<'¥^ J^^ 6^ LIBRARY OF THE Theological Seminary, PRINCETON, N. J. BS 413 .B58 V.23 Billroth, Gustav, 1808-1836. A commentary on the Epistles of Paul to the Corinthians A TVIE BIBLICAL CABINET; OR HERMENEUTICAL, EXEGETICAL, AND PHILOLOGICAL LIBRARY. VOL. XXIIL BILLROTH S COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLES OF PAUL TO THE CORINTHIANS. EDINBURGH: THOMAS CLARK, 38. GEORGE STREET; J. G. & F. raviNGTON, LONDOX ; A.Vn W. CUKRV, JITN. & CO. DUBLIN. MDCCCXXXYIII. COMMENTARY ox THE EPISTLES OF PAUL TO THE CORINTHIANS, BY DR. GUSTAV BILLROTH, LATE PROFESSOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN THE UNIVERSITY OF HALLE. TRANSLATED FROM THE GER.MAN, WITH ADDITIONAL NOTES, BY THE REV. W. LINDSAY ALEXANDER, M.A. EDINBURGH. VOL. IL EDINBURGH: THOMAS CLARK, 38. GEORGE STREET. MDCCCXXXVIII. J. TH^,.^;so^J, nuN'TEn, Mii.xn square:. { , 3.X-S 10I.0G10^> ^. , _ SECTION FOURTH. CHAP. XII — XIV. The Apostle proceeds now to give instructions respecting another subject, viz. the proper use of the gift of tongues, and to settle its relation to the other spiritual gifts. Probably on this subject also, the Corinthians had pro- posed to him certain questions. He replies, that everf/ man speaks in the Spirit who acknowledges that Jesus is the Lord ; that this acknowledgment is proof sufficient that he has i-eceived the Spirit ; but that this Spirit mani- fests himself in different ways, without thereby ceasing to be the same Spirit. Hence no gift is to be preferred to another, for the church is like a living body, to which one member is as necessary as another, although all may not receive the same honour, (xii. 1 — 31) ; consequently as unity must pervade the whole, there is need, above all things, of love, from which the spiritual gifts receive their true value ; and from this the Apostle takes occasion to describe, most impressively, the nature of love, and, es- pecially, to hold up to view its eternal duration, whereby it outlives all other gifts. Hence this is principally to be sought after, yet without despising the gift of tongues, (xiii. — xiv. 1.) Among the spiritual gifts, those are the most eminent which, under all circumstances, tend to VOL. If. B '2 CHAP. XII. VERSE J . the edification of the Church, inasmuch as their utteran- ces are intelligible of themselves, and need no interpreter. This, however, is not the case with such, for instance, as the gift of tongues, and, consequently, this is to he exer- cised with a regard to circumstances, (xiv. 2—21.) The Apostle proceeds to give more particular directions as to their conduct when they meet together ; and especially impresses on them the necessity of every thing being conducted according to the place it occupies, and decrees that the women shall be silent in the church, (26 — 40.) CHAPTER XII. J. Il£5/ oi roov 'rvs'jfjLccTizojv. — By some, the genitive here is regarded as masculine, by others as neuter. In itself, this is a matter of no importance, where all are unanimous as to the meaning of the passage. Almost all regard ra ci/jo/xar/^icc as equivalent to tcc ')(aoi(!ixara, the spiritual gifts in general, (of which the writer is about to speak), and o/ rrn-jiMarrKoi of those endowed with tliem. But Heydenreich justly remarks, that the word ■-rvi-o'j.a-r/.og here is used in quite a special meaning, and denotes one who speaks with tongues, (see ver. 10) ; for in this section, it is o?i/g so used, as in ch. xiv. 1 and 37 ; where the ■~viv/y,(XTr/.6g is 0})posed to the 'TToo^yittic, the 'rrvrjij^ari/td to the rrpoipririja, which could not be the case, were •rvrjfji,. to be taken in that general meaning, inasmuch as prophecy is itself reckoned by the apostle among the spiritual gifts. Moreover, the proper object of the apostle in this section, is to speak concerning the gift of tongues, and he is led to refer in the general, to other gifts of the Spirit, only that he may shov.- CHAP. XII. VERSES 1 — 2. 3 tliat the gift of tongues is neither the only, nor the most excellent gift. In thus using the word rrvvoij.. in this special meaning, the apostle probably followed intentionally the mode of expression common among the Corinthians, who seem to have over-estimated the gift of tongues, and consequently may have re- stricted the title cri/gu/xar/xo/ to those who were endow- ed with it. Unless we adopt this interpretation, it will not be easy, as we shall presently see, to trace clearly and connectedly the whole course of Paul's argument. — If it be asked noiv, whether the genitive here be masc. or neut., it may be replied, that (as both words are used in the passages referred to, and consequently a free choice is left to us), it is more probable that Paul had the neut. in his mind, a con- clusion which is favoured by the analogy of the other sections, all of which are introduced with remarks on things, and not on jicrsons^ (comp. v. 1 ; vii. 1 ; viii, 2. The proper connection here seems to be only this : I Avill not withhold from you my opinion re- specting the gift of tongues. To instruct you re- specting it, 1 need only recal to your recollection the time when ye were yet heathens. Ye know, that then when ye allowed yourselves to be carried to dumb idols, ye perceived no effect produced by them on their worshippers. As they themselves were dumb, so also their devotees remained, nor out of any of them did the Spirit speak. Here then is the essen- tial difference between that time and this ; wherefore I say unto you, that every man who acknowledges 4 CHAP. XII. VERSES 2, 3. Jesus as the Christ, speaks by the impulse of the Holy Spirit, (not those only who speak with tongues) ; hut this Spirit manifests himself in various waj^s and )>y various gifts, all of which, nevertheless, are the gifts of the one Spirit — The other interpretations, those for instance, which introduce true and false prophets, and the distinction between them into the context, are so very unsatisfactory, that it is not worth Avhile so much as to refer to them. Let us proceed therefore, to consider the expressions in detail. o'ldc/.r- oTi Ur^ rjn. — The best reading, and that from which the others on and oti ots appear to have sprung, to which also the preference in point of diffi- culty must be assigned, and which furnishes the most suitable meaning, provided it be correctly understood, is o/'dars on Ui^rj ^rs. The expression o'Id. ors is a brevi- loquence, as when we say in English, " Ye know w ell when such and such a tiling happened," for " ye re- member the iiiii' ichen it happened." Paul seeks to remind the Corinthians not so much of the fact that they had been heathens, as of their then condition, compared with their present. — w? oi]/ riysffdi. — How ye were completely led. This is expressive of arbitrari- ness and fortuitousness, as they had not then the de- finite criterion which he immediately names. 3. A/0 ym^i^oj v/jlTv ztX. — Wherefore, (since ye remember that time), ye will perceive that I utter truth, when I say that as no man who speaks in the Spirit execrates Jesus, (determinately denies him), so conversely ever?/ one, who really acknowledges Jesus, speaks in the Spirit. The whole emphasis lies in the CHAP. XII. VERSES 3, 4. 6 latter half of tlie verse, and this I have endeavoured to show, by inserting an as in the former half. Paul reasons thus : With the same justice with which you conclude, that no man who is influenced by the Spirit of God, execrates Jesus, do I conclude that the ac- knowledgment by any one of Jesus as the Lord, is proof enough that he speaks in the Spirit of God. The same thing is affirmed, 1 John iv. 2, 3. It is not without reason, that Paul uses 'Iviffovv here, and not X^iffTov, because the point of importance was the acknowledgment that that particular individual who bore the name of Jesus, had come in the flesh as the Son of God. It is, moreover, to be observed, that the iJ-r/cTv Tt-j^iov does not refer to a particular declara- tion, but to a continued avowal, (See Notes on 1. 2), as is clear from its opposite "kiyziv ava^s/za, whicli expression does not refer to the mere verbal execra- tion of Jesus by itself, but to this as a mark of the stedfast rejection of him, and is synonymous with (3Xaff!priixs?j in Acts xxvi. 11. 4. Aiai^sGiig ds ^a^iff/j^druv s/V/, to ds avrb 'Tvsvfxu, — The ds has in both cases the same reference, for the clause TO d; auTo 'zvsv/xa, is only a repetition of what was introduced into the third verse, that all the gifts of the Spirit, however different they might be, have one and the same source. As to the nature of the •^aoia/^aTa it may be ob- served, that the word ^doi(r>j.a is applied in general by the apostle to any blessing enjoyed by the Christian as the gift of God's grace (see vii. 7.) ; in this section, however, it has a more restricted 6 CHAP. XII. VERSES 4 — 6. meaning, which Neander (p. 113.) thus explains: — " The predominating talent or capabilitj^ of each in- dividual, by which he exhibited the power and the working of the Holy Spirit that inspired him, whether that capability were something immediately communicated to him by the Holy Spirit, or were only a talent which he possessed before his conver- sion, but which had been anew quickened, conse- crated, and elevated through the new life-principle, and thereby rendered subservient to one common (ai]d that the highest) object — the advancing of the kingdom of God or the church of Christ both out- wardly and inwardly." Neander further correctly distinguishes between different forms in which this agency of the Holy Spirit was manifested in indivi- duals ; the two kinds of which have been already hinted at in the above quotation. To the former belong the dvvdfMic, the /a/^ara, the ysvrj yXucrauiv, &c. ; to the latter again the Xoyog (To^/ac, yvujffiuc^ the -/.vS'iovriffic, &c. The former includes what may be called the miraculous charismata, and is, as regards both exegesis and dogmatic, the more difficult of the two. 5, 6. '/.ai oiaip'sffiig btaxovicov ii6i, Kai 6 ahrog xvoiog' Kui biatoi6iig h Traffiv. — It would seem as if in these two divisions, taken together with the first biatosffsig yaiisij^aTw^ there were set forth three mem- bers corresponding to those enumerated in ver. 7 — 11. For there can be no doubt that Paul from verse 8 forms three principal divisions with subdivisions, as Beza has already correctly remarked. The former are introduced by w f^sv ver. 8, srs^uj ds ver. 9, and st'sum bs ver. 10, while the subdivisions are always indicated by a'AAu) d's. We should thus have two classes of three members each. They do not, however, correspond to each other ; for although we may take the Xoyog j according to the advantage which the church could derive from it, secundicin (Winer, p. 343, d), not as T^v Tovruv -TT'/iyrtV. tu ycc^ aura. 'i(P'/) ^o^yiyvir^at xx) -Trotoa, rou "^av- ayiou TViufiCKTos, y.tti 'Tfo.^a. tow xv^iou, xui Ta^x to^ Sso? xcit Ta- r^os. rot. avTo. yeco ^^et^iff/Axrci xet) ^laxoviag xou Ivt^y^/iaTee. Toe.o;/oc 6o(piag and the Xo-yog /vwcTsw; were probably subordinate modes of the general yjLo^\Gij.aL hhaszaXiag (see ver. 28, r^lrov didaffx.dXoug) the former denoting a more practical, the latter a more theoretical mode of instructing, (Neander, p. 120.) If this be cor- rect, the ffo^'ia is chiefly exemplified in the parables of Jesus, the paraenetical parts of the apostolic epistles, &c. ; the yvcosig, on the other hand, in the gospel according to John, especially in its commence- ment, in many parts of Paul's epistles, especially that to the Romans, &c.* — xara ro avrb TrtsD/xa. — Some * [I cannot agree with the author in the supposition that any of the gifts of the Spirit, here spoken of, were other than mi- raculous. The whole tenor of the apostle's reasoning, as well as the general doctrine of the New Testament respecting spiritual gifts, seems to require that so arbitrary a distinction should not be made in this place. Nor can I accord in Dr. Billroth's explanation of these two charismata. The usage of the word ffo(piet, by the apostle, in this and other of his epistles, e. g. i. 6, 7 ; Eph. iii. 10, &c., requires that we should under- stand by it ihe revealed truth of God. The koyos ffo tote fiiv (rv/i(iai~ vovriuv, vvv Ti ou ytVOfAifUV* CHAP. XII. VERSES 9, 10. 21 miracle is employed, (in this case the object remains still only external to it,) but we must also unfold what it is, (z. e. the idea of it), which is what Olshau- sen seems to refer to, in the second of the above mentioned four essays, when he expresses a wish to have this charisma " construed." We pass on, therefore, to the third theory of this subject, which Bleek follows, and of which Olshausen says, that, " taken on the whole, it is the right one." III. yXoiSSai are peculiar expressions belonging to a language or dialect not in common use, and there- fore not known to all, but of which the poets, or those speaking under the influence of inspiration, might make use. (Bleek, Abh. I. p. 32). To this view of the subject Herder and De Wette had previously given their suffrage. The latter, in a note to his translation of this part of the Bible, explains the word thus " unusual, outlandish, obscure, enigmati- cal expressions," and that as well in his first edition of 1814, as in his second of 1832. With regard to this explanation, it is to be ob- served, in the first place, that it is strongly supported by the usage of the word y\Z)6 Ss ovx. irt Itti, tu filv TontZroc yXutrffeti xaXovai. ^ ei'pra.v Ti ovofi,ei itrriv >j xv^iov, ^ ykaJTra, v fjiiTa.uvxi yXurras ladXovv, u$ 'A^iyro- •^ De Pyth. Orac. c. 24, Reisk. vii. p. G02 : upXuv l\ [o Ssoj] ruv ^^ncfAuv 'i.a,) vri^uvov a,ofioZ,ofjt,ivo$. 24 CHAP. XII. VERSES 9, 10. supernatural? Can we find in them an operation and a token of the Holy Ghost as received by men ? In and by itself certainly not, just as little as the fa- culty of connected discourse in a foreign tongue could in and by itself have been regarded in this light, or as the gift of effecting cures furnished in and by itself a sure proof that the person by whom it was exercised had received the Holy Spirit. But when a believer made use of a language^ as decided- ly diflferent from that of common life, as the highly - poetic language of the lyric poets was from that of simple prose, and, when from his natural gifts and previous education, no such style of speaking as that employed by him — no use of the lingua secretior, as Quinctilian terms it — could have been expected ; then must this have of necessity appeared as something supernatural, and as the effect of that miraculous in- spiration by which they saw themselves in general influenced. When, moreover, all their discourses were on religious subjects, when in all they proclaimed the praise of God who had proved so gracious to them, and of the Saviour through whom that grace was ex- tended to them, as well as the blessedness they had found in believing on him, — how could any one fail to find in such a yXoJffsocig XaXiTv an effect of the Spi- rit whom the Lord had promised to send to his peo- ple ? And why should it seem strange to us that this Spirit should manifest himself in the converts first and most obviously by such an inspired decla- ration of their religious experience ?" Captivating as these words are, we cannot, never- CHAP. XII. VERSES 9, 10. 25 theless, suppress a few scruples and doubts. With- out insisting upon the circumstance, that, on the the- ory of Bleek, respecting yXoKrcra/, it is not easy to explain the use of the singular yXoJffffp XocXsTv,^ or on the incompatibility of this theory with the use of the adjective zaivai in Mark, we pass on to the principal objection. This lies in the fact that the simple meaning of the passage in Mark, and expressly of the second chapter of the Acts, always forces upon us the idea of a foreign tongue, and that this alone, apart from preconceived opinions, can be brought out of them. This seems to have been perceived by Olshausen also, and indeed to have called forth his strictures on Bleek. With respect to the passage in Mark, every one must feel how very unsuitable and out of place it would be to suppose that Christ, just before his departure from the world, and when, con- sequently, all his discourses were peculiarly elevated and solemn, should have said, " They that believe in me shall employ in their discourses obsolete, out- landish, unusual, and highly-poetical expressions." That, surely, could hardly be a charisma — at any rate such a charisma as to be worthy of being named along with the rest, which showed forth signs, and wonders, and the power of the Spirit over nature. Still more inappropriate is this theory to Acts ii. Let us take the words simply, just as they stand : — " Bleek saw this himself, and compares Xi^is yXucrtrnf/.xTixii, but as Olshausen has rightly observed, this latter expression is quite of another kind TXa/a-a-x, as a collective for a dis- course interspersed with yXuffirai, is and remains harsh. 26 CHAP. XII. VERSES 9, 10. Tsvo/xsvYjg 65 7r,g cpmr,i ravT'/jC, (TL/t^XSg to -rXJiSoc, xa/ G'jviy^-j^rj, or/ 7J-/.ovov iig sxaffTog Tr\ Jo/a diaXsjCTM Xakoh))- TOiv uhrm. 'E^/Vravro ^2 %ai s'^av/Ma^ov, Xsyovrsg 'TtPog dXX'/jXoug' oh/i Idov Trdvrsg ovroi s/V/v o/ XaXovvrsg TaXi- \a7oi ; 'Aai 'rrug ^/xsTg dzovo/jjsv sxaffrog tt] ihia diaXs'/cruj riijjojv^ sv f\ ly-cvrr^rnxzv. That by dtdAi'/.Ttg here is to be understood language (as in xxi, 40 ; xxii. 2 ; xxvi. 14), and not what we call dialect, seems plain from what follows, where the different nations Udodoi, MT^doi Ttai ^ 'EXaiMiraij zai o'l zccroizouvrsg tyjv MscoTora/x/ay, 'lo-jdatav rs zai Ku'^'zadoyJav, Uovtov xai tyjv 'Aff/'ai/, X. r. X., are siDecified. In this passage it is impossi- ble to suppose that reference is made to discourses deliver.ed in one particular language (say the Greek)? in which case alone, however " peculiar, obscure, outlandish, obsolete, and highly-poetical expressions" could have occurred. If, therefore, we maintain in general — as Bleek himself rightly does — the identity of the yXudffai here spoken of with the rest, and es- pecially with those in this epistle, it is clear that the theory of Bleek respecting the latter will not hold.^ * The opinion which some, even of the ancients, entertain- ed, and which has been partially adopted in recent times, that the miracle was performed on the hearers, and that the XaXuv yX. spoke in his own language, but was regarded by the foreigners, with whom he came in contact, as speaking in theirs, and was thus understood by them ; is, as respects the epistles to the Corinthians, quite untenable, because, in this case, there would have been no need of an interpreter; and, what is more, the blame which the apostle lays on the too frequent use of the glosses would be quite inapplicable, as, in that case, to by far the majority of the Corinthian church the speaker would have spoken in their own tongue, (the Greek). CHAP. XII. VEKSES 9, 10. 27 Bleek himself felt that his theory would not do for the second chapter of the Acts ; but how does he remove the difficulty ? By the supposition that Luke himself was not present on the day of Pentecost at Jerusalem, and that, consequently, he had received his information by hearsay report ! Moreover, he reminds us that Luke, as a historian of antiquity, employs the oratio directa, where a modern writer would have used the indirecta. Consequently, he in- fers that we ought not to view the matter too strictly. " Luke means only to express that Jews from the most different districts were collected together on the occasion, without intending that his enumeration should be taken in detail, and every particular of it scrutinized" (p. 52). Now, suppose we grant all this [the whole of which, however, is not merely pure unsupported supposition, but utterly inconsistent with the fact of Luke's being an inspired historian, Ti\~\, it may still be asked, Are we entitled, because the form of Luke's account is not diplomatically re- gular, to conclude, that as regards the matter he meant to say something else than his words clearly express, when he speaks of the hearing of different tongues (didXsz-oi) ? As the matter stands, it ap- pears to me that there are only two ways possible, for neither of which, however, does Bleek venture to decide determinately : — Either we must regard the account of Luke as not only formally irregular, but also as essentially, and as regards the subject-matter, modified by a mythus or tradition, (If this were ad- missible, and if along with it were to be taken the 28 CHAP. Xn. VERSES 9, 10. position that the yXo^caai in the epistles to the Co- rinthians are to be explained independently of the account in the Acts, we should in some respects at least be entitled to adopt, with regard to the former, the interpretation of Bleek given above under No. III., as we should thereby set aside the strongest objections against it which arise from the supposed identity of the yXiasaai in the Acts and in Corinthi- ans) ; or we must admit that in the explanation of yXwcca/ the idea oi foreign, outlandish tongues must have a place. But it may be asked, have we not already under No. II. adduced reasons sufficient against the ex- planation foreign tongues ? Certainly, and these are tenable enough. So far, therefore, must the matter remain undecided, since none of the three interpre- tations is free of difficulties. It is possible, how- ever, to find an expedient by which, on the one liand, the idea of foreign tongues may receive jus- tice, and, on the other, the objections adduced under No. II. be evaded. At the same time, we do not profess to adduce in what follows convincing evi- dence, so as to compel general accordance, but only in re paetie conclamata to advance a few remarks of a kind similar to those offered by others. Olshausen has admitted, (in the second of the treatises above referred to) that the speaking in glosses was a speaking in an elevated poetical strain, but he, on the other hand, supposes also, that it at times rose to be actuall}^ a speaking in foreign tongues. This took place, he imagines, when persons CHAP. XII. VERSES 9, ] 0. 29 were present who understood the respective tongues. Bleek objects to this latter supposition, that in Acts ii. 4, the disciples are said to have begun to speak sTioai; yXojGffuic, while as yet there were no foreigners with them ; but this may be obviated by the consi- deration that this statement is introduced by antici- pation in the narrative. We have here, therefore, two distinct formal modes of XaXsTv yXoJffcaig, the one that which Bleek has suggested, the other that which the older theologiens deemed the only one. We have thus the two congenial interpretations No. II. and No. III. united, though only outwardly. Olshausen says he advances a step beyond Bleek ; we go a step beyond Olshausen. We dis- pense with the supposition of the actual bodily pre- sence of persons of foreign nations, as a condition, if we may so speak, of too medical a cast. The spirit of Christianity places all nations in a relation of a lofty and spiritual kind. It is of the essence of this religion to penetrate all people, and to unite them in one spiritual whole. The significant type of this universality of Christianity was the miraculous yXwcca/s XakzTv. It was a speaking in a language, which in a certain degree comprehended the ele- ments (rcc (STOfxiTa) or rudiments of the various actually historical tongues. This second elementary tongue, as it were, (we call it second to distinguish from the first ante -historical original tongue) sustains the same relation to the actually historical tongues of the later Christian nations, as the original form of Christianity itself, with its signs and wonders, to 30 CHAP. XII. VERSES 9, 10. the forms which were afterwards developed in the different national churches. In this way of viewing the matter, justice is done to the philological part of the question, without its being carried too far. As regards the relation of the Christian usage of the term y\u(j6a, to that of the Greek and Roman profane writers in the passages above quoted, we may readily imagine, that for a new thing, and one peculiar to themselves, the old appellation of what was allied to it would occur. So it was with the most of the peculiar notions of Chris- tianity, such, for instance, as bizaioG-jvyj, Xoyog, &c. the terms designating which, were borrowed partly from the Jewish and partly from the Grecian philo- sophy and theologj^ As no one, however, in inves- tigating these, feels himself called upon to rest his exegesis upon an inquiry as to whether and in what sense these words were used by the Greeks and Jews, as well as whether they were transferred from them to the Christians, but aims at the higher object of unfolding the peculiar re-formation of these no- tions in Christianity, so in like manner with the glosses. The y\Z)Ssa. of the New Testament is like that of the Greeks and Romans, a " lingua secre- tior," but not identical with it. This view enables us, farther, easily to explain why the singular yXojssa and the plural yXuGGai should be used promiscuously for one and the same thing. The new language was, on the one hand, a definite language, the characteristic of which was, that it was a mixed language ; and, on the other hand, the CHAP. XII. VERSES 9, 10, 31 various languages of which it was formed might be regarded separately, and by themselves, which would lead to the use of the plural. By this also may we explain the phrase yhyi y\(ji(smv. Neander's explana- tion (p. 118. note) : "Inasmuch as from this state of mind [into which those who spoke with tongues were thrown] different modes of religious exercises, — as the 'rr^ooi'jyjG^ai and the 4'a/.>.£/y are different — might result, so we have the plural form yXoi66c/.i, and the phrase yhri yXwcrcrwv," appears to me less tenable.^ * [Neander thinks that those who spoke with tongues were in such a state of mind that they were entirely abstracted from all regard to the world around thein> and were concerned only with the relation of their own mind to God. " The soul," says he, " was immersed in devotion and prayer. Hence sup- plication, singing the divine praise, and shewing forth the great deeds of God, were peculiai-ly appropriate to this state." Somewhat of a similar notion seems to be entertained by all his countrymen, who allow that there was any thing super- natural in the speaking with tongues ; and to the prevalence of this notion is, in a great measure, to be traced their endea- vours to represent this gift as something else than the mira- culous acquisition of a foreign language. So long as it is imagined that the exercise of this gifc was accompanied with a suspension of the individual's ordinary faculties, there will be a necessary inclination to account for the phenomena in some way less obvious at first sight, and more connected with the individual's own private advantage, than the common in- terpretation furnishes. This supposition, however, is perfectly gratuitous ; it is supported by no evidence either from the New Testament or from the nature of the case. On the con- trary, we should rather be inclined to suppose that, as this gift could be so easily abused, the power of exercising it was -32 CHAP. XII. VERSES 9, 10. From this development of the notion of XccXsTv y^ojcffatc, it is easy to see what is intended by the sofirjveia yXuffffuv. Under the influence which pro- duced the former charisma, the vovg, the conscious- more under the control of the individual possessing it, than any of the other gifts. In fact, it seems to have been a per- manent faculty of the individual, which he could use accord- ing to his own discretion, and to have been miraculous only in the mode of its acquisition in the first instance. With this impression, the most natural interpretation is, that it consisted in the faculty of discoursing in a foreign language, which the individual using it had never learned ; and this, the most na- tural interpretation, will be found also, it is apprehended, the most correct. Dr. Billroth has shown that when, in addition to considerations of a purely philological kind, we add those suggested by the historical circumstances of the case, we must admit that the speaking in foreign tongues formed a part, at least, of this charisma, and he has not indistinctly intimated that, could the difficulties which he has stated as pressing upon the ancient view of the subject, be removed, that view would be to be preferred. Now, what are these difficulties ? The first relates to the order of the narrative in Actsii., which Dr. B. thinks inexplicable or irreconcileable with the suppo- sition that the apostles all spoke connected discourses in a foreign tongue ; for, if they spoke in regular succession, how could the Jews suppose that they were intoxicated, and that they all spoke in regular discourse at the same time, he deems inconceivable. But why inconceiveable ? The multitude around them were conversing in all the variety of tongues belonging to the different parts of the world from which they had come ; and it seems only natural that the disciples should address the mixed mass, each in that language which he had re- ceived, so as that a// should hear the wonderful truths they had to communicate. This simultaneous address of a number of per- sons speaking different languages would produce no confusion CHAP. XII. VERSES 9, 10. 83 iiess of the speaker was entirely suspended ; he spoke cri^s^/xccr/ /jyj6-'/jPia, xiv. 2, 14, 15, 19. Paul could, consequently, in these places say, ovx avd^oj-xoig AaXiT, uXacc rtZ k<2- ohhiig ya^ d/iovn, moreover o voug either on their ov/n minds or on those of their auditors, for each speaker would understand only his own address, and the hearers would understand and listen to that address only which was in their own tongue. To an onlooker, however, to whom all the languages were strange, the speakers would have very much the appearance of men intoxicated or mad. In this way, therefore, the statement of T,uke may be easily reconciled with the supposition, that the gift of tongues was a faculty of actually speaking in a foreign language. Dr. B.'s second difficulty arises from what is said in ch. xiv. ver. 2, of this epistle ; but this presents no real difficulty, if we suppose that those who possessed this gift could exercise it when they chose; as, in that case, it is quite conceivable that the apos- tle may be here rebuking an unseasonable and ostentatious display of the gift, when no foreigners were present. As re- gards the l^f^nviix, thei'e was no need, certainly, for it, as a spi- ritual gift, to the foreigners in whose language the person who had the gift of tongues spoke, but it was needed for the sake of those who were present during his address, and who did not understand the language in which he spoke Dr. B.'s third difficulty I confess I do not understand. I can see no comparison or contrast whatever between the tongues and the voices in the verse referred to. The statement of the apostle is simply this: there are many languages in the world, and all of them are significant ; but if I do not understand them, of what ui*e is iheir significancy to me ? I can see nothing in this inconsistent with the supposition that the gift of tongues was the power of speaking foreign languages, but rather the con- trary — With regard to Dr. B.'s last difficulty, I remark, that though the apostle does not expressly say that the gift ought never to be exercised, except when foreigners were pre- VOL. II. D 34 CHAP. XII. VERSES 9, 10. axa^-os Idriv. By a state of such exstacy, the spi- ritual life of the speaker himself might be advanced^ and so mediately, perhaps, also his efficiency for his own advantage and that of the church beyond this state ; bat the proper and true use for himself and the church, could only then be reached when what he spoke in glosses was understood. If, then the Xa?^.s/i' yXwctra/g was to bring forth any advan- tage, it was necessary either that his own conscious- ness should return (xiv. 13), or that some other, to whom the gift of the understanding of these glosses belonged as his part, but who w^as not thereby thrown into an exstacy, should be present, in order that either the speaker himself, or the person last sent, this is plainly implied in the whole of his reasoning. It is further to be borne in mind that he was addressing himself to the consciences of persons who Icnew that this was the con- dition of its exercise, and that to exercise it without this was wrong. Indeed the whole of the 14th chapter is more con- nected and easily explicable, on the supposition that this con- dition was taken for granted, than if we adopt Dr. Billroth's view. The permission to two or three would thus rest on the condition that foreigners were present, and the interpretation required would be for the sake of the body of the assembly. Not more than three were to speak with tongues, as not more than three were to prophesy (ver. 29), that too much time might not be given to one class of exercises. There seems, then, no really serious difficulty in the way of the old mode of viewing this charisma ; and there can be no question as to its superiority in point of propriety and ra^ tionality to every one that has been substituted for it. Dr. B.'s own theory is far too fantastic to require serious refuta- tion. — Tr.] CHAP. XII. VERSE 12. 35 mentioned, might expomid the meaning of the other- wise unintelligible address to the hearers, (xiv. 5, 27, &c.). The hfLrivsla. yXM6(ju}\/, thus belonged to what Neander not unsuitably calls the '• receptive or critical powers." 12. In what follows, the apostle, in order to show more clearly that in the church different spiritual gifts were requisite, and, consequently, that no one should esteem himself above another on account of his peculiar gift, brings in an illustration borrow- ed from the organic human body, in which, while each member has its own peculiar distinction, the good of the whole is, at the same time, and by that very means, promoted. Throughout the whole pas- sage there lies involved the notion that not the un- distinguishable, but the One, resulting from antithesis, is the only true and living. ouro} xat 6 X^icrog. — Christ is here put for the church, of which he is the head, and which he pervades with his spirit. Chrysostom : " It was to have been expected that he would have said, so also is the church, (for to this his inference relates), but in place of this he puts Christ, to elevate his discourse, and excite greater attention. For what he says is this : so also is the body of Christ which is the church ; for as the body and the head form one man, so he affirms the church and Christ to be one. Wherefore he puts Christ in place of the church, so calling his body. As then, he says, our body is one, though composed of many parts, so in the church we 36 CHAP. XII. VERSE 13. are all one ; for though it consist of many members, yet these many become one body.^ 13. sln'lovdaToi, s/Vs "EX?.'/ji/j; x. t. X. — In the church all must be alike, however different their condition may have been previous If/ : How much less then ought the necessary diversity of gifts within, the church to give occasion for strife, xa; -avnc, ug h '-vivijjcc si:oTiG&r,>j.iv — It appears, on the whole, better to read, with Lachmann, simply sV rrviviJ.a : We all have been given to di^nk of the one Spirit (as above iii. 2, ydJM u,aa; liro-iaa). The words cannot well be referred to baptism, but respect rather the fur- ther nourishment and improvement in Christianity, (see iii. 6, 7, 8,) by the Holy Spirit, who ever re- news himself within each Christian.*^ There is thus no reference, as many interpreters imagine, to the Lord's Supper alone ; but the collective means of grace and blessings of Christianity are included, by the use of which the Christian is spiritually nourished. ^ V-ov ilfTuv, ovrea xa.) h IxxXtia-iec {touto yu.^ icxoXov^ov yiv), rovro fAv ov ^Tiffiv, avT ixiivyji Ti rov X^itrrov TiBticn* ilg v\J/o; ctvayatv tov Xoyov xa) (jt,nZ,6vus rh ax^oarnv IvT^i^uv. o ^l X'eyti rovro lirriv evTu Kcii rov K^iffrov ro ffoificet, o^i^ iffriv h Ixxkfifict, xa.^oi'Zi^ ya.^ XKi tib)f/.oi. KU' xi(ptt./Lh us lif-rtv civB^u^os, ovru rviv lxxkyi(riciv xa) rov K/Jtffrov tv 'i(p*ii -TrXiiovos a.'ToXavii ti/u,)}?. xa) ol .':7/^s/. — It hopes all good of others. 8. 'H uyd'TTr} ovd's'Tors sTC-ri-Trsr s'/tb ds x.. r. a. — The worth of love is ever-during ; it is not temporal and relative ; but it is otherwise with the gifts of the Spirit, for a time is coming when no less prophecies than tongues and knowledge shall cease, retiring be- fore the approach of a more perfect state. Of the whole of this description, the foundation lies in the truth, partly that our knowledge of the individual, as such.) is only one-sided and limited (i;c /x-syoug ytv'Jj6-/.oiJ.iv), and that we approach to perfection in pro- portion as we advance in the kingdom of God ; partly that this earthly life is not the last, but that beyond it the knowledge of the Spirit shall become ever more copious and more profound. II. "On ri[x,Yiv vrjmog ■/.. r. X. — The apostle compares the present state, in its relation to that which is to come, with the state of imperfection in which the knowledge of a child is shut up, compared with that of a full-grown man. He carries forward this com- parison through this and the following verses, in or- ^ These Avords may, nevertheless, here mean, perhaps, " It covers all unrighteousness, tacendo iolerat^'''' as some of the interpreters have already proposed. 44 CHAP. XIII. VERSES 11, 12. der that he may the more impressively show the Corinthians, who over-valued the miraculous gifts, their merely relative worth. 12. 0/' sffO'TTT^ov. — De Wette translates this " by means of a mirror." It is better, however, to trans- late it, through a mirror, in the same sense in which we say in a mirror; properly considered we see through the surface to the reflected image apparently standing behind it. — b aivr/ij^an. — Adverbially used : in an enigmatical, obscure manner. This refers pro- perly not to the seeing subject, but to the object that is represented in an enigmatical manner. Chrysos- tom : — " Moreover, since the mirror presents the object seen as it happens, he has added, sv aJvly/jt^an, in order to show, in a peculiarly forcible manner, the great imperfection of our present knowledge."^ TOTS ds T^o&u-Tov <7r^og rreoffu-Trov. — Tors : orav sX^p to TsXsiov. The mode of expression, t^ogutov ,aki7. /Mvaryj^ia. — Men under- stand him not, (ovdsig dzovBi) because he has not the command of his intelligent consciousness, the vovg, which is the medium of intelligence, but only in a state of extacy produced by the Holy Spirit (h ■rvs-j/j^ari ver. 2) he speaks things, which to men are mysteries, but which God, who is the searcher of the heart, understands (y^aXiTrOi ^sGj). Comp. Rom. viii. 26, 27. 3. If we take the word olxodo/xy; here (as well as in ver. 4.) in the most general meaning, we may place a comma after it, and interpret the words Ttai ^aod- ■/.ArjGiv xai 'Traooc/xv'^iav as subdivisions. So Heyden- •jfitrrii and iX^lgy {fityUrfi would have meant that faith and hope also differed in worth among themselves)." — Gr. d. N, r._TR.] ^ [" The Vi, in 1 Cor. xiv. 1, is however: — the %hukiiv t^v ayoivfiv must not, however, keep you from the Z,n>.oZv ru !t»."— - Gr.d. N. T Tr.] VOL. II. E 50 CHAP. XIV. VERSES 3, 4. reich explains the passage : " oixodo/xri, the utiUty which his discourses possess lies in this, that he exhorts his auditors to piety and holiness (n-a^oc- •/.Xyjffig), that he alleviates their grief, rouses and esta- blishes their drooping and afflicted spirit by win- ning and pleasing addresses, while he puts them in mind of the promises of the gospel, and excites in them a good hope and assured confidence, (-raoa- fiv^ia."^ In like manner also Grotius. On the other hand Theophylact: " It (prophecy) is both of the Spirit and more useful, (than the gift of tongues) as it edifies those that are not confirmed in the faith, admonishes and excites the more remiss, and encourages the feeble-minded."^ 4. savrov o}-/.odo,(/,iT. — It may be asked, wherein does this edification consist ? Some of the ancients think that the XaXojv yXuffffuig understood himself what he said, but could not communicate it to others. But a perfect conscious intelligence is not to be supposed ; for what a man perfectly understands he can convey to others, unless he be prevented by an incapacity for speaking. That this latter was the reason why * oUahfiv, utilitas, quam sermones illlus habent, consistit nempe in eo, ut exhortetur auditores ad pietatem et sanctita- tem (5raga«X»(r/5) ; ut luctum eorum levet, animum labantem atque afflictum erigat et contirmet blanda suavique allocutione, cominonefaciens eos de promissionibus evangelii, spem bonam et exploratam fiduciam illis concitans ('^oc^afiv^ia.) ^ Ixuvn Kcti Ik ^vivfiXT6S, xa) eo^iXi/ucwri^a iodo/M7j of the XaXojv yX. seems therefore to have lain in his own state of elevation and extacy — in the vision, which, without his having a clear consciousness of what was shown to him in it, or being able to give to others a correct account of it after it was over, nevertheless elevated himself to new spiritual life.* 5. sxTog SI [JjYi hii^fMYivii)-^. — The phrase sKrhg u ixri is pleonastic ; it seems to have arisen from the circum- stance, that both hxrhg u and simply /xjj were used indifferently, like the Latin praeterqiiam ne {dum- ^ [All this Is very far-fetched and fanciful, and ends in an unnecessary mystifying of a very plain subject. The state- ment of the apostle seems to be simply this, that when a man spoke with tongues, in an assembly of persons who understood only their own mother tongue, his address might be very good, and to himself who understood it, very profitable, but for the rest of the church it was useless. There is nothing in the New Testament to lead us to suppose that any man ever was, or ever can be, edified in Christianity by such means as Dr. B. supposes. Edification is the result of an intelligent appre- hension of truth ; and would be hindered rather than advanc- ed by such extacies and visions as those supposed in the text. — Tr.] 52 CHAP. XIV. VERSES 5, 6. modo ne) interpretetur. The conjunctive (which occurs also in Lucian Diall. mort. 16) is thus less irregular than Winer (p. 243) holds it to be. The subject to dis^fji^rivsvp is unquestionably 6 XocXuv yX. for it is clear that sometimes the gift of tongues and that of interpretation, belonged to the same in- dividual, so that the vo\Jg remained no more oixaPTog' see ver. 13, and 13. There is no ground for the opinion, that the subject of this verb is some general word, such as rig- preferable to this would be the opinion that it was 6 hn^ij^rivrorric, according to the analogy of some modes of speech in the profane writers, such as ai/ayvwcsra/, viz. 6 avayvuidri^g (see Winer, p. 471) ;* but such omissions occur only with very customary forms of speech, and there is no sufficient reason for supposing any such here. 6. Chrysostom, and others with him, put emphasis in this verse upon the first person, imagining that Paul means to say, that not only would not others, but not even would he himself benefit the Corin- thians by only speaking with tongues. Heyden- reich refers to ver. 18, where the apostle certainly speaks of himself alone ; but there is nothing to re- quire us to understand the verse before us in the same way as that. For it is without doubt more na- tural to suppose, that Paul here again, as is fre- ^ [" The subject of a verb is omitted only in a few cases, such as when it is naturally and of itself understood, the pre- dicate being affirmable, in the nature of things, of only one definite subject, thus ; jSgovra (o Zivs), (retXrt^u (<5 o-akTt'yKTvs], &c."— Gr. d. N. T.—Tn.] CHAP. XIV. VERSE 6. 53 quently the case with him, uses the first person, for the sake of giving vivacity to his language, in reference to a matter which is true of all. The sense of the whole verse is thus given by Bleek (Abh. I. p. 63) : Now, however, my brethren, (since the thing is so, that the dis^/xr,viviiv is not joined with the yXdoffffatg XaXsTv) were I to come to you speak- ing with tongues, what should I profit you ? Hence, I must speak to you in revelation, or knowledge, in prophecy, or in doctrine." Bleek justly observes, that we must not be induced by the lai/ /xjj to suppose, that by the ?.uXsTv sv dcroxaXj-vj^s/ is intended a de- scription of the manner in which the XaXsTv yXwo-ca/c was to be employed in order to minister edification to the church ; for as the TPoipyirsia is always else- where co-ordinated with the Xa?.. yX. it cannot here be regarded as forming a special sort and mode of the latter. The words lav /x?? x. r. X. contain not an excep- tion to the whole sav sX^u w^sX'/jcw, but only to r/ u{jt,ag u(psXr}ffu, so that, conversely, with these latter words they form a whole, which, as a whole, is the apodosis to the protasis lav sX^w XaXuv. Further, it is to be observed (see Bleek, p. 64 ; Neander, p. 116) that the words aToxaXu-^ig and rr^o- up^a, ofMug. The yet refers not as Winer thinks to (puvriv didovra, as if the antithesis were : The dead, yet sounding instrument ; but to the whole of what is said of them thus : The dead, sound-giving instrument, though dead, may yet serve for an example. TO auXo-jfMBvov rj ro ziOaPi^o/Mvov. — The Ji here is not to be emphasized as if the meaning were : How should one distinguish between what is played on the flute and what on the harp; but the meaning of CHAP. XIV. VERSES 7, 10. 55 Paul is : One cannot understand what is meant by that which is played upon the flute or (and) upon the harp. That the words must be so taken is shown by the following verse. 9. ha Trig /XouCcrTjs. — Here yX. is unquestionably the bodily member, the instrument of speech, as re- marked above. 10. The ^ojvai are here clearly languages, as is plain from ver. 11, especially from the words d-jva/xig (meaning,) and (3dp(3u^og (a person using a foreign tongue.) The ovdsv is commonly taken for ovosig: No rational creature (Bleek) is speechless ; (if we re- tain avToov, which Lachmann omits, we must ex- plain it by dvdpoj-rrw.) But this is very harsh, nor is the meaning of the whole, as thus given, ver}?^ suit- able. I would rather, therefore, refer ovdev to what, in a grammatical point of view, lies nearest it, ysvog, thus : No one (kind of language =r no language,) is without meaning. The expression (pojvri a7Ti. ^ 'EvrctvBa, ^iixvvtriv iv auTo7s ov to ;^ct^iff/£u. -rpofftv^^'urS^oj yao J^/'»J. a"ru roivvv fAT) yXuTTti? 'i^uv xagifffAa f^ovov, uXkk xa) l^f^mtas, "va Taa-iv utpiXifAOf yivri, xa) (ayi Iv tnuvTM fioveu xa- raxXtifffis to ^ei^ifff/,u. CHAP. XIV. VERSES 13, 14. 59 tion — the one adopted by almost all the commen- tators — is required ;* and further, that a correspon- dence is thereby established between ver. 13 and ver. 15, the "r^ocgi/^o/xa/ roD 'jrvsvficcri and the -^^aXw ro5 itvibijjari of the latter corresponding to the first half of the former ; and tlie 'rrpoffsv^ofMai rui vot and the -v^aXc? rip voi to its second half. 14. rb crvsv/xd (mqu ir^o^zlyjrai., 6 ds vovg ft,ou axcc^Tog sari. — Bleek explains rh crvjD.aa [xou by ro rrv. to h I/moi the Spirit of God, who possesses the individual, and speaks out of him. This is certainly correct. The thing may be made still plainer, if we say rb 'rviv/Md fj.ou = rb 'TTViv/jLa, rb ^doifff^a, o i^oj. But it may be asked, how is this 'zviv/^a put in opposition to the vovg ? Nojc is here the self-conscious intelligent faculty in man,'' — " the faculty of unfolding to one's self or others, that which is shown by the Spirit in thoughts," Neander. This is distinguished from the TrviviMci or Spirit of God. — o vovg fioo cixao'Trog — These words, Bleek (following Theodoret, who says : — " the fruit of the speaker, is the profit of the hearers ; this he ^ At the same time, too much stress must not be laid upon this, for, as Bleek observes, the word ii);if^a^i(rTuv is used in ver. 17 in a very different meaning from what it bears in ver. 18. ^ The opinion of Usteri, that ^viv/iu here denotes not the ^a^i(rfjt,a, but is equivalent to h '4fux'^ C""^ ^"-^ lawrjjv, and that • vovi fji-ov is used of the objective sense, or matter of the thoughts r=iwfe^/ecf avrri Ki^^nTfui Xi^n ^xkiv, ^a^Qaxet vfjuv^ K'.yuv S xai Tx^iXafiev* eli^l ivrav^a ifA S<^a;^S^va/ (py](nv, aXXa ^ra^iXafiov' ^vo radra »oe,raffxiva,Z,uVj on n ouhiv oiKoB-iv iTitffa.yitv 'hi7, xa) crt fAira aTo^ii^ias rrii S/a tuiv 'i^yuv i'7fXn^ods/ia — the stand- ing number used for the designation of the apostles chosen by Christ, so that the circumstance that Judas was then dead, and Thomas at first absent, does not affect the statement. There is no need, therefore, either to bring in artificially Matthias, as Chrysostom does, or to read svdsxa. See Winer, p. 488.^ It is probably the appearance of Christ recorded in John XX. 19, that is here referred to. 6. It is very uncertain whether this refers to the same circumstance as is mentioned by Matt, xxviii. 10. As respects the number five hundred, it has been ^ [" A pleonasm of a peculiar kind is found in 1 Cor. xv. 5, u(p^'/] K>7(pa, ura Totf ^u^iKa' ot ^u'^. as the usual designation of the apostolic band is here used in that sense, just as it is said the triumviri, the decemviri, even when they were not all together. Gen. xlii. 13, which passage Bauingarteu adduces, explains nothing ; on the other hand comp. Petron. Sat. ii. : Pindarus novemque lyrici. Some Codd. and Verss. have ivhxa, an apparent correction, hut which does not, after all, make the passage right, for, on this appearance of Christ, Thomas was absent."— Gr. d. N, T Tr.] CHAP. XIV. VERSES 6, 7. 77 advanced as a difficulty, that in Acts i. 15, only one hundred and twenty disciples are mentioned : But it is not said that, on the occasion there referred to, the company that met to supply the vacancy in the num- ber of apostles comprehended the entire body of the disciples of Christ. — Of l-rai/w Chrysostom gives two interpretations, the former of which, however, viz. that it means " above, from the heavens," needs hardly be mentioned, as the latter, viz. that it means " above 500, more than 500," is unquestionably the correct one. 7. 'Iaxw/3w. — Respecting this nothing is recorded in the evangelists. It is probably James the younger that is meant, who was president of the church in Jerusalem; see Acts xv. 13; xxi. 18. The tradi- tion preserved by Jerome, of an appearance of the Lord vouchsafed to James, will not suit here, on this account, that it refers to something which hap- pened immediately after the resurrection. s/ra 7o7i a'TtodToXoig cradiv. — Some think that the 'xdvrsg here has respect to the circumstance that Thomas, who, on the first occasion, was absent, was present subsequently. Calvin, on the other hand, who follows Chrysostom ('^cav yccp xai aXkot d'XoGToXoi, uc, o't hjSdofirixovTa), says : " By all the apostles I un- derstand not only the twelve, but also the disciples on whom he had laid the office of preaching the gos- pel." No parallel passages can with certainty be re- ferred to in the gospels. 8. Without doubt this refers again to the appear- ance on his journey to Damascus ; see the note on 78 CHAP. XIV. VERSES 8 — 10. ch. ix. 1 ; and Neander, p. 77. — ^ff'Trsost toj sTtr^ojfiart. — Paul calls himself "Exr^w/xa, because he was intro- duced to his apostolic office in a violent, and conse- quently in an unnatural manner, and because he stood as far behind the other apostles as a child born prematurely does behind one that is sound, and enters the world in the usual manner. Comp. Fritzsche I. p. 60, 7wte, where also the erroneous in- terpretation vars^ov yhvTjfMcc is refuted. Moreover, the reading mgx^u rcfj, instead of uffTs^si tOj is very arbitrary, and here unnecessary, " since," as Fritzsche has remarked, " Paul, in this place, comparing him- self with the other apostles, calls himself sxr^w/xa, as if /car sjopz/jv," (comp. verse 9, 6 kXdyjfSTog, Eph. iii. 8, sfMOi ru) k\ayj6T0T^(i) ay'im'). 10. aWa 'Trioiffffors^ov. — Winer, p. 376.* — ouz, syoj dsj dXTC yj %ag/S tou ^sou ■/) cvv sfMoL — It need scarcely be remarked that here again ovx — dXXd denotes not no?i tarn — qimm, but ?io?i — sed, for Paul means to say that man could do nothing for himself, but that it is God that works in him both to will and to perform what is good. Paul, indeed, does not deny the freedom of the human will ; but this is to be proved in another way, not as a simple deduction from the use of ovx — dXXd. In like manner the pas- sage which Heydenreich quotes from Augustin (" but not I, i. e. I alone, but the grace of God with a [" uX^x does not stand here for yaf but aXka, tti^ktc. ccvrZ^ 'TTa.vruv ino'TiBcace, is the antithesis to h X°^i^^ avTou ov xivh lyir/iin, hut it has had in and through me a proper effect."" — Gr. d. N. T Tr.1 CHAP. XIV. VERSES 10 — 12. 79 me ; so that it was not the grace of God alone, nor himself alone, but the grace of God with him."*), in itself is quite true, but it will suit only, if we, with Lachmann, omit the jj before cvv Ifj^o/, for if we retain the 7) we must supply the substantive verb ovaa, and give the meaning thus : the grace of God which at- tends me, which has been communicated to me. 12. rrug Xsyoucl rivsg sv hiirj, on uvd^rafftg vskpoj)/ ovx, isrtv ; — It is asked, Who these rr/sg were ; and what they particularly held. These questions are of first rate importance for the proper interpretation of this chapter. Some have thought they were Sadducean Jewish- Christians ; but Sadduceism hardly ever spread beyond the confines of Palestine ; and, besides, Paul would have contended against the unbelief of the Sadducees in another way than he does here. As little tenable is the opinion of others, that it was hea- then frivolity and epicureanism which influenced these unbelievers in the resurrection ; had this been the case, Paul would have more sharply rebuked the Corinthians than he has done ; and, moreover, the very passage which those who hold this doctrine ad- duce in its support (^(pdyojfMiv '/.at '7:io}ix>z\i) goes directly to oppose it, as we shall more clearly shew when we come to it. Both Usteri (p. 362^ note) and Neander (p. 213—215), have opposed and confuted both of these opinions; but the view which these writers ' Non ego autem, i. e. non sohis, sed gratia del mecum : ac per hoc nee gratia dei sola, nee ipse soius, sed gratia dei cum illo. 80 CHAP. XIV. VERSES 12. have themselves expressed, [viz. that the persons here referred to were cultivated, philosophical con- verts, who were disposed to view the resurrection as purely spiritual, Tr.], though right in itself, appears to me to leave still many difficulties unsolved connected with the apostle's argumentation both as a whole, and in its individual parts. In order to place the matter in a clear light, we must take into considera- tion a fact in the history of opinion among the early Christians. That fact is the prevailing expectation among them of the immediate return of Christ, in connection with which event they expected the ful- filment of all Christ's promises, and the perfection of the Messianic reign. The peculiar aim of the Christian, therefore, was not the life before, but the life after Christ's return. But by whom would this aim be reached ? By those naturally in the first in- stance, who outlived the intervening period. Such, therefore, had comfort under all the trials of life, but how was it with those who should die before- hand ? Such a question would very naturally disquiet the minds of the believers, and take from them the joy of life. So it was with the church of Thessalonica, whose condition Pelt, in his Commentary on the epistles to that church, p. 83, thus accurately describes : " Many errors had arisen among the Thessalonians respecting the resurrection, so that some feared lest, should they or their friends die before the coming of the Lord, they should be deprived of that bless- ing which they supposed to be promised only to CHAP. XV. VERSE 12. 81 those who should be then alive."^ The same state of things, doubtless, prevailed among the Corin- thians. The majority, indeed, comforted themselves with the certain hope of a resurrection antecedent to the coming of Christ ; but some (the rtvsc, ver. 12.) had doubts respecting the resurrection itself, and consequently of any participation on the part of those already dead in the enjoyment of the coming reign. For the origin of such doubts we need not go so far as either Sadduceism or Epicureanism ; it lay in the difficulty which they felt in comprehend- ing how a corrupted body could again live. That this was in reality the case, appears from the whole of Paul's refutation of their errors ; comp. epeciallj^ the notes on ver. 35 (uXX' e^sTng) and ver. 50 (toutc Whether these doubters strengthened their hesita- tion by theories, such as we learn from 2 Tim. ii. 17, were held by Hymenaeus and Philetus, who taught that the resurrection was past already, and so, probably, that it was entirely allegorical, cannot now be accurately determined. The thing, however, is not improbable ; for as Christ himself set forth the dvdaraeig as an article of faith (see Matt. xxii. 23, ff. and the parallel passages) and so rendered it im- possible for any calling themselves his followers to deny it, those who doubted the fact of a bodily re- ^ Multi inter Thessalonicenses de resurrectione oboiti erant errores, ut nonimlli ex lis timerent, ne vel ipsi, vel amici, si ante domini adventum morerentur^ felicitate, utpole soils turn superstitibus promissa, carerent. VOL. II. G 82 CHAP. XV. VERSE 12. surrection, might explain it away as referring merely to the regeneration of every true Christian to the new spiritual life here upon earth, and, in support of this, they might perhaps appeal, as Usteri remarks, (p. 363) even to the declarations of Paul him- self (such as those in Rom. vi. 4 — 6, &c.) They perceived not that the resurrection to eternal life, which certainly takes place upon earth, is so far from excluding the eternal life of the cw/xa cri/su/Aa- riTiov, that it rather is the becoming of the latter. The great object of Paul, then, in this section is, to shew that before the return of Christ to the earth, a resurrection shall certainly take place of those who are dead, that they also may share in the blessings of his reign ; and that this shall happen within the period of an ordinary life-time.* * [" Billroth interprets this passage in a peculiar manner. He thinks that the same anxieties were excited in the minds of the Corinthians as in those of the Thessalonians, (1 Thess. iv. 15, ff.), lest those who should die before the coming of our Lord should have no share in the blessings of his reign. But, between the opinion of the Thessalonians and that of the Co- rinthians there seems to have been an essential difference. The former were in a state of ignorance, or imperfect infor- mation, respecting the fate of their dead, in relation to the advent of Christ; but they did not doubt the doctrine of the resurrection : The Corinthians, on the contrary, as well as Hymenaeus and Philetus doubted the resurrection altogether. They knew the doctrine well enough, but they esteemed it Jewish and carnal, and so believed in a pure duration of Spirit without a material covering, the union of which with the Spirit they probably regarded as a pollution of the latter. If we adopt Billroth's view, we must regard the apostle as CHAP. XV. VERSE 13. 83 13. E/ ds avuffragtg — On the ^s see Winer, p. 378.* In the preceding verse lies the thought: they say con- trary to truth that there is no resurrection. The ds is thus easily explained. On the £/' — oix sffnv (if it pursuing a course of thought not very appropriate. In that case, the remark which he introduces quite incidentally, that the dead shall rise^ but the living shall be changed, (ver. 51, 52), would have formed the centre point of the entire discourse, whereas this is occupied with the pi'oof of the general resur- rection." Ohhausen. — The opinion which Dr Billroth has expressed in the text seems to me very far-fetched and unne- cessary. Nothing further is requisite i . order to enable us to understand the design of the Apostle in this chapter than his own statement, that there were some in the Corinthian church who (from whatever cause induced) denied the doctrine of the resurrection. To confute these objectors, and to establish this doctrine on a sure basis, this oh .pter was written; and this seems to be the sole object of the discourse it contains. The idea, moreover, that Paul here fosters the notion that our Lord's return was to be within a lifetime from the period of his departure, is not only a pure assumption, but one of a very dangerous kind. If Paul taught this, he taught error, a supposition quite irreconcileable with the inspiration of his writings. It will not be easy, however, to show that any such notion either prevailed among the apostolic churches, or received any encouragement from the writings of the apostles. The few passages in which such an idea seems to be hinted at are easily explainable, on the supposition that the apostles were anxious to keep before the minds of those to whom they wrote, the truth, that the day of their departure from earth was, to them, practically, the same as the day of the Lord ; for as the one day left them so would the other find them — Tr.] * ["In the passage, 1 Cor. xv. 13, u %\ dvuffraffis mc^m x.t. X. the ^s has an adversative meaning; for, from the question 84 CHAP. XV. VERSE 13. be a non-entity) see Winer, p. 405.* As regards the reasoning here, Paul proves the resurrection of the dead, by affirming that those who denied it must also deny the resurrection of Christ ; there is no greater cause to deny the one than to deny the other. The foundation of the apostle's reasoning lies in the fact that Christ was " in all things made like unto his brethren," Heb. ii. 17. Hence, I cannot see with Usteri (p. 364.) anything strange in the fact, that Paul " should not in the least anticipate the ob- jection, that a thing may have happened to the Son of God to which mankind can lay no claim ;" for since the [human] nature of Christ is the same as that of man, no natural destiny can be attained by the one which may not also be attained by the other. This supposition of the similarity of essence be- tween Christ and his people, on which Paul builds his reasoning, has not been sufficiently kept in mind by the majority of the interpreters, and consequently the whole has been viewed too one-sidedly. Thus Chrysostom says : " The inference, that if Christ be not risen, neither shall others rise, is plain ; but what reason is there in the converse inference, that if others shall not rise, neither is he risen ? Since, then, this does not appear to be strictly logical, see how -TTui Xiyovai rtvss sa-nv, we can bring out only a nega- tive sense. If Christ be arisen, then is a resurrection of the dead certain ; bicf if there be no resurrection of the dead, thea is not Christ risen. The one necessarily sustains or overturns the other."_Gr. d. N. T.—Tr.] * [See also Bib. Cab. No. X. p. 228, note d Tr.] CHAP. XV. VERSE 13. 85 vigorously he works it, introducing first principles, and founding upon the very basis of the gospel- message, as that he was raised having died for our sins, and that he is the first fruits of them that slept. For in that he is called i\ie first fruits, of what can he be the first fruits, but of those that are raised up ? and if they are not raised up of whom he is the first fruits, how can he be the first fruits ? How then are they not raised ? and if they are not raised, for what has Christ risen ? for what did he come ? for what did he assume flesh again, if he were not about to raise up flesh ? He needed it not himself ; it was on our account. But those things he passes over for the present, and in the meantime says : If the dead rise not, neither hath Christ risen, — the one being connected closely with the other ; for if he did not intend to raise them, he would not have risen him- self. See how little by little the whole economy is subverted by such speeches, and the unbelief con- cerning the resurrection ! But, in the meantime, he says nothing of the incarnation, but only of the re- surrection ; for it was not the incarnation but the dy- ing that destroyed death, seeing it was by his having flesh that [Christ] overcame the tyranny of death."* ^ To [Aiv, roZ X^icTToZ fi^i iyi^^iVTis, f^fl^i aXXov; lyii^icrB-xi, axo- Xav^ev' TO ^l, u eiXXoi fm lyi^^uiv, fjunSi tovtov iyyiyi^Bxt, Tug «v iX°* ^oyov t^o} ovx lyei^ovrai. — Whom he hath not raised, if so be, as ye suppose, that the dead rise not. The upcc seems, as Winer remarks, p. 372, to introduce conclusions from an opponent's premises : ihsp aoa together, therefore, is exactly stquidem, and the simple si with which the Vulgate and most translators render it, is consequently incor- rect. For the rest, it is clear that in this passage the apostle has in view a complete assimilation of Christ and the dead in respect of the resurrection. This is shown also b}'^ the words of the following verse : s/ ydo vszooi oOz sysUovrai, ovde Xptcrbg sy/j- yeorai. 18. 57/ iCTS h ra7g aixccoriaig iz/xwi/ — The death of Christ for the sins of men is so closely connected with his resurrection, that if the latter had not taken place, the former would have failed of its end en-- tirely. Hence it is that Paul says : og (Iy,gov!;) era- ^ Contra Deum enim est testimonium omne, quod Deum fecisse dicit id, quod non fecit. . Si de homine falsum dicere magnum est scelus, quanto magis de Deo. Si quis regis mo- netam adulterat, gravissime punitur : quanto magis qui Dei. Miracula enim Dei moneta. 90 CHAP. XV. VERSES 18 — 20. osbodrj dta, ra 'jccoa'rru/MUTa tj/xuv 7tai Tjys^dfj diu ttiv dixaiojffiv Tjfj^uv. On this passage Riickert remarks correctly: " The sins of men were atoned for by the death of Christ, but that atonement would have been of no avail to them if they could not have be- lieved it. Now faith is produced by the resurrec- tion, and accordingly this also is necessary to the diKa/uffig, and has been prepared by God that men might be brought to the enjoyment of those bless- ings which the death of Christ has procured for them." — 0/ xoifM'r}6svTsg h XpiffrQj, — Grotius thinks that the persons referred to here are the martyrs ; but for this there is nothing in the connection ; the dis- course is rather of all who, as Christians, have died in Christ, i. e. in faith in Christ. Such would be lost if none but those who should be alive at the re- turn of the Messiah should become partakers of his kingdom. 19. If we are persons who have placed their hopes on Christ only for this life, we are to be pitied more than all men, because, to wit, we must die daily, and after all, if there be no resurrection from the dead, find that we have hoped entirely in vain. The sub- ject in h/Msv is doubtless quite general ; all Christians are meant. Why Hydenreich should take jj/asr^ 0/ f^uvrsg as the subject, and seek to find a contrast here with those already dead, I cannot perceive. 20. Chrysostom : " Having shown how many evils flow from not believing in the resurrection, he again takes up the discourse, and says. Now hath Christ been raised from the dead ; adding directly the CHAP. XV. VEKSE 20. 91 words from the dead, that he might close up the mouths of the heretics."* The vwi here again does not refer to time, but is adversative. aira^yri ruv /C£xo//x75/x£vwv. — These words the apostle adds, to indicate that the resurrection of Christ took place, not alone and for itself, but that it was only the beginning of the general resurrection. Calvin : "As the crop of the whole year was consecrated in the first fruits, so the power of Christ's resurrection is extended to us all, — unless the passage be taken more simply, that in him was tasted the first fruit of the resurrection. I rather, however, incline to re- gard the declaration in this sense, that the rest of the dead shall follow him, as the whole harvest does the first fruits, and this is confirmed by what follows."^ On a similar usage of the word acrczp;/-/^, see Rom. xi. 16, a passage which Theodoret had before his eyes when he ^^Tote on that before us, rfi oL'^a^yr, 'TrdvTug d'/.oXov&ri(fn rb ipvpoc/ji^a. Nevertheless, Paul does not seem to have had exactly the same image in his mind here. In a grammatical point of view, a Ae/^aj oVa l» rov /ah mtrTivurBai t^v avaffraviv rixrtreu a.vu ^sui x.cci iraroi — God the Father ; properly to him who is the God and Father. Comp. 2 Cor. i. 3, and other parallel passages in Wahl's Clavis, I. p. 776. or CIV xctra^yriGri %. r. X. — Here something is men- tioned which is to />rec£'£,/a, Chrysostom : ri yao slds^dsdTs^ov vsji^ov dta^pvsvrcc ;), to weakness : the body of those raised up, on the other hand, shall be in- dued with immortality, glory, power. All these points of contrast are ultimately brought together in the words (fmiQirai 6cio[La ^uy^inov, syzioirai 6oj[j^(x 'tthv- fiarr/Jv. What is subjected to earthly death is only the soul-body, the principle of natural life ; at the coming of Christ, however, it will be raised a spirit- body. Of this latter, Paul gives only, as it were, a negative representation ; he furnishes no positive conception of it, but contents himself with indicating that it is of a higher nature than the physical or na- tural body. 44. sVr/ cw^aa -^v^ixov, xai sdTi cufMcc 'TrviVfJi^ccriTtov. — These words are apparently added in defence of the use of the expression cw^aa 'Trvsv/j.arrAov in the preced- ing clause — an expression which must have naturally appeared paradoxical — in this manner: there is in fact a spiritual body as well as a natural body. Lachmann has the reading (which also Luther has followed) £/' sGTiv aojiMa •/.. r. X. Usteri also appears to have had this reading in view when he para- phrased the passage thus (p. 358) ; " If there is a (Tu/Mu -^l^v^tzov, which organisation is suited to a pre- ponderating soul-life, why should there not also be a Gufia Ti/su/^ar/xoi/ that shall be adapted to our then purely spiritual life." As regards this paraphrase CHAP. XV. VERSES 44, 45. 113 itself, it appears to me not to give the meaning of the words with sufficient strictness, as it introduces among them a " wherefore — should there not." I believe that even if we read s/' as above, the words contain nothing more than a defence of the expres- sion ffw/Aa TV., so that the meaning is : If there is a natural body (z. e. if it be correct to speak of a natural body, which you will allow), there is also a spiritual body (i. e. it is allowable to speak of a spi- ritual body). We thus also connect it well with what follows, for there we have the further defence of the expression out of the Old Testament. 45. 'EysvsTo T^MTog avdou-rog 'A^a^a s/'g -^v^rriv ^wdav. — Gen. ii. 7. Paul employs the account given in this passage of God's having breathed into Adam, whom he had formed from the dust, the breath of life, and thereby elevated him to the rank of a being endowed with a living soul, for the purpose of there- by evincing the natural principle, which was the rul- ing principle in the first man. *0 'iGyjxrag ' Aha[L i/g Tviv/Ma Z^ojottoiovv. — From the manner in which this verse begins, we might have expected to find proof of the latter part of it, as well as of the former, drawn from the Old Testament, for the ov-cjj refers not only to the expression ffojfia ■>\>vyj'A.6v, but also is intended probably to introduce the defence of the expression gojijjol tvzuij..^ This de- * Calvin is of opinion on these words, that " as it is no- where so written, this statement, it is written, must refer ex- clusively to the first clause." But how can at/Vw refer only to VOL. II. I 114 CHAP. XV. VERSE 45. fence appears, however, to be taken from the circum- stance that Adam is the anti-type of Christ ; that, consequently, what is said of the one in scripture may be applied to the other, and that such an appli- cation has, consequently.) scripture for its basis. The contrast here lies in this, that Adam possessed only natural life, and that, consequently, his body was in so far corruptible ; but that in Christ, on the contra- ry, the Spirit is the essence (comp. 2 Cor. iii. 17.) — the Spirit to which life is not communicated from without, but which itself makes to live. It may be asked, what is the object to be supplied to Jwoto/oDv ? The majority suppose other Christians. But since the apostle adds no object, the word ought certainly to be taken more generally, so as to comprehend no less the life which Christ had in himself (comp. John V. 26.), than that which is communicated to others, who have become one with him (John v. 21, y/o? o*J5 ^sXsi '(^m'jroicl). After the same manner Christ is called, (John xi. 25), t] avdsracig '/.al rj ^w;^, there, indeed, in the first instance, as the bestower of the resurrection and the life ; but he bestows this not as one bestows an earthly possession, which be- fore the gift belonged to one, and after the gift be- longs to another, but as believers are one spirit with him (o 'AoXAU};j^ii'o: rui /iu^iui h TViv/uid hriv, 1 Cor. vi. 17), they have their Hfe and their resurrection in him. Theophylact says on this passage " The first the former and less important clause, (for there is no need for proving that there was a f<.u •v^y;^;.), while it has no re- ference to the latter and more important ? CHAP, XV. VERSE 46. 115 Adam, indeed, was an animal man, i. e. had a body inhabited by animal powers; the last Adam, how- ever, the Lord, a live-giving spirit. He does not say a living spirit, but a live-giving, which is the greater of the two. For the Lord had the co-substantial co-existent holy Spirit, by whom he both quickened his own flesh, and granted to us incorruption through him. Wherefore we have the pledges of this cor- ruptible life in the first Adam^ but of that which is to come in Christ."* 46. 'AXX* oh 'jT^uTov 7t. T. X. — In order to perceive correctly the object of these words, we must keep in view what the apostle says in the following verses : The two principles, of which the one was operative in Adam, the other in Christ, are repeated in the Christian — the physical natural life is the basis upon which the spiritual erects itself. Calvin .• " It is ne- cessary, he says, that, before we can be renewed in Christ we should derive our origin from Adam, and be like him. Wherefore it is not to be wondered at if we begin with a living soul, for as the order is to be born before we are regenerated, so also is it to live before we are raised up."** Theo'phylact : " Lest any ^UOTTOtoZv. OUK I'tTiV, Itg TTViVf^K ^V. Kai ya,g o kv^ios il^i to ohffiuous uvto cvvcv to ciytov iTviVf/tec, ^/' o5 xai Triv t^locv aa-gKO. i^Moroiuj xec) rif^cTv ^/ ccItov Tyiv a,jt»iv (pvfftv xaXv' a'^'jvurov Ti Tavrnv in 120 CHAP. XV. VERSE 51. to the Corinthians, and in his Epistles to the Thes- salonians. We proceed to notice the particulars of his statement more closely. 'idov, [jyj()77]mv b[uv Xsyoi. — With these words Paul intimates to the Corinthians, that what he is about to state is of such a kind, that in order to apprehend it, they must give up all their previous views re- specting the kingdom of heaven. So the whole Christian system announces itself as a mystery to the merely sensuous and fleshly understanding, by which it cannot be comprehended without a re- linquishment of its one-sided and contracted stand- point. The mystery, however, is not one of an ab- solute, but only one of a relative kind. (See the notes on ii. 7.)^ — Most interpreters suppose here a trajection of the o'j, in this sense : We, indeed, shall not all die, but nevertheless all shall be changed. Chrysostom pa- raphrases thus : " We shall not all die, but we shall all be changed, even those who shall not die ; for they also are mortal. Fear not, therefore, he says, though thou shouldst die, as if thou shouldst not rise again ; for though there be some who shall a ["When Paul here calls that a mystery, which, at the same time, he declares, we must understand the mysterious- ness as lying not in the that, but in the hoiv. The power of the Spirit which, in that great moment, shall be poured forth on the church as a life-giving light-dew, (Is. xxvi. 19,) will, in a mysterious manner, effect this corporeal change." — Olshausen. — Ta] CHAP. XV. VERSE 51. 121 escape death, yet will not this suffice for that resur- rection, but even their bodies, though they have never died, shall be changed, and translated into in- corruption."* As regards the substance, the con- trast is here certainly correctly brought out ; never- theless Paul seems to have expressed it somewhat differently, so that it is not indispensably necessary to suppose a case of trajection ; we need only main- tain, that the whole force lies on aXXa^/Tj (To'/xs^cc, and that Paul had this predicate in view already pecu- liarly with the first cravrsg in this manner : Tccvrsg — ,a£v ol 7Loi[i7iQri(So[j.i6a, — 'javng o\ aXXayriGo^i&a, we all — ^shall not, indeed, before that time be dead, never- theless — all shall be changed = Although we shall not all die, yet shall we all be changed, if we remain at that time. We have followed, in respect of these words, the received reading, because it accords best with the known doctrine of Paul in other passages, (see espe- cially 1 Thes. iv. 15, ff. ; Rom. xiv. 9 ; and also the second Epistle to the Cor.), and also is sufficiently confirmed by outward testimony. It is the less ne- cessary to reject the strong internal testimony in its favour, since, as Mill well remarks, the other read- ings, though certainly in some respects well support- ^ oh sravTSf f/.iv ct'^oBctvovfAiBa, •ra.vrii t\ o.'k'kai.yni'OfJi.iBot,, x,ai 31 fjt,yi uTroB-vi^trxovris, Bvyiro) ya^ xdrnTvot. fih toivvv, i-^nihh u-n-oB-v^nrxsts, 5/a TouTo ^iitr^i, (pnff'iv, us ovx avcttrrniro/xivos' i'ttri ya^-, tivU ilfftv, of KCti TOVTO dtCi(piV^OVTCtl, KO.) OflUi OVX U^Xll TOVTO aVToTs iU T^V OtVO,- (TTXtrtv Ikuvviv, ocXXoc. ^i7 xa) Ixuvci to, (Tu(ji,ot,Ta. ra (jun ccvfoBv^a'xovTci dXXetyfiviiti xoci us », sv li'jyj oipdaX/jLou %. r. "k. give evi- dence against the reading Tcti/rsg [xh xoi^mt^O., oh <7:dv' Tig hi dXXay., for Paul will, in that case, have add- ed to an entirely negative predicate, a fuller and closer description, wh'ich no person who knows how to express himself intelligibl}'^ ever does. Matthaei has already observed, in a note on this passage, in his edition : '* The common reading, which we also have retained, seems to be supported by the connec- tion of the passage : for there can be no doubt that h aToiJM ■/.. r. X. in spite of the arrangement of Stephens, is to be referred to the former dXAay7}ff6/M6a. But if so, then it is necessary that the proposition before ev uT6fj.(jjy and the circumstances of which are de- CHAP. XV. VESSE 51. 12 scribed in these words, be in the affirmative. If, however, the second proposition afiirni the first, on account of the adversative particle di, ought to deny. Moreover, the other part of the 52d verse sup- ports this reading on account of the parallelism. For to the -ravTs; /iisv ob zo!fj.riSriGG,UA9a corresponds the 0/ isxpoi (TJyovv 01 xoifxridsvng) syspO'/iffotrai) and to the crav- Tig ds aXkayriGhiLZ&a. answers the xa/ 7\ihiic, (^rr/ovv Tav- Tsc, xai 0/ xo/fjbri&hrsg, rjdri ds hyioQhnc, zai o/ sri ^wvrsg roVi^) aXXayriffofM^a. And Paul plainly says the same thing in 1 Thes. iv. 15, ff. For what he here says ob rravrzg %oiix.'r\^ri) iffp^^drri ffaXTtyyt at the last trumpet, (just as it sounds), &c."— Gr. d. N T— Tr.] '' [See also Robinson's Lexicon, sub. voc. — Tr.] 126 CHAP. XV. VERSE 52. surrection of the dead must somewhat precede the transformation of the living, provided that in the passage in 1 Thes. iv. 16, 17, the matter is repre- sented exactly as here, and the statement there made be strictly equivalent to dXXayrjff6fj.s&a. here, (which, however, maybe doubted.) On the form ca'krr'iCii in place of (raX'-r/'y^ii see Winer, p. 80,^ and on the use of the third person, see the same, p. 471,'' (where, hovvever, the supposition of an understood ellipsis I cannot assent to ; it is sufficient to suppose the verb impersonal, and that it is used like our " it blows," " it sounds," and the like.) v/J-^'^i' — Correct- ly and without prejudice Grotius remarks : " Those namely, whom God shall at that time find alive ; among whom Paul thought it possible that he, and many others then alive, might be found. So, also in 1 Thess. iv. 17, he says concerning the same thing, TjfMsTc; ot ^uvrsg. This arose from the circum- stance, that Christ had revealed nothing to his dis- ciples concerning the last day, when it was to be, in order that they might ever be in a state of expec- tancy; and the apostles, mid the Christians who followed them, were sufficiently ready to believe it would happen soon."^ a [" (TxXTt^ea, Fut. ffaX-ritru, in place of (ru/.Tty^u (Xen. Anab. I. ii. 17.) 1 Cor. xv. 52. Comp. also Mechan. Vett. p. 201. (Numb. X. 3 ; also the Aor. L Iffdx-riirx is common in the LXX.) See Phryn. p. 191 ; Thorn. M. p. 7»9; Butt- mann, I. .383."-i-Gr. d. N. T.—Tr.] ^ [See note on ch. xiv. ver. 5. — Tr.] <= Nempe quos vivos deus illic deprehenderit : inter quos CHAP. XV. VERSES 53, 54. 127 53. AiTyuo '/.. T. X Connection : We shall be changed, for, since as before said, flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of heaven, so must this mortal (body) put on immortality, &c. In place of hdv6a(jdai we have in 2 Cor. v. 2, sTivd-jffagdai. (On tlie representation of the organ under the image of a covering, see Schoettgen's Horae Hebr. p. 701.) Tertullian remarks, that the discourse is not of an entire annihilation, but of a changing (a glorifying) of the earthly body : " A change is one thing, utter loss is another. What a man loses is different from what he changes. As, therefore, what is lost is not changed, so what is changed is not lost."^ 54. TiWz ysvrjff-rai o Xoyoc, 6 ygy^a/jt/xsvoj z. r. /.. — Then will happen what has been foretold : \6yoc like "n^l is used (not indeed for subject-matter but still) for that ivhich is denoted by language, objectively. Others render these words : turn ratiim fiet vatici- nium ; as respects the meaning the same, for a pro- phecy is verified when what is affirmed by it comes to pass. Paulus putavit fieri posse nt et ipse esset et alii multi qui cum ipso vivebant, Sic hi^iii o\ (avrig dixit de eadem re Paulus 1 Thess. iv. I7. Id eo evenit, quia de die ultimo, quando is futurus esset, nihil Christus suis revelaverat; ut semper ex- spectaretur. Et propiores fuere apostoli et qui eos secuti sunt Christiani, ut crederent brevi id futurum. a Aliud demutatio, aliud perditio. Perdit liaec, ilia mutat. Quomodo ergo, quod perditum est, mutatura non est, ita quod mutatum est, perditum uon est. 128 CHAP. XV. VERSES 54 — 56, '/cocTSTo^yj 6 ^dvocTog sig vTxog. — Is. xxv. 8. In the Heb. we have H^^ / for ever, which is frequently rendered (though not in this passage from Isaiah) by the LXX. 2/'? vTxog e. ffr. 2 Sam. ii. 25. Jerem. iii. 5. Wjcog is a later form of vixrj. ug n%og thus means properly " so that the enemy is utterly overcome, is for ever destroyed." Comp. the notes of Grotius on this passage. 55. Yiou ffoD, Sat'ars, to zsvr^ov ; tou cou, adrj, to vTx,og ; — After Hosea xiii. 14, LXX. Lachmann reads tou sou, ^ai/ars, to vTkog ; croD ffov, ^dvaTS, to xsvt^ov ; With this what follows certainly accords better. If we retain ddrj the meaning appears to be, that the meaner world shall sustain a loss, inasmuch as it must resign the dead whom it has imprisoned. It is not at all im- probable that Paul had in view a sleep of the souls of those dead until the resurrection ; comp. Usteri, p. 368. 56. TO §s xsvT^ov K. T. X. — A closcr unfolding of the meaning in which he had spoken in ver. 55 of the x'svT^ov ^(xvdTov. The LXX. in the passage of Hosea seem to have used xsvt^ov simply in reference to the pain which a prick causes : Paul, however, employs it also in respect of the use to which it was sometimes put in urging or driving cattle. The goad which death uses for the purpose of tilling his field is sin, without which he could have no power over us. So Schoettgen understands this passage : Q,uod mors in nos, tanquam agricola in jumenta, imperium exercere CHAP. XV. VERSES 56, 58. 129 potest, hoc facit peccatum : alias a morte liberi esse- mus. This interpretation commends itself by its parallelism with the following words tj ds d-jvafitg X. r. X. which Schoettgen thus explains : quod vero peccatum vim nos damnandi habet, id inde est, quia a lege divina prohibitum est. Rom. vii. 7, 8. The apostle thus brings his discourse finally to Christ, the beginner and the finisher of salvation. He has deprived death of his power, since by him the curse of the law has been removed. And fur- ther, he brings back the mission of Christ (ver. 57.) to God the Father, in whom everything good, and, among the rest, the scheme of salvation has its ulti- mate source. 58. Not without reason does the apostle add these words : He that believes not in the resurrectiouj will have no courage, and no desire to labour in the work of the Lord. For such an one must naturally feel, that if he is not to be alive at the coming of Christ, his work will be in vain. Having, however established the truth of the resurrection, he says : So may ye now courageously labour on, for ye need not fear that your exertions will be fruitless. VOL. II. SECTION SECOND. CHAP. XVI. VERSES 1 — 24. This concluding chapter, in the first place, contains certain directions respecting the collection for the poor saints in Jerusalem, (1 — 4); the apostle then advertises them of his intended journey to Corinth, (5 — 9) ; recommends Timothy to them, (10, 11), and remarks that Apollos had put off his return to Corinth, (12.) He concludes with exhortations and greetings. 1. The Christians of Palestine were more strait- ened than other churches, and this might be from their being assailed with every sort of oppression by the Jews. The activity of Paul on their behalf is evident from what is said, Acts xxiv. 17. Rom. XV. 23, 26. 2 Cor. viii. and ix. and Gal. ii. 10. 2. Kara [uav ffa,(3l3drMv z. r. X. — On this formula, see the interpreters on Matt, xxviii 1 ; Winer, p. 204; Wahl, I. 440. and II. 349.^ That there is no evidence from this verse that the early Christians observed religiously the first day of the week is shewn by Neander, p. 133 — 6. The o-a^' eauru) and ^T^ffav^/t^wv appear rather to intimate that Paul means to say, that " each ought on the first day of the week to lay by what he could spare, in order that ^ [See also Bib. Cab., No. X. p. 121, and Negris' Edition of Robinson's Lexicon, under tig, § c, and ^a/S/SaTo*, § b — Tr.] CHAP. XVI. VERSES 2 — 8. 131 when he himself should come, each might have the contribution which he had collected by those weekly deposits ready by him, so that the whole collection should be as easily made up at once from the con- tribution of each, as if it had already been cast into one common fund."^ The o, rt av s-jodoorai is translated by De Wette : What any one has prospered [so as to have to spare] ; but it is better to render it : What is convenient for him ; as thus the plan which Paul prescribes is more clearly contrasted with the burden- some plan of leaving the whole to be made up at his coming. 5 — 8. — 07UV MuKsdov/av oisXdoj. — Paul, as appears from 2 Cor. i. 15, (which passage is to be compared in general with this) had promised to the Corin- thians before this first Epistle w^as wTitten, to travel from Ephesus to Macedonia, not by the direct route through Asia Minor, but by way of Corinth, and then to return from Macedonia to Corinth again, on his way to Palestine. This determination, however, ^ [This interpretation obviously leaves unexplained the main peculiarity of the apostle's injunction, viz. the appoint- ment of the Jirst day of the week in preference to any other. Why, it may be asked, on that day rather than on any other ? To this the interpretation in the text gives no answer. The only conceivable reason for this seems to be, that, by the early Christians, the first day of the week was observed as the Sabbath of the Lord ; and, consequently, as on that day they commemorated that which formed the great bond of union be- tween them and other Christians, it was the most suitable oc- casion for their displaying their love in the way prescribed, and also the time when they would be most liberal. — Tk.1 132 CHAP. XVI. VERSES 5 11. he altered, and that, as appears from 2 Cor. i. 23, fF., in order that he might not have to appear in Corinth as a reprover and a punisher. On this account he rather preferred writing this Epistle, and he says in the verse before us, that he would fulfil his intention of coming, but would first journey through Mace- donia. " I am, says he, intending to traverse Ma- cedonia. With you, however, I shall remain as long as I have opportunity {r-o-)(ov) ; perhaps I shall winter with you, in order that you may facilitate my pro- gress whither I shall be journeying. I shall not, therefore, (as I formerly intended) see you now on my journey, but I hope rather to abide M^th you a long time when the Lord will." Comp. Neandevy p. 216, note. 9. Paul was desirous to remain in Ephesus as long as possible, because, on the one hand, a larger prospect of extending the gospel was there presented to him, and, on the other, there were many adver- saries of Christianity there, who, were Paul no longer present to establish the church, would be able easily to destroy what he had erected. Comp. Neander^ p. 225. 10. Comp. ch. iv. 17. 'iva d(p6j3ujg ysvrjTUi 'rfog vfiag. — Be careful that when Timothy comes to you he may have no cause to fear any injury from the ill- disposed. 11. fMs-cc rojv ddsX(pu)v. — These words are, without doubt, to be referred to the object avrov, and denote the companions in travel whom Paul had given Timothy. Compare the same words, verse 12. CHAP. XVI. VERSES 12 — 19. 133 12. Probably the Corinthians had requested Paul to appoint Apollos, whom they knew as an able teacher of Christianity, to visit them again ; and Paul had done all in his power to effect this, but Apollos was unwilling. Whether he had left Co- rinth on account of the party-divisions, and while they continued, shrunk from returning, or whether there were other grounds for his refusal, is uncertain. Were the former the case, it would show that he was not equal to Paul in intrepidity. 13, 14. With these words the apostle might have concluded his epistle ; in the verses that follow, how- ever, he adds a commendation of the persons who were about to return to Corinth, and to convey the epistle he had written to the church. He reminds the Corinthians especially of the services of Ste- phanas (see ch. i. 16), who, with his house, had been the first in Achaia to receive the gospel, and had de- voted himself to the service of the believers, of which his present journey was a new proof. 16. To such men they should seek to render their work not burdensome, but, on the contrary, to ac- knowledge and prize them, (verse 19). 17. on TO lijjojv vffTsoyjfjba, x. r. X — Desiderium vestri expleverunt. 18. avi'i:a-j6av -/,. r. X. — They have lightened my spirit and yours, i. e. inasmuch as they have been the means of a reciprocal communication. 19. 'Ax'jXag zai HoicziXXcc. — These had followed the apostle, and were abiding at that time at Ephe- sus ; Acts xviii. 18, &c. — yj %ar oJxov airwv IxxX^jc/a. 134 CHAP. XVI. VERSES 19 22. — This seems to have been only a •portion of the Ephesian church (comp. verse 20, Tcti/rgc) which was in the habit of meeting in the house of Aquila. Comp. Neander, Kirchengeschichte i. p. 381. A si- milar expression occurs in Coloss. iv. 15. 20. 'Aff'TTacao'^s dXXTjXovg sv (ptX^/j^ccTi ayiuj. — Here- by he once more exhorts them to unity. The (plXrifjua, aym is also elsewhere mentioned in the New Testa- ment ; Rom. xvi. 6. 2 Cor. xiii. 12. 1 Thess. v. 26. 1 Pet. V. 14, in which last place it is called (p'lKriiLo. dyd'Trrig. It is well known that the kiss of peace was the usual mode of salutation in the meetings of the ancient Christians, especially on the observance of the Lord's Supper, 21, 22. Paul had dictated this epistle to an amanu- ensis ; but he is desirous, before concluding, to add a word or two with his own hand, in order, perhaps, there- by the more fully to authenticate it ; for, as we learn from 2 Thess. ii. 2, there were even at that time supposititious letters to be found. The words them- selves which the apostle writes do not require to be so scrupulously weighed, as most of the interpreters have done. He required to add some words in order to show his own hand- writing. For this purpose he selected the sentence, " He that loveth not the Lord (Litotes for he that slights) should be expelled from the church." The following Syro-Chaldaic words, fji^a^dv add (the Lord cometh ; to be understood, perhaps, of the rrctoovffia), are not easily to be joined with the preceding. I think, however, that there is no need for this, as they, perhaps, only served to show Paul's Aramaic signature, which many of the CHAP. XVI. VERSES 21, 22. 135 Corinthians, it may be, knew, and thereby to render the letter the more authentic. For this purpose the first most weighty sentence that occurred to the apostle would serve best. The Aramaic letters were probably exchanged for the corresponding Greek ones by subsequent transcribers.* ^ [" The opinion of Billroth that ua^av d^d was added by Paul, simply to show his Syriac hand-writing, and that it was afterwards written in Greek letters by the transcriber, appears to me very improbable. The sentiment, the Lord cometh ! is intended rather to strengthen the preceding idea : Repent quickly for the time of decision is now near ! It might be that the Syriac formula for this was usual with the apostle. In the jjrw dnihfMt, moreover, there lies not simply exclusion from the church, but also relinquishment to the inimical powers that were at work beyond its pale."— 0/*- hausejif — Tr.] SECOND EPISTLE. PART I. CHAP. I— VII. CONTAINING OBSERVATIONS SUGGESTED BY THE IM- PRESSION WHICH THE FORMER EPISTLE HAD PRO- DUCED ON THE CORINTHIANS. SECTION FIRST. CHAP. I. 1.— III. 18. After the apostolic greeting, (i. 1, 2,) the apostle adds, immediately, an offering of thanks unto God, because of the deliverance which he had sent him from afflic- tions and dangers, and the consolation he had given him, a circumstance which, as he hoped, would also minister consolation to the Corinthians, and for which they would thank God, (3 — 11,) since they knew his fidelity and undissembled love to them, (12 — 14.) In confidence of this acknowledgment, he had purposed to visit them twice, but had altered his resolution, not from fickleness or fear, but simply from respect to them themselves, as he should have been compelled to chide them sharply, which would have occasioned him the greatest pain ; wherefore he rather consigned his hard words to writing, though even this was not with- 140 CHAP. I. VERSES 1 — 3., out great grief to himself, (15 — ii. 4). He next desires them to receive back the immoral person whom they had, by his injunction, excluded from the church, as he was reformed, (5 — 11.) On account of the deep interest he took in them, he was on the rack to receive information from them ; and had no rest until he had found Titus ; now, however, all had fallen out for the triumph of his good cause, (12 — 14.) From this he takes occasion to exult in the latter, yet not so as if it had resulted from his own power, but so as to render the honour to God alone, ( 5 — iii. 5.) He had, by the gospel, superseded the killing letter of the law, and given to the new cove- nant a higher glory, in which he who proclaimed it might well exult, (6—18.) CHAPTER I. 1. Compare in general the notes on 1 Cor. i. 1. — ■Aui Ti,(M6^sog 6 adsX(p6c. — Probably Timothy is men- tioned here, for the same reason that Sosthenes is mentioned in 1 Cor. i. 1, because he was the aman- uensis of the letter. 3. EvXoyy]Tog 6 '^iog x. r. A. — Here also Paul com- mences with praising God, but so as, according to his wont, to adapt his thanksgiving to the relations be- fore him. He praises God here for the consolation which he had given him in his sorrows, in order thereby to bring forward these sorrows themselves. These again, and his deliverance from them, are men- tioned in order to indicate his conviction that the Co- rinthians still continued sincerely to love him ; that CHAP. I. VERSE 3. 141 he has been delivered and comforted by God, is the first thing in his letter, and this he informs the Co- rinthians of, in the firm confidence that they heartily participate in the blessing, and rejoice with him. He thus aims at avowing that, at least on his part, the old love and friendship still prevail, whilst he as- sumes the same on their part, and is so far removed from fearing the possibility of a coldness in their fel- lowship, that he declares to them his whole heart, and meets them without the slightest constraint. With this intention the greater part of the epistle is written, and that this is the introduction to the whole is shown especially by ver. 1 1 and 12, as well as by the circum- stance, that the chief weight is laid, not on the mention of his sorrows themselves, but on his deliverance out of them, and the consolation thence arising to him. The other reasons for this introduction, which the in- terpreters have ascribed to the apostle, are not per- haps to be excluded, but they are not the principal grounds. Thus Theophylact (following Chrysos- tom) says : " He promised in his first epistle to come to them ; having then delayed to do this, he very much feared lest they should be vexed as if others were more highly esteemed by him. In or- der, therefore, to defend himself, and to show that he had been prevented by many trials that had sur- rounded him, he suitably makes this apology."* (i^a^vva; ff^oh^u, i'Xu'TfTivai kvzriier^cn avTOVg, as aXXuv -r^ortftti- ^iyrciiv ocutm' ^ikeov ovv a,'^oXoyrio£i/ be placed immediately after the first '7ra,^axX7}(fsctig xal aurri^iag, it is impossible to see how the idea of co-suffering, co-endurance, is to be re- ^ta Xoyov ^x^etHeikBTv v/aois. aw fziK^ov u.va.'^rvivffuf/.iv f^'ovov iifAUS, u^KSi Toun ili ■^ra^ccfiv^ixv vftTv^ xuv etlro) ^a^axX7i^uf/,iv, vfAiTi^a touto ^ra^axXvi/TH yivircci. oxttti^ ya.^ tx TaBj^fAxret to, nfHTt^a vf^in^a ilvai vofAi^iTS, evrco kk) rhv Ta^axXtjiriv rhv yifAiri^uvj ii/jur'^av. ^ Lachmann includes xai Mag p/ao/ff/^a together, and, on the other, bia iroXKojv sv)(ao. ; but, not to insist upon the consideration that irPosoJ-Trojv is not nearly so well explainable in this manner as in that followed by us, the construction Ix toaa. t^oc. to big Tj/j^ag "^uo. re- mains alvv^ays much harsher than ours, to z/g Tj/uLag yao. ha 'xoaX., where the foregoing article unites all into one whole. Thus already has Theophylact ex- pounded the passage : " God, he says, has delivered us, and will deliver by means of your prayers ; in order that the gift on us, which is by many, i. e. the grace that has come to me by many, i. e. by you who have prayed for me, might be acknowledged, Ix <7roXkuv rr^offuiTTuv, i. e. by you. For (God) hath granted my salvation accomplished by your prayers, to you all, in order that many faces may return thanks to him for us.^ ivx TO its TifAois ^x^ia-fABc, ;^x^if-njB^, tiyouv vfAuv. T^v ffuTtj^iav yot,^ t^v IfAnv ^