be meek and gen- 
 tle as was their Lord. Matt. 11, 29. Is. 42, 2. In Rom, 12, 1, 
 we have a similar exj^ression, " I beseech you by the mercies 
 of God." See Phil. 2, 1. The words Trpaorrjs and iiruLKaa dif- 
 fer very much as our words meekness and gentleness do ; the 
 former referring more to the inward virtue, the latter to its 
 outward expression. As Christians are bound to be meek and 
 gentle, Paul begged the Corinthians not to force him to be 
 severe. He describes himself as his opposers described him, 
 as craven when present, and a braggart when absent. Who 
 m presence am base among you. In presence, Kara Trpoo-wTrov, 
 coram^ before, towards the face of any one, here opposed to 
 d-TTwi/, ccbsent. The word raTretvos, literally, loio ; then lowly, 
 humble. It is commonly used in a good sense. Our Lord 
 says of himself that he was, raTreii/os rrj /capSta, loicly in hearty 
 and his follovrers are always described as the loicly. But the 
 word also means doicncast^ as in 7, 6, and thence it sometimes 
 expresses depression when it is the effect of the want of cour- 
 age. This is its meaning here. But being absent am bold 
 toicards you. Bold, in the sense opposite to base, or craven. 
 This word also (dapfjeoi) is commonly used in a good sense, 
 5, 6. It is only the context which gives it a different shade 
 of meaning. Paul was regarded by his enemies as in heart a 
 coward, and his boldness as merely assumed when there was 
 no danger to confront. No one (except Ruckert) now be- 
 lieves this. True heroism was never more fully exemplified 
 than in the life of this apostle, who against numbers, wealth 
 and power, always was true to his convictions ; who encoun- 
 tered all manner of dangers and sufferings in the service of 
 Christ, and whose wliole conduct showed that he was ready 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 10, 2. 231 
 
 not only to be bound, but to die for the name of the Lord 
 Jesus. Acts 21, 13. 
 
 2. But I beseecli (jou), that I may not be bold 
 when I am present with that confidence, wherewith I 
 think to be bold against some, which think of us as if 
 we walked according to the flesh. 
 
 The particle (Se), but, serves to resume the exhortation in 
 the first clause of v. 1. There it is {-n-apaKaXu) ^/xas) I exhort 
 you, here it is (Sco/xat) I beseech. This shows that r/xas and 
 not ^iov is to be supplied as the object of the verb. The 
 sense is, ' I beseech you,'' not, ' I pray God.'' "What Paul be- 
 seeches of them is, that they would not force him to have 
 recourse to severity. This he expresses by saying, to fxrj -rrapibv 
 Sappyja-at, that I may not be bold when present. The article 
 {to) serves to render the object of the verb more prominent ; 
 and Trapwv is in the nominative because the subject of both 
 verbs is the same. To be bold, i. e. to act with decision and 
 courage ; to exhibit the character which the opponents of the 
 apostle said he assumed only when absent. With the confi- 
 dence, i. e. with the conviction of his right to exercise the au- 
 thority which he claimed, and with the consciousness of power 
 to carry his decisions into effect. Wlierewith I think ; Xoyt- 
 ^o/xai, which means to reckon, to reason, and then, as here, to 
 purpose. Paul had determined in his own mind that if per- 
 suasion failed to bring his opponents to a right state of mind, 
 he would resort to that power with which God had armed 
 him to put down all opposition. The Vulgate gives the word 
 Xoyt^o/xai a passive sense, qua existimor, ' which I am thought, 
 or supposed to assume.' So Luther, " die man mir zumisset," 
 which men ascribe to one. Bengel and many other commen- 
 tators adopt the same interpretation. This has the advantage 
 of giving Xoyt^o/xat and the following participle A-oyt^o/xeVons 
 the same sense. But it is objected to this interpretation that 
 it would reqmre airoiv to be used. ' The confidence wherewith 
 I am thought ichen absent to assume.' The common interpre- 
 tation, therefore, is to be preferred. To be bold. The word 
 is here not ^apprjo-ai as before, but ToXfjirjaaL, to dare ; to act 
 without fear and without regard to consequences. Paul had 
 determined, if forced to it, to set his opponents at defiance 
 and to act with utter disregard of all they could say or do. 
 
232 II. CORINTHIANS 10, 3. 
 
 The persons against whom he had determined to exercise this 
 severity, were those who thinli of us, he says, as if toe loalked 
 according to the flesh. The word flesh sometimes means the 
 body, sometimes it expresses the secondary idea of weakness, 
 sometimes, and most frequently in Paul's epistles, our corrupt 
 nature. Beza gives it here the second of these meanings. 
 He understands Paul as describing his opponents as those who 
 regarded him as weak and cowardly, or, as invested with 
 nothing more than human powers (non alio prsesidio freti, 
 quam quod prse nobis ferimus), so that, as Bengel says, "they 
 may despise us with impunity." But this is not only incon- 
 sistent with the scriptural use of the word "to walk," which, 
 in its figurative sense, refers to moral deportment, but also 
 with the familiar use of the phrase {Kara crapKa), after the flesh. 
 See the next verse, and Rom. 8, 1.4. 5. 13. The persons re- 
 ferred to were those who regarded the apostle not only as an 
 ordinary man, but as acting under the control of his corrupt 
 nature, governed by selfish or malicious feelings, and relying 
 on himself. 
 
 3. Por though we walk in the flesh, we do not war 
 after the flesh. 
 
 There is here, so to speak, a play on the word flesh, which 
 is used in somewhat difterent senses. Paul did indeed walk 
 in the flesh, he Avas a man, and a mere man, not only invested 
 with a body, but subject to all the infirmities of human nature ; 
 but he did not war after the flesh. What was human and 
 worldly neither determined his conduct, nor was the ground 
 of his confidence. The phrase to be in the flesh has vari- 
 ous meanings according to the connection in which it is used. 
 In 1 Tim. 3, 16, it is said, " God was manifested in the flesh," 
 i. e. in human nature. In Rom. 8, 8. 9, to be " in the flesh," 
 means to be in an unrenewed state. In Phil. 1, 22. 24, "to 
 live," or, " to abide in the flesh," means to live, or abide, in 
 the body. Here the phrase has substantially the same mean- 
 ing, but with the accessory idea of weakness and exposure to 
 temptation. ' Though he was a man, and therefore compassed 
 with the infirmities incident to humanity, yet, &c.' "Hie," 
 says Calvin, " Ambulare in came significat in mundo versari : 
 quod ahbi dicit, habitare in corpore (suj^ra 5, 6). Erat enim 
 inclusus in cor^joris sui crgastulo; sed hoc non impediebat 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 10, 4. 233 
 
 quominus Spiritus sancti virtus mirifice se exsereret in ejus 
 iufirmitate." 
 
 Instead of the general expression " to walk," Paul uses, in 
 the second clause, the more specific term, " to war." We war 
 not y ov aTparevoiJieSa. 'XrpaTevo) means, to go to war, to make 
 a campaign ; crrpaTevofxaL means, to serve as a soldier, to fight. 
 The war here referred to, is that which the apostle waged 
 against error and every thing opposed to the gospel. This 
 war, he says, he did not conduct {Kara adpKa) after the flesh ; 
 that is, governed by the flesh, or relying on it. He was not 
 guided by the princij^les of ordinary men, who act under the 
 influence of their corrupt nature ; neither did he depend for 
 success on any thing the flesh (i. e. human nature) could aflbrd. 
 He was governed by the Spirit and relied upon the Spirit. 
 " What Paul says of himself, is true of all the faithful ministers 
 of Christ. They bear about an incomparable treasure in 
 earthen vessels. Therefore, although they are compassed 
 with infirmities, nevertheless the spiritual power of God is 
 resplendent in them." — Calvin. The connection of this 
 verse, as indicated by the j^article yap (/or), is either with 
 the middle clause of the preceding verse, ' I am determined 
 to be bold towards the opponents of the truth, for though I 
 walk in the flesh, I do not war after the flesh ; ' or, as is often 
 the case in Paul's epistles, the yap refers to a thought omitted. 
 * Some think that I walk after the flesh — that is 7iot true — for 
 though I walk in the flesh, I do not war after it.' The latter 
 seems the more natural and forcible. 
 
 4. (Por the weapons of our warfare (are) not car- 
 nal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of 
 strong holds). 
 
 This proves that the main idea intended by warring after 
 the fleshy is warring with human weapons, relying on human 
 resources. In the war in which Paul was engaged, his confi- 
 dence was not in himself, not in human reason, not in the 
 power of argument or eloquence, not in the resources of cun- 
 ning or management, but simply and only in the supernatural 
 power of God. ' We war not after the flesh, for our weapons 
 are not carnal.' That is, such as the flesh, or human nature, 
 furnishes, and which therefore in their own nature are carnal, 
 or human. By weapons is, of course, to be understood all the 
 
234 II. CORINTHIANS 10, 5. 
 
 means which the apostle employed in the defence and propa- 
 gation of the truth. Those means, he says, were mighty 
 through God. The words are hwara tw ^eaJ, which are vari- 
 ously explained. Some, as Beza, Grotius and others, give the 
 dative the force of the ablative — mighty by God — afflatu Dei^ 
 as Erasmus expresses it. Others regard the expression as a 
 Hebraic superlative. Others say the meaning is, mighty /or 
 God, i. e. for his use, weapons which are powerful in his hand. 
 The common explanation is, ' mighty to God,' i. e. such means 
 as even God himself regards as mighty ; mighty in his estima- 
 tion. Of Nineveh it is said it was, 7r6A.ts jxeydXyj tS ^€o3, a city 
 great to God, a version which strictly answers to the Hebrew. 
 Reference is also made to Acts 7, 20, where Moses is said to 
 have been aarelos toJ -^ew, beautiful to Gocl^ i. e. in his sight ; 
 and 2 Peter 3, 14. These weapons Avere divinely powerful to 
 the ptdling down of strwig holds, Trpos Ka^atpecnv oxupw/xaTwv. 
 The last word is most apj^ropriately rendered strong holds, as 
 it is from ox^^pos (from ex'*^), haltbar, what may be held, what 
 is secure from assault. The opposers of the gospel felt that 
 they were so entrenched, so protected by the fortresses Avhich 
 they occupied, that they despised the ministers of Christ and 
 derided their efforts. What these strong-holds were the 
 apostle tells us in what follows. This verse is properly 
 marked as a parenthesis, not only in our version, but in al- 
 most all the critical editions of the Greek Testament, because 
 the grammatical construction of v. 5 connects it immediately 
 with v. 3. 
 
 5. Casting down imaginations, and every high thing 
 that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and 
 bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience 
 of Christ. 
 
 As just intimated, the participle Ka^acpovvres {ptdling 
 doicn) depends on the verb a-TparevoixeSa at the end of v. 3. 
 ' We war — puHing down, &c.' According to this view v. 3 is 
 parenthetical. Riickert, De Wette and others, however, on 
 the ground that v. 4 contains the main idea, whicli is carried 
 out in V. 8, prefer considering the construction of the passage 
 as irregular, the participle being used here as in 9, 11. 13. 
 They therefore connect this verse" with what immediately pre- 
 cedes. * Our weapons are mighty — ^in that we pull down, &c.' 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 10, 5. 235 
 
 What the apostle was thus confident he could cast down were 
 wxaginations (Xoyio-ftov's), thoughts^ i. e. the opinions, or con- 
 victions of those who set themselves and the deductions of 
 their own reason against the truth of God. Compare 1 Cor. 
 1, 17-31, and Rom. 1, 21-23. Aiid every high thing (vi/^w/ta), 
 every tower, or fortress ; the same as ox^pw/xa in v. 4. Not 
 persons, but thoughts, are intended by this figure. It is every 
 thing which the pride of human reason exalts against the 
 knoioledge of God ; i. e, that revelation of himself which God 
 has made in the gospel. 1 Cor. 3, 18-20. The conflict to 
 which the apostle here refers is that between truth and error, 
 between the wisdom of God and the wisdom of the world. 
 When the gospel was first proclaimed it found itself in conflict 
 with all the forms of religion and philosophy then prevailing 
 among men. To the wise of this world the gospel appeared 
 as foolishness. It was, however, the^ wisdom and power of 
 God. The conflict then begun has continued ever since, and 
 is now as deadly as at any former period. Men of science 
 and philosophers are as confident in their conclusions, and as 
 much disposed to exalt themselves, or their opinions against 
 the knowledge of God as ever. There is no doubt as to the 
 issue of this contest. It is a contest between God and man, 
 in which, of course, God must prevail. The instructive lesson 
 which the apostle designs here to mculcate is, that this war- 
 fare must not be conducted on the part of the advocates of 
 the gospel, with carnal weapons. They must not rely upon 
 their own resources and attempt to overcome their enemies 
 by argument. They must not become philosophers and turn 
 the gospel into a philosophy. This Avould be to make it a hu- 
 man conflict on both sides. It would be human reason against 
 human reason, the intellect of one man against the intellect of 
 another man. Paul told the Corinthians in his former epistle, 
 that he did not appear among them as a philosopher, but as a 
 witness ; he came not with the words of man's wisdom ; he 
 did not rely for success on his powers of argument or of per- 
 suasion, but on the demonstration of the Spirit. The faith, 
 which he . laboured to secure, was not to be founded on the 
 wisdom of men, but on the power of God ; not on arguments 
 addressed to the understanding, but on the testimony of God. 
 That testimony has the same effect which intuition has. It 
 reveals the truth to the mind and conscience as self-evident; 
 and therefore it cannot be resisted. A rationalistic Christian, 
 a philosophizing theologian, therefore, lays aside the divine 
 
236 II. CORINTHIANS 10, 6. 
 
 for the human, the wisdom of God for the wisdom of men, 
 the infinite and infallible for the finite and fallible. The suc- 
 cess of the gospel depends on its being presented, not as the 
 word of man, but as the word of God ; not as something to 
 be proved, but as something to be believed. It was on this 
 principle Paul acted, and hence he was in no degree intimi- 
 dated by the number, the authority, the ability, or the learn- 
 ing of his opponents. He was confident that he could cast 
 down all their proud imaginations, because he rehed not on 
 himself but on God whose messenger he was. 
 
 And bringing into captivity every thought^ ttolv vo-rjixa. 
 This word means either thought, or the mind, that which 
 thinks. 3, 14. 4, 4. Phil. 4, V. Hence it may be translated 
 thought, as it is in our version ; or as in the Vulgate, " omnem 
 intellectum," every understanding, and by Luther, " alle Ver- 
 nunft." Although the modern commentators make an outcry 
 against this latter translation, it really differs little from the 
 former. It does not matter much Avhether we say that human 
 reason must be subjected, or that all the products of human 
 reason (every thought) must be subjected. It amounts to the 
 same thing. Both forms of statement are equally true. It is 
 the indispensable condition of salvation that our understand- 
 ing should be brought into captivity, led submissive, as though 
 bound, hito the obedience of Christ, cis Tr]v vTraKorjv tov Xpta-Tov. 
 Agreeably to the figure in the context, the obedience of Christ 
 is conceived of as a place, or fortress, into which the captive 
 is led. The sense is the same as the dative, rfj viraKafj tov Xpta- 
 Tov, would have expressed. We must renounce dependence 
 on our own understanding and submit implicitly, as obedient 
 children, to the teaching of Christ. He who would be wise, 
 must become a fool. 1 Cor. 3, 18. 
 
 6. And having in a readiness to revenge all diso- 
 bedience, when your obedience is fulfilled. 
 
 And having i?i a readiness y ev ctoljxio Ixoitcs, holding our- 
 selves ready, i. e. being ready. He had the ability and the 
 determination to do what he declares he would do. Com- 
 pare ctoi/ukjds exo), 12, 14. The participle €xovt€<; is connected 
 by Kttt with KadaLpovi/T€<; of the preceding verse. ' AYe Avar — 
 casting down all that opposes itself — and ready, cfec' To 
 avenge all disobedience ; cKSiKT/crai, to maintain, or to exact 
 justice, or satisfaction, to i)unish. All disobedience, i. e. every 
 
II. CORINTHIAlsrS 10, 7. 237 
 
 case of disobedience. The gospel, being the word of God, is 
 divinely efficacious, and is certain ultimately to triumph over 
 all opposition. This, however, does not imply that all will 
 obey it. In the apostolic churches, there were those who cor- 
 rupted the word of God, Judaizing or philosophizing teachers 
 and their followers, who refused to obey the truth. Such 
 persons Paul announced his ability and his determination to 
 punish. They were in the church, for what, he said in his 
 former epistle, have I to do to judge them that are without? 
 1 Cor. 5, 12. They had voluntarily submitted themselves to 
 his jurisdiction, and he therefore had a legitimate authority 
 over them. What was the nature of the punishment which 
 he threatened, he does not intimate. It may be that he pur- 
 posed nothing more than excommunication. The fact, how- 
 ever, that the apostles were armed with supernatural power, 
 that they exercised that power for the punishment of offend- 
 ers, 1 Cor. 5, 5. 1 Tim. 1, 20, and the whole tone of the pas- 
 sage are in favour of the assumption that Paul was determined 
 to use all the means at his command to suppress the insolence, 
 and to destroy the power of the corrupters of the* truth in 
 Corinth. He gives what he had said a special application by 
 adding, ichen your ohedietice is fulfilled. That is, ho would 
 not resort to severity until all other means had failed, and un- 
 til it had become fully manifest who among the Corinthians 
 would submit to God, and who would persist in their disobe- 
 dience. 
 
 7. Do ye look on things after the outward appear- 
 ance? If any man trust to himself that he is Clirist's, 
 let him of himself think this again, that, as he (is) 
 Christ's, even so (are) we Christ's. 
 
 Abrupt transitions are characteristic of this epistle. Paul 
 having in the preceding verses so strongly asserted his apos- 
 tolic authority and supernatural power, turns to those who 
 denied the validity of his claims, and calls upon them to give 
 a reason for skepticism. He was thus led to vindicate his 
 title to the apostolic office and to his special jurisdiction over 
 the church of Corinth. This vindication extends to 12, 18. 
 After which he resumes the subject broached in the preceding 
 verses of this chapter, viz., what he purposed to do when he 
 accain visited Corinth. 
 
238 II. CORINTHIANS 10, 1, 
 
 Do ye look on things after the outward appearance 9 to. 
 Kara TTpoaoiTvov /JAeVcTe. This clause may be taken interroga- 
 tively, as by most commentators, or imperatively, or declara- 
 tively. If interrogatively, the sense may be, * Do ye regard, 
 or take into view, only what is external? Do you judge of 
 me from my personal appearance, manner, and speech ? ' It 
 would seem that a judgment founded on such grounds as 
 these, led the false teachers to regard the apostle with con- 
 tempt. Or, the meaning is, 'Do you regard only external 
 advantages? Such as being a minister of Christ, being a He- 
 brew, an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, &c.' 11, 22. In 
 favour of this view is the use of TrpoaoiTcov in this epistle, 5, 12. 
 11, 1. See also Matt. 22, 16. Mark 12, 14 ; the parallel passage 
 in 11, 18 (where Kara rrjv adpKa answers to Kara irpocroiTtov here) ; 
 and the context, which goes to show that the things which 
 Paul's opponents regarded, and on which they prided them- 
 selves, were their supposed external advantages. Those who 
 take ^AeVere as imperative understand the passage thus: 
 ' Look at what is before your eyes, i. e. at what is evident to 
 all. If you are thus and so, so am I.' Calvin and others take 
 the verb as in the indicative. ' Ye do regard what is external 
 — and therefore despise me.' The first interpretation, for the 
 reasons stated, is to be preferred. If any man trust to him- 
 self The use of rts (any one), in this passage, and of the 
 singular number in vs. 10 and 11, and in 11, 4, has led to the 
 conjecture that there was in Corinth one particular opponent 
 of the apostle to whom in this whole context he refers. But 
 it is evident from the general drift of the epistle that it was a 
 whole class of persons who had arrayed themselves against 
 Paul's authority. Trust to himself Tri-rroL^ev eavraJ, is persuad- 
 ed concerning himself, that he is ChrisVs. What that means 
 is somewhat doubtful. It may be taken in the most general 
 sense, ' If any thmks that he is a Christian,' i. e. belongs to 
 Christ as every believer does ; or, ' If any man thinks that ho 
 is a minister of Christ ; ' or, ' If any man thinks that he stands 
 in a peculiar relation to Christ.' It is probable from 1 Cor. 
 1, 10 that there were certain persons in Corinth who said, 
 'We are of Christ,' as claiming some nearer connection with 
 him than that which belonged to other believers or to other 
 ministers. Whether this claim rested on their having seen 
 Christ in the flesh, or on relationship to his kinsmen, is mere 
 matter of conjecture. Still as the claim existed, it is most 
 likely referred to here. Let him of himself i. e. without its 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 10, 8. 239 
 
 being suggested by others. The fact was so i^lain that it 
 needed not to be asserted. Let him think this again^ i. e. let 
 him consider the matter again. The last reflection will con- 
 vince him that as he is ChrisPs^ so are we. There was no re- 
 lationship which these false teachers could rightfully claim to 
 Christ to which Paul was not equally entitled. They were in 
 no resj)ect his superiors. They had no advantage which did 
 not belong equally to him. 
 
 8. For though I should boast somewhat more of 
 our authority, which the Lord hath given us for edifi- 
 cation, and not for your destruction, I should not be 
 ashamed. 
 
 Paul might have said much more than he had said in what 
 precedes. He was not only all that his opponents claimed to 
 be, but more. He had an authority and power to which they 
 could make no pretensions. He therefore here says that if he 
 had set forth higher claims, he should not be ashamed — facts 
 would not prove those claims to be unfounded. For though^ 
 idv T€ yap Kat, for eve?i 171 case, &g. The connection is with 
 the words " we are Christ's." ' We are Christ's, in all the 
 senses in which you can claim to be, for we have received 
 more from him.' The greater includes the less. Somewhat 
 more, -rrepLora-oTcpov tl, \. e. somewhat more than was claimed in 
 vs. 3-6, or more than ' being in Christ,' which might be said 
 of others as well as of the apostle. Paul had an authority 
 which extended beyond the limits of any claim which he had 
 yet advanced. E^oLma includes the ideas of power and au- 
 thority. The apostle had authority (i. e. the right to rule) 
 and he had abihty, inherent power, to enforce that authority. 
 Which the Lord hath given (or rather, gave) to us. ^ The au- 
 thority in question was given when he was constituted an 
 apostle, with not only a commission to exercise dominion, but 
 a grace, or inward gift of the Spirit, rendering him infallible 
 as a teacher and investing him with supernatural power. The 
 giver of this authority and power was the Lord, i. e. Christ. 
 Christ, therefore, as the author of supernatural gifts, is a di- 
 vine person, for to give such gifts is a prerogative of God. 
 The design for which Paul was not endo^v'ed, was not his own 
 exaltation, not the accomphshment of any worldly end, not, 
 as he says, " for your destruction," i. c. not that he might be 
 11 
 
240 II. CORINTHIANS 10, 9. 
 
 able to put down his personal enemies, but for edification^ 
 i. e. the building up of the church in holiness and peace. 
 Power in the church comes not from the civil magistrate, nor 
 from the people, but from Christ only. He is, as Calvin says, 
 Solus Dominus et Magister. And this power can be legiti- 
 mately exercised only for the edification of the church. 
 When exercised for other objects, or for the destruction of 
 the church, then it should be disowned and resisted. Even 
 an apostle, or an angel from heaven, who should preach any 
 other gospel — teach or require any thing contrary to the word 
 of God — would be accursed. And of this contrariety, from 
 the necessity of the case, and from the authority of Scripture, 
 the people, i. e. those who are required to believe and obey, 
 are (at their peril) to be the judges. If they reject a true 
 apostle, their sin is as great as if they gave ear to false teach- 
 ers. Having the inward teaching of the Spirit, they know 
 of the doctrine whether it be of God. 
 
 9. That I may not seem as if I would terrify you 
 by letters. 
 
 The connection of this clause (tVa ^xy] loKiii) is somewhat 
 doubtful. If it belongs immediately to the preceding words, 
 the sense is, ' I should not be ashamed — in order that I should 
 seem,' i. e. God would so order it that I should not appear as 
 an emj)ty boaster. But this is evidently unnatural. The de- 
 sign of God in sustaining the apostle, and giving him a victory 
 over the enemies of the truth, was something higher than pre- 
 serving him from being regarded as a boaster. A very large 
 number of commentators connect this verse with the 11th, 
 throwing the 10th into a parenthesis. 'That I may not seem 
 to terrify you — let such an one think, &c.' But neither in 
 this way is the connection natural or logical; and v. 11 evi- 
 dently refers to v. 10, and would not be intelUgible if that 
 verse were omitted; verse 11, therefore, is not a parenthesis. 
 A clause \\Ax\\ tm, as we have seen before in this epistle, (com- 
 pare also Gal. 2, 10,) often depends on some word or words 
 omitted but easily supplied from the context. In this case we 
 may supply, ' Tliis I say.'* ' This I say in order that I may 
 not appear, &c.' So Luther (" Das sage ich aber "), Bcza, and 
 many others. As if I would terrify^ ws tiv lK<^o^dv. This is 
 the only instance in the New Testament where o.v after a con- 
 junction is used with the infinitive. Winer resolves it into 
 
II. CORIISTTHIANS 10, 10. 241 
 
 0)5 av eK<f)ol3oiixL r/xa?, tonquam vellm vos terrere^ which agrees 
 with our translation. These particles serve to soften the ex- 
 pression, and are equivalent to as if perhaps^ or, so to sjyeaJt'. 
 There is evident allusion to the false representations made by 
 the false teachers, that Paul wrote in the authoritative tone 
 which he assumed merely to frighten his readers, having 
 neither the power nor the purpose to carry his threats into 
 execution. By letters^ or, hy the letters^ i. e. the letters which 
 he had already written or intended to write. 
 
 10. Por (his) letters, say they, (are) weighty and 
 powerful ; but (his) bodily presence (is) weak, and (his) 
 speech contemptible. 
 
 There was reason for his not wishing to appear as assum- 
 ing a tone of threatening in his letters, for this was the very 
 reproach cast upon him. His letters^ they say, {4>'n^^-, here, as 
 often, used impersonally, ' one says,' sagt man,) are iceighty 
 (/Sapelai, i. e. impressive) and ptowerful, (laxvpat,) including the 
 ideas of vigour, authority and severity. But his bodily 2)res- 
 ence is iceah. This passage, probably more than any other, 
 has given rise to the impression, in accordance with a tradi- 
 tion neither very ancient nor well sustained, that Paul was 
 small in stature, weak and unattractive in his personal appear- 
 ance. The words here used, howev'er, even supposing that 
 this language of his enemies expressed the truth, do not neces- 
 sarily imjoly this. The phrase r] irapova-ia tov crco/xarog probably 
 refers not to his personal appearance, but to his deportment. 
 He wrote boldly, but acted teebly. There was not that ener- 
 gy and decision in his acts which one would expect from his 
 language. This was the representation of his enemies ; the 
 truth of which, however, the apostle denies. The same re- 
 mark applies to the next clause, his speech contemptible. This 
 does not refer to feebleness of voice, but to the impression 
 made by his oral instructions and addresses. He dared not 
 assume any such authority in speaking to the people that he 
 did in Avriting to them. The whole history of the apostle, his 
 unceasing labours, his constant journeyings, his innumerable 
 suflerings which he sustained so heroically, prove that he was 
 not physically a man of feeble constitution. And his own 
 declarations, as well as his clearly revealed character, prove 
 that there was no such want of correspondence between his 
 
242 II. CORINTHIANS 10, 11.12. 
 
 letters and his actions as the false teachers in Corinth, to whom 
 he was probably personally unknown, endeavoured to make 
 the people believe. 
 
 11. Let such an one think this, that such as we are 
 in word by letters when we are absent, such (will we 
 be) also in deed when we are present. 
 
 Let such an one, i. e. any one, not necessarily implying 
 that there was only one person who had set himself up in op- 
 position to the apostle. That such as ice are in word, &c. 
 It was admitted that his letters were energetic. He assures 
 them that, when present, his deeds would correspond to his 
 words. His denunciations would not prove idle threats. 
 
 12. Eor we dare not make ourselves of the number, 
 or compare ourselves with some that commend them- 
 selves : but they, measuring themselves by themselves, 
 and comparing themselves among themselves, are not 
 wise. 
 
 In confirmation of his declaration that his acts would be 
 found to correspond with his words, he adds, ' For I am not 
 like those, who having nothing to recommend them, commend 
 themselves.' We dare not (ov toX/xcu/xcv, we cannot bring our- 
 selves to, or, we cannot prevail on ourselves to. Rom. 5, 7. 
 1 Cor. 6, 1) make ourselves of the member, or compare our- 
 selves ; [iyKfnvat rj cruyKptvat, enrol ourselves among, or place 
 ourselves by,) so77ie who commend themselves. The reference 
 is obviously to the false teachers, whose only reliance was self- 
 laudation. So far this verse is jilain. The latter part of the 
 passage is exceedingly difiicult, and has been very variously 
 explained. There are three classes of interpretation, two of 
 which proceed on the assumption of the correctness of the 
 common text, and the third is founded on a different reading. 
 According to the first general view, the avroi refers to the 
 apostle himself. He is assumed to contrast himself, in this 
 verse, with his opponents. The sense, according to some 
 then is, 'They commend themselves, but we, measuring our- 
 selves by ourselves, (i. e. we do not overestimate ourselves, 
 but determine our importance by our performances,) and 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 10, 12. 243 
 
 comparing ourselves with ourselves, not with these wise men.' 
 According to this view, a-vviovaLv^ at the end of the verse, is a 
 participle, and is used ironically in reference to the false teach- 
 ers. To this interpretation it is objected, 1. That avvtova-tv 
 would require the article in order to express the meaning 
 given to it ; and 2. That it is plainly inconsistent with the 
 77/xets 8e of the next verse, which are antithetical to the avroc 
 of this verse. ' They do so — but we do so.' Others, who 
 make the latter part of this verse refer to the apostle, refer 
 a-vvLovcrtv also to him. ' We measure ourselves by ourselves, 
 and compare ourselves with ourselves, we who, as they say, 
 are unwise.' Then the tj^jlcls 8c of verse 13th refers to this last 
 clause. ' They say we are unwise, but we, &c.' This, how- 
 ever, is liable to the same objections, and gives a sense un- 
 suited to the context. According to the second interpreta- 
 tion, avTol in this verse refers to the false teachers, with whom, 
 in the next verse, Paul contrasts himself, {rjfJieLs Se,) and awL- 
 ovo-iv is the third person plural, as from the verb o-wtco), as in 
 Matt. 13, 13. 'They measuring themselves by themselves, 
 and comparing themselves with themselves, are not wise ; but 
 we, &c.' This is the view of the passage adopted by our 
 translators, after Chrysostom, Calvin, and Luther. It is also 
 sanctioned by De Wette, Meyer, and Riickert, and many oth- 
 ers. These false teachers commended themselves, confined 
 their views to themselves, despised or disregarded all others, 
 intruding into other men's labours. Paul, on the contrary, 
 boasted not of himself; he rehed only on God and his grace, 
 and he kept himself within his own limits, not appropriating 
 to himself the fruits of the labours of other men. The third 
 mode of interpreting this passage assumes that the text afford- 
 ed by the Western, as distinguished from the Eastern manu- 
 scripts, is correct. Those authorities omit ov awiovat, ly/xct? Se, 
 so that avTOi (17/Aets) is the nominative to Kavxw^f^^^"- ^^ ^' 1^? 
 if that verb be retained. ' They commend themselves ; but 
 we, measuring ourselves by ourselves, and comparing our- 
 selves with ourselves, will not boast as to things beyond our 
 measure.' Fritsche and Billroth, on the authority of the Co- 
 dex Clarom., omit also Kavx>;o-o/x€^a, and connect the participles 
 fX€T^ovvT€'i and (TvyKpLvovT€<; with Kau^oj/xevot of V. 15, thus bring- 
 ing out substantially the same sense, but rendering the sen- 
 tence longer and more complicated. The meaning afforded 
 by this new reading is simple and pertinent. Since, however, 
 the critical authorities by which it is supported are compara- 
 
244 II. CORINTHIANS 10, 13. 
 
 lively few and of a secondary class, the great body of editors 
 adhere to the common text. If that text is correct, then the 
 interpretation given in our English version is the most natural 
 and suitable. Calvin applies this whole passage, with his 
 usual vigour, to the monks of his day. Hujus loci expositio 
 non aliunde petenda est quam a monachis : nam quum sint 
 omnes fere indoctissimi asini, et tamen oblongse vestis et cu- 
 culli causa docti censeantur : si quis tenuem modo gustum ele- 
 gantioris literaturie habeat, pluraas suas instar pavonis fastuose 
 extendit: spargitur de eo mirabilis fama, adoratur inter 
 sodales. At si seposita cuculli larva ventum fuerit ad justum 
 examen, deprehenditur vanitas. Cur hoc? Yerum quidem 
 est vetus proverbium: Audax inscitia: sed inde praecipue 
 monachalis insolentissimus ille fastus, quod se metiuntur ex se 
 ipsis : nam quum in eorum claustris nihil sit praeter barbari- 
 em, illic nihil mirum, si regnet luscus inter coecos. 
 
 13. But we will not boast of things without (our) 
 measure, but according to the measure of the rule 
 which God hath distributed to us, a measure to reach 
 even unto you. 
 
 The words cts ra a/xcrpa may be taken adverbially, equiva- 
 lent to afx€Tpu)s, hmnoderately^ beyond what is proper; or, 
 since in the latter part of the verse jxirpov is used literally, they 
 may be explained as in our version, in reference to things be- 
 yond our measure, i. e. beyond the limits of my apostolic la- 
 bours. This idea is clearly presented in the following verses ; 
 but here the contrast with the preceding verse favours the 
 former explanation. The false teachers set no limits to their 
 boasting — self conceit and not facts determined the character 
 and amount of their assumptions, and therefore their claims 
 were inordinate. Paul expresses his determination to limit 
 his claims to his actual gifts and labours. According to the 
 measure of the rule^ Kara to fxcrpov tov kuvovos^ i. e. according 
 to the measure determined by the rule, or line, that is, the 
 measure allotted to him. The Kavojv is the rule, or measuring 
 line, which, so to speak, God used in determining the apostle's 
 gifts and sphere of activity. Paul's boasthig, therefoi-e, was 
 not immoderate, but confined to just limits. According to 
 Beza Kuvwv is used metonymically for that which is measured ; 
 certuui et dehnitum spatium ; the district or diocese measured 
 
II. CORINTHIAN^S 10, 13. 245 
 
 off to him. But this is not consistent ^^4th the ordinary mean- 
 ing of the word, or with the context. Wliich God hath dis- 
 tributed to us y ov ifxipicrev -qfjuv 6 «^eo5 ixirpov^ for fxirpov 6 i/xepL- 
 o-ev 6 ^eos, by attraction. This clause is in apposition with 
 Kaj/wos, and explains what was the rule or line which deter- 
 mined the sphere of his activity. It was not something self- 
 assumed, or self-applied, but something w^hich God had 
 appomted ; a measure, he adds, to reach even unto you. It is 
 agreeable to Paul's manner to include two or more related 
 ideas in the same form of expression. To hoast according to 
 the measure assigned him., may mean to regulate his boasting 
 according to his gifts ; or, to boast in reference to what was 
 done within the limits assigned him in preaching the gospel. 
 Both ideas are here united. In opposition to the false teach- 
 ers, who not only boasted of gifts which they did not possess, 
 but appropriated to themselves the fruits of other men's la- 
 bours by intruding into churches which they had not founded, 
 Paul says he did neither one nor the other. His boasting was 
 neither immoderate, nor was it founded on what others had 
 done. He invaded no man's s^^here of labour. It was his set- 
 tled purpose to preach the gosj^el where Christ had not been 
 named, and not to build on another man's foundation. Rom. 
 15, 20. Acting on this principle he had the right to regard 
 Corinth as legitimately within his field. His assigned limit of 
 labour reached at least that far. He had founded the church 
 in that city; others had built thereon. 1 Cor. 3, 10. The 
 Corinthians were his work in the Lord. 1 Cor. 9, 1. Over 
 them, therefore, if over no others, he had the authority of an 
 apostle. It is plain, on the one hand, from the ISTew Testa- 
 ment that the apostles had a general agreement among them- 
 selves as to their several fields of labour. Paul was to go to 
 the Gentiles ; Peter, James and John to the Jews. Gal. 2, 9. 
 But it is no less plain that they were not confined to any pre- 
 scribed limits. They had not, as modern bishops or pastors, 
 each his particular diocese or parish. As their authority did 
 not arise from their election or appointment to a particular 
 church or district, but from their plenary knowledge, infalli- 
 bility, and supernatural power, it was the same everywhere, 
 and in relation to all churches. Hence we find Paul writing 
 to the church in Rome which he had never visited, as well as 
 to others who had never seen his face in the flesh, with the 
 same authority with which he addressed churches which he 
 had himself planted. Peter addressed his epistles to churches 
 
246 II. CORIlsTTHIANS 10, 14.15. 
 
 within Paul's sphere of labour ; and, according to all tradition, 
 St. John presided during the latter years of his life over the 
 churches in Asia Minor, founded by the apostle to the Gen- 
 tiles. Still it was a matter of courtesy that one apostle should 
 not intrude unnecessarily upon the sphere already occupied by 
 another. Paul, at least, determined that he would not build 
 upon another man's foundation. 
 
 14. Por we stretch not ourselves beyond (our 
 measure), as though we reached not unto you; for 
 we are come as far as to you also in (preaching) the 
 gospel of Christ. 
 
 This verse is generally regarded as a parenthesis, although 
 some commentators make it the beginning of a new sentence. 
 It is logically connected with the last clause of v. 13. ' God 
 assigned us a measure extending to you, /or not, as not reach- 
 ing to you, do we unduly stretch ourselves out ; ' v-rrepeKTeivo- 
 fxev €avTovs, clo toe overstretch ourselves. The present tense is 
 used, because the reference is to the sphere of the apostle's 
 authority. For ice have come as far as yoii^ (Ifji^da-afjiiv.) 
 ' Our authority extends to you, for we have come to you in 
 preaching the gospel.' That is, Corinth was included in the 
 region throughout which he had been the first to preach 
 Christ. The word (fiSdvio properly means, to come, or be, be- 
 forehand ; to anticipate ; and then, in the aorist, to have come 
 already. See Matt. 12, 28. Phil. 3, 16. 1 Thess. 2, 16. This 
 sense may be retained here. * We have already come even 
 unto you.' He had already reached them and expected soon 
 to reach beyond them; see v. 16. 
 
 15. Not boasting of things without (our) measure, 
 (that is), of other men's labours; but having hope, 
 when your faith is increased, that we shall be enlarged 
 by you, according to our rule abundantly. 
 
 If verse 14 is parenthetical, then this verse is connected 
 with the 13th. * We will boast according to our measure — 
 not boasting immoderately.' Of other men^s labours. This 
 is explanatory of the eis to. afxerpa. He did not boast of what 
 other men had done. If the comiection is with the 14th verse, 
 the participle Kav;(a>ju.€vot most naturally depends on ov iirepcK- 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 10, 15. 247 
 
 TctVo/xcv. * We do not stretch ourselves unduly — not boasting, 
 &c.' The reproach to the false teachers here implied is of 
 course obvious. They had done what Paul refused to do. 
 They came to Corinth after the church had been gathered, 
 assumed an authority to which they were not entitled, and 
 endeavoured to destroy the influence of the apostle to whom 
 the church owed its existence, and the people their hope of 
 salvation. Jam, says Calvin, liberius pungit pseudo-apostolos, 
 qui quum in ahenam messem manus intulissent, audebant 
 tamen iis obtrectare, qui sudore ac industria locum illis para- 
 verant. 
 
 But having hope^ lohen your faith is increased. This 
 clause the Vulgate renders, ' Habentes spem crescentis fidei 
 vestrae.' This interpretation the words av^avo/xivr]^ rrj^ Trto-rcco? 
 (your faith being increased) do not admit. Corinth was not 
 the limit which Paul had fixed for his field of labour. He had 
 the purpose, as soon as the state of the Corinthians would 
 allow of his leaving them, to press forward to preach the gos- 
 pel in regions beyond them. That we shall be enlarged by 
 you., iv vfjuv ixeyakvv^rjvaL. Luther, Calvin, Beza, and others, 
 connect iv vfuv with the preceding clause — ' Your faith being 
 increased among you.' Beza says this is required by the op- 
 posite clause, as the advantage was mutual. They were to 
 grow in faith among themselves, he was to enlarge his boun- 
 daries. But in this case the words iv vfuv are redundant. 
 They belong to the following word, and are to be rendered 
 either by you, or, among you. This depends on the sense 
 given to fjL^yaXwSrjvaL. This word is used either literally, as in 
 Matt. 23, 5, " They make broad their j^hylacteries ; " or figu- 
 ratively, as in Luke 1,58, "The Lord hath made great his 
 mercy toward her." In every other case where it occurs in 
 the New Testament it means to praise, to declare great. 
 Luke 1, 46, "My soul doth magnify the Lord." So in Acts 
 5, 13. 10, 46. 19, 17. Phil. 1, 20. This meaning of the word 
 is very commonly retained here. ' I hope to be honoured by 
 you abundantly.' But the object of the apostle's hope was 
 neither to be glorified by them, nor among them. Besides, 
 the following clause (' according to our rule ') does not agree 
 with this interpretation. The word, therefore, is to be taken 
 in its more literal sense — ' He hoped to be enlarged abundant- 
 ly (cig Treptoro-etW) according to his rule.' That is, he hoped to 
 preach the gospel far beyond Corinth, agreeably to the line 
 of action marked out for him. The iv vfxlv may then be ren- 
 
248 II. CORINTHIANS 10, 16-18. 
 
 dered, vobis adjuvantibus. They would aid Paul in his future 
 labours. The same idea is brought out by rendering the 
 clause thus, ' To become great among you as to that which is 
 beyond.' 
 
 16. To preach the gospel in the (regions) beyond 
 you, (and) not to boast in another man's Hne of things 
 made ready to our hand. 
 
 This infinitive (to preach) is either exegetical, ' We hope 
 to be enlarged, that is, we hope to preach beyond you ; ' or it 
 is the infinitive of the object, 'We hope to become great 
 among you, in order to preach, &c.' The choice between 
 these explanations depends on the interpretation of the pre- 
 ceding verse. To 2weach the gospel in the regions beyond 
 you ; ets vTrepeKuva (an adverb, heyond)^ parts leyond^ and 
 with vyMv^ parts beyond you, Ets is not here for ei^, but means 
 unto^ as expressing the extent to which. Not to boast in an- 
 other mail's line; kv aWorpM KavoVt, within another's line. 
 That is, within the field of laloour occupied by another man. 
 Made ready to our hand. This is not a literal translation of 
 CIS TO. hoLfxa. These words belong to Kavxqo-aa-^ai, 'Not to 
 boast in reference to things prepared.' The sense is plain; 
 he would not appropriate to himself the fruits of other men's 
 labours. 
 
 17. 18. But he that glorieth, let him glory in the 
 Lord. Tor not he that commcndeth himself is ap- 
 proved, but whom the Lord commendeth. 
 
 ' To glory in the Lord,' is either to regard God as the 
 ground of confidence and source of all good, and to ascribe 
 every thing we have, are, and hope to his grace ; or, it is to 
 exult in his approbation. Instead of comforting ourselves 
 with our own high estimate of our attainments and efliciency, 
 or allowing ourselves to be inflated by tlie a])plause of men, 
 we should be satisfied with nothing short of the divine appro- 
 bation. The connection is here in favour of the latter view. 
 ' He that glories should glory in the Lord, i. e. he that re- 
 joices should rejoice in the approbation of God, (not in his 
 own good opinion of himself, nor in the praises of others,) /or 
 not he who connnendeth himself is approved, i. e. is really 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 11. 249 
 
 worthy of approbation, but he whom the Lord commendeth.' 
 Paul did not commend himself; his claims were not founded 
 on the suggestions of self-conceit ; neither did he rely on the 
 commendation of others, his eye was fixed on God. If he 
 could secure his favour, it was to him a small matter to be 
 judged by man's judgment. 1 Cor. 4, 3. 
 
 CHAPTER XI. 
 
 The apostle apologizes for the self-commendation which was forced upon 
 him, vs. 1-15. He contrasts himself and his labours with the assump- 
 tions of the false teachers, vs. 15-33. 
 
 JReasons for his self-commendation^ vs. 1-15. 
 
 He had just condemned all self-commendation, yet he was 
 forced to do what had the appearance of self-laudation. The 
 Corinthians were in danger of being turned away from Christ 
 by having their confidence in Paul undermined by the mis- 
 representations of his enemies. It was therefore necessary 
 for him to present the grounds which he had for claiming au- 
 thority over them, and for asserting his superiority over his 
 opponents. Yet so repugnant was this task to his feelings, 
 that he not only humbly apologizes for thus speaking of him- 
 self, but he finds it difiicult to do what he felt must be done. 
 He over and over begins what he calls his boasting, and im- 
 mediately turns aside to something else. He begs them to 
 bear with him while he proceeds to praise himself, v. 1, for 
 his doing so sprang from the purest motive, love for them and 
 anxiety for their welfare, vs. 2. 3. An anxiety justified by 
 the readmess with which they bore with those who preached 
 another gospel, v. 4. He thus spoke because he was on a par 
 with the chief apostles, and not behind those who among 
 them claimed to be his superiors, v. 5. They might have 
 higher pretensions as orators, but in knowledge and in every 
 thing that really pertained to the apostolic ofiice he was 
 abundantly manifest among them, v. 6. His refusal to avail 
 himself of his right to be suj^ported by those to whom he 
 preached was no offence to them, and no renunciation of his 
 
250 II. CORINTHIANS 11, 1.2. 
 
 apostleship, vs. 7-9. He was determined to refuse any pecu- 
 niary aid from the Christians in Achaia, not because he did 
 not love them, but because he wished to cut off all occasion 
 to question his sincerity from those who sought such occasion, 
 and because he desired to put the false teachers to the same 
 test of disinterestedness, vs. 10-12. These teachers claimed 
 to be apostles, though they had no more right to the office, 
 than Satan had to be regarded as an angel of light, vs. 13-15 
 
 1. Would to God ye could bear with me a little in 
 (my) folly : and indeed bear with me. 
 
 The self-commendation of the false teachers was the fruit 
 of conceit and vanity ; with the apostle it was self-vindication. 
 Although so different in character and design, they had one 
 element in common. Both included self-laudation. Both, 
 therefore, are designated by the same woid, boasting ; and 
 both, therefore, he calls a^poa-vv-q^ a want of sense. Would to 
 God, in the Greek simply, ocfieXoi', oh that, I vjoidd. In iact, 
 however, every such exclamation is, in the pious mind, a 
 prayer; and, therefore, the rendering, 'I would to God,' is 
 neither irreverent nor inaccurate. Oh that ye coidd hear with 
 me, {avdxdd^c, Hellenistic form, instead of rjvctx^crSe.) The 
 pronoun (xov properly belongs to the verb, and not to the fol- 
 lowing jXLKpov Ti, as if the sense were, a little of my folly . The 
 meaning is, 'Bear with me (fxcKpov n acf>poavvr]<;), as to a little 
 of folly? This reading is, on the authority of the majori- 
 ty of MSS., adopted by the later editors. Knapp and others 
 read, fxiKpov rrj acfipoa-vvyj, a little as to folly ; which amounts to 
 the same thing. A7id indeed bear icith me. So Calvin, Beza, 
 and many others, who take avix'^a-Sf^ as the imperative. This 
 clause is then a repetition of the first, only more vehemently 
 expressed. The former is a wish, the latter a supplication or 
 demand. But the context does not require this vehemence. 
 A more appropriate sense is afforded by taking the word in 
 the indicative, ' But indeed ye do bear with me ; ' i. e. the 
 request is not necessary, I know you are disposed to suffer 
 me to speak as I sec fit. 
 
 2. For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy : 
 for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may 
 present (you as) a chaste virgin to Christ. 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 11, 2. 251 
 
 This is the reason either why they should bear vdth. him, 
 or why he was assured that they would do so. That is, the 
 connection is either with the first and principal clause of y. 1, 
 or with the latter clause. It makes but little difference. The 
 sense is better if the connection is with the first clause. ' Bear 
 with my folly — for I am jealous over you.' ZrjXo) yap vjj-a^. 
 The word ^r;Aoco may mean, I ardently love, or more specifi- 
 cally, I am jealous. The latter, as the figure of marriage is 
 used, is probably the sense in which the apostle uses the word. 
 With godly jealousy ; t,rj\os ^€ov may mean a zeal of which 
 God is the object, as in Rom. 10, 2; comp. John 2, 17. In 
 that case Paul intends to say that the feeling which he had 
 for the Corinthians was a pious feeling. It was no selfish or 
 mercenary interest, but such as arose from his desire to pro- 
 mote the honour of God. Or, the meaning is, a zeal of which 
 God is the author ; or, a zeal which God approves ; or, the 
 zeal which God has. As the people of God are so often rep- 
 resented in the Bible as standing to God in a relation analo- 
 gous to that of a wife to a husband, so God is represented as 
 being jealous, i. e. moved to deep displeasure when they trans- 
 fer their love to another object. Is. 54, 5. 62, 5. Ez. 16. 
 Hos. 2. In this view, the apostle means to say, that he shares 
 in the feeling which God is represented as entertaining 
 towards his church. The translation given in the English 
 version includes all the meanings above mentioned ; for a 
 godly jealousy (or zeal) is a pious zea], it is a zeal of which 
 God is both the object and the author, and it is such a zeal as 
 he has. JFo?' I have espoused you to one husband. It was 
 natural for the apostle to feel this jealousy over them, /or he 
 stood in a most intimate relation to them. Their union with 
 Christ was his work. 1 Cor. 4, 15. 9, 1. He may compare 
 himself in this verse to a father who gives his daughter to 
 the bridegroom. To this it is objected that Paul became the 
 father of ^he Corinthians by their conversion; whereas the 
 relation here referred to subsisted before their conversion or 
 espousal to Christ. It is commonly assumed that the allusion 
 is to the ofiice of "the friend of the bridegroom," John 3, 29, 
 (TrapavvixcfiLos^) whose business it was to select the bride, to be 
 responsible for her conduct, and to present her to the bride- 
 groom. In this sense Moses was called -jrapavvfx^Los by the 
 Rabbis, as it was through him the people entered into cove- 
 nant with God. In either way the sense is the same. Paul's 
 relation was so intimate with the Corinthians as the author of 
 
252 II. CORINTHIANS 11, 3. 
 
 their espousals to Christ, that he could not fail to feel the 
 deepest interest in their fidelity. I have espoused you. The 
 vert) ap/xo^co in the active voice is used of the father who be- 
 troths his daughter ; in the passive of the bride who is be- 
 trothed ; in the middle voice it is generally used of the man 
 who pledges himself to a woman. The middle form, however, 
 is sometimes used, as in this verse, (i7p/xoo-a/x->7v,) in the active 
 sense. To one hushcmd. The marriage relation from its nar 
 ture is exclusive. It can be sustained only to one man. So 
 the relation of the church, or of the behever, to Christ is in 
 like manner exclusive. We can have but one God and Sa- 
 viour. Love to him of necessity excludes all love of the same 
 kind to every other being. Hence the apostle says he had 
 espoused (betrothed) them to one man. This was done in 
 order, in due time, to present them as a chaste virgin unto 
 Christ. As in Eph. 5, 27, this presentation of the church to 
 Christ as his bride, is said to take place at his second coming, 
 this passage is commonly understood to refer to that event. 
 Paul's desire was that the Corinthians should remain faithful 
 to their vows, so as to be presented to Christ a glorious 
 church, without spot or wrinkle, on that great day. He 
 dreaded lest they should, in that day, be rejected and con- 
 temned as a woman unfaithful to her vows. 
 
 3. But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent 
 beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds 
 should be corrupted from the simphcity that is in 
 Christ. 
 
 The apostle adheres to his figure. Though they Avere be- 
 trothed to Christ, he feared that their affections might be se- 
 duced from him and fixed on some other object. Men are 
 not jealous until their apprehensions are excited. They must 
 have some reason, either real or imaginary, for suspecting the 
 fidelity of those they love. The ground of the apostle's jeal- 
 ousy was his fear. He feared (/x-rjTrcos) lest i^er adventure. They 
 had not yet turned aside, but there was great danger tliat they 
 might yield to the seductions to which they were exposed. 
 There was one standing example and warning both of the in- 
 constancy of the human heart, and of the fearful consequences 
 of forsaking God. Eve Avas created holy, she stood in paradise 
 in the perfection of her nature, with every conceivable motive 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 11, 4. 253 
 
 to secure her fidelity. Yet by the subtilty of Satan she fell. 
 What reason then have we to fear who are exposed to the 
 machinations of the same great seducer. As the serpeiit be- 
 guiled Eve ; i. e. Satan in the form of a serpent. TJie serpent, 
 i. e. the well-known serpent of which Moses speaks. The 
 New Testament writers thus assume, and thereby sanction, 
 the historical verity of the Old Testament record. The ac- 
 count of the temptation as recorded in Genesis is regarded by 
 the inspired writers of the New Testament not as a myth, or 
 as an allegory, but as a true history. Comp. 1 Tim. 2, 14. 
 Kev. 12, 9. 15. JBeguiled^ i^rj-rrdTrja-ev, thoroughly deceived. 
 All seduction is by means of deception. Sin is in its nature 
 deceit. The imagination is filled with false images, and the 
 foolish heart is darkened. Eve was thus deceived by the sub- 
 tilty of Satan. She was made to disbelieve what was true, and 
 to believe what was false. Man's belief, in a very large sphere, 
 is determined by his feelings. The heart controls the under- 
 standing. The good believe the true; the evil believe the 
 untrue. This is the reason why men are accountable for their 
 fiiith, and why the Avicked are led captive by Satan into all 
 manner of error. Eve was deceived by exciting unholy feel- 
 ings in her heart. Paul's apprehension was lest the Corinthi- 
 ans, surrounded by false teachers, the ministers of Satan, 
 should in like manner be beguiled. What he feared was that 
 their minds should he corrupted. It was a moral perversion, 
 or corruption, that he apprehended. Your niinds^ ra vorjixara 
 vfxiov. The word vorj/xa means first thought / then that which 
 thinks, the imderstanding ; and then, the aftections or dispo- 
 sitions. Phil. 4, 7. Our translation, " your minds," as includ- 
 ing the idea both of thought and feeling, is the most appro- 
 priate rendering. Corrupted from., is a pregnant expression, 
 meaning corrupted so as to be turned from. The simplicity 
 that is in Christ y aTro t^s a.irXoT-qTO'i rrj<i ets Tov XptoTov, ' from 
 singleness of mind towards Christ.' That is, the undivided 
 aifection and devotion to Christ which is due from a bride to 
 her spouse. The allusion to the marriage relation is kept up, 
 Paul had compared the Corinthians to a virgin espoused to 
 one man, and he feared lest their aflfections might be seduced 
 from Christ and transferred to another. 
 
 4. Por if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, 
 whom Ave have not preached, or (if) ye receive another 
 
254 II. CORIIsrTHIAlSrS 11, 4. 
 
 spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, 
 which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with 
 (him). 
 
 There are two entirely different views of the meaning of 
 this verse, depending on the view taken of the connection. 
 If the association of ideas is with the preceding verse, so that 
 this passage assigns the reason of the fear there expressed, 
 the meaning is, 'I am afraid concerning yon, for if a false 
 teacher comes and preaches another gospel, you readily bear 
 with him.' It is a reproof of their credulity and easiness of 
 persuasion to forsake the truth, analogous to that administered 
 to the Galatians. Gal. 4, 6-8. 5, 8. But if this verse is con- 
 nected with the main subject as presented in v. 1, then the 
 sense is, ' Bear with me, for if a false teacher preaches another 
 gospel you bear with him.' This is to be preferred, not only 
 because the sense is better as more consistent with the con- 
 text, but also because avexofxai means to endure^ to put up loith^ 
 and supposes that the thing endured is in itself repulsive. In 
 this sense the word is used twice in v. 1, and should be so 
 taken here. ' If a man preaches a new Christ ye would put 
 up with his self-laudation, therefore, you should put up with 
 mine.' The proper force of the verb (dve^o^ai) is also against 
 the interpretation given by Chrysostom and followed by many 
 later commentators. 'If any one really preached another 
 gospel (i. e. communicated to you another method of salva- 
 tion), you would do well to bear with him and receive him 
 gladly.' But all this is foreign to the context. The thing to 
 be endured, was something hard to put up with. It was what 
 the apostle calls folly. 
 
 For if he that cometh^ 6 ipx6fji€vo<;^ the corner^ any one who 
 happens to come. The reference is not to any one well known 
 false teacher, but to a whole class. Preaches another Jesus ; 
 not another Saviour, but another person than the son of Mary 
 whom we preached. That is, if he sets forth some other in- 
 dividual as the true deliverer from sin. Or if ye receive an- 
 other spirit^ which ye have not received. The gitt of the Holy 
 Ghost was secured by the work of Christ. He redeemed us 
 from the curse of the law — in order that we might receive the 
 promise of the Spirit. Gal. 3, 13. 14. The indwelling of the 
 Spirit, therefore, as manifested by his sanctifying and miracu- 
 lous power, was the great evidence of the truth of the gospel. 
 Hence the apostle, to convince the Galatians of the folly of 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 11, 5. 255 
 
 apostasy to Judaism, says, " This only would I learn of you. 
 Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the 
 hearing of faith ? " Gal. 3, 2 ; and in Heb. 2, 4, he says, God 
 bore witness to the gospel by the gifts of the Holy Ghost. 
 The apostle here supposes the impossible case that a like con- 
 firmation had attended the preaching of the false teachers. 
 ' If,' he says, ' they preach another (aXXo?) Jesus, and in proof 
 that he is truly a Saviour, ye receive a different (erepos) spirit, 
 i. e. a spirit whose manifestations were of a different kind 
 from those of the Spirit who attests my preaching,' &c. Or 
 another {eT€po<s, a different) gospel, lohich ye have not accepted. 
 In the former clause the verb is iXd/Sere (ye received), in the 
 latter eSe^acr^e (ye accepted), because, as Bengel says, Non 
 concurrit voluntas homiuis in accipiendo Spiritu, ut in recipi- 
 endo evangelio. That is, man is passive in receiving the 
 spirit, and active in accepting the gospel. Te might well 
 hear with him. The word is di/etxco-^e, in the imperfect. The 
 tense which the context would seem to demand is the present, 
 dvcx^cT'^c, a reading which Lachmann and Riickert, on the au- 
 thority of the MS. B, have introduced into the text. The 
 other leading verbs of the verse are in the present, ' If one 
 preaches another Jesus, and ye receive another Spirit, and 
 accept another gospel, (in that case,) ye do bear with him.' 
 Instead, however, of saying, ' ye do bear with him,' the apostle 
 is supposed purposely to soften the expression by saying, ' ye 
 might well bear with him ; ' the particle av being, as often, 
 understood. In this way he avoids the direct charge of tol- 
 erating the conceited boasting of the false teachers. Others, 
 as Meyer and Winer, assume an irregularity, or change of 
 construction. 
 
 5. Por I suppose I was not a whit behind the very 
 chiefest apostles. 
 
 The sense here again depends on the connection. If the 
 yd/3 refers to v. 4, the reference must be (as so often occurs in 
 Paul's writings) to a thought omitted. 'Ye are wrong in 
 thus bearing with the false teachers, for I am equal to the 
 chief apostles.' This, however, is not in harmony with the 
 context. Paul's design is not so much to reprove the Corin- 
 thians for tolerating the folly of the false teachers, as to induce 
 them to bear with his. He felt it to be necessary to vindicate 
 himself, and he therefore prays them to bear with him a little 
 
•256 II. CORINTHIANS 11, 6. 
 
 in his folly. To this point every thing here refers. They 
 should thns bear with him, 1. Because he was jealous over 
 them with a godly jealousy. 2. Because they would bear 
 with any who really preached another gospel, were that possi- 
 ble. 3. Because he was on a par with the chief apostles. 
 The connection, therefore, is not with v. 4, but with the main 
 subject as presented in v. 1. This also determines the ques- 
 tion. Who are meant by the chiefest apostles ? If the con- 
 nection is with V. 4, then the expression is to be understood 
 ironically in reference to the false teachers. ' Ye do wrong 
 to tolerate them, for I am in no respect behind those superla- 
 tive apostles.' So Beza, Billroth, Olshausen, Meyer, and the 
 majority of the moderns. The reason given for this is, that 
 there is no controversy with the true apostles in this connec- 
 tion, and therefore nothing to call for such an assertion of his 
 equality with them as we find in Gal. 2, 6-11. There is, how- 
 ever, no force in this reason if the connection is with v. 1. 
 ' Bear with me in my boasting, for I am not behind the chief- 
 est apostles.' In this view the reference to the true apostles 
 is pertinent and natural. Paul says, ixrjSlv va-TeprjKivaL, that as 
 to nothin(/, in no one respect, had he fallen short, or was he 
 left behind by the chiefest apostles ; neither in gifts, nor in 
 labours, nor in success had any one of them been more highly 
 favoured, nor more clearly authenticated as the messenger of 
 Christ. He was therefore fully entitled to all the deference 
 and obedience which were due to the chiefest apostles. The 
 expression rcoj/ vircpXiav dTroo-ToAcuv, is not in itself bitter or 
 ironical. This is a force which must be given by the connec- 
 tion ; it does not lie in the w^ords themselves. It is not equi- 
 valent to the xj/ev^aTToa-ToXoL of V. 13, and therefore there is no 
 more reason why the true apostles should not be called ol 
 VTrepXtav aTToaroXoL than ot Sokovvt€<; elvat tl in Gal. 2, 6. The 
 argument, therefore, which the Reformers derived from this 
 jjassage against the primacy of Peter is perfectly legitimate. 
 Paul was Peter's equal in every respect, and so far from being 
 under his authority, he not only refused to foUow his example 
 but reproved him to his face. Gal. 2, 11. 
 
 G. But though (I be) rude in speech, yet not in 
 knowledge ; but we have been thoroughly made mani- 
 fest among you in all things. 
 
 In Corinth, where Grecian culture was at its height, it had 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 11, 6. 257 
 
 been urged as an objection to Paul that he did not speak with 
 the Avisdom of words. 1 Cor. 1, 17. He was no rhetorician, 
 and did not api^ear in the character of an orator. This he 
 here, as in the former epistle, concedes. If that were an ob- 
 jection, he had no answer to make other than that his depend- 
 ence was on the demonstration of the Spirit, and not the per- 
 suasive words of man's wisdom. 1 Cor. 2, 4. Et 8e Kai is 
 concessive. ' But if, as is true, I am rude in speech ; ' ZSicott^s 
 Tw Xoyo), untrained, or unskilful in speech. The word tStwr?;? 
 means a private person as opposed to those in official station ; 
 a commoner as opposed to a patrician; an uneducated, or 
 unskilful man, as opposed to those who were specially trained 
 for any service or work, corporeal or mental. What Paul 
 concedes is not the want of eloquence, of which his \\a-itings 
 afford abundant evidence, but of the special training of a 
 Grecian. He spoke Greek as a Jew. It is not improbable 
 that some of his opponents in Corinth, although themselves 
 of Hebrew origin, prided themselves on their skill in the use 
 of the Greek language, and made the apostle's deficiency in 
 that respect a ground of disparagement. JSut not in knowl- 
 edge. He was no iStwrT^s r-^ yvwo-et. Having been taught the 
 gospel by immediate revelation from Christ, Gal. 2, 12, he had 
 complete possession of that system of truth which it was the 
 object of the apostleship to communicate to men. He there- 
 fore everywhere asserts his competency as a teacher instructed 
 of God and entitled to full credence and implicit confidence, 
 1 Cor. 2,6-11. Eph. 3,4.5. But ice have been thoroughly 
 made manifest among you in all things. In this clause, 
 after ^ai/epoj^eVres, ia-fxiv is to be supplied ; iv 7rai/rt, rendered 
 thoroughly^ is in every point, or in every respect ; kv Tracnv, iti 
 all things^ so that in every j^oint in all departments he was 
 manifest, i. e. clearly known ; cts v/xa?, as it concerns you, (not 
 among you, which would require Iv vfuv). So far from being 
 deficient in knowledge, he stood clearly revealed before them 
 as thoroughly furnished in every respect and in all things as 
 an apostle of Jesus Christ. In nothing did he fall behind the 
 very chief of the apostles. Luther's translation of this clause 
 is, Doch ich bin bei euch allenthalben wohl bekannt. It is in 
 this view a correction of what goes before. ' I am not de- 
 ficient in knowledge. Yet I am in all respects perfectly 
 known by you; there is no need to tell you what I am.' 
 Beza and Olshausen give the same explanation. This, how- 
 ever, does not agree with what follows in the next verse. 
 
258 II. CORINTHIANS 11, 7. 
 
 Others again, understand the apostle as here asserting his 
 well established character for purity of purpose and conduct. 
 * My Avhole conduct is perfectly open and straightforward for 
 you to see.' There is, however, no impeachment of his con- 
 duct referred to in the context, and therefore no call for this 
 general assertion of integrity. It is better to restrict the pas- 
 sage to the point immediately in hand. ' He was not behind 
 the chief apostles ; but although rude in speech, he was not 
 deficient in knowledge, and was manifest before them in all 
 things, i. e. in all things pertaining to the apostolic office.' 
 Listead of (^ai/epto^eVTes'the MSS. B, F, G, 1 7, read cftavepojo-av- 
 T€9, which Lachmann, Rilckert and Tischendorf adopt. This 
 alters the whole sense. The meaning most naturally then is, 
 ' I am not deficient in knowledge, but have manifested it in 
 every point in all things.' The majority of critical editors re- 
 tain the common text, which gives a sense equally well suited 
 to the connection. 
 
 7. Have I committed an offence in abasing myself 
 that ye might be exalted, because I have preached to 
 you the gospel of God freely ? 
 
 Our version omits the particle ^ (or), which is necessary 
 to indicate the connection. Paul was clearly manifested as 
 an apostle. 'Or,' he asks, 'is it an objection to my apostle- 
 ship that I have not availed myself of the right of an apostle 
 to be supported by those to whom I preach ? Have I sinned 
 in this respect?' Comp. 1 Cor. 9,4-15. Ifave I com.mitted 
 an offence in abasing inyself ^ ifxavTov raTrcti/cov, humbling my- 
 self by renouncing a privilege which was my due. Comp. Phil. 
 4, 12. It was an act of self-humiliation that Paul, though en- 
 titled to be supported by the peoj^le, sustained himself in 
 great measure by the labour of his own hands. I humbled 
 myself, he says, that ye might he exalted^ that is, for your 
 good. It was to promote their sj^iritual interests that he 
 wrought at the trade of a tent-maker. Because I preached 
 unto you the gospel of God freely f This clause, beginning 
 with on, is exegetical of the preceding. 'Have I sinned hum- 
 bling myself, i. e. have I sinned because I preached freely ? ' 
 (Scopeav, gratuitously). It is clearly intimated in 1 Cor. 9, that 
 Paul's refusing to be supported by the Corinthians was repre- 
 sented by his enemies as arising from the consciousness of the 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 11, 8. 9. 259 
 
 invalidity of his claim to the apostleship. As they had no 
 other objection to him, he asks whether they were disposed 
 to urge that. 
 
 8. I robbed other churches, taking wages (of them), 
 to do you service. 
 
 To rob is to take with violence what does not belong to 
 us. It is therefore only in a figurative sense the word is here 
 used. What Paul received from other (i. e. the Macedonian) 
 churches, he was fully entitled to, and it was freely given. 
 The only point of comparison or analogy was that he took 
 from them what the Corinthians ought to have contributed. 
 Taking wages {XafSiov 6\j/u)vlov), or a stipend. To do gou ser- 
 vice, TTpos Tr]v v/xcov SiaKovcav, Jbr youT tninistry. This expresses 
 the object of his receiving assistance from others. It was 
 that he might minister gratuitously to them. 
 
 9. And when I was present with you, and wanted, 
 I was chargeable to no man : for that which was lack- 
 ing to me the brethren which came from Macedonia 
 supplied : and in all (things) I have kept myself from 
 being burdensome unto you, and (so) will I keep 
 (myself). 
 
 It is plain from this verse that when Paul went to Corinth, 
 he took with him a supply of money derived from other 
 churches, which he supplemented by the proceeds of his own 
 labour ; and when his stock was exhausted the deficiency was 
 supplied by the brethren from Macedonia. And ichen I icas 
 present {Trapcbv Trpos vfxaq), 'being present with you; ' (koI vare- 
 pT7^€ts), 'and being reduced to want;' (ov KarevapKirja-a ovS€v6<i), 
 I was chargeable to no man, literally, 'I jjressed as a dead 
 weight upon no one,' i. e. I was burdensome to no one. The 
 verb here used is derived from vapKiy, torpor, hence vapKaco, to 
 he torpid. The compound KaravapKao}, to he torpid against 
 any one, (to press heavily upon him,) is found only here and 
 in 12, 13. 14. In confirmation of the assertion that he had 
 been chargeable to no man he adds, for that which was laclc- 
 ing to me {to varip-qixa fxov, my deficiency^ the brethren ichich 
 
260 II. CORINTHIANS 11, 9. 
 
 came from Macedonia (rather, Hlie brethren ha^ang come 
 from Macedonia,') supplied ; TrpoaaviTrX-qpoicrav, a double com- 
 jDound verb, to siipj^ly in addition. The contribution of the 
 churches were added to what Paul earned by his labour, or, 
 to his diminished stock which he had brought with him to 
 Corinth. The point on which he here dwells is not that he 
 laboured for his own support, but that he received assistance 
 from other churches, while he refused to receive any thing 
 from the Corinthians. His conduct in reference to receiving 
 aid varied with circumstances. From some churches he re- 
 ceived it without hesitation ; from others he would not receive 
 it at all. He said to the Ephesians, " I coveted no man's sil- 
 ver, or gold, or apparel. Yea, ye yourselves know, that these 
 hands have ministered unto my necessities, and to them that 
 were with me," Acts 20, 34. 35. So also to the Thessalonians 
 he said, " Ye remember, brethren, our labour and travail : for 
 labouring night and day, because we would not be chargeable 
 unto any of you, we preached unto you the gospel of God," 
 1 Thess. 2, 9. 2 Thess. 3, 8. Among the Corinthians he adopt- 
 ed the same course. Acts 18, 3. 1 Cor. 9, 15-18. Whereas 
 from the Philippians he received repeated contributions, not 
 only while labouring among them, but as he reminds them, 
 " Even in Thessalonica ye sent once and again unto my neces- 
 sity," Phil. 4, 16 ; and when a prisoner in Rome they sent by 
 the hands of Epaphroditus an abundant supply, so that he 
 said, "I have all, and abound," Phil. 4, 18. It was therefore 
 from no unwillingness to receive what he knew to be due by 
 the ordinance of Christ, (viz., an adequate support,) 1 Cor. 9, 
 14, but simply, as he says, to cut off occasion from those who 
 sought occasion. He was unwilling that his enemies should 
 have the opportunity of imputing to him any mercenary mo- 
 tive in preaching the gospel. This was specially necessary in 
 Corinth, and therefore the apostle says, ' In all things (iv Travrt', 
 in every thing, not only in pecuniary matters, but in every 
 thing else,) I have kept myself from being burdensome unto 
 you, and will keep myself.' He would receive no obligation 
 at their hands. He was determined to assume towards them 
 a position of entire independence. This was doubtless very 
 painful to the faithful in Corinth. They could not but regard 
 it as a proof either of the want of love or of the want of con- 
 lidcnce on his part. Still his determination as to this point 
 was settled, and he therefore adds solemnly in the next 
 verse : 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 11, 10-12. 261 
 
 10. As the truth of Christ is in me, no man shall 
 stop me of this boasting in the regions of Achaia. 
 
 Calvin, Beza, and others, understand this as an oath, or 
 asseveration. Our translators adopted the same view, and 
 therefore supply the word as, which is not in the Greek. 
 This interpretation is not required by the text or context. 
 The words are simply, 'The truth (dXiy^^eia, the veracity, 
 truthfulness) of Christ, (i. e. the veracity which pertains to 
 Christ, and which Christ produces,) is in me.' That is, in vir- 
 tue of the veracity which Christ has produced in me, I declare, 
 that (on, which our translators omit,) 7io man shall stop me of 
 this boasting. Literally, ' This boasting shall not be stopped 
 as to me.' The w^ord is (^payTJcrcTat, w^hich in the New Testa- 
 ment is only used in reference to the mouth. Rom. 3, 19. 
 Heb. 11, 33. 'This boasting as to me shall not have its 
 mouth stopped.' In all the regions of Achaia ; not in Cor- 
 inth only, but in all that part of Greece not included in Mace- 
 donia. From the Macedonians he was willing to receive aid ; 
 from the Christians of Achaia he would not. The reason for 
 this distinction he states negatively and affirmatively in the 
 following verses. 
 
 11. 12. Wherefore? because I love you not? God 
 knoweth. But what I do, that I wall do, that I may 
 cut off occasion from them which desire occasion ; that 
 wherein they glory, they may be found even as we. 
 
 That his purpose not to receive aid from the Corinthians 
 did not, as it might seem, arise from Avant of love to them he 
 solemnly declares. The expression " God knows " in the lips 
 of the apostle, it need not be remarked, implies no irreverence. 
 It is a pious recognition of the omniscience of God, the search- 
 er of all hearts, to whom he appeals as the witness of the 
 strength of his affection for his people. The true reason for 
 his determination to continue to do as he had already done, 
 was, as he says. That I may cut off occasion from them that 
 desire occasion. That is, that I may avoid giving those wlio 
 desire to impeach my motives any pretence for the charge 
 that I preach the gospel for the sake of gain. It is plain from 
 1 Cor. 9, 15-18, that this was his motive in refusing to receive 
 
262 II. CORINTHIANS 11, 11. 12. 
 
 aid fi'om the Corinthians ; and that his special Kav^^y/w-a, oi 
 ground of boasting, was that he preached the gospel gratui 
 tously. He said he would rather die than that any man should 
 take from him that ground of confidence. This of course im 
 plies that the purity of his motives had been assailed, and that 
 his object in making " the gospel of Christ without charge " 
 was to stop the mouths of his accusers. That wherein they 
 glory. This clause (with Iva) depends on the immediately 
 preceding one. He desired to cut off occasion from those 
 seeking it, in order that, if they chose to boast, they may he 
 found even as ice. That is, he wished to force them to be as 
 disinterested as he was. According to this interpretation, iv 
 w, in the phrase iv w Kavx^ivrai, does not refer to any special 
 ground of boasting, but to the general disposition. 'Inas- 
 much as they are so fond of boasting and of setting themselves 
 up as apostles, they may be forced to give over making gain 
 of the gospel.' 
 
 Calvin, Grotius, Riickert, and others, assume that the false 
 teachers in Corinth preached gratuitously, and that the reason 
 why the apostle did the same, was that he might not give 
 them occasion to glory over him. In this view the second 
 clause with tVa is co-ordinate with the first, and iv w in the last 
 clause refers to their special ground of boasting, and the sense 
 of the whole is, ' I will do as I have done in order that these 
 false teachers shall have no occasion to exalt themselves over 
 me ; that is, in order that they be found, when they boast of 
 their disinterestedness, to be no better than I am.' But to 
 this it may be objected, 1. That it is evident from v. 20 of 
 this chapter, and from the whole character of these false 
 teachers as depicted by the apostle, that so far from preach- 
 ing gratuitously, they robbed the churches. 2. It is clear 
 from what is said in the former epistle that Paul's object was 
 not to prevent his opponents setting themselves forth as his 
 superiors, but to make undeniably manifest the purity of his 
 own motives in preaching the gospel. Others again, admit- 
 ting that the false teachers received money from the Corinthi- 
 ans, understand the aj^ostle to say, that he refused aid in 
 order that he might take away from the false teachers all 
 occasion for boasting that they were as he was. This, how- 
 ever, was not their boast. They did not claim to be what 
 the apostle was, for they denounced him as an impostor. The 
 first interpretation suits both the words and the context. 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 11, 13. 263 
 
 13. Por such (are) false apostles, deceitful workers, 
 transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. 
 
 The reason assigned in this verse for the determination 
 expressed in the preceding, to cut off occasion from those who 
 sought to degrade the apostle, is, the unworthy character of 
 his opponents. They were so unprincipled and unscruj^ulous 
 that Paul was determined they should have no advantage over 
 him. The words ol tolovtol xJ/evSaTroa-ToXot may be rendered 
 either, Such false apostles are, &c., or, Such are false apostles. 
 The Vulgate, Luther, Calvin, and the majority of the earlier 
 commentators, give the former interpretation ; most of the 
 later writers the latter. The latter is to be preferred because 
 the emphasis is on the vrovd false ajyo sties ; and because such 
 false apostles would imply that there were other false apostles 
 who were not deceitful workers. False apostles are those 
 who falsely claimed to be apostles, as false Christs, Matt. 24, 
 24, and false prophets, Matt. 11, 15, are those who falsely 
 claimed to be Christ or prophets. An apostle was commis- 
 sioned by Christ, endowed with the gifts of plenary inspiration 
 and knowledge, and invested with supernatural powers. 
 Those in that age, and those who now claim to be apostles 
 without this commission, these gifts, and these signs of ths 
 apostleship, are false apostles. They claim to be what they 
 are not, and usurp an authority which does not belong to 
 them. The fundamental idea of Romanism is the perpetuity 
 of the apostolic office. Bishops are assumed to be apostles, 
 and therefore clauii infallibility in teaching, and supreme au- 
 thority in ruling. If we admit them to be apostles, we must 
 admit the validity of their claims to unquestioning faith and 
 obedience. Deceitful icorkers, i. e. workers who use deceit. 
 They were workers in so far as they were preachers or teach- 
 ers ; but they were not honest ; they availed themselves of 
 every means to deceive and pervert the j^eople. To the same 
 persons the apostle refers in Phil. 3, 2, "as evil workers." 
 Transformmg themselves into, i. e. assuming the character of, 
 tJie apostles of Christ. Though their real object was not to 
 advance the kingdom and glory of Christ, and although they 
 were never commissioned for that work, they gave themselves 
 out as Christ's messengers and servants, and even claimed to 
 have a more intimate relation to him, and to be more devoted 
 to his service than Paul himself, 
 12 
 
264 II. CORINTHIANS 11, 14. 15. 
 
 14. And no marvel; for Satan himself is trans- 
 formed into an angel of light. 
 
 It is not wonderful that false apostles slioulcl put them- 
 selves forward under the guise of apostles of Christ, and ap- 
 pear and be received as such, for Satan himself, the most evil 
 of all beings, assumes the form of the highest and purest of 
 created intelligences. A^i angel of light, i. e. a bright, pure, 
 hap])y angel. Light is always the symbol of excellence and 
 blessedness, hence the expressions kingdom of light, children 
 of light, &c. And hence God is said to dwell in light, and 
 the saints are said to have their inheritance in light. It is by 
 no means clear that the apostle refers either to the history of 
 the fall or to Satan's appearing with the sons of God as men- 
 tioned in Job 1,6. It is more probable that the statement 
 rests on the general doctrine of the Bible concerning the 
 great adversary. He is everywhere represented as the de- 
 ceiver, assuming false guises, and making false represen- 
 tations. 
 
 15. Therefore (it is) no great thing if his ministers 
 also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness ; 
 whose end shall be according to their works. 
 
 If Satan can be thus changed, it is no great thing if his 
 ministers undergo a similar transformation. If a bad angel 
 can assume the appearance of a good angel, a bad man may 
 put on the semblance of a good man. The lalse teachers are 
 called ministers of Satan, that is, they are his servants, 1. In 
 so far as they are instigated and controlled in their labours by 
 him. 2. And in so far that their labours tend to advance his 
 kingdom, i. e. error and evil. All wicked men and all teach- 
 ers of false doctrine are, in this sense the servants of Satan. 
 He is their master. The false teachers assumed to be minis- 
 ters of righteousness. This may mean, righteous, upright 
 ministers; or, promoters of righteousness in the sense of gen- 
 eral excellence. They pretended to be the promoters of all 
 that is good. Or, righteousness may be taken in its peculiar 
 New Testament and Pauline sense, as in 3, 9, where tlie 
 the phrase "mhiistry of righteousness " occurs; see also E})h. 
 6, 15. In these and many other places the word righteous- 
 jiess refers to " the righteousness of God," or, as it is also 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 11, ]6. 265 
 
 called "the righteousness of faith." These false teachers 
 professed to be the preachers of that rio-hteoiisness which is 
 of God and which avails to the justification of sinners in his 
 sight. Satan does not come to us as Satan ; neither does sin 
 present itself as sin, but in the guise of virtue ; and the teach- 
 ers of error set themselves forth as the special advocates of 
 truth. Whose end shall be according to their icorks. Satan 
 is none the less Satan when he appears as an angel of light, 
 and evil is evil when called by the name of good. God's 
 judgments are according to the truth. He does not pass 
 sentence on the (o-xv/xa) the external fashion which we assume, 
 but on our real character ; not on the mask, but on the man. 
 The end, i. e. the recompense of every man, shall be not ac- 
 cording to his professions, not according to his own convic- 
 tions or judgment of his character or conduct, not according 
 to appearances or the estimate of men, but according to his 
 works. If men really promote the kingdom of Christ, they 
 will be regarded and treated as his servants ; if they increase 
 the dominion of sin and error, they will be regarded and 
 treated as the ministers of Satan. 
 
 16. I say again, Let no man think me a fool; if 
 otherwise, yet as a fool receive me, that I may boast 
 myself a little. 
 
 After the foregoing outburst of feeling against the false 
 teachers, the apostle resumes his purpose of self-vindication. 
 He therefore says again what he had in substance said in v. 1. 
 Let no man think me afool^ that is, a boaster. Self-laudation 
 is folly ; and self-vindication, when it involves the necessity 
 of self-praise, has the aj^pearance of folly. Therefore the 
 apostle was pained and humbled by being obliged to praise 
 himself He was no boaster, and no one could rightfully so 
 regard him, hut if othenoise {d 8e /a7^/€, the negative is used 
 because although the j^receding clause is negative, the idea 
 is, ' I would that no man should regard me as a fool, but if 
 you do not think of me as I would wish, still, &c.*) Meceive 
 me^ (i. e. bear with me,) that I may hoast myself a little. 
 The words are Kdyw, I also., i. e. I as well as others. 'You 
 allow my enemies to boast of what they do, permit me to say 
 a little of what I have done and suffered.' 
 
 17. That which I speak, I speak (it) not after the 
 
266 II. CORINTHIANS 11, 17 
 
 Lord, but as it were foolishly, in this confidence of 
 boasting. 
 
 That which I speak^ o \a\Zi. The apostle uses XaXcu and 
 not Aeyo), because the reference is not to any definite words 
 which he had uttered, but general — my talk, or language. 
 Is not after the Lord., i. e. is not such as characterized Christ, 
 or becomes his discij^les. Our Lord was no boaster, and his 
 Spirit does not lead any one to boast. This is very common- 
 ly regarded as a denial of inspiration, or divine guidance in 
 these utterances. Even Bengel says, " Whatever Paul wrote 
 without this express exception, was inspired and spoken after 
 the Lord ; " and Meyer says, ov XaXC) Kara Kvpiov, negirt aller- 
 dings den theopneusten Charakter der Rede. This arises 
 from a misconception of the nature and design of inspiration. 
 The simple end of inspiration is to secure infallibility in the 
 communication of truth. It is not designed to sanctify ; it 
 does not preclude the natural i^lay of the intellect or of the 
 feelings. When Paul called the High Priest a " whited wall," 
 Acts 23, 3, although he apologized for it, he was as much in- 
 spired as when he wrote his epistle to the Ephesians. Even 
 supposing therefore that there was something of human weak- 
 ness in his boasting, that would not prove that he was not 
 under the inspiration of God in saying that he boasted, or in 
 saying that boasting was folly. But this assumption is un- 
 necessary. There Avas nothing wrong in his self-laudation. 
 He never appears more truly humble than when these refer- 
 ences to his labour and sufferings were wrung from him, filling 
 him with a feeling of self-contempt. Alas ! how few of tlie 
 holiest of men does it pain and mortify to speak of their own 
 greatness or success. How often are the writings even of 
 good men coals on which they sprinkle incense to their own 
 ])ride. When Paul said that his boasting was not after the 
 Lord^ he said no more than when he called it folly. AH that 
 the expression implies is that self-praise in itself considered, is 
 not the work of a Christian ; it is not a work to which the 
 Spirit of Christ impels the believer. But, when it is necessOr- 
 ry to tlie vindication of the truth or the honor of religion, it 
 becomes a duty. But as it icere foolishli/, (iv acfypoa-mrri, iv 
 folly.) That is, speaking boastfully was not religious but 
 Ibohsh. I/i this confidence of boasting.^ iv ravrrj rrj vTroo-racret 
 ttJ? Kav;)(ryo-ccu9. 'YTroo-Tacris may mean 77iattei% or coiifidcnce. 
 'In this i)articular matter, or case of boasting.' In this sense 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 11, 18. 267 
 
 rit is a limitation of what precedes. He was justified in boast- 
 ing in this particular matter. It is, however, more consistent 
 with the common use of the word in the New Testament, that 
 here, as in 9, 4, it should be taken in the sense of confidence^ 
 and kv be rendered icith. ' I speak with this confidence ol 
 boasting.' 
 
 18. Seeing that many glory after the flesh, I will 
 glory also. 
 
 The apostle here assigns the reason of his glorying. His 
 opponents so magnified themselves and their services, and so 
 depreciated him and his labours, that he was forced, in order 
 to maintain his influence as the advocate of a pure gospel, to 
 set forth his claims to the confidence of the people. Seeing 
 ihat (eTrei, shice^ because) many glory. From this, as well as 
 from other intimations aboundmg in this ej^istle, it is evident 
 that the opposition to Paul was headed not by one man, but 
 by a body or class of false teachers, all of whom were Juda- 
 izers. They gloried after the flesh {Kara rrjv a-apKo). This 
 may mean, ' they gloried as to the flesh.' Then llesh means 
 what is external and adventitious, such as their Hebrew de- 
 scent, their circumcision, etc. See v. 22, where these false 
 teachers are represented as boasting of their external advan- 
 tages. Compare also Gal. 6, 13 and Phil. 3, 4, where the 
 apostle says in reference to the same class of opponents, " If 
 any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust 
 in the flesh, I more." The sense in this case is good and ap- 
 propriate, but it would require ev and not /cara. See 10, 17 
 li, 12. 12, 9, &c., &c. Kara adpKa more properly means ac- 
 cording to the flesh, i. e. according to corrupt human nature, 
 as opposed to Kara Kvptov in the preceding verse. These men 
 were influenced in their boasting by unworthy motives. I 
 loill glory also. Does Paul mean, 'As others glory after the 
 flesh, I also will glory after the flesh ' ? i. e. as others give 
 way to their selfish feelings, I vnM do the same. This is the 
 view which many commentators take. They say that Kara 
 a-dpKa is necessarily implied alter Kayw Kavxqcrofxai, because the 
 apostle had just said that in boasting he did not act Kara Kvpiov, 
 which implies that he did act Kara aapKa ; and because in the 
 following verse he makes himself one of dcftpove? of whose glo- 
 rying the Corinthians were so tolerant. But the sense thus 
 expressed is neither true nor consistent with the character of 
 
268 II. CORINTHIANS 11, 19. 20. 
 
 the apostle. It is not true that he was influenced in boasting 
 by corrupt feelings; that self-conceit and the desire of ap- 
 plause were in him, as in the false teachers, the motives which 
 governed him in this matter. There is no necessity for sup- 
 plying Kara aapKa after the last clause. What Paul says is, 
 ' As many boast from unworthy motives, I also will boast.' 
 If they did it from bad motives, he might well do it from 
 good ones. 
 
 19. For ye suffer fools gladly, seeing ye (your- 
 selves) are wise. 
 
 That is, '■ I will indulge in the folly of boasting, for ye are 
 tolerant of fools.' The Corinthians had, to a degree disgrace- 
 ful to themselves, allowed the boasting Judaizing teachers to 
 gain an ascendency over them, and they could not, therefore, 
 with any consistency object to the self-vindication of Paul. 
 Seeing ye are icise. As it is the part of the wise to bear with 
 fools, so the Corinthians in their wisdom might bear with the 
 apostle. Of course this is said ironically and as a reproof. 
 In the same spirit and with the same purpose he had said to 
 them in his former epistle, 4, 8, " We are fools, but ye are 
 wise." 
 
 20. For ye suffer, if a man bring you into bondage, 
 if a man devour (you), if a man take (of you), if a man 
 exalt himself, if a man smite you on the face. 
 
 They might well bear with Paul since they bore with the 
 tyranny, the rapacity, the insolence, and the violence of the 
 lalse teachers. The character of these troublers of the church 
 was everywhere the same; see Gal. 1,7. They were lords 
 over God's heritage, 1 Pet. 5, 3, not only as they endeavoured 
 to reduce the Christians under the bondage of the law, as ap- 
 pears from the epistle to the Galatians, but as they exercised 
 a tyrannical authority over the people. To this the apostle 
 here refers when lie says. If any man bring yon into bondage 
 (KaraSoiAoi), i. e. makes slaves of you. TJiat this is not to be 
 hmited to subjection to the Jewish law, is evident from what 
 f<)lh)\vs, which is an amplification of the idea here expressed. 
 These men were tyrants, and therefore they devoured, insult- 
 ed and maltreated the people. If any 7nan devour (yoii)^ 
 i. e. rapaciously consumes your substance, as our Lord de- 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 11, 21. 269 
 
 scribes the Pharisees as devouring widows' houses, Matt. 
 23, 14. If any take (of you) ; et rt? Xaix/Sdvet- vfxa<; is to be 
 supplied as after KaTea^Ut in the preceding clause. " If any 
 take you^'' i. e. capture you or ensnare you, as a huntsman his 
 prey. Our version by sup^jlying of you alters the sense, and 
 makes this clause express less than the preceding ; devouring 
 is a stronger expression for rapacity than 'taking of you.' 
 If any man exalt himself {iTTaipeTai^ sc. Ka^ vjxwv)^ i. e. if any 
 one proudly and insolently lifts himself up against you. And 
 as the climax, If any one smite yoit on the face. To smite 
 the face or mouth was the highest indignity ; as such it was 
 offered to our Lord, Luke 22, 64, and to Paul, Acts 23, 2 ; 
 see also 1 Kings 22, 24. Matt. 5, 39. Such was the treatment 
 to which the Corinthians submitted from the hands of the 
 false teachers ; and such is ever the tendency of unscrij^tural 
 church-authority. It assumes an absolute dependence of the 
 people on the clergy — an inherent, as well as official superiori- 
 ty of the latter over the former, and therefore false teachers 
 have, as a genernl rule, been tyrants. The gospel, and of 
 course the evangelical, as opposed to the high-church system 
 of doctrine, is incompatible with all undue authority, because 
 it teaches the essential equality of believers and opens the 
 way to grace and salvation to the people without the inter- 
 vention of a j)riest. 
 
 21. I speak as concerning reproacli, as though we 
 had been weak. Howbeit, whereinsoever any is bold, 
 (I speak fooKshly) I am bold also. 
 
 I speak as concerning reproach. Kara dn/xtai/ A.eya> means 
 simply I reproach. After artfjiLav may be supplied ifxrjv. The 
 sense would then be, ' I say to my own shame, that, &c. ; ' 
 Ae-yw being understood as referring to what follows. ' I say 
 to my shame that I was weak.' The Greek is, Kara anixiav 
 {ifir]v) (OS ort r]fji€L<s rjaS^cvrjaajxev ; where ws on may, as Winer, 
 § 67, 1, says, be a redundancy for simply ort (5, 19. 2 Thess. 
 2,2.) 'I say that.^ This would be a direct assertion on the part 
 of Paul that he was w^eak in the sense intended. It is better, 
 with Meyer and others, to give ws its proper force, «s, as if. 
 His being weak was not a fact, but an opinion entertained con- 
 cerning him. ' I say that (as people think) I was weak.' One 
 class of the Corinthians regarded Paul as weak in bodily pres- 
 
270 II. CORINTHIANS 11, 21. 
 
 ence and contemptible in speech, 10, 10. In reference to this 
 judgment of his opponents he says, 'I acknowledge to my shame 
 that, when present with you (the aorist, ya-Sev^o-afx^v, is used), 
 I was weak.' In 1 Cor. 2, 3 he told the Corinthians that he 
 came among them in w^eakness and fear and much trembling. 
 There was a sense in which he admitted and professed himself 
 to be weak. He had no self-confidence. He did not believe 
 in his own ability to persuade or convert men. He felt the 
 responsibihty of his office, and he relied both for know^ledge 
 and success entirely on the Spirit of God. His conceited and 
 arrogant opposers were strong in their own estimation ; they 
 contemned the mean-spirited apostle, and considered him des- 
 titute of all sources of power. The weakness of which Paul 
 here speaks is that which was attributed to him by his ene- 
 mies. The w^hole preceding context is ironical, and so is this 
 clause. ' Youi- teachers are great men, I am nothing com- 
 pared to them. They are strong, but, I say it to my shame, 
 I am weak. J3ut^ as opposed to this imj^uted weakness, I 
 am equal to any of them, I speak in folly.' Howhelt icherein- 
 soever any is hold (iv w 8' av ns roX/xa), ' But whatever they 
 dare, I dare. Whatever claims they put forth, I can assert 
 the same. If they boast, I can outboast them. If they are 
 Hebrews, so am I, &c.' 
 
 The foregoing interpretation of this passage, which as- 
 sumes that Aeyo) in the first clause refers to what follows, and 
 that the reproach mentioned had Paul for its object, is given 
 by Storr, Flatt, Meyer, and many others. The great majority 
 of commentators, however, understand Xiyoi as referring to 
 what precedes and the Corinthians and not Paul to be the ob- 
 ject of the reproach. ' I say this to your shame.' Compare 
 1 Cor. 6, 5, TTpos ivTpoTrr]v vfxiv Aeyw. (In this latter passage, 
 however, it will be remarked that the preposition is Trpos and 
 not Kara, as in the passage before us, and that vjxlv is in the 
 text, whereas here there is no i~»ronoun used.) The two prin- 
 cipal objections to this interjjretation are, 1. That if Acyco re- 
 fers to the i-)receding verses the sense must be, ' I make this 
 exhibition of the character of your teachers in order to shame 
 you.' Tiiis would do very well if what follows carried out 
 that idea; but instead of speaking of the Corinthians, and en- 
 deavouring to convince them of their folly in adhering to such 
 men as teachers, he immediately speaks of himscH^ ana shows 
 how he was desj^jised as weak. 2. According to this interpre- 
 tation there is great difficulty in explaining the following 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 11, 22. 23. 271 
 
 clause. It would not do to say, ' I speak to shame you that 
 I was weak ; ' or, if on be made causal, ' I speak to shame you 
 because I was weak,' still the sense is not good. The former 
 interpretation of this difficult passage is therefore to be pre- 
 ferred. 
 
 22. Are they Hebrews? so (am) I. Are they Is- 
 raehtes ? so (am) I. Are they the seed of Abraham ? 
 so (am) I. 
 
 In this verse the apostle begins his boasting by showing 
 that in no point did he come behind his opponents. The 
 three designations here used belonged to the chosen people. 
 The Hebrews were Israelites, and the Israelites were the seed 
 of Abraham. The first, as Meyer remarks, is the national 
 designation of the people of God ; the second their theocratic 
 appellation; and the third marked them as the heirs of Abra- 
 ham and expectants of the Messianic kingdom. Or, as Ben- 
 gel remarks with no less justice, the first refers to their nation- 
 al, and the two others to their religious or spiritual relation. 
 A Hebrew was not a Jew of Palestine as distinguished from 
 the Hellenists, or Jews born out of Palestine and speaking 
 the Greek language. For Paul himself was born in Tarsus, 
 and yet was a Hebrew of the Hebrews, that is, a man of pure 
 Hebrew descent. In Acts 6, 1 the word is used for the Jews 
 of Palestine in distinction from other Jews, but it is obvious- 
 ly not so either here or in Phil. 3, 5. 
 
 23. Are they mmisters of Clirist? (I speak as 
 a fool) I (am) more ; in labom's more abmidant, in 
 stripes above measure, in prisons more frequent, in 
 deaths oft. 
 
 In all that related to the privileges of birth, as belonging 
 to the chosen seed, Paul stood on a level with the chief of his 
 opposers ; in all that related to Christ and his service he stood 
 fiir above them. Are they the ministers of Christ ? Such 
 they were by profession, and such for the moment he admits 
 them to be, although in truth they were the ministers of Satan, 
 as he had said in v. 15. 1 7nore (v-rrlp eyw, where virip is used 
 as an adverb). This may mean either, I am more than a 
 (StaKovos) minister of Christ ; or, I am a minister or servant of 
 12* 
 
2Y2 II. CORINTHIANS 11, 24. 
 
 Christ in a higher measure than they. That is, I am more 
 devoted, laborious and suffering than they. The latter is the 
 true explanation as is clear from what follows, and because in 
 Paul's language and estimation there was no higher title or 
 service than that of minister of Christ. / speak as a fool, 
 Trapacfiovihv Xa\u). This is a strong expression, ' I speak as one 
 beside himself' This is said out of the consciousness of ill- 
 desert and utter insufficiency. Feelmg himself to be in him- 
 self both impotent and imworthy, this self laudation, though 
 having reference only to his infirmities and to what God had 
 done in him and by him, was in the highest degi-ee painful 
 and humiliating to the ajDOstle. It is Paul's judgment of him- 
 self, not the judgment which others are presumed to pass 
 upon him. I?i labours more abundant^ kv kottols TrcpLoraoTcpois. 
 There are three Avays of explaining this and the following 
 clauses, 1. In (or, b^) labours I am more abundantly the ser- 
 vant of Christ. 2. Or, (supplying rjv or yeyova,) I have been 
 more abundant in labours. 3. Or, comiecting, as De Wette 
 and Meyer do, the adverbs with the substantives with the sense 
 of adjectives, bj/ more abundant labours. This latter explana- 
 tion can better be carried through, and expresses the sense 
 clearly. In strij^es above oneasure, Iv TrXrjyai^ vTrep/SaWovTws, 
 i. e. b^ stri2:)es exceeding measure (in frequency and severity). 
 In prisons tnore frequent, either, as before, ' I have been more 
 frequently imprisoned,' or, ' By more frequent prisons.' The 
 sense remains the same. In deaths oft, h ^avarots ttoXXolkls, 
 by manifold deaths. Paul, in accordance with common 
 usage, elsewhere says, " I die daily." He suffered a thousand 
 deaths, in the sense of being constantly in imminent danger 
 of death and of enduring its terrors. 
 
 24. 25. Of the Jcavs five times received I forty 
 (stripes) save one. Thrice was I beaten with rods, 
 once was I stoned, thrice I suffered shipwreck, a night 
 and a day I have been in the deep. 
 
 These verses are a parenthesis designed to confirm tlic 
 preceding assertion that he liad laboured and suffered more 
 in tlie service of Christ than any of his opponents. In v. 26 
 the construction is resumed. The apostle had at this period 
 of his history been scourged eight times ; five times by the 
 Jews and thrice by the Romans. Of this cruel ill-treatment 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 11, 26. 273 
 
 at the hands of his own countrymen, the Acts of the Apostles 
 contain no record ; and of the three occasions on which he 
 was beaten mth rods, that mentioned in Acts 16, 22 as having 
 occurred at Philippi is the only one of which we have else- 
 where any account. In the law of Moses, Deut. 25, 3, it was 
 forbidden to inflict more than forty stripes on an offender, and 
 it appears that the Jews, in their punctilious observance of 
 the letter of the law, were in the habit of inflicting only 
 thirty-nine so as to be sure not to transgress the prescribed 
 limit. From the distinction which the apostle makes between 
 receiving stripes at the hands of the Jews and being beaten 
 -wdth rods, it is probable that the Jews were at that period 
 accustomed to use a lash. The later Rabbis say that the 
 scourge was made with three thongs, so that each blow in- 
 flicted three stripes ; and that only thirteen strokes were 
 given to make up the prescribed number of thirty-nine lashes. 
 Once was I stoned. Acts 14, 19. On this occasion his ene- 
 mies supposed he was dead. He must therefore have been 
 rendered for the time insensible. Thrice I suffered shijncrecJc. 
 Of this we have no mention in the Acts. The shipwreck in 
 which Paul was involved on his journey to Rome, was at a 
 much later period. A night and a day have I been in the 
 deep. That is, for that length of time he was tossed about by 
 the waves, clinging to a fragment of a wreck. A night and 
 day (v^jx-^rz/xepov), i. e. a whole day of twenty-four hours. The 
 Jews commenced the day at sunset. 
 
 26. (In) journeyings often, (in) perils of waters, 
 (in) perils of robbers, (in) perils by (mine own) coun- 
 trymen, (in) perils by the heathen, (in) perils in the 
 city, (in) perils in the wilderness, (in) perils in the sea, 
 (in) perils among false brethren. 
 
 Our translators have throughout this passage suppUed the 
 preposition in. But as kv in the preceding verse is used in- 
 strumentally, so here we have the mstrumental dative, hy 
 joimieyi7igs, hy perils., &c. It was by voluntarily exposing 
 himself to these dangers, and by the endurance of these sut- 
 ferings the apostle proved his superior claim to be regarded 
 as a devoted minister of Christ. Perils of water., literally, of 
 rivers ; as distinguished from the dangers of the sea mentioned 
 afterwards. History shows that in the country traversed in 
 
274 II. CORINTHIANS 11, 27. 
 
 Paul's journeys great danger was often encountered in passing 
 the rivers which crossed his j^ath. Perils of robbers^ to which 
 all traA'ellers were exposed. Perils from my otvti countrymen 
 (e/c ycVovs as opposed to l^ c^vthv). The Jews were, at least in 
 most cases, the first to stir up opposition and to excite the 
 mob against the apostle. This was the case at Damascus, 
 Acts 9, 23 ; at Jerusalem, Acts 9, 29 ; at Antioch in Pisidia, 
 Acts 13, 50 ; at Iconium, 14, 5 ; at Lystra, 14, 19 ; at Thessa- 
 lonica. Acts 17, 5 ; at Berea, Acts 17, 13 ; at Corinth, 18, 12. 
 From the Gentiles^ as at Philippi and Ephesus. In the city^ 
 as in Damascus, Jerusalem and Ephesus. In the desert. The 
 dangers of the desert are proverbial. Paul traversed Arabia, 
 as well as the mountainous regions of Asia Minor, and was 
 doubtless often exposed in these journeys to the dangers of 
 robbers, as well as those arising from exposure, and hunger 
 and thirst. Of the sea, not only in the case of shipwreck be- 
 fore mentioned, but to other and lesser perils. Perils among 
 false brethren, referring probably to the treachery of those 
 w^ho falsely professed to be his brethren in Christ, and yet 
 endeavoured to deliver him into the power of his enemies. 
 
 27. In weariness and painfulness, in watchings 
 often, in hunger and thirst, in fastings often, in cold 
 and nakedness. 
 
 Here the preposition Iv is again used, but in its instru- 
 mental sense by. It was by these trials and sufferings he 
 proved himself to be what he claimed to be. Py iceari7iess 
 and 2^ainfulness, iv kottw koI fjiox^^o. These words are thus as- 
 sociated in 1 Thess. 2, 9, and 2 Thess. 3, 8, in both of which 
 places they are rendered " labour and travail." They both 
 express the idea of wearisome toil and the consequent ex- 
 haustion and suifering. JBy icatchings often, referring to the 
 sleepless nights which he wa3 often compelled by business or 
 suffering to pass. In hunger and thirst, in fastings often. 
 The common meaning of the word vqa-Teia^ and its connection 
 Avith the words " hunger and thirst," implying involuntary ab- 
 stinence I'rom food, are urged as reasons for understanding it 
 to mean voluntary fasting. But the context is in favour of tlie 
 common interpretation which makes it refer to involuntary ab- 
 stinence. Every other particular here mentioned belongs to 
 the class of sufferings; and it would therefore be incongruous 
 
II. CORINTHIAl^S 11, 28. 275 
 
 to introduce into this enumeration any thing so insignificant 
 and so common as religious fasting. In this the Pharisees 
 were his equals and probably far his superior. They fasted 
 twice in the week. Paul was no ascetic, and certainly did not 
 deny himself food to the extent of making that denial an act of 
 heroism. It is remarkable that we have no record of Paul's 
 ever having fasted at all, unless Acts 13, 3. By cold and no- 
 kedness. This completes the picture. The greatest of the 
 apostles here appears before us, his back lacerated by frequent 
 scourgings, his body worn by hunger, thirst, and exposure ; 
 cold and naked, persecuted by Jews and Gentiles, driven from 
 place to place without any certain dwelling. This passage, 
 more perhaps than any other, makes even the most laborious 
 of the modern ministers of Christ hide their face in shame. 
 What have they ever done or sufiered to compare with what 
 this apostle did ? It is a consolation to know that Paul is now 
 as pre-eminent in glory, as he was here in suiFering. 
 
 28. Besides those things that are without, that 
 which Cometh upon me daily, the care of all the 
 chm-ches. 
 
 This verse is variously interpreted. The first clause, Be- 
 sides those t/migs which are vnthout^ is rendered in the same 
 way in the Yulgate. Praeter ilia, quae extrinsecus sunt. So 
 also Calvin, Beza, and others. But this is contrary to the 
 usage of the words ra TrapcKros, which mean, the things besides^ 
 i. e. other things; so that the sense of the clause x^p'^5 "^^^ 
 irapeKTo^ is, 'Not to mention other things.' The preceding 
 enumeration, copious as it is, was not exhaustive. There 
 Avere other things of a hke nature which the apostle would 
 not stop to mention, but proceeded to another class of trials. 
 That class included his exhausting official duties. That which 
 Cometh on me daily, viz., the care of all the churches. The 
 latter clause is, according to this explanation, assumed to be 
 explanatory of the former. The same view is taken of the 
 relation of the two clauses by Meyer, who renders the passage 
 thus: "My daily attention, the care of all the churches." 
 This latter interpretation assumes that instead of k-ma-va-raa-L^, 
 which is in the common text, the true reading is cVto-rao-t?, a 
 reading adopted by Lachmann, Tischendorf, Meyer, Riickert, 
 and others. Both words are used in the sense of concourse, 
 
276 II. CORINTHIANS 11, 29. 
 
 tumult, as of the people, see Acts 24, 12, but the former has 
 also the sense of care, or attention. If the corrected text be 
 adopted, then the interpretation just mentioned is to be pre- 
 ferred. ' Without mentioning other things, {y eTrt'o-rao-ts /aov 17 
 Ktt^' rjjxipav) my daily oversight, the care of all the church.' 
 If the common text, although not so well sustained, be ad- 
 hered to, the meaning probably is, 'My daily concourse' 
 (quotidiani hominimi impetus). That is, the crowding upon 
 him every day of people demanding his attention. This is 
 the sense expressed by Luther ; " Dass ich ttiglich werde an- 
 gelaufen, und trage Sorge fur alle Gemeinen." The solicitude 
 which the apostle felt for the churches which he had founded, 
 is apparent from all his epistles ; and it may be easily im- 
 agined how various and constant must have been the causes 
 and occasions of anxiety and trouble on their account. 
 
 29. Who is weak, and I am not weak? who is of- 
 fended, and I burn not ? 
 
 That is, he sympathized with his fellow Christians, who 
 were his children in the faith, so that their sorrows and suffer- 
 ings were his own. This was the consequence not only of the 
 communion of saints, in virtue of which, " if one member suf- 
 fer, all the members suffer with it ; or one member be hon- 
 oured, all the members rejoice with it," 1 Cor. 12,26; but 
 also of the peculiar relation which Paul sustained to the 
 churches, which he had himself i^lanted. Who is loeak / i. e. 
 in faith, or scrupulous through want of knowledge, compare 
 1 Cor. 9, 22, and J am not iveak f That is, with whose in- 
 firmities of faith and knowledge do I not sympathize ? He 
 pitied their infirmities and bore with their prejudices. To 
 the weak, he became as weak. There are men, says Calvin, 
 who either despise the infirmities of their brethren, or trample 
 them under their feet. Such men know little of their own 
 hearts, and have little of the spirit of Paul or of Paul's master. 
 God never quenches the smoking flax. Who is offended 
 (oTKai/SaAi^erat), i. e. caused to stumble, or led into sin ; and / 
 burn not. That is, and I am not indignant? It was not to 
 Paul a matter of indifference when any of the brethren, by 
 the force of evil example, or by the seductions of false teach- 
 ers, were led to depart from the truth or to act inconsistently 
 with their profession. Such events filled him not only with 
 grief at the fall of the weak, but with indignation at the au- 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 11, 30.31. 277 
 
 thors of their fall. Thus his mind was kept in a state of con- 
 stant agitation by his numerous anxieties and his wide-hearted 
 sympathy. 
 
 30. If I must needs glory, I will glory of the 
 things Avhich concern mine infirmities. 
 
 Paul's boasting was not like that of the false teachers. 
 They boasted not only of their descent, but of their learning, 
 eloquence, and personal advantages ; he boasted only of the 
 things which implied weakness, his sufferings and privations. 
 The future, Kavxrjo-ofxaL, expresses a general purpose, illustrated 
 in the past, and not ha\4ng reference merely to what was to 
 come. The persecutions, the poverty, the scourgings, the 
 hunger and nakedness of which Paul had boasted, were not 
 things in which men of the world pride themselves, or which 
 commonly attract human applause. 
 
 31. The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, 
 which is blessed for evermore, knoAveth that I lie not. 
 
 This is a peculiarly solemn asseveration. An oath is the 
 act of calling God to witness the truth of what we say. Here 
 the appeal is not simply to God as God, but to God in his pe- 
 culiar covenant relation to believers. When the Israelite 
 called on Jehovah as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, 
 he recognized him not only as the creator and moral governor 
 of the world, but as the covenant God of his nation. So the 
 Christian when he calls God " The God and Father of our 
 Lord Jesus Christ," recognizes him not only as his Creator, 
 but as the author of redemption through his eternal Son. 
 Jesus Christ is a designation of the Theanthropos, the histori- 
 cal person so named and known, to whom God stood in the 
 relation at once of God and Father. Our Lord had a de- 
 pendent nature to which God stood in the relation of God, 
 and a divine nature to which He stood in the relation of 
 Father, and therefore to the complex person Jesus Christ 
 God bore the relation of both God and Father. 
 
 There is a difference of opinion as to the reference of this 
 passage. Some suppose that the apostle intended by this oath 
 to confirm the truth of the whole preceding exhibition of his 
 labours and sufferings ; others, that it is to be confined to the 
 assertion in v. 30, viz., that he would boast only of his infirmi- 
 
278 II. CORINTHIANS 11, 32. 
 
 ties ; others, as Calvin and many others, refer it to what fol- 
 lows, i. e., to the account which he was about to give of his 
 escape from Damascus. To give this explanation the more 
 plausibility, Meyer assumes that Paul had intended to intro- 
 duce an extended narrative of his escape and sufferings, be- 
 ginning with the incident at Damascus, but was interrupted 
 and did not carry out his intention. As, however, there is no 
 intimation of this in the context, it is probable that the refer- 
 ence is to the w^hole of the preceding narrative. He intended 
 to satisfy his readers that he had not exaggerated or over- 
 stated his sufferings. God knew that all he had said was 
 true. 
 
 32. Ill Damascus tlie governor under Aretas the 
 king kept the city of the Damascenes Avith a garrison, 
 desirous to apprehend me. 
 
 It is useless to inquire why Paul introduces, as it were, as 
 an after-thought, this disconnected account of his escape from 
 Damascus. It is enough that the fact occurred to him when 
 writing, and that he saw fit to record it. The account here 
 given agrees with that found in Acts 9, 24. 25, except that 
 there the attempt to apprehend the apostle is attributed to 
 the Jews, and here to the governor of the city. There is no* 
 inconsistency between the two. The governor acted no doubt 
 at the instigation of the Jews. He had no grievance of his 
 own to redress or avenge. The governor, or ethnarch^ a term 
 applied to a vassal prince, or ruler appointed by a sovereign 
 over a city or province. Governor imder^ literally, o/ Aretas 
 the king. Aretas was a common name of Arabian kings, as 
 Pharaoh of the kings of Egypt. A king of that name is men- 
 tioned as contemporary with the high-priest Jason, and with the 
 king Antiochus Epiphanes. The one here referred to was the 
 fatlier-in-law of Herod Antipas. Herod having re2:)udiated 
 the dnughtcr of Aretas, the latter declared war against him 
 and totally defeated his army. Vitellius, proconsul of Syria, 
 undertook to punish him for this assault on a Roman vassal, 
 but was arrested on his march by the death of tlie emperor 
 Tiberius. It is commonly supposed that it was during this 
 respite that Aretas, who was king of Petra, gained temporary 
 possession of Damascus. J'CejJt the city of the Damasce^ies^ 
 not, besieged the city^ but as it is expressed in Acts, watched 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 11, 33. 2Y9 
 
 the gates. The \rorcls of the Damascenes (rrjv Aa fxao-K-rjvCJv 
 TToXiv) are omitted in the original edition of 1611 of King 
 James's version, but are now found in all the copies. With a 
 garrison. The word is simply €<f)povp€Lj he kept^ or guarded. 
 Desirous to apprehend me. The governor set a guard at the 
 gates to seize the apostle should he attempt to leave the 
 city. 
 
 33. And through a whidow in a basket was I let 
 down by the wall, and escaped his hands. 
 
 Through a window, 5vpt9, a little door., or aperture. This 
 was either an aperture in the wall itself, or, as is more proba- 
 ble, a window of a house built upon the walls of the city. A 
 representation of these overhanging houses as still to be seen 
 on the walls of Damascus, may be found in Conybeare and 
 Howson's life of St. Paul, p. 98 of the 8vo. edition. The same 
 mode of escape was adopted by the spies mentioned in Joshua 
 2, 15, and by David, 1 Sam. 19, 12. 
 
 CHAPTER XH. 
 
 The account of a remarkable vision granted to the apostle, vs. 1-6. The 
 other evidences of his apostleship, and his conduct and purooses in the 
 exercise of his office, vs. 7-21. 
 
 PauVs revelations and visions. 
 
 He would give over boasting, and refer not to what he had 
 done, but to what God had done ; not to scenes in which he 
 was the agent, but to those in which he was merely the sub- 
 ject — to revelations and visions. He had been caught up to 
 the third heavens, and received communications and revela- 
 tions which he was not permitted to make known. This was 
 to him, and to all who believed his word, a more reliable evi- 
 dence of the favour of God to him as an apostle than any thing 
 he had yet mentioned, vs. 1-6. With this extraordinary proof 
 of the divine favour there was given him some painful bodily 
 aftection, from which he could not be delivered, in order to 
 
280 II. CORINTHIANS 12, ]. 
 
 keep him duly humble, vs. V-IO. This reference to his per- 
 sonal experience was exceecling^ly painful to him. He had 
 been forced by their unreasonable opposition to speak of him- 
 self as he had done ; for the external signs of his apostleship 
 should have couAdnced them that he was the immediate mes^ 
 senger of Christ, vs. 11. 12. They themselves were a standing 
 proof that he was truly an apostle. They were not less richly 
 endowed than other churches founded by other apostles. If 
 inferior at all, it was only that he had refused to be supported 
 by them. This he could not help. He was determined to 
 jDursue in the future the course in that matter which he had 
 hitherto adopted ; neither by himself nor by others, neither 
 mediately nor immediately, would he receive any thing at 
 their hands, vs. 13-18. All this self-vindication was of little 
 account. It was a small matter what they thought of him. 
 God is the only competent and final judge. His fear was that 
 when he reached Corinth he would be forced to appear as a 
 judge ; that not finding them wdiat he desired them to be, he 
 should be obliged to assume the aspect of a reprover, vs. 
 19-21. 
 
 1. It is not expedient for me doubtless to glory. 
 I will come to visions and revelations of the Lord. 
 
 The authorities differ much as to the text in this verse. 
 The common text has Srj (indeed, doubtless) with few MSS. or 
 versions in its support. Many of the oldest MSS. read Set, it 
 is 7iecessary / some few 8c, which is adopted by Meyer as the 
 original reading. The difference is only as to the shades of 
 the thought. The idea is that boasting is not expedient ; he 
 will pass to something else, or at least to things which implied 
 no agency or superior power on his part. Is not expedient. 
 Here again some MSS. read with the common text, ov (rv/x<^€- 
 pet /xot, cAcTJo-o/xat yap, (/5 not expedient foT me, for Iicill cotne;) 
 others with Lachmann, Tischendorf, and Riickert, ov (ruix<j>epov 
 /xku, cAcTJo-o/xat 8e, (it is not expedient indeed, but I will cotne.) 
 The common text is on the whole to be preferred. Boasting, 
 the apostle says, is not expedient for me, either in the sense 
 that it does not become me, is not a seemly or proper thing ; 
 or, is not profitable ; does not contribute to set my apostleship 
 in a clear light. There is a better way of proving my divine 
 mission than by boasting. The former explanation is better 
 suited to the apostle's mode of representation. lie had re- 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 12, 2. 281 
 
 peatedly spoken of boasting as a kind of folly, something de- 
 rogatory and painful. He expresses the same feeling here 
 when he says it is not expedient. I will come. Our translat- 
 ors omit the yap, for I icill come. The connection is with a 
 thought omitted. Boasting is not expedient, (therefore I de- 
 sist,) for I will pass to something else. What follows in the 
 relation of the revelations made to him, was no selt-laudation, 
 but a recital of God's goodness. Visions and revelations. 
 The latter term is, on the one hand, more general than the 
 former, as there might be revelations where there were no 
 visions ; and, on the other, the latter is higher than the for- 
 mer, as implying a disclosure of the import of the things seen. 
 Of the Lord ; not visions of which the Lord was the object; 
 it was not seeing the Lord that he here speaks of, but visions 
 and revelations of which the Lord is the author. By Lord is 
 obviously to be understood Christ, whose continued existence 
 and divine power over the thoughts and states of the soul is 
 hereby recognized. 
 
 2. I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years 
 ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell ; or whether 
 out of the body, I cannot tell : God knoweth ;) such 
 an one caught up to the third heaven. 
 
 He speaks of himself in the third person, " I knew a man." 
 \yhy he does this is not clear. He narrates what had hap- 
 pened as though he had been a spectator of the scene, perhaps 
 because his own activity was so completely in abeyance. A 
 inan in Christ / a man who was in Christ ; the scriptural 
 designation of a Christian, because union with Christ makes a 
 man a Christian. It is the one only indispensable condition 
 of salvation ; so that all who are in Christ are saved, and all 
 who are out of Christ perish. It is also the plain doctrine of 
 the Bible that, so far as adults are concerned, this saving 
 union Avith Christ is conditioned, not on any thing external, 
 not on union with this or that external church, but on a per- 
 sonal appropriating act of faith, by which we receive and rest 
 on Christ alone for salvation. And still further, it is no less 
 clearly taught that holiness of heart and life is the certain 
 fruit and therefore the only satisfactory evidence of the genu- 
 ineness of that faith. Above fourteen years ago. The event 
 referred to in this verse is not the same as that which occurred 
 
282 II. CORINTHIANS 12, 3. 4. 
 
 at the time of Paul's conversion. That was a vision of Christ 
 to the apostle here on earth, this was a translation of the 
 apostle into heaven ; that occurred twenty years before the 
 probable date of this epistle. So that the two agree neither 
 in nature, nor in the time of their occurrence. Whether in 
 the body or out of the hody^ I cannot tell. The point as to 
 which Paul was in doubt, was not the nature of the event, 
 not as to whether it was a mere exaltation of his conscious- 
 ness and perceptions or a real translation, but simply Avhether 
 that translation was of the soul separated from the body, or 
 of the body and soul together. Though heaven is a state, it 
 is also a place. According to the scriptural representation, 
 more is necessary to our introduction into heaven than mere- 
 ly opening the eyes to what is now about us and around us. 
 The gloritied body of our Lord is somewhere, and not every- 
 where. Such an one caught up j apirayivTa^ carried aicay, 
 the proper term to express a removal from one place to an- 
 other without the agency of the subject. Paul was entirely 
 passive in the translation of which he here speaks. Comp. 
 Acts 8, 39. 1 Thess. 4, 17, " Caught up to meet the Lord in 
 the air." To the third heaven. This means either the highest 
 heavens ; or, on the assumption that Paul used the language 
 and intended to conform to the ideas of the Rabbins who 
 taught that there were seven heavens, it means the air, the 
 region of the clouds. He was caught up mto the air, and 
 then still further raised to Paradise. The former explanation 
 is to be preferred, 1. Because there is no evidence that the 
 opinions of the Jewish writers, whose works are still extant, 
 were prevalent at the time of the apostle. 2. Because there 
 is no evidence m the New Testament that the sacred writers 
 adopted those opinions. 3. Because if Paul believed and 
 taught that there were seven heavens, that is, if he sanctioned 
 the Rabbinical doctrine on that subject, it would be a part of 
 Christian doctrine, which it is not. It is no part of the faith 
 of the Christian church. 4. Because it is plain that the " third 
 heaven " and "paradise" are synonymous terms ; and paradise, 
 as is admitted, at least by those who suppose that Paul heie 
 speaks as a Jew, means heaven. 
 
 3. 4. And I knew such a man, (whether in the 
 body, or out of the body, I cannot tell : God knoweth ;) 
 how that he was caught up into paradise, and heai'd 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 12, 5. 6. 283 
 
 unspeakable words, Avhich it is not lawful for a man to 
 utter. 
 
 This is a repetition of v. 2, with the exception of the sub- 
 stitution of the word " j^^^^^i^e " for the phrase " the third 
 heaven." Paradise is a word of Sanscrit origin, and signifies 
 a park, or garden. It is used in the Septuagint, Gen. 2, 8, in 
 the description of Eden, which was a paradise or garden. The 
 word was early used among the Jews as a designation of 
 heaven, or the abode of the blessed after death, as appears 
 from Luke 23, 43, (compare Ecclesiasticus 40, 17. 28.) In 
 Rev. 2, 7, it occurs in the same sense. And heard imspeaka- 
 hle tcords, apprjTa pyfxara^ literally, unspoken words ; here ob- 
 viously the meaning is words not to be spoken, as explamed 
 by what follows. Which it is not lawful for a man to utter. 
 The communications made to the apostle he was not allowed 
 to make knovrn to others. The veil which conceals the mys- 
 teries and glories of heaven God has not permitted to be 
 raised. It is enough that we know that in that world the 
 saints shall be made perfectly holy and j^erfectly blessed in 
 the full enjoyment of God forever. 
 
 5. Of such an one will I glory : yet of myself I will 
 not glory, but in mine infirmities. 
 
 Of such a one^ vttkp tov roiovrov^ for such a one, i. e. in his 
 behalf; or, v-^kp being taken in the sense of Trcpt, about ^ or 
 concerning. This latter gives the better sense. ' Concerning 
 such a person I will glory.' This is equivalent to saying, 
 ' Such an event is a just ground of glorying.' But roiovrov is 
 not to be taken as neuter, (of such a thing,) as is plain from 
 the antithetical e/xavroi). ' Of such a one, but not of myself.' 
 The translation which he had exj)erienced was a proper 
 ground of boasting, because it was a gratuitous favour. It 
 implied no superiority on the part of the subject of this act of 
 divine goodness, and therefore might be gloried in without 
 assuming any special merit to himself. Of myself I loill not 
 glory ; that is, he would not boast of his personal qualities as 
 entitling him to admiration. But {d ^x-q^ except^ in my iii- 
 firmities. That is, ' I will boast concerning myself only of 
 those things which prove or imply my own weakness.' 
 
 6. Por though I would desire to glory, I shall not 
 
284 II. CORINTHIANS 12, 1, 
 
 be a fool ; for I will say the truth : but (now) I for- 
 bear, lest any man should thmk of jne above that 
 which he seeth me (to be), or (that) he heareth of me. 
 
 The connection as indicated by (yap) /or, is not immedi- 
 ately with what is expressed in the preceding verse, but with 
 a thought obviously implied. Paul had said he would not 
 glory concerning himself. The reason for this determination 
 was not the want of grounds of boasting. ' I could do it, for 
 if I chose to boast, I should not he a fool ; i. e. an empty 
 boaster — for I would speak the truth.' J^iit I forbear [c^dho- 
 fxai 8e sc. Tov KavxaarSai). Abundant as were the materials for 
 boasting at the apostle's command, justly as he could refer to 
 the extraordinary gifts with which he was endowed, and the 
 extraordinary success which had attended his labours, he did 
 not dwell on these things. The reason which he assigns for 
 this forbearance is that others might not be led to think of 
 him too highly. He did not wdsh to be judged of by what 
 lie said of himself or of his experiences. He preferred that 
 men should judge of him by what they saw or heard. 
 
 7. And lest I should be exalted above measm'e 
 through the abundance of the revelations, there was 
 given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of 
 Satan to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above 
 measure. 
 
 As Paul determined not to give occasion to others to 
 tliink too highly of him, he here tells us that God provided 
 against his being unduly elated even in his own mind. It is a 
 familiar matter of experience that men are as much exalted 
 in their own estimation by the distinguishing favour of their 
 superiors, as by the possession of personal advantages. There- 
 fore the apostle, although he would not boast of himself, was 
 still in danger of being unduly elated by the extraordinary 
 manifestations of the divine favour. The order of the words 
 is inverted. " And by the excess of revelations lest I should 
 be exalted above measure ; " vTrcpatpw/xat, be lifted up above 
 what is meet or right. The expression excess, or exceeding 
 abundance, of revelations seems to refer not exclusively to the 
 event above mentioned, but to other similar communications 
 made to him at other times. That was not the only occasion 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 12, 7. 28^ 
 
 on which God had unveiled to the apostle the treasures of di- 
 vine knowledge. There vxis given to me^ i. e. by God. It was 
 God who sent the trial here referred to, and from God the 
 apostle sought deliverance. A thorn in the fleshy o-KoXoxp rrj 
 aapKL. The word o-Kokoij/ properly means a sharpened stake, a 
 paHsade, then any piece of sharpened wood, and specifically a 
 thorn. This last is the meaning best suited to this passage, 
 and is the one commonly adopted. Others say the meaning 
 is, "a goad for the flesh," borrowing a figure from oxen, 
 raetaphora a bobus sumpta, as Calvin says ; others again un- 
 derstand a-KoXoij/ to refer to a stake on which offenders were 
 impaled, or the cross on which they were suspended. A 
 stake, or cross, for the flesh, would be a figurative expression 
 for bodily torture. Flesh may be taken literally for the body, 
 or figuratively for the corrupt nature. Calvin and many oth- 
 ers take the latter view. But there is no reason for departing 
 from the literal meaning, which should in all cases be pre- 
 ferred, other things being equal. The dative o-apKt may be 
 rendered either, for the flesh, or pertaining to the flesh, i. e. 
 in the flesh. This last is to be preferred, as it suits the con- 
 text and is sustained by the parallel passage. Gal. 4, 14, tov 
 Tretpao-ftov />cov tov Iv rrj crapKc fxov. If this is the true interpreta- 
 tion of the word adpi, it goes far to determine the nature of 
 the thorn of which the apostle here speaks. It cannot be the 
 evil suggestions, or fiery darts of Satan, as Luther, Calvin, and 
 others, understand it; nor some prominent adversary, as 
 many of the ancients suppose ; it was doubtless some painful 
 bodily affection. A messe^iger of Satan. In the Bible the 
 idea is often presented that bodily diseases are at times pro- 
 duced by the direct agency of Satan, so that they may be 
 regarded as his messengers, something sent by him. The 
 Avord Saray is used here probably as an indeclinable noun, as 
 in the Septuagint in one or two places, but in the New Testa- 
 ment it is always, except in this instance, declined, nom. 2a- 
 Tava<;^ gen. ^arava. On this account many are disposed to 
 take the word here as in the nominative, and translate the 
 phrase a7igel Sata7i, i. e. an angel (or messenger) who is Sa- 
 tan. But inasmuch as iSarai/ is at times indeclinable, and as 
 Satan is never in the New Testament called an angel, the 
 great majority of commentators give the same exposition as 
 that given in the English version. To buffet me, iVa /xe koXo.- 
 (^iQq^ in order that he (i. e. the angel or messenger) may buffet 
 me. The use of the present tense seems to imply that " the 
 
286 II. CORINTHIANS 12, 8.9. 
 
 thorn in the flesh " was a permanent afi*ection under which 
 the apostle continued to sufier. Lest I should he exalted 
 above measure. This last clause expresses the design of God 
 in permitting the apostle to be thus afiiicted. He carried 
 about with him a continued evidence of his weakness. How- 
 ever much he was exalted, although raised to the third heaven, 
 he could not extract this rankling thorn. And the experience 
 of God's people shows that bodily pain has a special ofiice to 
 perform in the work of sanctification. In the unrenewed its 
 tendency is to exasperate ; when self-inflicted its tendency is 
 to debase and fill the soul with grovelling ideas of God and 
 religion, and with low self-conceit. But when inflicted by God 
 on his own children, it more than any thing teaches them their 
 weakness and dependence, and calls upon them to submit 
 when submission is most difiicult. Though he slay me, I will 
 trust in him, is the expression of the highest form of faith. 
 
 8. 9. Por tills tiling I besouglit the Lord thrice, 
 that it might depart from me. And he said unto me, 
 My grace is sufficient for thee : for my strength is 
 made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will 
 I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of 
 Christ may rest upon me. 
 
 For this thing ^ v-n-lp tovtov, in reference to this ^ v-n-ep is 
 here used in the sense of Trepi Tovtov may be neuter, /or this 
 thing ^ i. e. this aflliction ; or masculine referring to ayycXo?, 
 '' about this angel or messenger of Satan," &c. This is gene- 
 rally preferred on account of the following clause, iVa aTroo-Tij, 
 that he might depart from me. I besought the Lord, says 
 the apostle, thrice. So our blessed Lord prayed " the third 
 time saying. Let this cup pass from me." Paul was therefore 
 importunate in his petition for deliverance from this sore trial. 
 He says, I besought the Lord^ that is, Christ, as is clear not 
 only from the general usage of Scripture, but from what fol- 
 lows in V. 9, where he speaks of the " power of Christ." A7id 
 he said unto me^ dprjKi {xoi. The perfect is used either for tlie 
 aorist, or in its proper force connecting the past with the 
 present. Tlie answer was not simply something past, but 
 something which continued in its consoling power. Winer, 
 § 41. "lie has said ;" the answer was ever sounding in the 
 apostle's ears, and not in his oars only, but in those of all his 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 12, 8.9. 287 
 
 suffering people from that day to this. Each hears the Lord 
 say, 3Iy grace is sufficient for tliee^ apK€L a-oi rj x^P^? fxov. 
 These words should be engraven on the palm of every believ- 
 er's hand. If}/ grace^ either, 'my love,' or metonjTnically, 
 ' the aid of the Holy Spirit,' which is so often meant by the 
 word grace. The connection is in favour of the common mean- 
 ing of the term. ' My love is enough for thee.' These are the 
 words of Christ. He says, to those who seek deliverance from 
 pain and sorrow, ' It is enough that I love you.' This secures 
 and implies all other good. His favour is life ; his loving- 
 kindness is better than life. For my strength is perfected in 
 weakness. This is given as the reason why the grace or fa- 
 vour of Christ is all-sufficient. That reason is, that his 
 strength is perfected, i. e. clearly revealed as accomplishing 
 its end, in weakness. ' Weakness, in other words, says our 
 Lord, is the condition of my manifesting my strength. The 
 weaker my people are, the more conspicuous is my strength 
 in sustaining and delivering them.* Most gladly therefore 
 will I rather glory in my infirmities. The sense is not, ' I 
 will glory in infirmities rather than in other things,' as though 
 Paul had written fxaXXov iv rats acr^evetat9, but, ' I will rather 
 glory in infirmities than seek deliverance.' If Paul's suffer- 
 ings were to be the occasion of the manifestation of Christ's 
 glory, he rejoiced in suffering. This he did -qhicrTa^ most 
 sweetly^ with an acquiescence delightful to himself. His suf- 
 ferings thus became the source of the purest and highest 
 pleasure. Kavxao/xat kv rats do-^evetats doGs not mean I glory 
 in the onidst of infirmities^ but on account of them. See 5, 
 12. 10, 15. Rom. 2, 23, &c., &c. This rejoicing on account 
 of his sufferings, or those things which implied his weakness 
 and dependence, was not a fanatical feelmg, it had a rational 
 and sufficient basis, viz., that the power of Christ may rest 
 upon me. The y»'ord is iTna-Krjvwari], may pitch its tent upon 
 me ; i. e. dwell in me as in a tent, as the shechinah dwelt of 
 old in the tabernacle, To be m.ade thus the dwellingvplace 
 of the power of Christ, where he reveals his glory, was a ra- 
 tional ground of rejoicing in those infirmities which were the 
 condition of his presence and the occasion for the manifesta- 
 tion of his power. Most Christians are satisfied in trying to 
 be resigned under suffering. They think it a great thing if 
 they can bring themselves to submit to be the dwelling-place 
 of Christ's power. To rejoice in their afflictions because 
 thereby Christ is glorified, is more than they aspire to. Paul's 
 
288 II. CORINTHIANS 12, 10. 
 
 experience was far above that standard. The power of Christ 
 is not only thus manifested in the weakness of his people, but 
 in the means which he employs for the accomplishment of his 
 purposes. These are in all cases in themselves utterly inade- 
 quate and disproportionate to the results to be obtained. The 
 treasure is in earthly vessels that the excellency of the power 
 may be of God. By the foolishness of preaching he saves 
 those who believe. By twelve illiterate men the church was 
 established and extended over the civilized world. By a few 
 missionaries heathen lands are converted into Christian coun- 
 tries. So m all cases, the power of Christ is perfected in 
 weakness. "We have in this passage a clear exhibition of the 
 religious life of the apostle, and the most convincing proof 
 that he lived in communion with Christ as God. To him he 
 looked as to his supreme, omnipresent, all-sufficient Lord for 
 deUverance from " the thorn in the flesh," from the bufietings 
 of the messenger of Satan, under which he had so grievously 
 suffered. To him he prayed. From him he received the an- 
 swer to his prayer. That answer was the answer of God ; it 
 implies divine perfection in him who gave it. To what suffer- 
 er would the favour of a creature be sufficient ? Who but 
 God can say, " My grace is sufficient for thee ? " To Paul it 
 was sufficient. It gave him perfect peace. It not only made 
 him resigned under his afflictions, but enabled him to rejoice 
 in them. That Christ should be glorified was to him an end 
 for which any human being might feel it an honour to sufler. 
 It is therefore most evident that the piety of the apostle, his 
 inward spiritual life, had Christ for its object. It was on him 
 his religious affections terminated ; to him the homage of his 
 supreme love, confidence and devotion was rendered. Chris- 
 tianity is not merely the religion which Christ taught ; but it 
 is, subjectively considered, the religion of which Christ is the 
 source and the object. 
 
 10. Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities, in re- 
 proaches, in necessities, in persecutions, in distresses 
 for Christ's sake : for when I am weak, then am I 
 strong. 
 
 The difference between glorying in infirmities and taking 
 pleasure in them, is that the former phrase expresses the oul- 
 \Y[ivd manifestation of the feeling expressed by the latter. 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 12, 11. 289 
 
 He gloried in infirmities when he boasted of them, that is, re- 
 ferred to them as things whicli reflected honour on him and 
 were to him a source of joy. As they were thus the occa- 
 sions of manifesting the power of Christ, Paul was pleased 
 with them and was glad that he was subjected to them. In- 
 firmities is a general term, including every thing in our condi- 
 tion, whether moral or physical, which is an evidence or 
 manifestation of weakness. From the context it is plain that 
 the reference is here to sufferings, of which reproaches, neces- 
 sities, persecutions and distresses were different forms. For 
 ChrisPs sake. These words belong to all the preceding 
 terms. It was in the sufferings, whether reproaches, necessi- 
 ties, persecutions. or distresses, endured for Christ's sake, that 
 the apostle took pleasure. Not in suffering in itself consid- 
 ered, not in self-inflicted sufferings, nor in those which were 
 the consequences of his own folly or evil dispositions, but in 
 sufferings endured for Christ's sake, or considered as the con- 
 dition of the manifestation of his power. For ichen I am 
 iceah^ then am I strong. When really weak in ourselves, and 
 conscious of that weakness, we are in the state suited to the 
 manifestation of the power of God. When emptied of our- 
 selves we are filled with God. Those who think they can 
 change their own hearts, atone for their own sins, subdue the 
 power of evil in their own souls or in the souls of others, who 
 feel able to sustain themselves nnder afiliction, God leaves to 
 their OAvn resources. But when they feel and acknowledge 
 their weakness he communicates to them divine strength. 
 
 11. I am become a fool in glorying ; ye have com- 
 pelled me : for I ought to have been commended of 
 you: for in nothing am I behind the very chiefest 
 apostles, though I be nothing. 
 
 I am become a fool., &c. This some understand as ironi- 
 cally said, because the self-vindication contamed in what pre- 
 cedes was not an act of folly, although it might be so regarded 
 by Paul's opposers. It is more natural, and more in keeping 
 with the whole context, to understand the words as express- 
 ing the apostle's own feelings. Self-laudation is folly. It was 
 derogatory to the apostle's dignity, and painful to his feelings, 
 but he was forced to submit to it. And, therefore, in his case 
 and under the circumstances, although humiliating, it was 
 
290 II. CORINTHIANS 12, 12. 
 
 right. Ye have coinjyelled me. It was their conduct which 
 made it necessary for the apostle to commend himself. This 
 is explained in the following clause. For I ought to have been 
 coinmended of you. If they had done their duty in vindicat- 
 ing him from the aspersions of the false teachers, there would 
 have been no necessity for him to vindicate himself. They 
 were bound thus to vindicate him, for hi nothing icas he he- 
 hind the very chief est apostles. It is an imperative duty rest- 
 ing on all who have the opportunity to vindicate the righteous. 
 For us to sit silent when aspersions are cast upon good men, 
 or when their character and services are undervalued, is to 
 make ourselves partakers of the guilt of detraction. The 
 Corinthians were thus guilty under aggravating circum- 
 stances ; because the evidences of Paul's apostlcship and of 
 his fidelity were abundant. He came behind in no one re- 
 spect the very chief of the apostles. Besides this they were 
 not only the witnesses of the signs of his divine mission, but 
 they were the recipients of the blessings of that mission. For 
 them therefore to fail to vindicate his claims and services was 
 an ungrateful and cowardly dereliction of duty. By the chief 
 of the apostles, still more clearly here than in 11, 5, are to be 
 understood the most prominent among the true apostles, as 
 Peter, James, and John, who in Gal. 2, 9 are called pillars. 
 Neither here nor in 11, 5 is it an ironical designation of the 
 false teachers. Though I he nothing. The apostle felt that 
 what was the eflect of the grace, or free gift of God, was no 
 ground of self-complacency or self-exaltation. 1 Cor. 4, 7. 15, 
 8-10. There were therefore united in him a deep sense of 
 his own unworthiuess and impotence, with the conviction and 
 consciousness of being full of knowledge, grace and power, by 
 the indwelling of the Holy Ghost. 
 
 12. Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought 
 among you in aU patience, in signs, and wonders, and 
 mighty deeds. 
 
 This is the proof tliat he did not come behind the chief 
 apostles. Timly ; /xcV, to wliich no 8e answers. The opposi- 
 tion is plain from the connection. 'The signs indeed of an 
 a])ostIe were wrought among you, hut you did not acknowl- 
 edge them.' So Kiickert, Do Wette, and others. The signs 
 of a7i ai^ostle were the insignia of the apostleship; those 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 12, 12. 291 
 
 things which by divine appointment were made the evidence 
 of a mission from God. When these were present an obliga- 
 tion rested on all who witnessed them to acknowledge the 
 authority of those who bore those insignia. When they were 
 absent, it was, on the one hand, an act of sacrilege to claim 
 the apostleship ; and, on the other, an act of apostacy from 
 God to admit its possession. To acknowledge the claims of 
 those who said they were apostles and were not, was (and is) 
 to turn from God to the creature, to receive as divhie what 
 was in flxct human or Satanic. This is evidently Paul's view 
 of the matter, as appears from 11, 13-15, where he speaks of 
 those who were the ministers of Satan and yet claimed to be 
 the apostles of Christ. Comp. Rev. 2, 2. These signs of an 
 apostle, as we learn from Scripture, were of different kinds. 
 Some consisted in the manifestations of the inward gifts of the 
 apostleship (i. e. of those gifts the possession of which consti- 
 tuted a man an apostle) ; such as plenary knowledge of the 
 gospel derived by immediate revelation from Jesus Christ, 
 Gal. 1, 12. 1 Cor. 15, 3; inspiration, or that influence of the 
 Holy Spirit which rendered its possessor infallible in the com- 
 munication of the truth, 1 Cor. 2, 10-13. 12, 8, in connection 
 with 12, 29 and 14, 37. Others of these signs consisted in the 
 external manifestations of God's favour sanctioning the claim 
 to the apostleship. Gal. 2, 8. To this class belongs fidelity in 
 teaching the truth, or conformity to the authenticated stand- 
 ard of faith, Gal. 1, 8. 9. Unless a man was thus kept faithful 
 to the gospel, no matter what other evidence of being an 
 apostle he might be able to adduce, he was to be regarded as 
 accursed. Gal. 1, 8. To this class also belong, success in 
 preaching the gospel, 1 Cor. 9, 2. 2 Cor. 3, 2. 3 ; the power 
 of communicating the Holy Ghost by the imposition of hands, 
 Acts 8, 18. 19, 6 ; the power of working miracles, as appears 
 from the passage under consideration, from Rom. 15, 18. 19, 
 and many other passages, as Heb. 2, 4. Mark 14, 20. Acts 5, 
 12. 14, 3 ; and a holy walk and conversation, 2 Cor. 6, 4. 
 Without these signs no man can be recognized and obeyed as 
 an apostle without apostacy from God ; without turning from 
 the true apostles to those who are the ministers of Satan. 
 1)1 all patience^ or constancy. This does not mean that the 
 patient endurance of severe trials was one of the signs of his 
 apostleship, but that those signs were wrought out under ad- 
 verse circumstances requiring the exercise of the greatest 
 constancy. In signs^ and wonders^ and mighty deeds. These 
 
292 II. CORINTHIANS 12, 13. 14. 
 
 fire different designations for the same thing. Miracles are 
 called signs in reference to their design, which is to confirm 
 the divine mission of those who perform them ; wonders be- 
 cause of the effect which they produced ; and ^nighty deeds 
 (Bvvdjxets) because they are manifestations of divine power. 
 
 13. For what is it wherein ye were inferior to oth- 
 er clmrches, except (it be) that I myself was not bur- 
 densome to you ? forgive me this wrong. 
 
 M>r. The connection indicated by this particle is with 
 the assertion in v. 12. 'I am not inferior to the chief apostles, 
 for you are not behind other churches.' The fact that the 
 churches founded by Paul were as numerous, as well furnished 
 with gifts and graces, as those founded by the other apostles, 
 was a proof that he was their equal. In other words, as it is 
 said Gal. 2, 8, " He that wrought effectually in Peter to the 
 apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me 
 towards the gentiles." Comp. 1 Cor. 1, 5-7. Wei^e ye infe- 
 rior to other cJuircJies^ literally, less, or weaker than. The 
 verb rjTTaofxaL (from t/ttoji/, less) has a comparative sense, and 
 therefore is followed hy vTrep^ beg o?id ; 'weak beyond other 
 churches.' The only distinction to the disadvantage of the 
 Corinthians was, that the apostle had refused to accejit aid 
 from them. This is not to be regarded as a sarcasm, or as a 
 reproach. It was said in a tone of tenderness, as is plain from 
 what follows. Forgive me this \orong. It was, apparently, a 
 reflection on the Corinthians ; it seemed to imply a want of 
 confidence in their liberality or love, that Paul refused to 
 receive from them what he wilhngly received from other 
 churches. In the preceding chapter he endeavoured to con- 
 vince them that his doing so was no proof of his want of aftec- 
 tion to them, or of his want of confidence in their love to him. 
 His conduct in this matter had other and sufficient reasons, 
 reasons which constrained liim to persist in this course of con- 
 duct, hoAvever j^ainful to him and to them. 
 
 14. Bchohl, the third time I am ready to come to 
 you ; and 1 will not be burdensome to you : for I seek 
 not yours, but you. Por the children ought not to lay 
 up for the parents, but the parents for the children. 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 12, 15.16. 293 
 
 The Acts of the Apostles mention but one visit of Paul to 
 Corinth prior to the date of this epistle. From this passage, 
 as well as from 2, 1 and 13, 1. 2, it is plain that he had already- 
 been twice in that city. The words, therefore, the third time^ 
 in this verse, belong to the word come^ and not to I am ready. 
 The sense is not, ' I am the third time ready,' but, ' I am 
 ready to come the third time.' His purpose was to act on 
 this third visit on the same principle which had controlled his 
 conduct on the two preceding occasions. I icill not be biir- 
 densotne to you^ I will receive nothing from you. For this he 
 gives two reasons, both not only consistent with his love for 
 them, but proofs of his love. For I seek not yours^ hut you. 
 This is the first reason. He had no mercenary or selfish ends 
 to accomplish. It was not their money, but their souls he 
 desired to win. For the children ought not to lay \ip for the 
 parents^ but the parents for the children. This was the second 
 reason. He stood to them in the relation of a parent. In the 
 course of nature, it was the parent's office to provide for the 
 children, and not the children for the parent. You must al- 
 low me, says Paul, a parent's privilege. Thus gracefully and 
 tenderly does the apostle reconcile a seemingly ungracious act 
 with the kmd feelings which he cherished in himself and de- 
 sired to excite in them. 
 
 15. And I will very gladly spend and be spent for 
 you ; though the more abundantly I love you, the less 
 I be loved. 
 
 As I am your father, I will gladly act as such, spend and 
 be spent for you ; even though I forfeit your love by acting 
 in a way which love forces me to act. This is the strongest 
 expression of disinterested affection. Paul was wiUing not 
 only to give his property but himself, his life and strength, 
 for them (literally, for your souls, virip rtov ij/vx^^v {-/xiov), not 
 only without a recomj)ense, but at the cost of their love. 
 
 16. But be it so, I did not burden you : neverthe- 
 less, being crafty, I caught you with guile. 
 
 J3e it so ; that is, admitted that I did not personally bur- 
 den you, yet (you may say) I craftily did it through others. 
 This was designed to meet the ungenerous objection which 
 
294 II. CORINTHIANS 12, 17-19. 
 
 the false teacliers might be disposed to make. They might 
 insinuate that although he refused to receive any thing him- 
 self, he quartered his friends uj^on them, or spoiled them 
 through others. I caught you icith guile^ 8o/\(i) v/xa? eXa/Sov, 
 i. e. I despoiled you by artifice, as an animal is taken by being 
 deceived. This shows the character of the opponents of the 
 apostle in Corinth. That he should think it necessary to 
 guard against insinuations so ungenerous and so unfounded, 
 is proof of his wisdom in refusing to give such antagonists the 
 least occasion to question the purity of his motives. 
 
 17. 18. Did I make a gain of you by any of them 
 whom I sent mito you ? I desired Titus, and with 
 (him) I sent a brother. Did Titus make a gain of 
 you ? w^alked Ave not in the same spirit ? (walked we) 
 not in the same steps ? 
 
 The best refutation of the insmuation that Paul did in an 
 underhand way by others what he refused to do openly and 
 in his own person, was an appeal to facts. The Corintliians 
 knew the charge to be unfounded. They knew that no one 
 of those whom Paul had sent to Corinth received any com- 
 pensation at their liands. This was specially true in the case 
 of Titus, his immediate representative. All his messengers 
 followed the example, and doubtless the injunctions of Paul, 
 in bearing their own expenses. The mission of Titus to Cor- 
 inth here referred to, is not that mentioned in chap. 8, wliich 
 was not yet accomplished, but that mentioned in chap. 7, de- 
 signed to ascertain the effect produced by Paul's previous 
 letter. In the same .ynrit / either the same inward disi)0si- 
 tion of mind, or toith the same Holy Spirit, i. e. imbued and 
 guided by the same divine agent, who controls the conduct 
 of the jjcople of God. Jn the same ste^^s. VvluI and his mes- 
 sengers walked in the same footsteps. That is, they all fol- 
 lowed Christ, whose steps mark the way in which his followers 
 are to tread. 
 
 19. Again, think ye that we excuse ourselves unto 
 you ? we speak before God in Christ : but (we do) all 
 things, dearly beloved, for your edifying. 
 
 There were two false impressions which the apostle here 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 12, 20. 295 
 
 designs to correct. First, that he felt himself uccountable to 
 the Corinthians, or that they were the judges at whose bar he 
 was defending himself Second, that his object was in any 
 respect personal or selfish. He spoke before God, not before 
 them ; for their edification, not for his own reputation. 
 
 Again think ye. Do you again think, as you have thought 
 before. Instead of TraXtv, again., the MSS. D, E, J, K read 
 iraXai^ formerly., long. This reading is adopted by the majori- 
 ty of modern editors. The sense then is, ' Ye are long of the 
 opinion,' or, ' Ye have long thought.' Comp. d iroXai i-n-iSa- 
 vcv, ichether he had been long dead., m Mark 15, 44. The 
 common reading has so much MSS. authority in its favour, 
 and it gives so good a sense, that it is generally by the older 
 editors and commentators retained. With -koXw the passage 
 is best read interrogatively. Do ye again think ? as tliey had 
 before done. See 3, 1. 5, 12. They were too much disposed 
 to think that the apostle, like the false teachers, was anxious 
 to commend himself to their favour, and to appeal to them as 
 his judges. He on more occasions than one gives them to 
 understand that he was not under their authority, his office 
 was not received from their hands, and he was not accounta- 
 ble to them for the manner in which he exercised it. See 
 1 Cor. 4, 3. Excuse ourselves unto you j vfuv, before you as 
 judges. Excuse., a.iTokcy^/ko\xo.i^ to talh oneself off., to plead^ or 
 answer for oneself. This was not the position which the 
 apostle occupied. He was not an ofiender, real or supposed, 
 arraigned at their bar. On the contrary, as he says, we speah 
 before God ; i. e. as responsible to him, and as in his presence ; 
 in Christ., i. e. as it becomes one conscious of his union with 
 the Lord Jesus. In all his self-vindication he considers liim- 
 self as a Christian speaking in the presence of God, to whom 
 alone he was, as a divinely commissioned messenger, answera- 
 ble for what he said. All things., dearly beloved., for your 
 edification. This is the second point. His apology, or self- 
 vindication, had their good, not his rej)utation or advantage, 
 for its object. 
 
 20. Por I fear, lest, when I come, I shall not find 
 yon snch as I wonld, and (that) I shall be fonnd unto 
 you snch as ye wonld not : lest (there be) debates, en- 
 vymgs, wraths, strifes, backbitings, whisperings, swell- 
 ings, tumnlts. 
 
 13* 
 
296 II. CORINTHIANS 12, 21. 
 
 He aimed at their edification, for he feared their state was 
 not what he could desire. He feared lest they would not be 
 acceptable to him, nor he to them. What he feared was that 
 the evils to which frequent reference had already been made, 
 should be found still to exist. Those evils were, tpci?, conten- 
 tions^ such as existed between the different factions into which 
 the church was divided, some saying we are of Paul, others, 
 we are of Cephas, &c., see 1 Cor. 1, 11 ; envyings^ ^^Aot, those 
 feelings of jealousy and alienation which generally attend con- 
 tentions; ^vfxoL^ outbreaks of anger ; ept^etat, cabals. The 
 word is from Ipt^og, a hireling^ and is often used of a factious 
 spirit of party ; KaraXaXiol and i//t^upto-/xoi, backbiting and whis- 
 perings, i. e. open detractions and secret calumnies ; <f)vaM(reL<s, 
 swellings, i. e. manifestations of pride and insolence ; aKarao-- 
 raa-LUL, tumults, i. e. those disorders which necessarily follow 
 the state of things above described. This is a formidable list 
 of evils, and it seems hard to reconcile what is here said with 
 the glowing description of the repentance and obedience of 
 the church found in the preceding part of this epistle, espe- 
 cially in chapter 7. To account for this discrepancy some 
 suppose, as before mentioned, that the latter part of this epis- 
 tle, from ch. 10 to the end, formed a distinct letter written at 
 a different time and under different circumstances from those 
 under which the former part was written. Others, admitting 
 that the two portions are one and the same epistle sent at the 
 «ame time, still assume that a considerable interval of time 
 elapsed between the writing of the former and latter parts of 
 the letter; and that during that interval intelligence had 
 reached the apostle that the evils prevailing in the church had 
 not been so thoroughly corrected as he had hoped. The 
 common and sufficient explanation of the difficulty is, that 
 part of the congregation, probably the mnjority, were penitent 
 and obedient, while another part were just the o})posite. 
 When the apostle had the one class in view he used the lan- 
 guage of commendation ; when the other, the language of 
 censure. Examples of this kind are abundant in his epistles. 
 The first part of his first epistle to the Corinthians is full of 
 the strongest ex[)ressions of praise, but in what follows severe 
 re2>roof fills most of its pages. 
 
 21. (And) lest, Avhcn I come again, my God will 
 humble me among you, and (that) I shall bewail many 
 
II. CORINTPIIANS 12, 21. 297 
 
 which have sinned already, and have not repented of 
 the uncleanness, and fornication, and lasciviousness, 
 which they have committed. 
 
 The same apprehension expressed under a different form. 
 The word again may belong to co^ning^ "me coming again;" 
 or with will humble^ " God will humble me again." This im- 
 plies that during his second unrecorded visit, Paul was humbled 
 by what he saw in Corinth, and grieved, as he says, 2, 1, in 
 having to use severity in suppressing prevalent disorders. He 
 feared lest his third should prove like that painful second 
 visit. The more obvious and natural connection, however, of 
 iraXiv is with eA^oVra, as in our version. ' Lest God will hum- 
 ble me when I come again.' Nothing filled the apostles with 
 greater delight than to see the churches of their care stead- 
 fast in faith and in obedience to the truth ; and nothing so 
 pained and humbled them as the departure of their disciples 
 from the j^aths of truth and holiness. Humble me among 
 you / TTpos v/xtt?, in relation to you. 
 
 And that I shall bewail^ Trev^rjo-oi. The word TrevSio) is 
 here used transitively ; to mourn any one, to grieve for him. 
 Many suppose that the sorrow here intended was that which 
 arises from the necessity of punishing ; so that the idea really 
 intended is, ' I fear I shall have to discipline (or excommuni- 
 cate) some, <fcc.' But this, to say the least, is not necessary. 
 All that the words or context requires is, that Paul dreaded 
 having to mourn over many impenitent members of the 
 church. Many lohich have sinned already and have not re- 
 2)ented^ ttoXXovs tCjv TrporjfjiapTrjKOTOiv kol /xtj /xcTavor/crai/Tcov, many 
 of those 2cho having sinned shall 7iot have repented. The irpo 
 in 7rpor]ixapTy]K6TO)v is probably not to be pressed, so as to make 
 the word refer to those who had sinned before some specific 
 time, — as their profession of Christianity, or Paul's previous 
 visit. The force of the preposition is sufficiently expressed by 
 the Avord heretofore. 'Those who have heretofore sinned.' 
 What Paul feared, was, that when he got to Corinth he should 
 find that many of those who had sinned, had not joined in the 
 repentance for which he commended the congregation as a 
 v/hole. Of the imclean7iess^ <£c., which they committed. Ac- 
 cording to Meyer, eVl t^ aKa^apo-ta, K.r.\.., are to be connected 
 with Trei/^rjo-w, ' I shall lament many on account of the unclean- 
 ness, &c.' The position of the words is evidently in favour 
 of the common construction. ' Who have not repented con- 
 
298 II. CORINTHIANS 13. 
 
 cerning the imcleanness they have committed.' The classes 
 of sms most prevalent in Corinth were those referred to in v. 
 20, arising out of the collisions of the different classes or par- 
 ties in the church ; and those here mentioned, arising out of 
 the corruptions of the age and of the community. To make 
 a holy church out of heathen, and in the midst of heathenism, 
 was impossible to any but an almighty arm. And we know 
 that in the work of sanctification of the individual or of a 
 community, even Omnipotence works gradually. The early 
 Christians were babes in Christ, much like the converts from 
 among the heathen in modern times. 
 
 CHAPTER XIII. 
 
 Threatening of punishment to impenitent offenders ; exhortation to self-ex- 
 amination and amendment ; conclusion of the epistle. 
 
 PauVs icaniings and exhortations. 
 
 Having previously admonished and warned, he now distinctly 
 announces his purpose to exercise his apostolic power in the 
 punishment of offenders, vs. 1. 2. As they sought evidence 
 of his apostleship, he would show that although weak in him- 
 self, he was invested Avith supernatural power by Clirist. As 
 Christ aj)pearcd as weak in dying, but was none the less im- 
 bued with divine power, as was proved by his resurrection 
 from the dead ; so the apostle in one sense was weak, in an- 
 other full of power, vs. 3. 4. Instead of exposing themselves 
 to this exercise of judicial authority, he exhorts them to try 
 themselves, since Christ lived in them unless they were repro- 
 bates, V. 5. He trusted that they would acknowledge him as 
 an apostle, as he sought their good, vs. G. 7. His power was 
 given, and could be exercised, only for the truth. He re- 
 joiced in his own weakness and in the prosperity of the Co- 
 rinthians. Tlie object in thus warning them was to avoid the 
 necessity of exercising the power of judgment with which 
 Christ had invested him, vs. 8-10. Concluding exhortation 
 and benediction, vs. 11-13. 
 
II. CORIlSrTHIANS 13, 1. 299 
 
 1 . This is the third (time) I am coming to 3*011 : 
 In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every 
 word be established. 
 
 From this it is evident that Paul had already been twice 
 in Corinth. He was about to make his third visit. Those 
 who do not admit that he went to Corinth during the interval 
 between the writing the first and second epistle, say that all 
 that is proved, by this verse, is that " on«e he had been there ; 
 a second time he had intended to come ; now the third time 
 he was actually coming." Others, stiU more unnaturally, say 
 he refers to his presence by letter, as Beza explains it : Binas 
 suas epistolas pro tolidem profectionibus recenset. There is 
 no necessity for departing from the obvious meaning of the 
 words. The Acts of the Apostles do not contain a full record 
 of all the journeys, labours and suiFerings of the apostle. He 
 may have visited Corinth repeatedly without its coming with- 
 in the design of that book to mention the fact. In the mouth 
 of tico or three icitnesses^ <bc. It was expressly enjoined in 
 the Old Testament that no one should be condemned unless 
 on the testimony of two or three witnesses. Num. 35, 30. 
 Deut. 17, 6. 19, 15. In this latter passage, the very words 
 used by the apostle are to be found : " One man shall not 
 rise up against any man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any 
 sin that he sinneth ; at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the 
 mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established." 
 This principle of justice was transferred by our Lord to the 
 New Dispensation. In his directions for dealing with oftend- 
 ers he says, "Take with thee one or two more, that in the 
 mouth of two or three witnesses every word shall be estab- 
 lished," Matt. 18, 16; see also John 8, 17. Heb. 10, 28. In 
 1 Tim. 5, 19 the apostle applies the rule specially to the case 
 of elders: "Against an elder receive not an accusation, but 
 before two or three witnesses." In the judgment of God, 
 therefore, it is better that many offenders should go unpun- 
 ished through lack of testimony, than that the security of 
 reputation and life should be endangered by allowing a single 
 witness to establish a charge against any man. This principle, 
 although thus plainly and repeatedly sanctioned both in the 
 Old and New Testaments, is not held sacred in civil courts. 
 Even in criminal cases the testimony of one witness is often 
 considered sufficient to establish the guilt of an accused per- 
 son, no matter how pure his previous reputation may have 
 
300 II. CORINTHIANS 13, 2. 
 
 been. Paul here announces his determination to adhere, in 
 the administration of discipline, strictly to the rule relating to 
 testimony laid down in the ScrijDtures. There are two expla- 
 nations, however, given of this passage. Some suppose that 
 Paul merely alludes to the prescription in the Law, and says 
 that his three visits answers the spirit of the divine injunction 
 by being equivalent to the testimony of three witnesses. Tres 
 mei adventus trium testimoniorum loco erunt, says Calvin. 
 This interpretation is adopted by a great many commentators, 
 ancient and modern. But the formality w^ith which the prin- 
 ciple is announced, the importance of the principle itself, and 
 his own recognition of it elsewhere, show that he intended to 
 adhere to it in Cormth. Three visits are not the testimony 
 of three witnesses. Every icord^ ttSv p^/>ta, every accusation^ 
 a sense which, agreeably to the usage of the corresponding 
 Hebrew word, the Greek word pij/xa has here in virtue of the 
 context, as m Matt. 5, 11. 18,16. 27,14. Shall he estab- 
 lished^ i. e. legally and conclusively j^roved. 
 
 2. I told you before, and foretell you, as if I were 
 present, the second time ; and being absent now I 
 write to them which heretofore have sinned, and to all 
 other, that, if I come again, I mil not spare. 
 
 The meaning of this verse is doubtful. The words second 
 time (to Sevrepov,) may be connected with bei?!// present (ws 
 Trapw]/,) or with I foretell (TrpoXeyo)). If the former, the sense 
 may be, "I foretold (i. e. when in Corinth), and I foretell, as 
 though present the second time, although yet absent, to those 
 who heretofore have sinned, &c." If the latter connection be 
 preferred, the sense is, " I foretold you, and foretell you the 
 second time, as if present, although now absent, etc." This 
 is not consistent with the natural order of the words. Assum- 
 ing Paul to have been already twice in Corinth, the simplest 
 explanation of this verse is that given by Calvin, Meyer, 
 Riickert, and others, "I have said before, and say before, as 
 Avhen present the second time, so now when absent, to those 
 who have sinned, I will not spare." Paul gives now when 
 absent the same warning that he gave during his second visit. 
 The words irpodirov and -rrpoXiyia are combined here as in Gal. 
 5,21 and 1 Thess. 3,4. "I said before, and I forewarn." 
 TliosG loho heretofore have sinned ; Trpo-qiJiapTrjKoal, to those 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 13, 3. 301 
 
 who sinned before, not before Paul's second visit, but those 
 who heretofore have sinned, i. e. those who already stand in 
 the category of known sinners, and to all other^ i. e. to those 
 who were not thus known, who had not as yet oifended. If 
 I come again (cts to ndkcv), I will not spare, Paul had for- 
 borne long enough, and he was now determined to try the , 
 effect of discipline on those whom his arguments and exhorta--^ 
 tions failed to render obedient. From this, as well as from 
 other passages of Paul's epistles, two things are abundantly 
 manifest. First, the right of excommunication in the church. 
 It is only in established churches controlled by the state, or 
 thoroughly imbued with Erastian principles, that this right is 
 seriously questioned, or its exercise precluded. In his former 
 epistle, chap. 5, the apostle had enjoined on the Corinthians 
 the duty of casting out of their communion those who openly 
 violated the law of Christ. The second thing here rendered 
 manifest, is, that the apostle as an individual possessed the 
 right of excommunication. The apostolic churches were not 
 independent democratic communities, vested with supreme 
 authority over their own members. Paul could cast out of 
 their communion whom he would. He was indeed clothed 
 with supernatural power which enabled him to deliver offend- 
 ers " unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh," 1 Cor. 5, 5, 
 but this was not all. This presupposed the power of excom- 
 munication. It was the abihty miraculously to pimish with 
 corporeal evils those whom he cut off from the church. This 
 right to discipline, as it is not to be merged into the super- 
 natural gift just referred to, so it is not to be referred to the 
 inspiration and consequent infallibility of the apostles. The 
 apostles were infallible as teachers, but not as men or as dis- 
 ciplinarians. They received unrenewed men into the church, 
 as in the case of Simon Magus. They did not pretend to read 
 the heart, much less to be omniscient. Paul proposed to ar- 
 rive at the knowledge of offences by judicial examination. 
 He avowed his purpose to condemn no one on his own judg- 
 ment or knowledge, but only on the testimony of two or three 
 witnesses. This right to exercise discipline which Paul 
 claimed was not founded on his miraculous gifts, but on his 
 ministerial office. 
 
 3. Since ye seek a proof of Christ speaking in me, 
 Avliicli to you-ward is not weak, but is mightv in you. 
 
302 II. CORINTHIANS 13, 4. 
 
 This is part of the sentence begun in v. 2. 'I will not 
 spare since ye seek a proof of Christ speaking in me.' 01s- 
 hausen says the sense of the context is, 'Since they wished to 
 put the apostle to the test and see whether Christ was in him, 
 they had better try themselves and see whether Christ was in 
 them. If Christ was in them, they would recognize the power 
 of God in the apostle's weakness.' This supposes v. 4 to be a 
 parenthesis, and connects iirel SoKifiyjv t,r]T€LTe of y. 3, with eav 
 rov^ 8oKifxd^€T€ of V. 5. But this is arbitrary and unnatural, as 
 it is unnecessary, there being no indication of want of conti- 
 nuity in the connection. A proof of Christy may mean, 'a 
 proof which Christ gives,' or, ' a proof that Christ speaks in 
 me.' De Wette and Meyer prefer the former, on account of 
 the following, ' who is not Aveak,' which agrees better with 
 the assumjDtion that Xpto-roi) is the genitive of the subject. 
 ' Since ye seek a i:)roof or manifestation of Christ who speaks 
 in me, who is not weak.' Calvin's idea is that it was not 
 Paul, but Christ, that the Corinthians were questioning. *' It 
 is Christ who speaks in me ; when therefore you question my 
 doctrine, it is not me, but him whom you oifend." He refers 
 to Num. 16, 11, where murmuring against Moses and Aaron 
 is represented as murmuring against God. Compare also 
 Isaiah 7, 13. The common interpretation, however, is more 
 in keephig with the drift of the whole context. What the 
 iiilse teachers and their adherents denied, was Paul's apostle- 
 ship ; what they demanded was proof that Christ spoke in 
 him, or that he was a messenger of Christ. Since the evi- 
 dence which he had already given in word and deed had not 
 satisfied them, he was about to give them a proof which they 
 would find it difficult to resist. Who is not weak as concerns 
 you^ hut is mighty among you. The messenger and organ 
 of Christ was not to be rejected or offended with impunity, 
 since Christ was not weak, but powerful. His power had 
 been proved among them not only in tlie conversion of multi- 
 tudes, but by signs and wonders, and by divers manifestations 
 of omnipotence. 
 
 4. Por though he was crucifiecl through weakness, 
 yet lie Hveth by the power of God. Por we also are 
 wxak iu him, hut we shall live with him by the power 
 of God toward you. 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 13, 4. 303 
 
 Christ is divinely powerful, for thougli he died as a man, 
 he lives as God. He had a feeble human nature, but also an 
 omnipotent divine nature. So we his apostles, though in one 
 aspect weak, m another are strong. We are associated with 
 Christ both in his weakness and in his power ; in his death 
 and in his life. For though. The text is doubtful. The 
 common edition has koI yap et, for even if which the Vulgate 
 renders etsi and the English version although^ taking koX d 
 {even if) as equivalent to d Kat, if even. Many MSS. and 
 editors omit the d. The sense then is, ' For he was even cru- 
 cified through weakness.' The common text gives a clear 
 meaning, ' For even if he were crucified through weakness.' 
 The case is hypothetically presented. Through iceakness^ Ik 
 acr^€vua<s. His weakness was the cause or necessary condition 
 and evidence of his death ; not of course as im^^lying that his 
 death was not voluntary, for our Lord said he laid down his 
 life of himself; but the assumption of a weak human nature 
 liable to death, was of course necessary, in order that the 
 eternal Son of God should be capable of death. Comp. Phil. 
 2, 9. Heb. 2, 14, 15. His death, therefore, was the evidence 
 of weakness, in the sense of having a weak, or mortal nature. 
 Yet he Uveth hy the poiaer of God. The same person who 
 died, now lives. That complex person, having a perfect hu- 
 man and a true divine nature hypostatically united, rose from 
 the dead, and fives forever, and therefore can manifest the di- 
 vine power which the apostle attributed to him. The resur- 
 rection of Christ is sometimes referred to God, as in Kom. 6, 
 4. Eph. 1, 20. Phil. 2, 9 ; sometimes to himself, as in Matt. 
 26, 61. Mark 14, 58. John 2, 19. 10, 18. This is done on the 
 same princi^ile that the works of creation and providence are 
 referred sometimes to the Father and sometimes to the Son. 
 That princijjle is the miity of the divine nature, or the identity 
 of the persons of the Trinity as to essence. They are the 
 same in substance, and therefore the works ad extra of the 
 one are the works of the others also. It is not, however, the 
 fact that the resurrection of Christ was efiected by the power 
 of God, but the fact that he is now alive and clothed with 
 divine power, that the apostle urges as pertinent to his object. 
 For ice also^ &c. The connection of this clause may be with 
 the immediately preceding one, ' Christ liveth by the power 
 of God, for we live.' The life which the apostle possessed 
 and manifested being derived from Christ, was proof that 
 Christ still fived. Or the connection is with the close of the 
 
804 II. CORINTHIANS 13, 4. 
 
 preceding verse. 'Christ is powerful among yon, 1. Because 
 though he died as a man, he lives ; and 2. Because though we 
 are weak, we are strong in him.' In either way the sense is 
 substantially the same. In what sense does the apostle here 
 speak of himself as weak ? It is not a moral Aveakness, for it 
 is conditioned by his communion with Christ ; ice are iceak 
 in 1dm. It is not subjection to those sufferings which were a 
 proof of weakness and are therefore called infirmities ; be- 
 cause the context does not call for any reference to the apos- 
 tle's sufferings. Nor does it mean a weakness in the estima- 
 tion of others, i. e. that he was despised. It is obviously 
 antithetical to the strength or power of which he was a 
 partaker ; and as the power which he threatened to exercise 
 and demonstrate was the power to punish, so the weakness 
 of which he speaks was the absence of the manifestation of 
 that power. He in Christ, that is, in virtue of his fellowship 
 with Christ, was when in Corinth weak and forbearing, as 
 though he had no power to vindicate his authority ; just as 
 Christ was weak in the hands of his enemies when they led 
 him away to be crucified. But as Christ's weakness was 
 voluntary, as there rested latent in the suffering Lamb of God 
 the resources of almighty power ; so in the meek, forbearing 
 apostle was the j^lenitude of supernatural power which he de- 
 rived from his ascended master. TFe shall live icith him. 
 "Vitam," says Calvin, "opponit infirmitati: ideoque hoc 
 nomine florentem et plenum dignitatis statum intelligit." As 
 the life of Christ subsequent to his resurrection was a state in 
 which he assumed the exercise and manifestation of the power 
 inherent in him as the Son of God, so the life of which Paul 
 here speaks, was the state in which he manifested the apostolic 
 power with which he was invested. There is no reference to 
 the future or eternal life of which Paul, as a believer, was here- 
 after to partake. He is vindicating the propriety of his de- 
 nunciation of chastisement to the disobedient in Corinth. 
 Though he had been among them as weak and forbearing, 
 yet he would manifest that he was alive in the sense of having 
 j)Ower to enforce his commands. J3y the power of God. 
 Paul's i)ower was a manifestation of the power of God. It 
 was derived from God. It was not his own either in its 
 source or in its exercise. He could do notliing, as he after- 
 wards says, against the truth. Toward you ; i. e. ice shall 
 live toward you. We shall exercise our authority, or manifest 
 our apostolic life and power in relation to you. 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 13,5. 305 
 
 5. Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith ; 
 prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, 
 how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be repro- 
 bates ? 
 
 There are two links of association between tins verse ana 
 what precedes. They had been trpng the apostle, seeking 
 proof of Christ speaking in him. He tells them they had bet- 
 ter examine themselves and see whether Christ was in them. 
 Hence the antithesis between €avTov<; (yourselves) placed be- 
 fore the verb for the sake of emphasis, and 8oKt/xr)v ^T^rctre (ye 
 seek a proof, &g.) of v. 3. * Ye would prove me — prove your- 
 selves.' Another idea, however, and perhaps a more important 
 one is this, ' Ye seek a proof of Christ speaking in me, seek it 
 in yourselves. Know ye not that Christ is in you (unless you 
 be reprobates), and if he is in you, if you are really members 
 of his body, ye will know that he is in me.' The passage in 
 this view is analogous to those in which the apostle appeals to 
 the people as seals of his ministry, 1 Cor. 9, 1, and as his let- 
 ters of commendation, 3, 2. To examine and to 2^fove mean 
 the same thing. Both express the idea of trying or putting 
 to the test to ascertain the nature or character of the person 
 or thing tried. Whether ye be in the faith, that is, whether 
 you really have faith, or are Christians only in name. This 
 exhortation to self-examination supposes, on the one hand, 
 that faith is self-manifesting, that it reveals itself in the con- 
 sciousness and by its fruits ; and, on the other hand, that it 
 may exist and be genuine and yet not be knoT\Ti as true faith 
 by the believer himself. Only what is doubtful needs to be 
 determined by examination. The fact, therefore, that we are 
 commanded to examine ourselves to see whether we are in 
 the faith, proves that a true believer may doubt of his good 
 estate. In other words, it proves that assurance is not essen- 
 tial to faith. Calvin, in his antagonism to the Romish doc- 
 trine that assurance is unattainable in this life, and that all 
 claims to it are unscriptural and fanatical, draws the directly 
 opposite conclusion from this passage. Hie locus, he says, 
 valet ad probandam fidei certitudinem, quam nobis Sorbonici 
 sophistse labefactarunt, imo penitus extermiuarunt exhominum 
 animis: temeritatis damnant, quotquot persuasi sunt se esse 
 Christ! membra, et ilium habere in se manentem ; nam morali 
 quam vocant, conjectura, hoc est, sola opinioue contentos esse 
 
306 II. CORINTHIANS 13, 5. 
 
 nos jiibent, ut conscientiie perpetno snspensoe htereant ac 
 perplexa?. Quid autem hie Paulas? rcprobos esse testatur 
 quiciinqiie dubitaiit an possideant Christum, et sint ex ilhus 
 corpore. Quare sit nobis hoec sola recta fides, quae facit ut 
 tuto, neque dubia opinione, sed stabiii constantique certitudi- 
 ne, in gratia Dei acquiescamus. ElscAvhere, however, Calvin 
 teaches a different doctrine, in so far as he admits that true 
 believers are often disturbed by serious doubts and inward 
 conflicts. See his Institutes, Lib. iii. cap. ii. IV, and Lib. iv. 
 cap. xiv. 7. 8. 
 
 Knoio ye not your own selves hoio that Christ is m you. 
 This version overlooks the connecting particle r) (o>'), the force 
 of which indeed it is not easy to see. It may be that the 
 apostle designed in these w^ords to shame or to rouse them. 
 ' Examine yourselves, or are you so besotted or ignorant as 
 not to know that Christ is in you ; that some thing is to be 
 discovered by self-examination, unless ye are no Christians at 
 all.' It may, however, be a direct appeal to the consciousness 
 of his readers. ' Do you not recognize in yourselves, that is, 
 are ye not conscious, that Christ is in you.' The construction 
 in this clause is analogous to that in 1 Cor. 14, 37 and 16, 15. 
 'Know yourselves that, <fcc.,' equivalent to 'know that.' 
 Winer 63, 3. The exj^ression Christ is in you^ does not mean 
 ' Christ is among you as a people.' It refers to an hidwelling 
 of Christ in the individual believer, as is plain from such pas- 
 sages as GaL 2, 20, "Christ liveth in me," and Gal. 4, 19. 
 Rom. 8, 10. Christ dwells in his people by his Si)irit. The 
 presence of the Spirit is the presence of Christ. This is not a 
 mere figurative expression, as when we say we have a friend 
 in our heart — but a real truth. The Spirit of Christ, the Holy 
 Ghost, is in the people of God collectively and individually, 
 the ever-present source of a new kind of life, so that if any 
 man have not the Spirit of Christ he is none of his. Rom. 8, 0. 
 Unless ye he reiyrohates. The word reprobate^ in its theologi- 
 cal sense, means one who is judicially abandoned to e^•erlast- 
 ing perdition. Such is obviously not its sense here, otherwise 
 all those not now converted would perish forever. The Avord 
 is to be taken in its ordinary meaning, disapproved., nmoorthy 
 of approhation. Any person or thing which cannot stand the 
 test is dSoKt/Aos. Those therefore in Avhom Christ does not 
 dwell cannot stand the test, and are proved to be Chiistians, 
 if at all, only in name. 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 13, 6. 7. 307 
 
 6. But I trust that ye shall know that we are not 
 reprobates. 
 
 In V. 3 Paul had said that the Corinthians sought SoKifii^v 
 (evidence) that Christ was in him as an apostle. He exhorted 
 them to seek evidence that he was in them as beUevers. If 
 tliey should prove to be {aSoKL/xo^;) without evidence, he was 
 satisfied that they would find that he was not dSo/ct/xos. The 
 SoKifxyj (or evidence) of Christ speakmg in him which he pro- 
 ijDosed or threatened to give, was the exercise of the apostolic 
 power which resulted from the indwelling of Christ, and there- 
 fore proved his presence. He was loath, however, to give 
 that evidence ; he would rather be (dSoKi/xos) without that 
 evidence ; and he therefore adds, 
 
 7. Now I pray to God that ye do no evil; not that 
 we should appear approved, but that ye should do that 
 which is honest, though we be as reprobates. 
 
 JVoio I pray God that ye do no evil ; that is, I pray that 
 ye may not give occasion for me to give the evidence of Christ 
 speaking in me, which I have threatened to give, in case of 
 your continued disobedience. So far from desiring an oppor- 
 tunity of exhibiting my suj^ernatural power, I earnestly desire 
 that there may be no occasion for its exercise. The hiterpre- 
 tation which Grotius, and after him Flatt, Billroth, and others 
 give of this clause, ' I pray God that I may do you no evil,' is 
 possible so far as the words are concerned, as Troiryo-at i)/xas 
 K-ttKoV may mean either, to do you evil^ or, that you do evil. 
 But to do evil is not to punish. And had Paul intended to 
 say, ' I pray God that I may not punish you,' he certainly 
 would have chosen some more suitable expression. Besides, 
 TToiYjaai KUKov is the opposite of ivoirjTe TO Kokov {ye 7nay do 
 right) in this same verse. Not that we should arppear ap- 
 proved^ &c. This and the following clause give the reason 
 of the prayer just uttered. The negative statement of that 
 reason conies first. He did not desire their good estate for 
 the selfish reason that he might appear, i. e. stand forth ap- 
 parent, as ^oKiiLO'i (approved), as one concerning whom there 
 could be no doubt that Christ dwelt in him. There were dif- 
 ferent kinds of evidence of the validity of Paul's claims as a 
 believer and as an apostle ; his holy life and multiform labours ; 
 signs and wonders ; the apostolic power with which he was 
 
308 II. CORINTHIANS 13, 8. 
 
 clothed ; his success in preaching, or the number and charac- 
 ter of his converts. The good state of the Corinthian church 
 was therefore an evidence that he was approved, i. e. could 
 stand the test. This, however, as he says, Avas not the reason 
 why he prayed that they might do no evil. That reason, as 
 stated positively, was, that ye should do that lohich is honest. 
 That is, it was their good, and not his own recognition, that 
 he had at heart. Do ichat is honest, to KaXov TrotrJTc, that ye 
 may do the good, the beautiful, what is at once right and 
 pleasing. Though ice he as reprobates, dSoKi/xoi, without ap- 
 probation. Paul was earnestly desirous that the Corinthians 
 should do what was right, although the consequence was that 
 he should have no opportunity of giving that Soklixi^v (evi- 
 dence) of Christ speaking in him which he had threatened to 
 give, and thus, in that respect, be dSoKt/xog, icithout evidence. 
 There is such a play on words in this whole connection that 
 the sense of the passage is much plainer in the Greek than it 
 is in the English version. This view of the passage is simple 
 and suited to the connection, and is commonly adopted. 
 Calvin and others interpret it more generally and without 
 specitic reference to the connection. "Concerning myself," 
 he makes the apostle say, "I am not solicitous; I only fear 
 lest ye should offend God. I am ready to appear as repro- 
 bate, if you are free of offence. Reprobate, I mean, in the 
 judgment of men, who often reject those who are worthy of 
 special honour." This is the general sense, but the peculiar 
 colouring of the passage is thus lost. 
 
 8. For we can do nothing against the truth, but 
 for the truth. 
 
 This verse is connected Avith the last clause of the preced- 
 ing. 'We shall, in one sense, be dSoKt/xoi (without evidence) 
 if you do what is right, for we can do nothing against the 
 truth, but are powerful only for the truth,' That is, ' We can 
 exercise the apostolic and supernatural power which is the 
 evidence of Christ speaking in us, only in behalf of the truth.' 
 By the truth is not to be understood moral excellence, or rec- 
 titude — a sense indeed which the word dXiJ^cta often has when 
 antithetical to unrighteousness ; nor does it mean judicial rec- 
 titude specifically, i. e. that standard to which a judge shoukl 
 be conformed, or, as Bcngel explains it, " the exact authority 
 to be exercised over the Corinthians ; " but it means trutli in 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 13, 9. 10. 309 
 
 its religious, scriptural sense ; that revelation which God has 
 made in his word as the rule of oar faith and practice. This 
 passage is of special interest as fixing the limits of all ecclesi- 
 astical power, whether ordinary or miraculous. The decision 
 of the apostle, if against the truth, availed nothing in the sight 
 of God ; the supernatural power with which he was invested 
 forsook his arm, if raised against God's own people. The 
 promise of our Lord, that what the church binds on earth 
 shall be bound in heaven, is limited by the condition that her 
 decisions be in accordance with the truth. The doctrine of 
 the extreme Romish party that acts of discipline are effectual 
 in cutting off from the true church and the communion of 
 God, even clave errante^ i. e. when the church errs in her 
 knowledge of the facts, is utterly inconsistent with Paul's 
 doctrine. He claimed no such power. 
 
 9. For we are glad, when we are weak, and ye are 
 strong : and this also we wish, (even) yonr perfection. 
 
 If connected with the preceding clause the sense of this 
 verse is, ' AYe can act only for the truth, for we have no de- 
 sire to exercise our power to punish ; we are glad when we are 
 weak.' The meaning is better if this verse is regarded as co- 
 ordinate with verse 8, and subordinate to v. 7. ' We desire 
 that you should do right, though we appear as dSoKtjaot (with- 
 out evidence), for we are glad when we are weak.' That is, 
 we are glad when we have no occasion to exercise or manifest 
 our power to punish. This is evidently the sense in which the 
 word iceaJc is to be here taken. It does not mean weak in 
 the estimation of men, that is, despised as unworthy of respect. 
 And ye are strong^ i. e. such as cannot be overcome. They 
 were strong when they were good. Their goodness was a 
 sure protection from the disciplinary power of the apostle. 
 This also tee wish^ viz. your ]y€,rfection. That is, we are not 
 only glad when you are strong, but we pray for your complete 
 establishment. Perfection^ KaTdpTicn<;^ from KarapTi^w, in the 
 sense to put in complete order. Paul prayed that they might 
 be perfectly restored from the state of confusion, contention, 
 and evil into which they had fallen. 
 
 10. Therefore I write these things being absent, 
 
310 II. CORINTHIANS 13, 10. 
 
 lest being present I should use sharpness, according to 
 the poAver which the Lord hath given me to edification, 
 and not to destruction. 
 
 Therefore^ i. e. because I desire your good, and because I 
 prefer to appear dSoKi/xo?, loitliout ^JToof^ so far as the proof of 
 my apostleship consists in the exercise of my power to punisii. 
 This is the reason Avhy the apostle wrote these exhortations 
 and warnings, lest being prese7it I should use sharjmess, i. a. 
 be obhged to exercise severity in dealing with ofienders. 
 The expression is ttTroro/xoos xPW^H-"-'-f where vixlv must be sup- 
 plied, 'lest I should use you sharply.' According to the 
 power. The word is e^ofcrtav, which includes the ideas of 
 abihty and authority or right. Paul was invested both with 
 the authority to punish ofienders and with the power to carry 
 his judgments into efiect. W7iich the Lord hath given me. 
 His autliority Avas not self-assumed, and his power was not 
 derived from himself. They were the gifts of the Lord, the 
 only source of either in the church. The Lord is of course 
 Christ, whose divine power and omnipresence are taken for 
 granted. Paul everywhere as much assumes that the Lord 
 Jesus is invested with divine attributes and entitled to divine 
 worship, as God himself. Nothing can be more foreign to 
 the whole spirit of the New Testament than tlie idea, that 
 Christ, having linished his work on earth as a teacher and 
 witness, has passed away so as to be no longer present with 
 his people. The whole Scriptui-es, on the contrary, assume 
 that he is everywhere present in knowledge and power, the 
 source of all grace, strength and consolation, the object of the 
 rehgious aftections, and of the acts of religious worship. For 
 edification^ and not for destruction. This not only expresses 
 the design witli which Paul was invested and endowed with 
 apostohc i^ower, but it teaches that the j^ower itself could be 
 exercised only for good. Christ would not sanction an unjust 
 decision, or clothe the arm of man with supernatural power to 
 inflict unmerited punishment. The apostles could not strike 
 a saint with blindness nor deliver a child of God unto Satan. 
 The church and its ministers are in the same ])redicament still. 
 They are powerful only for good. Their mistaken decisions 
 or unrighteous judgments are of no avail. They affect the 
 standing of the true believer in the sight of God no more 
 than the judgments of the Jewish synagogues when they cast 
 out the early disciples as evil. Truth and holhiess are a sure 
 
II. coRlNTiiiAisrs m, n. sii 
 
 defence against all ecclesiastical power. Ko one can harm ns, 
 ifwc be followers of that which is good. 1 Peter o, 13. 
 
 11. Finally, brethren, farcvv'ell. Be perfect, be of 
 good comfort, be of one mind, live in peace ; and the 
 God of love and peace shall be with you. 
 
 The severe rebukes contained in the preceding chapters, 
 are softened down by the parental and apostolic tone assumed 
 \n these concluding verses. Ho addresses them as brethren, 
 members of the Ihmily of God and of the body of Christ. 
 Farewell^ x^'/'^^^j hterally, rejoice^ ^^'')joy to you. It is used 
 often in salutations, as Plail ! On accoimt of what follows it 
 is better to take it as an exhortation to spiritual joy. Mejolce^ 
 i. e. in the Lord. In Phil. 3, 1 and 4, 4 we have the same ex- 
 liortation, x^tperc Iv Kvptio. Joy in redemption, rejoicing in 
 our union and communion with the Lord is one of our highest 
 duties. Blessings so iniinite as these should not be received 
 with indiirerence. Joy is the atmosphere of heaven, and the 
 more we have of it on earth, the more heavenly shall we be 
 ui character and temper. JBe perfect^ Kapri^ecr^e, reform your- 
 selves ; correct the evils which prevail within and among you. 
 Be of good comfort^ irapaKaXua^c^ which may be rendered, 
 exhort one another. This latter interpretation is perhaps 
 preferable, because more distmct from the precedmg com- 
 mand. The exhortation to rejoice includes that to be of good 
 comfort. Be of one mind, to airb (/>poi'etrc, be united in Ihith 
 in feeling, and in object. Cognate with this is the exhorta- 
 tion, Bive in peace. One of the greatest evils prevaiimg in 
 Cormth, as we learn fi'om 1 Cor. 1, 10-12, was the contentions 
 of the various parties into which the church was divided. 
 And the God of love andpeace, i. e. God is the author of love 
 and of peace, shcdl he xclth you. The existence of love and 
 peace is the condition of the presence of the God of peace. 
 He withdraws the manifestations of his presence from the soul 
 disturbed by angry passions, and from a community torn by 
 dissensions. We have hero the familiar Christian paradox. 
 God's presence produces love and peace, and we riir.st have 
 love and peace in order to have his presence. God gives 
 what he commands. God gives, but we must cherish his 
 gifts. His agency does not supersede ours, but mingles with 
 it and becomes one with it in our consciousness. AVe work 
 . 14 
 
312 II. CORINTHIANS 13, 12. 13. 
 
 out our own salvation, wliile God works in us. Oar duty is 
 to yield ourselves to the operation of God, and to exert our 
 faculties as though the effect desired were in our own power, 
 and leave to his almighty, mystic co-operation its own gra- 
 cious office. The man with the withered hand, did some 
 thing when he stretched it forth, although the power to move 
 was divinely given. It is vain for us to pray for the presence 
 of the God of love and j^eace, unless we strive to free om* 
 hearts from all e\il passions. Shall he vnth you ; shall mani- 
 fest his presence, his glory and his love. This gives perfect 
 peace, and tills the soul with joy unspeakable and full of glory. 
 It is the restoration of the original and normal relation be- 
 tween God and the soul, and secures at once its purification 
 and blessedness. He who has the presence of God can feel 
 no want. 
 
 12. Greet one another with a holy kiss. 
 
 The kiss was the expression of fellowship and affection. 
 It was and is in the East the common mode of salutation 
 among friends. A holy kiss, is a kiss which expresses Chris- 
 tian communion and love. It was the usage in Christian as- 
 semblies for the men to kiss the minister and each other, 
 especially at the celel)ration of the Lord's supper. It did not 
 go out of use in the Western churches until about the thii-- 
 teenth century, and is still observed among some eastern 
 sects. It is not a command of perpetual obligation, as the 
 spirit of the command is that Christians should ex2:)ress their 
 mutual love in the way sanctioned by the age and community 
 in which they live. 
 
 13. All the saints salute you. 
 
 The saints^ in scrij-jtural usage, are not those who are 
 complete in glory, but believers, separated from the world, 
 consecrated to God, and inwardly pmified. This term, there- 
 fore, exj^resses the character and the relations, not of a class 
 among God's people, but of the disciples of Christ as sucl). 
 They ai-e all, if sincere, separated from the Avorld, distin- 
 guislied from men of tlie Avorld as to their objects of desire 
 and pursuit, and as to tlie rules by whicli they are governed ; 
 they arc consecrated to the service and worship of God, as a 
 holy])eople; and they are cleansed from the guilt and con- 
 
II. CORINTHIANS 13, 14. 313 
 
 trolling power of sin. They are therefore bound to live in 
 accordance with tliis character. All the saints, i. e. all those 
 in the place in which Paul then was. The communion of 
 saints includes all believers who feel themselves to be one 
 body in Christ. /Salute you, tliat is, wish you salvation, which 
 includes all good. 
 
 14. The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the 
 love of God, and the commimion of the Holy Ghost, 
 (be) with you all. Amen. 
 
 This comprehensive benediction closes the epistle. It in- 
 cludes all the benefits of redemption. First, the grace, or fa- 
 vour, of the Lord Jesus Christ. This is the theanthropical 
 designation of our blessed Saviour. It includes or indicates 
 his divine nature, he is our Lord ; his human nature, he is Je- 
 sus ; his ofiice, he is the Christ, the Messiah, the long-promised 
 Redeemer. It is the flavour, the unmerited love and all that 
 springs from it, of this divine person clothed in our nature, and 
 who as the theanthropos is invested with the ofiice of Messiah, 
 the headship over his own people and all power in heaven and 
 earth, that the apostle invokes for all his believing readers. 
 Every one feels that this is precisely what he, as a guilty, pol- 
 luted, helpless sinner, needs. If this glorious, mysteriously 
 constituted, exalted Saviour, Son of God and Son of man, 
 makes us the objects of his favour, then is our present security 
 and ultimate salvation rendered certain. The love of God. 
 In one view the love of God is the source of redemption. 
 God manifested his love in giving his Son for us, Rom. 5, 8. 
 But in another view the love of God to us is due to the grace 
 and work of Christ. That is, the manifestation of that love 
 in the pardon, sanctification and salvation of men, was con- 
 ditional on the work of Christ. We are reconciled to God 
 by the death of his Son. His death as a satisfaction for our 
 Kins was necessary in order to our being actually introduced 
 into the fellowship of God and made partakers of his love. 
 Therefore the apostle puts the grace of Christ before the love 
 of God, as, in the sense mentioned, the necessary condition of 
 its manifestation. A?id t/ie coinmunion (Koivwvta, the partici- 
 pation) of the Holy Ghost. The primary object of the death 
 of Christ was the communication of the Holy Spirit He re- 
 deemed us from the curse of the law that we might receive 
 14 
 
314 II. CORINTHIANS 13, 14. 
 
 the promise of the Spirit, Gal. 3, 13. 14. It is the gift of the 
 Holy Ghost secured in the covenant of redemption by tlio 
 doatli of Christ that applie.s to us the benefits of his mediation. 
 As tlie gift of the Spirit is secured to all the peoj^le of God, 
 tliey are Koivoivot, joint partakers, of the Holy Ghost, and 
 tliereby made one body. This is the ground of the commu- 
 nion of saints m which the church universal professes lier i^iith. 
 The distinct personality and the divinity of the Son, the 
 Father, and the Holy Spirit, to each of Avhom prayer is ad- 
 dressed, is liere taken for granted. And therefore this pas 
 sage is a clear recognition of the doctrine of the Trinity, which 
 is the fundamental doctrine of Cliristianity. For a Christian 
 is one Avho seeks and enjoys the grace of the Lord Jesus, the 
 love of Gocl, and the communion of t}u3 Holy Gliost.,;. 
 
 THE END. 
 
 1 
 
 
DATE DUE 
 
 I 
 
 mmmemiil^ 
 
 m. 
 
 PNINTCOINUa A. 
 

 \^ 
 
 p