Skip to main content

Full text of "A critical and exegetical commentary on the Second epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians"

See other formats




International Critical (jUmnuntarg 

on % jjoljj Striates of % #lft ano 
ffoto Cesiammts. 

The International Critical Commentary 









NEW YORK : charlbs scribner's sons 



The Rights of Translation and of Reproduction are Reserved. 








Printed . 1915 

Reprinted 1925 

Reprinted 1948 

Reprinted 1951 

Reprinted 1956 

MAY 1 8 1964 


Since the volume on the First Epistle of St Paul to the 
Corinthians appeared, circumstances have arisen, some of 
which have affected the present volume, while others 
must affect volumes in this series which still remain un- 

The increase of episcopal work which had fallen to the 
lot of the Bishop of Exeter, and the ill-health from which 
he suffered for a considerable time, convinced the present 
writer that, in the interests of the Diocese and of the Bishop 
himself, he ought to offer to free the Bishop from the 
promise which he had kindly given of sharing with his 
former colleague the work of producing the present 
volume. This offer the Bishop, after much consideration, 
reluctantly accepted, and the commentary has been 
written without the advantage of his co-operation. The 
loss is great, but it is not quite total. The writer who 
has been left to do the work single-handed knows the 
Bishop's mind about most of the important questions 
which are raised by this perplexing Epistle, and more- 
over he has had his article on it in Hastings' Dictionary 
of the Bible (i. pp. 491-498) to aid him. Readers who 
miss in the present volume qualities which they valued in 
its predecessor may find in the above statement an ex- 
planation of the difference. 

The changes of circumstances which must affect the 
remaining volumes of this series are more grave. The 
deaths of Dr. Briggs in June 191 3 and of Dr. Driver in 
February 19 14 are a loss, not only to these commentaries, 
but to Christendom. Wherever learning, acute criticism, 



and sound judgment are appreciated, the loss of two such 
scholars within less than a year will be deeply deplored ; 
and it is impossible for their surviving colleague among 
the original editors of the International Critical Com- 
mentary adequately to express his own personal loss. 
Dr. Briggs and he were almost exactly the same age, 
and a year or two ago Dr. Briggs expressed to him a 
doubt whether either of them would live to see the series 
completed. As regards one of the two persons concerned 
that doubt has been shown to be only too well grounded. 

The survivor must leave it to others to decide whether 
there is room for any such commentary as the present 
volume, and (if there is) whether the volume in any 
particulars fills it. He has no new solutions to offer 
for any of the numerous problems which this Epistle 
presents. But he has endeavoured to show that in some 
cases there is one solution which is so reasonable in itself, 
and so much more probable than any other, that students 
who have no time to investigate every point for them- 
selves may be allowed, without discussion, to assume this 
solution as the right one. There must, however, always 
remain a considerable number of questions to which no 
certain answer can be given, because certainty requires a 
knowledge of details respecting the Church of Corinth 
which we do not possess and are not likely to acquire. 
It is hoped that no difficulty of importance has been 
passed over in silence, and that no untenable explanation 
of a difficulty has been adopted. 

Readers will do well to study the paraphrases prefixed 
to the sections before consulting the notes. No transla- 
tion, however accurate, can give the full meaning of any 
Pauline Epistle, and this is specially true of 2 Corinthians. 
The only adequate method is to paraphrase ; and great 
pains have been taken in both these volumes to make the 
paraphrases as luminous and exact as possible. 




§ I. Authenticity .... 

§ II. Occasion, Problems, and Probabilities 

§ III. Place, Date, and Contents 

§ IV. Integrity . 

§ V. The Opponents of St Paul 

§ VI. Doctrine . 

§ VII. Mystery Religions 

§ VIII. Characteristics, Style, and Language 

Words peculiar to 2 Corinthians in the N.T. 
Phrases peculiar to 2 Corinthians in the N.T. 
Quotations from the O.T. 

§ IX. The Text . 

General Features 
Authorities for this Epistle 

8 X. Commentaries 



Greek Words 

Double Compound Words 

Variant Vulgate Renderings 

















§ I. Authenticity. 

The evidence, both external and internal, for the genuineness 
of 2 Corinthians is so strong that a commentator might be 
excused for assuming it without discussion. In the present state 
of criticism there is no need to spend time in examining the 
captious and speculative objections which have been, during the 
last sixty years, urged against this and others of the four great 
Epistles of St Paul by a very small group of eccentric critics,* 
and various recent commentators not only abstain from doing so, 
but do not even think it worth while to give so much as a 
summary of the evidence in favour of the genuineness. 

The external evidence does not begin quite so early as that 
for i Corinthians ; for we may regard it as certain that the Second 
Epistle was unknown to Clement of Rome, who was so well 
acquainted with the First. Much of the Second would have 
served his purpose much better than the First Epistle; yet, 
frequently as he quotes the First, he nowhere exhibits any 
knowledge of the Second, for none of the five or six passages, 
in which some writers have thought that there may be an echo 
of something in 2 Corinthians, can be relied upon as showing 
this. Those who care to verify this statement may compare 
2 Cor. i. 5, viii. 9, x. 3, 4, x. 13, 15, 16, x. 17, x. 18 respec- 
tively with Clem. ii. 1, xvi. 2, xxxvii. 1, i. 3, xiii. 1, xxx. 6. 
Clement is writing on behalf of the Church of Rome to rebuke 
the Corinthians for rebelling against authority, and he tells them 
to " take up the Epistle of the blessed Paul the Apostle " and see 
how he rebukes them for party spirit. It would have been far 
more to the point to have referred to the Second Epistle in 
which St Paul rebukes them far more severely for rebellion. " Yet 
in the sixty-five chapters of Clement's epistle there is not a single 
sentence which indicates that he had ever heard that the 

• Bruno Bauer, Bruins, Havet, Loman, Mayborn, Naber, Pierson, Steck, 
Van Manen. 



Corinthians had before his own time rebelled against those set 
over them, or that they had ever repented of their rebellion, 
though he tells the Corinthians that he has handled every argu- 
ment " (Kennedy, The Second and Third Epistles to the Corinthians, 
p. 147). The absence of any clear quotation may be regarded 
as conclusive. " In the whole field of literature it would hardly 
be possible to adduce a stronger case of proof" (Rendall, The 
Epistles of St Paul to the Corinthians, p. 91). The inference is 
that 2 Corinthians in a.d. 96 was not known in the Church of 
Rome ; it had not yet been circulated through the Churches. 

On the other hand, Polycarp seems to show knowledge of 
both letters. See on 2 Cor. iii. 2, iv. 14, viii. 21. Irenaeus 
quotes from chapters ii., iii., iv., v., xiii., sometimes by name ; in 
epistola secunda ad Corinthios (iv. xxviii. 3). Athenagoras and 
Theophilus of Antioch show knowledge of the Epistle. Clement 
of Alexandria, Tertullian, and Cyprian quote it very frequently. 
It is named in the Muratorian Fragment, and Marcion ac- 
cepted it. 

Nearly all critics regard the internal evidence as conclusive. 
Even if the outside testimony were defective, the contents of the 
letter would completely reassure us.* It is so natural and so 
vivid ; it so evidently deals with a number of details, well known 
to the writer and to the Corinthians, but not well known, and (in 
some cases) not particularly interesting, to outsiders ; and so 
much of it refers to a temporary crisis, that it is utterly unlike 
the artificial product of a forger. What motive could there be 
for constructing such a fiction? And here one of the great 
obstacles to a clear understanding of the writer's meaning 
becomes an argument for the genuineness of the letter ; a forger 
would at least have taken pains to make his meaning clear to 
those whom he wished to have as readers. The obscure allusions 
and insinuations are natural enough, if they were written by one 
who knew all the circumstances, and knew that they were equally 
well known to those to whom he was writing. They are quite out 
of place in the composition of one who was imagining what the 
Apostle might have said to his Corinthian converts. The items 
of autobiography, which are among the most precious details in 
the Epistle, ring true and are not at all like fiction. Moreover, 
there are frequent links with the other three great Epistles of St 
Paul, and it would be beyond the skill of any inventor to forge 
all these, to say nothing of the general agreement with the 
characteristic ideas of the Apostle. There is no letter which 
enables us to see so deeply into the workings of the writer's mind 
and heart. Thankfulness, affection, anxiety, entreaty, and 
indignation come to the surface in successive waves, and the last 

* Bachmann, p. 6. 


of these is expressed with a severity and bitterness which can be 
best understood when we keep in mind his repeated assertion 
that the attacks on his character and authority have compelled 
him to break out in what must look like a hateful indulgence in 
self-praise and self-assertion (x. 12, xi. 1, 16, xii. 1, 11). It is 
strange criticism that can see in all this the imagination of an 
anonymous inventor. See Bishop Robertson, Hastings, DB. i. 
p. 492 ; Massie, I and 2 Corinthians in The Century Bible, pp. 
4, 5 ; Knowling, The Witness of the Epistles, ch. iii., and The 
Testimony of St Paul to Christ, lect. xxiv. and passim (see Index). 
With regard to the four great Epistles and 1 Thessalonians, 
B. W. Bacon says ; " No doubt exists to-day among scientific 
critics regarding the authenticity of any one of them, for indeed 
1 Corinthians is referred to in 96 a.d. as written by Paul to 
Corinth, and this and others of the group can be traced even 
further back as employed by Hebrews, 1 Peter, and James. 
Moreover, the impression of vivid feeling, of intense and close 
relation to objective fact, produced by the writings themselves is 
corroborated by the largely contemporary tradition of Acts, 
which shows just such combination of agreement in essentials and 
discrepancy in detail as we expect from honest witnesses " {Introd. 
to N.T. p. 56 ; see also p. 80). 

§ II. Occasion, Problems, and Probabilities. 

The familar comparison of the transition from the region of 
1 Corinthians to that of 2 Corinthians, to the passage from the 
somewhat intricate paths of a carefully laid-out park to the 
obscurity of a pathless forest, gives one a fairly correct idea of 
the difference between the two Epistles. But it needs to be 
supplemented, and to some extent corrected. The forest is not 
only obscure, it is thick with roots which trip one up, and with 
"wait-a-bit" thorns, which continually arrest one's progress. 
Moreover, it is not altogether pathless. Three main divisions 
(i.-vii., viii. and ix., x.-xiii.) are as clear as any divisions in the 
First Epistle. It is when we endeavour to interpret numerous 
details in the main divisions, and to get them into an intelligible 
and consistent relation to one another and to the First Epistle, 
that we stumble and stick fast. Over and over again the Apostle 
seems to be alluding to something which his readers can under- 
stand ; but we are not always certain that there is any allusion, 
and we can rarely be certain what the allusion is. For instance, 
he often states that he is not in the habit of doing, or that he 
has not done, such and such things. In some cases this may be 
a mere statement of fact ; he takes the Corinthians into his con- 


fidence and acquaints them with his personal conduct. But in 
some cases he may be alluding to the fact that, although he does 
not, yet his opponents do, act in this particular way; e.g. i. 12, 
19, ii. 17, iii. 3, 5, v. 16, x. 2, 4, 8, 12, 15. In others he may 
be alluding to the fact that he has been accused of doing 
these things; e.g. i. 17, 24, iv. 5, v. 13, vii. 2, xi. 7, 9, 16, 
xiii. 6. Or there may be allusion to both these points ; e.g. iv. 2, 
x. 15. 

The immediate occasion of this perplexing, but most instruc- 
tive letter is plain enough. Since the writing of 1 Corinthians, 
St Paul had had to deal with a very serious crisis in the Church 
of Corinth, in which his Apostolic authority had been opposed, 
questioned, and by some scornfully denied, and he had sent 
Titus to Corinth to deal with the difficulty and reduce the 
rebellious persons to submission (ii. 13, vii. 6, 7, 13-15). About 
the success of this enterprise of Titus the Apostle was intensely 
anxious. He left Ephesus for Troas, hoping that Titus would 
return from Corinth and meet him there, and in Troas he found 
an opening for missionary work. The suspense at last became 
so intolerable that he threw up his work in Troas and crossed 
over to Macedonia, in order to meet Titus the sooner. Here he 
did meet Titus, whose report of the result of his mission to 
Corinth was so unexpectedly favourable that St Paul, in a fervour 
of thankfulness and affection, at once begins to dictate this letter, 
in order to make the reconciliation between himself and his 
Corinthian converts complete (i.— vii.), and stir them up to 
increased sympathy with their fellow-Christians in Palestine 
(viii., ix.).* 

Thus far we are upon sure ground ; but there are at least a 
dozen questions arising out of this Epistle, or connected with it, 
respecting which great diversity of opinion exists. With regard 
to a few of them a decided answer may with confidence be given, 
in spite of diversity of view ; but with regard to the remainder 
we can do no more than adopt what seems to us to be probable, 
while admitting that there is room for doubt. Not all of the 
questions are of equal importance, but hardly any of them can 
be set aside as trivial. 

1. Did Timothy, who had been sent to Corinth before 
1 Corinthians was written (see on 1 Cor. xvi. 10), and was with 
St Paul when 2 Corinthians was written (2 Cor. i. 1.), reach 
Corinth and was unsuccessful there? Or did he return to St 
Paul without having reached Corinth? If he reached Corinth, 
did he leave before 1 Corinthians arrived ? 

* The whole letter, as Bengel remarks, resembles an itinerary, interwoven 
with noble instruction. The main points of narrative are found i. 8, 15, 16, 
ii. I, 12, 13, vii. 5, 6, viii. I, 6, ix. I, 2. 


2. How long an interval was there between i Corinthians and 
2 Corinthians? See on 2 Cor. viii. 10, ix. 2. 

3. Did the Apostle pay a visit, short and distressing, to 
Corinth before 2 Corinthians was written? If so, 

4. Did this visit take place before or after 1 Corinthians ? 

5. Was there a letter (other than 1 Corinthians and the 
letter mentioned in 1 Cor. v. 9) written by St Paul to Corinth 
before 2 Corinthians? In other words, Does the severe letter 
mentioned in 2 Cor. ii. 3, 4 and vii. 8, 9 refer to 1 Corinthians ? 
If it does not refer to 1 Corinthians but to some other letter, 
two questions arise ; — 

6. Was this severe letter before or after 1 Corinthians? 

7. Is this letter wholly lost, or does part of it survive in 
2 Cor. x.— xiii. ? 

8. Is the offender mentioned in 2 Cor. ii. 5-10 and vii. 12 
to be identified with the incestuous person of 1 Cor. v. if.? 
If not, 

9. Who was the offender, and whom did he offend? 

10. This offender was punished, not in accordance with a 
vote of the whole Church of Corinth, but only of a majority of 
the members (2 Cor. ii. 6). What was the punishment? and was 
it more severe, or less severe, than that which the minority 
proposed ? 

n. What was the nature of the opposition to St Paul at 
Corinth ? Did it come from those who thought that he paid too 
much regard to the Law, or from those who thought that he 
paid too little ? 

12. Does part of the letter mentioned in 1 Cor. v. 9 survive 
in 2 Cor. vi. 14-vii. 1, or is it wholly lost? 

At least two of these questions can be answered with 
certainty; two others can be answered with confidence, if not 
with absolute certainty ; and in the case of two others the 
probability is very decidedly on one side. With regard to the 
remaining six the probabilities are more evenly balanced. In 
each case the reader is referred to the notes on the passages in 
question for a discussion of the arguments ' for ' and ' against.' 

5. It ought to be regarded as certain that 1 Corinthians 
cannot be the severe letter alluded to in 2 Cor. ii. 3, 4 and 
vii. 8, 9.* Therefore St Paul wrote two letters to the Church of 
Corinth in addition to the two which have come down to us, viz. 
the one mentioned in 1 Cor. v. 9 and this severe letter. 

8. The offender mentioned in 2 Cor. ii. 5-10 and vii. 12 is 
not the incestuous person of 1 Cor. v. 1 f. The identification is 
untenable, and, like the identification of the sinner in Lk. 

* It is little use to point to I Cor. iv. 8-13, 18-21, v. 1-7. It is of the 
letter as a whole that St Paul writes in 2 Cor. ii. 34 and vii. 8, 9. 



vii. 37-39 with Mary Magdalen, it ought to be generally 

3. It is almost certain that St Paul did pay a short and dis- 
tressing visit to Corinth between his first stay there and the 
writing of 2 Corinthians (ii. 1, xii. 14, xiii. 1). 

9. It is almost certain that the offender in 2 Cor. v. 5-10 and 
vii. 12 is some one who had behaved in an outrageous manner 
to the Apostle. But, if Timothy reached Corinth, it is possible 
that he was the person who was outrageously treated. 

7. It is probable that part of the severe letter of 2 Cor. ii. 3, 4 
and vii. 8, 9 survives in 2 Cor. x.-xiii. 

12. It is probable that the letter mentioned in 1 Cor. v. 9 
is wholly lost. 

But it is not easy to determine 

1. Whether Timothy failed to reach Corinth or reached 
Corinth and failed to effect any good there. 

2. Whether the interval between 1 and 2 Corinthians was 
somewhat less than a year or somewhat less than two years. 

4. Whether the distressing visit took place after or before 
1 Corinthians. 

6. Whether the severe letter was written after or before 
1 Corinthians. 

10. Whether the minority wished the offender to receive a 
more or a less severe punishment than that which was inflicted 
by the majority, and whether that punishment was excommuni- 

11. Whether St Paul was opposed for having too little or 
too much regard for the Law. 

In all these six cases the balance is perhaps in favour of the 
alternative which is stated first ; but it is more easy to adopt a 
decided opinion than to convince others that it is right ; e.g. 
in the volume on 1 Corinthians (pp. xxi-xxiv) reasons have been 
given for believing that the second visit of St Paul to Corinth f is an 
historical fact, and that it took place before the writing of 1 Corin- 
thians ; but Professor K. Lake {Earlier Epistles of St Paul, p. 
152) has given strong reasons for believing that it took place 
between 1 and 2 Corinthians, an arrangement which has mani- 

• " To identify this offender (dSt/cTjaas) — who had not, as Paul insists, 
caused him personal sorrow (ii. 5) — with the incestuous person of 1 Cor. v. 
would be almost as monstrous, when we consider the mildness with which 
Paul treats him, as to identify the First Epistle with the stern letter described 
in the Second" (Julicher, Intr. N.T. p. 91). After writing 1 Cor. v. 5 
how could the Apostle say that he had not written ' for his cause that did 
the wrong ' ? 

t Sometimes called " the intermediate visit," i.e. intermediate between the 
first visit, during which he founded the Church, and the visit which followed 
soon after the writing of 2 Corinthians. 


fest advantages. How greatly opinions are divided on the 
subject will be seen from the following statement. 

This intermediate visit is doubted or denied by Baur, David- 
son, De Wette, Farrar, G. H. Gilbert, Heinrici, Hilgenfeld, 
Lange, Lewin, Lias, Paley, Ramsay, A. Robertson, Stanley. 

It \% placed before I Corinthians, and in most cases before the 
lost letter of i Cor. v. 9, by Alford, Beet, J. H. Bernard, Bleek, 
Conybeare and Howson, Comely, Denney, Findlay, Klopper, 
Hausrath, Lightfoot, McFadyen, Olshausen, Otto, Rabiger, 
Redlich, Reuss, Sanday, Schmiedel, Waite, B. Weiss, Wieseler, 

It is placed after 1 Corinthians, and before the severe letter 
of 2 Cor. ii. 3, 4 and vii. 8, 9, by Adeney, Bachmann, Barth, 
Bousset, Cone, Drescher, Ewald, Eylau, Godet, Hagge, Jacquier, 
Jiilicher, Kennedy, Krenkel, Lake, Mangold, Massie, Menzies, 
Moffatt, Pfieiderer, Rendall, Sabatier, Weiffenbach, Weizsacker. 
Allen and Grensted incline to this alternative, but doubtfully; 
so also D. Walker. Belser and Schafer place the intermediate 
visit after 1 Corinthians, but they omit the intermediate letter, 
identifying the severe letter with 1 Corinthians. Volter regards 
the intermediate visit as a return to Corinth after a missionary 
excursion during the Apostle's first stay in the city. His elaborate 
dissection of both Epistles, as consisting of Pauline material very 
freely edited on doctrinal grounds, does not merit consideration. 

The problems respecting the intermediate letter will be most 
conveniently studied when the question respecting the integrity 
of the Epistle is discussed. 

The following scheme as to the sequence of events connected 
with these two great Epistles covers the whole period of the 
Apostle's work at Corinth. It is tentative, as all such schemes 
must be, and the more conjectural items are placed in square 
brackets. From what has been already stated it follows that no 
scheme which identifies the severe, letter (ii. 3, 4, vii. 8, 9) with 
1 Corinthians, and which identifies the great offender (ii. 5-10, 
vii. 12) with the incestuous man (1 Cor. v. 1), can be right. 
St Paul wrote four letters to the Corinthian Church, two of which 
have come down to us, while two have partly or wholly perished ; 
and there were two great offenders whom he required the Church 
to punish. This much may be treated as too firmly established 
to be open to reasonable doubt. A good deal of the accom- 
panying scheme is generally admitted to be correct. 

Possible Sequence oj Events. 

1. St Paul spends ' a year and six months ' at Corinth, 
' teaching the word of God ' (Acts xviii. 11). 


2. He leaves Corinth with Aquila and Priscilla and settles at 
Ephesus (Acts xviii. 18, 19). 

3. Apollos continues the work at Corinth, ' powerfully con- 
futing the Jews ' (Acts xviii. 27, 28, xix. 1), and returns to St Paul 
at Ephesus (1 Cor. xvi. 12). 

4. St Paul sends a letter [by Titus], now [wholly] lost, to 
Corinth condemning fornicators (1 Cor. v. 9) [and announcing 
the plan mentioned 2 Cor. i. 5, 16]. [A collection for the poor 
at Jerusalem is started by Titus.] 

5. Bad news is brought from Corinth to Ephesus by members 
of Chloe's household (1 Cor. i. 11) [and also by Apollos (1 Cor. 
xvi. 12)]. 

6. Timothy starts from Ephesus for Macedonia and Corinth, 
and reaches Macedonia (1 Cor. iv. 17, xvi. 10; Acts xix. 22; 
2 Cor. i. 1). 

7. Letter of the Corinthians to St Paul (1 Cor. vii. 1) 
[brought by Fortunatus, Stephanas, and Achaicus (1 Cor. 
xvi. 17)]. 

8. St Paul writes 1 Corinthians at or near Easter [and sends 
it by Titus and a brother; the collection for the poor is now 
organized (1 Cor. xvi. 1 ; 2 Cor. viii. 6, xii. 18), and Titus then 
returns to the Apostle at Ephesus]. 

9. [Timothy arrives at Corinth.] Fresh difficulties arise 
in the Corinthian Church ; the Apostle's authority is questioned, 
and by some is defied (2 Cor. x. 7, 10, xi. 23, xii. 16, 17). 
[Timothy leaves, unable to deal with the crisis.] 

10. St Paul hears of this [from Timothy] and pays a short 
visit to Corinth (2 Cor. ii. 1, xii. 14, xiii. 1), during which he is 
grossly insulted by some Corinthian Christian (2 Cor. ii. 5-8, 
vii. 12).* 

11. St Paul sends Titus to Corinth with a severe letter 
(ii. 3, 9, vii. 8-12), [the greater part of which is preserved in 
2 Cor. x.— xiii.]. Titus is instructed [to press for the collection 
for the Palestinian Relief Fund and] to return to St Paul through 
Macedonia and Troas (ii. 12, 13, vii. 5, 6). 

12. [Longer stay in Ephesus having become perilous,] 
St Paul leaves Ephesus for Troas, and being intensely anxious 
about the effect of the severe letter, he leaves Troas for Macedonia, 
in order to meet Titus the sooner and get his report (ii. 12, 13). 

13. He meets Titus in Macedonia and receives from him a 
most encouraging report as to the end of the grave crisis in 
Corinth (vii. 6-16). 

* This visit ought possibly to be placed earlier, either between 3 and 
4 or between 4 and 5- If the former, then it would be mentioned in the 
lost letter of 1 Cor. v. 9, and this would account for its not being mentioned 
in 1 Corinthians. 


14. He writes 2 Corinthians [i.-ix.] and sends it from 
Macedonia by Titus and two brethren (viii. 16-24).* 

15. St Paul reaches Corinth, and during a stay of three 
months there (Acts xix. 21, xx. 3) writes the Epistle to the 
Romans (see Sanday and Headlam, Romans, pp. xxxvi f.). 

The most speculative portions of this scheme are those which 
are placed in square brackets in the sections numbered 4 and 9. 
That Titus was the bearer of the first letter written by the 
Apostle to Corinth, and that he then began to urge the Corin- 
thians to raise money for the poor Christians in Judaea, is not 
improbable, but there is little evidence for either conjecture. 
That Timothy reached Corinth and was a failure there is possible, 
but the silence about his doing anything there is equally well 
explained by the hypothesis that he never got so far. If he 
reached Corinth and was contemptuously treated, he probably 
returned as quickly as possible to St Paul at Ephesus, and his 
report of the grave condition of things at Corinth would account 
for the Apostle's decision to hurry across to Corinth himself. 
But the bad news from Corinth may easily have reached St Paul 
in some other way. 

§ III. Place, Date, and Contents. 

Both place and date can be fixed within narrow limits. The 
country was Macedonia (ii. 13, vii. 5, viii. 1, ix. 2-4) ; and it is 
possible that the subscription of the Epistle, which is certainly 
early (B 2 , Syr-Pesh. Syr-Hark. Copt.), is correct in saying that the 
city was Philippi. It has already been shown (1 Corinthians, p. 
xxxiii) that the First Epistle was probably written in the spring 
of a.d. 55, and it is probable that the Second Epistle was written 
in the autumn of the same year. In neither case, however, is 
the year quite certain. For the First Epistle nearly all modern 
writers allow some margin ; Harnack, a.d. 50-53 ; C. H. Turner, 
52-55 ; Ramsay, 53-56 ; Lightfoot, Lewin, and Wieseler, 54-5 7. 
For the Second Epistle, Harnack says 53, Turner 55, Ramsay 56, 
Lightfoot, Lewin, and Wieseler 57. There is no serious objec- 
tion to assigning both Epistles to the same year, even for those 
who believe that between the two letters St Paul paid a brief 
visit to Corinth. In favourable weather that might be accom- 
plished in less than three weeks. All the events enumerated 
above, 8-14, might take place in seven or eight months. But 
Jiilicher and others think that we must place about a year and a 
half between the two Epistles. 

* This is at least the third mission of Titus to Corinth {8, Ii), and may 
be the fourth, if Titus was the bearer of the first letter, now lost (4). 


With regard to the letter itself it is better to talk of " con- 
tents" rather than "plan." Beyond the three clearly marked 
divisions (i.-vii. ; viii., ix. ; x.-xiii.) there is not much evidence 
of plan. In these main divisions the Apostle seems to have 
dictated what he had to say just as his thoughts and feelings 
moved him, without much consideration of arrangement or 
logical sequence. We may conjecture that the last four chapters 
were dictated at one sitting, without much pause until the last 
chapter was reached. But between vii. and viii., and between 
ix. and x. there were doubtless breaks of some duration, if not 
between viii. and ix. ; and it is not likely that the first seven 
chapters were dictated all at one time. Hence the rapid 
changes (as they seem to us) of topics and temper; but some- 
thing more than a break in the time of dictating is required to 
account for the immense change from ix. to x. The following 
analysis of the three main divisions is offered as a help to a 
study of the Epistle in detail. It is not meant to imply or 
suggest that the Apostle had any such scheme in his mind as he 
dictated the various paragraphs. As in the first Epistle, there is 
a mixture of precept and instruction with personal matter ; but 
the proportion of the two elements is reversed. In i Corinthians 
the personal element is comparatively slight and appears inciden- 
tally. In 2 Corinthians the personal element is the main thing, 
especially in the first and last divisions ; what is didactic, how- 
ever important, is not the leading topic or series of topics. It is 
the Apostle's conduct and authority that comes to the front 

Epistolary Introduction, i. 1-11. 

A. The Apostolic Salutation, i. I, 2. 

B. Preamble of Thanksgiving and Hope, i. 3— XX. 

I. Review of his recent Relations with the Corinthians, 
i. 12-vii. 16. 

A. Defence of his Conduct with regard to his promised 

Visit and the great Offender, i. 1 2— ii. 1 7. 
The postponement of the intended Visit, i. 12- 

ii. 4. 
The Treatment of the great Offender and the 

Result of the severe Letter, ii. 5-17. 

B. The Glory of the Apostolic Office, iii. i-vi. 10. 

The Superiority of the New Ministration to the 
Old, iii. i— 11. 


The great Boldness of the New Ministers, 

iii. 12-iv. 6. 
The Sufferings and Supports of an Apostle, 

iv. 7 -v. 10. 
The Life of an Apostle, v. n-vi. 10. 

C. The Restoration oj Confidence between the Apostle 
and the Corinthians, vi. n-vii. 16. 
Appeal of the reconciled Apostle to the Cor- 
inthians, vi. n-vii. 4. 
The Reconciliation completed, vii. 5-16. 

II. The Collection for the poor Christians at Jerusalem, 
viii. 1-ix. 15. 

The Example of the Macedonian Churches, 

viii. 1-7. 
The Example of Christ, viii. 8-15. 
The new Mission to be entrusted to Titus and 

two others, viii. 16-24. 
Exhortation to Readiness, ix. 1-5. 
Exhortation to Liberality, ix. 6-15. 

III. Vindicating his Apostolic Authority; the great In- 
vective, x. 1-xiii. 10. 

A. The Apostle's Authority and the Area of his Mission, 

x. 1-18. 
Reply to the Charge of Cowardice, x. 1-6. 
Reply to the Charge of Weakness, x. 7-11. 
The Area of his Mission includes Corinth, x. 


B. Glorying a Folly which has been forced upon him, 

xi. i-xii. 18. 
The Reason for this Folly, xi. 1-6. 
Glorying about refusing Maintenance, xi. 7-15. 
Glorying about his Services and his Sufferings, 

xi. 16-33. 
Glorying about Revelations to his Soul and a 

Thorn for his Flesh, xii. 1-10. 
The Credentials of an Apostle ; exceptional Signs 

and exceptional Love, xii. 11-18. 

C Final Warnings in view of his approaching Visit, 
xii. 19-xiii. 10. 

Concluding ExhortpSion, Salutation, and Benediction, xiii. 


These contents, however we may interpret them in detail, 
reveal a situation very different from that which is exhibited by 
the First Epistle. Even with regard to the features which are 
the same in both letters there is difference. The old relations 
between Apostle and converts may remain, but they have been, 
and perhaps still are, severely strained. Some of the old features 
have vanished and new features have appeared. The Apostle 
is no longer so serenely sure of the Corinthians' affection and 
loyalty. They had sometimes criticized him before, and had 
raised questions as to his being an Apostle (i Cor. iv. 3, ix. 1, 2) ; 
but now he has been openly insulted, defied, and laughed at, and 
his Apostleship has been denied. He says that self-praise is no 
recommendation, but they say that he is always singing his own 
praises and asserting his own importance. Although we hear no 
more of the four factions of which St Paul speaks with dis- 
approval in 1 Cor. i. 12, 13, yet faction of a far more virulent 
kind is manifest, and it threatens the Church of Corinth with 
ruin. Corinth has been invaded by a band of fanatical Jewish 
Christians, who have a narrow and bigoted view of the spirit of 
the Gospel and an intense hatred of St Paul's free interpretation 
of it. They did not attempt to enforce circumcision, as similar 
fanatics were endeavouring to do among the Galatians, for they 
probably saw that such attempts would have no success in 
Greece ; but they did their utmost, by accusation and insinua- 
tion, to undermine and overthrow the influence of St Paul. 
We can measure the malignity of their attack by the vehemence 
of the Apostle's language in repelling it, and indeed we have to 
attribute atrocious conduct to them in order to understand how 
he could regard as justifiable all the strong expressions which he 
uses. This applies specially to xi. 13-15. See Menzies, ad loc, 
and McFadyen, pp. 247, 248. 

§ IV. Integrity. 

Among the many features in which 2 Corinthians differs 
from 1 Corinthians is that of structure. The First Epistle 
exhibits an evenness of style so complete that its unity, although 
disputed by a few eccentric critics, as Hagge and Volter, is not 
open to serious question. A few words in the traditional text 
are wanting in authority, as ' and in your spirit, which are God's ' 
(vi. 20) ; and a few are open to suspicion, but not well-grounded 
suspicion, as possible glosses, as xiv. 34, 35, xv. 56. But pro- 
posals to treat the Epistle which has come down to us in the 
familiar form as a conglomeration of several letters, or of por- 
tions of several letters, are not worthy of consideration. The 


same cannot be said of the Second Epistle. There is con- 
siderable probability that it is composite, and that chapters i.-ix. 
are the greater part of a conciliatory letter, while chapters 
x.-xiii. are the greater part of a sharp and severe letter which 
was written before the conciliatory letter was sent ; and there 
is a possibility that part ot a third letter, written before either of 
the Epistles which have come down to us, is embedded in it 
(vi. 14-vii. 1). Moreover, doubts have been raised as to whether 
both viii. and ix. belong to the same letter, some critics regard- 
ing ix. as an intruder while a few regard viii. as the intruder. 
Nor is this all. The verses which tell of the Apostle's escape 
from Damascus (xi. 32, 33) come so abruptly and prosaically in 
a passage of lofty feeling and language, that they also are suspected 
of being out of their original position. They may be a fragment 
from some other letter, or they may have been accidentally 
omitted from this letter and then reinserted in the wrong place. 
A less violent conjecture is that St Paul inserted them after the 
letter was finished, without caring whether they were quite in 
harmony with the context. 

But the large majority of the critics who are inclined to adopt 
one or more of these hypotheses are agreed that all the passages in 
question, vi. 14-vii. 1, viii., ix., xi. 32, 33, and x.-xiii., were written 
by St Paul. This consensus is specially strong with regard to 
the last four chapters. There are a few wild critics who contend 
that not one of the Pauline Epistles is genuine, and their criti- 
cisms carry no weight. To accept Galatians, Romans, 1 Corin- 
thians, and 2 Cor. i.-ix. as by St Paul, and reject 2 Cor. x.-xiii. as 
spurious, would be an amazing result to reach by any kind of 

It must always be remembered that in every one of these 
four cases the doubts as to their being part of the Second 
Epistle, as St Paul dictated it, are based etitirely on ititernal 
evidence. No MS., no version, . and no patristic quotation 
supplies any evidence that the Epistle was ever in circulation 
anywhere with any one of these four portions omitted. 

It will be convenient to take the four shorter passages first, 
in the order of their occurrence, reserving the more important 
question respecting the last four chapters for more detailed 
treatment after the other passages have been discussed. 

1. The strength of the case against vi. 14-vii. 1 lies in the 
facts that (1) the six verses violently interrupt the sequence of 
thought, and that (2), when they are removed, vii. 2 fits admirably 
to vi. 11-13. ' My lips are unlocked to tell you everything ; my 
heart stands wide open. There is no restraint in my feeling 
towards you ; the restraint is in your own affections. But 
love should awaken love in return ; let your heart be opened 


wide to receive me. Make room for me ; I have never wronged 
any of you in any way.' The connexion is excellent between 
7rAarw^7;re kolI i/xeis and x oj PV (TaT€ VP^, whereas it is diffi- 
cult to see what the connexion is between vi. 13 and 14, 
and between vii. 1 and 2. These facts justify the statement 
that, in its present position, the passage " looks like an 
erratic boulder." And, when it is pointed out that the 
letter mentioned in 1 Cor. v. 9 dealt with the same subject 
as that which is treated in this passage, viz. careful abstention 
from the pollutions of heathendom, and that the strict 
charge given in 2 Cor. vi. 14-vii. 1 might be easily misunder- 
stood in the way mentioned in 1 Cor. v. 10, the suggestion that 
we have here a fragment of that lost letter becomes attractive. 
This view is accordingly adopted by Dobschutz, Franke, Hilgen- 
feld, Lisco, Moffatt, Sabatier, Von Soden, and Whitelaw. 
Others, with less probability, think that the original position of 
the passage was in 1 Cor. vi. or 1 Cor. x., an hypothesis which 
has the additional difficulty of there being no external evidence 
that it ever occupied that position. Consequently we have two 
great difficulties, — to account for its being universally omitted 
there and universally admitted here. Others again regard it as 
a fragment from another letter without attempting to define the 
original place. If the passage is an erratic boulder, the conjec- 
ture that it comes from the letter of 1 Cor. v. 9 is the best that 
can be made as to its origin; Bacon {Intr. to N.T. p. 95) some- 
what doubtfully inclines to it. 

The least probable hypothesis is that these six verses are not 
by St Paul, but are an interpolation by another hand. The 
arguments used in support of this theory are not of great 
weight.* (a) We have in these six verses six words which 
St Paul uses nowhere else, and which are found nowhere else 
in N.T. ; Irepo^uyowres, /xerox*], o~v/x<j>(i)vr)cn<;, BeAi'ap, trvvKaTa^ecrt?, 
fjLo\va-/j.ov. That fact counts for very little. The subject of 
intimacy with the heathen is rarely discussed by St Paul, and 
this topic accounts for some of these six words : and when a 
writer, in order to vary his language, requires five different words 
to express ' intimacy,' he is likely to employ some that are less 
usual. 'Svfji.cfHjivo'; occurs in 1 Corinthians, and /xere^co is frequent 
there, as also in Hebrews. (0) It is said that this stringent pro- 
hibition is inconsistent with 1 Cor. v. 9f. and x. 27 f. But that 
is not correct. There, the Apostle tolerates the idea of a Chris- 
tian caring to accept a heathen's invitation to dinner ; here, he 
strictly forbids intimate combinations with heathen — a very 
different thing from an exceptional sharing of a meal, (c) It is 

* " Neither the language nor the ideas justify a suspicion of the genuineness 
of the passage " (Moffatt). 


urged that 'defilement of flesh and spirit' is not Pauline. St 
Paul treats 'the flesh' as the seat of sin and defilement, and 'the 
spirit' as the opponent of 'the flesh.' The latter statement is 
true of the Apostle's common practice, when he is writing theo- 
logically. Here he is not doing so. In popular language ' flesh 
and spirit ' is an expression which covers the whole of man's 
nature. The Apostle says in conclusion that Christians must 
keep themselves free from what would defile them (as we might 
say) ' body and soul.' St Paul often uses ' flesh ' in the sense of 
the weak physical part of man, without any idea of its being the 
seat of sin and opposed to the spirit (v. 5, xii. 7 ; Gal. ii. 20, 
iv. 13). 'That life which I now live in the flesh I live in faith, 
the faith which is in the Son of God' (Gal. ii. 20), shows clearly 
that with St Paul ' flesh ' is not always essentially sinful. See 
Gifford, Romans, in the Speaker's Commentary, p. 50. 

But all these hypotheses as to this passage being no part of 
our Epistle in its original form, labour under the grave difficulty 
that there is no MS. evidence to support them. How is it that 
all our witnesses have the passage, and have it in this place ? A 
fragment of the letter mentioned 1 Cor. v. 9 might easily survive ; 
but how did it come to be inserted here ? Why place it where 
it does not seem to fit ? If it be supposed that a stray leaf from 
one letter has accidentally got among the leaves of another letter, 
then we have to suppose that the stray leaf chanced to begin and 
end with a complete sentence, and that, of the leaves between 
which it was erroneously inserted, one chanced to end with a 
complete sentence and the other to begin with one. Such a 
combination of chances is improbable. 

It seems, therefore, safer to abide by the external evidence 
and regard the passage as being not only Paul's, but as having 
been placed by him in this apparently unsuitable place. Abrupt 
digressions are more possible in dictating than in writing. While 
he was imploring the Corinthians to be as frank and affectionate 
towards him as he was towards them, he may have remembered 
that their refusal to comply with his demand that they should 
make no compromises with heathendom was one of the chief 
causes of the constraint which kept them apart from him. In 
that case he might there and then repeat his demand and the 
reasons for it, before going on with his tender appeal. Zahn 
(Intr. to N.T. i. p. 350) goes so far as to suggest that the 
connexions between vi. 13 and 14 and between vii. 1 and 2 are 
better than the connexion between vi. 13 and vii. 2. While 
Baljon, Clemen, Pfleiderer, and others favour the excision of the 
passage, Bachmann, Bousset, and Lietzmann regard the reasons 
for treating it as an interpolation as inadequate. Adeney 
(Biblical Intr. to JV.T. p. 371) seems to think that the hypo- 


thesis does not need to be mentioned. Allen and Grensted 
(Intr. to the Books of N.T. p. 129) mention it without expressing 
any opinion of its merits. K. Lake {Earlier Epistles of St Paul, 
pp. 123, 162) says that, although " to some extent the very strongly 
supported theory which divides 2 Cor. x.-xiii. from 2 Cor. i.-ix. 
lends strength to the much more doubtful hypothesis that 2 Cor. 
vi. 14-vii. 1 is an interpolation," yet this hypothesis " from its 
nature can never be regarded as more than a probable guess." 

2. The proposal to separate ch. viii. from i.-vii. has met with 
very little approval, and it may be safely rejected. The sequence 
is quite natural, and any change in tone is adequately accounted 
for by the change of subject. One does not ask favours in the 
same tone as that in which one claims rights. 

3. Still less has the proposal of Semler to separate ch. ix. 
from ch. viii., and make the former a letter to the Christians of 
Achaia, found favour. The audacious theory of A. Halmel 
{Der zweite Korintherbrief des Apostles Paulus, Halle, 1904) 
needs little more than mention. He divides our Epistle into nine 
portions, of which the largest is x. i-xiii. 10, and this is supposed 
to be the second of three letters. The first letter contains viii., 
the last contains ix.* As will be shown in the notes, so far from 
there being a manifest break between viii. and ix., the division of 
the chapters is clumsily made. The first verses of ix. are linked 
to the end of viii. The one thing that is probable in this extreme 
theory is that x. i-xiii. 10 ought to be separated from i.-ix. 
"The attempts to isolate viii. as a separate note (Hagge), written 
later than ix. (Baljon), or as part of the Intermediate Letter 
(Michelsen), break down for much the same reason as the cog- 
nate hypothesis that ix. itself was a subsequent letter sent to the 
Achaian churches (Semler). The unity of the situation pre- 
supposed in viii. and ix. is too well-marked to justify any 
separation of the chapters either from one another or from the 
letter i.-ix., whose natural conclusion they furnish " (Moffatt). 

4. The case of xi. 32, 33 is somewhat similar to that of 
vi. 14-vii. 1. We have a violent transition in the vein of thought; 
and if we omit the verses which produce this abrupt change, we 
have a good sequence of thought. But the two cases are very 
different. Here the transition is not nearly so violent as there ; 
and, when the verses which seem to interrupt the flow of idea 
are omitted, we do not obtain so good a junction of thought and 
language as in the former case. Indeed, those who propose to 
excise the sentences which seem to cause a difficulty are not 
agreed as to how much ought to be cut out in order to make a 
good junction. Some would omit only xi. 32, 33. Some would 

* We may say with C. R. Gregory (Einl. in das N. T. p. 666) ; Das isl 
alles viillig aus der Luft gegriffen. 


omit these two verses and the first half of xii. i ; others, these 
two and the whole of xii. i. But it is by no means incredible 
that St Paul dictated just what has come down to us. No one 
always writes letters that are perfectly consecutive in thought. 
Certainly St Paul does not ; and those who habitually dictate 
their letters are apt to make sudden digressions from which they 
return with equal suddenness. How often, when we read a letter 
over, we note that the omission of a sentence or two would have 
made it read more smoothly. It is possible that the story of the 
Apostle's escape from Damascus had been embroidered, in order 
to make his descent in a basket laughable. Therefore, when he 
is recounting rd t^s do-flemas fiov, he mentions it and solemnly 
declares that his account of what took place is the truth. It is, 
however, possible that in dictating he omitted the incident, and 
that, when he decided that it ought to be inserted, his amanuensis 
put it in the margin not quite in the best place. It would come 
better immediately after xi. 23. Even if this passage stood alone, 
there would be no need to doubt that the event took place ; and 
it is confirmed by Acts ix. 23-25. 

The Last Four Chapters. 

5. We come now to the much larger, more important, and 
more interesting question, whether the four concluding chapters, 
x.-xiii., or at.any ratex. i-xiii. 10, ought not to be separated from 
the first nine chapters and regarded as the main portion of a very 
different letter, which probably preceded the first nine chapters. 

We may at once set aside the second alternative. If the 
theory is true in any shape, it must include the whole of the 
last chapter. To say that no one could wrije xiii. 10, and then 
immediately afterwards write v. 1 1, is dogmatic assumption. The 
sudden change of tone, so far from being incredible, is natural, 
especially in one who was so full of shifting emotions as St Paul. 
The most unwelcome task of denouncing malignant enemies and 
threatening impenitent offenders is accomplished. He will not 
utter another word in that strain. He ends with a few words of 
exhortation, a few words of affection, and his fullest benediction. 

Moreover, if we assume that the whole of the last four 
chapters form one piece, viz. the middle and conclusion of a 
different letter, which had lost its beginning, we can more easily 
understand how this came to be joined to the main portion of 
another letter, which had lost its end. It is much less easy to 
understand how a large portion of a letter, without either begin- 
ning or end, came to be inserted between the main portion of 
another letter and its conclusion. As a conclusion, xiii. 11-13(14) 


belong to the last four chapters and not to the first nine. In 
the discussion which follows, that point is assumed. We are 
dealing with the supposed conjunction, of a letter that has lost 
its conclusion with a letter that has lost its beginning, not with 
the insertion of a large fragment of one letter into a break near 
to the conclusion of another letter. See p. 385. 

The hypothesis that x.-xiii. ought to be separated from i.-ix. 
is almost always combined with the hypothesis that x.-xiii. is part 
of the severe letter to the Corinthians (2 Cor. ii. 3, 9, vii. 8), as 
to the effect of which the Apostle was so anxious when he left 
Ephesus for Troas, and still more so when he left Troas for 
Macedonia in order to meet Titus as soon as possible and receive 
his report of the state of Corinth (ii. 12, 13, vii. 6). This is a 
convenient place, therefore, for considering the problem of this 
severe "intermediate" letter. Although scholars of great emi- 
nence have declared that it is not impossible that 1 Corinthians 
is the letter which was written ' out of much affliction and anguish 
of heart . . . with many tears ' (2 Cor. ii. 3), the sending of 
which he at one time regretted (vii. 8), that hypothesis may once 
for all be abandoned as untenable. On the other hand, we may 
well believe that much of 2 Cor. x.-xiii. was written in anguish, 
and that there are things in these scathing criticisms, especially 
in x. and xi., which he sometimes regretted having written. As 
in the case of the intermediate visit, there is great difference of 
opinion respecting this intermediate letter. 

Its existence is doubted or denied by Alford, Beet, J. H. 
Bernard, Conybeare and Howson, Denney, Lias, McFadyen, 
Meyer, B. Weiss, Zahn ; in fact by all who would identify the 
letter of 2 Cor. ii. 3, 9 and vii. 8 with 1 Corinthians. 

It is regarded as wholly lost by Bachmann, Barth, Bleek, 
Bousset, Credner, Drummond, Ewald, Farrar, Findlay, Godet, 
Heinrici, Klopper, Jacquier, Jiilicher, Lietzmann, Menzies, 
Neander, Olshausen, Sabatier, Sanday, Weizsacker, Ziegler. 

It is regarded as probably preserved in part in 2 Cor. x.-xiii. 
by Adeney, Bacon, Clemen, Cone, Cramer, Hausrath, Kennedy, 
Konig, K. Lake, Lipsius, Lisco, McGiffert, Massie, Michelsen, 
Moffatt, Paulus, Peake, Pfleiderer, Rendall, Schmiedel, R. Scott, 
Seufert, Volter, Von Soden, Wagenmann, Weisse. G. Milligan 
inclines to this view. 

There is yet another theory respecting these four chapters. 
Drescher, Krenkel, and Weber regard them as constituting a 
separate letter, which, however, they place after 2 Cor. i.-ix. 
So also in the main does Schnedermann.* The supposition is 
that, after 2 Cor. i.-ix. had been despatched to Corinth, bad reports 

* Such a theory requires us to believe that Titus had been utterly mistaken 
in the excellent report which he had just brought from Corinth. 


of the state of the Corinthian Church reached the Apostle, and that 
he then wrote and sent x.-xiii. Drescher places the intermediate 
visit between the sending of i.-ix. and the sending of x.-xiii. 

It is plain from these facts that there is a very large consensus 
of opinion in favour of there having been a severe letter of the 
Apostle to Corinth which cannot be identified with i Corinthians, 
and that among those who hold this opinion, which is doubtless 
correct, not a few favour the hypothesis that a great deal of this 
severe letter survives in 2 Cor. x.-xiii. Thus far, however, the 
case for the latter hypothesis is not a strong one. St Paul tells 
us that before writing 2 Cor. i.-ix. he had in affliction and anguish 
written a letter to Corinth which was so severe that at times he 
wished that he had not sent it, and that for weeks he was intensely 
anxious about the result ; and in 2 Cor. x.-xiii. there is a good 
deal that harmonizes with those statements. But there are 
stronger reasons for the identification than this general harmony. 
We have to take into account (1) the extraordinary change of 
tone which is manifest when we pass from ix. to x. ; (2) the 
apparent inconsistency between passages in i.-ix. and passages in 
x.-xiii., which make it difficult to believe that statements so 
inconsistent can have been penned in one and the same letter ; 
(3) the fact that there are passages in i.-ix. which seem to refer 
to passages in x.-xiii., and therefore indicate that x.-xiii. was 
written and sent to Corinth before i.-ix. was written ; (4) the 
fact that x. 16 is expressed naturally, if the writer was in Ephesus, 
where the severe letter was written, but not naturally, if the writer 
was in Macedonia, where i.-ix. was written. All these points 
added to the general harmony between x.-xiii. and the Apostle's 
statements about his severe letter make a really strong case. 

(1) The extraordinary change ottone which begins at x. 1 and 
continues to xiii. 10 is generally admitted, and is sometimes 
described in adequate language by those who nevertheless 
maintain the integrity of the whole Epistle. K. Lake, who 
surrenders the integrity, says tersely and truly enough ; " There is 
not only no connexion between 2 Cor. i.-ix. and 2 Cor. x.-xiii., 
but there is an absolute break between them. . . . There never has 
been, and indeed there never can be, any dispute as to the fact 
that the whole tone of the Epistle changes suddenly at ch. x. 1, 
and that, if 2 Cor. x.-xiii. had existed in a separate form, no one 
would ever have dreamt of suggesting that it was the continua- 
tion of 2 Cor. i.-ix." (pp. 155, 157). There is not only logical 
inconsistency, as will be seen in the next section, there is 
psychological maladroitness. The change is not only surprising 
in its intensity, it is in the wrong direction. When one wishes 
to re-establish friendly relations with persons, one may begin by 
stating one's own grievances frankly and finding fault freely, and 


then pass on to say all that is conciliatory, showing a willingness 
to forgive and a desire for renewed affection. But here the 
Apostle does the opposite. Having written in tender language 
of his intense longing for reconciliation and his intense joy at 
having been able to establish it, he suddenly bursts out into 
a torrent of reproaches, sarcastic self-vindication, and stern 
warnings, which must almost have effaced the pacific effect of the 
first seven chapters. Nor is this all. In between these strangely 
inharmonious portions there is placed a delicate and somewhat 
hesitating, yet eager, petition for increased interest in the 
collection for the poor Christians at Jerusalem. This follows 
naturally enough after affectionate relations have been re- 
established by the first seven chapters. But it is strange policy, 
immediately after imploring freshly regained friends to do their 
duty, to begin heaping upon them reproaches and threats. 

(2) The logical inconsistency is not so conspicuous as the 
psychological, and it might escape observation ; but in certain 
particulars it is striking enough. A writer might say first one 
and then the other of two inconsistent statements, if each was in 
a different letter, especially if the less pleasing statement was sent 
first ; but he would hardly put them in the same letter, writing 
first what was pleasing and then what was the reverse. At any 
rate he would not act thus towards people with whom he wished 
to be on good terms. The contrasts will be best seen if the 
inconsistent passages are placed side by side. 

2 Cor. i.-ix. 2 Cor. x.-xiii. 

i. 24. By your faith ye stand ; i.e. xiii. 5. Try your own selves, 

as regards belief, ye are sound. whether ye be in the faith. 

vii. 16. I rejoice that in everything xii. 20, 21. I fear lest by any 

I am of good courage concerning you. means there should be strife, jealousy, 
viii. 7. As ye abound in every- wraths, factions, backbitings, whisper- 
thing, in faith, and utterance, and ings, swellings, tumults ; lest I should 
knowledge, and in all earnestness, mourn for many of them that have 
and in your love to us. sinned heretofore, and repented not 

of the uncleanness and fornication and 

lasciviousness which they committed. 

ii. 3. My joy is the joy of you x. 2. I beseech you, that I may 

all. not when present show courage with 

vii. 4. Great is my glorying in the confidence wherewith I count to 

your behalf ; I am filled with comfort, be bold against some, which count of 

us as if we walked according to the 
vii. 11. In everything ye approved xi. 3. I fear lest by any means 

yourselves to be pure in the matter. your minds should be corrupted from 

the simplicity and purity that is toward 
iii. 2. Ye are our epistle, written xiii. 10. I write these things while 

in our heart. absent, that I may not when present 

deal sharply. 


The hypothesis that x.-xiii. is part of a stern letter, which was 
sent to Corinth before the conciliatory first chapters were written, 
puts these divergent statements in their logical order. Fears and 
warnings are expressed while a very rebellious spirit is prevalent 
in the Corinthian Church. Joyous commendation is expressed 
after the rebels have submitted and shown regret. 

(3) Let it be admitted that divergent statements such as the 
above would be not impossible in a letter written, as 2 Corinthians 
must have been, at intervals, in some cases of hours, and possibly 
of days ; for the thirteen chapters cannot have been dictated at 
one sitting. There are, however, passages in i.-ix. which appear 
to make a reference to things in x.-xiii. As in the case of the 
previous argument, the effect of these passages is cumulative. 
One or two might be accidental ; but if all of them are mere 
coincidences, we have here a literary phenomenon which is very 
remarkable. As before, we will place the passages in question 
side by side, but in the reverse order, in order that the probability 
of the second being an allusion to the first may be judged. 

2 Cor. x.-xiii. 2 Cor. i.-ix. 

x. 1. I have confidence against vii. 16. I have confidence in you 

you {dappd eh vfias). (dappuj iv v/juv). 

x. 2. With the confidence (7re7roi- viii. 22. By reason of much con- 

Orjaet) wherewith I count to be bold. fidence (ireTroidrjaei) to youward. 

In both of these cases St Paul seems to be purposely repeat- 
ing in a friendly sense an expression which in the former letter 
he had used in a stern and unpleasing sense. 

x. 6. Being in readiness to avenge ii. 9. To this end also did I write, 

all disobedience, when your obedience that I might know the proof, whether 

(viraKori) shall be fulfilled. you are obedient {vtt^kooi) in all 


xii. 16. But being crafty (iravovp- iv. 2. Not walking in craftiness 

705) I caught you with guile. (iravovpyiq.). 

xii. 17. Did I take advantage vii. 2. We took advantage {£ir\eov- 

(eir\eoviKT7)aa) of you ? €Krv(ra/jLev) of no one. 

xiii. 2. If I come again I will not i. 23. To spare you (<pei56fjLei>os) I 

spare (ov (peL<ro/xai). forbore to come to Corinth. 

xiii. 10. I write these things while ii. 3. I wrote this very thing that 

absent, that I may not when present I might not by coming have sorrow, 
deal sharply. 

The last two examples are very remarkable, and they come 
very near to one another, especially in what seems to be the 
later letter. It is also to be noted that, when the severe letter 
was written there was some doubt about St Paul's returning to 
Corinth (If I come again). When i.-ix. was written there was no 
such doubt. It is quite true that even when i.-ix. was written, 


the Apostle might say £uv e\6(n eU to 7raA.1v : but such an expres- 
sion would be more suitable in the earlier letter. 

It is possible that in v. 13, 'Whether we were beside our- 
selves ' (i$€aT7]/xev), we have a reference to the earlier letter, 
especially to the account of his being 'caught up even to the 
third heaven' (xii. 2). He may have anticipated that this and 
other things would lead the Corinthians to say, "The man must 
be mad." In connexion with this it may be noticed that only in 
the chapters which we are assuming to be part of the severe 
letter does he use the strong words acppwv (xi. 16, 19, xii. 6, 11) 
and a<f>pocrvvr] (xi. 1, 17, 21) of the 'folly' with which he was 
sometimes charged ; and elsewhere in N.T. the words are rare. 
In 1 Corinthians he always uses /*w/ao's (i. 25, 27, iv. 10) and 
/xwpCa (i. 18, 21, 23, ii. 14, iii. 19) in relation to the apparent 
' foolishness ' of his preaching. In 2 Cor. i.-ix. none of these 
words occur. Here, therefore, there is another marked difference 
between i.-ix. and x.-xiii. 

Kennedy (Hermathe?ia, xn. xxix., 1903, p. 343) points out 
a difference in the use of the words KavxaaOai, Kau^crts, and 
Kax>xqjxa, which is similar to the difference pointed out in the 
first two examples quoted above ; viz. in the later letter repeat- 
ing in a pleasing sense expressions which in the earlier letter had 
been used in an unpleasing sense. Of these three words Kennedy 
says; "We find that, while these expressions occur ten times in 
the first nine chapters, there is not one of the paragraphs in 
which any of them is to be found which does not contain a 
marked compliment to the Corinthians — a compliment which is 
paid in every instance by the use of one or more of these very 
words. We find, further that, in these nine chapters the writer 
(after i. 12) never speaks of himself as boasting of anything, 
except of the Corinthians ; or of them as boasting of anything, 
except of him. When, however, we pass beyond the break at 
the end of ix., a new and opposite (an apparently contrasted) 
use of these words begins. We meet them nineteen times in 
these four chapters ; but never once do we find the least 
approach to the complimentary use of them which characterized 
the former section. On the contrary, they are here employed 
again and again to describe the writer's indignant vindication of 
his claims against the disloyalty of the Corinthians." There is, 
therefore, some reason for believing that the changed application 
of these words in i.-ix. is intended to take the sting out of their 
application in x.-xiii. K. Lake, Earlier Epistles of St Paul, 
p. 161. 

To these cases in which i.-ix. seems to contain references to 
what is said in x.-xiii. the passages in the latter in which he 
commends himself, and those in the former in which he declares 


that he has no intention of doing so any more, should be 

2 Cor. x.-xiii. 2 Cor i.-ix. 

x. 7. Even as he is Christ's, so iii. 1. Are we beginning again to 

also are we. commend ourselves ? 

xi. 5. I am not a whit behind 
those pre-eminent apostles. 

xi. 18. I will glory also. v. 12. We are not again com- 

xi. 23. Are they ministers of mending ourselves to you. 
Christ ? I more. 

xii. 12. Truly the signs of an viii. 8. I speak not by way of 

apostle were wrought among you. commandment. 

(4) In x. 16, St Paul looks forward to an extension of his 
missionary labours beyond Corinth ; ' so as to preach the gospel 
even unto the parts beyond you ' (eis to. vTreplKtiva. v/awv). We 
know that soon after writing 2 Corinthians, St Paul had thoughts 
of visiting Rome and Spain (Rom. xv. 24, 28), and we may 
suppose that 'the parts beyond you' mean Italy and Spain. 
2 Cor. i.-ix. was written from Macedonia (ii. 13, vii. 5, viii. 1, 
ix. 2-4), and a person in Macedonia would hardly use such an 
expression as ' the parts beyond you ' in reference to Corinth, if 
he was thinking of Italy and Spain. But the severe letter was 
written from Ephesus, and a person in Ephesus might well say 
' the parts beyond Corinth,' and by this mean Italy and Spain. 
Here again, therefore, we seem to have another indication that 
x.-xii. is part of the severe letter which had preceded the letter 
written from Macedonia after Titus had brought the good news 
of the Corinthians' return to loyalty and obedience. 

These arguments, when taken together, do constitute a 
strong case for the theory that 2 Cor. i.-ix. and x.-xiii. are the 
main portions of two different letters, and that x.-xiii. is part ot 
the severe letter which St Paul sent to Corinth before he wrote 
2 Cor. i.-ix. The theory cannot be set aside as gratuitous and 
superfluous. It solves in a reasonable and complete manner a 
grave difficulty by supplying a satisfactory explanation of the 
extraordinary change of tone which begins suddenly at x. 1. 
Nevertheless, this useful theory, supported though it be by a 
remarkable amount of corroborative evidence drawn from the 
documents themselves, is doubted or rejected by a considerable 
number of critics of the first rank, and it is necessary to weigh 
what is urged on the other side. 

1. It is said that the taunt which the Apostle quotes in x. 10, 
1 His letters, they say, are weighty and strong,' includes the severe 
letter, and indeed is a direct reference to it. Therefore it is 
impossible that ch. x. can be part of the severe letter ; and no 
one has proposed to separate x. from xi.-xiii. 


That, of course, is conclusive, if it is correct. But there is 
little reason for believing that it is correct. The letter mentioned 
in i Cor. v. 9 would be weighty and strong, and 1 Corinthians 
is certainly of that character. There is no need to bring in the 
severe letter of ii. 3 and vii. 8. The painful visit, from which 
the Apostle returned insulted and defeated, explains the second 
part of the taunt. 

2. It is urged that this theory cannot be brought into 
harmony with the plan of the promised double visit to Corinth 
(2 Cor. i. 15). 

We have no reason, however, to suppose that the double 
visit was promised. The Apostle says that he ' was wishing ' to 
make it. How soon the Corinthians were aware of this wish, 
we do not know ; still less do we know of his sending them a 
promise about it. See notes on i. 15. 

3. Nor has the argument that the severe letter must have 
included some notice of the case of the incestuous person of 
1 Cor. v., whereas it is not alluded to in x.-xiii., any force; and 
that for two reasons. Perhaps no one now maintains that x.- 
xiii. is the whole of the severe letter ; and the case of incest may 
have been mentioned in the part that is lost. Secondly, there is 
no difficulty in supposing that the severe letter contained no 
allusion to this case. St Paul had recently been in Corinth (the 
short and unsuccessful visit), and during that he would have said 
all that need be said about that painful matter. 

4. Still less force has the argument that there are more than 
20 words, some of which are not common in the Pauline Epistles, 
which occur both in i.-ix. and x.-xiii., the inference being that 
both are parts of the same letter ; e.g. dyvor^s, aypvirvia, aKarao-- 
racria, air\6rr)<;, $0Kip,d£,(ti, SoKi/xy, Swarto), Itoiaios, Oappeo), Kara 
crdpKa (always in reference to the Apostle himself),, 
/C07T05, vor)p.a, 07rXa, iriiroiOa, ir€iroi9rio~i<;, irepio-o-cia, irtpio-o-OTepos, 
Trepicro-OTepiti<;, irXeovc/cTCO), Ta7r«vos (of himself), viraKorj. An 
argument the other way, and at least as strong, may be drawn 
from similar facts. There are more than 30 words, not found 
elsewhere in the Pauline Epistles, which occur in x.-xiii. but not 
in i.-ix. ; and more than 50 words, not found elsewhere in the 
Pauline Epistles, which occur in i.-ix. and not in x.-xiii. More- 
over we have So£a 19 times, TrapaK\r)(rt<; n times, 6\tyts 9 times, 
and x a P^ 4 or 5 times, in i.-ix., and none of them in x.-xiii. ; 
also acrOeveia and do-#eveu> each of them 6 times in x.-xiii., and 
neither of them in i.-ix. 

Such statistics can prove very little as to whether the two 
parts formed one letter or not. For according to both theories 
the two parts were written by the same person, to the same 
persons, about the same subject, viz. the condition of the 


Corinthian Church, with a brief interval between the writing of 
the two parts, in the one case an interval of perhaps a few days, 
in the other an interval of a few weeks. In either case there 
would be similarities as well as differences of expression. 

5. It is urged that the surprising change of tone which begins 
abruptly at x. 1 can be explained without the violent hypothesis 
of two separate letters, and the following explanations are offered. 

(a) The first part is addressed to the submissive majority who 
have become reconciled to the Apostle, while the last part is 
addressed to the still rebellious and impenitent minority. This 
is simply untrue. It is quite clear that both i.-ix. and x.-xiii. 
are addressed to the Corinthian Church as a whole. In neither 
case is there any hint at a limitation ; and in x.-xiii. there is no 
appeal to the example of the supposed submissive majority. 
This is repeatedly pointed out in the notes. 

(b) It is asserted that St Paul's appeal for a collection on 
behalf of the Jerusalem poor skilfully " prepares for the polemic 
against his Judaistic opponents in the third " part. This is asser- 
tion without evidence, and also assumes that only the Judaistic 
opponents are addressed in x.-xiii. Few people would think 
that it was politic to make an urgent, yet somewhat diffident 
request for a generous subscription to a charity fund, and then 
at once begin to hurl sarcastic reproaches and threats at the 
people who were asked to give. 

(c) It is suggested that " the change of tone is sufficiently 
accounted for by a change of mood such as every busy and 
overburdened man is subject to, especially if his health is not very 
robust (cf. 2 Cor. i. 8, 9 and xii. 7)." Lietzmann thinks that a 
sleepless night might account for it. Such explanations are 
strangely inadequate. 

(d) It is suggested that grave news had come from Corinth 
after i.-ix. had been written, news so serious that it made a 
radical change in the attitude of the Apostle to the Corinthian 
Christians. This might be an adequate explanation, but in 
x.-xiii. there is no mention of such news having arrived. The 
excellent news brought by Titus is spoken of with affectionate 
enthusiasm (vii. 6-16), but there is no hint of a more recent 
report totally different in character. 

(e) Perhaps the best argument is that we are so very much in 
the dark as to the details of the situation at Corinth, that we are 
hardly competent to say what St Paul might or might not write 
in the circumstances ; the change of tone would seem more 
intelligible, if we knew what St Paul knew. Yet in any case we 
have to explain how he came to write so vehemently severe an 
attack as x.-xiii. 10 after being so intensely anxious about the 
effect of his former severe words. 


6. By far the strongest argument in favour of the integrity 
of the Epistle as it has come down to us is that the proposal 
to make i.-ix. and x.-xiii. parts of two different letters rests 
entirely upon internal evidence and receives no support what- 
ever from MSS., versions, or quotations. That is solid ground; 
and so long as no documentary evidence can be found in favour 
of the proposal, those who reject it can do so with reason. 
But the internal evidence in favour of this hypothesis is so 
cogent in detail, and so coherent as a whole, and the difficulty 
from which it frees us is so great, that there will probably always 
be some who prefer it to the traditional view. The case is not 
parallel to that of the more recent hypothesis that in Mk. xiii. 
5-37 we have a Christian Apocalypse, in which a few genuine 
Sayings of Christ are embedded, but which was "composed to 
meet a definite crisis " ; its main purpose being " to encourage 
the despondent by showing that the delay of the Parousia and 
the intervening events had been foretold by the Master, and 
especially to warn believers against the false Christs who were 
expected to precede the Parousia" (Studies in the Syjioptic 
Proble?n, p. 165). This hypothesis is gratuitous. It solves no 
difficulty, unless it be a difficulty that in this one place Mark 
gives us a discourse of Christ as distinct from short Sayings. 
There is nothing in the discourse which is unworthy of Christ, 
and nothing which is unlike Mark ; on the contrary, the char- 
acteristics of his style are rather abundant. The one thing in 
which the two cases resemble one another is that neither is 
supported by any documentary evidence. But in the one we 
have an hypothesis which is based on weak internal evidence, 
and which is not of any service to us ; while in the other we 
have an hypothesis based on evidence which not a few regard as 
convincing, and one which frees us from a perplexing difficulty 
of great magnitude. 

§ V. The Opponents. 

In the Second Epistle we find no traces of the four factions 
which were disturbing the Church when the First was written 
(1 Cor. i. 12). That evil appears to have been not very grave; 
it did not amount to rebellion : but in principle it was quite 
wrong, as tending to schism. Enthusiasm for one's teacher may 
be a good thing ; but championship for one leader as against 
another is not, for it is contrary to the spirit of the Gospel and 
may end in disaster. To cry up Paul or Apollos or Kephas as 
rivals, if not opponents of one another, was wrongheaded 
enthusiasm ; and to bring the name of Christ into such a con- 


nexion was to degrade Him who bore it. St Paul thinks that it 
is enough to point out and condemn this error. He does not use 
severe language, and he does not come back to the subject. In the 
interval between the two Epistles the evil appears to have passed 
out of sight, driven under perhaps by other causes of excitement. 

In the Second Epistle, however, we do find traces, if not of 
the earlier ' Christ ' party, yet of one which was akin to it, and 
which had perhaps absorbed the ' Christ ' party together with 
some of the more fanatical members of the party of Kephas. It 
seems to have continued the exclusive claim to the name of the 
Master. People who say ' We are Christ's,' when the whole 
Church is included (cf. i Cor. iii. 23), use language which is right 
enough. But the Corinthian cry, ' I am of Christ,' had implied ' I 
am His, and you are not,' or ' He is mine and not yours.' There 
seems to have been something of the same spirit, but a good deal 
intensified, in the new party with which St Paul is in actual con- 
flict some months later. ' If any man trusteth in himself that 
he is Christ's, let him consider this again with himself, that even 
as he is Christ's, so also are we ' (2 Cor. x. 7 ; cf. xi. 3, 4). 

Among the obscurities of 2 Corinthians there are various stray 
hints which enable us to conjecture with considerable probability 
the genesis of this new ' Christ ' party, if such it may be called. 
The Corinthian Church had been invaded by a band of teachers 
who perhaps were making a missionary tour through various 
Churches. St Paul sarcastically calls them, or their leaders, ' the 
super-eminent apostles' (xi. 5, xii. 11), apparently because they 
falsely claimed the honourable title of 'apostle' (xi. 13), while 
they denied it to him (xii. 12). They said that they were true 
Jews, and he was not (xi. 22). They were 'ministers of right- 
eousness' (xi. 15), who insisted on the Law, while he ignored it 
and even declared it to be obsolete. They were ' ministers of 
Christ' (xi. 23), and he was not. It is possible that some of them 
said, and not untruly, that they had been actual hearers of 
Christ, which he had not been 5 but it is perhaps more probable 
that in saying that they were 'ministers of Christ' they claimed 
that their teaching was much nearer to that of Christ, who had 
kept the Law, than was St Paul's. Quite certainly their teaching 
about Jesus was very different from his (xi. 4). 

It would appear that these invaders had come with 'letters of 
commendation ' (iii. 1), and this is sometimes thought to point 
to their having come from Jerusalem ; but we cannot assume 
this with any certainty. They must have been Greek-speaking 
Jews, or they could not have preached to Corinthian Christians, 
nearly all of whom were Gentiles ; and they may have been 
Hellenists, like St Paul himself. Their ' letters of commenda- 
tion ' may have been from the Churches which they had recently 


visited in their tour. But if they had letters of commendation 
from some members of the Church at Jerusalem, we may be sure 
that they had none from any of the Twelve, although they would 
no doubt wish it to be believed that the Twelve sanctioned their 
mission to Corinth. In the Apostle's prolonged and vehement 
attack on these invaders, there is not a hint that he supposes them 
to have the support of the Twelve or of the Church at Jerusalem. 
His friendly relations with the Twelve remain as they were ; he 
and they teach the same thing (i Cor. xv. n). The letters of 
commendation would come from Jewish Christians who wished 
the Law to be made as binding as the Gospel (Acts xv. 5, 24). 

We know that when these new missionaries arrived in Corinth 
they found Gentile converts who continued the practice of 
heathen vices (xii. 21). If they came to Corinth for the purpose 
of attacking St Paul, this feature in the lives of many of his con- 
verts would intensify them in their desire to oppose a preacher 
whose teaching had had such results ; and if they came without 
any such definite purpose, this feature would be likely to turn 
them into opponents, for it would seem to show that there must 
be something radically wrong in his teaching. It is probable that 
they were prejudiced against him before they arrived; and it 
is evident that they soon became malignant assailants, who seem 
to have regarded any weapon as admissible in the effort to defeat 
so dangerous a teacher. They were not content with trying to 
prove that he was no true Apostle, and that as a preacher he was 
miserably ineffective, but they bitterly assailed his private 
character. He was altogether, as in public, so also in his private 
life, a despicable person. He never knew his own mind, or at 
any rate he would never declare it clearly ; he was always trying 
to say 'Yes' and 'No' in the same breath (i. 17, 18). He was 
a tyrant, lording it over his converts (x. 8) ; and, like many 
tyrants, he was a coward, who said that he would come to Corinth, 
and yet did not dare to show himself there (i. 23, xiii. 2). He 
could be very brave on paper, but he was utterly ineffective face 
to face (x. 10). At the beginning of his career he had run away 
from Damascus in quite a ludicrous fashion (xi. 32, 33); and 
now quite recently he had run away from Corinth, unable to stand 
up against determined opposition (ii. 1, xiii. 2). During his stay 
he would not accept the maintenance of an Apostle, because he 
knew that he was not a true Apostle ; this was his real reason, 
but he made a great parade of this refusal, as if it was a proof 
of great generosity (xi. 7-9, xii. 14). And all the while, although 
he accepted nothing openly or directly, yet he was getting 
support in an underhand way through his agents (vii. 2, xii. 17, 18). 
Indeed it was by no means certain that he did not appropriate 
some of the money collected for the poor Christians at Jerusalem 


(viii. 20, 21). And yet the man who was capable of this despic- 
able behaviour was never tired of asserting himself as a person 
of exceptional authority (iii. 5, iv. 5), and praising himself as a 
person of exceptional merit and success (iii. 1, x. 8, xi. 16-18, 
xii. 1, n). The only reasonable explanation of his conduct was 
that he was mad (v. T3). There is, however, no reason for believ- 
ing that even thesewild and unscrupulous assailants ever insinuated 
that, in spite of all his strong words against impurity, Paul was 
himself a man of impure life. That is not the meaning of x. 2. 

Some of these supposed accusations or insinuations are 
inferences from what St Paul says about himself, and in one or 
two cases the inference may be erroneous ; but about the majority 
of charges made against the Apostle by these opponents there 
is no doubt, and they form a consistent whole. They are just 
the kind of things which exasperated controversialists have in all 
ages been apt to say about those whose teaching they regarded 
as heretical and poisonous. In a similar way we can gather the 
other side of the picture. The invaders evidently had a very bad 
opinion of St Paul ; we may now look at the estimate which he 
had formed of them. Like the fraudulent seller who adulterates 
his wares, these men corrupted the Gospel which they preached 
(ii. 17, iv. 2, xi. 3, 13). Their Gospel was utterly different from 
St Paul's (iii. 5-10, xi. 4); indeed it was little better than a dia- 
bolical caricature of it (xi. 14). They lowered the spiritual 
standard down to their own moral level, and then they lauded 
themselves and one another for having reached that low standard 
(x. 12). They professed to have a great zeal for religion, but 
they did not go among the heathen and labour to win converts ; 
they followed in the footsteps of genuine workers and tried to take 
the credit for what had been done before they came (x. 15, 16). 
And wherever they obtained influence they used it in a tyrannical 
and grasping manner, not only accepting maintenance (xi. 12), 
but exacting it by brutal and violent means (xi. 20). In a word, 
they were 'Satan's ministers' (xi. 15). 

One sees what monstrous distortion there is in the descrip- 
tion which these invaders gave of the Apostle's character and 
teaching. Is there no exaggeration in the picture which he draws 
of them ? A teacher who was so absolutely absorbed in his work 
as was St Paul, who had seen his work so marred, and for a time 
almost wrecked, by the intrusion of these bigoted propagandists, 
and whose personal character had been so venomously assailed 
by them, would have been almost superhuman, if he had been 
able to form and state a perfectly just estimate of such opponents. 
We are not competent to decide whether the estimate which he 
gives us is just or not. We must leave the matter in the obscurity 
which blurs so many of the details of this tantalizing Epistle. 


Reitzenstein and K. Lake think that the opponents of St Paul 
at Corinth were not Judaizers, but ' spirituals.' They accounted 
themselves as 7n/€i>/i.axucoi, and were " inspired by a desire to go 
still further than St Paul in the direction of freedom from the 
Law, and to lay even greater stress on the spiritual nature of 
Christianity " {Earlier Epp. of St Paul, p. 219). In favour of this 
view appeal is made to 2 Cor. x. 2, xii. 11-15 ; and it is suggested 
that x. 3-18 is not a reply to a vulgar attack on St Paul's personal 
appearance (v. 10), but to an argument that he "had not got the 
impressive powers which resulted from the gift of the Spirit" 
(p. 224). It is also contended that the right interpretation of the 
difficult passage v. 16 (see notes there) confirms the view that St 
Paul's opponents were TcveofiaTiKoL Saul of Tarsus had once 
known Christ as a teacher of lawlessness and falsehood, who was 
rightly put to death and had never been raised : but that was long 
ago, and now he had a lofty and spiritual conception of Him. 
In this matter he had long been as ' spiritual ' as his opponents 
claimed to be. 

It may be doubted whether the passages in question will bear 
the interpretation thus put upon them. At the outset it is almost 
startling to be told of Jewish Christians who assailed St Paul as 
a dangerous teacher because he did not go far enough in throwing 
off the yoke of the Law. In that case would it have been 
necessary for him to declare so passionately that he was just as 
much a Hebrew, an Israelite, the seed of Abraham, as any of 
them? Would he have spoken of them as false apostles} In all 
his vehement language about them he nowhere accuses them of 
being libertines who by their antinomian doctrines were under- 
mining the moral law and opening the door to licentiousness. 
When he expresses a fear that many of the Corinthian Christians 
have not repented of their former uncleanness and lasciviousness 
(xii. 21), he gives no hint that they have been led astray by the 
false teachers. On the other hand it is easy enough to believe 
that Judaizing Christians, coming to Corinth and finding much 
licentiousness among the converts there, would assail St Paul as a 
cause of the evil, owing to his abrogation of the Jewish Law. On 
the whole there does not seem to be sufficient reason for abandon- 
ing the usual view that these Jewish teachers were Judaizers who 
insisted on the Law to an extent which was fatal to Christian 
freedom. The contrast drawn in ch. iii. between the transient 
character of the old dispensation and the permanence of the new, 
looks like an indirect condemnation of the teaching which 
Judaizers had, with much success, been giving to the Corinthians. 
If it be asked why St Paul does not make the Judaizing character 
of his opponents more clear, we may reply that the Corinthians 
did not need to have it made clear to them ; they knew what 


these men taught. That is the puzzle all through the Epistle ; 
allusions which were perfectly obvious to the Corinthians then 
are obscure and perplexing to us now, because we do not know 
the details of the situation. 

§ VI. Doctrine. 

As already stated, in 2 Corinthians the didactic element is 
secondary ; doctrine and instruction are found in it, but they 
are incidental : the primary element is a personal one, viz. the 
vindication of the Apostle's authority and character. The First 
Epistle is not a doctrinal treatise ; only one great dnctrj ^ e is 
discussed in it. that of the Resurr ection. t l 3^causft_ it had b een 

doctrine or rules of life in the Second Epistle. Nevertheless 
there are some topics which need consideration. 

With regard to the writers own relation to the Master there 
is the same position as before. He is 'an Apostle of Christ 
Jesus by God's will' (i. 1), and this position is strenuously 
asserted as one which can be demonstrated in the face of all who 
question or deny it. Its proof lies in the Corinthians themselves 
(iii. 2, 3), i.e. in the existence of the Church at Corinth, and in 
the 'signs and wonders and mighty works' which he had wrought 
among them (xiii. 12). It is by God that he was made sufficient 
as a minister (iii. 5, 6, iv. 7), and not by any commission 
received from man. 

The Christology is the same. Jesus Christ is the 'Son of 
God' (i. 19), and it is 'in Him ' that all Christians live (i. 21, ii. 
14, 17, etc.). His pre-existence is implied in the statement that 
'for your sakes he became poor' (viii. 9), which refers to the 
Word becoming flesh. In His human life Jesus did not make 
any sacrifice of wealth ; He was poor from His birth. But by 
taking on Himself human life He sacrificed more than man can 
understand. He died for all (v. 15), and through Him God has 
reconciled us to Himself (v. 18-21), a statement of deep import.* 
He has been raised from the dead, and with Him we also shall 
be raised (iv. 14). Statements made in O.T. of Jehovah are 
often transferred to Christ. 

In neither Epistle is there any clearly defined Trinitarian 
doctrine, but in the Benediction at the end of 2 Corinthians 
we are nearer to such definite doctrine than in ' the same Spirit 

* " This memorable passage is the culminating point of the Apostle's 
teaching in this Epistle, and is perhaps the profoundest and most important 
utterance in the whole of his writings " respecting the mystery of the Atone- 
ment (C. R. Ball, Preliminary Studies on N. T. p. 143). 


. . . the same Lord . . . the same God' (i Cor. xii. 4-6). See 
notes on i. 2, 22 and iii. 17 for other evidence. 

In one particular it has been thought by some that we have 
a development in St Paul's thought amounting to a change of 
view, viz. with regard to the manner of our resurrection. Certainly 
he expresses himself very differently in each Epistle. See 
Additional Note on v. 1-10 . It may be said of his theology 
gem-rally, that there is no system in it, and that to suppose that 
out of his various statements we can construct the theological 
system which was in his mind when he delivered his various 
statements about God, Christ, the Spirit, redemption, etc., is 
utterly to misunderstand him. This is specially true of what is 
commonly spoken of as his " Eschatology." What distinguishes 
it and his theology generally is its want of system. In each 
utterance his object is to make his meaning clear to those to 
whom he is writing; and he does not stop to think whether 
what he says is logically coherent with what he may have said 
elsewhere. Hence the frequent occurrence of what have been 
called "the Antinomies of St Paul." Like Ruskin and West- 
cott, he is not afraid of a verbal contradiction. Deissmann goes 
so far as to contend that " what is called the ' Eschatology ' of 
Paul has little that is ' Eschatological ' about it. . . . Paul did 
not write de novissimis. . . . One must be prepared for a surging 
hither and thither of great thoughts, feelings, expectations" 
(Theol. Lit. Zeit., 1898, Sp. 14; cited by Milligan, Thessalonians, 
p. lxix, and by Kennedy, St Paul's Conceptions of the Last 
Things, p. 21 n.). Sometimes there is a Judgment (v. 10), some- 
times there seems to be no room for one (1 Thess. iv. 16, 17). 
Sometimes God is the Judge (Rom. xiv. 10), sometimes Christ 
(1 Cor. iv. 4 ; 2 Cor. v. 10). "We must keep the two categories 
of passages together, without attempting any artificial reconcilia- 
tion of apparent discrepancies in order to attribute to the Apostle 
a complete system of Eschatology " (Weinel, St Paul, the Alan 
and His Work, p. 49). The Jewish Apocalypses are full of 
contradictory notions on a variety of points. St Paul in this 
matter was a man of his age, and it is not improbable that at 
different times he was under the influence of different Jewish ideas, 
which, however, were always tested by his own penetrating thought. 

In the somewhat crude picture which is put before us in 
1 and 2 Thessalonians nothing is said about the nature of the 
resurrection-body. In 1 Cor. xv. he deals with this question, 
not perhaps because he himself regarded it as of very great 
moment, but because there were Christians at Corinth who 
thought it incredible that a body which had been dissolved in 
the grave should be restored, and who therefore denied that the 
dead could be raised. The Apostle had to answer this objec- 


tion, and in doing so he would naturally think of answers which 
were prevalent among Jews with regard to a resurrection. We 
can distinguish four views. 

i. The Book Ecclesiasticus says that the soul of man is not 
immortal (xvii. 30), but that the wise man's name will never die, 
to ovofxa avrov Cv a€TaL € ' s T0V o-lwva (xxxvii. 26). This is not 
very different from the old idea that Sheol is the end of man, 
for existence in Sheol is hardly to be called life. St Paul would 
be familiar with this idea, whether he knew Ecclesiasticus or 

2. Almost certainly he knew the Book of Wisdom (Sanday 
and Headlam, /tomans, pp. 51, 52, 267; Gregg, Wisdom, pp. 
lvi-lix), and in that we have not only the immortality (i. 15, 
ii. 23, iii. 1, iv. 7) but the pre-existence of souls (viii. 20). This, 
however, is immortality for the soul alone ; it is the spirit that is 
raised from sleep, and there is no resurrection of the body 
(Enoch xci. 10, xcii. 3, ciii. 3, 4; Jubilees xxiii. 31). We cannot 
with any certainty get the idea of a return to a golden age on 
earth from the picturesque language in Wisd. iii. 7-9 and v. 
16-23 (Gregg, p. xlviii). 

3. In 2 Mace. 9-1 1, xiv. 46 we have the resurrection of the 
body in the most literal sense. The very limbs in which men 
die are to be restored, according to the popular idea that bodies 
will come out of their graves at the resurrection, as out of their 
beds every morning during life, — an idea which is certain to 
prevail wherever the resurrection is represented in sculpture or 
painting (2 Esdr. vii. 32). Even Rabbis taught that the righteous 
after resurrection would beget children and feast on the flesh of 
Leviathan, the latter being a gross misunderstanding of Ps. 
lxxiv. 14 (see Briggs, ad loc). In the Apocalypse of Baruch we 
have both this view (1. 1) and the next (see below). It was this 
idea which seemed to the sceptics at Corinth to be quite 
incredible, and St Paul does not ask them to believe it. 

4. In Enoch li. 4, civ. 6, as in the Apocalypse of Baruch li. 5, 
10, there seems to be some idea that the resurrection-body will 
be the material body transfigured into a spiritual body, such as 
Angels have. This is not a creation of a new body, in which 
case there would be no resurrection ; it is a marvellous transfor- 
mation of the earthly body. This is the idea which the Apostle 
adopts (see on 1 Cor. xv. 35). When is the spiritual body / 
received by the person who dies? It is on this point that St J 
Paul's view appears to have undergone a change. When 1 Cor. | 
xv. was written he seems to have thought that the spiritual body! 
was received at the resurrection. When 2 Cor. v. was written! 
he seems to have thought that it was received at death. Somef 
such change as the following may have taken place. Formerly 


he expected that he and nearly all Christians would live to see 
the Coming of Christ, and the brief interval between death and 
the Coming in the case of the few who died before the Coming 
did not impress him. But since writing i Corinthians he him- 
self had been in great and prolonged peril of death,* other 
Christians had died, and it was still uncertain when Christ would 
come. Were the dead to wait till the day of resurrection for the 
spiritual body which fits them for eternal life with the Lord? 
Surely not. At death we are immediately clothed upon with 
this glorified body, in which we at once enter into full com- 
munion with the glorified Christ. Comp. the words of the dying 
Stephen (Acts vii. 59), words which St Paul had heard. 

Commentators differ as to whether the way in which St Paul 
expresses himself in 2 Cor. v. amounts to a change of view from 
1 Cor. xv. Lightfoot (on Phil. i. 23) simply says; "The one 
mode of representation must be qualified by the other." Vincent 
(on Phil. i. 23) holds that "the assumption that Paul's views had 
undergone a change " is " beside the mark." Kennedy (St 
PauPs Conceptions of the Last Things, p. 163) is convinced of 
"the futility of postulating schemes of gradual development in 
St Paul's Eschatology." On the other side see Cohu, St Paul 
and Modern Research, pp. 320-324. Alford (on 2 Cor. v. 1) 
thinks that the question need not be raised at all, but quotes a 
variety of opinions. 

§ VII. Mystery Religions. 

The theories that St Paul is the real founder of Christianity 
by bringing into prominence doctrines which went far beyond, 
and at last almost eclipsed, the simple teaching of Christ, and 
that in so doing he borrowed a great deal from the Mystery 
Religions which were in vogue in his own day, would seem to be 
finding their proper level. Criticism has shown that only in a 
very limited and qualified sense is there truth in either of them. 
No doubt there are differences between the teaching of St Paul 
as we have it in his letters, and the teaching of Christ as we have 
it in the Synoptic Gospels. That was inevitable, seeing that the 
personal experiences of each were so different, and the require- 
ments of their hearers were so different also. But with this con- 
troversy we need not concern ourselves here, for it has no special 
connexion with 2 Corinthians. The reader who desires to 

* This fact might influence him in opposite ways. It might make him 
think that another such crisis would probably kill him. Or it might lead 
him to hope that, as he had been preserved through this, he would be pre- 
served till the Coming. 


consider it may turn to Cambridge Biblical Essays, to Knowling's 
The Testimony of St Paul to Christ, and to Maurice Jones' The 
JV.T. in the Twentieth Century. The other controversy lies 
somewhat more in our path, not only because some of the words! 
which are thought to be technical terms in Mystery Religions 
are used in this Epistle, but also because of the 'revelation ' in 
xii. 1-7, which is supposed to mark some affinity with Mystery 
Religions. Among these technical expressions are ranked- wko 

Ka\v\)/LS (xii. I, 7), app-qra pijfxara (xii. 4), yvwcris (hi. 1 8), 86£a 
(passim), cIkwv (iv. 4), ivSvoftai (v. 3), o-o<f>ia (i. 12), crcfrpayi^ofAai 
(i. 22), crwTrjpia (i. 6, vi. 2, vii. 10) ; and it may be remarked thai 
most of them might easily be employed by a writer who had 
never heard of a Mystery Religion, and that not one of them is 
conclusive evidence of acquaintance with the language of such 
cults ; although, when St Paul's Epistles are considered as a 
whole, acquaintance with the language of some of these cults 
need not be doubted. But knowledge and use of certain 
technical terms which were current in connexion with Mysteries 
is one thing ; borrowing from the Mysteries themselves in order 
to construct a new Gospel is quite another. Before the latter is 
allowed to be probable there is much to be considered. 

1. The amount that we really know about the Mysteries has 
been exaggerated ; a great deal of what modern writers tell us 
about them is conjectural, for evidence is insufficient. This is 
specially the case with regard to Mithraism, the most important 
of all the Mystery Religions of which we have any knowledge. 
This is fully admitted by F. Cumont in the Preface to Die 
Mysterien des Mithra. Inscriptions are our only sure guides, and 
they are scanty enough. A great deal of what is told us about 
Mithra-worship is inference from the interpretations which have 
been put upon pieces of sculpture in which the figure of Mithra 
appears. But are the interpretations right ? There are sculptures 
which are undoubtedly Christian, but which our intimate 
knowledge of the Christian religion does not enable us to 
interpret with certainty. Where should we be if our knowledge 
of Christianity depended upon the interpretation of the 
sculptures ? As Cumont says, about the conflict between 
Mithraism and Christianity we know only the result. Mithraism 
was vanquished, and its defeat was inevitable, not merely because 
of its intrinsic inferiority, but also because, although both were of 
Eastern origin, Christianity could, while Mithraism could not, 
adapt itself permanently to the thought and life of the West. 
This is the more remarkable, because Christianity was exclusive 
and Mithraism was not. Mithraism could co-exist with almost 
any other religion. It was specially popular in the legions, and 
with them reached the Roman Wall along the Tyne ; and it is 


perhaps true to say that in the second century Mithra had more 
worshippers than Christ. The two religions started about the 
same .time, and at first they did not often come into collision. 
The battle was fought out later in Africa, Gaul, and Rome. It 
may be doubted whether much was known about Mithra in 
Corinth at the time when St Paul was at work there. 

With regard to the extent to which meagre evidence is 
supplemented by conjecture, Schweitzer has some useful remarks. 
" Those who are engaged in making these comparisons are rather 
apt to give the Mystery Religions a greater definiteness of thought 
than they really possess, and do not always give sufficient 
prominence to the distinction between their own hypothetical 
reconstruction and the medley of statements on which it is based. 
Almost all popular writings fall into this inaccuracy. They 
manufacture out of the various fragments of information a kind 
of universal Mystery Religion which never actually existed, least 
of all in Paul's day " {Paul and his Interpreters, p. 192). Diete- 
rich in his work on the Mithras liturgie admits that we have 
very little exact knowledge regarding the sacred meals of the 
Mystery Religions, about which so much is sometimes urged in 
connexion with the institution of the Eucharist ; that they were 
believed to have supernatural effects is perhaps all that can be 
said with certainty. 

2. Chronology is often fatal to the supposition that St Paul 
borrowed a great deal from this or that Mystery Religion, for few 
of them had made much way in the Roman Empire until about 
a.d. 100. Our knowledge of them often comes from sources 
which belong to the second century or later, and then the question 
at once arises whether, in the details which are really analogous, 
— and these are not so numerous as is sometimes supposed, — 
the Mystery Religion has not borrowed from Christianity. At 
Tarsus, Antioch, Ephesus, and elsewhere St Paul would learn 
something about Oriental Mysteries ; and in Greece he would 
learn something about the Eleusinian Mysteries and perhaps 
some other Greek cults, enough probably to enable him to make 
skilful but cautious use of some of the language which was used 
by the initiated. But we must always bear in mind the possibility 
that the Apostle sometimes uses in its ordinary sense language 
which afterwards became technical in connexion with the 
Mysteries ; also that, where he consciously uses the language of 
the Mysteries, he uses it in a new sense.* Records of prayer for 
' Salvation,' says Ramsay, are found in many villages of Asia 
Minor. "St Paul may have caught the Greek word from the 

* See F. B. Westcott, A Letter to Asia, pp. 122, 123 n. ; Ramsay, The 
Teaching of Paul in Terms of the Present Day, pp. 283-305; Maurice Jones, 
The N.T. in the Twentieth Century, pp, 144-149. 


lips of thousands of pagans. It is the same word that became 
specially characteristic of Christian teaching. Yet it would be a 
serious error to argue that, because pagans and Christians alike 
longed and prayed for ' Salvation,' therefore the thing that they 
sought for was the same. . . . Paul in the last resort was an 
uncompromising enemy of the religious ideas embodied in the 
Mysteries" (pp. 285, 303). 

There is this amount of truth in the theory that the Mystery 
Religions have influenced St Paul. In a very real sense Chris- 
tianity is a Mystery Religion, the best that the world has ever 
seen. Many of the Apostle's converts had some knowledge of 
what the Mystery Religions of the East, or of Egypt, or of 
Greece, professed to offer to those who accepted them. We may 
regard it as certain that some of his converts had been initiated in 
one or other of these cults ; and their experiences of initiation and 
membership might easily lead them to inquire about, and finally 
to be admitted to, the Christian Church. To such converts the 
Gospel would seem to be the best Mystery Religion of which 
they had ever heard ; and the Apostle in instructing them would 
naturally at times use language with which they were already 
familiar, and which could now be employed of Christian 
Mysteries in a far deeper and more spiritual sense. It is perhaps 
going too far to say with H. A. A. Kennedy {Expositor, July 
1912, p. 67) that "he must have gained a first-hand acquaintance 
with those religious conceptions by which they (the initiated) had 
attempted to reach spiritual peace." But Kennedy is certainly 
right in his criticism of Heinrici, that " we know too little about 
the organization either of Pagan or early Christian societies to 
accept his conclusion that the Christian community at Corinth 
was nothing else than a heathen religious guild transformed." 
" We know far less about the actual ritual and doctrines of the 
Mystery Religions in the Graeco-Roman world than we do of 
their wide diffusion and potent influence. This is not surprising, 
for, on the one hand, their votaries were strictly enjoined to 
keep silence on their most sacred experiences, and, on the other, 
stern critics of Paganism like the early Christian Fathers must 
inevitably have been biassed in their casual representation of the 
facts. The literary remains of these communities are very scanty " 
(p. 60). " Extreme divergence of opinion prevails as to the full 
significance and effect of the ritual and its accompaniments. . . . 
Considerable caution must be employed in attempting to define 
with any certainty the beliefs or ritual of these cults at special 
moments in their history. For that history remains exceedingly 
dim, especially for the period when Oriental faiths were confronted 
with Greek culture in Asia" (pp. 70, 72). In particular, it is 
difficult to determine the period at which such savage and 


barbaric ritual as the gashing themselves with knives, and the 
taurobolium or bath of blood, became associated with deeper and 
saner religious ideas, such as self-sacrifice, purification from sin, 
and the securing of immortality by union with the deity. In any 
given case this momentous change may have taken place at a 
period long after the lifetime of St Paul ; and it is precisely in 
these deeper and saner ideas that resemblances between Chris- 
tianity and Mystery Religions can be found. One idea would 
in any case be new to converts who had previously been initiated 
in some heathen cult, new both in language and in thought, — the 
doctrine of Christ crucified. " The Cross is the peculiar property 
of the Gospel" (Bigg, The Church's Task under the Roman 
Empire, p. xi). 

Clemen, Primitive Christianity and its Non-Jeivish Sources, 
supplies much valuable criticism on the theory that St Paul and 
other N.T. writers borrowed largely from Mystery Religions. 

§ VIII. Characteristics, Style, and Language. 

As literature the Second Epistle does not rank so high as the 
First. Powerful as is the language of the Great Invective 
in the last four chapters, which sometimes has a rhythmical and 
rhetorical swing that sweeps one along in admiration of its im- 
passioned intensity,* there is nothing in the whole letter which 
rises to the sustained beauty and dignity of i Cor. xiii. and xv. 
The ease and smoothness and orderly arrangement of the earlier 
letter are wanting, and the rapid changes in the series of con- 
flicting emotions are not conducive to literary excellence. The 
mixture of human weakness with spiritual strength, of tender- 
ness with severity, of humility with vehement self-vindication, of 
delicate tact with uncompromising firmness, produces an impres- 
sion of intense reality, but at the same time bewilders us as to 
the exact aim of this or that turn of expression. The Greek is 
harder to construe than that of the First Epistle, owing to the 
ruggedness which results from dictating when the feelings are 
deeply stirred. 

Sanday and Headlam (Romans, lvii f.) have shown that there 
is much resemblance, both in style and vocabulary, between the 
four great Epistles of this period of the Apostle's life. The 
resemblance is stronger when Romans is omitted from the com- 
parison, and it is strongest of all when only Galatians and 
2 Corinthians are compared. One reason for this resemblance is 
that all four letters were written during the time when the brief 
but bitter conflict between Gentile and Judaistic Christianity 
* See especially the paraphrase of xi. 16-33. 


was at its height. Traces of this conflict come to the surface in 
i Corinthians and Romans, but other topics keep it in abeyance : 
in Galatians and 2 Corinthians one is in the thick of the battle. 
The personal element is least prominent in Romans, the latest 
of the four great Epistles, rather more so in 1 Corinthians, much 
more so in Galatians, and most of all in our Epistle. The feature 
which is specially characteristic of all four letters is intense 
sincerity, to which we may perhaps add sureness of touch. In 
common with other Pauline Epistles they have a marked argu- 
mentative form. See Introduction to 1 Corinthians^ pp. xlviii, 
xlix, for other features. 

The use of such words as avrdpKeia (ix. 8), liruLKua (x. 1), to 
Kakov (xiii. 7), TrpaoTTjs (x. i), (ix. 7), crwetSr/cris 

(i. 12, iv. 2, v. n), and <pav\os (v. 10) may be taken as indicating 
some knowledge of Greek philosophical language. 

Words peculiar to 2 Corinthians in N.T. 

In this list it will be of some interest to separate the words 
which are found only in the first nine chapters from those which 
ire found only in the last four; but, as has been pointed out 
already, no sure inference can be drawn from such statistics. 
An asterisk indicates that the word is not found in the LXX. 

The following words occur in i.-ix. : 

* ayava.KTr]o-L<s (vii. Il), * d.8poT7js (viii. 20), dvaKaXxmTOi 
(iii. 14, 18), * dveKSt^y^TOS (ix. 15), * dirapao-KivaaTO'i (ix. 4), 
aTrel-Trov (iv. 2), * dwoKpipa (i. 9), avyd^w (iv. 4), * av6aipe.TO<; 

(viii. 3, 17), * BeXt'ap (vi. 15), SoAdw (iv. 2), S0V/7? (ix. 7), hvo-<prjp.ia 

(vi. 8), €(cre'xO) (vi. 17), * ix8r]p.€LO (v. 6, 8, 9), cAa-rrovew 
(viii. 15), * e'Aa<£pt'a (i. 17), * €vSrjp.ico (v. 6, 8, 9), £V7rept7raT€w 
(vi. 16), * ivrvirou) (iii. 7), e£a7ropeo/ucu (i. 8, iv. 8), eVa/covw (vi. 2), 

* €7revSi;a> (v. 2, 4), * iirnroOyjo-is (vii. 7, n), tVi-rip-ia (ii. 6), 

* €T€po£,vyew (vi. 14), * ev^y/xia (vi. 8), ip'Ua (iii. 15, 16), * i/cavor^s 
(iii. 5), lAapds (ix. 7), KaXvp.p.a (iii. 13, 14, 15, 16), * KaTrqXevay 
(ii. 17), * Kcn-anr/DUTis (iii. 9, vii. 3), * KaT07rTpi£opai (iii. 18), /xoXvo-jaos 
(vii. 1), 1xwp.d0p.aL (vi. 3, viii. 20), irapavrLKa (iv. 17), 7rev^5 (ix. 9), 

* Trepvai (viii. IO, ix. 2), irpoaipea) (ix. 7), * (viii. 6, 10), 

* TrpoKaTapTtXo) (ix. 5), * irpocrKOTrr] (vi. 3), irTojy^voi (viii. 9), 
o-tajvos (v. I, 4), oTrovSaios (viii. 17, 22), crrevo^wpeoyuat (iv. 8, 
vi. 12), * o-vp.(pwvr]o-is (vi. 15), * o-vvKardOtaLS (vi. 16), * 0-vvirip.Troi 
(viii. 18, 22), * o-vvvTTovpyew (i. Ii), * o-rcrrartKos (iii. 1), * <f>ci8o- 
pevws (ix. 6), (f>(j>TLo-p.6<; (iv. 4, 6). 

The following words occur in x.-xiii. : 

* aftaprjs (xi. 9), * a/Aerpos (x. 13, 15), * 'Aperas (xi. 32), 
dpp.6£,<A (xi. 2), * dppr}TO<s (xii. 4), (Svdos (xi. 25), Aap-ao-K-^vos 


xi. 32), e0vapxr)<; (xi. 32), * €/cSa7ravao) (xii. 1 5), eV(po/3ea> (x. 9), 

* ivKpivui (x. 12), * €7ricrK7yi'0(o (xii. 9), * e<f>u< (x. 13, 14), 

* ^Sierra (xii. 9, 15), Ka#aip£<ris (x. 4, 8, xiii. 10), * Kara^aploi 
(xii. 16), * KaravapKaoy (xi. 9, xii. 1 3, 14), * KarapTio-is (xiii. 9), 

* wxOrjpLtpov (xi. 25), 6\vp(ap.a (x. 4), 7rapa<ppove'co (xi. 23), 
7revi-aKis (xi. 24), * Trpoap.apTa.voi (xii. 21, xiii. 2), aapyavr] (xi. 33), 
o-Ko\.o\f/ (xii. 7), o-uAaw (xi. 8), crwa7roa-TeXXa) (xii. 18), £'7rep- 
/SaAXovTcos (xi. 23), * VTrepeKZLva (x. 1 6), * vwepeKTeui'd} (x. 1 4), 

* V7T€p\iav (xi. 5, xii. Il), * <pvo-La>o~i% (xii. 20), * i//et>Sa.7rdcrToXos 

(xi. 13), \[/i8vpio-p.6<> (xii. 20). 

The following occur in both divisions of the letter : 
aypvirvia (vi. 5, xi. 27), TrpoaavairXrjpow (ix. 12, xi. 9), and per- 
haps * ayvoTTjs (vi. 6, xi. 3), but the reading in xi. 3 is doubtful. 

Phrases peculiar to 2 Corinthians in N. T. 

TraAata 8ia8i]Kr} (iii. 14). 
6 0eos tov aiwvos tovtov (iv. 4). 
6 (i$u) 7]p.£>v av0pw7ros (iv. 16). 
KaTa fidOovs (viii. 2). 
ayyeXo? <j>wt6<; (xi. 14). 
TpiVos ovpavo? (xii. 2). 
ayyeXo? craTava (xii. 7). 

Quotations from the O.T. 

For this subject Swete, Introduction to the O. T. in Greek, 
pp. 381-405, should be consulted; also Sanday and Headlam, 
Romans, pp. 302-307. Even when the difference in length 
between the two Epistles is taken into consideration, the number 
of quotations in the Second is less than in the First. In 
I Corinthians (pp. Iii f.) we found about thirty quotations 
from eleven different books. In 2 Corinthians there are about 
twenty quotations from nine or more different books. Not many 
of these are given as direct quotations, and all such are in the 
first nine chapters : naddirep (iii. 12), Kara, to yeypap.p.tvov (iv. 13), 
Xcyct (vi. 2), Ka#u)s ecTrev 6 ®eds (vi. 16), /<a#u>s yiypairrai (viii. 1 5, 
ix. 9). In the last four chapters quotations of any kind are few. 
In the first nine chapters we have quotations from Exodus 
(iii. 3, 7, 10, 13, 16, 18, viii. 15), Leviticus (vi. 16), 2 Samuel 
(vi. 18), Psalms (iv. 13, vi. 9, n, ix. 9), Proverbs (iii. 3, viii. 21, 
ix. 7), Isaiah (v. 17, vi. 2, 17, vii. 6, ix. 10). There are possible 
citations from Ezekiel (iii. 3, vi. 16, 17), Hosea (vi. 18, ix. 10), 
and Amos (vi. 18), but where the wording of the original passages 
are similar, the source of the quotation becomes doubtful, and 


in some cases we may have a mosaic of several passages. In 
the last four chapters we have quotations from Genesis (xi. 3), 
Deuteronomy (xiii. 1), and Jeremiah (x. 17). In some instances 
it is possible that St Paul is not consciously reproducing the lan- 
guage of the LXX, but his mind is full of that language, and it 
comes spontaneously as the natural wording in which to express 
his thoughts. Like other N.T. writers, he was very familiar with 
the LXX, and, although he was also familiar with the Hebrew, 
his quotations are commonly either in exact agreement with the 
Greek Version or very close to it. As Swete remarks, "it is 
impossible to do justice " to the N.T. writings " unless the reader 
is on the watch for unsuspected references to the Greek O.T., 
and able to appreciate its influence upon the author's mind" 
(Intr. to the O.T. in Greek, p. 452). 

In this Epistle we have five cases of exact agreement with 
the LXX. 

iv. i3 = Ps. cxvi. 10 [cxv. 1]. ix. 9 = Ps. cxii. [cxi.] 9. 

vi. 2 = Is. xlix. 8. ix. 10= Is. Iv. 10. 

viii. i5 = Exod. xvi. 18 (slight change of order). 

In five cases the agreement is close. 

viii. 2i=Prov. iii. 4. x. I7=jer. ix. 24. 

ix. 7 = Prov. xxii. 8. xi. 3 = Gen. iii. 13. 

xiii. l=Deut. xix. 15. 

In one place, vi. 16-18, it is possible that recollection of the 
Hebrew may have influenced the composite quotation of Lev. 
xxvi. 11, 12 and other passages: cf. Is. Hi. 11; Ezek. xi. 17, 
xx - 33) 34) xxxvii. 21, 27; 2 Sam. vii. 8, 14; Zeph. iii. 20; 
Zech. x. 8. But the remarkable expression ivotK^a-ta Iv avTol<;, 
which is stronger than 'walk among them' or ' tabernacle among 
them,' is not found in any of the passages ; and this seems to be 
a case in which the Apostle has changed the wording in order to 
make the quotation more suitable to his purpose. Cf. the sub- 
stitution of cro^cuv for avOpwTroiv in 1 Cor. iii. 2o = Ps. xciii. [xciv.] 
11, and the substitution of aOe-ija-u) for Kptyu) in 1 Cor. i. 19 
= Is. xxix. 14. 

§ IX. The Text. 

There is no special problem in determining the text of 
2 Corinthians. In the Pauline Epistles, as elsewhere, B is the 
most constant single representative of the ' Neutral ' text, but it 
occasionally admits readings of the ' Western' type. The term 
1 Western ' is misleading, for this type of text seems to have 
originated in the East and thence to have spread in the West. 


But the term holds its place against the proposed substitutes, 
' Syro-Latin,' which better describes it, and ' 8-text,' which sug- 
gests connexion with codex D and yet commits one to no theory 
as regards origin. X admits Western elements more often than 
B does, but in the Pauline Epistles X does this less often than 
elsewhere. Western readings are found chiefly in D E F G, in 
the Old Latin and the Vulgate, and in ' Ambrosiaster,' among 
which E, as a copy of D, and F, as the constant companion of 
G, are comparatively unimportant. An examination of the texts 
of d and g side by side with that of Ambrosiaster shows what 
divergence there was in the Old Latin texts, and how much need 
there was of revision. Perhaps it may also to some extent ex- 
plain the surprising inadequacy of Jerome's revision, especially 
in the Epistles. Jerome may have thought that, if he made all 
the changes that were required, his revision would never be 
accepted. In the notes in this volume the imperfections of the 
Vulgates are often pointed out. It is clear that Jerome not only 
left many times uncorrected, but also sometimes corrected 
unsystematically. See Index IV. 

In his valuable Atlas of Textual Criticism, p. 43, Mr. E. A. 
Hutton remarks that the combinations B D and B F in the 
Pauline Epistles are by no means always to be condemned off 
hand.f Yet even BDFG may be rejected when X A C are ranged 
on the other side, for the latter group may represent the Neutral 
text, while the former may be Western. But in 2 Corinthians, A 
is defective from iv. 13 to xii. 6, and C is defective from x. 8 to 
the end, so that only from i. 1 to iv. 13 is the combination X A C 
possible. This fragment of the Epistle, however, yields at least 
two examples of the weight of this combination. In iii. 1 crw- 
icrravetv (x A C K L P) is to be preferred to owio-rav (B D), and 
in iii. 7 iv ypap,paa-\.v (s A C K L P) is to be preferred to iv 
ypd/jLlxaTi (B D F G). Perhaps we may add iii. 5, where e| iavrwv 
(x A C D E KLP) may be preferable to i£ avrwv or i£ avrtov 
(B F G). Even when A or C is absent, X C or X A (especially 
when supported by other witnesses) may be preferable to B D F G. 
In v. 3 ei ye (x C K L P) is perhaps to be preferred to el-rep 
(B D F G), in ix. 5 eh v/xas (X C K L) is to be preferred to irph<; 
v/j.S.'; (B D F G), and in ix. 10 <nrepp.a (x C K L P) is to be preferred 
to a-TTopov (B D F G). The transfer of K L P to the other side 
does not turn the scale. In iii. 16 tyUa Se e'av (x* A 17) may be 
preferable to rjvtKa 8'av (B D F G K L P), where C has neither 

t In xi. 4 avixwOe (B D* 17) is probably to be preferred to avelxecOe 
(X D 3 E G K L M P) ; in xi. 32 we should probably omit 0Awv with B D*, 
def Vulg. against X D 3 K L M P and Y G, g Copt.; in xii. 3 x u P}* 
(B D*) is certainly to be preferred to 4kt6s (X D 2 and s F G K L M P) ; in 
xii. 5 the omission of fnov (B D* 17, 67) is doubtless to be followed. 


lav nor av. In v. 10 we may adopt <f>av\ov (x C 17, 37 and other 
cursives) rather than /caxov (B D F G K L P) ; in xii. 15 we 
may adopt ayairw (x A) rather than dya77w (BDFGKLP); 
and in xii. 20 epis (x A) is certainly to be preferred to cpets 
(BDFGKLP). The ninth century uncials K L P represent 
the late ' Syrian ' or ' Antiochian ' or ' a-text,' and a reading 
which is purely Syrian cannot be right ; e.g. virlp in viii. 3, 
and the omission of tovto after rpiVou in xii. 14. The untrust- 
worthy character of the combination BDFGKLP shows that 
a reading may be both Western and Syrian and yet be wrong, for 
"width of attestation is no proof of excellence"; and hence the 
perplexing Sid (x A B F G) in xii. 7 must be retained, although 
DEKLP, Latt. Syrr. omit. The two great Alexandrine witnesses, 
B and X, when united are seldom wrong. Relying on them we 
may omit the 17 after eVi TtVou in vii. 14, although almost all other 
witnesses repeat the article ; in xi. 2 1 we may adopt rjaOevrJKafjiev 
(x B) against rjcrOevTjcra^v (DEFGKLMP); and in xii. 10 we 
may adopt kol o-Tevo^w/Diais (x* B) against Iv orcvoxcupicus (X 3 
D E F G K L P). Hutton has collected a number of passages 
in 2 Corinthians in which triple readings, Alexandrine, Western, 
and Syrian, are found, and in all the cases the Alexandrine 
reading supported by x B is to be preferred. See critical notes 
3, hi. 9, iv. 10, vi. 16, x. 8, xi. 21. 

Authorities for this Epistle. 
Greek U?iaal MSS. 

X (Fourth century). Codex Sinaiticus ; now at Petrograd, 

the only uncial MS. containing the whole N.T. 
A (Fifth century). Codex Alexandrinus, now in the British 

Museum. All of 2 Corinthians from lirLo-Tevcra iv. 13 to 

e£ ifxov xii. 6 is wanting. 
B (Fourth century). Codex Vaticanus. 
C (Fifth century). Codex Ephraemi, a Palimpsest; now at 

Paris, very defective. Of 2 Corinthians all from x. 8 

onwards is wanting. 
D (Sixth century). Codex Claromontanus ; now at Paris. A 

Graeco-Latin MS. The Latin (d) is akin to the Old 

Latin. Many subsequent hands (sixth to ninth centuries) 

have corrected the MS. 
E (Ninth century). At Petrograd. A copy of D, and 

F (Late ninth century). Codex Augiensis (from Reichenau) ; 

now at Trinity College, Cambridge. 


G (Late ninth century). Codex Boernerianus ; at Dresden. 

Interlined with the Latin (in minuscules). The Greek 

text is almost the same as that of F, but the Latin (g) 

shows Old Latin elements. 
H (Sixth century). Codex Coislinianus, very valuable, but 

very incomplete. The MS. has been used in bindings 

and is in seven different libraries; 2 Cor. iv. 2-7 is at 

Petrograd, and x. 18-xi. 6 at Athos. 
I 2 (Fifth century). Codex Muralti vi. Fragments at Petrograd. 

Two leaves contain 2 Cor. i. 20-ii. 12. 
K (Ninth century). Codex Mosquensis ; now at Moscow. 
L (Ninth century). Codex Angelicus; now in the Angelica 

Library at Rome. 
M (Ninth century). Codex Ruber, in bright red letters ; two 

leaves in the British Museum contain 2 Cor. x. 13- 

xii. 5. 
O (Ninth century). Two leaves at Petrograd contain 

2 Cor. i. 20-ii. 12. 
P (Ninth century). Codex Porfirianus Chiovensis, formerly 

possessed by Bishop Porfiri of Kiev, and now at 

R (Eighth century). Codex Cryptoferratensis. One leaf at 

Grotta Ferrata contains 2 Cor. xi. 9-19. 

Minuscules or Cursive MSS. 

About 480 cursives of the Pauline Epistles are known. Very 

few of them are of much weight in determining readings, but 

others have some interest for special reasons. Excepting No. 17, 

very few are mentioned in the critical notes in this volume. 

7. At Basle. Used by Erasmus for his first edition (1517)1 Dut 

not of special weight. 
17. (Evan. 33, Acts 13. Ninth century). Now at Paris. "The 

queen of the cursives" and the best for the Pauline 

Epistles ; more than any other it preserves Pre-Syrian 

readings and agrees with B D L. 
37. (Evan. 69, Acts 69, Apoc. 14. Fifteenth century). The 

well-known Leicester codex ; belongs to the Ferrar group. 
47. (Eleventh century). Now in the Bodleian. Akin to A and 

B, which are nearer to one another in the Epistles than 

in the Gospels. 
67. (Eleventh century). At Vienna. Has valuable marginal 

readings (67**) akin to B and M ; these readings must 

have been copied from an ancient MS., but not from the 

Codex Ruber itself. 
73. (Acts 68). At Upsala. Resembles 17. 


80. (Acts 73. Eleventh century). In the Vatican. Akin to the 
Leicester codex; used by John M. Caryophilus (d. 1635) 
in preparing his edition of the Greek Testament. 


The Old Latin text is transmitted in defg, the Latin com- 
panions of the bilingual uncials DEFG. But in no MS. is the 
Latin text always an exact translation of the Greek text with 
which it is paired ; in some passages the Latin presents a better 
text than the Greek. This is specially the case with d, which 
often agrees with the quotations in Lucifer of Cagliari (d. a.d. 
370), while efg approximate more to the Vulgate. Besides 
these four witnesses we have also 
x (Ninth century). Codex Bodleianus; at Oxford. The 

text often agrees with d. The whole Epistle. 
m (Ninth century). Speculum pseudo-Augustinianum ; at 

Rome. Fragments. 

r (Sixth century). Codex Frisingensis ; at Munich. Fragments. 

Respecting the Vulgate, Egyptian, Syriac, Armenian, and 

Gothic, the reader is referred to Sanday and Headlam, Romans, 

pp. lxvi f. No MS. of the Old Syriac is extant. The Harkleian 

revision (seventh century) preserves some ancient readings. 

§ X. Commentaries. 

These are not so numerous as in the case of the First Epistle, 
but they abound, as the formidable list in Meyer shows ; and 
that list has continued to increase. See also the Bibliography in 
the 2nd ed. of Smith, Dictionary of the Bible, i. pp. 658, 659 ; 
Hastings, DB. i. pp. 491, 498, iii. p. 731. In the selection 
given below, an asterisk indicates that information respecting the 
commentator is to be found in the volume on the First Epistle, 
pp. lxvif., a dagger that such is to be found in Sanday and 
Headlam on Romans, pp. xcviii f. 

Patristic and Scholastic : Greek. 

*t Chrysostom (d. 407). Tr. Oxford, 1848. 
*f Theodoret (d. 457). Migne, P.G. lxxxii. 
*t Theophylaci (d. after 11 18). Migne, P.G. cxxv. 

Patristic and Scholastic : Latin. 

*t Ambrosiaster or Pseudo-Ambrosius (fl. 366-384). 

Pseudo-Primasius. Migne, P.L. lxviii. An anti-Pelagian 
edition of Pelagius. This has been established by the investiga- 


tions of Zimmer {Pelagius in Irland), C. H. Turner {JTS. Oct. 
1902, pp. 132-141), and above all of A. Souter {The Commentary 
of Pelagius on the Epistles of Paul : The Problem of its Restora- 
tion). Turner suggested that Pseudo-Primasius is the com- 
mentary on the Pauline Epistles evolved out of Pelagius and 
Chrysostom by Cassiodorus and his monks of Vivarium, and 
Souter has proved that this surmise is correct. The original 
commentary of Pelagius was anonymous. Apparently the symbol 
P was wrongly interpreted by Gagney (1537) to mean 'Primasius,' 
and hence the error, which has continued to the present time, of 
quoting this commentary as 'Primasius.' It is an authority of great 
importance for determining the Vulgate text of the Pauline Epistles. 
Bede (d. 735). Mainly a catena from Augustine. 

* Atto Vercellensis (Tenth century). Migne, P.P. cxxxiv. 

* Herveius Burgidolensis (Twelfth century). Migne, P.L. 

Peter Lombard (d. 1160). 
t Thomas Aquinas (d. 1274). 

Modern Latin. 

Faber Stapulensis, Paris, 15 12. 
Cajetan, Venice, 1531. 
t Erasmus (d. 1536). 
*t Calvin, Geneva, 1539-1551. 

* Estius, Douay, 16 14. 

t Grotius, Amsterdam, 1 644-1 646. 
*t Bengel, Tubingen, 1742 ; 3rd ed. London, 1862. 
*t Wetstein, Amsterdam, 1751, 1752. 
R. Comely, S.J. Roman. 


*\ H. Hammond, London, 1653. 
t John Locke, London, 1 705-1 707. 

Edward Burton, Oxford, 1831. 

T. W. Peile, Rivingtons, 1853. 
f C. Wordsworth, Rivingtons, 4th ed. 1866. 

F. W. Robertson, Smith and Elder, 5th ed. 1867. 
t H. Alford, Rivingtons, 6th ed. 187 1. 

* A. P. Stanley, Murray, 4th ed. 1876. 

E. H. Plumptre in Ellicotfs Commentary, v.d. 
J. Waite in the Speaker's Commentary, 1881. 

* W. Kay (posthumous), 1887. 

J. Denney in the Expositor's Bible, 1894. 
J. A. Beet, Hodder, 6th ed. 1895. 
J. Massie in the Century Bible, n.d. 


J. H. Bernard inihe Expositor's Greek Testament, Hodder, 1903. 
G. H. Rendall, Macmillan, 1909. 
J. E. McFadyen, Hodder, 191 1. 
A. Menzies, Macmillan, 191 2. 

The more recent commentaries are, in general, the more 
helpful ; but Alford and Waite retain much of their original value. 

New Translations into English. 

The Twentieth Century New Testament, Part II., Marshall. 1900. 

R. F. Weymouth, The New Testament in Modern Speech, 
Clarke, 2nd ed. 1905. 

A. S. Way, The Letters of St Paul, Macmillan, 2nd ed. 1906. 

W. G. Rutherford (posthumous), Thessalonians and Cor- 
inthians, Macmillan, 1908. Ends at 2 Cor. ix. 15. 

J. Moffatt, The New Testament, a New Translation, Hodder, 


E. E. Cunnington, The Neiv Covenant, a Revision of the 

Version of a.d. 1611, Routledge, 19 14. 


Billroth, 1833; Eng. tr., Edinburgh, 1837. 
Olshausen, 1840; Eng. tr., Edinburgh, 1855. 
\ De Wette, Leipzig, 3rd ed. 1855. 
Kling, 1861 ; Eng. tr., Edinburgh, 1869. 
Maier, Freiburg, 1857. Roman, 
f Meyer, 5th ed. 1870; Eng. tr., Edinburgh, 1877. Re- 
edited by B. Weiss, and again by Heinrici, 1896 and 1900; 
again by J. Weiss, 19 10. 

Schnedermann, in Strack and Zockler, Nordlingen, 1887. 

* Schmiedel, Freiburg, i. B., 1892. 

* B. Weiss, Leipzig, 2nd ed. 1902 ; Eng. tr., New York and 
London, 1906. Also his Textkritik d. paul. Brief e (xiv. 3 of 
Texte und Untersuchungen), 1896. 

Lietzmann, Tubingen, 1907. 

Bousset, in J. Weiss's Die Schriften des NT., Gottingen, 1908. 

Bachmann, in Zahn's Kommentar, Leipzig, 1909. 

The last five are of great value. 


The literature on the life and writings of St Paul is enormous 
and is rapidly increasing. In the volume on the First Epistle, 
p. lxx, a selection of modern works is given, to which the 
following may be added : — 


O. Pfleiderer, Hibbert Lecture, 1885. 
Das Urchristentum, 3nd ed. 1902; Eng. tr., 1907. 
G. Matheson, The Spiritual Development of St Paul, 1890. 
G. B. Stevens, Pauline Theology, 1892. 

A. Hausrath, History of N.T. Times', Time of the Apostles, 

E. L. Hicks, St Paul and Hellenism, 1896. 

A. B. Bruce, St Paul's Conception of Christianity, 1896. 

A. Sabatier, L'Apotre Paul, 3rd ed. 1896. 

O. Cone, Paul, the Man, the Missionary, and the Teacher, 

P. Faine, Das gesetzfreie Evang. des Paulus, 1899. 

H. A. A. Kennedy, St Paul's Conception of the Last Things, 
2nd ed. 1904. 

C. Clemen, Paulus, sein Lebe7i und Wirken, 1904; much 
information in the foot-notes. 

B. Lucas, The Fifth Gospel, being the Pauline Lnterpretation of 
The Christ, 1907. 

W. Sanday, Paul, Hastings' DCG. ii., 1908. 

B. W. Bacon, The Story of St Paul. 

A. B. D. Alexander, The Ethics of St Paul, 19 10. 

P. Gardner, The Religious Experiences of St Paul, 191 1. 

K. Lake, The Earlier Epistles of St Paul, 191 1. 

A. Deissmann, St Paul, a Study in Social and Religious 
History, 191 2. 

A. Schweitzer, Paul and his Lnterpreters, 191 2. 

S. N. Rostron, The Christology of St Paul, 191 2. 

W. Ramsay, The Teaching of St Paul in Terms of the Present 
Day, 19 1 3. 

A. C. Headlam, St Paul and Christianity, 1913. 

E. B. Redlich, St Paul and his Companions, 1913. 

The Apocryphal Correspondence. 

The apocryphal letters between St Paul and the Corinthians 
are of some interest as illustrating the clumsiness with which 
forgers sometimes execute their work, and the uncritical spirit 
which allows such work to pass muster as genuine. Stanley 
gives a translation of the letters in an appendix to his commentary 
on 1 and 2 Corinthians, and he exposes various blunders. 
Harnack has edited them in his Geschichte d. altchrist. Literatur, 
1897 ; and there is a convenient edition of them in Lietzmann's 
excellent Materials for the use of Theological Lecturers and 
Students, 1905. Other literature on the subject is mentioned in 
Moffatt, Lntr. to the Literature of the N.T. pp. i29f. 



Paul, a divinely chosen Apostle, and Timothy our 
brother, give Christian greeting to the Corinthian Church 
and to the Christians near it. 

1 Paul, an Apostle by divine appointment, and Timothy 
whom ye all know, give greeting to the body of Corinthian 
Christians and to all Christians in the Province. 2 May the free 
and unmerited favour of God be yours, and the peace which 
this favour brings ! May our Heavenly Father and the Lord 
Jesus Christ grant them to you ! 

The Salutation has the usual three parts ; the writer, those 
addressed, and the greeting. 

1. riauXos diro(7ToXos Xpiorou 'It)(tou. St Paul states his own 
claim to be heard before mentioning Timothy, who is aSeX^o's 
and not a7roo-ToAos. Vos Corinthii mihi debelis obedire, et falsos 
apostolos respuere, quia sum Paulus apostolus Jesu Christi, id est 
mirabilis legatus Salvatoris Regis. Apostolus sum, non usurpative, 
sed per voluntatem Dei Patris. Pseudo autem apostoli, nee a 
Christo sunt missi, nee per Dei voluntatem venerunk Ideoque 
respuendi sunt (Herveius Burgidolensis). 

In nearly all his letters, including the Pastorals, St Paul 
introduces himself as an Apostle, with or without further 
description ; and here, as in Phil. i. i and Col. i. i, he is careful 
not to give to Timothy the title of 6.tt6<jto\o<;. Cf. the opening 
words of i and 2 Thess., Phil., and Philemon. We find the 
same feature in i and 2 Pet. The amplification, 'I^crou Xpio-Tov 


Sid ^eXr;/i,aT09 ®eov, is specially in point in Epistles in which he 
has to contend with the opposition of false teachers, some of 
whom claimed to have a better right to the title of Apostle 
than he had (Batiffol, Primitive Catholicism, p. 42). We find it 
in 1 Cor., Eph., Col., 2 Tim. ; and in Gal. i. 1 the fact that his 
Apostleship is of God and not of man is still more clearly stated. 
It did not come to him in the ordinary course of events, but by 
a definite Divine decree. 

TifioOeos 6 d8e\<j>6s. He is mentioned, like Sosthenes in 
1 Cor., to show that what St Paul sends by Apostolic authority 
has the approval of one who can regard these matters from 
the Corinthians' own point of view, as a fellow-Christian, without 
authority over them (i. 19; Acts xviii. 5). The Apostle might 
be prejudiced by his high position ; Timothy is influenced 
simply by his brotherly affection. ' He agrees with me in what 
I have to say to you.' Timothy is joined with Paul in the 
addresses of five other Epistles (1 and 2 Thess., Phil., Col., 
Philemon) and is mentioned at the close of two others (1 Cor. 
xvi. 10; Rom. xvi. 21; cf. Heb. xiii. 23).* He was converted 
by St Paul at Lystra during the First Missionary Journey, and 
afterwards seems to have been more often with the Apostle than 
not. Very possibly he was the Apostle's amanuensis for some of 
the Epistles ; but this does not follow from his being included in 
the Salutations : Tertius (Rom. xvi. 2) is not mentioned in the 
address of that Epistle. But, whether or no he acted as scribe, 
it is not likely that Timothy here, or Sosthenes in 1 Cor., or 
Silvanus and Timothy in 1 and 2 Thess,, had much to do with 
the composition. Whoever acted as amanuensis may have made 
an occasional suggestion ; but in every case we may be sure that 
the letter is St Paul's and not a joint production. St Paul had 
been anxious about the reception which Timothy would have at 
Corinth (1 Cor. xvi. 10), and here he shows how highly he thinks 
of Timothy. But nowhere in 2 Cor. does he say anything about 
Timothy's reception at Corinth. Either Timothy never reached 
Corinth (Lightfoot, Bibl. Essays, p. 220), or (more probably) he 
was so badly received that St Paul does not think it wise, after 
the submission of the Corinthians, to recall Timothy's ill-success 
in trying to induce them to submit (K. Lake, Earlier Epistles of 
St Paul, p. 134 ; Paley, Horae Paulitiae, IV.). What is certain 
is that the mission of Timothy to Corinth, whether carried out 
or not, is done with when 2 Cor. was written. There is no need 
to mention it. (Redlich, .S. Paul and his Companions, p. 279.) 

6 dSe\(|>69. This does not mean 'my spiritual brother'; 
Timothy was St Paul's spiritual son (1 Tim. i. 2 ; 2 Tim. i. 2); 

* In Origen's phrase, " the concurrence of Paul and Timothy flashed out 
the lightning of these Epistles." 


nor does it mean 6 o-wepyos [xov (Rom. xvi. 21). It means 'one 
of the brethren,' a member of the Christian Society. Deissmann 
{Bible Studies, pp. 87, 88, Light from the Anc. East, pp. 96, 107, 
227) has shown from papyri that aSeA^o? was used of members 
of pagan brotherhoods. While the Master was with them, 
Christ's adherents were described in their relation to Him ; they 
were His 'disciples ' : in the Gospels, fia^r?/? occurs more than 
230 times. After His presence had ceased to be visible they 
were described in their relation to one another as ' brethren,' and 
in relation to their calling as 'saints': in the Epistles, fmdrjrai 
nowhere occurs ; its place is taken by d8eX(f>ut and ayiot. In 
Acts all three terms are found. 

tt] ckkXtjo-ici t. 0eou. Having reminded them of his high 
authority as 'an Apostle of Christ Jesus, 1 he at the same time 
reminds them of their own high position as ' the Church of God 1 
In both cases the genitive is possessive. The Society of which 
they are members has as its Founder and Ruler the Creator of 
the world and the Father of all mankind. St Paul is not hinting 
that in Corinth there is an ecclesia which is not 'of God.' 
Rather, as Theodoret suggests, by reminding them of their Lord 
and Benefactor, he is once more warning them against divisions 
— cts 6/Aovotav 7raAiv o-vvairTuv : what God has founded as one 
body they must not divide. It is probable that, wherever he 
uses this phrase, tou ®eov is not a mere otiose amplification, but 
always has point (1 Thess. ii. 14; 2 Thess. i. 4 ; 1 Cor. i. 2, 
x. 32, xi. 16, 22, xv. 9; Gal. i. 13; 1 Tim. iii. 5 without articles). 
Everywhere else in this Epistle we have eKKXrja-iai in the plur., 
showing that local Churches are meant (viii. 1, 18, 19, 23, 24, xi. 8, 
28, xii. 13) ; and here rj iKKXrja-la is expressly limited to Corinth; 
so that nowhere in the letter is the Church as a whole mentioned. 
In Rom. xvi. 16 we have at ckkX. tov Xpiorov, an expression 
which occurs nowhere else in N.T. In Acts xx. 28 both reading 
and interpretation are doubtful. In LXX we have iKKXrja-ca 
Kvpiov and other expressions which show that the IkkX. is a 
religious one. There is no instance of ckkX. being used of 
religious assemblies among the heathen. The ovarj implies that 
the Church was now established in Corinth (Acts xiii. 1 ; cf. 
v. 17, xiv. 13, xxviii. 17); it had ceased to be a congregation of 

We can draw no reasonable inference as to change in the 
Apostle's feelings from the brevity of the description of the 
Church in Corinth here when compared with that in 1 Cor. i. 2. 

ow t. dyiois ttoktiv t. ouffif iv o\r\ t. 'Axcua- ' With all the 
saints which are in the whole of Achaia.' All Christians are 
' holy ' in virtue, not of their lives, but of their calling ; they are 
set apart in a holy Society as servants and sons of the Holy God. 


Chrysostom thinks that St Paul addresses ' all,' because all alike 
need correction. In Thess. he does not include all in Mace- 
donia, nor in Rom. all in Italy. Achaia may be used loosely 
for the district of which Corinth was the chief city. St Paul 
does not mention other Churches in Achaia (contrast Gal. i. 2), 
and therefore we can hardly regard this as a circular letter. But 
there were Christians in Athens and Cenchreae, and probably in 
other places near Corinth, and the Apostle includes all of them 
in the address. We may perhaps, with Lietzmann, regard this 
as the germ of the later Metropolitan constitution. See on 
1 Cor. i. 2. The Corinthians were apt to be exclusive and to 
plume themselves upon a supposed superiority. St Paul may be 
reminding them that they are not the whole Church (1 Cor. 
xiv. 36), even in Achaia ; at any rate he lets Christians outside 
Corinth know that they are not forgotten. The whole of Greece 
may possibly be included. 

XpwroO 'Irjffov (KB MP 17) rather than I^troD Xp. (ADEGKL, 
Latt. Copt. Arm. Aelh. Goth.). F, f omit. In the best texts of the 
earlier Epp. (1 and 2 Thess. Gal.) always 'I. Xp. ; in the later Epp. (Phil. 
Eph. Col. Philem. 1 and 2 Tim.) almost always Xp. 'I. In the inter- 
mediate Epp. ( 1 and 2 Cor. Rom. ) the readings vary, and St Paul's usage 
may have varied. While Xpiards was a title, it was naturally placed after 
'Irjaovs, which was always a name. But Xp. became a name, and then the 
two words in either order, became a name. See on Rom. i. 1, and 
Sanday, Bampton Lectures, p. 289. 

2. x^P l? "f" 1 ' K * «ip^w|- So in all the Pauline Epp. (except 

1 and 2 Tim.) and in 1 and 2 Pet. In N.T., 'peace' probably 
has much the same meaning as in Jewish salutations, — freedom 
from external enmity and internal distraction. The two Apostles 
"naturally retain the impressive term traditional with their 
countrymen, but they subordinate it to the term 'grace,' which 
looked back from the gift to the Giver, and which the Gospel 
had clothed with special significance. This subordination is 
marked not only by the order, but by the collocation of vfiiv, 
which invariably precedes ko.1 dp-qv-q" (Hort on 1 Pet. i. 2; see 
on 1 Cor. i. 3). It is the grace which produces the peace. In 

2 Mace. i. 1 we have x a ^P €LV • • • dpyvw aya6i]v, and in 
2 Mace. i. 10, ix. 19, we have the frequent combination x a W £LV 
k. vyiaLveLv, which is found in the oldest Greek letter known to 
us, 4th cent. B.C. (Deissmann, Light from Anc. East, p. 149). 
See J. A. Robinson {Eph. pp. 221 f.) on x*P l s in Bibl. Grk., and 
G. Milligan (Thess. p. 127 f.) on St Paul's use of current 
epistolary forms and phrases. 

&tt6 0eou TTcu-pos r\jxC)v Kcii Kupiou 'I. Xp. As at the beginning 
of the earliest book in N.T. (1 Thess. i. 1) we find the notable 
phrase ' God the Father,' so here we find Christ called ' Lord,' 


the usual title of God, and we find Christ linked with God the 
Father under one preposition, which shows that the Apostle 
regards the two as on an equality. " In the appellation 
'Father 'we have already the first beginning — may we not say 
the first decisive step, which potentially contains the rest? — of 
the doctrine of the Trinity. . . . The striking thing about it is 
that the Son already holds a place beside the Father" (Sanday, 
Outlines of the Life of Christ, p. 218). "It is well known that 
the phrase ' God the Father ' is especially common in these 
opening salutations. We cannot think that it is a new coinage 
of St Paul. It comes to his pen quite naturally, and not as 
though it needed any explanation. We may safely set it down 
as part of the general vocabulary of Christians. Its occurrence 
in Q is proof that it was familiar in circles far removed from 
Pauline influence" (Christ in Recent Research, p. 131). It is 
not probable that the Spirit is omitted because eo tempore 
nullus errabat de Spiritu. St Paul is not consciously teaching 
Trinitarian doctrine ; he uses language which indicates, without 
his intending it, how much he held of that doctrine. Cf. xiii. 13. 

This Salutation exhibits undoubted resemblances in form to 
secular letters that have come down to us from the same period. 
But the differences are greater, and that in three respects. 
There is the firm assertion of Apostolic authority, the clear 
indication that those whom he addresses are not ordinary 
people but a consecrated society, and the spiritual character of 
the good wishes which he sends them. Comparison with a 
letter from some religious official, addressed to those who had 
been initiated into one of the Mysteries, if we did but possess 
such, would be of great interest. 

The Thanksgiving which follows the Salutation, in accord- 
ance with St Paul's almost invariable practice, is also a common 
feature in secular letters; cf. 2 Mace. ix. 20. Deissmann 
{Light from Anc. East, p. 168) gives a close parallel to this one 
in a letter from Apion, an Egyptian soldier, to his father, 2nd 
cent. a.d. After the usual greeting and good wishes he says: 
" I thank the Lord Serapis, that, when I was near being 
drowned in the sea, he saved me straightway" — €t>xapio-rw t<3 
Kupt'w 2«pa7n8t, on fiov Kiv$vvev<TavTO<; ets OdXacraav Hawae evOew;. 
See also Bibelstudien, p. 210, an example not given in Bible 
Studies. St Paul usually thanks God for some grace bestowed 
on those whom he addresses, and hence his omission of the 
Thanksgiving in the stern letter to the Galatians ; here and in 
1 Tim. i. 12 he gives thanks for benefits bestowed on himself. 
But his readers are not forgotten (vv. 6, 7) ; it is largely on their 
account that he is so thankful. The Thanksgiving is in two 
parts; for Divine Comfort (3-7) and for Divine Deliverance (8-1 1 V 



/ bless God for the recovery and comfort zvhich enables 
us to recover and comfort the fallen and distressed. 

3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, — 
the Father who is full of compassion and the God who is the 
Source of all comfort. 4 Blessed be He, for He ever comforts 
us all through our affliction, and He does this as a lesson to us 
how to comfort other people in any kind of affliction whether of 
body or soul, viz. by using the same way of comforting that 
God uses with us. 6 For if, through our intimate union with the 
Christ, we have an abundant share of His sufferings, to just the 
same extent, through His merciful mediation, we can draw upon 
an abundant fund of comfort. 6 So then, whatever happens to 
us, you reap an advantage : for, if we receive afflictions, it is to 
bring comfort and spiritual well-being to you ; and if we receive 
comforting in our afflictions, our comforting is for your benefit, 
for God makes it effective to you when you courageously accept 
the same kind of sufferings as He lays upon us. And our 
confidence in your future is too well founded to be shaken, 

7 because we know well that, as surely as you share our 
sufferings, so surely do you share our comfort. 

8 When I speak of our sufferings, I mean something very 
real. I do not wish you, my Brothers, to be in any uncertainty 
about that. Affliction so intense came upon us in Asia that it 
prostrated us beyond all power of endurance ; so much so that 
we despaired of preserving even life. 9 Indeed, when we asked 
within ourselves, whether it was to be life or death for us, our 
own presentiment said ' Death,' — a presentiment which God 
sent to teach us not to rely any more on our powers, but on 
Him who not only can rescue from death but restores the dead 
to life. 10 Of course He can do both ; for it was He who 
delivered us out of such imminent peril of death and will do so 
again; and it is on Him that we have set our hope that He will 
continue to deliver us, n while you also join in helping on our 
behalf by your intercessions for us. And the blessed result of 
this will be that from many uplifted faces thanksgivings on our 
behalf will be offered by many for the mercy which has been 
shown to us. 

As in Eph. i. 3-14 (see Westcott), the rhythmical flow of the 


passage will be felt, if it is read according to the balance of the 
clauses, which is very marked in the first half. 

EuAoy^TO? 6 0e6s kcu irarrjp tov Kvptov rjfxwv 'I^crov XpiaTOv, 
6 7rarr/p ruV otxTipptov «at ©eos iriaq^ 7rapaKAr;o-etoS, 
6 TrapaKaXwv ?/pas eVt iraarj tjj tfAu/'ei r)jx.wv, 
eis to SvvaaBai ?} irapaKaXelv tois iv Trdarj 6\L\pei 
ota. t^? 7rapa/<A^o-eajs rjS 7rapa.Ka\ovp.e8a avTol vtto tov ®eov. 
otl kol&ios TTcpLcro-euei to. Tra.6tjp.aTa tov Xpto-rov eis '/pas, 
outojs ota rou Xpio~roD 7repio-o"€i;ei Kal r) irapai<\-qo-i<; rjp.u)v. 
etre Se 6Xi/36pe9a, virip t^s vp-wv 7rapaKAryo-€ajs, 
etre 8c 7rapaKa\ovp.e6a, virip 7-775 vp.wv 7rapa/<A7/cr€cos. 

3. EuXoyTjTos 6 0e6s k. TtaTTjp tou Ki/piou iqpa>y 'l. Xp. The 
AV. is inconsistent here in separating 6 ©eos from t. Kupt'ou 
k.t.A., while in xi. 31, as in Eph. i. 3 and 1 Pet. i. 3, it takes 
both nominatives with the following genitive ; ' Blessed be the 
God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.' The latter is 
probably right, in accordance with 1 Cor. xv. 24; Eph. i. 17; 
Rev. i. 6, iii. 12; Mk. xv. 34; Jn. xx. 17. If St Paul had 
meant 6 ©eos to be separated from iraTrjp, he would probably 
have written 6 ©eo's pou, as in Rom. i. 8 ; Phil. i. 3 ; Philem. 4. 
It is remarkable that the Apostles Paul, Peter, and John, while 
thinking of Christ as God and giving Him Divine attributes, do 
not shrink from saying that God is not only Christ's Father 
but also His God. Benedictus Deus, qui Christum secundum 
humanitatem creavit et secundum divinitatem genuit, atque ita est 
Deus et Pater ejus (Herveius). 'God who is also Father of our 
Lord Jesus Christ' is a possible translation, in accordance with 
Col. i. 3 ; 'God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ'; but it is 
not the most natural rendering. See on Rom. xv. 6, and Hort 
on 1 Pet. i. 3. 

EuAoyT/ros occurs eight times in N.T., chiefly in Paul (xi. 31 ; 
Rom. i. 25, ix. 5 ; Eph. i. 3), and always of God. When human 
beings are called ' blessed,' euAoy>7p.eVos is used, but this occurs 
only in the Gospels. In a few passages in LXX (Deut. vii. 14 ; 
Ruth ii. 20; 1 Sam. xv. 13, xxv. ^^), evAoyriros is used of men. 
The adjective implies that blessing ought to be given, the 
participle that it has been received. This difference is pointed 
out by Philo (De Migr. Abrah. 19); but it cannot be rigidly 
insisted upon in exegesis. In Dan. iii. 52-56, evAoyriro's and 
-■>7peVos are used indifferently of God, e^Aoyr/ros being more 
frequent (4 to 2) in LXX, and euAoyri/xeVos (4 to 2) in Theod. 
Grammatically, we may understand either eWco (et??) or iariv. 
In Rom. i. 25, eo-nV is expressed, as also in 1 Pet. iv. 11, which 


is not quite parallel ; here, as in Eph. i. 3 and 1 Pet. i. 3, we 
almost certainly have a wish : but in Eph. i. 3 the Old Latin has 
benedictus est. 

Eusebius (Praefi- Evang. ix. 34) quotes from Eupolemus of 
Alexandria a letter from Surom (Hiram)* to Solomon which 
begins thus ; %ovpwv 2oAoju.wvi BacnXei MeyaAw ^atpetv. EvAoy??TO$ 
6 ®eos, bs tov ovpavov /cat ttjv yrjv €KTio~ev, os ei'Aero avOpuirov 
Xpyjarov £k XPV " 1 " ^ avSpds. ap.a rai avayvCovai ttjv irapa aov 
€7ticttoX^v (T<p68pa Zx&prjv kcu ev\6yr)(ra tov ®ebv irrl t<3 TrapeiXrj- 
<f»ivai <t\ ttjv (3ao-i\eiav. 

toG Kupiou r\if.G)v. A translation of the Aramaic Maran 
(1 Cor. xvi. 22) or Marana, and a continuation of the title by 
which the disciples commonly addressed the Master. Christ 
refers to Himself as 6 Kupios vp.wv (Mt. xxiv. 42 ; cf. xxi. 3). 
The general use of Mara?i after the Ascension is strong evidence 
for at least occasional use during our Lord's ministry. See 
Bigg on 1 Pet. i. 3 ; Plummer, Luke, p. xxxi ; Dalman, Words 
of Jesus, p. 328. "It may be said with certainty that, at the 
time when Christianity originated, 'Lord' was a divine predicate 
intelligible to the whole Eastern world. St Paul's confession of 
'our Lord Jesus Christ' was, like the complemental thought 
that the worshippers are the ' slaves ' of the Lord, understood in 
its full meaning by everyone in the Hellenistic East, and the 
adoption of the Christian term of worship was vastly facilitated 
in consequence " (Deissmann, Light from Anc. East, p. 354). 
' Lord ' or ' the Lord ' is very frequent as a name for Christ in 
1 and 2 Thess., eight times without, and fourteen times with, the 
article. But this lofty title, so full of meaning in the Apostolic 
age, "has become one of the most lifeless words in the Christian 
vocabulary " (Kennedy on Phil. ii. 11: with Klopper, Lipsius, 
and B. Weiss, he holds that Ku'/oios is the ' Name above every 
name ' which God has given to Christ). 

6 iraTT)p T. oiKTipfxwi' k. 0eo§ it. t. TrapaK\r)o-eoJS. The two 
genitives are probably not quite parallel, although Theodoret 
makes them so by rendering the first 6 tovs oIktip/jlovs -n-qyafav. 
The first is probably qualifying or descriptive ; ' the Father who 
shows mercy,' 'the merciful Father,' as in 6 v. r. 86^? (Eph. 
i. 17), rbv Kvpiov t. oof 17s (1 Cor. ii. 8), 6 ®eos t. Sdf^s (Acts 
vii. 2), and perhaps the difficult expressions, 6 7rarrjp t. <pwTu>v 
.*nd t. "Kvpiov rjpiwv I. Xpto-ToC tt}s Sdf^s (Jas. i. 17, ii. 1). But 
there is not much difference between ' the merciful Father ' and 
'the Father from whom mercy flows.' The plur. twv oiK.Tipp.wv 
does not refer to separate merciful acts, "Father of repeated 
compassions " ; it is a Hebraism, very frequent in LXX, even 

* Other forms of the name are Hirom (1 K. v. 10, 18) and Sirom (Hdt. 
vii. 98). 


when combined with IXcos in the sing. (Ps. cii. [ciii.] 4 ; Is. 
liii. 15; 1 Mace. iii. 44). In N.T., excepting Col. iii. 12, the 
plur. is invariable. Rede igitur no?i Pater judiciorum vel 
ultionum dia'tur, sed Pater misericordiarum, quod miserendi 
cansam et originem sumat ex proprio, judicandi vel ulciscendi 
viagis ex nostro (S. Bernard, In Nativ. Dom. v. 3). 

Theodoret's explanation is right of the second genitive ; ' the 
Supplier' or 'Source of all comfort.'* Vulg. has Deus totius 
consolationis, instead of omnis ; and this has misled some com- 
mentators who interpret totius as meaning integrac or perfectae. 
In v. 4, in iota tribulations {l-m. 7racn/ tq 6X.) might have been 
better than in omni tribulations. The threefold 77-010-779, Trdarj, 
Trda-j], intensifies the idea of abundance ; and the whole passage 
illustrates St Paul's fondness for alliteration, especially with the 
letter ir. 

TrapaK\r)creajs. The word occurs six times in these five verses, 
with TrapaKakzlv four times. f AV. spoils the effect by wavering 
between ' consolation ' and ' comfort' ' Comfort ' for both 
substantive and verb preserves the effect. Vulg. also varies 
between consolatio and exhortatio, and between consolari and 
sxhortare. The change to exhortatio and exhortare in vv. 4 and 
6 confuses the Apostle's meaning, and the double change in v. 4 
causes great confusion. 

4. Vulg. Qui consolatur nos in omni tribulations nostra, ut 
possimus st ipsi consolari eos qui in omni pressura sunt, per ex- 
hortationem qua exhortamur et ipsi a Deo. 

6 TrapaKaXwr. ' Who continually comforts us ' ; not once or 
twice, but always; the 7rapaK-A.?/o-ts is without break (Chrys.); 
and it is supplied in various ways — vel per Scripturas, vel per 
alios sandos, vel per occultam inspirationenem, vel per tribulationis 
allevationem (Herveius). 

The r/juas need not be confined to Paul and Timothy, still 
less to Paul alone. It probably includes all missionaries, and 
perhaps indirectly all sufferers; Is. xl. 1. It is unreasonable to 
suppose that St Paul always uses the 1st pers. plur. of himself in 
his Apostolic character, and the 1st pers. sing, when he speaks 
as a private individual ; and it would be rash to assert that he 

* Cf. 6 Geds ttjs vTrofiovrjs ical TrapaKhijaews (Rom. xv. 5), ttjs 4\irl5os 
(xv. 13), TTji elprjvijs (xv. 33): also al irapaKXrjcreis aov ■qyawqaav tt\v ^\>xh v 
/xov (Ps. xciii. [xciv.] 19). 

t In the first eight chapters 7rapdK\7)<m occurs eleven times, in the four 
last chapters not at all, and in the rest of the Pauline Epistles only eight 
times ; in the rest of N.T. (Lk., Acts, Heb.) only nine times. The verb is 
specially frequent in Acts and Paul, who uses it in all three senses ; ' beseech ' 
18 times, 'exhort' 17 times, 'comiort' 13 times, of which 7 are in this Epistle, 
where the verb occurs 17 times. Bernard, ad toe. 


never uses the plur. without including others ; but the latter 
statement is nearer the truth than the former. He seems to use 
the i st pers. plur. with varying degrees of plurality, from himself 
with one colleague to himself with all Christians or even all 
mankind ; and he probably uses it sometimes of himself alone. 
Some elasticity may be allowed in this passage. Each case must 
be judged by its context. But we cannot be sure that, when he 
employs the plur. of himself, he is emphasizing his official 
authority, for Milligan {Thess. p. 131) has shown that this use 
of the plur. is found in the ordinary correspondence of the time, 
and also in inscriptions. In Epistles written without any 
associate (Gal. Rom. Eph. Past.), the sing, is dominant. In 
2 Cor., the plur. is frequent, and sometimes changes rapidly with 
the sing. (i. 13, v. n, vii. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 12, 14, ix. 4, x. 2, 8, 
xi. 6, 21, xii. 19, 20, xiii. 6-10). It is very unlikely that all the 
plurals are virtually singular and also official ; but in vii. 5 rj crap£ 
r]fj.wv must mean St Paul only. See Lightfoot on 1 Thess. ii. 4. 

eir! irdo-T] -rfj 0\i\|/ei rj/jioii'. As in vii. 4 and 1 Thess. iii. 7, the 
eVt expresses the occasion on which the comfort is given; and 
the article indicates that the 0A.ii/>is is regarded as a whole, ' in 
all our affliction,' whereas cv iravrj 6X. means ' in every kind of 
affliction' that can occur, whether of mind or body (Blass, Gram, 
d. N.T. Gr. § 47. 9, p. 158). There is no exception on God's 
side (Ps. xciv. 19), and there must be none on ours. Both AV. 
and RV. mark the difference by change from 'all' to any.' 
The change from iiri to lv can hardly be marked in English 
without awkwardness : Latin versions make no change, and some 
Greek texts read iv for ori. 0Au//is (or Q\l\\iii) is found in all 
Pauline groups, except the Pastorals. It is rare in class. Grk., — 
perhaps never before Aristotle, and then always in the literal 
sense of 'crushing.' In LXX it is very frequent, especially in 
Psalms and Isaiah. AV. obliterates its frequency here by 
varying between ' tribulation ' and ' trouble ' (vv. 4, 7, 8) and 
'affliction' (ii. 4, iv. 17, etc.). RV. has 'affliction' always in 
2 Cor., but in other Epistles has 'tribulation' also: it retains 
'tribulation' always in Rev. and in the Gospels, except Jn. 
xvi. 21, where 'anguish' is retained. Vulg. usually has 
tribulatio, which is not classical, but sometimes has pressura: 
in v. 4 it has both, as if St Paul used two different words. In 
Col. i. 24 it has passio. 

€is to ouVao-Oai k.t.X. With the construction comp. 1 Cor. 
ix. 18. The teleological standpoint is Pauline: non sibi vivebat 
Apostolus, sed Ecclesiae (Calv.). Evangelists are comforted, not 
for any merit of their own, but in order that they may be able 
to comfort others. In missionary work sympathy is the great 
condition of success (1 Cor. ix. 22), and it was part of the 


training of the Apostles that they should need and receive 
comfort in order to know how to impart it; and the comfort is 
deliverance, not necessarily from the suffering, but from the 
anxiety which suffering brings. There is the assurance that 
sufferers are in the hands of a loving Father, and this assurance 
they can pass on to others in all their afflictions. But we need 
not confine ^uu? to Apostles and missionaries ; the words apply 
to all Christians. It is, however, exaggeration to say that only 
those who have received consolation know how to impart it. 

It is not impossible that St Paul is here thinking of the 
affliction which the Corinthians had recently been experiencing 
in their agony of self-reproach and remorse when the severe 
letter of the Apostle and the remonstrances of Titus, who had 
brought the letter to them, had convinced them that they had 
treated their spiritual father abominably in listening to the 
misrepresentations and slanders of the Judaizing teachers and in 
rebelling against him. These emotional Greeks, as Titus had 
reported to St Paul, had been crushed by the thought of their 
own waywardness and ingratitude. The Apostle, hardly less 
emotional than themselves, longs to comfort them, and he 
knows how to do it. They, by their rebellion and maltreatment 
of him had taught his tender and affectionate heart what afflic- 
tion, in one of its most intense forms, could be ; and God had 
comforted him and sustained him in it all. Now he knows how 
to comfort them. "The affliction had intensified Paul's capacity 
as a son of consolation" (Massie, The Century Bible, p. 71). 

tjs TT-apaKa\ou'|ui.eOa. This kind of attraction is not common 

in N.T. ; com p. tt}s ^a/xros avTOv, rjs e^aptrajo-ev rjfxas and Tr}<; 

/<Xr;creco5, ^s ck/Y^tc (Eph. i. 6, iv. 1). In these cases it may be 
"simplest" to take ^s as rj ; but in all of them the ace. is 
possible, as in Mk. x. 38 and Jn. xvii. 26 ; and in all five cases 
a substantive is followed by its cognate verb. Eph. i. 19, rrjv 

efe'pyetav . . . r)v ivipyr)Kev, and ii. 4, rrjv TroWrjv aydinqv olvtov, 

r/v rjyaTrrjcrev i^/ms, suggest the ace. rather than the dat. The 
attraction of the dat. is very rare, but we find it Ps. xc. 15; 
Hag. ii. 18. 

For iirl, C, Eus. Chrys. have iv. M, Hil. Ambr. omit rjfiwv. For els, 
F has tva. Vulg. ins. ical before ^uas. D E F G, Latt. (not r) ins. ical 
before avroL. For vtt6, F has u.tt6. 

5. on Kct0ws k.t.X. 'Because just as the sufferings of the 
Messiah abound unto us, so through the Messiah our comfort 
also aboundeth.' For Kadm . . . ourws . . . see 1 Thess. ii. 4. 
The sufferings are those quas Christus prior pertulit et nobis 
perferendas reliquit (Herveius). The preachers of the Kingdom 
have to suffer persecution as He had (1 Pet. iv. 13); but 


Chrys. gives too much meaning to ?repio-o-evei, when he inter- 
prets it as meaning that Christ's ministers suffer more than He 
did. ' The sufferings of the Messiah ' are those which He was 
destined to suffer, which eSet TraOziv r. Xpiorov (see on Lk. 
xxiv. 26 and cf. Acts xvii. 3 ; 2 Cor. iv. 10 ; Rom. vi. 5 ; Phil, 
iii. 10, with Lightfoot's note).* 'Sufferings endured for Christ's 
sake' is wrong as translation (cf. iv. 11), and inadequate as 
exegesis. ' Sufferings which the glorified Christ suffers when 
His members suffer' is questionable exegesis, which is not 
justified by the Apostle's use of toB Xpto-roC instead of tov 
'Irjaov as in Gal. vi. 17. It is the sufferings of the Messiah that 
he is pointing to, for his recent opponents were Jews. More- 
over, t. Xpia-Tov is necessary in the second clause, for not the 
historical Jesus who suffered is the Consoler, but the glorified 
Christ; and it would have marred the antithesis to have 'Jesus' 
in the first clause and 'Christ' in the second. In iv. 10, he has 
'Jesus' in both clauses. In the background is the thought of 
the absolute unity between Christ and His members ; and 
although we can hardly think of Him as still liable to suffering 
when His members suffer, yet their sufferings are a continuation 
of His, and they supplement His (Col. i. 24) in the work of 
building up the Church. One purpose of His sufferings was to 
make men feel more certain of the love of God (Rom. viii. 32). 
Cf. iv. 10; Rom. vi. 5, viii. 17; Phil. iii. 10; Mt. xx. 22, xxv. 
40, 45). It is less likely that he is hinting at opponents who 
had said that his sufferings were richly deserved. So far as 
possible, he wishes to suppress all allusion to the unhappy past, 
and hence the obscure wording of this paragraph. What he 
desires to emphasize is the comfort which he and those who had 
opposed him now enjoy, owing to their submission. In N.T., 
Trddrjixa is confined to the Pauline Epp., Heb. and 1 Pet. The 
change from plur. to sing, is effective ; ilia mirita sunt, haec una, 
et tamen potior (Beng.). D E have to Trad^jxa to match tj 


•n-epicro-eu'ei els T) Cf. ix. 8; Rom. v. 1 5 ; Eph. i. 8. 

8id tou Xpurrou. ' Through the Messiah ' : it is through His 
instrumentality that the reconciliation between the Jew of 
Tarsus and his Jewish antagonists in Corinth, which has been 
such a comfort to both sides, has come about. This use of 8l<x 
is freq. of the Son (1 Cor. viii. 6; Col. i. 16; Heb. i. 2), but 
it is also used of the Father (1 Cor. i. 9; Rom. xi. 36; Heb. 
ii. 10), and therefore, as Chrys. remarks, is not derogatory to 
the Divinity of the Son. It is He who sends His Spirit to bring 
comfort. He has become Trvtvixa ((dottoiovv (i Cor. xv. 45). 

kcu t) irapaK\T]CTis tj|juoc This does not mean the comfort 
* See Briggs, The Messiah of the Apostles, p. 122. 


which we give, but the comfort which we receive. After 
7repio-o-€t'et we may understand e£? vpas. St Paul and Timothy 
have received abundant comfort and have abundant comfort to 

DEFG 17, 37, Latt. Copt. ins. ical after ovtus. Vulg. omits ko.1 
before 17 irapdK\f]cns. 

6. €iT€ 8e 0\i(36fx€0a. c But whether we be afflicted, it is for 
your comfort [and salvation].' How this is the case, has been 
shown in v. 4. The teachers' sufferings and subsequent consola- 
tions have taught them how to comfort others ; so that all their 
experiences, whether painful or pleasing, prove profitable to the 

Tfjs u/jlojv irapaKXriaeus- We have 1/j.wv between article and 
substantive twice in this verse. The arrangement is peculiar to 
Paul (vii. 7, 15, viii. 13, 14, xii. 19, xiii. 9, etc.). The alter- 
natives, etTe . . . etre, are almost peculiar to Paul, and are very 
frequent in 1 and 2 Cor. Elsewhere in N.T., 1 Pet. ii. 3 only. 

ciTe irapaKa\ou'f«.€0a. ' Or whether we be comforted, it is for 
your comfort, which is made effective in the endurance of the 
same sufferings which we also suffer'; i.e. the comfort which 
their teachers receive overflows to them, when the sufferings of 
both are similar. 

Are we to suppose that there had been persecution of the 
Christians at Corinth? The 7retpao-/^os in 1 Cor. x. 13 might 
mean that some who had refused to take part in idolatrous 
practices had been denounced as disloyal. But, if there is a 
reference to persecution at all, it is more probable that St Paul 
is thinking of the possibility of future trouble, as 17 eA.7ris 
indicates. The fact that ivepyov/xivrjs and cVtc are presents must 
not be pressed ; they are timeless and refer to what is normal. 
St Paul expected further persecution for himself (v. 10) : he 
would neither cease to preach, nor preach a rigid Gospel 
pleasing to Judaizers, nor preach an elastic Gospel pleasing to 
freethinking Hellenists and Gentiles. 

evepyoufxeVris. Lightfoot has sanctioned the view that the 
passive of ivzpyziv does not occur in N.T. J. A. Robinson 
{Eph. p. 245) has given reasons for doubting this. The 
instances, with the exception of Jas. v. 16, are all in Paul 
(iv. 12 ; 1 Thess. ii. 13 ; 2 Thess. ii. 7 ; Gal. v. 6 ; Rom. vii. 5 ; 
Eph. iii. 20; Col. i. 29). In all of them it is difficult to decide 
between the middle and the passive, and even in Jas. v. 16 the 
passive is not impossible. Here Chrys. seems to regard the 
participle as passive, for he points out that St Paul says 
ivepyovixiv-qs and not ivepyovcrr)<;. The comfort does not work of 
itself, but 'is made to work' by him who bestows it. If we 


regard it as middle, the meaning will be 'which makes itself 
felt.' See Blass, § 55. 1. 

iv oTro|j.cH'f]. Manly endurance without cowardly shrinking 
(vi. 4, xii. 12) is meant. The word is found in all groups of the 
Pauline Epp. Cf. fj OXiipts viropov^v KaTepyd^erat (Rom. V. 3). 
In LXX it generally means patient expectation and hope, a 
meaning which prevails even in Ecclus. (ii. 14, xvi. 13, xvii. 24, 
xli. 2) ; but in 4 Mace, which was written not long before this 
Epistle, the N.T. meaning is found : rfj avSpeia ko.1 ttj iirop.ovrj 

(i. Il), rrjerSe rijs KO.Koira.Qua>; Kal virop.ovr)<; (ix. 8), aperr) oY virofJLOvrjs 

8oKifia£,ovcra (xvii. 12; also 17, 23). See on Luke viii. 15; 
Trench, Syn. § liii. 

Tc3f ciutw ira0r|jji(£Tcoi'. Note the attraction of ulv. Not the 
identical sufferings, as if the Corinthians were pained whenever 
the Apostle was pained, in which case the /cat would be 
meaningless; but the same in kind, arising out of devotion to 
Christ. Communio sanctorum egregie representatur in hac 
epistola (Beng.). 

The text is confused as to the order of the clauses. The received Text, 
which is followed in AV., was made by Erasmus without MS. authority. 
The two arrangements, between which the choice lies, are given by \VH., 
one in the text and one in a foot-note. The former, which is preferable, 
runs thus ; efre 5t dXi{36/j.e0a, vir£p ttJs v/j.<2v irapaKXrjiTeois Kal cwT-qplas' eiVe 
irapaKa.Xovjj.e9a, vire'p rrjs v/xQv irapaKXrjrjews tt?s ivepyovLiiv-qs iv VTro/.iovr) 
tuv aiiTuiv ira.9rifxa.Twv wv koX r^/xets irdcrxoLtev, Kal 77 iXirh i]p.Qv [3e[3aia vire'p 
vuCci' (KACMP). The other runs thus; e'ire 5k 8Xi(36fj.e9a, virep ri}s 
vliwv irapaKXrjtxeu'i [Kal <rwr?;p/as] tjJs evepyov/j.ivr)s iv virofiovfj tOiv avruiv 
iradrjpuxTwv wv Kal i]fj.eis irdcrx o /- iev KaL V eXirh ri/nCov /3e/3cu'a virep v/xQv eire 
TapaKaXovLLtOa, virep rrjs i]{iwv irapaKXrjtrews Kal abJTijpias (B D E F G K L). 
B 17, 176 omit the first Kal awr-qplas. Assuming that the text of hf A 
C M P is original, we may explain the origin of the other arrangement by 
supposing that, owing to homoeoteleuton (irapaKX-qcrews to irapaKXi'jcrews), 
the words Kal cwrripias e'ire irapaKaXov/xeOa virep r?]s vfiu>v irapaKXrjijeus 
were accidentally omitted and afterwards written in the margin, and that 
the next copyist inserted them in the wrong place. 

Editors differ as to the punctuation and the division of the verses, 
according as they regard i) iXirls ijfiwv as connected with what precedes or 
with what follows. Some place only a comma at irdo-x ^" an d a colon or 
full stop at virep v/jlwv. Others place a colon or full stop at irdo-xo/J-ev and 
only a comma at virep vllCiv. The latter is better, and Kal r\ iXirh k.t.X. is 
rightly assigned to v. 7. 

7. Kal V] eX-rris iquwi' pe^aia u-rrep upu^. ' And our hope is sure 
concerning you.' See Deissmann on /3e/3atWis, Bible Studies, 
pp. 104-109. Wetstein gives examples of the expression eA.7ris 
fiefiaia. There may be trouble in store for both sides, but those 
who have shared distress and consolation on a large scale may 
face the future without dismay. This is much higher praise than 
he bestows on the Thessalonians (1 Thess. iii. 2, 3, 5). 

€iS6t€s. 'Because we know'; cf. 1 Cor. xv. 58; Col. iii. 24; 


Eph. vi. 8. Strict grammar would require ciSo'twv, but this use 
of the nom. participle, not in agreement with the noun, is 
common in Paul and in papyri ; e.g. 6\if36/xevoi (vii. 5), otcAAo- 
jxevoi (viii. 20), Tr\ovTi£,6/i€i'oi (ix. 11), ippi&fxevoi (Eph. iii. 17), 
avtypi*-™ 01 (i v - 2 )> 8t8d(TKovT€<; (Col. iii. 16), c^ovtc? (Phil. i. 30), 
etc. Some refer ci'Sotcs here to the Corinthians ; ' because ye 
know,' which is improbable. It is expressly said that the know- 
ledge is the security for 'our hope.' 

Koivoivoi eore . . . rfjs TrapaKX^acws. He does not claim the 
credit of comforting them : they receive comfort from the same 
source that he does — from God through Christ. For the con- 
struction, cf. 1 Pet. v. 1 ; 2 Pet. i. 4 ; for ws . . . otrrws, Rom. 
v. 15, iS. 

For Jjs (K A B C D* M P 17), D 2 and 3 K L have wairep. 

8-11. The Thanksgiving still continues, these verses explain- 
ing (yap) why he blesses God for mercies to himself rather than 
for graces bestowed on them, and the wording continues to be 
obscure. The obscurity may be due to reference to a delicate 
matter which is understood rather than expressed. This would 
be very intelligible, if the 'affliction' is the Corinthian rebellion 
against the Apostle, and the 'comfort' is their submission and 
reconciliation to him. But a reference to persecution is not 

8. Ou yap 0e'\o|i.€e uuas ayvoelv, doe\4>oi. The formula is 

used six times by St Paul (1 Cor. x. 1, xii. 1 ; Rom. i. 13, xi. 25 ; 
1 Thess. iv. 13), always with doeA<£oi, as if the information given 
was an appeal to their affection and sympathy. Excepting 
1 Cor. xii. 3, where dSeA^oi has preceded, the similar expression, 
yvtopi£a> (-ofxev) ifilv, is also followed by aScXcpoc (viii. 8 ; 1 Cor. 
xv. 1; Gal. i. 11). The less frequent 0e'Aw vfxa.% cl&eviu (1 Cor. 
xi. 3; Col. ii. 1) is not so followed, Similar expressions are 
found in papyri ; yivwo-Kciv ae 6i\w is often placed at the begin- 
ning of letters. It is not quite exact to say that logically the oi 
belongs to ayvoeiv : there is something which he does not wish. 
The expression is not parallel with ovk Icprj xpw* 11 ', which does 
not mean that she did not say that she would, but that she said 
that she would not. St Paul does not wish the Corinthians to 
remain in ignorance of the intensity of his recent affliction, for 
when they know how greatly he has suffered, they will regard 
their own sufferings more patiently, and will also appreciate his 
present comfort and derive comfort from it. 

rfjs SXiiJ/ewg ^jiwv rfjs yevo^ievi]<; iv ttj 'Actio. Evidently the 
0A.u/as is something which the Corinthians already know, for the 
vague statement that it ' took place in Asia ' is enough to tell 


them what he means. He gives no particulars, but merely 
enlarges upon the terrible effect which the affliction had upon 
himself. This leaves plenty of room for conjecture, and there 
are many guesses. We must find something very severe and 
capable of being regarded as ' sufferings of the Christ.' Neither 
illness nor shipwreck seem to be very suitable, and a shipwreck 
would hardly have been described as taking place 'in Asia.' 
News that his beloved Corinthians had rebelled against him, and 
thereby had set an example of revolt to other Churches in 
Europe, is more probable. Such tidings might go far towards 
making so sensitive and affectionate a worker think that he 
could not live any longer. On the other hand, it is perhaps a 
little improbable that, after the joyous reconciliation, he should 
revive the past by telling them that they had almost killed him 
by their misbehaviour. Yet he might do this in order to show 
them how intensely everything that they do affects him.* If 
this conjecture is set aside as improbable — and the language of 
vv. 8-10 does seem to be rather strong for the effect of painful 
news — we may fall back upon the hypothesis of persecution, not 
by officials, but by furious mobs, consisting of, or hounded on 
by, exasperated Jews, so that he was nearly torn in pieces by 
them (i Cor. xv. 31, 32). Such 0Afyis would fitly be compared 
with 'the sufferings of the Messiah.' This is Tertullian's view 
(De Resur. Carnis, 48) ; the pressura apud Asiam refers to Mas 
bestias Asiaticae pressurae. Those who, with Paley, think that 
the reference is to the uproar raised by Demetrius at Ephesus 
(Acts xix. 23-41) must admit that, in that case, St Luke has given 
an inadequate account of St Paul's peril, for he gives no hint 
that he was near being killed. Paley's argument suffices to show 
that vv. 8, 9 cannot have been written by a forger who wished 
to make an allusion to Acts xix. ; a forger would have made the 
allusion more distinct ; but it does not prove that the allusion is 
to Acts xix. There may easily have been a much worse out- 
break at Ephesus somewhat later, and even a plot to kill St Paul, 
as in Acts xxiii. 12, and this peril may have hastened his 
departure from Ephesus. It is probably right to assume that ' in 
Asia' means in Ephesus. Ephesus was the metropolis of the 
Roman province of Asia, which contained the Seven Churches 
of Rev. i. 11. See on 1 Cor. xvi. 19. In Ephesus he had 

* G. H. Rendall, on i. 4, argues strongly for the view that the anguish 
was caused by the revolt and estrangement of the Corinthian converts. See 
also the Camb. Grk. Test., 1903, p. 28. It is perhaps best to leave the 
question open. " This trial, which the Apostle does not explain more 
definitely, surpassed all bounds, and exceeded his powers of endurance. He 
despaired of life. He carried within his soul a sentence of death. And now 
his unhoped for deliverance seems like an actual resurrection" (A. Sabatier, 
The Apostle Paul, p. 181). 


'many adversaries' (i Cor. xvi. 9). If Timothy shared this 
great affliction, either it took place before he started for Corinth, 
or he had returned to the Apostle before the latter left Ephesus. 
tea©' uireppoXt]!' uirep SuVafxif e'|3apr)0r||j.€i'. Some teachers and 
leaders insist upon their glories and successes; St Paul insists 
rather on his sufferings (xii. 5, 9, 10). Whatever this 0Atyis may 
have been, he hints that it was far worse than what the 
Corinthians had to endure. He says that he (and Timothy?) 
'were weighed down exceedingly beyond our power.' Does ko.6' 
iirepfioXr/v qualify vvrtp 8vrap.LV or ifiapyjOrjixev? Our English is 
as amphibolous as the Greek. The placing of i-n-lp Sw. after 
ifiapiftrjp.ei' (E K L) is an attempt to decide the point. Only 
once in LXX does ko.0' virepfioXrjv occur, in one of the latest 
books (4 Mace. iii. 18), and there of acute physical suffering, 

Tcts tuv crwp,a.Twv dAy^SoVas kolB' vTrepfioXrjv oucras. St Paul has it 

five times (iv. 17 ; 1 Cor. xii. 31 ; Gal. i. 13; Rom. vii. 13), all 
in this group of Epistles. 

wore e^airopr] 9t]f cu r|u.ds kch tou ^yjc ' So that we were utterly 
without way of escape, were utterly at a loss, were quite in de- 
spair, even of life' (iv. 8 only; in LXX, Ps. lxxxvii. 16 only). 
This is the right meaning, which is preserved in the Old Latin, 
ut de vita haesitaremus (Tert. De Res. Cam. 48), and by Jerome 
(on Eph. iii. 13), itaut desperaremus nos etiam vivere. But Vulg. 
supports the less probable meaning, that he did not wish to live 
any longer, ut taederet nos etia?n vivere. We have a braver strain 
in iv. 8 and in Phil. iv. 3. St Paul has many moods, and he 
has no wish to conceal from the Corinthians how profoundly 
great trouble had depressed him. On tou, see J. H. Moulton, 
pp. 217, 200. 

\nrhp tjjs (B K L M) is more likely to be original than wepl ttJs (XA 
C D E F G P 17) ; irepi is the usual constr. after ay voeiv (1 Cor. xii. I ; 
1 Thess. iv. 13), and hence the change here. Cf. viii. 23, xii. 8 ; 2 Thess. 
ii. 1 ; Rom. ix. 27. K 3 D- and3 EKL, Syrr. Copt. ins. tj/jlTv after yevoLievrjs, 
H* ABC D* FGMP 17, Latt. Arm. omit. i>7rep Suvaixiv before i^apTjdrjfjLev 
(XABCMP17) rather than napa dvv. after ifiap. (D F G). 

9. dXXd auTol Iv iauTots. Cf. Rom. viii. 23. ' Nay, we our- 
selves had the sentence of death within ourselves.' * We may 
render dXAa either ' Nay,' i.e. ' It may seem incredible, but, : or 
' Yea,' i.e. ' One may put the matter still more strongly.' The (iAAd 
confirms what has just been said (vii. n, viii. 7, x. 4), and is equi- 
valent to our colloquial, ' Why.' In his own mind the Apostle was 
convinced that in all human probability his hours were numbered. 

* Rutherford would render iv eavrofc ' in a tribunal composed of our- 
selves.' But the Apostle felt the sentence of death rather than pronounced 
it on himself. Rutherford explains the dXXd as due to the negative implied 
in i^airop-r]drivai. 


With Icrxquafx^v COmp. eo-xV Ka (ii. 13), 7T£7ron;/ca (xi. 25), 

TreTTOLTjKev (Heb. xi. 28). Here we might explain the perf. as 
expressing the permanent effects of the airoKpifxa as vividly 
recalling the moment when the airoKpt^a was recognized. 
But there seems to be a "purely aoristic use of the perfect" 
(Winer, p. 340), especially in late Greek. In Rev. v. 7 we have 
aor. and perf. combined, and the same in reverse order in Rev. 
iii. 3, viii. 5, xi. 17. See J. H. Moulton, pp. 143-146; Blass, 

§59- 4- 

Both AV. and RV. express doubt whether 'sentence or 

' answer ' is the better translation of a.TTOKpip.a. Vulg. has 
responsum. The word occurs nowhere else in Biblical Greek, 
but Josephus and Polybius use it for a decision of the Roman 
Senate ; and Deissmann {Bible Studies, p. 257) quotes an inscrip- 
tion dated a.d. 51 in which a-rroKpi/xa is used of a decision of the 
Emperor Claudius. Both Chrys. and Thdrt. use r^v if/rjcpov as an 
equivalent, to which Chrys. adds t. -n-poo-SoKiav and t. a-jrocpaaiv. 
Cf. w Odvare, kolXov o~ov to /cpi'/m ecrrtv, and fir] ev\a(3ov xpifxa (Ecclus. xli. 2, 3). 

Xva p) ireiroiGoTes 2>\i.ev <=4>' cauTots. A thoroughly Pauline 
touch. He has told us of one Divine purpose in sending 
afflictions and comfort, viz. to train him for administering com- 
fort to others who are in affliction (v. 4). Here he tells us of 
another. Suffering of great intensity has been sent to prove to 
him his own helplessness, and to teach him to trust in God. who 
has the power of life and death (2 Kings v. 7), and can not only 
recover the dying but restore the dead (iv. 14; Rom. iv. 17). 
We need not water down Iva into a mere equivalent to wore : 
the telic force is quite in place here. This dreadful trial was 
sent to him in order to give him a precious spiritual lesson 
(xii. 7-10). 

to eyeipoK-ri. Timeless present participle expressing a per- 
manent attribute, like 6 TrapaxaXwv in v. 4. Cf. Heb. xi. 19, 
where Swa-ros (not Swarai) gives a Divine attribute. In such 
extreme danger and dread, human aid was worthless ; real relief 
could come only from Him who had power to raise the dead : 
and to be rescued from so desperate a condition was almost a 
resurrection. Bousset refers to the " Eighteen-petition-prayer " 
of the Jews, the Schmone-Esre or chief prayer which each Jew 
ought to say thrice daily. It really contains nineteen petitions, 
as Schiirer (Gesch. d. Jiid. Volk. ii. pp. 460-462, 3rd ed. 1898) 
has shown. In the second petition we have, "Thou art 
almighty for ever, O Lord, for Thou makest the dead to live. 
Thou art mighty to help, Thou who sustainest the living 
through Thy mercy, and makest the dead to live through 
Thy compassion. . . . Who is like unto Thee, O King, 


who killest and makest alive and causest help to spring up. 
And true art Thou in making the dead to live." This is the 
great mark of Divine power — resturing the dead to life. 
Chrys. thinks that it is mentioned here because the possi- 
bility of resurrection was questioned at Corinth (1 Cor. xv. 12). 
But the mention is quite natural, without any polemical purpose. 
A reflexion on Corinthian scepticism is more probable in iv. 14 
and v. 15. Thdrt. and some others weaken the meaning greatly 
by substituting tyupavn for iyetpovn, as if it referred to the single 
act of raising Christ from the dead. Even in Deo qui suscitat 
mortuos (Vulg.) is not quite adequate : in Deo mortiwrum 
resuscitatore is the full meaning. Of the whole clause, Iva p.rj 
k.t.A., we may admit that facit locus iste contra eos qui suis aliquid 
merit is tribuere praesumunt (Pseudo-Primasius). 

10. 09 Ik tk]Xikoutou OacciTOu epuaaTO iqfias. ' Who Out of SO 

great a death delivered us.' He says ' death ' rather than ' peril 
of death,' because he had regarded himself as a dead man ; the 
Ik (not diro) seems to imply peril rather than death personified, 
but Wetstein shows that Ipvo-aro ex is a common ex- 
pression. This may be one of the rare N.T. reminiscences of 

the Book of Job ; * ipvaaTO ttjv ij/V)(rjv /aov Ik Oavdrov (xxxiii. 30). 
A comparison with ipvcr6r]v Ik o~ro//.aros Aeoi/To?. pvaerat p.€ 6 
Kvpios (2 Tim. iv. 17, iS) and iva. pvaOQ) diro twv aTreiOovvTwv 

iv rrj 'IouSaia (Rom. xv. 31) rather favours the hypothesis that 
the great OXfyis in Asia was violent persecution. As in Heb. ii. 
3, t7]\ikovto<; here means ' so great' as to require such a Saviour : 
cf. Rev. xvi. 18 ; Jas. iii. 4. In LXX the word is found in Mace, 
only ; in class. Grk. it is used more often of age than of size, ' so 
old,' and sometimes 'so young.' 

Kal puo-eTcu. This is superfluous, anticipating and somewhat 
spoiling the next clause. Hence some witnesses read pveTai or 
omit, and some editors either omit the word or adopt awkward 
punctuation: see critical note. But St Paul, in dictating, might 
easily repeat himself, toning down the confident 'He will 
deliver' into a confident hope that He will do so. Thus afflic- 
tion is set before us as a school of sympathy (v. 4), a school of 
encouragement (v. 5), and a school of hope (v. 10). He pro- 
claims that the rescue in all cases is God's work, not their own : 
it must come from Him, if at all. 

els ov T)XmKajjLef [on] Kal en puaeTai. ' Unto whom we have 
directed our hope that He will also still deliver us ' ; or, omitting 
on, ' and He will still deliver us ' ; or ko.1 may be intensive, ' that 
He will indeed deliver us.' Praescit se adhac passurum qui sperat 

* Cf. I Cor. iii, 19 ; Rom. xi. 35 ; Phil. i. 19 ; 1 Thess. v. 22 ; 2 Thess. 
ti. 8. 


se libera?idum (Pseudo-Primasius). He had enough experience 
of perils of death (xi. 23 ; 1 Cor. xv. 31) to feel that he must be 
prepared for others in the future. Cf. TrpoaTroOvijo-Kio ttoXXow;,; virofxevwv (Philo, In Flaccum, 990 A) ; p-eviro) kv rats 
i\ivyai<; aKa#atp€Tos rj eVi tov crwTrjpa ®eov €/\.7rts, os 7roAAa/as i£ 
ajXYj-^avoiv koX airopwy 7repiecra)cre to eOvos {Leg. ad Caium, 574). For 
kX-n-C^eiv eh, see Jn. v. 45 ; 1 Pet. iii. 5 ; IXttl'^lv «ri is more 
common (Rom. xv. 12 ; 1 Tim. iv. 10, v. 5, vi. 17); in quo spent 
repositam habe7nus is nearer to hcL 

Origen (on Lev. xi. 2), with too rigid logic, argues that, as it is not to 
be supposed that St Paul expected to be immortal, he cannot mean physi- 
cal death when he says that he hopes that God will continue to deliver him 
from deaths ; he must mean sins. Origen evidently read £k ttjXikovtuv, with Vulg. (de tantis periculis) Syrr., Jerome (on Eph. i. 13), 
Rufinus {ad loc. ), Ambrst. He also read Kal puercu with D'EFGKLM, 
Latt. Goth., Chrys. But ck tijXikoutov 6ava.Tov and Kal pvaeraL is to be 
preferred with ^ B C P 17, Copt. Arm. A D* omit koX pvaerai. B D* M 
omit 6ti, ard F G place it after Kal. Goth. Aeth. omit both Kal and efrt. 
B. Weiss proposes to read els bv rfKirlKafxev. Kal en pi'crerat. 

11. o-uvuTroupyoui'Twi' Kal ufxwv k.t.X. ' Ye also helping together 
on our behalf by your supplication,' which may mean either 
'provided you help' or 'while you help.'* The latter is more 
probably right ; the Apostle is as secure of the intercession of 
the Corinthians as he is of God's protection, and the one will 
contribute to the other. With whom do the Corinthians co- 
operate ? Various answers have been given to this question. 
• With the Apostle, in his hope or in his prayers ' (Rom. xv. 30) ; 
or, ' with one another'; or, 'with the particular purpose.' He 
has just said that God will rescue, and he adds that the 
Corinthians will help. Their intercessions are part of the 
machinery which God has provided for preserving His Apostle 
from deadly peril. " Even if God doeth anything in mercy, yet 
prayer doth mightily contribute thereto " (Chrys., who, however, 
takes o~vvvrrovpy. of the Corinthians uniting with one another in 
intercession). We need not take v-rrep rjp.wv after 177 Se^'o-a : it 
goes well with o-wvirovpy. 

As a word for 'prayer,' Serais is almost as general as 
irpoo-e.vxq, with which it is often joined. It is commonly an 
expression of personal need (see on Lk. i. 13), but is often 
used of intercession; ix. 14; Rom. x. 1; Phil. i. 4 (see 
Lightfoot) ; 2 Tim. i. 3 ; Heb. v. 7. Cf. the letter of Agrippa 
in Philo, Leg. ad Caium, § 36 sub init. (ii. p. 586); ypa.^>rj Se 

* St Paul was a strong believer in the value of intercession, whether of 
others for him (Rom. xv. 30 ; 1 Thess. v. 25 ; 2 Thess. iii. 1), or of himself 
for others (Rom. i. 9 ; Eph. i. 16 ; Phil. i. 4 ; I Thess. i. 2 ; 2 Tim. i. 3 ; 
Philem. 4). *Ep7ov est Dei, uirovpyeiv est apostolorum, <rvvvirovpyei9 
Corinthiorum (Beng.). 


fir]vv(r€i fxov rrjv Serjcriv, tjv av6' LKeTY]pia<; TrpoTavoy . . . Siofiat virip 


tea ex Tro\\wi> irpoffwirwi' . . . uirep rjp.we. A perplexing 
sentence. Among the doubtful points are (i) whether ttoWwv 
qualifies ■vrpoa-wir^v or is the gen. after Trpoo-uTro>v (ex multorum 
personis, Vulg.); (2) whether to efc 17/xas x" L P lcr l xa refers to God's 
rescue of the Apostle from death or to the Corinthians' inter- 
cessions for him ; (3) whether Sia ttoXXwv is masc. or neut. ; 
(4) the meaning of TrpoawTruv. (1) The meaning is much the 
same whether we say ' many 7rpoo-w7ra ' or ' the 7rpoo-w7ra of many,' 
but the former is almost certainly right. (2) The context 
strongly suggests that to eis x"-P i<T l xa rneans the Divine 
favour in delivering St Paul from death. That deliverance had 
already taken place, and was a more conspicuous subject for 
thanksgiving than the intercessions of the Corinthians on his 
behalf. Here, as in 1 Pet. iv. io, x^P l<T l xa - means an external 
blessing. All the other passages in N.T. in which x (l P L0 't xa 
occurs are in Paul (1 Cor., Rom., 1 and 2 Tim.), and it is 
commonly used of a spiritual gift, especially of some extra- 
ordinary power. (3) It is true that, if Sia 71-oAAoJv is masc, 
it is superfluous after Ik tvoWwv irpocrutiroiv. But St Paul is dic- 
tating, and such repetitions as pvaerai . . . pva-trai (v. 10) and 
ck it. irp. . . . Sia ir. are quite natural. Similarly, vvkp r)p.wv is 
superfluous after to ek 17/x,. x a P-' an0 ^ Y et 1S quite natural. More- 
over, it is not easy to find a satisfactory meaning for Sia ttoWwv, 
if 7roX\aiv is neut. 'With many thanks' {ingentes gratias), or 
1 with many words ' (prolixe), makes poor sense, even if such a 
translation is possible. We may safely regard 81b. ttoWILv as 
meaning ' through many people ' {per mzrfios, Vulg.). (4) The 
meaning of irpoawirov is less easily determined. The word occurs 
twelve times in this letter; in eight places it certainly means 
'face,' iii. 7 (bis), 13, 18, viii. 24, x. 1, 7, xi. 20 ; in one it means 
'face' in the sense of outward appearance (v. 12); in three 
it may mean either 'face' or 'person' (here, ii. 10, iv. 6). 
Herveius renders ex personis multarutn facierum and interprets 
homines multarutn aetatum et qualitatum diversarum. Ambrosi- 
aster has mitltorum faciebus. Bengel is much less happy than 
usual in giving the impossible ex multis respectibus. The con- 
jectural emendation, irpoo-e.vxp>v for 7rpoo-u>Trwv, has not found 
much support. 'From many persons' makes excellent sense, 
and this late use of irpoawn-ov is abundantly illustrated in the 
Greek of the period. But the literal sense is more probable and 
more attractive. It is difficult to explain ix, if persons are 
meant ; and we can well believe that the Apostle, as he dictates, 
sees in thought the many upturned fnces, lighted up with 
thankfulness, as praises for this preservation rise up from their 


lips. Some, however, while giving this meaning to e* it. 
Trpoa-wTrwv, understand it of the intercessions for the Apostle's 
protection ; others (AV., RV.) give this meaning to Sia irokXwv. 

Certainty is unattainable; but the following renderings are 
intelligible; (i) 'that from many mouths, for the favour shown 
to us, thanks may be offered by means of many on our behalf ; 
or (2) ' that the benefit accruing to us from the intercessions of 
many persons may through many be a matter of thanksgiving on 
our account'; or (3) 'that for the gift bestowed upon us by 
means of many, thanks may be given by many persons on our 
behalf ' (R V.). The last is questionable; it involves taking to 

cis rjfx. x a P- <^« 7ro ^- as if ft were T0 ^ 7r0 ^" e ' s ^ X a P- ^^ e 
second is still more questionable ; it involves taking Zk it. -n-poo-. 

to cis tux. x a P- as if it were T0 * K *■■ 7r P 00 '- £ k W- X a P- The first is 
more accurate and makes equally good sense. But in any case 
the words show what an impression this great affliction had made 
on St Paul, as if "even in a life of peril this peril in Asia had 
marked an era" (J. Agar Beet, p. 322). 

81a iroXXcJi/ euxapio-TT]0fj. Lit. ' may be thanked for by many,' 
i.e. may be made a subject of thanksgiving through the instru- 
mentality of many thankful persons. The passive occurs nowhere 
else in either N.T. or LXX. By Justin it is used of the euchar- 
istic bread which has been dedicated with thanks {Apol. i. 65). 

For bfiwv virtp rjfiQv, A has rj/iuv virtp v/xwi>, while D* F have v/mwv irepl 
rifiQv and G has ii^Qiv irepl vp.wv. For £k iroXXdv Trpoaw-rrwv, FGM have iv 
7toXXw irpo<r<l>Tr<j), g in multa facie. For ei'xop. virep rj/xu>v (K A C D* G M 
17, Vulg. Syrr.' Copt. Arm. Goth.), B D 3 E F K L P, Chrys. haye£ux a />- 
virtp vfxuv. Baljon would omit both 5ia iroXXQv and the second uirep i]u.Qiv 
as glosses. Neither of them has the look of a gloss, but both might be 
omitted without injury to the meaning. 


This is the first of the main divisions of the Epistle, and it 
may be divided into three sections; i. 12-ii. 17, iii. i-vi. 10, 
vi. 11-vii. 16. But the Second Epistle does not present such 
clearly marked divisions as the First. There the Apostle takes 
up the matters which had been reported to him and the questions 
which had been asked, disposes of them one by one, and passes 
on. Here it is his strong feeling rather than any deliberate 
arrangement that suggests the order of his utterances. Never- 
theless, although exact analysis is seldom possible owing to 
digressions and repetitions, yet some divisions are fairly clear, 
and the letter becomes more intelligible when they are noted. 


The headings given to the different sections are tentative : they 
are offered, not as adequate summaries of the contents of each 
section, but as stating what seems to be its dominant thought, or 
one of its dominant thoughts. In each section we have often to 
be content with highly conjectural explanations of the language 
used, seeing that we are in complete ignorance of the circum- 
stances to which the Apostle alludes, and about which he perhaps 
sometimes writes, from feelings of delicacy, with studied vagueness. 
In some cases the meaning of individual words is uncertain. 


The first verses (12-14) are transitional, being closely con- 
nected (yap) with the preceding expression of thanksgiving and 
hope, and at the same time preparing the way for the vindication 
of his character and recent actions. He can conscientiously say 
that in all his dealings he has endeavoured to be straightforward. 
Some editors attach these verses to what precedes, and treat them 
as the concluding part of the Thanksgiving. But a new note is 
struck by the words ev dytor^Ti k. eiAi/cpivia, which anticipate 
Tavrr] ttj ireTToiO-rja-ei in v. 15, and on the whole it seems better to 
regard the verses as introductory to what follows. 

My motives have been disinterested, and I believe that 

you are willing to admit this. 

12 For if we have any right to glory, it is because our con- 
science bears testimony that whatever we did was done in purity 
of motive and in a sincerity which had its source in God, in 
reliance, not on worldly cleverness, but on the gracious help of 
God. This is true of all our conduct in the world, and it is more 
abundantly so of our relations to you. 13 Do not believe for a 
moment that I write one thing at one time and another at 
another. I write nothing different from what I have written 
before. My meaning lies on the surface ; you read it and you 
recognize it as true ; and I hope that the time will never come 
when you will refuse to recognize it as such: 14 just as, in fact, 
you have recognized about us — some of you, at any rate — that 
you have good reason to glory in us, even as we also look forward 
to glorying in you in the Day of the Lord Jesus. 


12. e H yap KauxT]<ns tj/j.ui' auTT] ecttic. ' For our glorying is 
this,' — viz. the testimony that, etc. To make 5™ depend upon 
avT-Q, and take what lies between in opposition, is forced and 
unnecessary. The yap is perhaps an indefinite conjunction 
without special reference. But we can give it special 
reference by connecting it with v. u. 'I may count upon 
your prayers and thanksgivings for me, for I have done nothing 
to estrange you. Some of you think that I am too fond of 
glorifying myself and my office. What I do pride myself upon 
is my sincerity, especially towards you.' The cognate words, 
KavxTji^a (thrice), Kai^o-is (six times), Kav^ao-Oai (twenty times) 
are more frequent in this letter than in all the rest of the N.T. ; 
and the frequency ought to be reproduced in translation. AV. 
has ' rejoicing ' here, which is never the meaning, and elsewhere 
' glorying ' and ' boasting ' ; Vulg. has gloria and gloriatio, and the 
Old Latin sometimes has exsultatio. The distinction between 
words in -/xa and words in -o-is has lost its sharpness in N.T., but 
in some cases it still holds good, as here in vv. 12 and 14 (see 
on 1 Cor. v. 6 ; Lightfoot on Gal. vi. 4) ; and Kau'x^o-is more 
often preserves its special meanings as the ' act of glorifying ' than 
Kav^rj/xa as the ' ground for glorying ' or the ' completed boast' 

to pxipTupioi/ ttjs oweiorjaews TJpji/. " Virtue is better than 
praise ; for virtue is content with no human judgment, save that 
of one's own conscience" (Aug. De Civ. Dei, v. 12). While 
/xapTvpia is the act of testifying or bearing witness, fxaprvpLov is 
the testimony or evidence ; but piaprvpLa is sometimes used in 
the latter sense. Except in 1 Tim. iii. 7 and Tit. i. 13, St Paul 
always uses piapTvpiov. For awd^qir^ ' reflexion on the value of 
the actions which we are conscious of doing,' see on Rom. ii. 15 
and 1 Pet. ii. 19 ; also Westcott on Heb. ix. 9, p- 293 ; Cremer, 
Lex. p. 233 ; Hastings,. DB. i. p. 468. The word is rare in LXX, 
but the picture of a guilty person with an accusing conscience is 
given Wisd. xvii. 1 1 (cf. Tennyson's Sea Dreams) ; it is frequent 
in the Pauline Epistles and in Hebrews; cf. Rom. ix. 1, and, for 
the construction, 1 Thess. iv. 3. 

lv dyioTTjTi Kal elXiKpicta t. ©eou. The expression is strange, 
especially t. ©eoS : see critical note. Riickert's conjecture of 
ayvoTrjTt. is attractive. The apparent inappropriateness of 
ayioT-qri, and its rarity in LXX and N.T., may have caused the 
change to awXoTrjTi, which is more in point and a better com 
panion to elXucptvfy. The etymology of the latter word is a puzzle, 
but it appears to mean ' transparency ' and hence ' ingenuous- 
ness' or 'sincerity' (1 Cor. v. 8; see Lightfoot on Phil. i. 10). 
B. Weiss paraphrases, " in the holiness of God, which is separ- 
ated from all uncleanness of the world, and in an uprightness 
which, even if examined by the most brilliant light of the sun, 


will show no defects." See WH. ii. p. 154 on the change of 
termination, -eta to -<a. The exact force of-roC ©coOis uncertain; 
'superlative,' 'approved by God,' 'divine,' 'godlike,' 'godly' 
have been suggested and are possible ; but ' derived from God ' 
or ' God-given ' is more likely to be right, and the gen. prob- 
ably belongs to both nouns ; ' God-given holiness (simplicity) 
and sincerity.' St Paul is free from all iravovpyia and SdAos (iv. 2) 
and the sin of Ka-TrrjXeveiv w Xoyov t. ®eov (ii. 17). He passed 
on the truth to them without adulteration, and he passed it on 

ouk eV CTo4>ia cmpxiKf) d\V eV x- ©• The iv in all three places 
indicates the element in which his life moved ; but the antithesis 
in these two qualities is somewhat strange. It is the opposition 
between the man who relies simply on his own natural clever- 
ness, which suggests unprincipled dealing, and the man who 
relies upon the grace of God. By professing to be all things to 
all men, St Paul had laid himself open to the charge that he was 
an unscrupulous schemer. It is possible that in aocpia aapKiK-f} 
he just glances (rjpi/xa Ka6a.TrT6fj.evos, Chrys.) at teachers who j>er 
hypocrisim faciunt quidquid boni facere videntur (Herveius), and 
also at heathen culture — t^ e$w 7rai8evo-Lv (Chrys.). In these 
Epistles St Paul repeatedly points out that he does not rely upon 
worldly wisdom or human ability (x. 4; 1 Cor. i. 17, ii. 4, 13) 
The word crap«t/cos is Pauline, five times against twice elsewhere : 
in LXX it does not occur. Cf. p.r) 7repnraTovvT£<i Iv TravovpyLa 

avecnp&$r\i).ev. Life is movement, and this is abundantly 
suggested by various expressions for conduct and manner of life ; 
TrepLTrareXv (iv. 2, V. 7, X. 2, etc.), iropevecrOai (1 and 2 Pet. and 
Jude, but in Paul always of actual travelling) dmo-rpcepeo-tfai 
(Eph ii. 3 ; 1 Tim. iii. 15 ; Heb. x. 33, xiii. 18). Of these three, 
Trepi-areiv and TropeveaOai belong to Hebrew thought ; both are 
found fairly often in LXX in the sense of pursuing a particular 
mode of life, a use foreign to class. Grk. But avao-Tpecptcr- 
6ai and d.vao-Tpo<pr} (Gal. i. 13; Eph. iv. 22; 1 Tim. iv. 12) 
belong to Greek thought. Deissmann {Bible Studies, pp.88, 194) 
shows from inscriptions that the ethical use of these words is 
common in current Greek from B.C. 150 onwards. Polybius 
(iv. 82. 1) usesjit of Philip's general conduct. Vulg. has conversari 
and conversatio ; but B.V. rejects the old rendering 'conversa- 
tion,' which has now become misleading. 

irepicraoTepws 8e irpos upas. ' More abundantly in our rela- 
tions to you.' He does not mean that he had been less scrupu- 
lous in his dealings with others than in his dealings with the 
Corinthians, but that they had had more opportunity than others 
(Acts xviii. 11) of knowing how scrupulous he was. He had 


been on the most intimate terms with them for many months. 
It is possible that there is something of a compliment to the 
Corinthians in the comparison. In the wicked heathen world 
(if t<3 koct/xo), cf. i Cor. v. io) he might have been tempted to use 
the world's underhand and slippery methods, but among the 
brethren at Corinth there was no such temptation. There may, 
however, be no comparison : ' our conduct has been straight- 
forward everywhere, and certainly it has been so among you.' 

The evidence for aytdrvTi. (S'ABCKM P 17, 37, 67**, Copt. Arm., 
Clem. -Alex. Orig. ) is certainly superior to that for airXdr-qTi (it 3 D F G L, 
Vulg. Syrr. Goth., Chrys. Ambst.), and no one would change air\6n)Ti, 
which is so suitable, to ay^rrjTL, which is much less so. But, by tran- 
scriptional error, airXoTTjTi might become airorriTt, and then ayiorrjTi. 
ayudTTjTi (vi. 6 and perhaps xi. 3) is a good conjecture. A ins. iv before 
el\t.Kpii>Lq.. FGKLP omit rod before 0eoO. 

13. ou yap d\\a yp^c-fAey. He justifies the 7repio-crOT£p(jjs 7rpos 

vfxas by answering a charge which has been made against him, 
that he writes shuffling letters, in which one has to read between 
the lines in order to see that what he seems to say is not what 
he really means. ' The testimony of my conscience, that I am 
sincere in my dealings with you is true, for 1 never write any- 
thing but what you see the meaning of, or even accept the 
meaning of, from what you know of me.' His letters are always 
consistent in themselves, and with one another, and with his 
conduct, of which the Corinthians have large experience. 
There are no reserves and no cunningly contrived phrases. 
Some commentators, however, confine ypacpo/Aci/ to the present 
letter ; ' I am not writing now anything different from the things 
which you read in my previous letters.' That is an unnecessary 
restriction. At this time St Paul had sent the Corinthians at 
least three letters, — the one mentioned in 1 Cor. v. 9, 
1 Corinthians, and a severe letter, of which the greater part 
probably survives in 2 Cor. x.-xiii. This correspondence, 
added to their personal experience of him, gave them sufficient 
means of judging whether the claim made in v. 12 was just, 
especially the ' more abundantly to you-ward.' 

It is impossible to reproduce in English the play upon words 
in a avayu't!)crK€T€ rj /cat eVtytvwo-KeTe, ' that which you read, or 
even recognize as true.' 'Assent to, or even consent to,' is 
perhaps the nearest approach that can be made, but it is not 
satisfactory. Quae hgitis aut etiam intelligitis is better, but it is 
not found in any Latin version.* We have hgitis et cognoscitis 
(some MSS.), legistis et cognoscitis (Am. Ambrst.), legistis et 
cognovistis (Vulg.-Clem.). St Paul is fond of playing upon words 
in various ways, by alliteration, by bringing together words com- 
* Wetstein quotes the saying, legere et non intelligere negligere est. 


pounded with different prepositions, by interchanging simple 
and compound words, and so forth; iii. 2, iv. 8, vi. 10, vii. 4, 10, 
viii. 22, ix. 8, x. 6, 12; 1 Cor. iv. 3, vi. 1-6, vii. 31, xi. 29-32, 
etc. See on 1 Cor. ii. 15. 

There can be little doubt that both here and in iii. 2 
dvayivwa-Kuv means 'read,' although in both places 'recognize,' 
which is its frequent meaning in class. Grk., makes sense. 
The verb is very common both in LXX and N.T., and its 
dominant meaning is 'read,' often in the sense of 'read aloud'' 
(iii. 15), which is its almost universal sense in class. Grk., 
when the verb is used of reading. In iii. 15 it certainly means 
'read,' and hardly less certainly it has this meaning here and in 
iii. 2 : its position between ypa.tpop.ev and €7rtytvwo-K£T6 is almost 
conclusive here. And it may mean 'read aloud,' 'read publicly,' 
so that all knew what he said. In papyri it is found in both 
senses ' read ' and ' read aloud.' 

This is the only passage in which St Paul uses the 1st pers. 
plur. of his letters: elsewhere he has either ypdcpoj (xiii. 10; 
1 Cor. iv. 14, xiv. 37 ; Gal. i. 20 ; 2 Thess. iii. 17 ; 1 Tim. iii. 14) 
or Zypaipa (ii. 3, 4, 9, vii. 12 ; 1 Cor. v. 9 ; Gal. vi. 11 ; Philem. 
19, 21). The ypd(f>ofxev probably covers all his correspondence 
with the Corinthians, and perhaps the plur. indicates that in all 
his letters to them some one else was associated with him in 
writing. This would be some guarantee for his sincerity. 

ea>s teXous. Cf. i Cor. i. 8. In the Gospels we have eh 
te'Aos, as in 1 Thess. ii. 16; in Heb. p.exP L or d^pi reAovs. In 
such expressions there is some vagueness. ' To the end of the 
world' and 'to the end of your lives' would for the Apostle and 
the Corinthians mean much the same. Cf. oltt dpx>)<;, i$ o/jx*? 5, 

dXX' 7} & may be safely adopted as the right reading. B F G omit dXX'. 
A 17 omit t) &. Goth. Arm. omit ij. D* omits d. The somewhat mixed 
construction (see on Lk. xii. 51) has caused confusion, but the meaning is 
clear, and the construction is classical. Winer, p. 552 ; Blass, § 77. 13 ; ews 
riXovs (KABCD*EFG, Latt. Copt. Goth. Arm.) rather than ?ws ko.1 
reXovs (D'KLMP). AV. follows the latter, 'even to the end.' The 
punctuation is doubtful, and editors differ considerably : place a comma 
after iiriytvuxTKeTe and a colon after eiriyvwcreaOe. It is a drastic remedy for 
the uncertainty as to the connexion of the clauses to cut out all that any 
text omits and even more, so as to read ov yap dXXd ypd<po/.t.ev vij.Iv 7) a 
yiyunxKere' iXirifa oe k.t.X. So Baljon and others. 

14. kcxGws kcu ittdyvwTe irjjj.cts diro jjiepous. ' As also you did 
acknowledge us in part.' His reason for hoping that they will 
now always form a right estimate of his letters is that they have 
already formed a right estimate of himself — at any rate to some 
extent. The d-rro piepovs is an afterthought, to qualify the state- 
ment. The qualification may be understood in two ways, — 
1 part of you,' or ' part of me.' Either, ' There are some of you 


who still misjudge me,' or, 'There is something in me which 
none of you quite understands.' Thdrt. adopts the former; ofy 
a7rXaJS irpocrTiOeLKtv, dXAa vvttwv avTovs, ws fxrj iravTeXws airocra- 
(xivovs Tas Ka.T avrov yeyevvrjjxa'a'; Sia/3oAds. Chrys. with more 
probability adopts the latter, and thinks that St Paul is con- 
trasting the imperfect estimate of his sincerity which the 
Corinthians now have with that which will be theirs when the 
secrets of all hearts are revealed at the Last Day. So also 
Pseudo-Primasius ; quia nondum est finis ; cum autem venerit 
finis, tunc ex integro cognoscetis. In Rom. xi. 25 and xv. 24 there 
is a similar ambiguity as to what is the exact force of d™ 
ixepovs. But the two interpretations might both be true. Some 
Corinthians had been more prejudiced against the Apostle than 
others, and none fully appreciated him. His irony might easily 
puzzle them. As Lietzmann remarks, Beschrdtikte Leuie halten 
oft Ironie fur Zzveideutigkeit. 

The change from eViyuwKere to cViyvwo-co-flc is intelligible 
enough : the change to iiriyvwre is not so clear. To what period 
does the aorist refer? Probably to the time before their rebellion 
against him. But it may refer to the time of their estrangement : 
he is willing to believe that even then they did not wholly dis- 
trust him. 

on Kau'xT)p,a ujAa>t/ eorjxeV. There are three ways of taking on. 
1. It = ' because,' and gives the reason for their past recognition 
of him. 2. It = ' that,' and depends upon eViyuwKCTe, the inter- 
vening words being parenthetical. 3. It = ' that,' and depends 
upon oreyi/ajre: 'ye acknowledged us in part, that we are your 
glorying— something that you are proud of.' The last is the 
best, and the first is the worst, of the three possible construc- 
tions. In these chapters (i.-ix.) Kavxw* and Kax>xw a "have an 
apologetic note and refer to the self-glorying forced upon him 
when composing x.-xiii. (x. 8, 13, 15, 16, 17, xi. 10, 12, 16, 17, 
18, 30, xii. 1, 4, 5, 6, 9). In this Epistle (i.-ix.) all glorying in 
personal claims or services is set aside ; the letter is a reaction 
from the unwelcome temper of rights, of claims, of authority, of 
reproof, to the satisfactions of reconciliation, the fruitions of 
friendship, the understandings of confidence and love. For 
himself his one boast is sincerity j above all, sincerity of relation 
to themselves {v. 12); apart from that the one thought of 
glorying is that they could find some cause of glorying in him, 
as he abundantly in them (i. 14, v. 12, vii. 4, 14, viii. 24, ix. 2, 3). 
The whole of this is sacrificed and unsaid if x.-xiii. is read as a 
continuation and part of i.-ix. ; and the end miserably stultifies 
the beginning" (G. H. Rendall, The Epistles of St Paul to the 
Corinthians, pp. 49, 51). The change from kcii^o-is (v. 12) to 
Ka\\->-ju a is probably intentional : the difference between the act of 


glorying and the material for it is here quite in point. The 
ia-fxiv is a timeless present expressing a permanent relationship, 
a relationship so real that it will stand the scrutiny of the Day 
of the Lord. 

KaGciTrep kcu u/jieis r)fj.wi/. He has been suspected of glorifying 
himself and looking down on them. That is a double mistake. 
He does glory, but not about himself; and, so far from looking 
down on them, it is about them that he glories. He is just as 
proud of them as his spiritual children (1 Cor. iv. 15) as (he 
feels sure) they are of him as their spiritual father. The Ko.Qa.Tvtp 
brushes away all idea of his claiming superiority; ws fiadyTius 
0/tOTt/tOtS SiaAcyo/xevos outws e'£icra£a tov Xoyov (Chrys.). He 
thus cuts at the root (viroTefjiveTai) of all jealousy {ibid.) by 
making the glorying mutual and equal. St Paul rather fre- 
quently brings in the thought of the Day of the Lord as a 
sort of test of the value of his missionary work and its results 
(1 Cor. iii. 12, 13, iv. 5 ; Phil. ii. 16 ; 1 Thess. ii. 19, 20, which is a 
close parallel to this). The Attic KaOairep is frequent in N.T., and, 
excepting Heb. iv. 10, is wholly Pauline (iii. 13, 18, viii. n ; etc.). 

tt) T)|J.epa k.t.X. N071 in node praesentis saeculi, sed in die et 
clarificatione Domini nostri Jesu Christi (Herveius) ; ubi et veri 
magistri et boni discipuli probabu7iiar (Pseudo-Primasius). St 
Paul still believed that the Day of the Lord would come soon 
(1 Cor. vii. 29, x. n, xv. 51), and had imparted this belief to his 
converts (see on Rom. xiii. 11-14, p. 379); it is therefore no 
remote date to which he appeals. Cf. 1 Thess. ii. 19. 

A C D E K L omit ty&v before 'Ii/<roO. K'ABC D 2 and 3 K L omit 
Xpiarov after 'Itjuou, and it is probably not original. Even if the evidence 
were less strong, its insertion would be more probable than its omission. 
Nearly all Versions have the addition. 

In LXX, Tjfxtpa Kvplov (MSS. differ as to i] tj/x. and rod K.) is frequent 
in the Prophets. St Paul uses i) 7]fj.ipa of the Parousia, with r. Kvplov 
(1 Cor. v. 5 ; 2 Thess. ii. 2), or r. Kvp.'Irjaou (here) ; also ypitpa, with 
'Irjaov Xpiarov (Phil. i. 6) or Xpiarov only (Phil. i. 10, ii. 16). The fullest 
form is 77 r\ii.. r. Ki>p. i]fiQiv 'I. Xpicrrov (1 Cor. i. 8). The Day in which the 
thoughts of all hearts shall be revealed is mentioned here in confirmation of 
the Apostle's claim to perfect sincerity. He is not afraid of what will then 
be revealed about his heart. The mention of it forms a solemn conclusion 
to this introduction (vv. 12-14) to his defence of his conduct. We have 
similar solemn conclusions ii. 17, iv. 6, v. 10, ix. 15, xi. 15. 

I. 15-11. 4. The Postponement of the Intended. Visit. 

TV was out of consideration to you that I abandoned my 
original plan of coming to see you. 

15 In the confidence that we stood on these terms of mutual 
trust and esteem, and that you would not take it amiss if I was 


obliged after all to change my plans, I entertained the desire to 
come first to you, so that I might give you the pleasure of two 
visits from me on the same tour, 16 one on my way to Macedonia 
and one on my way back from it, and then be helped forward by 
you to Judaea. 17 Well, that was my desire. Do you suppose 
that I did not care whether I fulfilled it or not? that I make 
plans and unmake them, like a man of the world, just as the 
fancy of the moment takes me, and that, when I give a promise, 
I always hold myself free to break it, if I please. 18 But, what- 
ever you think of me, God is faithful, and of this you have 
evidence, in that the Gospel which we preach to you is no un- 
certain message wavering between 'Yes 'and 'No.' 19 For the 
Son of this same faithful God, Christ Jesus, who was proclaimed 
among you by us — by me and Silvanus and Timothy — was not 
found by you to be a waverer between ' Yes ' and ' No ' ; a 
steadfast 'Yes 'has ever been found in Him. 20 For however 
many promises God may have made to us, they are all of them 
assured to us in Christ with His affirming 'Yes' : He is their 
fulfilment. And so it is through Him that the ' Amen ' goes up 
to God in thankful assent, and He is glorified through the faith 
of us who are His ministers. 21 And it is God who causes us, 
yes, and you also, to be securely established in the life of His 
Anointed, and it is God who anointed us, 22 and sealed us as 
His own, and gave us the presence of His Spirit in our hearts 
as an earnest and foretaste of future blessings. 

23 Now it is this same faithful and never-failing God that I 
who have been distrusted by you call as a witness ; and, as my 
life shall answer for it, I assert that it was from a wish to spare 
you pain that I abandoned my original plan of coming to 
Corinth. 24 Do not misunderstand me again. We have no wish 
to domineer over you as regards your faith ; not at all. But we 
do wish to have a share in making you happy in your faith. 
You need no one now to tell you what to believe ; as regards 
that your condition is sound. II. x For I made up my mind for 
my own sake not to come again to see you in pain and grief; it 
would be better to stay away. 2 For if I of all men make you 
grieve, who then is to cheer me when I need cheering but 
the very people who receive pain and grief from me? 8 This 
is just what I said in the letter which I wrote instead of coming ; 
that it was better not to come at all, if, instead of the happiness 


which I might expect to have from you, I was to have only 
pain and grief by coming ; because I was and am confident, 
with regard to every one of you, that what gives me happiness 
is a happiness to all of you. 4 For that letter was the out- 
come of intense affliction and anguish of heart. I shed many 
tears as I wrote it. Yet it was not written to make you grieve, 
but to make you see how abundantly my love overflows towards 

15. Kal rauTT] ttj TreTvoi0rj<xei. Placed first with great em- 
phasis. It looks back to vv. 13, 14, and repeats the Z\tti(w 
in a more confident form. With the dative comp. those in 
1 Cor. viii. 7; Gal. vi. 12; Rom. xi. 31. The noun is late 
Greek (Hatch, Biblical Greek, p. 13), and occurs in LXX only 
once, in Rabshakeh's taunt, 2 Kings xviii. 19. In N.T., no one 
uses it but St Paul; four times in 2 Cor. (here, iii. 4, viii. 22, 
x. 2), and Eph. iii. 12; Phil. iii. 4. He is also fond of iziTroSo. 
and 7r€7rot6w?, which are rare elsewhere in N.T. He has glanced 
at the Last Day when all secrets shall be revealed, and his con- 
fidence in the Corinthians and in his own sincerity is unshaken. 
He is not conscious of any reason why he should have felt 
shy of paying them a visit. Their salvation is the only thing 
which he has tried to gain: nihil aliud vestrum quaesivimns, quam 
salutem (Pseudo-Primasius). 

The changes from 1 pers. plur. to 1 pers. sing, and vice versa 
are here very rapid: ypdfpo/iev . . . ikir'itp (13), io-jiev (14), 
Zj3ov\6p.r)v (15). Such things are found in secular corre- 
spondence. Bachmann quotes a letter from Dinon, an official 
personage, to Harimuthes (Uibeh Pap. 44); iypdipa/xev <roi 
irporepov . . . 6pcovT€S Se ere KarapvOp-ovvTa thifjLTjv vtlv Kal vvv 
€7rio"TeiAat crot . . • diroo'TeiXoi' 7rpos r; 

e^oiAou/ne irporepoK irpos upas eXGeif. ' I was wishing to come 
first to you,' i.e. before going to Macedonia. He is speaking of 
the time before his relations with the Corinthians became so 
strained ; when he was on as good terms with them as he is now, 
he had this desire. Authorities vary as to the position of 
irporepov, but the above order is almost certainly right, and 
almost certainly it is to be taken with iXdelv rather than 
cySovAdp,r/v : it deprives it of force to translate ' I was formerly 
desiring.'* And irporepov does not mean 'sooner than I was 

* K. Lake thinks that, in the ' Koine ' Greek -rrpdrepov is more commonly 
used in the sense of ' originally,' with no comparative sense beyond that 
involved in a contrast between past and present, than in the more classical 
significance ; and he holds that this is "almost indisputably its meaning in 
all the ten passages in which it is found in the N.T." (The Earlier Epp. of 
St Paul, p. 226). 


able to come,' but ' before going to Macedonia.' It is un- 
certain whether he communicated to the Corinthians this desire 
to visit them twice ; he does not say ' I promised,' or ' I 
said,' or ' I wrote to you,' but simply that at one time he was 
wishing to pay them a double visit, and no doubt intended to do 
this. He may be merely giving evidence of his devotion to 
them. He had promised one visit (see on i Cor. xvi. 6), but 
we do not know that he had promised two. He had been 
hindered more than once in paying an intended visit to the 
Thessalonians (i Thess. ii. 18), and often in paying one to the 
Romans (Rom. xv. 22, where to 7roXXa means 'these many 
times'). Bachmann contends for the view that in vv. 15-17 
St Paul is telling the Corinthians of a plan for visiting them of 
which they had hitherto known nothing (p. 66). For ifiov\6fj.r]v, 
see Lightfoot on Philem. 13. 

Xva SeuTepay xapae o^tc. We are again in uncertainty. To 
what does this 'second joy' refer? Various suggestions are 
made. The first long visit in which he converted the Corinthians 
was the first joy ; the projected visit would be a second joy. 
Those who do not believe in a second visit, short and painful, 
can adopt this suggestion easily. Those who do believe in the 
painful visit must suppose that it does not count when x"/ 3 * * s 
under consideration. To make 1 Cor. the first joy or grace 
(Chrys., Atto) is very unsatisfactory. The best interpretation is 
that St Paul is referring to the two visits which he had wished 
to pay instead of only the one promised in 1 Cor. xvi. 5, the 
second of which would be a second joy to them. The objection 
that he has not yet mentioned two visits is not a serious one. 
He is dictating, he has the two visits in his mind, and he 
mentions them in the same breath. There is no difficulty, 
either, if x°-P tv De adopted as the right reading: the visit of an 
Apostle might confer some x° L P L(T l Jia Tveu/xcmKov and be iv 

7r\r][)io[JLaTi eu/Voyias Xpicrrov (Rom. i. II, XV. 29). 

wpoTepof after epov\6,ur)v (ABCDEFGMP 17, Latt. Syrr. Arm. 
Goth.) rather than after e\6eTv (K, Copt., Thdrt. ) ; &* omits, irpbs v/acIs 
i\6eip (NABCMP, Arm., Chrys.) rather than iXdelv Trpos ^.(DEFG 
KL, Latt. Copt. Goth., Thdrt.). x a P°- v (N 3 BLP, Thdrt.) is perhaps 
better than x°-P LV (S*ACDEFGK, Latt.). As in 3 Jn. 4, a copyist 
may have substituted a more spiritual word: in N.T., x<*/" y is f ar more 
frequent than x a P"- Chrys. adopts x^P' J » but explains it as x a P<* '• Thdrt. 
adopts x a pv-> ^ ut; explains it as human xdpts, which in N.T. is not probable, 
although in the KotviJ examples of x c V" J= ' courtesy ' are found. <rxv Te 
(NBCP, Thdrt. ) rather than Zxv™ (A D E F G K L) : confusion between 
2 and E would be easy. 

16. tea! 81* u/jlwc . . . eis t. 'louScu'ar. Both AV. and RV. 
are somewhat misleading, and neither marks the sequence of 
prepositions (eis . . . 7rpos . . . ets) correctly. ' Pass by you ' 


may mean ' go past without visiting you ' ; and ' by you to pass ' 
may mean 'to be sent on by you'; both of which are wrong. 
Translate, 'Through you to pass on unto M., and again from M. 
to come to you, and by you to be set forward on my way unto 

SieXOew (NBCD 3 EKL, Latt.) rather than a-rreXedv (AD*FGP, 
Copt. Arm.). 

17. touto ouv PouXd/j.6fos k.t.X. ' With this, then, as my wish, 
did I at all show levity?' The art. rrj i\a<ppia may be generic, 
but it possibly means 'the levity with which you have charged 
me.' Vulg. has cum ergo hoc voluissem ; but vellem would be 
right ; and ' levity ' is perhaps nearer to eAa</>pia than ' fickleness.' 
The word is found nowhere else in N.T. or LXX, and, like 
7re7roi'#?7o-is, belongs to late Greek. Polybius uses e\a<pp6s in an 
ethical sense of the unthinking multitude which needs to be kept 
in order by a religion of some kind (vi. lvi. 11). "'EAa</>pia 
does not mean change of mind ; but rather the lightness of 
character of a man who has no mind, who makes a promise with- 
out any real intention of fulfilling it, or, if he does at the time 
intend to do so, forgets it almost as soon as it is made. St Paul's 
answer to this charge seems to be, that, while the Corinthians 
supposed him to be careless about them, he was all the time 
wishing and planning to visit them, if only he could do so 
without having to exercise severity " (Kennedy, The Second and 
Third Epistles to the Corinthians, p. 36 ; cf. p. xxv). Bachmann 
takes a similar view (pp. 64-66). Cf. v. 23. Other charges are 
answered iii. 5, iv. 2. 

The ftTjrt here, as elsewhere (xii. 18), anticipates a negative 
answer. ' Of course he was not exhibiting levity when he acted 
in this manner.' The AV. spoils Jn. iv. 29 by not observing 
this. The apa after an interrogative particle points to some 
antecedent statement, 'Did I in that case?' num igiturl It is 
frequent in the Synoptists (Mt. xviii. 1, xix. 25, 27, xxiv. 45, etc.), 
but is not found elsewhere in Paul, fond as he is of argumentative 
questions. 'Was then my intention so flimsy and fleeting, that 
I did not care whether I acted upon it or not?' 

tj & PouXeuoficu. The change from the aorist (ixprjo-a.iJ.-qv), of 
what took place on a particular occasion, to the pres. (/SovAeu- 
op.a.1), of what is habitual, must not be overlooked. ' Or the 
things which I (at any time) purpose, do I (always) purpose them 
in accordance with (the fitful fancies of) my lower nature (v. 12), 
without reference to reason or spirit ? ' The second question is 
far more comprehensive than the first ; it covers his life as a 

ira t] Trap' ep.ot. In late Greek the distinction between ha 



and wore becomes somewhat blurred, and the idea of purpose 
can scarcely be included here (Blass, § 69. 3) ; see on 1 Jn. i. 9. 
But J. H. Moulton (p. 210) takes Iva here as final; "Paul is ' 
disclaiming the mundane virtue of unsettled convictions, which 
aims at saying yes and no in one breath." So also Beet. The 
exact meaning of what follows is uncertain. The art. to Nai. vat 
and to Ov ov, like the art. in Trj iXacppia, may be either generic or 
'that with which you charge me.' The repetition gives emphasis. 
The charge which he is rebutting is probably that of blowing hot 
and cold with the same breath, and always having retraction of 
what he says in reserve. Others make the charge to be one of 
inflexibility, of never modifying when he has once said 'Yes' or 
' No ' ; but it is difficult to get this out of the Greek, and it does 
not fit the facts. It was his change of plans that had brought 
him into disrepute. The Greek has to be altered in order to 
get the meaning ' that with me No should be Yes, and Yes No ' ; 
for there is no such reading. It is, of course, impossible that 
St Paul is alluding to Mt. v. 37, for that Gospel was not yet 
written; but he may be alluding to some tradition, or even 
written record, of our Lord's words which was known to him. 
Yet the difference between the way in which Nat vox, Ov ov is 
used in the Saying and in this passage is so considerable that 
allusion is not very probable. See J. B. Mayor on Jas. v. 12, 
p. 155, and Plummer on Mt. v. 37, p. 84. For Kara o-dpxa, see 
v. 16, x. 2, xi. 18; Rom. viii. 4, 12, 13; Jn. viii. 15: it means 
'on external grounds,' such as expediency, likes and dislikes, 
without internal principle. St Paul contends that, though his 
plans changed, yet his principles did not ; he was always loyal to 
the Gospel and to his converts. 

PovMfxevos (KABCFGP, Vulg. Copt.) rather than pov\ev6/xet>os 
(DEK, g Syrr. Arm. Aeth. Goth.) or ^ovXevaifj.ei'os (L). Note that G 
supports j3od\. and g fiovXev. 

18. marros 8e 6 0eos on k.t.X. There is doubt whether this 
is an adjuration or not. In favour of its being an adjuration 
(Genevan, AV., RV.) is the fact that 'as God is faithful' makes 
excellent sense, and that it seems to be analogous to such 
expressions as £u> «y«, 0V1 (Rom. xiv. 11 from Is. xlv. 23, where 
LXX has KaT c/xavTov ofxvvo)), £7} Kupios oTi (1 Sam. xx. 3 ; 2 Sam. 
ii. 27, xii. 5 ; etc.). Bousset and Lietzmann adopt the rendering, 
Bei Gottes Trene. But there is much to be said against this 
interpretation. The formula, 7tio-tos 6 ©eo's, is used elsewhere by 
St Paul in places where it is not an adjuration (1 Cor. i. 9, x. 13 ; 
cf. 1 Thess. v. 24 ; 2 Thess. iii. 3). In adjurations and solemn 
asseverations he uses forms which are quite different ; e.g. Lidprvpa 

T. ®€OV tTTLKaXoVfiaL (V. 3), ©60S /xdpTVS (i TheSS. ii. 5, io), [xdpTVS 


yap fxov coriv 6 ©eos (Rom. i. 9), fxdprv<: yap fiov 6 ©eo? (Phil. i. 8), 
6 ©eos otSev (xi. 11), 6 ®. /cat irarrip t. Kupiou 'Irjcrov oI8ev on oi (xi. 31), l&ov ivw-n-iov r. ©eoG on ov if/ (Gal. i. 20), ivwTnov t. Qeov (i Tim. V. 21 j cf. 2 Tim. ii. 14, 
iv. i), irapayytWu) croi eVoSiriov T. ©eov (i Tim. vi. 1 3). Wiclif, 

Tyndale and Cranmer follow the Vulgate (Fidelis autetn Deus) in 
not making this an adjuration. Schmiedel has, Treuer Biirge 
ist Gott. 

This use of 7tio-to's as a special attribute of God is frequent in 
N.T. and hXX (e.g. 2 Tim. ii. 13; Heb. x. 23, xi. 11; Deut. 
vii. 9 ; Is. xlix. 7) ; cf. 7tio-tos Ki'ptos rots aya.7rwcnv auTo'v, and 
■marrbs 6 Kupios tv iracn tois Kpi/xaaiv olvtov (Ps. Sol. xiv. I, xvii. 
12). As in Jn. ii. 18, ix. 17, o-ri='in that'; 'God is faithful in 
that our word toward you is (not 'was,' AV.) not a wavering 
between Yes and No.' They have his letters, they have in their 
minds what he and others taught them, and there is no incon- 
sistency or insincerity in the Gospel which they possess ; it is a 
reflexion of the faithfulness of God. Chrys. paraphrases, ' Mis- 
trust not what is from God, for what is from God cannot be 
untrue.' The argument is one from "ethical congruity." God 
is faithful in the fact that the Gospel which is proclaimed by His 
messengers is not a Gospel of duplicity, full of misleading state- 
ments and of promises which are not fulfilled. 

ovk iaTiv (N*ABCD*FGP 17, Latt. Copt. Goth. Arm.) rather than 
oiiK iyivtTo (N 3 D 2and3 EK L, Syrr. Aeth.), which is assimilation to v. 19. 

19. 6 toC ©eou yap uu$s. The usual order would be o yap 
vlos t. ©. The transfer of yap from the second to the fourth 
place throws great emphasis on t. ©eou and marks the con- 
nexion with what precedes. ' For it is this faithful God's Son.' 
Comp. the position of p.kv in x. 1, and of ovv in 1 Cor. viii. 4, 
where, as here, some MSS. put the particle back to the usual 
place. Winer, p. 699 ; Blass, § 80. 4. ' That 6 7uo-tos ©eo's 
should have a Son who was Yes and No would be a monstrous 
contradiction, and it is His Son who is the subject of 6 Aoyos 
r)fx.wv.' AvtI tov KrjpvyfxaTO<s avrbv KrjpvTro/xevov rWeiKe (Thdrt.) 
His title is given with solemn fulness. The full expression, 6 
mo? tot) ©eov, is used by St Paul in only two other places, Gal. 
ii. 20, Eph. iv. 13 (in Rom. i. 4, inos ©eov), in both of which 
there is an emphatic change of titles from ' Christ ' to ' the Son 
of God.' See J. A. Robinson, Ephesians, pp. 100, 183. The 
rareness of use may be accidental, for St Paul often refers to 
Christ as the 'Son ' (1 Cor. i. 9, xv. 28 ; 1 Thess. i. 10; Gal. i. 
16, iv. 4, 6; Rom. i. 3, 9, v. 10, viii. 3, 29, 32 ; Col. i. 13), i.e. 
in all groups, excepting the Pastorals. St Paul's usage has to be 
compared with the evidence of papyri and inscriptions, in which 


6eov i>lo?, or in Latin inscriptions divi filius, is frequently used of 
Augustus. In a votive inscription from Magnesia on the 
Menander, now at Pergamum, for Nero between his adoption 
by Claudius and his accession (a.d. 50-54), Nero is called "the 
son of the greatest of the gods, Tib. Claudius," tov vXbv tov 
fxeyicrrov Oedv Ti^Septou KXclvSlov. Deissmann gives an illustration 
of it, Light from Anc. East, p. 351 ; see also Bible Studies, p. 166. 
Hence two opposite suggestions. St Paul used vtos ®eov 
rarely, because its evil associations would cause it to be mis- 
understood by converts from heathenism. He uses it, and the 
still stronger 6 vtos tov ®eov, and frequently uses mos of Christ's 
relationship to God, because he wished to point out that there 
was only one Son to whom the title rightly belonged. See 
Milligan, Thessalonians, p. lxvi ; F. H. Stead, Expositor, 3rd 
series, 1888, vii. pp. 386-395. The full title is found Heb. iv. 
14, vi. 6, vii. 3, x. 29, and very often in 1 Jn. See on 1 Jn. 
i. 3 ; also Swete, Apost. Creed, pp. 24 f. ; Menzies, 2 Corinthians, 
p. lii. 

6 iv u\iiv 8i" f\}i<x>v KTipuxGei's- The verb is very frequent in 
Paul (all four groups) of preaching Christ and the Gospel (iv. 5, 
xi. 4 ; 1 Cor. i. 23, xv. 12; Phil. i. 15; 1 Tim. iii. 16; etc.). 
The Apostle places the two related pronouns in close proximity, 
bound together in one expression between the article and the 
participle ; the Christ ' who was preached among you by our 
instrumentality' (Sia not liro). He is not claiming what belongs 
to 6 ai£dvwv ®£os. He and his colleagues are only Slolkovol 8l 
wy €7rto-rei)craT€ : see on 1 Cor. i. 5, 6. This 8id is also used of 
Christ {vv. 5, 20, iii. 4, etc.), and therefore is no evidence that 
St Paul regarded himself as a mere machine; but he is not the 
supreme worker. Here he is appealing to the probability that 
there is moral resemblance between master and servant. The 
Son of the God who cannot lie is one who may be trusted and 
has proved to be trustworthy. Therefore the message which 
His ministers bring — 6 Xoyos rjfjiwv 6 irpos ifxas — is likely to be 
trustworthy. On St Paul's use of 6 Aoyos, often with a genitive 
following, — tov ®eov, tov Kvptov, r>}s a\r]f)ei'a<;, and (v. 1 9) ttJs 
Ka.Ta\\ayr}<;, — see Harnack, The Constitution and Law of the 
Church, pp. 339-343- It is clear from v. 20 that ' the Son of 
God, Jesus Christ,' does not mean ' the doctrine about Jesus 
Christ.' The meaning of v. 19 is not doubtful. The Apostle 
reminds the Corinthians of the way in which he and his colleagues 
proclaimed Christ among them at first. To make it quite clear 
what is meant by ' proclaimed by us,' he names the missionaries. 
Paul and Silvanus were working together in Corinth for a time 
before Timothy, who had been left behind at Beroea and had 
afterwards been sent to Thessalonica, joined them. All three 


are associated in writing 1 and 2 Thess.* Chrys. may be 
right in suggesting that the appeal to the preaching by three 
different agents is given as a guarantee for consistency. Calvin 
suggests that these three had been specially maligned by the 
Apostle's opponents. More probably St Paul is simply re- 
calling the time when all three were working happily together.! 
He does not mention Apollos, who came later, after St Paul had 

We may safely assume that the Silvanus of the Pauline 
Epistles and of 1 Pet. v. 12 and the Silas of Acts may be 
identified, and that the proposal to identify him with St Luke 
is to be rejected. See Bigg, St Peter and St Jude, pp. 85, 
86, art. 'Silas' in Hastings' DB. iv., art. 'Acts' in Smith, £>£., 
2nd ed. We know very little about him after his work in 

ouk iyiveTO Nai Kal Ou, d\\d Ncu eV auTw yiyovev. ' The Son 
of God, who was proclaimed by us among you, did not prove 
to be Yes and No, but in Him Yes has proved true.' The 
Corinthians' experience of Him had shown that He was a Son 
who faithfully fulfilled the promises of His faithful Father. J 
The change to the perfect (ye'yovev) marks the permanent 
result : comp. the change from iKTicrOrj to Iktio-tcu (Col. i. 
t6). For this use of yive.aOat, comp. yiviadoi 6 ©eos aXrjOrjS 
(Rom. iii. 4), ' prove to be,' ' be seen to be.' 'Ev airrw means 
' in Christ' 

6 tov Qeov ydp (K A B C P) rather than 6 yap rod Qeov (D E F G K L ; 
F G omit rod) ; correction to more usual order. Xpiarbs 'Irjcrovs (K* AC) 
may be right, but 'Irja. Xp. is powerfully supported (K 3 BDEFGKLP, 
Vulg.). 17 omits Xpiarbs. See critical note on v. 1. DEFG have 
2iA/WoO for SiAowxeoO, but f g have Silvanum. 

20. ooxu yap eiraYY e ^ ai ©eou. This is an independent clause, 
' For how many soever are the promises of God ' ; it is not 
(as AV.) the subject, of which the next clause is the predicate, 
which obscures the meaning. With ev airy to Nai we may 
understand -yiVerai from v. 19 : ' For of all the promises of God, 
however many they may be, in Him is found the fulfilment ' : 
ev aira) again means ' in Christ,' who sums up the historical 
development of Divine revelation. By ' the promises ' are meant 
those which were made to the Jews, and through them to rnan- 

* On the supposed influence of Silas on St Paul's movements, see Redlich, 
S. Paul and his Companions , pp. 66, 82-84, 272. 

t On the striking coincidence between this passage and Acts, see 
Knowling on Acts xviii. 5, and Paley, Horae Paulinae, iv. and viii. 

+ That St Paul is here opposing Judaizing teachers, who preached a 
different Jesus, and that he names Silvanus and Timothy in order to exclude 
the Judaizers, is an unnecessary hypothesis. 


kind, with reference to the coming of the Messiah (Rom. ix. 4, 
xv. 8 ; Gal. iii. 14). The word is frequent in N.T., but is hardly 
ever used of anything else but Divine promises, for which it is 
the constant expression. It implies that what is promised by 
God is freely offered, it is not an engagement extracted by 
negotiation. See Lightfoot on Gal. iii. 14. The word is rare in 
LXX, and there it has no such special meaning. In Eph. i. 13, 
iii. 6, the Gentiles are said to share in the promise through 
Christ. What is said here is that to all God's promises Christ 
is the never-failing Yes, the Yes that assures, confirms, and 

816 Kal 8i' auTou to 'Ap.rji'. 'Wherefore also through Him 
is the Amen.' This doubtless refers to the Amen in public 
worship (Deut. xxvii. 15 f. ; Neh. v. 13, viii. 6 ; Ps. xli. 14) which 
the Church had taken over from the Synagogue : see on 1 Cor. 
xiv. 16. This does not imply that 'Amen through our Lord 
Jesus Christ' was already the usual formula for closing each 
prayer in public worship. About the response of ' Amen ' by 
the congregation there is ample evidence, and in this way the 
Corinthian converts had again and again given their adhesion to 
the teaching of St Paul and his colleagues. Their saying, ' Jesus 
is Lord' (1 Cor. xii. 3), was of a similar character. The article, 
to 'A^yv, means ' the customary Amen,' and cori'v, or possibly 
ytWcu, is to be understood. Calvin erroneously makes the 
clause a wish ; quare et per ipsum sit Ame?i Deo adgloriampernos. 
The reading, Kal iv avrw, followed in AV., makes the 'A/i^v a 
repetition of the Nat, like 'Abba, Father,' which is weak. The 
clause is not a mere amplification of the first part of the verse, 
but a deduction from it. The fact that in Rev. iii. 14 Christ is 
called 6 'Afxrjv, 6 Maprvs 6 tho-tos, probably helped to cause the 
corruption of the text. 

tw ©eu irpos S6£ay 8t' t||xoW. These words belong to to 'A/irjv 
exclusively, to the saying of Amen by the Corinthians in public 
worship, not to the first half of the verse ; and tw 0e<? is placed 
first with emphasis. It is to God, for His glory, that this assent 
by the congregation is given. In 1 Cor. x. 31 we have cfc &6£av 
Oeov. For the history of the word So£a, see Milligan on 1 Thess. 
ii. 12 ; Parry, St fames, pp. 36 f. ; Hastings, DCG. i. pp. 648 f. 
The Si' fi/xwv repeats the 81' 7jpSh> of v. 19 : ' all this comes to pass 
nostro ministerio, through our preaching of Christ to you.' It is 
the Corinthians who are inconsistent if, in the face of their own 
public asseveration, they tax their teachers with inconsistency. 
Others understand 81' 17/Aaiv as meaning that the ' Amen ' is said by 
the Apostle and his colleagues as the spokesmen of the congre- 
gation ; which weakens the argument. Still farther from the 
Apostle's meaning is the corrupt reading which omits oV and 


makes rjjx^v the genitive after 7rpos oo£av, 'to our glory.' There 
is no Kavxqcri% rjfjiwv (v. 1 2) here : he is answering the charge of 
levity. People who cause glory to be given to God for His 
faithfulness are not likely to be unfaithful. 

SibKalSi avTov(it A B C F G O P 17, 37, Latt. Copt. Goth. Arm.) rather 
than Kai 81 avrov (D* d e Ambrst.) or /cai iv avrCb (D 2 and s E K L, Chrys. 
Thdrt. ). irpbs So^av dt' r^Cov (K A B D E F G K P) rather than irpbs 56£av 
ijfiuiv (C LO, ad gloriam nostram f Vulg. ). The addition of dicitmis after 
ad gloriam nostram in some Latin writers is a gloss without authority in any 
Greek text. 

21. 6 8e PePcuwy criiv ujuk ei$ XpioTdy Kal xP lcra S TfJ-aS 
©eos. It is better to take this as a complete sentence of which 
©to? is the predicate than to make it the subject of a long 
sentence of which v. 22 is the predicate. It is doubtful whether 
a-vv r/fxiv is to be carried on to the second y'jfxas and to the 17/xas 
and 7]jxu)v in v. 22 : the fact that 17/xas is repeated while o-vv rjpuv 
is not, is rather against the carrying on, but is by no means 
decisive. The change of tense from present to aorist does not 
affect this question. Both teachers and taught are included in 
r//x5s avv rjfjuv : the following i^uas and 17/xwi/ may mean the 
officials only, and the anointing and sealing may refer to their 
being ' separated ' (Acts xiii. 2) for ministerial work. The "^pto-as 
is evidently suggested by XpLarov, and it is implied that the 
Apostle and his colleagues shared the unction with which Christ 
was anointed, i.e. the power of the Spirit. In 1 Jn. ii. 20, 27 
this is extended to all believers " (Swete, The Holy Spirit in the 
N.T., p. 385). Elsewhere in the same work Swete takes this 
passage as applying to all believers (pp. 193, 220, 232) ; see 
especially p. 298, "The Epistles of the N.T., which are silent 
about the fact of the Lord's Baptism (except the allusions in 
1 Tim. hi. 16 ; 1 Jn. v. 6), as they are about most of the other 
facts of the Gospel history, speak freely of the anointing received 
by all Christians from the Holy One, i.e. the ascended Christ 
(2 Cor. i. 21 ; 1 Jn. ii. 20, 27)." This agrees with Neander's 
view ; Es ist dies die Weihe des allgemeinen Pries terthums. If we 
confine xP ta " as an d o-<ppayL<rd/Ac\>o<; to the teachers, then the 
aorists refer to the time when they were set apart for missionary 
work. If we regard all Christians as included in the 17/xas, then 
the aorists refer to their conversion and baptism. In either case, 
the change of tense indicates that God continually establishes 
those whom He once for all consecrated to Himself. The 
Xpta-as does not imply any actual ceremony of unction : the 
anointing is with the Spirit ; and in order to bring out the 
connexion between Xpicrrov and xP'O" 01 ?) th e former might*" be 
translated ' the Anointed.' ' But He who confirmeth us and you 
also unto the Anointed and who anointed us is God.' We must 


keep in mind that St Paul is dictating and not always adhering 
to the form of sentence which he originally had in his mind. 
1 Who confirmeth us ' is another blow at the charge of levity ; it 
indicates that the relationship established between us and Christ 
cannot be impugned ; there is no flaw in it, and it is legally 
indestructible. See Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. iog ; in 
papyri /Sc/foiwTryp is often used of a ' surety.' 

TjfAas (t\>v ujjuV. The avv v/xtv is a conciliatory addition, like 
kcu v/xets rjfxwv in v. 1 4. In this permanent /Je/foiWis the 
Corinthians share equally with their teachers, and this is a strong 
guarantee for the sincerity of the latter. 'It is absurd to suppose 
that we who remain united with you in such a relationship treat 
you with levity.' The addition of to-yikv dAA^Acov fxeX-q in Eph. 
iv. 25 is similar; joint membership in the same body conduces 
to truthfulness. 

els Xpicrrov. * In relation to Christ,' 6 fxrj £u>v t^/aSs 7rapacraAev- 
eo-Oou (Chrys.). This is another security against levity and 
caprice. One is tempted to translate, ' into the Anointed so as 
to abide in Him'; but the present participle is against this. 
1 They entered into Christ as members of His Body when they 
became Christians, and God is continually confirming them 
in that relationship. The ' in Christ ' of AV. and RV. is right , 
cf. Col. ii. 7. 

kcu xP lcra s *| If <rvv ifuv is not carried on, this refers to 
the consecration of the Apostle and others for missionary work. 
But all Christians receive unction from God (see on 1 Jn. ii. 
20, 27), and we cannot with any certainty restrict the xP l 'o~as to 
the officials. The mention of Xpicrrov has suggested XP" 701 ^ Dut 
there is probably no direct reference to the anointing of Christ 
at His Mission to bring the good tidings (Lk. iv. 18 ; Acts iv. 27, 
x. 38 ; cf. Jn. x. 36). Heb. i. 9 should not be quoted in this 
connexion, for there the glorified Son is anointed with the oil of 
gladness at the completion of His work, not with power at the 
beginning of it (Lk. iv. 14).* 

For T]fj.8,s ffiiv v/mv, which is overwhelmingly attested, C and the Harlean 
Syriac with a few cursives have v/j.Sls ctvv ij/xiv. The scribe of B perhaps 
had the same reading ; he has written v/jl3.s guv vixiv, with Ofids after xpt ffas - 

For xP^ as Vulg. has qui unxit. Comely points out that ungere in 
N.T. is used to translate four different Greek words ; a\el<peiv (Mt. vi. 17 ; 
Mk. vi. 13, xvi. 1 ; Lk. vii. 38, 46 ; Jn. xi. 2, xii. 3 ; Jas. v. 14), pyptfap 
(Mk. xiv. 8), iirixptetv (Jn. ix. 11), and xP teiv ( Lk - iv - lS ? Acts iv - 2 7» 
x. 38 ; 2 Cor. i. 21 ; Heb. i. 9). The first three words are always 
used in the literal sense, svhile the last is nowhere so used ; xpUiv is 
always symbolical, as also is \pl<rna. (1 Jn. ii. 20, 27). In LXX, 
Xpk lv ' s verv frequent, and almost always in the literal sense. 

* An allusion to the rubbing of athletes with oil before gymnastic contests 
is not probable. 


22. 6 Kal a^paYio-dfjiei'os %as. The 6 is omitted in important 
authorities, but is probably genuine. Deissmann {Bible Studies, 
pp. 108 f.) has thrown much light on both o-0payio-dp.evos and 
appafiwva. Sealing is mentioned in O.T. in the literal sense as 
a security against secret opening (Dan. vi. 17) and as a substitute 
for signature (1 Kings xxi. 8); and in a figurative sense (Deut. 
xxxii. 34; Job xiv. 17, xxxiii. 16, xxxvii. 7; Is. viii. 16). But 
the papyri show that sealing had a very extended and important 
use in the East, especially for legal purposes, to give validity to 
documents, to guarantee the genuineness of articles, and that 
sacks and chests convey the specified amount, etc. The mean- 
ing here may be that, in confirmation of a covenant, God sealed 
us as His own (mid.) and attested our value (see J. A. Robinson 
on Eph. i. 13, 14, and Swete on Rev. vii. 2). ' He not only 
anointed us, but also (Kal) sealed us and gave us ' ; this is a 
further security. The first /cat does not anticipate the second, 
'■both sealed us and gave ' ; it introduces a fresh argument. We 
need not suppose that St Paul is referring to supernatural spiritual 
gifts as signs of an Apostle. An allusion to rites for initiation 
into certain mysteries is perhaps possible ; but it is more 
probable that an allusion to Christian baptism is meant, a rite 
for which at a later period the metaphor of ' sealing ' was often 
used. The aorists point to some definite occasion. See on 
Rom. iv. 11, xv. 28. 

Toy appaPwra tou Trreu'iJiaTos. Lightfoot has a full note on the 
strange word appafiwv, Notes on the Epistles of St Paul, pp. 
323 f.; see also Ellicott on Eph. i. 14. It may be Phoenician. 
Cf. the Scotch 'arles' and the German Angeld or Handgeld. It 
is more than a pledge (pignus, Iviyypov) ; it is piKpov tl p.ipo<; 
tov iravros (Thdrt.), an instalment, i.e. delivery of a small portion, 
whether of money or goods, as an earnest that the remainder 
would be delivered later. Comp. the use of airapx>] in Rom. 
viii. 23. In v. 5 the expression occurs again. Papyri show 
that the appafiuv was sometimes a considerable portion of the 
total, and that, if the buyer failed to deliver the remainder, he lost 
his dppa/3wv ; on the other hand, if the seller failed to fulfil his 
side of the bargain, he had to pay twice the amount of the 
appafiuv plus interest on it. The genitive is one of apposition; 
the Spirit is the earnest, the earnest of eternal life ; quantum 
ergo praemium est, cujus tanta est arrha t id est gratia Spiritus 
(Pseudo-Primasius). The Spirit is the anointing, the sealing, 
and the first instalment of eternal life ; and the three metaphors 
are perhaps meant to form a climax. The incidental, and 
probably unintentional, suggestion of Trinitarian doctrine is note- 
worthy. God confirms both teachers and taught to Christ ; as a 
security He gave His Spirit. See on xiii. 14, on 1 Cor. xii. 4-6, 


and comp. Eph. iv. 4-6 ; also Clem. Rom. Cor. xlvi. 3, lviii. 2. 
In the last two passages, as here, we have the order, God, 
Christ, Spirit ; in the other passages the order varies, and some- 
times Christ or the Spirit is mentioned first. In the Apostolic 
age there was evidently a pervading thought that in some sense 
the Divine Essence is threefold. 

Iv tcus KapStcus Tjpii'. ' Our hearts are the sphere tn which 
the gift of the Spirit is displayed'; cf. iv raU eV/cAfyo-iais, eV tw 
ciayyeXtb) (viii. i, 16), and especially iKi<ix vrai & Ta ^ KapSiau^ 
Tj/j-Qiv (Rom. v. 5). 

Kal trcppay. (X 3 BC 3 DEL O) rather than koL 6 <r<f>pay. (F G, Latt. ), or 
ko.1 afoay. (K* A C* K P). 

Jerome notes that the Latin version has pignus here and v. 5, instead 
of arrabo (or arrhd). Pignus = ii>tx v P° v (Deut. xxiv. 10-13), a word not 
found in N.T. Nevertheless, in the Vulgate, Jerome has left pignus in 
both passages. This is one of many pieces of evidence that Jerome's 
revision of the Epistles was very perfunctory. Augustine also points out 
the inaccuracy of pignus as a translation ; Melius dicitur arrha t/uam 
pignus ; haec enim duo similia videniur inter se, sed tamen habent aliquatn 
differentiam non negligendam {Serin. 378). In LXX appafidiv occurs Gen. 
xxx viii. 18-20, and there it means pignu s, a pledge, and not an instalment. 

McFadyen takes this paragraph (15-22) as evidence of "the 
heights upon which Paul was habitually living." He repels a 
charge of insincerity by showing how impossible it must be for a 
minister of Christ, the eternal affirmation of all God's promises, 
to be insincere. "For a moment he loses sight of himself and 
his pain in the contemplation of Christ as the Everlasting 
Yea ... the finished realization of the divine purpose." 

Here the chapter ought to have ended ; or still better at 
v. 14. The next two verses (23, 24) are closely connected with 
ii. 1-4. See on 1 Cor. xi. 1. 

23. 'Eyw Se. With great emphasis. He returns to his own 
individual case, in which Silvanus and Timothy are not included. 
Having shown how antecedently improbable it is that a minister of 
Christ should be guilty of levity and faithlessness, he now tells 
the Corinthians the actual reason why he changed his plans. It 
was not out of caprice, nor out of cowardice (xiii. 10; 1 Cor. 
iv. 18, 19), nor simply for his own convenience; it was out of 
consideration to them. The Se marks the relation between the 
Apostle's attitude and what has just been stated respecting God. 
• He who continually confirms us is the faithful God ; but / call 
Him as a witness, etc' These strong appeals (v. 18, iii. 1, iv. 2, 
v. n) are evoked by his opponents' charges of untrustworthiness 
and timidity. 

(xapTupa toc Qebv eVi t. cut^ tyuyr\\>. '/call God 
for a witness upon my soul ' ; we might render ' I call this God,' 


'the God whom I have just described.' 'He knows every 
corner of the soul and all its secrets ; the most subtle deceit 
would not escape Him ; and I should at once be convicted if I 
were lying.' The rendering ' against my soul ' is possible (see 
on Lk. ix. 5, and cf. Acts xiii. 51); in which case the idea is 
that, if he is lying, his soul, the seat of his physical life (Rom. ii. 
9), will pay the penalty. Vulg. has in animam meam, Aug. super 
animam meam. In one of his letters (Ep. 157), Augustine says 
that many people do not know what constitutes swearing. They 
think that if they do not say ' Per Deum,' but use expressions 
which are found in St Paul, they are quite safe. They say 
Testis est Deus (Rom. i. 9 ; Phil. i. 8), Sat Deus (2 Cor. xii. 2), 
Testem invoco Deum super animam meam (i. 23), without think- 
ing. There is no sin in swearing to what is true ; but swearing 
falsely is a very grievous sin, and those who swear frequently are 
likely to fall into it. Non ideo, quia in suis epistolis juravit 
Apostolus, vir in veritate firmisswius, ludus nobis debet esse 

Calling Heaven to witness is freq. in literature from Homer 
onwards. Hector proposes to Achilles that each shall offer to 
the other the witness of his own gods as a guarantee of good 
faith (//. xxii. 254); 

d/\/V aye Sevpo Oeovs eViSw/xe^a" to] yap apicnoi 
fxaprvpoL tcrcroi'Tai Kal Ittlctkotvoi app.ovLa.wv. 

Still closer to the present passage we have tov tc ITaiSva, 
iTTLKa\ovp.evo<; [xaprvpa twv Aeyo/xeVwv a\rj6zia,<; -rrepi (Plato, Laws, 
ii. 644 C) J liriKaXiLo-Oai Ocovs Kadopav to. ytyvop.€va. (Xen. Hell. 

11. iii. 55) ; in all which cases the mid. indicates that Heaven 
is invoked as a witness on one's own side.* Harveius combines 
the ideas of ' upon my soul to search it ' and ' against my soul to 
condemn it ' ; Deum invoco in animam meam, ut ipse inspiciat, 
si verum dico, et testis mi/ii sit, — si autem mentiar, puniat. 

iJ/eiSofAeyos ujxojf. Emphatic; ' it was in order to spare you.' 
Levity was not the cause, but consideration for them ; he did 
not wish to come iv pd(38w to punish offenders (see on 1 Cor. iv. 
21, vii. 28), so he gave them time to come to a better mind. In 
this he was not shirking a painful duty. If they had not yielded 
to his severe letter and to Titus, he would have come in all 
sharpness (xiii. 10). Delay was a gain to both sides, but it was 
not prompted by timidity or cro^ta o-apKiK-f) {v. 12). 

ouK6Ti tjXQoc els KopifSoy. ' I came not any more to Corinth.' 
The Greek cannot mean 'I came not as yet' (AV.), and can 
hardly mean ' I forbare to come ' (RV.). Com p. oWti yiywo-Kop.€v 
{v. 16), ovkItl vtto 7raiSayojydi' iap.€v (Gal. iii. 25), and with past 

* The expression is Greek rather than Hebrew. In LXX we have /xdprvs 
icijpios (1 Sam. xii. 5, 6, xx. 23, 42), but not this phrase. 


tenses, ovk eTSev avrov ov/ceri (Acts viii. 39), ovxtTi auTO cA./cvcrat 
icr^vov (Jn. xxi. 6). 'I came not any more,' or 'I came not 
again,' harmonizes so well with the theory of a second and pain- 
ful visit to Corinth, even if it does not actually imply it, that those 
who reject the theory prefer some other manner of translation, 
as that in RV. See on 1 Corinthians, pp. xxi-xxiv, for argu- 
ments in support of the theory, and pp. xxxi-xxxiii for arguments 
against it. 

The theory that 2 Cor. x.-xiii. is part of the severe letter 
written between 1 Cor. and 2 Cor. i.-ix. is strongly confirmed 
by this verse. In xiii. 2 he writes, ' If I come again I will not 
spare ' ; here he writes, ' To spare you I came not any more to 
Corinth.' This parallel combined with those between xiii. 10 
and ii. 3, and between x. 6 and ii. 9, make a strong case. " It 
seems difficult to deny that St Paul, in each case, is referring 
to the same thing, — in the passage from x.-xiii. in the present 
tense, and in that from i.-ix. in the past " (K. Lake, The 
Earlier Epp. of St Paul, p. 160). See also Kennedy, Second and 
Third Corinthians, pp. 79 f. ; G. H. RendalL p. 55. 

24. Epanorthosis. At once the thought strikes the Apostle 
that what he has just said may be misunderstood, especially by 
the emotional Corinthians, who are so jealous of their own 
independence. The power to spare implies the power to punish, 
and this seems to imply a claim to control everything. He 
hastens to assure them that he makes no such claim. This 
nervous anxiety about seeming to presume is so unlike the tone 
of x.-xiii. that it is difficult to think that both belong to one and 
the same letter. 

oux on. Elliptical for ov Aeyco tovto oti. The ellipse is very 
intelligible, and seems to have been in common use ; iii. 5, 
vii. 9; Phil. iii. 12, iv. 17 ; 2 Thess. iii. 9 ; etc. Winer, p. 746. 
'Not that' is in common enough use in English. 

Kupi€uo/A€>'. He includes his colleagues once more ; v. 23 is 
purely personal. And he is perhaps once more glancing at the 
rival teachers who did try to domineer and dictate as to what 
the Corinthians must accept (xi. 20). ' Do not think that we 
are attempting anything of the kind. Our work is to awaken, to 
instruct, to entreat' Non quia dominatur fidei vestrae (Vulg.) ; 
'have dominion over' (AV.), 'have lordship over' (RV.). Fides 
non necessitatis sed voluntatis est, dominatus necessitatis causa est. 
Fides per dilectionem operatur (Gal. v. 6) non per dominium cogitur 
(Herveius). Faith must be free. What power, asks Chrysos- 
tom, can make an unconvinced man believe? All you can do 
is to make him say that he believes. With regard to faith, 
Apostles are not tyrants but ministers and stewards (see on 1 Cor. 


iv. 1) ; they labour to help their flocks, not to oppress them,* 
The construction is not quite certain. ' Lord it over your faith 
is simple enough, but everywhere else in N.T. Kvpuxn.iv has a 
gen. of the person (Rom. vi. 9, 14, vii. 1, xiv. 9; 1 Tim. vi. 15 ; 
Lk. xxii. 25), not of the thing, and here the meaning may be 
'lord it over you,' tt}s 7rioT€ws being added as an afterthought, 
either because he had been accused of undue pressure (see on 
1 Cor. vii. 35, and comp. 2 Cor. x. 8, xiii. 10) in matters of faith, 
or because other teachers had used such pressure. In LXX 

such expressions as Kvpieveiv t>}s Oa\du-(rr)<;, rrj<; yrjs, rrj<; oiKOVj.Uvq<;, 

are common enough (1 Es. iv. 15 ; Dan. ii. 39, iii. 2 ; etc.). 
Nevertheless, the position of v/w is in favour of its dependence 
on Kupieuo/Aev rather than on -n?? 7r«rT£W9, especially in contrast 
with rrjs xa-pa-s vfmv. See critical note. Erasmus would supply 
eveKa to govern tt}<; mareo}^. 

owepyoi ecrjjtei'. ' So far from being tyrants we are fellow- 
workers ' — of course with the Corinthians. There is nothing in 
the context to suggest ' with God ' or ' with Christ ' ; in 1 Cor. 
iii. 9, ©eov is expressed ; in LXX the word is very rare ; in N.T. 
usually of St Paul's colleagues, t 

ttjs x a P^5 up*?- This comes rather as a surprise, for it forms 
no contrast with rr}<; 7ri'o-reu)s, which might have been repeated. 
' We do not force a creed upon you, but we help you in your 
quest of one.' But, as he goes on to state, they no longer need 
such help, for they have found the truth. Yet they have not 
reached the full happiness which the Gospel can give them 
(Gal. v. 22); their teachers can and do help them to greater joy 
in believing. It is the x a P<* T1 7 s wwrretos (Phil. i. 25), the x a P« *<« 
dprjvr} iv tw ino-Teveiv (Rom. xv. 1 3) that they labour with their 
converts to produce. { He mentions the x a 9^ OI " tne Gospel in 
contrast to the Xvirrj which has to be mentioned (ii. 1) in con- 
nexion with his change of plans. See Chadwick, The Pastoral 
Teaching of St Paul, p. 175. 

Tij yap ttiot€i eorrJKdTe. Not ' by faith ' (AV., RV.), nor 'by 
your faith ' (RV. marg.), but ' in your faith.' In that sphere the 
position of the Corinthians was correct and firm, and Kvpuveiv 
would have been altogether superfluous. It was not in their 
faith that they needed guidance and control, but it ought to 

* Fides enim prorsus ab hominum jugo soluta liberrimaqiie esse debet, says 
Calvin. He goes on to remark that, if any man had a right to have dominion 
in matters of faith, it would be St Paul ; yet he disclaims it. Whence Calvin 
infers that the only rule of faith is Scripture. 

f St Paul uses (rvvepySs eleven or twelve times, 1 Thess. iii. 2 being doubt- 
ful ; elsewhere only 3 Jn 8. 

J " It is implied in this, that joy is the very end and element of the Chris- 
tian life, and that it is the minister's duty to be at war with all that restrains 
it, and to co-operate in all that leads to it " (Denney). 


have more influence on their lives. If the Gospel had its right 
effect among them, there would be no fear of XvTrrj either for 
them or for him. Some take the words as meaning that it is by 
faith that Christians have a secure foothold ; but such a state- 
ment has no point here. St Paul is explaining why he has no 
wish to lord it over them as regards faith ; it is because he is 
confident that they need nothing of the kind ; their faith is 
sure. Could he afterwards, in the same letter, have written, 
' Try your own selves whether ye be in the faith ' (xiii. 5) ? 
If that was written when they were disgracing the faith by 
rebellion, and ' in your faith you stand firm ' was written after 
they had submitted, all becomes intelligible. 

With the dat. here comp. tu> crw/xan /cat t<3 Trvev/xari (1 Cor. 
v. 34) and reus <£peo-iV (xiv. 20). Papyri yield examples ; e.g. ovk 
e/xevev rfj yevojievrf fiecnreia. Bachmann would make it a dativus 
ethicus. For eoT^/caTe, see 1 Cor. xv. 1. 

vfiCiv ttjs irtarews (H A B C K L O P) rather than r. irlareM i>fi. 
(DEF G), which is an unintelligent assimilation to rijs x a P^ v/jl(ov. The 
difference of order has point. 

II. 1. Quisquis fuerit capitum divisor, fecit hie ineptam 
sectionem, says Calvin with justice. The connexion with what 
goes before is very close. The Apostle is continuing his answer 
to the charge of levity. He had changed his plans in order to 
spare them. Having stated what he did not mean when he 
spoke of sparing them (i. 24), he now explains what that expres- 
sion does mean. 

cKpiya 8e euau-rw touto. It is not easy to decide whether Se 
or yap is the right reading. External evidence seems to be 
somewhat in favour of 8i, but yap is more likely to have been 
changed to Se than vice versa, and yap makes a good connexion ; 
' It was to spare you that I gave up the idea of another visit to 
Corinth, for I determined this for myself.' But another yap 
immediately after rfj yap 7rto-rei car^KaTe is unpleasing and some- 
what unlikely, and <$e makes quite a natural connexion, whether 
one renders it by ' and ' or ' but.' ' It was to spare you, 

, \ as regards myself, etc' For eKpiva, see on 1 Cor. ii. 2 and 

vii. 37 ; in the latter passage we have, as here, tovto pointing 
forward to what is coming. The verb at once excludes the idea 
of levity or caprice ; he thought the matter over and came to a 
definite conclusion; cf. v. 14; also Rom. xiv. 13, where we 
have exactly the same construction as here, KptVeiv with an 
anticipatory 1-01)70, followed by to fxrj with the infinite ; dAAarovro 
Kpivare fxaXXov, to yu.?/ Ttdevai 7rpoo-/vopp.a to aStXcpio. In I Jn. 
touto commonly refers to what follows (iii. 1, 8, iv. 3) ; so also in 


1 Cor. (i. 12, vii. 29, xv. 50). 'Efxavrw is dat. commodi rather 
than dat. ethicus, which would have been /aoi rather than 
ifxavrw. It was chiefly for their sakes that he postponed his 
visit ; but he came to the conclusion that for his own sake he 
had better not have the pain. AV., following the Vulg., statui 
autem hoc ipsum apud me, has ' But I determined this with my- 
self,' which would require Trap (fxavrw or lv ifxavrw, a reading 
found in no text. And ipsum is in the wrong place ; we should 
have statui autem (or enim) tnihi ipsi hoc* 

to fir] irdXti/ lv Xu'ttt] irpos ujias iXQelv. There is little doubt 
that this is the right order of the words ; see below. The trans- 
lation of them is disputed. Those who hold that xii. 14 and 
xiii. 1 compel us to believe that St Paul had already paid two 
visits to Corinth, translate, ( Not again in sorrow to come to 
you.' 'Again in sorrow' is to be taken together and is emphatic 
by position. He has had to come once in sorrow ; and if he visited 
them on his way to Macedonia, he would have again to come in 
sorrow. This he decided not to do. The distressing visit 
cannot refer to the long stay during which he converted them ; 
therefore there must have been a second visit, which was prob- 
ably short. See Introduction; also G. H. Rendall, p. 57. 
Among recent writers, " Is it not plain," says K. Lake, " that 
this passage (ii. 1-11) implies a recent visit which had ended so 
unpleasantly that St Paul had determined not to come back if he 
was likely to undergo similar experiences ? " {Earlier Epp. p. 150). 

On the other hand, those who think that the silence of Acts 
and the difficulty of fixing a time for this second visit are fatal to 
the supposition that it took place, translate thus, 'Not to come 
to you again (and this time) in sorrow,' or, ' Not at my second 
coming to come to you in sorrow.' He had paid them one very 
happy visit, and he would not revisit them in circumstances 
which must make the second visit a sad one. There is no need 
to determine whether Xvirrj means the sorrow which the Apostle 
must cause or that which he must feel : the context shows 
that he is thinking of both. 

The AV. has 'heaviness' for Xvttt] here, with 'sorrow' in 
v. 3, ii. 7, vii. 10; Phil. ii. 27, etc.; and 'sorrow' is used to 
translate other Greek words. Even the R.V. uses ' sorrow ' for 
both Xvmj (often) and oSvvrj, which in Rom. ix. 2 it renders 'pain.' 

B 17, 37, Syr-Hark. Copt, support ydp : D*, Aeth. support re : almost 
all others support 84. T. R. with a few cursives reads ir&Xiv iXdetv iv 
\vwq. Nearly all authorities have ttoXiv iv \vtttj irpb's vfids iXdeTv, but 
D E G, Syr. Pesh. have ir. iv X. i/iOetv wpbs ijxas. Copt, omits irdXiv and 
has iXdelv irpbs u/j-as iv \virrj. 

* The Vulg. varies much in the translation of Kplyw : statuo, aestimo, 
judicio subjicio, and (most often) judicio. 


2. el y«P 6 'Y^ ^ u ™ "J 1 * 5 K,T ^- ' ^ or ^ ^ ( w ' th em P nas i s ) 
make you sorrowful, who then is he that maketh me glad, but he 
that is made sorrowful by me.' 'Sorry' and 'sorrowful' (vi. io) 
are not synonymous, and the latter is what is meant here : see 
on v. 5. The /«u makes the n's emphatic and thus adds force to 
the question, 'Why, who is there to make me glad?' Ja wo ist 
denn dann noch ei?ier, der mich erfreute ? So Bachmann. The 
answer to this question is ' No one, for the only people who can 
cheer me have been made sad by me.' The /cat accepts the 
previous statement, and the question shows what a paradox it 
involves; cf. v. 16; Mk. x. 26 ; Jn. ix. 36. See Winer, p. 545 ; 
Blass, § 77. 6. The singular 6 eicfrpaivuv, 6 Xvirov/xevos, does not 
allude to any individual. The rhetorical ti's is necessarily 
singular, and thus the community is spoken of as an individual. 
The point is delicately put. ' You Corinthians are my fount of 
joy ; how could I be the one to wish to trouble with sorrow the 
source whence I draw my own gladness ? ' But 6 Awnnyxej'os 
does not refer to the penitent rebel who has been pained by the 
process of conversion; and ad hoc vos contristo nt gaudeam de 
vobis (Pseudo-Primasius) is certainly not the meaning of the 
verse. Ambrosiaster is far better; ideo noluit ire, ne forte 
corripiens paucos multos contristaret, ipse etiam contristatus ; com- 
patiuntur enim omnia membra unius moerori. 

kclI ris without iariv (K A B C, Copt.) : other authorities insert. It is 
probably not original. 

3. lypcuj/a touto auTo. This may be accepted as the right 
reading (see below), but its meaning is not certain, for both 
Zypaij/a and tovto avro may be understood in more ways than 

Is lypaxpa a simple aorist referring to a previous letter? Or 
is it an epistolary aorist referring to the present letter? In other 
words, ought it to be translated ' I wrote ' or ' I am writing ' ? It 
is not quite certain that there is anywhere in N.T. an instance of 
Zypaxpa as an epistolary aorist meaning ' I am writing,' although 
there are several cases which may be such. It is not such in 
vii. 12, or 1 Cor. v. 9, or 3 Jn. 9 : in all three cases eypaif/a refers 
to a previous letter. It may be an epistolary aorist in 1 Cor. 
ix. 15 (see note there), but more probably it refers to an earlier 
part of the letter (see on 1 Jn. ii. 21, 26) ; and this is clearly the 
meaning of -n-poeypcuj/a. in Eph. iii. 3. See Lightfoot on Gal. vi. 
ir, where eypcaj/a may mark the place where St Paul ceased to 
dictate and began to write himself; also on Philem. 19, where 
typaxj/a seems to show that he wrote the whole letter with his 
own hand. 'Eypti\j/a/iev near the opening of the Martyrdom of 
Polycarp is a clear instance, and there are instances in papyri. 


There is no doubt that i-n-epipa is used in the sense of ' I am 
sending ' in viii. 18, ix. 3; Phil. ii. 28; Philem. 12; and there 
is an interesting example in the papyrus letter quoted above 
(introd. to i. 3) from Apion to his father ; eirepipd troi to cikoviv 
fxov Sta EvK-n']fj.ovos, " I am sending you by Euctemon the little 
portrait of me."* Other examples might be quoted. 

What is stated here and what is stated in vii. 8-12 show that 
lypaxpa does not mean ' I am writing,' in reference to this part of 
2 Cor. ; it means ' I wrote,' in reference to some earlier letter. 
Like c/cptva in v. 1, lypaxpa refers to what took place in the past ; 
and it is possible that both aorists refer to the same period in 
the past. In that case the meaning would be that, when he 
decided not to come to Corinth, he sent a letter instead of 
com ng. That is thoroughly intelligible and natural, and we 
may regard as certain that lypaxpa does not refer to 2 Cor. i.— ix. 
It is equally certain that it does not refer to 1 Cor. The language 
of vi. 3, 4 and of vii. 8-12 has to be explained in an unnatural 
manner, or indeed has to be explained away (see below), in 
order to make it fit 1 Cor. 

The meaning of tovto auro may be 'for this very reason.' 
That rendering is linguistically possible; see on 2 Pet. i. 5; 
Winer, p. 178; Blass, § 49. But elsewhere (v. 5; Rom. ix. 17, 
xiii. 6.; Col. iv. 8) St Paul writes cis airb tovto to express this ; 
and in v. 9; 1 Thess. iii. 3; 1 Tim iv. 10 we have eis tovto 
with a similar meaning. Nowhere else does St Paul use tovto 
avTo or avTo tovto, without cis, in the sense of ' for this reason,' 
and the probability is that it is not used in that sense here. 
' This very thing ' is the simpler and more probable rendering ; 
and what precedes shows what ' this very thing ' was, — viz. that to 
spare them he had given up the idea of coming, because he did 
not wish to pay a (second) painful visit, and was dealing with 
them by letter instead of coming. It is quite possible that in 
these verses he is quoting his earlier letter, just as in 1 Cor. he 
sometimes quotes the Corinthians' letter; but we cannot detect 
the quotations with any certainty. We may, however, feel sure 
that there was not only a letter from St Paul to Corinth before 

1 Cor. (see on 1 Cor. v. 9), but also a letter between 1 Cor. and 

2 Cor.f 

That 2 Cor. x.-xiii. is part of the latter letter is a theory 
which here finds further confirmation (see on i. 23). In xiii. 10 

* In the frayed original only viv is legible; and €Ik6viv = sIk6viov is a 
better restoration than odbviv, vhich was an earlier conjecture. 

t Wieseler thinks that these verses may refer to the letter of I Cor. v. 9, 
but they evidently refer to something more recent, and to the last letter which 
he had sent them. As this cannot be 1 Cor., it must be a letter written later 
than 1 Cor. 


he says, ' For this cause when absent I write these things, that 
when present I may not deal sharply.' Here, with apparent 
reference to those very words, he says, ' I wrote this very thing 
that I might not by coming have sorrow.' It is natural that 
what he called ' dealing sharply ' when they were in revolt, he 
should call 'having sorrow' now that they have submitted. 

ica (at) e'XGojc Xutttji' axw. ' In order that I might not by 
coming have sorrow.' He does not say Iva Z\8wv (jlyj A. ax^, 
'that when I came I might not have sorrow.' AV. and RV. 
rather imply the latter reading. 

d(j>' S>v e'8ei p.e x^P 61 "- ' From the hands of those from whom 
I ought to have been rejoicing,' if he had come. They were his 
spiritual children who ought to be making him happy by follow- 
ing his wishes and example (see on i Cor. iv. 16). 

TreiroiGws em TrdcTas ufxas. ' Because I had reposed trust on 
you all.' Even when they were rebels he was confident that 
there was real sympathy with him, and that they would wish to 
please him. Confidens vos omnes intelligere, quia tunc verum 
gaudium habitis, si ego gaudeo (Pseudo-Primasius). In the 
fulness of his heart he expresses what he hopes rather than what 
he knows ; fxiyari oikoi'o/awv (Chrys.). For the construction cf. oi 
7r£7roi$oTes cVi Kvpiov (Ps. cxxv. i) ; also 2 Thess. iii. 4. Contrast 
i. 9, x. 7 ; Philem. 21, where we have the more classical dative. 

Zypafa. without 6/uv (K A B C O P 17, Am. Copt., Ambst.): other 
authorities insert. C O, Chrys. have airrb tovto : A, Copt. Arm. omit 
clvt6 : other authorities have tovto o.vt6, which D E F G, Latt. Goth., 
Aeth. place before iypa^a. D F, Latt. insert tirl \virrjy after \iir-qv. (rx<2 
(K'ABO P, Chrys.) rather than t X <* (N 8 C D E F G K L) ; cf. i. 15 ; 
Rom. i. 13 ; Phil. ii. 27. 

4. Ik ydp ttoMtjs 0\i\J/ea>s . . . Sid iroWtov SaKpiW. These 
strong words, expressive of deep emotion and intense distress, 
are quite in place, if they refer to a letter of which x.-xiii. formed 
a chief part. That passionate outburst of feeling might well have 
been written in ' deep affliction and anguish of heart "amid a flood 
of tears.' But, as a description of the state of his mind when he 
wrote 1 Cor., the language is extravagant* It might apply to 
the short section about the incestuous person, but that is only a 
fragment of the Epistle ; and nowhere in the range of his extant 
letters can we find any considerable portion to which this state- 
ment would so fitly apply as to x.-xiii. 

It is interesting and instructive to compare the Apostle's 
description of his own condition during the writing of this 
vindication of his own authority with J. H. Newman's statements 

* "These words cannot be referred to our first canonical Epistle, and no 
more characterise its general tone than what he says about his second visit 
describes his first mission" (Orello Cone, Paul, p. 121). 


respecting himself, while he was writing the marvellous Apologia 
pro Vita sua in the spring of 1864. He wrote to Sir F. Rogers 
on April 22 ; "During the writing and reading of my Part 3 I 
could not get from beginning to end for crying." He wrote to 
Mr. Hope-Scott on May 2 ; " I have been writing without inter- 
ruption of Sundays five weeks. I have been constantly in tears, 
and constantly crying out with distress." 

The Apostle's statement explains (yap) how it came about 
that one whose function it was to be a 'helper of their joy' 
(i. 24) should write a letter which was sure to cause great sorrow. 
That incongruity was only too keenly felt by the writer, and it 
caused him intense distress. Yet the object of the letter was 
not to spare himself and inflict pain on them, but to prove the 
reality of his affection. He had had more than enough of Xvirrj. 

The change from « to Sid has significance. It was out of a 
condition of affliction that the letter was written, and it passed 
through a flood of tears. We should more naturally say ' amid 
many tears.' There is a similar change from ck to Sid in Rom. 
ii. 27: for Sta of "attendant circumstances," cf. Rom. iv. n, 
viii. 25, xiv. 20. Both 7roAA.??s and KapSias may be taken with 
both substantives ; ' out of much affliction of heart and much 
anguish of heart' In class. Grk. (twoxv is nearly always literal, 
of actual contraction, junction or check. It occurs Lk. xxi. 25 
and nowhere else in N.T. In LXX it occurs Judg. ii. 3 ; Job 
xxx. 3 ; Jer. Hi. 5 ; Mic. v. 1 (iv. 14), with a variety of meanings. 
Jerome's carelessness in revision is seen again in his rendering of 
the word. In Lk. 23, 25 he has pressura for both dvdy/07 and 
o-vvoxq, although Lat. Vet. distinguishes with compressio and 
necessitas, and here he has angustia for avvoxy- 

In his speech to the Ephesian elders at Miletus, St Paul 
twice mentions his frequent tears (Acts xx. 19, 31). One may 
call it softness, as Calvin remarks, but it is more worthy of a 
hero than ilia ferrea durities Stoicorum would have been. The 
Apostle was no Stoic, and for him the suppression of all emotion 
was no road to perfection. The sympathy which he felt he 
showed, with utter disregard for Stoical airdOeia and r/pc/xia, and 

Epicurean drapa$ia : dAoyos xal irapa (pvcriv \J/vxq'S Kivrj(TL<i is a 

doctrine to which he could never subscribe. 

d\Xd TTjc dydiTT]^ Iva. yvS>n. Placing t. aydirrjv in front of Iva 
throws great emphasis on the word ; cf. tw tttwxwv Iva 
fjLvrnjLovev<j)[j.ev (Gal. ii. 10). He could have spared himself the 
pain of writing such a letter ; he could have come at once and 
used severity, without giving them time to return to their obedi- 
ence : but his love for them would not allow him to do either. 
As Chrys. points out, the run of the sentence requires ' not that 
you should be made sorrowful, but that you should be itiduced to 


repent? Instead of this he substitutes 'that you should know 
the exceptional love which I have for you.' It was affection, not 
cold or cruel severity which made him write. He bears 
' Corinth ' written on his heart; i. 12, iii. 2, xii. 15 ; 1 Cor. iv. 

15, IX. 2 : Ko.TayKvKa.ivi.1 tov \6yov fiov\6}i.zvo<s liricnracraaOai 

auTous (Theophyl.). That aydir-q is not a word of Biblical origin 
has been shown by Deissmann {Bible Studies, p. 199). It has 
been found in Egypt in papyri of the Ptolemaic period. 

II. 5-17. The Treatment of the Great Offender and 
the Result of the Severe Letter. 

The offender ought now to be freely forgiven. A ndfor 
the intense relief caused by the report of you brought by Titus 
I thank God who does not allow ministers that work in 
sincerity to fail. 

6 As regards him who has been the cause of the sorrow, it is 
not so much to me that he has caused it (I do not wish to be 
considered at all) as to all of you ; and perhaps not to all of you, 
for there may be exceptions, and I do not wish to be hard upon 
any one. 6 I think, therefore, that the punishment which was 
inflicted by the majority is sufficient in the circumstances, and 
those who thought it inadequate need not insist upon anything 
more ; 7 on the contrary, you may now turn round and forgive 
and encourage him. 8 If you fail to do this, a person in his 
circumstances may sink down in despair in the excess of his 
grief. I therefore implore you to leave him no longer in suspense, 
but at once, by some formal act> put into execution, not any 
sentence of further punishment, but the renewal of your love for 
him. e This request that you should forgive him is not at all 
inconsistent with the letter which I sent instead of coming, for I 
wrote that letter, not so much in order to be severe on him, as 
to have a sure test whether in all respects you are prepared to 
obey me. 10 You have proved your loyalty by punishing where 
punishment was due ; but now, if you decide to forgive, you may 
rest assured that I agree with that decision ; for — and this is one 
more point — if there has been anything for me to forgive, it is 
for your sakes that I have forgiven it, not thoughtlessly, but as 
in the presence of Christ. n Satan is always on the watch to 
get an advantage over us. He did get an advantage when he 


caused this member of our body to sin so grievously. Are we to 
let him have another advantage — over a sinner that has repented ? 
12 My disturbing anxiety about you is now removed ; but it 
was so intense that, although, when I came to Troas to preach 
the Gospel, God gave me openings there which were very 
favourable, 13 yet I could not settle to any fruitful work, because 
Titus, who was to bring me news of you, was not to be found 
there. In my eagerness to learn what success he had had among 
you I said good-bye to Troas and went on to Macedonia to 
meet him the sooner. li But, God be thanked, all has turned 
out for the best. God, as always, led us along in His triumphal 
train with Christ, using us as His instruments to diffuse the 
sweet odour of His Gospel in every place. 15 For it is of the 
fragrance of Christ that we ourselves are a sweet savour to God 
among both those who are in the way to deliverance and those 
who are in the way to destruction, 16 to the one being a savour 
exhaled from death and breathing death, to the other a savour 
exhaled from life and breathing life. It is an awful charge, and 
what ministers are competent to undertake it? 17 Some are not, 
but by God's grace we are. For, unlike most teachers, we are 
not men who for their own ends corrupt God's message. No ; 
with sincerity in our hearts, nay with God in our hearts, and 
with His eye upon us, as befits those who are members of Christ, 
we deliver our message. 

5-11. This paragraph about the great offender is not really 
a digression (Meyer), and the fact that we should have a good 
sequence of thought if it were omitted does not prove it to be a 
digression. It is part, and not on unimportant part, of St Paul's 
vindication of himself. The Corinthians' chief grievance was 
his sending them a severe letter instead of coming to them for 
the long and happy visit indicated in 1 Cor. xvi. 5-7. But there 
was also the treatment of the ringleader against Apostolic 
authority. The majority censured him in a way which some 
thought inadequate. The Apostle assures them that the action 
of the Church in condemning the offender satisfies the require- 
ments, all the more so as the person condemned is very penitent. 
He assures them that he is more than ready to join in their 
tormal restoration 01 the man to favour; and there is now no 
bar to his coming. 


We are ignorant as to the exact nature of the penalty which 
was inflicted by the majority, but apparently it was not that 
which St Paul was believed to require. Possibly it was that 
suggested in i Cor. v. 1 1, t<5 tolovtw fjirjSk aweo-OUiv, as also in 
2 Thess. iii. 14, fxrj o-vvavaiAiyi'vo~6ai avr<5, Iva ivrpany, where we 
have the important addition, ko.1 fir) ws e'v#pov yyeicrOe, dAAa 
vov6f.Ta.Ti is dSeA<£oj/. In accordance with this addition, the 
Apostle now pleads earnestly for a generous forgiveness. 
Punishment had been inflicted in order to rescue him from 
perdition by inducing him to repent ; and he had repented. If 
punishment were continued, it might drive him to perdition by 
making him desperate. 

We are ignorant also as to who this offender was and as to 
what was the exact nature of his offence. But "it should no 
longer require to be proved that this offender is not the 
incestuous person of 1 Cor. v. 1, but some one who had wronged 
Paul himself" (Moffatt, Int. to the Literature of the JV.T., p. 122). 
This theory is still advocated by Zahn (1909), McFadyen (1911), 
and others, and therefore it is necessary to point out once more 
how untenable it is. Tertullian's vigorous argument almost 
suffices without any others (De Pudic. 13). After quoting this 
passage (5-1 1) he asks whether the Apostle could possibly have 
written in this effusively indulgent way about a man who had 
been guilty of fornication aggravated by incest, and this without 
one word of severity about the past or warning about the future.* 
We must remember that, if the offender here is the incestuous 
person of 1 Cor. v. 1, then the incest was of a specially monstrous 
character, for the sinful union was contracted in the lifetime of 
the man's father. This passage and vii. 12 refer to the same 
case, and there, if 6 dSt/c^o-a? is the incestuous son, 6 a8iKr]6iis 
must be the woman's injured husband, who was still alive when 
St Paul wrote. f This adds immense force to Tertullian's 
question. Moreover, it is unlikely that St Paul would view such 
a sin simply as an injury inflicted by one man on another. 

* The omission is all the more astonishing when we remember that St 
Paul had ordered that the offender should be handed over to Satan, and that 
(on this hypothesis) the sentence had not been executed. 

t McFadyen is inconsistent. On 1 Cor. v. 1 he says that it is uncertain 
whether the father was dead when the son took his father's wife ;_ on 2 Cor. 
vii. 12 he assumes that the father was alive when the son formed this revoking 


When he treats of incest in 1 Cor., it is the infection of the whole 
Church upon which he enlarges (v. 6, 7, 11, 13). Lastly, it is 
incredible that St Paul would say {v. 9) that he had insisted 
upon the punishment of so grievous a sin, merely to test 
the Corinthians, whether they were ready to obey him in all 

If 6 dSiKT/^ets is the Apostle himself, the language used here 
and in vii. 12 is quite natural. This man had grossly wronged 
St Paul, but the particulars are unknown to us.* Of such an 
offender St Paul might reasonably say that he had demanded 
his punishment to test the loyalty of his converts. This man 
had insulted and defied him. The personal affront St Paul 
could treat as nothing, but he could not allow his authority to be 
defied. The man must be punished, and punished by the 
community ; that would test their loyalty. If this was done, the 
amount of punishment was of comparatively small importance; 
and when the man had expressed contrition, prolongation of his 
punishment would do more harm than good. On this inter- 
pretation, everything falls into its place. From a feeling of 
delicacy, St Paul uses indefinite language ; it sufficed to 
tell the Corinthians what he meant, but it does not suffice to 
tell us.f 

5. Ei %i tis. The indefiniteness begins at once. ' But if 
any one has caused sorrow, it is not to me that he has caused 
it.' The personal element is brushed on one side at once ; the 
injury to the Church, whose members are members of Christ, 
is what matters. The argument that we have here a tk and a 
toiovtos {v. 6) and SaraiSs {v. 11), and that in 1 Cor. v. we 
have also a tis {v. i) and a toiovtos (v. 5) and 2<xTavas {v. 5), 
and that therefore this passage refers to the same case as that, 
is very shallow. In every sinful irpayfxa (vii. 11) there is a tis 
and a toiovtos, with Satan at work also. The use of toioitos in 

* Es muss sick hier urn eine schwere persoiiliche Krankung des Paulus 
und itin einen persotilichen Beleidiger handcln (Bousset, p. 175). See also 
Hastings, DB. i. p. 493 ; Enc. Bibl. i. 902 ; G. H. Rendall, p. 61 ; 
Schmiedel, p. 221. Bleek, Hilgenfeld, Ewald, Godet, Bachmann, Lietz- 
mann and others take a similar view : the offence was a personal attack on 
St Paul. 

t Krenkel's suggestion that the offender had wronged a leilow-Christian 
in a matter of property has found little support. It is more probable than 
the supposed reference to I Cor. v. I ; but the only reasonable hypothesis is 
that the adiKla. was against St Paul himself. Against Timothy is not im- 
possible, but it is improbable. 


the two places is different. In the other case St Paul refuses 
to stain his letter with the name of such a transgressor, and 
perhaps intimates that any one who transgresses in a like manner 
will receive the like punishment. In this case, he refrains from 
naming him out of consideration for the offender's feelings, whose 
case he states hypothetically ; ' if there is such a person ' : in 
v. 10, vii. 14, x. 7 we have a similar use of eL So also there is 
difference in the way in which Satan is introduced in each 
case. There he was made the instrument of chastisement ; 
here he is to be guarded against as a crafty enemy. 

d\Xd &7to jxepous (ifa jultj eiripapw) Trdvras ujxas. This is the 
best arrangement of a sentence which has suffered by being 
dictated ; ' He hath caused sorrow, not to me, but in part (that 
I press not too heavily) to you all.' So RV. and others. He 
does not wish to be severe, but it is really the whole Corinthian 
Church that has been troubled by this man's doWa. A qualifying 
d77-o fiepovs is inserted, because there were a few who were not 
distressed by the scandalous treatment of the Apostle. 

It is possible, with Mosheim, Olshausen, and others, to 
include Trdvras in the parenthesis and make it the ace. after 
cVt/?apw, 'that I press not too heavily upon all.' But this gives 
a weak position to iravras, and leaves ifxa<; awkwardly alone 
after the parenthesis. If 77-dvTas is taken with v/ids, we have a 
pointed and almost necessary antithesis to i/x£, * not me but all 
of you.' 

The AV. rendering, ' He hath not grieved me but in part : 
that I may not overcharge you all,' follows Tertullian, Vulgate, 
Luther and others, but it cannot stand, for dAAd does not mean 
' except ' (Mk. x. 40), and St Paul is not urging that he has 
been distressed even ' in part ' ; he is dismissing the personal 
affront altogether. It is not quite certain whether air6 /xepovs 
means that not quite all the Corinthians had been distressed, or 
that all of them had been distressed to some extent; but the 
former is much more probable as being more true, and this is 
an additional objection to the rendering in AV. B. Weiss 
understands a.7r6 /xepov; as limiting the action of the A-eXu^/cus : 
the offender was only partly the cause of the Corinthians' grief; 
the other part was caused by the Apostle's severe letter. Hof- 
mann gives airo (xepow; the highly improbable meaning of ' for 
a time,' and with perverted ingenuity makes the first part of the 
verse interrogative ; ' If any one has caused sorrow, is it not to 
me that he has caused it?' The answer to this question is, 
' Yes ; nevertheless, for a time (that I may not press too heavily 
on you all) sufficient to such a one, etc' This is a very clumsy 
construction, and — what is far more serious — it destroys the 
tact and delicacy of the Apostle's appeal by laying the whole 


emphasis on the personal injury to himself — the thing about 
which he desires to say as little as possible.* 

In Biblical Greek, iTrifiapeiv is peculiar to Paul, who always 
uses it in a metaphorical sense (1 Thess. ii. 9 ; 2 Thess. iii. 8) 
and with the ace. Appian has it several times, always with 
the dat. (examples in Wetstein); and it is found in inscriptions. 
Cf. KaTafiapeiv, xii. 16. On the whole verse see Stanley and 

6. iKavoi' tw toiouto) f\ eiriTifjua aurrj. ' A sufficient thing for 
such a person is this punishment.' We may understand Icttw, 
but idTLv is more probable. This substantival use of the neuter 
adjective accompanied by a feminine substantive is found else- 
where ; apKtrov rrj rjfAtpq- rj kclkiol avTrjs (Mt. vi. 34) ; apecTTOv iartv 

Tot? 'IovSatots 17 eirixeLprjaris uvtov (the reading of D and other 
authorities, Acts xii. 3) ; 17 ifsvxy 7rAeiov eo-riv rrjs Tpo<prj<; (Lk. xii. 23). 
Blass, §31. 2, quotes also tKavdv€o-Ttv(Lk. xxii. 38), but the meaning 
there is, ' Enough of this subject,' not, 'two swords are a sufficient 
thing.' There is perhaps a slight difference of meaning between 
ixavov and iKav-q. The latter would mean that the existing iiriTi/iia 
need not be prolonged. The former means that no additional 
penalty need be imposed. But this cannot be insisted on.f 
The meaning here is that ' the punishment is a sufficient thing.' 
It is not said that it is adequate to the offence, but that it 
satisfies the requirements of the case. J Apostolic authority has 
been defied, and the Church, acting through the majority, has 
censured the offender. Nothing further is necessary. 

In Wisd. iii. IO we have 01 Se do-e^eis ko.6' a iXoylaavTo 
e£ovaiv eTTLTLfxiav, but nowhere else in Bibl. Grk. does ea-ni/ua 
occur. In Attic Grk. it means ' possession of political rights,' 
'citizenship.' The transition to 'punishment' is curious, the 
intermediate step being 'getting one's due': the citizen gets 
his due, and the criminal gets his. Cf. the Biblical use of eVt- 
Tip:av = ' rebuke, censure severely,' and the classical use of to eVt- 
Tt/Aiov =' legal penalty.' The Latin renderings of liriTip.ia vary ; 
increpatio (Tert), correptio (Aug.), objurgatio (Vulg.); in Wisd. 
iii. 10, Vulg. has correptio. It is possible that both ixavov and 
k-KiTip.ia. are forensic terms. In 2 Thess. i. 9 St Paul has ZU-q = 
'punishment,' a word of somewhat similar history, passing from 

* If the offender were the incestuous man, could St Paul have said, ' He 
has not pained me at all ' ? For the moral of these words see Chadwick, The 
Pastoral Teaching of St. Paul, p. 239. 

t Bachmann quotes what Zeus says about the parasites (Lucian, Timon, 
10), Ikclvti /cat avrri Ti/xwpLa tartu avrols, viz. that of seeing Timon rolling in 
money, which tells against the supposed distinction. 

+ Sufficiens non quantum ad Dei judicium, sed quantum expediebai 


' customary rights,' through ' legal action ' to ' penalty.' ' Punish ' 
and ' punishment' are freq. in O.T., but not so in N.T. 

tj utto Tut- •n-Xeioi'wi'. ' Which was inflicted by the many ' (RV.) 
or 'by the majority,' rather than 'by many' (AV.). A similar 
correction should be made iv. 15, ix. 2 ; 1 Cor. x. 5 ; Phil. i. 14 ; 
cf. 1 Cor. xv. 6. It may be lawful to translate 01 irAaWs 'many' 
or even ' several' (Blass, § 44. 4), but in this and other places in 
N.T. 'the many' or 'the majority' is probably right. They 
are contrasted with a minority who did not concur in what was 
done by ol 7rA.a'or€s, and it is often assumed that this minority 
opposed the infliction of the eVn-i/zta as being excessive, or as 
being altogether undeserved. Those who hold this view remind 
us that there was an anti-Pauline party at Corinth which would 
be sure to refuse to punish a man whose only offence was that 
of having defied St Paul. But there is no hint that this 
minority had been patronizing a rebel. St Paul tells them that 
''contrariwise they should rather forgive' the rebel, which implies 
that hitherto they had refused to forgive him. It is more likely 
that the minority were the Paul party (1 Cor. i. 12, 13), who 
thought that one who defied the Apostle ought to be much more 
severely punished ; and it is this minority whom he is specially 
addressing. Kennedy, Second and Third Corinthians, pp. 100 f. ; 
Lake, Earlier Epistles, p. 171. 

7. wore Toucan-tow jiaWoy k.t.X. ' So that on the contrary 
you may rather forgive him fully and comfort him.' The wore 
gives the natural consequence of the view that the penalty 
which has been imposed satisfies the requirements. So far 
from imposing anything more, they may put an end to what 
has been imposed. He is not telling them what they must do ; 
there is no Seiv. He tactfully points out the logical consequence 
of admitting the Ikovov, and leaves them to act upon it. The 
fiaXAov is probably genuine (see below), and it indicates that 
there were still some who felt that the punishment was insufficient. 
For x a P L(Ta(J b a <; which implies making the man a present of the 
remainder of the penalty,* and forgiving him absolutely, cf. xii. 
13 ; Lk. vii. 42, 43; Col. ii. 13, iii. 13 ; Eph. iv. 32. 

firj ttcus tt] Trepio-aoTe'pa Xu'ttt] KaTa7ro0fj 6 t. ' Lest by any 

means such a one should be swallowed up by his overmuch 
sorrow.' Neither here nor ix. 4 nor xii. 20 does the AV. give 
the right force to /x>/ -w;: it does so 1 Cor. ix. 27; Gal. ii. 2. 
Various conjectures are made as to what the Apostle feared 

* Vulg. here and elsewhere uses donare to translate xapl^eadax, and 
donare may mean ' to forgive ' ; culpa gravis precibus donatur saefe suorxim 
(Ov. Pont. 11. vii. 51). The idea that an offence involves a debt to be wiped 
out by punishment lies at the back of such language. 


might be the result ; apostasy, reckless indulgence in sin, 
suicide. It is more important to notice that this implies that 
the man had already repented; he was no longer rebellious; 
and vera poenitentia est jam cessare a peccato (Herveius). Evi- 
dently, his grief was already great, and there was danger of his 
despairing of being restored to favour in Christian society. For in the metaphorical sense cf. v. 4 ; 1 Cor. xv. 54 ; 
1 Pet. v. 8. It is freq. in LXX. The ' swallowing,' as Chrys. says, 
may be o>s eirl Or/piov, <I>s tVt ^etyawvos, tbs «7Tt kXvSwvos. In the 
Ep. of the Churches of Lugdunum and Vienna those who had 
apostatized are said to have been swallowed by the Beast, Iva 
airoTrvix6zL<i 6 6i]p, ovs irporepov wcto KaTaireTrwKevai, £u>vto.<; efe/xccr^ 
(Eus. H.E. v. ii. 6). The rather superfluous repetition of 6 
ToiovTos at the end of the sentence gives a touch of compassion, 
enforcing the plea. Locus diligenter observandus, says Calvin ; 
docet enim qua aequitate et dementia temperanda sit disciplina 
Ecclesiae, ne rigor modum excedat. Severitate opus est ne im- 
punitate {quae peccandi illecebra merito vocatur) mali reddantur 
audaciores. Sed rursus, quia periculum est, ne is qui castigatur 
animum despondeat, hie adhibenda est moderatio ; nempe ut 
Ecclesia simulatqut resipiscentiam illius certo cognoverit, ad 
dandam veyiiam sit parata. He goes on to contrast the cruel 
sentences of the penitential system. The comment is remark- 
able as coming from so rigorous a disciplinarian. 

H. C. Lea points out that in the Roman Catholic version of 
the N.T. there is a note appended to this text explaining that "the 
Apostle here granted an indulgence or pardon in the person and 
by the authority of Christ to the incestuous Corinthian whom 
he had put under penance, which pardon consisted in a releas- 
ing of part of the temporal punishment due to sin." This, says 
Lea, is "a typical instance of the facility with which men read 
into Scripture whatever they desire to find there" {Hist, op 
Auricular Confession and Indulgences, iii. p. 5).* 

A B, Syr-Pesh. , Aug. omit p.aWoi', which is found before v,uas in 
X C K L O P, Syr-Hark. Vulg. G>pt. Arm., Chrys. Ambrst. and after 
tyias in D E F G 17, Goth., Thdrt. Tert. 

8. 816 irapaKaXu upas. He does not invoke his Apostolic 
authority and command the forgiveness ; as an equal he entreats 
them to grant it. The community had selected and enforced the 
penalty, whatever it may have been, and he leaves to them the 
removal of it. He respects the democratic feeling of the 

* Until the Reformation it was not seriously disputed that indulgences 
were comparatively modern. But the Council of Trent (Sess. xxv.) declared 
them to have been used antiqitissimis temporibus, and this view is authori- 
tatively upheld. 


Corinthian Church, and he respects the spirit of the Lord's 
commission to the whole Church. " It is a fact of the highest 
importance and clearly established by the documents, that the 
commission given on the evening of the first Easter Day — the 
' Great Commission ' — was given to the Church and not to any 
class in the Church — to the whole Church and not to any part of 
it, primarily. ' Receive ye the Holy Ghost ; whosoever sins ye 
forgive, they are forgiven unto them ; whosoever sins ye retain, 
they are retained' (Jn. xx. 22 f.). The words are the Charter of 
the Christian Church, and not simply the Charter of the Christian 
Ministry" (Westcott, Ephesians, pp. 169 f.). On that first Easter 
evening, not all the Apostles were present, and others were 
present who were not Apostles. The commission, in the first 
instance, was to the community as a whole. The Apostle here 
makes his appeal to the whole community, and not to any class 
of officials, and he leaves the community free to act. The 
change of meaning from irapaKaktvai, 'to comfort' (v. 7), to 
7rapa.Ka\£), 1 1 beseech ' (v. 8), should be noted : see on i. 4. 

-irapaKaXw 6(jias Kupwcrai els auToe 6.ydirr\v. Oro vos, constitu- 
atis in aim dilectionem (Tert.). Obsecro vos, ut confir metis in 
ilium caritatetn (Vulg.). The differences are characteristic, and 
constituo is perhaps better than confirtno, in the sense of ' make 
effective ' ; we have constituere libertatem, victoriam, pacem, con- 
cordiam fidem, etc. We need not suppose that Kvpwo-ai implies 
that a formal resolution, rescinding the previous sentence, is to 
be passed, any more than ' ratify ' would imply that in English. 
What the Apostle cares about is the change from censure to 
affection ; the way in which the affection is to be made effective 
he leaves to them. What it is that they are to ratify is kept with 
effect to the last. Com p. Lk. xiv. 18, where irapaiTiio-Qai comes 
as a surprise at the end ; one would have expected just the 
opposite. At Corinth there were some who wished for a more 
severe punishment on the offender than censure and separation. 
The Apostle says, Evuxrare to /xe'AosTw 0-wp.a.Ti, crvvdipare rrj 7roip.vrj 
to irpo[$a.TOv, 6epp.7jy aura) 8id6e(TLV Sti^are" Trpoo-rjKti yap v/xas p.ij 
fiuvov ri/wovrL crvvepyelv aWa. koX o-vv6.tttovti. (Thdrt.). With 
Kvputaat «ts avrbv dydirrjv COmp. CKvpu)6rj 6 aypos toj 'Afipadp. 
(Gen. xxiii. 20). In papyri (Oxyrh. 513, 4) iKvpwOrjv olKiav. 
Thuc. VIII. lxix. I, rj iKK\.7)o~ia Kvpdxrao-a tclvto. SceXvdrj. 

9. els toGto yap Kai eypaij/a. ' For it was just for this that I 
also wrote'; the 'just' marks the emphasis on ets tovto, which 
looks forward to Iva yrw. As in v. 3, Zypaij/a refers to the letter 
between 1 Cor. and 2 Cor., of which 2 Cor. x.-xiii. is probably a 
part. The /ecu marks the agreement of this letter with that, not 
of this letter with what he had said, or of this passage with the 


earlier part of this letter. And we must not translate as if we 
had kou yap eh tovto. 

tt]v 8oKifj.t]y ujjuok. The proof of you, i.e. he wished to have 
them tested ; ut cognoscam probationem vestram (Tert.), which is 
better than ut cognoscam experimentum vestrum (Vulg.). In ii. 
9, viii. 2, xiii. 3, Vulg. has experimentum for SoKipu], as also in 
Phil. ii. 22; but in ix. 13 and Rom. v. 4 it has probatio. AV. 
has 'experience,' 'experiment,' ' trial,' and ' proof,' but without 
following Vulg. in its changes. 

el els irdWa utttjkooi core. ' Whether in all respects ye are 
obedient,' ' whether to every call of duty you lend your ear.' 
They were not to be obedient just so far as the claims made on 
them pleased them. The io-re implies that the proof was satis- 
factory ; they are obedient in all points; cf. la-re a£vuoi (1 Cor. 
v. 7). Here, as in vii. 12, St Paul seems to be interpreting his 
original intention in writing the letter by the light of the actual 
results of the letter. 

The reading rj for el may possibly be right;* it refers to 
hoKLftrjv, ' the proof whereby ye are, etc' This would strengthen 
the eo-Te'in indicating that they are found to be perfectly obedient. 
St Paul does not say, and perhaps does not mean, that they are 
obedient to himself: rather, they are obedient to the principles 
of the Gospel. 

Once more we have considerable confirmation of the theory 
that x.— xiii. is part of the severe letter to which allusion is made 
by lypai/'a here and in v. 3. In x. 6 he says, ' Being in readiness 
to avenge all disobedience when your obedience shall be ful- 
filled ' ; here he says, ' For it was just for this that I also wrote, 
that I might know the proof of you, whether you are obedient 
in all things.' As in v. 3 and i. 23, he here writes in the past 
tense of the same thing as that of which in x.-xiii. he writes in 
the present tense. It is quite natural that in the previous letter 
written in severity, he should speak of ' avenging disobedience,' 
and that in this letter of reconciliation he should omit all 
allusion to such a possibility. That within the compass of a 
dozen verses we should have three close parallels between i.-ix. 
and x.-xiii., and all of the same character, make a case of con- 
siderable strength. And we shall find other facts pointing in the 
same direction. 

A B 17 have §, other authorities el. Cf. Heb. vi. 14, where el fj.^v has 
been corrupted to ij fi-qv. 

10. w 8e ti xaplleaQe, Kdyci. They had joined with him in 
condemning ; he joins with them in forgiving. They had shown 

* The corruption of -q to et occurs elsewhere; aptarj to apicei (1 Cor. 
vii. 32). 


obedience in consenting to censure ; let them now be sure of 
his consent if they desire to give love instead of blame. The 
Apostle is not promising always to follow their lead in exercising 
leniency : although the statement is general, it is manifestly 
limited to the particular case ; and with regard to that he is not 
acting in the dark. He has the report of his official representa- 
tive Titus to guide him, and that made it clear to him that 
generous treatment of the offender would do a great deal of good 
and little or no harm. 

kcu yap e'yw o Kexdpia-fAcu. Here we have kcu yap (contrast 
v. 9), introducing an additional reason, and eyw is emphatic; 
' For also what / have forgiven,' I on my side as distinct from 
you. AV. is faulty in turning the perfects into aorists. 

ei ti Kexapuj-jj.a.1. A gracious parenthesis ; ' if I have forgiven 
anything,' i.e. ' if I have had anything to forgive.' He is not sug- 
gesting a doubt as to whether he has granted forgiveness, but he 
puts the fact of there being something for him to forgive as a 
mere hypothesis. The hypothetical statement is exactly parallel to 
«i ti? XeXv-n-rjKcv : ' if there is such person, he has received forgive- 
ness so far as I am concerned.' Some would translate, ' what I 
have been forgiven, if I have been forgiven anything,' which is 
grammatically possible, but it spoils the appeal, and is out of 
harmony with cV vpas iv -n-pouwirw Xp. St Paul" is not thinking of 
the Corinthians' change of attitude towards himself, but of his 
own towards the offender and them. It is 'for their sakes' 
that he has so entirely blotted out the thought of the man's 
offence. Their relation towards the offender has been a painful 
one, but it need not continue ; let it be changed for a happy 

iv Trpoaojirw Xpiorou. ' In the presence of Christ ' ; in facie 
Christi, or in conspectu Christi (Calv.) ; w? tov Xpiarov icpopwros 
kcu apeaKoptvov roi<; yevo/AeVoi? (Thdrt.). Cf. evcppaivofxrjv iv 
TrpoawTrw al<Tov iv 7ravTi Kaipcp (Prov. viii. 30). This is more 
probable than ' in the person of Christ ' (AV., RV.) ; in persona 
Christi (Vulg.), an Christi Statt (Luth.), or 'unto the glory of 
Christ' (Chrys.). See on i. 11. But, however we may translate 
the expression, the purpose of it is to correct a possible mis- 
understanding of oY I/las. Although it was for their sakes that 
he acted as he did, yet he remembered whose eye was upon him 
to approve or condemn his action. 

KayA (K*A BC ! DEOP) rather than K al iyti> (K 3 C* F G K L), as 
in most places where such crasis is possible. 6 Ktx- tin /cex- (KABCFGO) 
rather than d n Kex- $ xex- (D 2 K L 17). Baljon suggests that et rt k«x- 
is a gloss. It would be a very clever gloss, — subtly Pauline. As in the 
case of i. 6, 7, there is difference of opinion about the division of the verses. 
Some editors assign iW ,1177 . . . Zarava to v. IO. 


11. iva (XT] ■n\eoveKTr)&£>iJ.<;i> utto t. IaT. ' To prevent our being 
overreached by Satan.' The man is penitent and is freeing 
himself from Satan ; what a grievous error to aid Satan in getting 
control over him again ! Chrys. remarks that the Apostle is 
quite right in speaking of the 7rAeovc£ia of Satan, of his getting 
more than his due. That Satan should take man by sin is 
proper to him, but that he should do so through man's repent- 
ance is too much, for repentance is our weapon, not his. Vulg. 
has ut non circumveniamur a Sat ana* which is not so good as 
ne fraudetnur (Tert.), but better than ne possideamur (Aug. 
Ambrst.). The verse explains the oY lyxas. It was to the 
Corinthians' advantage and the Apostle's as well (his including 
himself in this gain is a delicate touch) that Satan should not be 
allowed to gain through a Christian's penitence : debemus cavere 
ne remedium nostrum fiat ejus triumphus (Ambrose). Nowhere 
else in Bibl. Grk. is the passive of ttXioviktCiv found. In LXX 
the verb is rare ; in N.T. both irXeoveKTecv and ttAcovcVt^s are 
peculiar to Paul. The 'us' or 'we' means the Church as a 
whole, not the Apostle. 

ou yap auTou to. yo^jiaTa dyyooGfAef. This is probably an inten- 
tional play upon words, but it can hardly be imitated in English ; 
'for we are not unwitting of his wiles': non ignoramus astutias 
ejus. This is the rendering of Pseudo-Cypr. (De sing. cler. 19) 
and of Ambrst. Sedulius has versutias ; Tert. injediones. 
Vulg. is very capricious in its translation of vorffiaTa, a word 
which in N.T. is almost peculiar to 2 Cor., in which it always has 
a bad sense. Here it has cogitationes, in iii. 14 (with Cypr. Test. 
i. 4) and in xi. 3 it has sensus, in iv. 4 mentes, in x. 5 intellectum 
(sing.), and in Phil. iv. 7 intelligentias. Chrys. gives a variety 
of expressions to represent to. voypara, all of them pointing to 
the wiliness of the evil one ; to SoXepov, to KaKOjxiqya.vov, to 
ttolklXov, to €7ti 7T/[)oo"^juaTt cvXaySeta? i-KriptacrTiKov : and this 
thought is freq. in Paul (iv. 4, xi. 14 ; 1 Cor. vii. 5 ; 2 Thess. 
ii. 9). See on iii. 14. 

Of the Scriptural designations of the evil one, four are found 
in this Epistle; ' Satan ' (here, xi. 14, xii. 7), ' the serpent ' (xi. 3), 
'Beliar' (vi. 15), 'the god of this age' (iv. 4). Elsewhere St 
Paul calls Satan 'the tempter' (1 Thess. iii. 5), 'the devil' 
(Eph. iv. 6, etc.), ' the evil one ' (Eph. vi. 16), ' the prince of the 
power of the air' (Eph. ii. 2). It is not necessary to dwell on 
the obvious fact that here and elsewhere he regards the evil 
power which opposes God and the well-being of man as a 
personal agent. Excepting xii. 7, 2a.Tava? always has the article 
in the Pauline Epp. So also most frequently in the rest of the 

* Vulg. always has circumvenire for nXeoveKTriv (vii. 2, xii. 17, 18; 
I Thess. iv. 6) : so also has Cyprian (Test. iii. 88). 


N.T. But, whether with or without the article, Saravas in N.T. 
is always a proper name which designates the great Adversary of 
God and man. 

12, 13. From the Xvir-q caused by the great offender the 
Apostle returns to the #Au//is which was nearly fatal to him in 
Asia, from which the news brought by Titus enabled him to 
recover. But the joyous recollection of the recovery makes 
him omit to mention the news. This dropping a subject and 
taking it up again is very natural, especially in a man of strong 
feeling, who dictates his letters. 

12. 'E\0wi' 8e els tV Tpwdoa. * Now ' (not ' furthermore,' AV.) 
' when I came to Troas.' The words might mean ' to the Troad,' 
the region between the Hellespont and Mount Ida, but a 
town must be meant.* St Paul would not tell Titus to meet 
him in a large district, and the city of Troas was a convenient 
landing-place from Macedonia. Its full name was Alexandria 
Troas, 'A\e£av8peia -f) Tpwas, Towds being an adjective to dis- 
tinguish it from other places called 'AAc^dvSpeia ; and while in 
N.T. and Pliny it is called simply Troas, in Strabo it is called 
simply Alexandria. Its modern name is Eski Stambui or Eski 
Stamboul, Old Constantinople. It was one of the few Roman 
colonies in Asia Minor, and Suetonius says that there was a 
widely spread rumour that Julius Caesar meant to transfer the 
capital of the Empire to this colony.f A coast-road ran north- 
wards from Ephesus through Adramyttium to Troas, and when 
St Paul left Ephesus (Acts xx. i) for Troas he probably followed 
it ; but he may have gone by sea. Troas is a few miles south of 
Novum Ilium, which was on the site of the Homeric Troy. See 
Enc. Bib. iv. 5215. 

els to euayY^oi' tou Xpiarou. ' For,' that is, ' to preach the 
Gospel (that tells) of the Christ.' This was his primary object. 
Such missionary work would take time, and during this time he 
expected that Titus would arrive with news as to the state of 
affairs at Corinth. If the report of Titus was encouraging, St 
Paul was conveniently placed for going on to Corinth through 

8u'pas fAoi dyea>yp.eVY]9 e> Kupiw. ' Although a door stood open 
to me in the Lord.' See on 1 Cor. xvi. 9 and Lightfoot on 
Col. iv. 3 and 1 Thess. i. 9, where birolav zlo-o&ov ea-xofxev is used 
of an excellent opening for missionary work. It was hardly 
necessary to add iv Ku/hu> after tov Xpiarov, but he wishes to 

* Cf. Acts xx 5, 6, where the art. is omitted and inserted of the same 
place in consecutive verses. 

t Validafama pcrcrebuit migraturum Alexandriam vel Ilium, translatii 
simul opibus imperii (Julius, 79). 


make it quite clear that he had come for the work of a Christian 
missionary, and that it was precisely in that sphere that he found 
a promising opportunity. This intensifies the significance of 
what follows. In spite of all this he found it impossible to 
remain and work. 

els rb evayySXiov with almost all authorities, except FG, Latt., which 
have 5i<x t6 evayyiXiov, propter evangetium. D E here do not agree with 
d e, but have 5i& rod evayye\iov : see critical note on v. \"J. For Ovpa.% /xoi 
dveifiyfi^u-qs, F G, Latt. have dvpa fioi. 7/v avetpyfiivT], ostium mihi apertum 
esset. Some editors assign owe Zcrxv Ka &ve<nv . . . dBeXcpdv fj.ov to v. 12, 
not without reason. There is similar difference between w. io and n ; 
see above. 

13. ouk ecrx!! tea SfeaiK tS -nreupaTi p.ou. ' I had no relief for 
my spirit.' He uses the same expression in vii. 5, ovSe/xiav 
i<T)cqK€v avecriv rj crap$ fjfxwv, where the change from 7rvev/*a to 
<rdp£ has no special significance : it is the seat of human emotion 
and sensation that is meant in each case. We talk of ' weariness 
of the spirit ' and ' weariness of the flesh,' without much change 
of meaning. We may explain the perf. as vividly recalling the 
moment when the Apostle had this experience and could say ' I 
have not got relief; but more probably this is another instance 
of the aoristic use of the perf. See on i. 9. 

Like vorjfxa, aveo-ts is specially freq. in this letter (vii. 5, 
viii. 13) and occurs elsewhere in N.T. only in 2 Thess. 1. 7 ; 
Acts xxiv. 23. Vulg. usually renders it requies, but 'relaxation' 
in the sense of loosening some kind of tension or restriction is 
its meaning rather than 'rest.' Being set free from 6\l\(/i<s is the 
main idea in this letter, as in 2 Thess. In Ecclus. xv. 20, xxvi. 
10, it means freeing from wholesome restraint, licence. So also 
in the Epistle of Barnabas iv. 2 ; ///») SSfxev rfj iavrwv ^vxfj aveacv 
warre «X £1V a ^ T W z^ovcriav //.era afiapTO)\wv kcu irovqpiHv awTpi^eiv. 
With the dat. ' for my spirit,' comp. ovx evpovo-a rj Kepio-repa 
avairavo-iv tois ttoctIv avriys (Gen. viii. 9). 

tw jatj eupeli' p.6 TiToy rbv &8€\<{>6V jiou. 'Because I found 
not Titus my brother.' For some reason, he fully expected to 
find Titus there, and his failing to do so seems to have robbed 
him of the power of work ; his anxiety about Corinth was so 
great. Chrys. thinks that St Paul may have wished to remain at 
Troas, but that God required him to go on. St Paul tells us 
that he could not endure remaining at Troas ; he was so miser- 
able there. There is no hint of any other reason. Thdrt. thinks 
that the Apostle felt that he must have a colleague; that a 
missionary working alone was wasted. What is intimated here is 
quite an intelligible reason. The Apostle was very human ; he 
was so anxious about the effect of his severe letter, that he 
decided to shorten the time of torturing suspense by going where 



he could meet Titus the sooner. Moreover, he may have 
reasonably thought that the rescue of the Corinthian converts 
from disaster was more important than making new converts at 
Troas. We know little of Titus, except what can be gathered 
from 2 Cor. and Gal. St Paul evidently had the highest opinion 
of him. Here he calls him 'my brother,' and in viii. 23, 'my 
comrade and fellow- worker in your interest'; in xii. 18 he 
mentions him as one who was utterly incapable of being mean 
or grasping. "EW-qv wv, Titus is the first missionary of purely 
' Greek ' and pagan origin that is known to us (Gal. ii. 3). But 
in N.T. "EXXtjv means no more than ' Gentile,' and we cannot be 
sure of the nationality of Titus. Nevertheless, his acceptability 
among the Corinthians, and his success in the delicate mission 
which St Paul entrusted to him, are evidence of his being by 
race a Greek. K. Lake, Earlier Epp. pp. 146 f., 275 f. Titus is 
mentioned nine times in 2 Cor. and is highly praised. In 
1 Cor. he is not mentioned at all. The reason may be that he 
was the bearer of 1 Cor. Ramsay, Paul the Traveller, p. 284. 

There is no parallel in N.T. to the causal dat. t<3 firj evpeiv, 
' by reason of my not finding ' ; in 1 Thess. iii. 3 the true reading 
is to fi-qSiva <raLve<T$ai, not tw. But examples are found else- 
where ; tw fiy] koll ravTa 7ravTa^ou (jltjo" iv tchs otj/jloo-lols air ok eta 6 ai 
ToVots (Jos. Ant. xiv. x. 1). Moulton quotes from papyri, 
aXXws h\ tw firjOev £x etv ""X^v T0 ^ IlToAc/xaiou. See Winer, p. 413 
for other references. 

&iroTa£d|j.ei/os auTois. The same words occur Mk. vi. 46, the 
only place in N.T. in which the verb occurs outside the writings 
of Paul and Luke, and where avTois is as indefinite as here. In 
N.T. the mid. only is found, and its meaning is 'to bid farewell 
to friends,' in Mk. probably to the disciples, here obviously to 
the converts at Troas; cf. Lk. ix. 61, xiv. 33 ; Acts xviii. j8, 21. 
The word suggests that he left them with reluctance. In 
Josephus it is used of Esther's fasting, rpocpfj ko.1 ttotw ko.1 rjhiaiv 
airora^ap-ivr) (Ant. xi. vi. 8). Hence it comes to mean 'to 
renounce,' as in the baptismal formula, airoTao-o-o/xat t<5 %arava 
Kctl crwracrcro/i-at Xoiotw* d7TOTacrcro/xai croi, Sarava, «ai Tens epyois 
crov. Suicer gives many references. Vulg. has vale facere here 
and in Acts, but in Lk. renunciare. See Index IV. 

effjXOoy els MctKcoovuxv. In Acts xvi. 10, xx. 1 we have i£eX6elv 
eis tt/v Max., and in each case it is needless to ask whether 
i$e\6elv refers to leaving the town or leaving the province. Both 
Asia and Macedonia were Roman provinces. See Index IV. 

In these two graphic verses (12, 13), St Paul once more 
shows the Corinthians how erroneous it was to suppose that his 
not visiting them at the time proposed was due to levity or any 
want of care for them. For their sakes he abandoned a very 


promising field of missionary enterprise. He is so overwhelmed 
with thankfulness at the thought of the ultimate result, that, 
without going on with his narrative, he bursts out into a hymn 
of praise. We can imagine the surprise of his amanuensis, 
as the Apostle suddenly changed his line of thought and 
began to dictate the next four verses. See vii. 5 f. for the 

It is difficult to believe that the man who had just been freed 
from an agony of anxiety as to the effect of a severe letter to the 
Corinthians should forthwith write the severe reproaches and 
sarcasms contained in x.-xiii. 10, and should send them to the 
Corinthians in the same letter in which he tells them of this 
agony of anxiety. 

For t$ M (N 3 A B C* G K) L P have rb rf and X* C 2 have tov rf, 
both of which may safely be disregarded, while D E 17 have iv t<£ /xij, 
which Blass is inclined to adopt. Schmiedel rightly rejects the conjectures 
that vv. 12, 13 originally came after i. 22, or were written by Paul as a 
marginal note to i. 16. The conjectures are quite unnecessary. 

14. Tw 8e 0€w x^P 1 ?- St Paul generally writes x"P ts T< ? ® e( ? 
(viii. 16, ix. 15 ; Rom. vi. 17, vii. 25), but here, as in the similarly 
sudden transition to thanksgiving in 1 Cor. xv. 7, he puts t<5 
©e<3 first with great emphasis. The two thanksgivings should 
be compared. In each case we have a noble digression of irre- 
pressible gratitude. And the gratitude here is evoked by the 
thought of the intense revulsion of feeling from anxiety to joy 
when he met Titus and heard that all was well in Corinth. To 
seek for any other explanation is unintelligent waste of time. 
The remembrance of the victory of God's cause at Corinth leads 
him on to think of the triumph of the Gospel generally, and of 
the very subordinate but glorious share which Apostolic mission- 
aries have in that triumph. He thinks of its progress as a 
magnificent procession moving onwards through the world. 
The victorious commander is God, and the Apostles are — not 
His subordinate generals, but His captives, whom He takes with 
Him and displays to all the world. St Paul thanks God, not 
for 'always causing him to triumph' (AV.), but for 'at all times 
leading him in triumph.' The Apostles were among the first to 
be captured and made instruments of God's glory. When a 
Roman imperator triumphed, clouds of incense arose all along 
the route ; and in the triumph-train of the Gospel the incense of 
increased knowledge of God is ever ascending. The Apostles 
cause this increase of knowledge, and therefore they themselves 
are a fragrance to the glory of God, a fragrance that is life-giving 
to those that are on the road to salvation, but will prove deadly 
to those who are on the other road. The atmosphere of the 
Gospel is one which only those who are prepared to welcome it 


can breathe with safety and delight ; to others it is a peril and 
a pain. 

Some editors make vv. 14-17 a separate paragraph; but the 
connexion with vv. 12, 13 should not be broken. 

■no iray-roTe OpiafiPeu'orri %£?. ' Who at all times leadeth us 
in triumph ' is almost certainly right. It is true that some verbs 
in -euw acquire a causative sense : fiadrjrevw may mean ' I make a 
disciple of' (Mt. xxviii. 19; Acts xiv. 21) as well as 'lam a 
disciple' (Mt. xxvii. 57), and fSaacXevoi may be 'I make to be 
king' (Is. vii. 6) as well as ' I am a king ' (Lk. xix. 14, 27). But 
we do not know that dpiafxfteva) ever means ' I cause to triumph,' 
although that meaning would make good sense here and is 
adopted by various interpreters ; qui facit ut semper triumphemus 
(Beza), qui triumphare nos facit (Calvin). But in Col. ii. 15 
6pia.fiJ3evu) has its usual meaning of ' I lead in triumph,' and that 
is likely to be its meaning here. Earlier writers have nos in 
triumpho circumduco. This is Thdrt.'s explanation ; -rfjSe KaKtio-e 
irepiayei o^Aous rjfxas Tracriv airocpaiva>v. And Chrys. is similar ; t<3 
7r£<n ivoiovvTi irepicpavets. Oecumenius also ; tw cpavepovvrL ^/xas 
Kai Ka.Ta8r)\ov<; iroiovvn.* See on i Cor. iv. 9, where we have a 
similar metaphor, and the leading idea in both places is that of 
exhibiting, displaying to the world. As to the usual signification 
of dpiafjLJSevoi one example may suffice ; Cleopatra, captured by 
Caesar, says to the Manes of Mark Antony, whom she had 
recently buried, fir)?)' iv ifxol Trepu&rjs 6pia.fJLl3ev6fji.evov a-eavTov 
(Plut. Ant. 84). Wetstein gives other examples. See also Field, 
Notes on Translation of the N.T. p. 181, who, however, questions 
the allusion to a Roman triumph. The derivation of Opiafxfios, 
like that of elXiKpivia (i. 12), is a problem, but its meanings are 
well established. Originally a hymn sung in processions in 
honour of Bacchus, it was used as equivalent to the Roman 
triumpkus, probably through similarity of sound and of associa- 
tion. Thus Polybius says that the Senate can add glory even to 
the successes of generals by bringing their achievements in 
tangible form before the eyes of the citizens in what are called 
'triumphs' (vi. xv. 8).f Wetstein well sums up the meaning of 
the passage ; " God leads us round as it were in triumph, so that 
we do not stay in one place or move on to another according to 
our own will, but as seems good to our all-wise Director. The 
man whom He vanquished at Damascus He leads in triumph, 
not at Rome, and just once, but through the whole world, as 

* Suidas gives drjfiocnevcras as the equivalent of dpiafifleiuTas. 

t St Paul uses a number of words to express his relation to God as a 
minister of the Gospel. It is \eirovpyia and diaKovia (ix. 12), wpeafiela (v. 20), 
ffrparela (x. 4), v-rn]pe<xia and olKovofiia (1 Cor. iv. l) ; but this metaphor of 
being led in triumph by Him is the most striking of all. 


long as he lives." See also McFadyen, ad toe, and also on the 
Pauline phrase 'in Christ' in Truth in Religion, pp. 242-259, 
from which much of the next note is taken. 

iv tw XpiffTw. Cf. iv Kvpiw in v. 12. The expressions, iv 

XpiCTTW, iv T(3 X/HtTTW, Iv XpiCTTW It/CTOU, iv Ir)(TOV XptCTTO), iv TO) 

Xptarw 'Itjo-ov, iv KvpLip 'Ir](rov Xpicrrw, occur upwards of fifty 
times in N.T., and nearly all of them are found in the Pauline 
Epp. The exceptions are 1 Pet. v. 10, 14, of which v. 10 is 
doubtful, and both may be due to Pauline influence. Of the 
six forms of expression (which cover all four groups of the 
Pauline Epp.), the first three are very common, while the last 
three are rare, occurring only once or twice each. The differ- 
ences in the forms of expression may not mean much, but the 
total amount may show channels of thought in which the Apostle's 
mind habitually ran. ' In Christ ' or 'in Christ Jesus ' was a 
sphere in which his inner life ever moved. To us the phrase 
has a conventional sound ; it is like a coin much defaced by 
frequent use, and it needs to be taken back to the mint in 
which it was fashioned, the mint of experience. St Paul had 
been persecuting the followers of Jesus as being the worshippers 
of a false and dead Messiah. Experience had confronted him 
with the same Jesus and had compelled him to recognize Him 
as the true Messiah, victorious over death, and able to make 
Himself known to living men. Further experience had proved 
that Jesus the Messiah was one in whom was revealed all that 
men could know about God, and that the way to learn the truth 
about God was to be united with His Christ. Henceforth 
St Paul thought of himself as '■in Christ,' and these words tell 
us of a man with a changed consciousness of life.* The chief 
element of change was a sense of freedom, freedom from the 
bondage of the Law and from the bondage of sin : but it was not 
the only element. ' In Christ ' we have indeed a sphere of 
liberty, but we have also a sphere of work ; for freedom is 
freedom to do something, and to be ' in Christ ' is to be working 
in His service, as fellow-workers not only of Apostles (viii. 23), 
but of God Himself (1 Cor. iii. 9). To be working in this 
atmosphere of liberty is an experience which makes men ' new 
creatures in Christ Jesus' (v. 17), with new estimates of things, 
new aims and hopes, and new powers wherewith to attain and 
fulfil them. 

* " Ask different persons what is the leading doctrine of the Apostle of 
the Gentiles, and you will get different answers. Some will reply, justification 
by faith, others, the liberty of the Gospel. You will find that for once when 
either of these doctrines is referred to, union with Christ will be mentioned 
ten times. They are indeed prominent. But it underlies the whole" 
(Lightfoot, Sermons in St PauPs, p. 227). 


Whether intended to do so or not, iv t<3 Xpio-Tw at the end 
of this clause balances t£> 0ew at the beginning of it. It is for 
being perpetually led in triumph i in Christ' that the Apostle 
gives rapturous thanks to God. And the central word is iravTOTt, 
which is repeated in another form in iv iravTi roVco. Neither in 
time nor in space is there any point at which this being led in 
triumph ceases. 

tt)v 6<r\j.r\v rf]s y^worecos ciutou. Sweet odours often reveal the 
presence of what cannot be seen ; odor ideo, quia sentitur potius 
quam videtur (Pseudo-Primasius). God makes manifest through 
the labours of His ministers the fragrance which a knowledge 
of the Christ who reveals Him always brings. The genitive is 
probably one of apposition ; the knowledge is the fragrance ; cf. 
tov appafiuiva. tov Hv(.vfjiaro<i (i. 22). This metaphor of fragrance 
suggests the penetrating strength of the revelation and the delight 
which it brings to those who receive it. We have here one of 
many passages in N.T. — more common in St John than in St 
Paul — in which we are in doubt whether a pronoun refers to God 
or to Christ. Here avrov may mean either ; but the preceding 
iv tw XpMTTw and the Xpiarov cuwSia which follows make the 
reference to Christ more probable. In any case it is in Christ 
that the knowledge of God is acquired ; iv. 6. 

<J>av€poCn-i 8i' Tjjj.we iv Tiarrl tottw. The choice of the verb is 
determined by ttjs yvwcrews rather than by ttjv 60-p.rjv* As in 
i. 19 and 1 Cor. iii. 5, the Apostles are not independent agents, 
but instruments. Cf. the frequent 81a tov Trpo^-qrov. It is a 
mistake to refer St' rjp.wv to St Paul alone. He is not claiming 
an exclusive revelation. 'Ev ttovtI toVw and Trdv-oTe show that 
there is no special reference to the crisis at Corinth. It is 
fanciful to find in 007*17 any allusion to the anointing of priests, 
or in cpavepovvTL any suggestion of the opening of a box of 
unguents. The verb is very freq. in the Johannine and Pauline 
writings, and occurs nine times in this Epistle. 

15. on Xpiorou euwSia ia^kv tw ©ew. By way of explanation 
(on) the metaphor of the sweet savour is used in a different way 
to express the work of those who preach the Gospel. In spread- 
ing the fragrance of it they are themselves a fragrance to God. 
Here Xpio-Tov is emphatic, as tm ®e<Z is in v. 14, 'For it is of 
Christ that we are a sweet odour to God.' ' Of Christ ' means 
that the fragrance comes from Him, for it is He whom the 
missionaries preach, and such preaching is pleasing to God. 
It is possible that tw ®e<3 is added because of the frequency of 
6o-/xT/ euwScas Kiyuu> or tw Kvptio in LXX. Codex Mosquensis (K) 
omits tw 0ea>, and J. Weiss regards it as an editorial insertion ; 

* In LXX, the most common verbs with 6<rfii}v are irou'iv and SiS^cu. 


but it has point. The preaching is always evcoSid to God, but 
not always to men, to some of whom it breathes death.* It is 
worth noting that the sacrificial phrase oV/ut) evwoYas, so frequent 
in LXX, is not used here, and this makes any allusion to 
sacrifice doubtful. Contrast Eph. v. 2, where see J. A. 
Robinson. In Phil. iv. 18, 6o-/at/v cuioSid?, Ovo-iav Sckt^v is used 
of the gifts of the Philippians to the Apostle. Cf. Ezek. xx. 41 ; 
Mai. iii. 4. In N.T. evcooYa is found only in Paul. See Index IV. 
iv tois aco^ojieVois kcu iv toi$ diroXXufieVois. The repetition of 
the iv shows how different the two classes are; 'among those 
that are being saved (pres. part. ; Lk. xiii. 23 ; Acts ii. 47 ; see 
on 1 Cor. i. 18) and among those who are perishing ' (iv. 3; 
1 Cor. i. 18; 2 Thess. ii. 10). The 'perfective' verb air6Xkv[i.a.i 
(Lk. xv. 17; Mt. viii. 25) gives the idea of something which is 
regarded as certain at the moment of utterance. The d7roAAu- 
fievoi are not merely on the road to airuXeia : a7rwA.eia is 
regarded as their end, unless some complete change takes place. 
J. H. Moulton, Gr. p. 114. The two expressions are far more 
pregnant and significant than ' believers ' f and ' unbelievers.' 
Cf. 1 Cor. x. 9, xv. 18 ; Rom. ii. 12 ; Phil. i. 28, iii. 18. 

16. 6K Oayd-rou els Qdvarov . . . ck £wfjs ets t,ur\v. The classes 
just mentioned are taken in reverse order : chiasmus is freq. in 
these Epistles (iv. 3, vi. 8, ix. 6, x. n, xiii. 3 ; 1 Cor. iii. 17, iv. 
10, viii. 13, xiii. 2). 'A savour from death to death ... a 
savour from life to life.' It may be doubted whether the double 
i< . . . ets ought to be pressed and rigidly interpreted. Perhaps 
nothing more is meant than continuous succession, as when we 
say 'from day to day,' 'from strength to strength.' In such 
cases it would be misleading to insist upon 'out of and 'into' 
as the meaning of ' from ' and ' to,' and then ask, ' out of what ? ' 
and 'into what?' It is easy to see that to some persons the 
Gospel message may be ek Odvcnov. ' What should have been 
to their wealth ' becomes, through their own fault, ' an occasion 
of falling ' lower and lower. But it is not easy to see how the 
Gospel can be eV, in the sense that it proceeds ' out of 

* "Wherever Christ's servants are, there should be fragrance. A 
Christian without this redolence is as impossible as incense whose presence is 
unfelt by those who come near it. It penetrates the atmosphere and compels 
attention ; — so plainly that their presence is, as it were, a perpetual challenge 
to their environment, repelling some, attracting others. They constitute a 
living standard, which compels men involuntarily to expose the inner quality 
of their life" (McFadyen, pp. 274 f.). 

t Other terms used by St Paul in reference to the fate of unbelievers are 
0dvaros (Rom. vi. 23, viii. 6), cpdopd (Gal. vi. 8), 6pyq (Rom. ii. 5, 8, v. 9 ; 
1 Thess. i. 10, v. 9). But he is much more concerned to remind his readers 
that believers can be sure of salvation in Christ than to discuss the future of 
those who refuse to believe on Him. 


death.' Progress from one evil condition to another is what is 
meant, movement from bad to worse. They were in a condition 
that was virtually fatal when the Gospel came to them, and its 
effect was to confirm that fatal tendency. The idea of pesti- 
lential air coming from a corpse is not required. Nor need we, 
with Bousset, bring in the oriental idea that the perfumes of 
heaven, or other strong smells (Tobit viii. 2, 3), will drive 
demons back to hell. Chrys. does not help us with the remark 
that ointment is said to suffocate swine, nor Thdrt. with the 
popular belief that sweet odours drive away vultures. Evidence 
of this curious belief is given by Wetstein. It is better to abide 
by the comment of Gregor. Nyss. ; Kara rrjv Trpoaovcrav l/cacn-to 
SidOccriv rj £a>07roios iyevero r) Oavar-q^opos rj tvirvoia. So also 
Jerome {Ep. cxx. 11); Nominis Christi in omni loco bonus odor 
sumus Deo et praedicationis nostrae lo?ige lateque spirat fragrantia. 
Sed odor noster qui per se bonus est, virtute eorum qui suscipiunt 
sive non suscipiunt in vitam transit aut mortem, ut qui c?-ediderint 
salvi fiant, qui vero non crediderint pereant. Schoettgen and 
Wetstein quote Jewish sayings to the effect that the words of 
the Law are medicine to the wise and poison to fools. As 
regards the XpLo-rov evwSta, Saul of Tarsus and Paulus the 
Proconsul illustrate the one side, Simon Magus and Elymas 
Magus the other side. 

tea! irpos Taura ti's iKaeog ; ' Well, if that is true (see on v. 2), 
who is sufficient for these responsibilities?' What kind of a 
minister ought he to be who preaches a Gospel which may prove 
fatal to those who come in contact with it? Vulg. has et ad 
haec quis tam idoneus ? The tarn has no authority in any Greek 
text, and it makes the question still more surprising in form ; 
' Who is so competent as we are ? ' Quis tain may be a mistake 
for quisnam. 

We do not know enough about the situation to see why 
St Paul prepares the way for his elaborate vindication of the 
Apostolic office and of the Gospel (iii. i-vi. 10) by flashing out 
this question in a way which, even without the tam, is almost 
offensive, and is certainly very abrupt. Augustine and Herveius 
interpret the question as meaning, ' Who is competent to under- 
stand these things ? ' which does not fit the context. ' Who is 
equal to such responsibilities?' is the meaning. The answer is 
not stated, but is clearly implied in the next verse ; ' We are, 
for, etc' 

4k is omitted in both places by DEFGK L, Latt. Arm. ; probably 
because of the difficulty of seeing how Xpiarov euudla could be 4k davdrov, 
Goth, has the second 4k, which is easy, and omits the first, which is 
difficult. We must read 4k in both places with KABC, Copt. Aeth., 
Clem-Alex. Orig. 


17. ou yap a>s ol ttoXXou The yap indicates the reply 
to the question just asked. ' We are sufficient for these things, 
for we are not as the many teachers.' Here we have for the 
first time in the Epistle a passage that is manifestly polemical. 
The Apostle's opponents may have been in his thoughts in 
earlier places, but here it is quite certain that he is censuring 
other teachers for doing what the Apostle and his colleagues 
never do ; they garble the word of God, in order to make the 
preaching of it more profitable to themselves. There are 
similar polemical hits in iii. 1, iv. 2, v. 12, while x.-xiii. teems 
with them, e.g. x. 12, 18, xi. 12, 13, 20, xii. 14. With d>? 01 
ttoXXol comp. w? rtces (iii. 1). Here, as in Rom. v. 15, 19, AV. 
ignores the article before ttoXXol and translates 'many ' instead 
of ' the many.' But we need not give the article its strongest 
force and make ol ttoXXol mean ' the majority,' although it is 
likely that at Corinth the majority of the teachers were mis- 
leading the converts, and that the Judaizers on the one hand, 
and the advocates of Gentile licence on the other, far out- 
numbered the Apostle, Silvanus, and Timothy with whatever 
helpers they may have had. The meaning here seems to be 
' the mob of teachers,' without comparing them in number with 
the Apostle and his colleagues. On the opposition to St Paul 
see K. Lake, Earlier Epp. pp. 219 f. In what sense he claims 
LKavoTr]? for himself and his fellow-workers he tells us at once 
in iii. 5, 6 ; none are sufficient, excepting those whom God has 
made so, and it is evident whom He has made sufficient, viz., 
those who preach His word as He would have it preached. 

Ka-n-TjXeu'oi'Tes rbv \6yov tou 0eou. 'Adulterating the word of 
God.' The participle belongs to lo-fxiv. not to 01 ttoXXol : ' We 
are not people who adulterate the word.' Vulg. has adulterantes 
for KaTvrjX€vovTe<; here and for SoAowres iv. 2. 'Adulterate' 
suggests more clearly than 'corrupt' (AV., RV.) that the corrup- 
tion is done for the sake of some miserable personal gain. The 
word occurs nowhere else in Biblical Greek, but KaTrqXos, 'a 
retail dealer,' occurs twice in LXX. In Is. i. 22 we have 01 
KaTrrjXoi aov fiio-yowi rov oTvov vSolti, 'Thy hucksters mix their 
wine with water,' in order to cheat the buyers; and Ecclus. 
xxvi. 29, ov SiKaito^Verai KaTrrjXos dirb dyaaprtas, 'An huckster 
shall not be judged free from sin.' St Paul may have had Is. 
i. 22 in his mind in using Kair-qXtvovTes. The Talmud counts 
the huckster as one whose business involves robbery, and Deut. 
xxx. 13 is interpreted to mean that the Law cannot be found 
among hucksters or merchants. Plato says, " Knowledge is the 
food of the soul ; and we must take care that the sophist does 
not deceive us when he praises what he sells, like those who 
sell the food of the body, the merchant and the hawker (kutt^Xos); 


for they praise all their wares, without knowing what is good or 
bad for the body. In like manner those who carry about items 
of knowledge, to sell and hawk (Ka.7rr)\<:vovT£<;) them to any one 
who is in want of them, praise them, all alike, though neither 
they nor their customers know their effect upon the soul" 
(Protag. 313 D). Lucian says that philosophers dispose of their 
wares just as hucksters (Kd-n-qXoi) do, most of them giving bad 
measure after adulterating and falsifying what they sell (Her- 
motimus, 59) : /ca^Aos is frequently used of a retailer of wine. 
Other illustrations in Wetstein. 

The expression, ' the word of God,' 6 Adyos tov ©eov, is very 
freq. in N.T., nearly forty times in all, without counting the 
expression, which is also freq., 'the word of the Lord,' 6 Adyos 
tov Kvpiov. It is specially common in Acts (twelve times) and 
in the Pauline Epp. (iv. 2 ; 1 Cor. xiv. 36 ; Rom. ix. 6 ; Col. i. 
25 ; 1 Thess. ii. 13 ; 2 Tim. ii. 9 ; Tit. ii. 5). Its usual meaning, 
as here, is the Gospel as preached, the contents of the new 
religion, as set forth in the O.T. and in the life and teaching of 
Christ. Often 6 Adyos, without tov ©eov, is used in much the 
same sense, and in interpreting it in the Pauline Epp. we must 
bear in mind 1 Cor. ii. 2, ' I determined not to know anything 
among you, save Jesus Christ, and Him crucified,' so that the 
preaching of the word means the preaching of Jesus Christ, 
crucified and raised again. It was this Adyos that was being 
adulterated at Corinth. See J. H. Bernard, Past Epp- pp 
74 f. ; Harnack, Constitution and Law of the Church, pp. 3321". 

As to the manner of the adulteration, omnis doctor qui 
auctoritatem Scripturarum, per quam potest audientes corripere, 
vertit ad gratiam et ita loquitur ut non corrigat sed delectet audientes, 
vinum Scripturarum violat et corrumpit sensu suo (Jerome on 
Is. i. 22). As Chrys. puts it, such teachers to. airuv dva/xiyvvovo-i 

TOIS #«OlS. 

dXA' ws H eiXiKpmas, d\V rf>s ek ©eou. ' But as from sincerity, 
nay, as from God.' Sincerity (see on i. 12) is the internal 
source, and God is the external source, of what the missionaries 
preach. Their message rings true, for it comes from an honest 
and good heart (Lk. viii. 15), and is inspired by the faithful God 
(i. 18) who cannot lie (Tit. i. 2). Cf. ov yap v/ueis io-re ol 
AaAovvTes, dAAd to Tryeu/xa tov 7rarpos v/xotv to AaAovv iv v/xiv 
(Mt. x. 20). The <I>s means ' as any one acts who acts i$ eiA., 
€K ©.' The repetition of dAAd gives emphasis in an ascending 
scale ; vii. 11 ; 1 Cor. vi. 11 ; ws as in Mt. vii. 49 ; Jn. i. 14. 

KorcVayTi Oeou. Cf. xii. 19; Rom. iv. 17, etc. Neither 
KarivavTi nor KaTevwTuov is classical ; both are found several 
times in N.T. and LXX. There is no dAA' d>s before kolt. ®., 
and there should be no comma either before or after these 


words ; ' but as from God in the sight of God speak we in 
Christ.' God is the source of what they preach and the witness 
of it ; what greater guarantee of truthfulness could there be ? 

iv XptcTTw. See on v. 14. Neither Christi nomine (Grot.), 
nor secundum Christum (Calv.), nor de Christo (Beza), but, quite 
literally, in Ciiristo (Vulg.) ; it is ' in Christ,' as members of His 
Body, that ministers of the Gospel do their work, in the power 
that flows from union with Him. The branches bear fruit by 
being in the vine, and in no other way (Jn. xv. 4). 

In this last verse (17), St Paul states both negatively and 
positively some leading characteristics of the minister who is 
equal to the responsibility of delivering a message which is so 
crucial that it may determine, not only the salvation of those 
who are already seekers after truth, but also the ruin of those who 
have set their faces against it. Such a minister is not one who, 
in order to win converts on easy terms, waters down the claims 
which the Gospel makes upon those who accept it. He is one 
who teaches with the openness and fulness which come from 
the God who inspires him ; and in God's presence he works as 
befits a member of Christ. He has, as the motive of all that he 
does or says, not his own gain or glory or satisfaction, but the 
desire to serve God by causing others to perceive the sweetness 
and the saving power of knowing something of Him. St Paul's 
own experiences lie at the root of all this. He never forgets 
how Saul the persecutor was changed into Paul the Apostle. 

oi ttoWo'l (>%ABCK, def Vulg. Copt. Aeth.) rather than ol Xoiirot 
(DEFGL, g Syrr. Arm.). FG, defgVulg. Copt. Goth, omit the second 
ujs. F G, d e f g omit the second d\\'. In all three cases, as in that of els to 
evay/e'Xiov in v. 12, D E do not agree with d e. Karivavn (K* A B C P 17) 
rather than Karevdnrwi' (K 3 D E F G K L), The second Qeou without rov 
(K*ABCD* 17) rather than with rod (K 3 D- and 3 E F G K L P). On 
the difference between Beds and 6 Geds see Westcott, additional note on 
I Jn. iv. 2. 


The first three verses, like i. 12-14, are transitional. They 
are closely connected with the preceding expression of thankful- 
ness and confidence, for £olvtov<; crvvuTTavuv clearly looks back to 
i$ ciAiKpii'ias . . . XaXovfxev. But fx-q ^pijcrofxev /c.r.A. equally 
clearly anticipates irz-KoLQ^viv roiavr-qv, and there is more pause 
between the chapters than between vv. 3 and 4. These three 
verses, therefore, are best regarded as introductory to the 
Apostle's vindication, not only of himself, but of the high office 
which he holds, and of the message which he is commissioned 
to deliver. 

The first verse gives us further insight into the opposition 


which confronted St Paul at Corinth. Evidently one of the 
charges brought against him was that he was always asserting 
himself and singing his own praises, — of course because nobody 
else praised him. A man who has often to speak with authority 
is open to this kind of criticism, and there are passages in i Cor. 
which would lend themselves to such a charge; ii. 6-16, iii. 10, 
iv. 3, 14-21, ix. 1-6, xi. 1, xiv. 18. But more probably it was 
the severe letter, of which x.-xiii. may be a part, which provoked 
this criticism. There is plenty of material for such criticism in 
those four chapters. Titus, no doubt, had reported the existence 
of these cavillings, and perhaps he knew that they had not been 
completely silenced. The Apostle does not assert that they 
still exist, but he meets the possibility of their existence with a 
tactful question. Then he still more tactfully asks a question 
which can be turned against his opponents. Finally, he makes a 
statement which is likely to go home to the hearts of the 
Corinthians and win those who are still wavering back to their 
devotion to him. The readiness with which the passionate out- 
burst of ii. 14-17 is turned to account for the vindication of the 
Apostolic office is very remarkable. 

III. 1-3. / have no desire to commend myself. The only 
testimonial wliich I need I have in you> and all the world 
can read it. 

*In claiming to be competent to deliver a message which 
involves the momentous alternative of ultimate life and death, do 
I seem to be commending myself once more? I was obliged to 
assert myself in my last letter, but I have no need to do so now. 
There are people who bring letters of recommendation to you, 
and ask you to give them such ; and no doubt they require 
them. 2 But what need have I of such things, when you your- 
selves are my letter of recommendation written on my very heart, 
a letter which the whole world can get to know and construe, 
wherever I go and tell of you ? 3 It is made plain to all that 
you are a letter composed by Christ and published by me ; 
written not with the blackness of perishable ink, but with the 
illuminating Spirit of the living God ; written not, like the Law, 
on dead tables of stone, but on the living tables of sensitive 
human hearts. 

1. 'Apx<Ve0a TnJXir eau-rous fsjvitn&veiv ; * Are we beginning 
again to commend ourselves? ' It makes no difference whether 
we take 7raA.1v with ap^o/xeOa or with crvvio-rdveiv. The sentence 
is certainly a question. Taking it as a statement involves a 


clumsy insertion in order to get a connexion with r\ fir] k.t.X., 
such as, 'Or if you object to our commending ourselves, I reply 
zvith this question, Do we need, etc' 'Apxo^Oa is a sort of echo 
of the supposed criticism ; ' He is beginning to belaud himself 
again.' The irdXiv plainly shows that St Paul is aware that this 
charge of self-praise had been made. He alludes to it again 
iv. 5, v. 12, vi. 4. It may have been an insult offered to him by 
6 ttStx^o-a?, the great offender ; but, whoever started it, it was 
accepted as true by some of the Corinthians. There are passages 
1 Cor. which would give a handle to such a charge; ix. 15, xiv. 
18, xv. 10; cf. iv. 16, vii. 40, xi. 1 ; 2 Cor. i. 12. 

The question may be a direct reference to rwv eavTovs 
(rvviarTavovTtov (x. 12) and to v<f}' v/xojv <TvvtcrTa<r6ai (xii. n). If 
they are, we have further evidence that x.-xiii. is part of the 
severe letter written between 1 Cor. and 2 Cor. i.-ix. These 
three verses are strangely out of harmony with the last four 
chapters, if those chapters are part of the same letter : they are 
natural enough, if those chapters had been previously sent to 
Corinth and had occasioned, or intensified, the charge that St 
Paul was too fond of praising himself. See Rendall, p. 65. 

We find crwio-raveij' or, 'to bring together,' used 
in two senses in N.T. (1) 'To bring persons together,' to 
introduce or commend them to one another; iv. 2, v. 12, vi. 4, 
x. 12, 18; Rom. xvi. 1. (2) 'To put two and two together,' 
to prove by argument and evidence; vii. 11 ; Gal. ii. 18; Rom. 
v. 8. This difference of meaning is not clearly marked in LXX, 
but in Susann. 61, Theod. has o-Wcmyo-ev of Daniel's proving 
that the elders have borne false witness. See on Rom. iii. 5. 
In these two senses the verb is peculiar to Paul in N.T. and is 
found chiefly in this Epistle. It occurs elsewhere only Lk. ix. 
32 and 2 Pet. iii. 5, in quite other senses. The position of the 
reflexive pronoun is to be noted. In this Epistle we have 
iavTovs crvv., in a bad sense, iii. 1, v. 12, x. 12, 18; and crvv. 
iavTovs, in a good sense, iv. 2, vi. 4, vii. n. 

t) pi xpuf^ofxei' <3s nves; 'Or is it the fact that we need, as 
some people do?' This side-stroke at the false teachers is very 
effective; he alludes to the 01 ttoWol of ii. 17 and others like 
them. St Paul often speaks of his opponents as 'certain 
persons,' nves (x. 2 ; 1 Cor. iv. 18, xv. 12 ; Gal. i. 7 ; 1 Tim. i. 
3, 19). The fj.ij, implying a negative answer, throws back its force 
on the previous question, and shows that the suggested criticism 
is unjust. Harnack thinks that the Apostles required a fresh 
commission for each missionary expedition. That was clearly 
not the case with St Paul. 

o-uoTcmKcjy eirioroXwy iTpos ufxas t] i% ofiou'. These words tell 
us three things : that the Judaizers had brought letters of 


recommendation from some one; that they had already left 
Corinth ; and that before leaving they had obtained, or had 
tried to obtain, letters of recommendation from the Corinthian 
Church. We know nothing, however, as to who gave recom- 
mendations to the Judaizers ; perhaps leading persons in Palestine 
did so. It is not likely that they had obtained credentials from 
any of the Twelve or from the Church at Jerusalem.* Letters 
of this kind were commonly brought by travelling brethren as 
evidence that they were Christians and honest persons. The 
Epistle to Philemon is a o-ixxraTiK?) i-n-Lo-roXy for Onesimus ; and 
eAa/?cr£ ivToXds, 'Eav e\.6rj 7rpo? v[xa<;, Se'£ao-#e avrov (Col. iv. 10) 
probably refers to a previous letter of recommendation. St Paul 
sometimes commends individuals to the Church whom he 
addresses; e.g. Titus and his companion (viii. 22 f.), Timothy 
(1 Cor. xvi. 10 f.), Phoebe (Rom. xvi. 1). Cf. Acts xv. 25 f., 
xviii. 27; 2 Jn. 12. Papyri yield examples; Deissmann {Light 
Jrom the Ancient East, p. 226) says that the letters in Epistolo- 
graphi Graeci, Hercher, pp. 259, 699, begin, like Rom. xvi., 
with crvvLo-Trjfxi. Suicer (ii. 11 94) gives instances of such letters 
in the early Church. The Latins called them epistolae com- 
mendaticiae or literae formatae. How necessary they were is 
shown by Lucian, who says that an adroit unscrupulous fellow, 
who has seen the world, has only to get among these simple- 
hearted Christians, and he can soon make a fortune out of them 
(Perigr. Prot. 13). Diogenes condemned ypd^fiaTa o-vcrrart/ca 
as useless ; nothing but personal experience of men, he said, 
was of any real value (Arrian, Epict. 11. iii. 1). This, however, 
was what existed between St Paul and the Corinthians ; and it 
was iracr^s a-vo-TariKWTepov eTTL(TTokr}<;. Cf. Acts xxviii. 21, and 
see Harnack, Mission and Expansion, i. p. 328. 

If we are right in inferring from this verse that the Judaizers 
had left Corinth, we have a strong argument for the view that 
x.-xiii. was written before i.-ix., for in x.-xiii. the Judaizers are 
denounced as a present plague in Corinth. 

If the reading el fi-q be adopted, we must translate, ' unless it possibly 
be the case that we are needing, etc.' ; and we must interpret this as a sar- 
casm ; ' unless it be the case that we are so unable to get recommendations 
that we are compelled to praise ourselves.' This sarcasm shows that the 

* The relation of the Judaizers to the Twelve is unknown to us, as also 
are the details of their teaching. " It was the life, not the teaching of the 
original Apostles which appeared to support the Judaizers. They continued 
in attendance upon the Temple services. To a superficial observer, they 
were simply pious Jews. They were not simply pious Jews. But the Judaizers 
failed to penetrate beneath the outward appearance. Because the original 
Apostles continued to observe the Jewish Law, the Judaizers supposed that 
legalism was of the essence of their religion" (J. G. Machen, Princeton 
Biblical Studies, p. 555). 


charge of St Paul's praising himself is ridiculous. So clumsy an interpre- 
tation need not be accepted, for the balance of evidence is decisive against 
el fj.rj. KBCDEFG, Latt. and other versions have 7) /xtj, A K L P, Arm. 
have el /jltj. BD 17 have ffwiardv, FG cvviardvai, all other witnesses 
vvviuraveiv. A D have wvrrep rives, other authorities cis rives. D E F K 
L P, d e Syrr. add crvcrrariKuv after ^ v/j-wv, and F G add crv<rr. e'lrioroXQv. 
Omit both words with KABC 17, 67**, Vulg. Copt. Arm. Aeth., Chrys. 

2. rj emoroXr) YjfAwe uixels tore. The asyndeton is effective, 
and the two pronouns are in telling juxtaposition. The con- 
vincing statement is flashed out with emphatic suddenness and 
brevity ; ' The letter of recommendation which we have to show 
are ye.'* No other testimonial is needed, either to the Corin- 
thians or from them. They know what Apostolic teaching has 
done for them ; and all the world can see this also. Their 
changed life is an object lesson to themselves and to all 
outside ; and both they and the outsiders know how this change 
has been produced; it is writ large in the history of the founda- 
tion of a Church in such a city as Corinth. The Apostle appeals, 
not to written testimony, which may be false, but to the experi- 
ence of all who know the facts. There seems to be an allusion 
to this passage in the Ep. of Polycarp (xi. 3), where he says 
"among whom the blessed Paul laboured, who were his letters 
in the beginning." See on iv. 14 and viii. 21. 

The details which follow are neither quite clear nor quite 
harmonious. St Paul dictates bold metaphors, in order to set 
forth the convincing character of his credentials, and he does 
not stop to consider whether they can all be combined in one 
consistent picture. ' Written in our hearts ' does not agree well 
with ' read by all men,' and yet both were true. The Christian 
life of the Corinthians was impressed in thankful remembrance 
on the hearts of those who had converted them, and it was 
recognized by all who knew them. It was also impressed on the 
hearts of the Corinthians themselves. See on 1 Cor. ix. 2. 
Experience showed to the teachers that their ministry had been 
blessed by God ; the existence of the Corinthian Church con- 
vinced them of this, and they could appeal to that conviction 
with a good conscience. Experience also taught the world at 
large that the men who had produced this change at Corinth 
were no charlatans ; and it had taught the Corinthians themselves 
the same truth. 

* " Observe the remarkable expression of the Apostle ; his letter ! He 
was writing on men's hearts ; and each man here is writing something ; and 
his writing lasts for ever. Pilate uttered a deeper truth than he thought when 
he said, ' What I have written, I have written.' For deeds are permanent 
and irrevocable : that which you have written on life is for ever. You cannot 
blot it out : there it is for ever ; your Epistle to the world, to be known and 
read of all men " (F. W. Robertson). 


crycypajjifjieVY] ei> Tats Kapouus rtfxwv. There is probably no 
allusion to Aaron ' bearing the names of the children of Israel 
in the breastplate (pouch) of judgment upon his heart, when 
he goeth in unto the holy place, for a memorial before the 
Lord continually ' (Ex. xxviii. 36). The idea of intercession is 
foreign to this passage. ' Written on our hearts ' suggests to 
us the idea of deep affection, and Chrys. interprets the words of 
the love to the Corinthians which causes Paul to sing their 
praises in other Churches. But it may be doubted whether this 
is the exact meaning of the words. The context seems to require 
some such meaning as this ; ' Our own hearts tell us that you 
are our recommendation, and everybody else can see this also.' 
The compound ivyeyp. implies that this fact cannot slip from 
our hearts, cannot be forgotten ; cf. fjv iyypd(pov <rv p,vqp.oa-iv 
SeA-rois cppevwv (Aesch. Pr. V. 789) ; and l-rriypaxpov liii to irAaYos 
t^s Kaphas crov (Prov. vii. 3). The plur. ' hearts ' probably 
implies that other teachers are included with the Apostle ; 
contrast 'our heart' in vi. n. The 'heart' in Scripture is the 
inner man, the centre of personality, known only to God; Rom. 
v. 5, viii. 27 ; Eph. i. 18, iii. 17 ; 1 Pet. iii. 4 ; Rev. ii. 23. See 
art. ' Heart ' in Hastings, DB. and D CG. ; Milligan on 1 Thess. 
ii. 4. 

Lietzmann and Bousset would read vfiCiv for tj/jluv with J* 17 after 
icapdlais. Confusion between the two pronouns is often found in MSS., 
and might easily be made at the outset in dictating, the pronunciation being 

' My testimonial is written in your hearts and can be read by all, for all 
can see that you are Christians.' Schmiedel and J. Weiss would omit the 
whole clause as a gloss. 

yu'wo-KOjj.eVT) kcu dyayivwo-KojAei/r]. Note the change from perf. 
to pres. participles. It was written long ago and the writing 
still remains, and this is continually becoming known and being 
read. See on i. 13 respecting the word-play* and the meaning 
of a.vayivwo~Kop.ivr). Some suggest that these participles are in 
the wrong order, for one reads a letter before one knows its 
purport. Has St Paul been careless, or has he sacrificed sense 
to sound ? Probably neither : one recognizes the hand-writing 
before one reads the letter ; at any rate, one perceives that it is 
a letter before one reads it. 

utto TTdvTon> dt'OpcoTTui'. Another blow, whether intended or 
not, to his opponents, whose testimonials were not published. 

3. <|>ai'epouaei'oi. The construction is continued from v/xeis 
tare, and the meaning is continued from avayivwo-KOfjLevr]. ' Ye 

* Cf. fi-qbev ipyafo/itvovs d\Xd irepiepyai,~oiJ.£vovs (2 Thess. iii. Ii); /ii) 
iirep<ppoveiv nap' 8 8ei <ppovdv (Rom. xii. 3); yivwviceis a avaytviiffKcts (Acts 
viii. 30). 



are our epistle, read by all, for you are being made manifest.' 
The idea of ' making manifest ' is freq. in this part of the letter; 
iv. 10, ii, v. 10, ii, vii. 12. 

emoToXri XpioroG. Is the genitive subjective, objective, or 
possessive? Probably the first, and in that case it may be 
another hit at the false teachers; 'their testimonials have little 
authority, but ours were written by Christ.'* Or he may be 
merely disclaiming all credit ; ' Christ is the agent to whom the 
composition of the letter is due; I am only the instrument.' 
Chrys. takes the genitive as objective ; ' a letter which tells of 
Christ.' Some moderns make it possessive; 'ye are a letter 
belonging to Christ,' i.e. • ye are Christians.' 

8iaicoi'r]0€i<ra i><$ r\}iQ>v. We need not seek an exact interpreta- 
tion and ask whether, if Christ is the author of the letter, cW. 
vcf>' rjfxuv means that St Paul was His amanuensis, or that he 
carried the letter to its destination.! The metaphor is not 
thought out in detail. The words mean that St Paul and his 
colleagues were Christ's ministers in bringing the letter of 
recommendation into existence by converting the Corinthians. 
See on i Cor. iii. 5, iv. 1. We have vtto here, not, as in i. 19, 
iii. 4, the more usual Sid. Chrys. understands SiaKovrjOeicra. of St 
Paul's preparation of their hearts ; ' for as Moses hewed the 
stones and tables, so we your souls.' Per minis terium nostruvi 
scrip sit Chris tus in vobis Jidem spent caritatem ac reliqua bo?ia 
(Herveius). We have the passive haKovuaOai, as here, in viii. 19, 
of the service rendered ; in Mk. x. 45 it is used of the person 
who receives the service. 

ou fieXcm. Cf. 2 Jn. 12; 3 Jn. 13; Jer. xxxvi. 18. See artt. 
' Ink ' and ' Writing ' in Hastings, DP., atramentum and tabulae 
in Diet, of Ant. Ink could be blotted out (Ex. xxxii. 33) or 
washed off (Num. v. 23, where see Gray's note). Non atramento 
scriptum est, id est non ita ut possit deleri, sicut ea quae atramento 
scribuntur ; sed Spiritu Dei vivi, id est ut aeternaliter et vivaciter 
in cordbus nostris aut vestris permaneat, sicut ille qui scripsit vivit 
et aeternus est (Herveius). See the beautiful passage in Plato, 
Phaedrus, 276 C, in which it is said of the good teacher, that he 
does not much care to write his words in perishable ink, tracing 
dumb letters which cannot adequately express the truth, but 
finds a congenial soul, and then with knowledge sows words 
which can help themselves and him who planted them, and can 
bear fruit in other natures, making the seed everlasting and the 
possessor of it happy. 

* Christum facit auctorem, se vero organum, ut calumniatores intelligant 
sibi cum Christo esse negotium, si maligne contra obtrectare pergant (Calvin). 

t See Swete, The Holy Spirit in the N.T., pp. 193 f. ; Deissmann, Light 
from the Anc. East, p. 379. 



TTf€u|j.aTt 0eou £wi/tos. See on i Cor. xii. 3 and Rom. viii. g, 
14. The epithet £wi"ros is not otiose; the Spirit is an efficient 
force, and the letter which it produces consists of living persons. 
Moreover, the epithet accentuates the contrast between the 
abiding illumination of the Spirit and the perishable blackness of 
inanimate ink. In the Pauline Epp. and Hebrews, ®eos £wv is 
frequent; in Mt. xvi. 16, xxvi. 63 ; Rev. xv. 7, we have the less 
common 6 ©eos 6 (wi/. For the difference see Westcott on Heb. 
iii. 12. 

ouk ce ir\a£!i/ \i0ieais. This again is not quite in harmony. 
It would have agreed better with the metaphor of a letter to have 
said 'not on parchment' (lv p.ep.f3pdvai<;, 2 Tim. iv. 13), or 'not 
on papyrus' (ev x°-P T U> 2 J n - I2 )- But the Apostle has already 
in his mind the contrast between the Mosaic and the Christian 
ministry (vv. 4-1 1), and he therefore introduces here 'tables of 
stone' (Ex. xxxi. 18, xxxiv. 1) rather than ordinary writing 
materials. He suggests that the living 'letter of Christ,' which 
is his testimonial, is superior, not only to the formal letters 
brought by the Judaizing teachers, but even to the tables at 
Sinai. Those tables were indeed written with the finger of God ; 
yet they remained an external testimony, and they had no power 
of themselves to touch men's hearts ; whereas the credentials of 
the Christian teachers are internal, written on the yielding hearts 
both of themselves and of their converts. The Corinthians 
cannot disregard a commendation written on their own hearts. 
The law written externally is a terror to evil-doers ; the internal 
law is an inspiration to those who do well. As soon as the 
Apostle's thought had reached the ' tables of stone,' the current 
contrast between 'the heart of stone' and a 'heart of flesh,' t^v 
KapStav ttjv XiOivrfV and Kap. crapxivTjv (Ezek. xi. 19, xxxvi. 26; 
cf. Jer. xxxi. t,^, xxxii. 38), would easily come in to strengthen the 

Omitting details, which give fulness but somewhat disturb 
the metaphor, we have as the main thought this; 'That which 
Christ by the Spirit of God has written on your hearts is 
recorded in our hearts as commending us to all mankind.' 
Once more (see on i. 22) we can perceive how the elements of 
Trinitarian doctrine lie at the base of the Apostle's mind and 
influence his thought and language; cf. Rom. xv. 16. 

iv irXa^li' KapSiais aapKiVais. This difficult expression is the 
better attested reading: KapSias is a manifest correction, for no 
one would alter KapSi'as to KapStais. Unless with WH. and 
Wendland we suspect a primitive error, such as the accidental 
insertion of the second irXa^lv, we must accept the harder 
reading and take /capSt'ai? in apposition with irXa^iv. Two ways 
are possible, according as crap/aVais is taken with -n-Xaiiv or with 


KapStais. The former is very awkward; 'on tables (viz. hearts) 
of flesh.' It does not follow, because o-ap/aWs balances \16tva1s, 
and AifliVcus agrees with irXa^iv, that therefore o-apnivais agrees 
with ir\a£iv. But Syr-Hark, takes it so ; 'on tables of flesh — on 
hearts.' ' On tables (which are) hearts of flesh ' is less awkward, 
but not pleasing. In dictating, St Paul might easily utter the 
words slowly in the order in which we have them, lv -rrXa^iv — 
KapSiais — <rap/avais. But the proposal to omit ir\a£iv is 
attractive. Both Ai&Ws and crap/aWs indicate the material of 
the TrXa^tv, which in each case has iv, while the instruments 
(peAavi, irvevjjiari) have no preposition; (rap/a^cus (i. 12, x. 4; see 
on 1 Cor. iii. 1) would indicate quality, especially ethical quality. 

B, f Vulg. insert ko.1 before ivyeypaixixivq. Khas yeypa/n/xivri. KapdLais 
(NABCDEGLP, Syr-Hark., Eus.) rather than napSLas (F K, Latt. 
Syr-Pesh. Copt. Aeth. Arm. Goth., Iren. and perhaps Orig. Did. Cyr- 

III. 4-11. The Superiority of the New Ministration to 

the Old. 

God alone made us competent to be ministers of the new 
covenant, which in splendour immeasurably surpasses the old. 

4 This confidence, that you are a letter composed by Christ 
testifying to the effectiveness and validity of our commission, is 
no fiction of my own invention : it comes through Christ, and it 
looks reverently to God as its source. 6 It is not a confidence 
that of ourselves we are competent to form any estimate of 
results, as though we made ourselves sufficient. All our com- 
petence to form such an estimate has its source in God. 6 For 
of course He did not leave us incompetent of serving Him when 
He called us to be ministers of His new covenant with men, — a 
covenant which consists, not of a lifeless written code, but of 
an active penetrating Spirit. For the written code imposes a 
sentence of death, but the Spirit breathes new life. 

7 Now if the Law's dispensation of death, which was a thing 
of letters graven on stones, was inaugurated with such dazzling 
manifestations of glory that the Children of Israel could not look 
steadily at the brightness on the face of Moses, a brightness 
which was already beginning to fade away, 8 how much greater 
must be the glory of the dispensation of the Spirit ! 9 For, 
surely, if the dispensation which sentences men to death can be 
a manifestation of God's glory, then the dispensation which offers 
righteousness as a gift to men must be a far greater manifesta- 


tion. 10 For the former may be said to have had no real glory, 
because its glory pales and vanishes before the overwhelming 
glory of the latter. n For if that which comes and soon passes 
away has somewhat of glory, much more must that which for 
ever abides be arrayed in glory. 

4. ri€TT-oi0T}crii' 8e ToiauTr]c e'xojiee. 'And confidence of this 
kind we possess through Christ to God-ward.' • He refers to the 
7r€.iroi0y}<Ti<s just expressed, viz. that he has no need of any 
credentials other than the testimony which the existence of the 
Corinthian Church bears : that fact by itself suffices to prove his 
Apostleship. But he at once hastens to show that in this 
confidence there is no self-praise and no claim to credit ; for it is 
conditioned in two ways which entirely exclude vain-glorious 
thoughts ; it is through Christ, and it is towards God. In LXX 
7T€7roi0r](ri<; occurs only in the taunt of Rabshakeh, Ti tj -n-eir. avrrj 
rjv ireVoitfas; but it is fairly freq. in other versions. It is found 
six times in Paul and nowhere else in N.T. See Index IV. 

8ia tou XpioroG. ' Therefore not through any innate power of 
our own. Apart from Him we could do nothing (Jn. xv. 5). 
He gave us the power that we have' — tovto fjfuv SeScoKoVos to 
6d P ao% (Thdrt). 

irpos Toy ©eoV. Erga Deam, which is the second security 
against boastfulness. 'The quiet confidence which gives us 
strength (Is. xxx. 15) is not directed towards anything earthly as 
the ultimate source of strength, but towards God' (Rom. xv. 16). 
The idea is that of looking towards the person on whom one 
relies. This use of 77-po's is rare ; the usual prepositions after 
Treiroi8r]crL's are cfc (viii. 22) and iv (Phil. iii. 4), and after ireKoi- 
Oevat, which is very freq. in N.T. and LXX, d<s, iv, and iiri with 
dat. (i. 9) or ace. (ii. 3). In 2 Thess. iii. 4 we have Treiroi- 
6a.fx.ev Se iv Kvpto) icf> viias, a construction which would have 
stood very well here. 

5. oux oTi . . . &\\\ The ireiroidrjo-is is further explained, 
both negatively and positively, in order to exclude still more 
emphatically the suspicion of self-commendation. ' I do not 
mean that (i. 24) of ourselves we are sufficient (ii. 16) to account 
anything as originating with ourselves.' He does not claim the 
right or power to judge that he and his fellows are the real 
authors of any part of the work ; they claim no credit whatever. 
Experience has proved that as ministers they are competent, for 
the Corinthian Church exists; but all their competency comes 
from above. 

The statement is particular, not general ; and it has reference 


simply to the successful work at Corinth. The Apostle is not 
denying free will, nor is he declaring that the natural man can do 
nothing but evil. Calvin's remark, Paulus 11071 poterat igitur 
magis liomiiiem nudare omni bono, is altogether beside the mark. 

By a fanciful derivation, El Shaddai, as a name for God, was 
sometimes interpreted as meaning 'The Sufficient One.' In 
Ruth i. 20, 21, 6 'I/cai/os, and in Job xxi. 15, xxxi. 2, xxxix. 32 
[xl. 2], 'Ikcwos is used as a Divine name. It is just possible that 
St Paul had this in his mind here ; ' Our sufficiency comes from 
the Sufficient One.' Nowhere else in LXX or N.T. is Iko-vot^s 

dtp' eavrwv should be placed before havol 4a/j.ev (N B C, Copt. Arm.) 
rather than after \oy. rt (ADE FGP, Latt.) or after Ik. ic/xev (K L, Syr- 
Hark.) or be omitted (17, Syr-Pesh. ). Xoyiaaadai (KABKLP) rather 
than Xoytfecdai (C D E F G). For 41- iavTwv, BFG have 4£ clvtwv (WH. 
ii. p. 144). 

6. os kcu iKcirwcrei' ^(xas. ' Who also made us sufficient as 
ministers,' where 'who ' = ' for He.' No English version before 
the RV. marks the repetition, Ikclvoi, tKavo-njs, LK&vwo-ev : nor does 
the Vulgate, which has sufficientes, sufficientia, idoneos fecit. 
There is a similar repetition in StaKov^delaa, cHa/<6Vovs, Sia/covta, 
and this is followed by oo£a (eight times in five verses), 8e86$acrTai, 
to 8e8o£acTfi.cvov. As in i Cor. iii. 5, Slolkovos is used in quite a 
general sense. There is no evidence that at this time SiaKovos 
had an exclusively official sense, or designated any particular 
class of Christian minister: see Westcott on Eph. iv. 12. The 
aorist iKavwo-ev points to the time when St Paul was called to be 
an Apostle; at that crisis he was made competent (Col. i. 12) to 
respond to the call. See Index IV. 

kcuvtjs 8ia0r|KT]s. ' Of a new covenant ' (RV.) : ' of the New 
Testament ' (AV.) is misleading. The covenant is fresh and 
effective, with plenty of time to run, in contrast to the old 
covenant, which is worn out and obsolete. This is the constant 
meaning of kcuvos as distinct from ve'05, so that kcuvos always 
implies superiority to that which is not kcuvos, whereas what is 
ve'os may be either better or worse than what is not veos. See 
Trench, Syn. § lx. and Lightfoot on Col. iii. 10. 

The usual word for ' covenant ' is a-wO^K-q, which occurs 
thirteen times in LXX, but not at all in N.T. It is not suitable 
for a covenant between God and man, for it suggests that the 
parties meet on equal terms. See on 1 Cor. xi. 25. Here the 
emphasis is on Kaivrjs. Contrast cnatfj/K^s kguv^s ^.co-tT^s (Heb. 
ix. 15), where the emphasis is on Sia^/ojs. To be ministers of 
the old covenant was no great distinction ; there were large 
numbers of them, and their duties were largely matters of routine. 
But to be made competent ministers of a new covenant with God 


was an extraordinary grace. In Heb. xii. 24 we have Sta^Tj^s 
I'e'as /xecrtV^s, the only passage in which 8ia8rJK7] via occurs. 
Christianity was both via and Kaivq, it was of recent origin and it 
was effective, whereas Judaism was old and effete. It was also 
aloivla. ' i will make a new covenant (StadrJKrjv Katvrjv) with the 
house of Israel' (Jer. xxxi. 31). ' And I will make an everlasting 
covenant (S. aicovtW) with them, that I will not cease to do them 
good ' (Jer. xxxii. 40). 

We are not yet in a position to say the final word respecting 
the rendering of htaOriK-q in N.T., where the word occurs thirty- 
three times, mostly in Paul (nine) and in Hebrews (seventeen). 
Probably the extremists on both sides are in error. It seems to 
be reasonable to hold that 8ia6rji<r) cannot always be rendered 
'covenant' in accordance with LXX use, and that it cannot 
always be rendered 'testament' in accordance with the usage of 
classical writers and that of Greek-speaking populations in the 
East in the first century. Among the crucial passages are Gal. 
iii. 15-18 (see Lightfoot) and Heb. ix. 16, 17 (see Westcott). It 
does not follow that, because 'covenant' is the meaning else- 
where in N.T., therefore 'covenant' is the meaning in both these 
passages ; or that, because ' testament ' is the meaning in one or 
both of these, therefore 'testament' is the meaning everywhere. 
Deissmann (Light from Anc. East, p. 341 ; Licht von Osten, 
p. 243) says; "There is ample material to back me in the state- 
ment that no one in the first century a.d. would have thought of 
finding in the word haOrjK-q the idea of ' covenant' St Paul 
would not, and in fact did not. To St Paul the word meant 
what it meant in his Greek O.T., 'a unilateral enactment,' in 
particular ' a will or testament.' This one point concerns more 
than the superficial question whether we write ' New Testament ' 
or ' New Covenant ' on the title-page of the sacred volume ; it 
becomes ultimately the great question of all religious history ; a 
religion of grace, or a religion of works? It involves the alter- 
native, was Pauline Christianity Augustinian or Pelagian ? " On 
this Lietzmann rightly remarks that, however true it may be that 
SiaOrJKr) almost always means ' testament ' in profane literature, 
yet in the very numerous passages in LXX in which a StaOyKr] 
between God and man is mentioned it cannot have this 
meaning ; and this is true also of the passages in N.T. which 
have been influenced by the LXX. " I know of no instances of 
'a unilateral enactment' (einseitige Verfiigung). We must abide 
by the Hebrew and translate 'covenant.' One instance of this 
usage we at any rate have in Aristoph. Birds, 440. Peisthe- 
tairos refuses to have any dealings with the birds, y\v fxy Sta^cuvrat 
y oiSe BiaOrJKTjv ifioi — not to peck him." See Ramsay's valuable 
dissertation, Galatians, §§ 33, 34, pp. 349-370; A. Lukyn 


Williams, Galatians, pp. 68-70; Wickham, Hebrews, pp. 71-73; 
Expositor, Dec. 190S, pp. 563-565; E. Riggenbach, Der Begrij} 
der Diatheke im Hebraerbrief, 1908 ; Muntz, Ro?ne, St Paul, and 
the Early Chiarh, pp. 146 f., 165 f. 

ou ypdfjijj.aTos d\\& weu'naTos. ' Not of letter, but of spirit, for 
the letter puts to death but the spirit gives life.' This saying 
holds good of many other things besides the Law and the 
Gospel; everywhere letter prescribes, spirit inspires. But we 
must not be misled by the common contrast in English between 
'letter' and 'spirit,' which means the contrast between the 
literal sense and the spiritual or inward sense of one and the 
same document or authority. By yp/xd/xa and irvevfia St Paul 
means two different authorities ; ypafjifia is the written code of 
the Law, irvevfj-a is the operation of the Spirit in producing and 
promulgating the Gospel. See on Rom. ii. 29, vii. 6.* This 
passage is almost a summary of the Ep. to the Romans. St Paul 
mentioned the tables of stone (v. 3) in preparation for this 
comparison between the old ministration and the new. The old 
put forth a written code of duty, so onerous as to kill hope and 
love ; the new is inspired by the spirit, which is able to revive 
what is ready to die. See Swete, The Holy Spirit in N.T., 

P- 3 IQ - 

We see here once more (see on 1 Cor. ix. 20 ; Dobschiitz, 

Probleme, p. 82) how completely St Paul had broken with the 
Jewish Law.f He has now reached the main topic in this 
portion of the Epistle (iii. i-vi. 10), viz. the glory of Apostleship 
under the new covenant. The Juclaizing teachers had not been 
able to extricate themselves from the trammels of the old 
covenant. But experience has taught St Paul that the embrace 
of the Law has now become deadly. It is effete and cannot 
adapt itself to the new conditions. It is purely external ; ' Thou 
shalt not do this overt act,' 'Thou shalt do this overt act.' It 
has no power to set free and strengthen the moral elements in 
man. It makes heavy demands, but it gives nothing. It com- 
mands and imposes a punishment for disobedience ; but it gives 
no power or encouragement to obey. The spirit of Christianity 
is the opposite of this. It is a living force. Instead of pressing 
the man down from without, it lays hold of him from within ; it 
supplies, not slavish rules, but emancipating principles. It 
enriches and quickens those who welcome it, and it makes them 

* " No idea is more familiar to us than the distinction between the spirit 
and the letter. . . . Yet, so far as I am aware, it occurs in S. Paul for the 
first time. No doubt the idea was floating in the air before. But he fixed it ; 
he made it current coin " (Lightfoot, Sermons in St PauPs, p. 206). 

t "The third chapter is a polemic against the doctrine that believers in 
Christ ought to pay respect to the Law of Moses " (Menzies, p. xxv). 



both desirous and able to follow its inspirations. " The Law," 
says Chrys., "when it takes a murderer, puts him to death; 
grace, whenit takes a murderer, gives him light and life." 

It is evident from the language used that the Apostle is 
contrasting the spirit of the Gospel, not merely with ceremonial 
regulations, but with the whole code, whether ceremonial or 
moral, of the Mosaic Law. That Law said to the Jew, " Obey, 
or it will be worse for you." The Christian says to the Gospel, 
" Obedience is the thing that I long for." 

The genitives, ypd/A/Aaros and irvev/xaros, probably depend on 
(WoVous (see v. 8) ; but the meaning is much the same if we 
take them after Sia&^s. They are qualifying or characterizing 
genitives and are equivalent to adjectives : we might translate, 
'not letter-ministers, but spirit-ministers.' Winer, p. 297 ; Blass, 
§ 35- N 5- r 

to yap ypdjULfjia diroKT. This does not refer to capital punish- 
ment, which the Law inflicted for a variety of crimes, such as 
adultery, blasphemy, dishonour to parents, idolatry, murder, 
prophesying falsely, sabbath-breaking, witchcraft, etc., although 
there may be some indirect allusion. In a much more serious 
sense the Law kills, in that it sends men along the road which 
leads to eternal death. It does this by its prohibitions, which 
at once suggest the doing of what is prohibited, and also make 
men conscious of having sinned and merited punishment. " By 
giving edge to the conscience, it intensifies the sense of remorse. 
A child will go on doing a wrong act ignorantly, till it has 
become a habit, without any inward dissatisfaction ; till at 
length some authoritative voice says, ' That is a wicked act.' 
Then everything is changed. Each recurrence of the evil habit 
brings misery to the child. It has the sentence of condemna- 
tion in itself. The commandment has slain the child " (Light- 
foot). Again, the letter kills by setting up lofty standards, which 
it does not help men to reach, and which without help they 
cannot reach. This takes the heart out of them, for they feel 
from the first that disastrous failure is certain. Moreover, the 
Law held out no hope of a resurrection, by means of which the 
failures of this life might be rectified. Lex non est adjutrix 
legentium, sed testis peccantium quae mortificat peccatores (Pseudo- 
Primasius). Spiritus vivivicat qui intus docet ani?nam qualiter 
ea qicae audit intelligere debeat (Herveius). With St Paul the 
principle that ' the letter puts to death ' is an axiom ; and it was 
confirmed by his own experience. See on Rom. vii. 7-25, 
pp. 184-189. But this verse would have been very obscure if 
we had not possessed Romans, which was written in Corinth 
and shows what St Paul had been teaching there. In all this 
disparagement of to ypd/x/xa there was no danger of seeming to 


disparage Christian writings, for as yet there were no Christian 
Scriptures. The Apostle, without being aware of it, was begin- 
ning to make such writings. 

The excellent cursive 17 has ov ypd/j./j.aTi dA\& irvaj/iaTi, which is 
supported by Lat-Vet. non litera sed spiritu ; but Vulg. has non littcrae 
sed spirilits. B has airoKreivet., K G K P 17 have awoKriwei, a form said 
to be Aeolic, ACDEL airoKTevei, which D 3 L accentuate arroKT^vet. 

7. f\ SiciKoyta toJ 6afd-rou. See on 1 Cor. xv. 56 and comp. 
Gal. iii. 10, which quotes Deut. xxvii. 26: SiaKovia is not abstract 
for concrete, 'ministry' for 'ministers'; it means the whole 
dispensation of the Mosaic Law. The Apostle's main object is 
to show the superiority of the Christian ministration. This 
involves disparaging the Jewish ministration, which he does in 
strong language, because of the mischief done by the Judaizers. 
"See," says Chrys., "how he again cuts the ground from under 
the Judaistic point of view." He adds that the Apostle does not 
say that the Law produced death, but that its ministry tended to 
death, when it declared 'the soul that sinneth, it shall die' 
(Ezek. xviii. 4).* The inferiority of the Law to the Gospel is 
shown in three different aspects, the second of which is an 
explanation or justification of the first; it is a ministration of 
death, a ministration of condemnation, and a ministration which 
was designed to be only temporary. 

iv ypdjifAaaif, efTeTuirw|j.eVr) XiOois. ' In letters, and engraven 
on stones.' It is necessary to insert 'and,' in order to make 
clear that we have here two attributes of the 8iai<oria, which was 
in writing that might never be read or understood, and written 
on dead and heavy material. ' Graven in letters on stones ' 
would give only one of these ideas. KeKoXafxfxevrj iv rats 
7rAa£iV is said of the writing made by God on the first tables 
(Ex. xxxii. 16). It is not said who wrote on the second tables 
(the nom. may be God or Moses), nor whether the writing was 
engraved or not (Ex. xxxiv. 28). The Commandments, as 
the centre and basis of the Mosaic code, are here put for the 
whole of it, as the Sermon on the Mount is sometimes put for 
the whole of the Christian code. 'In writing' would be better 
than 'in letters'; but the connexion between ypd/xfia and ev 
ypaixfxavLv must be preserved. 

eyecv]0T] iv o6|yj. ' Came into existence in glory,' i.e. had a 
glorious inauguration ; or ' came to be in glory,' i.e. was trans- 
ported into a glorious condition. Bachmann defends the latter 
rendering by a number of instances from papyri in which yiyvtcrOai 

* Minis/ratio mortis lex est, quae ostenso revelatoque peccato confundit, 
conterret et ocvidit conscientiam (Melanchthon, Loci Theologici, p. 65, ed. 


«v seems to mean ' pass into a certain state ' ; iv vocrw yevo/x,evos, 
lv da-cfiaXet yevicrOai, k.t.X. This use is not rare in N.T. Cf. [Lk. 
xxii. 44]; Acts xxii. 17; Phil. ii. 7; 1 Tim. ii. 14; Rev. i. 10, 
iv. 2 ; but it does not fit the context here. The Law was not 
given in an inglorious condition and afterwards promoted to a 
glorious one ; it was ev 86$r] from the first. Driver notices that 
St Paul's key-words in this passage (&6£a, SeSo'£ao-Ttu) are sug- 
gested by the LXX rendering of 'shone' in Ex. xxxiv. 29, 35, 
viz. SeSo^acrrai. We may contrast the aor. here with the fut. 
ecrrai in v. 8 ; the latter implies permanence, the former not. 

wore p) 8uyao-0ai drevia-ai. Ex. xxxiv. 30 says no more 
than that ' they were afraid to come nigh him ' ; but Philo ( Vita 
Moys. i. 2, p. 665) gives the current belief; Kariftaive ttoXv 
kolWicdv tt]v oxj/lv t) ore civr/ei, <Ls tous 6/dcuvtus TeOrjTrival /ecu Kara- 
Tr€TrX.rj)(6ai, /ecu /j.rj8kv iirnrXiov avre^eiv rots 6<^9a\[x6i<s SvvacrBai 
Kara, ttjv 7rpo<r fioXijv ^AtoeiSovs (f>eyyov<; drraaTpdiTTovTO^. There 
was a Jewish tradition that the light which shone in Moses' 
face was the light which inaugurated the Creation. Vulg. here 
varies the translation of 7rp6awTrov in a capricious way ; ut non 
possent intendere filii Israhel in faciem Mosi propter gloriam 
vultus ejus, quae evacuatur. See Index IV. On the difference 
between ware with the infinitive and wore with the indicative, 
see T. S. Evans in Expositor, 3rd series, iii. p. 3. Excepting 
here and v. 13, dren^etj/ is peculiar to Luke in N.T. ; it is freq. 
in Acts. In LXX it is rare and late. 

ttjk KaTapyoufjieVT]^ 'Which was being done away'; im- 
perfect participle. It was very splendid, but it was very 
transient. This is not stated in Exodus, but it seems to be 
implied, and it is brought in here with much effect at the end 
of the sentence, to be enlarged upon as a separate point of 
inferiority in v. 11. 'Was to be done away' (AV.) is certainly 
wrong,* and 'was passing away' (RV.) is doubtful. In v. 14, 
as generally in Paul, the verb is passive, and it may be passive 
here and in vv. n, 13 ; see on 1 Cor. i. 28, xv. 26 and on Luke 
xiii. 7 for the meaning of the verb. iv (X A C D 2 and 3 E K L P, d e i g Vulg. Copt. Syr-Pesh. Goth.) 
rather than ypafi/mari (B D* F G). f Vulg. omit the ev before ypaix/x. 8° 
D 2 and s E K L, d e f Vulg. Arm. insert iv before \ldois. In all three cases 
note the divergence between Greek and Latin in bilingual MSS. 

8. irws ouxl |ia\\oi\ ' How shall not to a greater extent the 
ministration of the spirit be in glory ? ' The eo-Tai does not 
point to the future coming of the Messianic Kingdom ; it 
indicates that StaKovM r. ■jn/euju.aTos will continue to be in an 

* The same error is made by Beza, quae gloria erat aboelenda, and is 
repeated in v. 13, infinem ejus quod abolendum est, where AV. inconsistently 
has ' is abolished.' 


atmosphere of glory. Or Iotcu may be the logical future, of 
the natural consequence of what has been stated. Cf. ei 8e 
a.TTi6dvofJL€v o~vv Xpitrrw, 7rurTevo/j.ev otl koi crv^aofxev avrio (Rom. 
vi. 8). 

9. el yap r\ Siaxoyia tt]s KaTaKpurews. The second point of 
contrast is explanatory (yap) of the first ; the Law is a Siolk. t. 
BavaTov because it is 8ia«. t. Karaxp., for condemnation results 
in death. 'If such a ministration is glory, to a much greater 
extent the ministration of righteousness is superabundant in 
glory.'* The use of the pres. here is against co-rat being the 
logical future. By 'righteousness' is meant that which is 
attributed to man when he is justified. Through faith in Christ 
man is more than forgiven ; his debt is cancelled and he has 
something placed to his credit. 

The iv which is usual after 7repto-creuetv (viii. 7 ; Eph. i. 8 ; 
etc.) is omitted here, probably to balance oo'£a in the first clause. 
In the first contrast we have iv 86$y . . . iv 86£r) : in the second, 
oo'£a . . . 00^77. Cf. 1 Thess. iii. 1 2 ; Acts xvi. 5 ; here many 
texts insert iv. 

■n diaKovta t. kclt. (B D 2 E K L P, f g Vulg. Copt. Goth.) is probably to 
be preferred to rrj diaKovlg. r. kclt. (KAC D* F G 17 d e Syrr.) ; but the 
latter may be original ; ' For if the ministration of condemnation has 
glory.' D E G have ianv after S6£a. K 3 D E F G K L P, Latt. Arm. have 
iv before doily. 

10. Kal ydp ou 8e86£aarai to SeSo^aap.eVoi'. ' For indeed 
that which has been made glorious in this respect has been 
deprived of glory by reason of the glory which exceeds it?' It 
is outshone by something which is much more dazzling and 
beautiful. When the sun is risen, lamps cease to be of use; 
orto sole lumen hicernae caecatur. In this way the paradox 
becomes true that ' what had been made glorious was not made 
glorious.' In comparison with the glory which superseded it, 
it seemed to have had no glory at all. Cf. 6/xotot tois ru^Aots 
av r}fx€V IvtKa ye twv rjfAerepwv ocfiOaXfjLwv (Xen. A/em. IV. iii. 3). 
Stallbaum on Plato, Rep. 329 B gives other examples of this use 
of eveKa. 

If iv touto) tw jue'pei be taken with to 8e8oiao-ixivov, the mean- 
ing will be ' in respect of the illumination of Moses' countenance.' 
But it is better to take the words with ou oeoo'^ao-Tcu and under- 

* "Paul, then, must be not less distinguished than Moses; this is the 
extraordinary claim made by the Apostle in this passage. To have set up 
a genuine and lasting spiritual movement in a society like the Church at 
Corinth is proof that it is so ; for Moses produced no such result ; the 
opposite is the result of what he did. And what is being done at Corinth is 
being done in other places also ; mankind is passing into the final stage of 
its history" (Menzies). 


stand them as anticipating what follows ; ' in this respect,' viz. 
because of the overwhelming glory of the Gospel. The phrase 
is repeated ix. 3, and nowhere else in N.T. c Y7rep/3aAAeiv is 
found only ix. 14; Eph. i. 19, ii. 7, iii. 19; and its derivative 
v7repfio\t] is also purely Pauline in N.T., peculiar to this group, 
and most freq. in 2 Cor. (i. 8, iv. 7, 17, xii. 7); in LXX only 
4 Mac. iii. 18. 

For oi 5eSo£. a few cursives and a few Latin texts have ovdt 5e5o£. Vu!g. 
has nee and also spoils the oxymoron by rendering nam nee glorificatum est 
quod claruit in hac parte. elW/cev (KABDEGP) rather than 'ivexev 
(C K L). 

11. Third contrast ; again explanatory (yap) and in support 
of what precedes. ' For if that which was being done away was 
through glory, to a much greater extent that which abideth is in 
glory.' What is given to last only for a time is as nothing in 
comparison with what is given to last for ever. Christianity is 
evayyeXiov aioiviov (Rev. xiv. 6), a Gospel reaching forward into 
eternity and bringing with it awr-qpiav alwvLov (Is. xlv. 17 ; Heb. 
v. 9), and its ministers are ministers 810.077/079 aitavCov (Heb. xiii. 
20). They have not the transitory glory of Moses hi their faces, 
but in their souls they have the everlasting glory of the message 
which they deliver. Supply ecn-iv rather than ecrnu with iv 

The change from Sta So'^s to iv 00^77 may indicate the 
difference between what passes and what abides. We have a 
similar change Rom. v. 10, in a sentence very similar in con- 
struction to this ; el yap i^Opol ovres Ka.TrjWdyrjp.ev rui ®e<3 81a. tov 
Oavdrov rov vlov avrov, 7r0A.Au) p.a\\ov KaTaAAayevTes crwOrjaop.e$a ev 
rfi £(nfj avrov. In Eph. i. 7 we have the converse change from 
ev to Sta, from what is permanent to what was transitory; ev <5 
e)(op.ev Trjv aTroXvTpwcriv 8ta toij aip.aros avrov. St Paul IS fond 
of changes in prepositions; 1 Cor. xii. 8; Gal. ii. 16; Rom. 
iii. 30. 

These verses (7-1 1) show what a revolution had taken place 
in the mind of St Paul since he had exchanged the Law for the 
Gospel. Christianity is so superior to Judaism that it has 
extinguished it. Even in its best days, when it also was a 
Divine revelation to the human race, Judaism had a glory which 
was infinitesimal compared with that which was inaugurated by 
Christ. A rich variety of expressions is used to bring this out. 
The Gospel is /xSAAov ev 80^77, is 7roAAw pSAAov ev 80^77, 7roAAc3 
/aSAAov irepLo-aevet 80^77, and the Sd£a is virepfidWovara. It secures 
from death, it secures from condemnation, and it abides. In 
this argument the Apostle has chiefly in view the Judaizers who 
made the Law indispensable and superior to the Gospel. Beet, 

P- 349- 


III. 12-IV. 6. The Great Boldness of the New Ministers. 

Conscious of the vast superiority of the New Covenant^ 
we need no veil to cover deficiencies, but deliver our message 
with boldness and openness. 

12 Seeing, therefore, that we servants of the Gospel have a 
sure expectation that the glory of the new covenant will prove 
as superior in duration as it is in splendour, and will never dis- 
appear before a far greater glory, we venture to preach with great 
confidence, frankness, and courage, at the risk of being accused 
of self-commendation. 13 Unlike our opponents, we have 
nothing to conceal. We have no need to act as Moses did. 
He used to put a veil over his face, to prevent the children of 
Israel from gazing at the gradual dying away of the glory which 
the presence of the Lord had imparted to his countenance. 
The passing away of that glory symbolized the transitory 
character of the Mosaic dispensation ; and by concealing the 
former from the people Moses might seem to be concealing the 
other also. 14 But, so far from seeing what the fading of the 
glory signified, or profiting by our plain speaking, their spiritual 
perceptions were deadened. For down to this very day, when 
the records of the old covenant (which might teach them so 
much) are read, the same veil of ignorance as to the transitory 
character of the Law lies still upon their minds, still unlifted, 
because by becoming members of Christ, and in that way alone, 
is it done away. 15 And unto this very day, whenever the Law 
of Moses is read in their synagogues, a veil of miscomprehension 
lies upon their hearts. 16 But just as Moses, when he returned 
to the presence of the Lord, removed the veil from his face, so, 
when any one of them turns to the Lord, the veil is removed 
from his heart, and he sees that the dispensation of the Law 
has come to an end. 17 Now the Lord to whom such an one 
turns is the Spirit of Christ, and where the Spirit of Christ is, 
there is emancipation from the bondage of the Law and of sin. 
18 And all we Christian men, freed from the Law and freely 
obeying a higher commandment, have a glory which resembles 
that of the unveiled Moses. As we gaze with unveiled face upon 
the glory of the Lord Christ, before which the glory of Moses 
vanished away, we are daily being transformed into spiritual 
likeness to Him, from one degree of brightness to another, — an 


amazing transformation, but not beyond belief, when we re- 
member that the power which transforms us is a Spirit which is 

IV. l Seeing then that the Gospel is so glorious and is so 
unreservedly made known, and that we by God's mercy have 
been made competent for the ministration of it, we have a 
courage which corresponds with that mercy. 2 We are not 
cowardly schemers, — far from it. We have from the first refused 
to adopt underhand methods of unworthy trickery; we follow 
no courses of unscrupulous cunning ; we do not tone down or 
in any way tamper with God's message. On the contrary, we 
set forth the truth so clearly and purely that this at once com- 
mends us to the conscience of our hearers, however much it 
may differ in different men. If, however, the verdict of all 
human consciences may err, we are not afraid to appeal to the 
judgment of God. 8 1 do not deny that the Gospel which we 
proclaim so openly and honestly does not penetrate to the hearts 
of all who hear it ; a veil intervenes. That is true, but only of 
those who are lost, 4 in whose case the god of this evil dispensa- 
tion has blinded their understandings, unbelievers, as they are, 
so that for them there is no morning-glow from the light which 
is shed by the Gospel, — the Gospel which is charged with all the 
glory of Christ, who is the image of God. 5 Yes, the glory of 
Christ ; for it is not our own claims that we press, but those of 
Christ Jesus, as the risen and glorified Lord. Our relation to 
you is that of bondservants, in the service of Him who Himself 
took the form of a bondservant. 6 1 say that we do not press 
our own merits, because we have none ; all that is of value in 
us is derived. To the God who in the beginning said, Out of 
darkness light shall shine, we owe the light that has shined 
in our hearts, the light which springs from the knowledge of 
the glory of God, which we must pass on to others. I have 
knowledge of that glory, for I have seen it myself on the face of 

The closing words of this section are a complete explanation 
of the statement made at the beginning of it and elaborated in 
iv. 2. The man who has always in his heart the Divine light 
which shone into it from the face of the glorified Lord cannot 
be guilty of tricky artifices and double-dealing with a view to 
commending himself and winning applause. The light trans- 


figures him, and he is ever transparent and open. He works to 
impart the light to others, not as coming from himself, but from 
God through Christ. 

We may notice the close correspondence between the last 
seven verses of this chapter and the first six verses of the next 
chapter. In both we have three subjects in the same order ; 
the excellence of the Gospel ministry, the sad condition of those 
who are so blind as to be unable to see the excellence of the 
Gospel, and the Divine source of the excellence. Both passages 
begin with similar words expressing the rich possession of those 
to whom the ministry of the Gospel has been entrusted, and in 
both the metaphor of the veil is used. In the first passage this 
metaphor is applied to the unbelieving Jews, in the second to 
unbelievers generally, especially, but not exclusively, Gentiles. 
The repetition of Zx ^ an< ^ ex 0] ' Tes °f tne treasure possessed by 
Christian misssionaries should be noted (iii. 4, 12, iv. 1, 7, 13). 
See below on iv. 1. 

12. "Exoyres ouV TOiauri\v eXm'Sa. That he says 'hope' rather 
than ' confidence ' (v. 4) does not prove that corai is to be 
supplied with Iv 86£rj in v. n. The glory of the Gospel has 
already begun, and therefore karCv rather than Icrrai is required. 
But that the Gospel will prove permanent (to fievov) is a matter of 
hope, and therefore iX-n-iSa is here quite in place. ' Because, there- 
fore, we have a sure hope that our glory will continue, we use 
great boldness.' For ovv following a participle see i. 17, v. 6, n, 
vii. 1 ; 1 Cor. xi. 20; Rom. v. 1 ; Heb. iv. 14, x. 19 ; 1 Pet. ii. 1. 

iroXXrj Trappr)oaa xpw(J.e0a. He had been accused of having in 
one matter used such levity that his word could not be relied on 
(i. 17). He says here that he habitually uses great boldness and 
openness of speech, because he is in possession of a great hope. 
The word Trapp^aia implies that the boldness is exhibited either 
in speech or in action. It is opposed, not only to timidity, but 
to reserve, and it is sometimes misunderstood, for it may seem 
to imply self-confidence and self-commendation.* But it has 
quite other sources. Ministers who feel that God has made 
them competent (ii. 16, 17), and that their work will endure, 
have ground for Trapp^a-ia. Chrys. expands, ovhlv airoKpvm-6p.€voi, 
ov%iv vtro<TTtk\6fjL£voi, ovSev v</>opwyu.evoi. Calv., aperta et plena 

* Arrian in his letter to Lucius Gellius, introductory to his report of the 
Discourses of Epictetus, says that they are memoirs of the philosopher's 
thought and freedom of speech (Trapprjcria), the aim of which was simply to 
move the minds of his hearers to the best things ; but it may not have this 
effect on those who read the report of these utterances. 


Christi manifestatio. It is possible that in explaining the nature 
of this irapprjo-La the Apostle is not only following up his answer 
to the charge of eavrovs crvvio-Taveiv {v. i), but also again 
glancing at the hole-and-corner methods of his Judaizing 
opponents; but what follows is on a higher level than mere 

In Vulg. irapprjcrla is generally fidncia, but also constantia (Acts iv. 13), 
and confidentia (Heb. x. 35), while fiera irapp-rjixias is audenter ( Acts ii. 29), 
and irappr]criq. (adv. ) is pa/am or manifeste. Beza's in loquendo evideniia is 
no improvement on fiditcia, and Erasmus goes wrong in changing utimur 
(Vulg.) to utamiir. See Index IV. 

13. Ka! ou KaGciTrcp Mgju(tt]9. The structure is defective, but 
the sentence is quite intelligible ; ' And we do not put a veil 
over our faces, as Moses used to put a veil over his face.' 
Comp. Mk. xv. 8, where there is nothing to correspond to ko^ws 
e-n-oui avrols and 'to do ' has to be supplied. From the lofty 
position in which God has placed him the Apostle looks down 
even on Moses. Moses and the Prophets often spoke obscurely, 
for they did not always understand their own message, and much 
had not been even dimly revealed to them that was clearly 
known to the Apostles. 'Many prophets and righteous men 
desired to see the things which ye see and saw them not ' (Mt. 
xiii. 17). 'Concerning which salvation the prophets sought and 
searched diligently.' And ' not unto themselves but unto you 
did they minister these things' (1 Pet. i. 10, 12). For KaO&Trep 
see on i. 14. 

irpos to p] &T€iriom. ' That the children of Israel should not 
look steadfastly upon the end of that which was passing away.' 
There is no 8vvaa-8ai in this verse, and we have irpos to iirj, and 
not ware fir). In v. 7 'could not look steadfastly' is right; but 
here 'could not' (AV.) is incorrect and misleading. The 
difference is considerable. In v. 7 it is said that the glory 
was so dazzling that the people could not look steadily at it. 
This is not stated in Ex. xxxiv. 29 f., but it is not inconsistent 
with what is stated there. Here it is said that Moses used to 
veil his face so that the people should not see the fading away of 
the glory on it. This is inconsistent with the AV. of v. 33 ; 
' Till Moses had done speaking with them he put a veil on his 
face ' ; which means that the people were terrified by the bright- 
ness and would not come near him, and so he wore a veil all the 
time that he was addressing them, This is erroneous. The 
correct translation is, ' When Moses had done speaking with 
them he put a veil on his face.' He knew that the brightness 
was caused by converse with Jehovah, and would fade away 
when he was absent from the Divine presence. He did not 
wish the people to see the disappearance of the brightness, and 


therefore, when he had delivered his message, he covered his 
face, until he returned to the presence of the Lord. This is 
plain in LXX and Vulg.,* as also in RV., but it is quite obscured 
in AV. Apparently we are to understand that this practice 
was continued by Moses throughout the wanderings in the 

The Apostle's main point is this fading of the glory, which 
he treats as symbolizing the temporary nature of the Mosaic Law. 
He does not say that it was intended to convey this lesson ; but, 
as in i Cor. x. 2-4 and Gal. iv. 21-26, he takes the O.T. record 
and gives it a spiritual meaning. The meaning of 777305 to with 
the infinitive is in N.T. generally final, expressing the subjective 
purpose, 'with a view to,' 'in order that.' Mt. v. 28, xxvi. 12, 
and Lk. xviii. 1 seem to be exceptions. St Paul has it four times 
(here; 1 Thess. ii. 9; 2 Thess. iii. 8; Eph. vi. 11), and in each 
case it expresses the purpose of the agent or agents. In this 
case it was the purpose of Moses that the Israelites should not 
witness the vanishing of the glory from his face. This does not 
imply that Moses understood the vanishing to be a sign of the 
transitory character of the Law; still less that he wished to 
conceal its transitory character from the Israelites. He wished 
to conceal from them the end of the fading illumination. He 
did not wish them to go on watching him till there was no more 
glory to watch. 

It is the Apostle who makes the passing away of the glory a 
symbol of the transitoriness of the Law, and the veil a symbol of 
obscurity and concealment. In these two respects the Gospel 
ministration is greatly superior to that of the Law. It is 
permanent, and it conceals nothing that its adherents can under- 
stand. Its ministers deliver a message which reaches out into 
eternity, and they deliver it fearlessly, with entire frankness and 

to tcXos tou KaTapyoujieVou. The whole phrase and the 
context make the meaning of tc'Aos certain : ' the end of that 
which was passing away,' or (passive) 'was being done away,' 
means the cessation of the glory. We may set aside ' the end of 
that which is abolished ' ( AV.), which seems to mean Christ as 
the end of the abolished Law (Rom. x. 4). This meaning of to 
Te'Aos is adopted by Aug. and Thdrt., but it does not stand in- 
vestigation. St Paul could not mean that Moses veiled his face 
to prevent the Israelites from seeing Christ. Nor does to tcAos 
mean the final cause, the aim and object of the Law. Why 
should that be concealed from the people, and how would the 
use of a veil conceal it? And Luther is certainly wrong in 

* iTreidr) Kar^Travaev \a\Qv irpbs avrovs, iiriOrjKev inl rb irpbawirov clvtov 
Kakv/jL/xa : impletisque sermonibus, posuit velamen super faciem suam. 



making tow Karapyovp-ivov masc, ' of him who is passing away,' 

viz. Moses, which is quite alien from the context. The Vulg. 

is puzzling, in faciem ejus, quod evacnatur, but the quod shows 

that this reading gives no support to the view that tov Karapy. is 


airod (A B C G L P 17) rather than iavrov (K D E K). For tAos, A 
has TrpScrunrov, which some copyist may have taken from the previous line 
or from v. 7. f Vulg. , Ambrst. have faciem ioxjinem. 

14. d\\a eTrwpw0T] to, ro^jxaTa auiw. ' But their minds were 
dulled.' The aXXd looks back to the preceding /ay/. ' Dulled ' is 
perhaps better than either 'blinded' (AV.) or 'hardened' (RV.). 
The Rhemish version has ' their senses were dulled,' following 
the Vulg., which has obtunsi sunt setisus eoram. Vulg. generally 
has excaecare, but Jn. xii. 4, indurare. ' Harden ' is the original 
meaning of the verb, but this does not agree well with ' minds ' ; 
minds are blinded, blunted, dulled. As ' blinded ' is wanted for 
irv(p\w(T€v (iv. 4), ' blunted ' or ' dulled ' will be better here. 
J. A. Robinson (Ephesians, pp. 264-274) gives a full history of 
■n-wpoo) and 7rwpwo-ts, and comes to the conclusion that from the 
original idea of petrifaction the words come to indicate insensi- 
bility, especially of the eyes. The meaning generally required 
by the context in the N.T. is obtuseness or intellectual blindness 
rather than hardness. Lightfoot on 2 Thess. ii. 8 remarks that 
St Paul sometimes uses Karapyelv in opposition to 'light' (1 Cor. 
ii. 7 ; 2 Tim. i. 10) as here in vv. 7, 13, and this is somewhat in 
favour of ' blinded ' or ' dulled ' rather than ' hardened.' Strictly 
speaking, vo-qp-ara are the products of vovs, and therefore 
' thoughts ' rather than ' minds ' : but here, as in iv. 4 and xi. 3, 
v6rjp.a seems to mean the thinking faculty. The same difference 
of meaning is found in class. Grk.* See on ii. n. 

It is not necessary to decide whether St Paul is speaking of 
the Jews of his own day, as what follows seems to intimate, or 
of the contemporaries of Moses, as what precedes rather implies. 
He is thinking of the nation as a whole without distinction of 
time. The aor. may be timeless, and in that case may be 
rendered ' have been dulled ' or ' are dulled.' Nor need we ask 
whether their minds were dulled by God, or by the evil one, or 
by themselves : in different ways all three contributed to the 
result. The indefinite passive has the advantage of raising no 
side issue; the one important fact is the intellectual Trw/Dwcm of 
the Jews, which is a warning to the Corinthians not to exchange 
Christian clearness and freedom for the obscure entanglements 
of Judaism. 

* In Agathon's speech in praise of Eros, he ends with mention of the 
beautiful song which Eros sings, Oi\yuv irdfTuv deuiv re nal avdpwiruv vdy/xa 
(Plat. Symp. 197 E). 


To what does But' (dXXd) refer? To the main topic of 
these verses, the Trapprja-Ca of the Apostle and his colleagues. 
1 We do not use concealments, as Moses did ; we speak openly 
to the people ; but (aber) in spite of that, they do not under- 
stand. Even the free preaching of the Gospel is powerless 
against the deep-seated insensibility of Jewish prejudice. This 
is one of the strongest of St Paul's strong statements against 
Judaism. Others explain, ' But (Moses had no need to hide 
anything, for) their minds were dulled.' This is a less obvious 

axpi y^P T - o' r! )f Ae P *' TJfJ.e'p a s- It must have been insensibility, 
for it remains unyielding still. " Why are ye perplexed that the 
Jews believe not Christ ? They do not even believe the Law. 
They are ignorant of grace also, because they did not know even 
the Old Covenant, nor the glory which was in it. For the glory 
of the Law is to turn men to Christ " (Chrys.). Nisi enim 
credideritis, non intelligetis (Pseudo-Primasius). 

t6 auTo KdXufxjia. Not of course the same veil that Moses 
used, but one which had the same effect, viz. preventing them 
from recognizing that the Mosaic dispensation was transient. 
Aug. evidently thought that Moses wore the veil while he was 
speaking to the Israelites, for he says on this passage, sonabat 
enim vox Moysi per velum, et fades Moysi non apparebat ; sic et 
modo Judaeis sonat vox Christi per vocem Scripturarum veterum : 
vocem earum audiunt, faciem sonantis ?ion vident (Serm. lxxiv. 5). 
The tallith, which Jews now wear as a scarf on the shoulder 
when worshipping in the synagogue, was formerly worn on the 
head. It is just possible that there may be some reference to 
this. A reference to the wrappers in which the rolls of the 
sacred books were kept is not probable. 

eir! tyj drayi'uaet. ' At the reading.' This use of liri of the 
occasion on which or circumstances in which something takes 
place is common enough (i. 4, vii. 4 ; 1 Cor. xiv. 6 ; etc.). It 
makes rather strange sense to take e7rt t. av. after nivei, for a veil 
abiding on reading is a picture difficult to realize. We know 
from Acts and other sources that the synagogues, where the O.T. 
was publicly read (Acts xiii. 15), were often the headquarters of 
hostility to the Gospel (Acts xiii. 45, 50, xiv. 2, 19, etc.). Aug. 
De Civ. Dei, xvii. 7, says; " The O.T. from Mount Sinai which 
gendereth to bondage, profiteth nothing, except so far as it bears 
witness to the N.T." 

ttjs iraXcuas 8ia0^KT]s. 'The Old Covenant' and 'the 
New Covenant' are such familiar expressions to us that we are 
apt to forget their enormous significance to those who first used 
their equivalents. This is plainly stated in Heb. viii. 13; 'In 
that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. But 


that which is becoming old and waxeth aged is nigh unto vanish- 
ing away.' Nowhere else in N.T. is the expression iraXaia 
haO-qKiq found, and it is possible that St Paul was the first person 
to declare the abrogation of the covenant made with Israel by 
speaking of the Pentateuch as r) Trakaib. 8ia6i]Kt}. IlaXaios 
implies far more than dp^atos does, that what is 'old' is the 
worse for wear. Trench, Syn. § lxvii. 

ja$I dmKaXuirrojxei'oi'. This probably agrees with to Ka.Xvfx.fia 
just mentioned; 'the same veil abideth, without being lifted, 
because it is in Christ (and in Him alone) that it is done away.' 
But firj avoiK. may be a nom. or ace. absolute ; ' the same veil 
abideth, the revelation not having been made that it is done away 
in Christ.' Field suggests a third method ; ' the same mystery 
remains unrevealed, viz. that it is done away in Christ.' The 
second method labours under two disadvantages; (i) the 
clumsy absolute case, which, however, is not without examples ; 
see Winer, p. 669, who rejects it as inapplicable to this passage ; 
(2) the meaning given to avaKaXvirToixevov, which in this context 
seems almost necessarily to refer to the moving of the veil ; see 
v. 18. The third method avoids these drawbacks, but involves 
one which is more serious, viz. taking KdXvfifxa in a different 
sense from that which it bears both before and after this verse. 
Everywhere else it means the veil and not the thing veiled, i.e. a 
mystery. The second method may be right ; it is strongly 
supported by Meyer, Stanley, Alford, Bachmann, and others, and 
is admitted to RV. marg. But with AV., RV., most ancient 
writers, Waite, Way, Weymouth, J. H. Bernard, Massie, De 
Wette, Neander, B. Weiss, Schmiedel, Bousset, and others, h; 
seems better to take //.t) avaKaXvTTTOjxevov with to KaXvixtxa. 

on iv Xpiorw KaTapyeiTai. AV. and RV. read o ti, and trans- 
late, 'which veil is done away in Christ.' But this use of on 
for o is open to question. Reading oti, our rendering will 
depend on the rendering of fj.r/ avaK. Either, ' abideth without 
being lifted, for it is in Christ that it is done away ' ; or ' abideth, 
the revelation not having been made that it is done away in 
Christ.' Adopting the former, we make the sentence a paren- 
thetical explanation of fiivei fir] avaKaXv-n-TOfievov, for it is union 
with Christ which does away with the veil, and this union the 
unconverted Jews reject. Note the emphatic position of iv Xp. 
It is in union with Him, and in that alone, that the removal of 
this ignorance takes place. The difference between iv (i. 14, 
17) and Sid (v. 4, i. 5) should be observed. The number of 
passages in which on may be either ' because' = ' for,' or 'that,' 
is considerable (i. 14, vii. 9, 13, 16; 1 Cor. i. 5, 14; etc.). 
They are specially common in Lk. (i. 45, vii. 16, 39, ix. 22, x. 
21, xi. 38, xxii. 70). 


T7j$ ffr/nepov rinfyas is the reading of nearly all authorities, but K L Syr- 
Pesh. Aeth. , under the influence of v. 15, omit T]/xipas. 

15. The metaphor of the veil is changed in a way somewhat 
similar to that in which the metaphor of the epistle is changed in 
w. 1-3. Previously, the veil was something external to them- 
selves which hid from them the truth that the dispensation of 
the Law was temporary and vanishing. Now it is something 
within them which keeps them from recognizing and welcoming 
the truth, viz. their prejudice in favour of the old dispensation ; 
see on Lk. v. 39. It is probably because of this change of 
meaning that Kakv/x/xa has no article ; ' the veil ' would mean 
' veil ' in the same sense as before, and AV. obscures the sense 
by inserting the definite article. In v. 16, to Kakvpp.a means 
the veil mentioned in v. 15. 

dW ews o-^fJi.epoi' -r\viKa &v dcayu'wcrriTai. ' But unto this day, 
whenever Moses is read, a veil lies upon their heart.' The 
a\\d refers to jut/ avaKaXv-n-TOLievov, ' not lifted up, but (so far 
from that) a veil lies on their heart.' ' Heart,' as often in 
Scripture, and especially in Paul, is the seat of the intelligence 
(iv. 6 ; 1 Cor. ii. 9 ; Rom. x. 6, 8, 10 ; Phil. iv. 7) as well as of 
the affections. Therefore it is beside the mark to say that the 
veil is said to be on the heart and not on the head, because " it 
was moral and not intellectual blindness which caused their 
unbelief." If any contrast is implied in eVl t. /capStav avrwv, it is 
to the effect that the existing veil does not lie on the head of 
Moses, hiding the vanishing of the glory of the Law, but on the 
hearts of his people, hiding the dawn of the glory of the Gospel. 
We might have expected rfj KapSYa, but bri with ace. usurps the 
place of e7u with dat., not only where motion previous to rest 
may be implied (Mk. ii. 14, iv. 38, etc.), but where there has 
been no previous motion (Mk. viii. 2 ; Lk. i. 33 ; etc.). Blass, 
§ 43. 1. With Iojs cnjixtpov (Ecclus. xlvii. 7) comp. Iws apn 
(1 Cor. iv. 13, viii. 7, xv. 6). 

7]vlKa &v with N'ABC (17 has idv) : D F E G K L P omit iv. dva- 
yivdxTKi^Tai (X A B C D E P) rather than avayivwo-KeTai (F G K L). 

There is no sufficient reason for suspecting with Heinrici that the verse 
is a gloss. The tjvIko. in v. 16 looks like a reference to TjW/ca here. 

16. TJviKa 8e iav emoTpe'i|/T] 7rp6g KopLOf. ' But, whensoever a 
man shall turn to the Lord, at once the veil is taken away.' The 
emphasis on 7rcptaipeiTai justifies ' at once ' ; ' away the veil is 
taken.' The nom. to iTnarpixprj is probably tis (so Origen) ; any- 
one in the synagogue, any who hears the Law read. Others make 
rj KapSta avrwv the nom., or Israel, or Moses as the representa- 
tive, either of the old Israel, or of the new. The last is Calvin's 
idea. No doubt St Paul has Ex. xxxiv. 34 in his mind ; fyuea 

8' av e icre7T opevtTO Maxrijs evavri Kvptov AaAetv avrw, irepLypeLTO to 

Ka.Xvfxp.a ews tow eKTropev€cr9aL. But that does not prove that 
here he is thinking of Moses as a type, or that here TreptatpeiTat 
is midd., as TrepujpeiTo is in Exodus. Whenever Moses turned to 
the Lord (in the tabernacle), he took off the veil from his head ; 
whenever a Jew turns to the Lord (Christ), the veil is taken off 
from his heart. The compound verb expresses the removing of 
something which envelops. 

In iirLa-Tpixprj irpos Kvptov we have another echo of Ex. 
xxxiv., and possibly more than one. When the people were 
afraid to come near him, Moses called them, ko1 iTrearpd^rjaav 
Trpos avrov. And St Paul probably says Kvptov rather than 
Xpio-ToV, because of evavri Kvptov in Exodus. Frequently the 
Apostle transfers to Christ expressions which in O.T. are used 
of Jehovah ; and Kvptov here clearly means Christ, for it balances 
iv Xpto-TO), and Jews had no need to turn to Jehovah. He is 
speaking of devout Jews worshipping in the synagogue, and per- 
haps he is thinking of his own conversion. 

It is difficult to decide between ijvlKa 5Z idv (K*A 17) and tjvIko. 5' &v 
(K 3 BDEFGKLP) : the latter may be assimilation to v. 15, where, how- 
ever, DEFGKLP omit &v. There is good reason for suspecting that, in- 
dependently of v. 15, &v may be a correction to literary form. Cf. 5 idv 
7roii)cri) (1 Cor. vi. 18); oQs idv doKin&crrjTe (l Cor. xvi. 3); 5 yap idv 
aweiprj (Gal. vi. 7)- I n many places WH. have restored idv, in accord- 
ance with the best MSS., where inferior texts have &v. The evidence of 
papyri is overwhelming as to this use of idv for &v after 5s, 6'oTts, &ttov, 
etc., being very common in the vernacular Greek of the first three cen- 
turies. "It seems that in this small point the uncials faithfully reproduce 
originals written under conditions long obsolete" (J. H. Moulton, p. 43). 
See Deissmann, Bible Studies, pp. 202 f. ; he gives numerous examples. 

17. These two abrupt sentences supply premises in support 
of the emphatic statement, 'away is taken the veil.' They might 
be omitted without loss to the argument, for no proof is 
required for the assertion that whenever men turn to the Lord, 
the veil which hides Him from them is taken away, and v. 18 
would follow well immediately after v. 16. Using these two 
sentences as premises, we get an argument in this form ; ' The 
Lord is the spirit,' 'Where the spirit is, is freedom.' Therefore, 
' Where the Lord is, the bondage of the letter is taken away.' 
Or, as Pseudo-Primasius puts it, Dominus spiritus est. Liber est 
spiritus. Idcirco non potest velamen accipere, sed magi's ipse 
revelat. Injected statements and appeals are found elsewhere in 
Paul; 1 Cor. xv. 56, xvi. 13, 14; Gal. iii. 20. 

In these two verses (17, 18) the fluctuation between to 
■n-vtvpa as that which is opposed to to ypappa, and to to 7rvevp.a 
as the spiritual nature or the inspiring power of Christ, must 
be allowed for. The contrast between Moses and Christ is one 


between letter and spirit, between compulsion and inspiration ; 
that is the main fact. How far St Paul thinks of the Spirit as a 
power distinct from Christ is not clear ; at any rate Christ and the 
Spirit work in the same way and produce the same effects. See 
on 1 Cor. ii. 12. 

The two verses have a rhythm and swing, the balance of 
which is easily felt in reading aloud. 

6 Se Ki'ptos to irvevjJLa icrriv. 
ov Se to Trvevfia Kvpiou, i\ev6epta. 
17/xeis Se 7raj'T€S ai aKeKakvp-pievw ir pocroiirta 
■n]v o"o£av Kvpiov, KaroTrrpt^o^ievoi 
tt)v avrrjV eifcova p:€Taji.opcpovp.e8a 
a7ro 80^77? eis 86£av, 
KaOdwep oltto Kupi'ou Trvtv/xaTOS. 

These rhythmical passages, of which there are several in 
the Epistle, are evidence of exalted emotion, and perhaps of 
rhetorical skill that has been acquired by study. In the next 
chapter note the correspondence in structure between v. 4 and 
v. 6 and the evenly balanced clauses in vv. 8-10. 

6 Se Ku'pios to irfeujAcl Iqtiv. This statement has been mis- 
used controversially ; on the one side to prove the Divinity of 
the Holy Spirit, on the other to show that St Paul identifies the 
Holy Spirit with the Lord Christ. The Apostle is not con- 
structing metaphysical propositions respecting the Divine 
Nature. Pie has still in his mind the distinction between 17 
Siclkovlo. ypajU.ju.aTos and f] 8iai<ovia Trvtvp.a.TO'z, the former of which 
is transient and is obscured by ignorance and exclusiveness, 
while the latter is permanent, informing, and open. Moses 
placed restrictions on external conduct; Christ transforms the 
inner life. Therefore to turn from Judaism to Christianity is to 
turn from the letter which enslaves to the spirit which gives free- 
dom, and to welcome Christ is to receive in oneself the Spirit of 
the Lord. " It is impossible in the Pauline Epistles to make a 
rigid distinction between the Holy Spirit and the Spiritual 
Christ. Life in Christ and life in the Spirit are the same. It is 
by partaking of the Holy Spirit that believers grow into Christ. 
In 1 Cor. xv. 45 Paul says that the last Adam, that is Christ, 
was made a life-giving Spirit. In 2 Cor. hi. 17 he says, 'The 
Lord is the Spirit.' Paul sometimes falls into the way of speak- 
ing of the Christian community as a manifestation of the Divine 
Spirit, and sometimes he speaks of the indwelling Christ. In 
Rom. viii. 9, 10 the words 'Spirit of God,' 'Spirit of Christ,' 
' Spirit ' and ' Christ ' are all used interchangeably " (P. Gardner, 
The Religious Experience oj St Paul, pp. 176 f.). 

It is in the interests of the Trinitarian doctrine that the 


possible, but most improbable translation, ' The Spirit is the 
Lord,' is sometimes adopted. Grammar allows it, for both 
terms have the article ; but the preceding 7rpos Kvpiov, which 
shows that 6 Kvpios means Christ, and the order of the words 
forbid it. Lias, in Appendix I., has collected patristic interpre- 
tations ; Meyer-Heinrici gives several modern suggestions. It is 
a passage, about the exact meaning of which we must be content 
to remain in doubt. It is well treated by Headlam, St Paul 
and Christianity, pp. io6f. 

oS Se to -nveGfjia. Kupiou, eXeuflepia. ' He who possesses the Spirit 
of Christ has liberty.' Spiritual freedom of all kinds is meant, 
with special reference to the bondage of the Law and of sin ; cf. 
i Cor. ix. i, 19, x. 29 ; Rom. viii. 15 ; Gal. iv. 6, 7. In Rom. 
vi. 15-23, vii. 1-6, St Paul expounds the freedom which comes 
by leaving the strictness of the Law for union with Christ. He 
compares it to release from slavery and to marriage with a second 
husband after the death of the first. In each case there is the 
substitution of new ties for old ones, not the abolition of all ties. 
Christian freedom is not licence ; it is the free acceptance of the 
ties of affection instead of the enforced acceptance of bonds of 
fear. Service voluntarily rendered to Him who is the Truth is 
the most perfect freedom of which a creature is capable ; rj ahfjOeia 
iXevOe/jwcret vfia<s. iav ovv 6 mos v[jt,as eXevdepioay oVtcds iXevOepoi 
eo-eo-#e (Jn. viii. 32, 36).* Ubicunque est Spiritus Filii, ibi est 
mentis libertas, ut remoto servili velamine possit libere metis veri- 
tatetn inspicere (Herveius). Cf. 1 Cor. vii. 22, and Seneca, De 
vita beata, xv. 6, In regno nati sumus ; Deo parere libertas est. 

Several conjectural emendations of the text have been suggested. In 
the first sentence for 6 5e nvpios Baljon and others would read ov 8£ Kvptos 
or od 5' 6 Kvpios, ' Now where the Lord is, there is the Spirit.' In the 
second sentence, for Kvpiov Hort would read Kvpiov, ' Where the Spirit (or, 
4 the spirit,' in opposition to the letter) is Sovereign, is freedom.' But 
Hort admits that there is no obvious difficulty in the universally attested 
reading ; and St Paul would be familiar with the expression irvedfj-a 
Kvpiov in LXX (1 Kings xviii. 12 ; 2 Kings ii. 16 ; Is. lxi. 1). 

L has to ayLov instead of Kvpiov. The ticel before iXevdepla should be 
omitted with X* A B C D* 17, 67**, Syr-Pesh. Copt. Elsewhere St Paul 
does not write ^/cei answering to od (Rom. iv. 15, v. 20). 

18. Tjp.eis Se -rrdrres. ' And we Christians, all of us.' 'And' 
rather than 'But' (AV., RV.), for there is probably no contrast 
in Se, but mere transition from ' liberty ' to those who have been 
set free. The main contrast is marked by the very emphatic 

* " There can be no liberty of thought whhout the love of truth " (Paget, 
The Spirit of Discipline, p. 106). The chapter is a good comment on this 
text. "By the use of one of the splendid paradoxes of the higher life, the 
acceptance of the service of God is equated with a supreme and glorious 
liberty" (P. Gardner, The Religious Experience of St Paul, p. 34). 


■fjfx.€L<s : ' we freed believers, unlike the servile Jews, qui fidei 
carent oculis ' (Erasmus). A second contrast is marked by 
7ravr€s, which is in antithesis to the one Moses. But this contrast 
is greatly weakened if, with Bengel and others, we confine ^//ets, 
as in vv. 1-12, to ' we ministers of the Gospel.' There is a tone 
of triumph in 71-avTes, which would be out of place if the meaning 
were confined to a handful of teachers. The contrast is between 
the one Hebrew leader and the whole body of Christians. Then 
only one was illuminated, and his illumination was hidden from 
all the rest ; now all are illuminated and there is no concealment. 
Point after point in the comparison is brought out, and in most 
of them superiority is brought out also. The rhythm throughout 
the two verses (17, 18) is jubilant. 

dvaK€KaXup.|i.eVa> TrpoawTrw. This is a third contrast. ' In our 
case there is no need of concealment ; there is no fear and there 
is nothing to hide. We Christians know that the glory which is 
seen in us is permanent, and no one will see it vanishing away. 
Neither ' with open face ' nor ' with unveiled face ' gives quite 
distinctly the full meaning of avaKiKoKv^Avw. More clearly 
than aKaraKaXvTTTo% (1 Cor. xi. 5, 13) or aKakvitTos (not in N.T. 
and rare in LXX), dvaK£KaA.u/x/*,eVos shows that there has been a 
veil and that it has been removed. We might have expected 
KapSia rather than irpocraj7ra), for the veil was on their heart before 
conversion (v. 15); but the comparison here is chiefly with 
Moses, whose face was veiled. 

ty^ 86|ac Kupiou. ' The glory of the risen and glorified Christ,' 
which is given here as equivalent to the glory of Jehovah in the 
Holy of Holies or on the Mount. It is inadequate to interpret 
this of Christ's moral grandeur and beneficence during the life of 
His humiliation. It is rather the glory of Him ' in whom dwelleth 
all the fulness of the Godhead bodily' (Col. ii. 9), and who was 
revealed to Stephen as ' standing at the right hand of God ' (Acts 
vii. 55, 57 ; cf. vi. 15). See Briggs, The Messiah of the Apostles ; 
pp. 127, 128; The Messiah of the Gospels, pp. 292, 293. 

KaTOTTTpi^op.ei'oi. Pres. part, of what continually goes on; 
either ' beholding as in a glass' (AV.), or 'reflecting as a mirror' 
(RV.). The former is clearly the meaning in Philo, Legis Alleg. 
iii. 33, where he expands the prayer of Moses in Ex. xxxiii. 13 
thus ; 'E/AtpdVicroi' /xoi (ravrov, yvwcrTws l8io ae, /x-tj yap ifj.(f>avi(r6eir)'; 
[aol Si oipavov y yrjs 77 vSaros rj depos rj tivos a7rAws tojv iv yeviarei, 
firjSe KaTOTTTpiaaifJi-qv ev dAXw tlvi rijv <xr)v tSe'ar, rj iv crol tw 0ew. 
The latter meaning is adopted by Chrys., and it makes excellent 
sense. When Moses spoke to the people, he covered with a veil 
the reflexion ot the Divine glory which shone in his face ; but it 
is with unveiled face that Christians reflect the glory of Christ 
and make known their changed condition with openness and 


boldness. The force of the participle is ' by continually reflect- 
ing ' ; it is by this process that the metamorphosis takes place. 

The Latins adopt the other meaning and translate kcltotttplCo- 
fievoL speculantes or contemplantes, neither of which preserves the 
allusion to KaToirrpov, ' a mirror.' Speculantes seems to preserve 
it, but does not, for speculari is 'to see from a watch-tower' 
{specula), not ' see in a mirror ' (speculum). In any case, ttjv 
86£av Kvpiov is in an emphatic position in reference to Ka.T07rrpi£o- 
fj.€voi, as ttjv avTr]v tin ova in reference to p.eTap.op<povjj.€0a, 

TTjk aoTTj^ eiKoi/a fj.€Tafjiop<}>oufj,e9a. 'Are transformed' (RV.) 
is better than 'are changed' (AV.), for 'to be changed' is the 
rendering of dWdo-o-zo- 6 ai (i Cor. xv. 51, 52; etc.). But 'are 
being transfigured' brings out both the force of the pres. and also 
the fact that we have here the same word that is used of the 
Transfiguration (ML ix. 2 ; Mt. xvii. 2), and nowhere else, 
excepting Rom. xii. 2.* Vulg. has three different words in the 
four passages ; transfigurari in the Gospels, transformari here, 
and rejormari Rom. xii. 2. Comp. /AeTacr^/wxTi^o/xevoi in xi. 13, 
where a less complete change is implied than that which is 
indicated here. See on Rom. xii. 2, Lightfoot's detached note 
on Phil. ii. 7, and Trench, Sy?i. § Ixx. Seneca (Ep. vi. 1) has 
Intelligo, Lucih, non emendari me tantum, sed transfigurari. 
Again (Ep. xciv. 48), Philosophiam qui didicit nondum sapiens est 
nisi in ea quae didicit animus ejus transfiguratus est. 

' The same image ' means the image of Christ reflected in the 
mirror. St Paul may have in his mind the ctxova ©eou (Gen. i. 
27), the image of God, marred in Adam and restored in Christ. 
The construction of ttjv airrjv «t/<oVa is regular. Beza and others 
say that Kara rather than eis is to be understood : but nothing is 
to be understood. Like other compounds of p.erd which mean 
change, p-era/xopcpovo-daL means ' to be transformed into.' Thus, 
(xeTafidWeiv is often ' to change to.' When Menelaus taxes Aga- 
memnon with acting very differently before and after gaining 
power, he says, ko.t tVei /carecr^es h< 'ds, p.eTa/3a\wv aWovs rpoirovs, 
and with being shifty about the surrender of Iphigeneia, ko.6' 
ii7rocrr/jei//as keX-qipai jM€Taj3aXwv aXXas ypa<pd<; (Eur. Jph. in Aul. 
343, 363). Similarly Plato has p.eTaf3dk\eiv kclivov eiSos, p.era/3. 
ttjv ipiXoTTOviav (Rep. iv. 424 C, vii. 535 D), and ^raWdcraav 
X^pav eripav i$ erepas (Farm. 138 C). In all these cases the verb 
means ' to make a change and adopt.' The omission of ets in 
the last example is conclusive. Again, while p.iTaTt0icr6ai ttJs 
ypwp.rj'i is 'to change from one's opinion,' p.eTa.Ti6eo-6ai rr/v 
yvu)p.-qv is ' to change to one's new opinion' (Hdt. vii. 18). This 
usage is regular and not rare, whereas we lack evidence that rr/e 

* Cf. iv 86£t? in iii. 7 with iv 56$y in Lk. ix. 31, and ^Xa/xfev in iv. 6 
with 2\an\J/ev in Mt. xvii. 2. 


clvti]v eiKova can be used absolutely like tov avrov rpoirov, tovtov 
tov rpoirov, rov8e tov rpoirov, and rpoirov riva.. See Stallbaum's 
note on Plat. Rep. iv. 424 C, where he renders p.ira.(3dWeLv 
tnutando assumere. 

Driver says of the narrative in Ex. xxxiv. 29-35, tnat ^ * s 
"a beautiful symbolical expression of the truth that close con- 
verse with God illumines the soul with Divine radiance, and that 
those who ' with unveiled face ' behold spiritually as in a mirror 
the glory of the Lord, are gradually through its influence trans- 
formed more and more completely into His likeness " {Exodus, 
P- 376)' We find similar ideas in the Book of E?wch, where it is 
said that the righteous "will become angels in heaven," and 
" their faces will be lighted up with joy because the Elect One 
has appeared" (li. 45), "the glory will not pass away" (lxii. 16), 
" and they will be resplendent for times without number, for 
righteousness is the judgment of God " (cviii. 13). Again, in the 
Apocalypse of Baruch ; " Their splendour will be glorified in 
changes, and the form of their face will be turned into the light 
of their beauty, that they may be able to acquire and to receive 
the world which does not die, which is then promised to them." 
" They shall be changed into every form they desire, from beauty 
into loveliness, and from light into the splendour of glory " (li. 3, 
10). This Apocalypse is contemporaneous with the chief writings 
of the N.T. Its authors were orthodox Jews, and it is a good 
representative of the Judaism against which the Pauline dialectic 
was directed " (R. H. Charles, Preface). 

diro 86^s els 86£av. There is no fading away, as in the case 
of Moses, for it is no superficial glory. It penetrates to the 
spiritual nature of the inner man and makes that, like the Lord 
from whom it comes, a source of light. Yet it is no sudden 
change, completed, as if by magic, in an instant; that might end 
in stagnation. It is a continual and gradual progress, 'from 
strength to strength' (Ps. lxxxiv. 7), 'shining more and more unto 
the perfect day ' (Prov. iv. 18). It passes on from this world to 
the next, from what is temporal to what is eternal. Less 
probably, diro So^s is interpreted of the Divine glory imparted, 
and et9 86£av of that which is received. Thus Bengel ; a gloria 
Domini ad gloriam in nobis : and Neander ; ' from the glory 
which we contemplate to the glory which we receive in ourselves.' 
Thdrt. perhaps means the same. Aug. De Trinitate, xv. 8 ; de 
gloria creationis in gloriam justification-is, vel etiam ; de gloria 
fidei in gloriam speciei, de gloria, qua filii Dei sumus, in gloriam, 
qua similes ei erimus, quoniam videbimus eum sicuti est. ' From 
the glory of Moses to that of the Spirit ' (Ambrose), and ' from 
the glory lost in Paradise to the glory to be received in Heaven ' 
(Ephraem) are curiosities of exegesis. 


KaGdurep &tto Kupiou TrceujxaTos. Like the first half of v. 17, 
this is a passage about the exact meaning of which we are 
obliged to remain in doubt. It is impossible to decide with 
certainty what the words mean. Every possible translation has 
been advocated. Are the genitives in apposition ? or is one 
dependent on the other? If the latter, which of the two is 
dependent ? Is the definite or the indefinite article to be supplied 
in each case? If the definite with one and the indefinite with 
the other, which is to have which? May the article, whether 
definite or indefinite, be in either case omitted in English? 
May Kvpiov be an adjective? AV. and RV. give us four 
renderings, which may be reduced to three, for AV. marg. is 
almost the same as RV. text. These three are ; ' by the spirit 
of the Lord' (AV.), 'from the Lord the Spirit ' (RV.), 'from the 
Spirit which is the Lord' (RV. marg.). Add to these renderings 
three more ; ' from the Lord of the Spirit,' ' from the Lord who 
is spirit,' and 'from a sovereign Spirit,' i.e. a Spirit which 
exercises lordship, making Kvpiov an adjective. These six do 
not exhaust the possibilities in English, but they probably 
include the right rendering. 

It will help us to select one or more of these as more 
probable than the others, if we consider why these words are 
added. The Ka.6d.irep (see on i. 14), 'even as,' means 'as one 
would expect,' 'as is natural,' and the words which follow 
Ka.6a.Trep explain how it is that the marvellous transfiguration 
into the very image of Christ is possible. It is because the Lord 
is spirit that He effects this change. A spiritual effect must 
have a spiritual cause, and from a cause of the highest order we 
may expect very high effects. On the other hand, a spiritual 
effect of the greatest magnitude requires an adequate cause. 
The Lord of glory as the giver of glory satisfies these conditions, 
and the Apostle shows talem gloriam dari, quae sublimitati con- 
gruat dantis (Ambrst). These considerations are in favour of 
' Even as from the Lord who is spirit ' (Jn. iv. 24), ' the Lord ' 
being Christ, as is shown by iv Xpio-rw and 7rpds Kvpiov. It is 
the glory of Christ that is reflected in Christians; for which 
reason ' Even as from a Spirit who is Lord,' or ' Even as from 
the Spirit which is the Lord,' is less probable. ' Even as from 
the Lord of the Spirit,' i.e. from Christ who sends the Spirit 
(Jn. xvi. 7), is the simplest translation grammatically, unless 
Kvpiov is an adjective; but it has against it (1) the absence of 
the articles, which would have made this meaning clearer, and 
(2) the fact that St Paul generally represents God as the giver of 
the Spirit (i. 22, v. 5; 1 Cor. ii. 12, vi. 19; 1 Thess. iv. 8), 
through the instrumentality of Christ (Tit. iii. 6). Hort's 
proposal to make Kvpiov an adjective is attractive, but it has 


against it the fact that nowhere else in Scripture is ki'/hos thus 
used, and this is a strong objection, for the fact can hardly be 
accidental.* Writers would avoid using as a mere epithet a 
word which was so constantly employed as one of the Divine 
names. 'Even as from the Lord who is spirit,' or 'from the 
Lord, the Spirit,' is on the whole to be preferred. AV. text is 
not likely to be right. 

There is no transforming power so effectual as spirit, and in 
this case it is the Lord Christ Himself who is the transforming 
power. Spiritual agency is here at its highest. The most 
wonderful changes are not only possible but natural, when such 
a cause is operating. But the conditions must be observed, and 
they are mainly three. There is the turning to the Lord ; every 
veil that might hide Him must be removed ; and it is His glory 
and no other that is reflected. When these three things are 
secured, by continual reflexion of the Lord's glory Christians are 
transfigured into the very image of Him whose glory they have 
caught and retained, and step by step the likeness becomes 
more and more complete — eis jxirpov rj\iKia<; rov irXrjpwpaTO% rov 
Xpicrrov, ' unto the full measure of the maturity of the fulness of 
Christ' (Eph. iv. 13). 

IV. 1. Here again, as between i. and ii., the division of 
chapters is unintelligently made. The first six verses of this 
chapter belong to the preceding one, and the close connexion 
between the two paragraphs is obvious : the opening verses of 
this chapter show how close it is, for the Apostle is still urging 
the claims of his office, especially against those who charge him 
with insincerity and self-commendation. 

The six verses run in couplets ; the glory of the new ministry 
(1, 2) ; the condition of those who are too blind to see the glory 
of the Gospel (3, 4) ; the source of the glory (5, 6). A fresh 
departure is made at v. 7. With 1-6 comp. 1 Thess. ii. 1-12, 
which is a similar vindication of Apostolic authority on behalf of 
St Paul and his colleagues, and contains several similar ex- 

Aia touto. In 1 Cor. iv. 17 both AV. and RV. have 'For 
this cause,' which might well be retained here, vii. 13, and xiii. 
10, in order to mark a difference between 81a tovto, 810 (iv. 16), 
which might be ' wherefore,' and ovv (v. 20), which is usually 
' therefore.' Vulg. has ideo for 8ta tovto, propter quod for 810', and 
ergo for ovv, not invariably, but in this Epistle. See Index IV. 

* The familiar language of the Creed, " the Lord, and Giver of Life," 
is based on these verses (iii. 6, 17, 18). The Greek, rb Kvpiov t6 faoiroidv, 
shows that it is wrong to rehearse the words as if they meant " the Lord of 
life and the Giver of life." 


KaGojg r|\er|0T}|j.ef. ' Even as we received mercy.' The words 
belong to what precedes ; ' seeing that, in full accordance with 
God's mercy, we have this ministry.' It is of God's goodness, 
and not of any merit of his own, that he has a calling of so high 
an order. Habentes earn, non ex mentis, sed ex Dei misericordia, 
quae nos ministros suos fecit (Herveius). Cf. the similar use of 
Kadd-rrep in hi. 1 8 to show how Divine action is the explanation 
of wonderful results. Hort, on i Pet. ii. 10, points out that this 
verb is used "in reference to the signal mercy of the gift of the 
Gospel." St Paul uses it several times of his own conversion 
and call (here; i Cor. vii. 25 ; 1 Tim. i. 13, 16). The use of so 
humble an expression respecting his appointment to the Apostle- 
ship had special point in writing to Corinth, because there he 
had been accused of being self-asserting and aggressive. Cf. 
1 Cor. xv. 9, 10. For SiaKovia see on v. 18. 

In these six verses, as in the preceding chapter, St Paul is 
sometimes answering charges which had been brought against 
himself, and sometimes indirectly bringing charges against his 
Judaizing opponents by hinting that they do what he declares 
that he himself does not do ; and we cannot always decide which 
of the two he is doing. In some cases he may be doing both. 
It is also difficult to decide whether the 1st pers. plur. includes 
Timothy or anyone else. Apparently the Apostle is thinking 
mainly of himself. 

ouk eyKdKoufiei'. ' We do not lose heart.' The verb indicates 
the timidity which shrinks from coming forward and speaking 
out. Such faintheartedness takes refuge in silence and inactivity, 
in order to escape criticism, and therefore is the opposite of 
Trapprjo-io.. In Eph. iii. 13, fxr] ivKOLKziv follows a mention of 
nappqaia. The consciousness that he owed his ministry to the 
graciousness of God inspired the Apostle with courage and 
frankness. Misericordia Dei, per quam ministerium accipitur, 
facit strenuos et sinceros. Etiam Moses misericordiam adeptus est, 
et inde tantatn invenit admissionem (Beng.). Chrys. paraphrases, 
ov Ka.Ta.TrLTrTop.ev, dAA.a ko.1 ^atpop.€v /cat TTappr]o-ia£ } 6p.e6a. In short, 

the Apostle acts up to his own exhortation, av8pt£,<-o-8e, KpaTaiovo-Oe 
(see on I Cor. xvi. 13). Cf. ov yap cSw/cev rjplv TTV€vp.a SetAtas 
(2 Tim. i. 7). 

Excepting Lk. viii. 1 (where see note), the verb is found only in Paul 
{v. 16 ; 2 Thess iii. 13 ; Gal. vi. 9 ; Eph. iii. 13), and everywhere there is 
a v.l. tKKaK. Here we should read eynaK. (X A B D* F G 17, 67**) rather 
than (kkclk. (CD 3 EKLP). In all five passages D 3 K L Phavee/c/caK., in four 
they are joined by C and E, and in three by F and G. The other uncials 
vary between evKaK., which is right in Lk. xviii. 1, and may be right in 
Gal. vi. 9 and Eph. iii. 13. The evidence is tabulated by Gregory in 
Prolegomena to Tisch. ed. 8, p. 78. The verb is not found in LXX, but 
iyicaK. is used by Symmachus four times, and ckkclk. once. Polyb. IV. 


xix. IO has rb irtfiireiv ras f3oi]0ela.s iv€Ka.Kri<xa.v of the Lacedemonians dis- 
honourably neglecting to send the promised reinforcements ; and Philo, De 
con/us. ling. § 13, has otire iKKa.Kovfj.evos £Kvaix<pdr}v, aXka eppoi/xivws wveiSiaa 
to?j it- avruiv fj.01 Karapio/nivois. Vulg. here has rum deficimus, d and e non 
deficimus, g 11011 fiamus segnes, Ambrst. non infirmemur. 

2. direurafxeGa. The verb both in act. and mid. has a variety 
of meanings, but there is no doubt as to its meaning here ; ' we 
have renounced ' or 'we renounce,' abdicamus occulta dedecoris 
(Vulg.). The aor. is timeless, or " ingressive," J. H. Moulton, 
pp. 109, 134. This is more probable than that the aor. refers 
to the same period as rjXeyOrj/xev. It is not likely that St Paul 
means that at his call he definitely renounced certain things. 
And of course dTi-aW/ietfa does not mean that he had previously 
practised what he here says that he has renounced, as was the 
case with St Matthew and Zacchaeus as toll-collectors. He 
means that these practices are quite alien to the work of an 
Apostle. On this 1st aor. in -a see WH. App. p. 164; Winer, 
p. 103; Blass, § 21. 1. The mid. of aTreiirov is not found in 
classical Attic, and the dictum of Thomas Magister (57) that 
aireuraix-qv is better Greek than direiirov may be doubted. In 
Joseph. Ant. XVII. iii. I we have aTreLTrecrOai rryvSe tt)v ya/ter^v, — a 
very rare instance of the 2nd aor. mid. 

rd KpuTTTci ttjs aiax<Ji'r)S- The exact meaning of ' the hidden 
things of shame' is not clear; but they are the opposite of irap- 
py]cria. ' The hidden things which bring disgrace when they are 
known,' or ' which make a man ashamed of himself,' or ' which 
shame makes a man conceal.' The general sense is much the 
same however we analyse the expression. He is not thinking of 
heathen vices (Eph. v. 12), but of the underhand methods of the 
false teachers. An allusion to circumcision (Thdrt.) is certainly 
not intended. See on rd KpviTTa. tov o-kotovs (i Cor. iv. 5). 
'The hidden things of dishonesty' (AV.) was not far wrong in 
161 1, when 'dishonesty' might mean 'disgrace,' and 'honesty' 
(1 Tim. ii. 2) might mean 'decorous behaviour,' and 'honest' 
(Rom. xii. 17) 'honourable,' or 'of good report' This usage 
still survives in the expression "to make her an honest woman," 
but ' dishonesty ' here is now misleading. 

(XT) TrepiTrciToiJVTCs iv Traeoupyia. ' So that we do not walk in 
craftiness'; non ambulantes in astutia (Vulg.). This is a result 
of renouncing rd Kpvirra t. atV^wr/s. By 7ravoi;pyia. is meant 
unscrupulous readiness to adopt any means in order to gain one's 
ends. Excepting Lk. xx. 23, only in Paul (xi. 3 ; 1 Cor. iii. 19; 
Eph. iv. 14). The Apostle had been accused of being a iravovp- 
yos (xii. 16), and if x.-xiii. is part of the intermediate severe 
letter, this passage may be a reference to that, or to xi. 3. If 
iravovpyia refers to the manoeuvres of the Judaizers, it may point 


to their efforts to undermine the influence of the Apostle. In 
our ignorance of the circumstances, there is abundant room for 
conjectures. See on i Cor. iii. 3 for Trepnrareiv of daily conduct, 
a very freq. use in Paul, = versari ; also Hort on 1 Pet. i. 15; 
Milligan on 1 Thess. ii. 12 ; Lukyn Williams on Gal. i. 13. 

fnjSe SoXourres t. \6yov t. 0eou. See on iii. 17. The verb 
occurs nowhere else in N.T. and only twice in LXX (Ps. xv. 3, 
xxxvi. 2). Here, as in ii. 17 and 1 Cor. xiv. 36, 6 Aoyos t. ®eov 
means the Gospel message, which is its usual, though not 
invariable, meaning in Paul (1 Thess. ii. 13; Phil. i. 14; Col. 
i. 25 ; 1 Tim. iv. 5 ; 2 Tim. ii. 9 ; Tit. ii. 5). See Harnack, 
The Constitution and Law of the Church, p. 340. By SoAoiWes 
he means using fallacious arguments and misinterpretations, and 
falsifying the relation of the old revelation to the new. The 
Judaizers of course resented his use of the O.T. and his disregard 
of the letter of the Law. 

dXXd ttj (jxxrepwo-ei. ' But, on the contrary, by manifestation.' 
The word occurs in Biblical Greek only here and 1 Cor. xii. 7 : 
it is selected in opposition to to k^v-kto. t^s aio-^wrys. Cf. i. 12, 
iii. 12, xi. 3. 

ttjs dXr}9€ias. In opposition to SoAowt£s. ' By the manifesta- 
tion of the truth ' stands first with emphasis ; by that, and by 
nothing else, do they commend themselves ; no letters of 
recommendation, no wily arts, no crying of ' peace ' when there 
is no peace (Jer. vi. 14, viii. 11). In Gal. ii. 5, 14, where St 
Paul is dealing with similar opponents, we have the more definite 
expression f] a\y8eLa t. cuayyeXioi;, and in Col. i. 5,6 Xoyos t^s 
dA?/#eias t. evayyeXCov. In all these places the expression is a 
protest against misrepresentations of the Gospel and spurious 
substitutes for it, especially such as destroyed Christian liberty. 
Veritas quam manifestamus nos ipsos efficit cotmnendabiles 

auviaTavovTes lauTous. This looks back to iii. 1-6. Re- 
membering who sent him and made him competent for the work, 
he is not afraid to magnify his office, although he knows that his 
doing so may be maliciously misinterpreted. Reflexive pronouns 
of the 3rd pers. with verbs of the 1st pers. plur. are freq. (v. 5, 
v. 12, 15, vi. 4; 1 Cor. xi. 31 ; Rom. viii. 23, xv. 1; etc.). The 
simplification is convenient where it causes no ambiguity. 

7rp6s irdorac owei8r]o"ii' dvGpcoTuoi/. ' Unto the human con- 
science in all its forms' ; see Westcott on Eph. i. 3, iv. 8, and cf. 
Rom. ii. 9; Eph. i. 8, iv. 19, 31, v. 3, 9, vi. 18; etc. Passion 
and prejudice are no safe judges ; reason cannot always be 
trusted ; even conscience is not infallible, for the conscience of 
this or that individual, or class, or profession may give a faulty 
decision. St Paul takes a wider range. He appeals to every 


kind of conscience among men, confident that they will all admit 
the justice of his claim ; and securus judicat orbis terrarum. For 
this use of 717505 comp. 7rp6s tov 0eoV in iii. 4 ; for owei'S-qo-is see 
on i. 12. 

ivuinov tou 06oO. The accumulation of solemn language in 
this verse here reaches a climax. He has felt the seriousness of 
the charges which had been openly formulated, or secretly 
insinuated, against him by his wily opponents, and he meets 
them seriously and without compromise. He appeals, not only 
to every form of human conscience, but to Him to whose mercy 
(v. 1) he owes the high calling which has subjected him to so 
much criticism, and under whose eye every conscience works : 
tows ev (f>povovvTa<s e^ofxev pzapTvpas ko\ tov tov <tvv€l86to<s 'Ettotttt;!/ 
(Thdrt.). The appeal can go no higher. Magnum esset, si hoc 
solummodo de hominibus diceret ; sed, quia homines /alii possunt, 
ideo subjunxit quod majus est incomparabiliter (Atto Vercellensis). 
Cf. vii. 13; Rom. xiv. 22. 

The reading owiaravovTes (A? B P 47, 67**, 80) is not quite certain ; 
avvmravTes (K C D* F G 17, 39) is preferred by some editors : either is to 
be preferred to o-wun-cDj/res (D 3 E K L). Winer, p. 94, note. 

3. ei 8e Kal eo~tiv KeKaXufxjieVoi' to euayye'Xioi/ f\u.S>v. ' But even 
though the Gospel which we preach really is veiled.' The use 
of el ko.1 (v. 16, v. 16, xii. 11) rather than Kal el, and the emphatic 
position of eo-nv, which here cannot be enclitic, show that St 
Paul concedes what is stated hypothetically to be actually a 
fact. Winer, p. 554. In spite of the (pavepwais rf}s d\r]6eta<s, 
the good tidings were not recognized as such by all. Some 
denied that there had been any cpavepucris : his preaching was 
obscure and shifty. He had said that a veil hid the meaning 
of the Law from them ; it was more true to say that a veil hid 
his Gospel from them. The Apostle here admits this; a veil 
has hid and does hide (perf. part.) the Gospel from them, but 
the veil is on their own hearts (iii.. 15). It is not the fault of 
the Gospel or of those who preach it that it is rejected by some ; 
it is the hearers' own fault, because they listen in an attitude that 
is fatal. They desire, not the truth, but the confirmation of their 
own views. 

The sublimity of St Paul's teaching and his paradoxical 
expressions laid him open to the charge of saying ' things hard 
to be understood ' (2 Pet. iii. 16). But that was not the cause 
of the vehement opposition to his teaching. His chief offence 
was his declaring the Law to be obsolete, and thereby (his 
enemies said) opening the door to boundless licence. So they 
declared that his Gospel was imperfect. He had never known 
the Christ, nor had been intimate with those who had known 
Him. They, on the contrary, had authentic information. 


iv tois d-n-oMujuieVois. ' In the case of those who are perishing ' 
(see on ii. 15). The iv is not superfluous (Blass, § 41. 2); nor 
does it mean ' in the hearts of,' for the Gospel had not reached 
their hearts; nor 'in their judgment,' like iv ifioC, 1 Cor. xiv. 11, 
for the question is one of fact, not of opinion ; but ' in their case.' 
The uses of iv in late Greek are very various ; J. H. Moulton, 
p. 103. Calvin comments on the confidence of the Apostle in 
this declaration ; magnae fiduciae argumentum est, quod pro 
reprobis ducere audet omnes qui doctrinam resptiunt. And then, 
perhaps remembering his own attitude towards those who dis- 
sented from him, he adds, Vei-um simili fiducia instructos esse 
convenit, quicunque pro Dei ministris haberi volunt ; ut ifitrepida 
conscientia non dubitent omnes doctrinae suae adversarios ad Dei 
tribunal citare, ut illiuc damnationem certain referant. See on 

1 Jn. iv. 16, where the writer says that he and his fellow-teachers 
receive their inspiration from God, and their message is rejected 
only by those who are not of God and are not striving to know 

4. 6 0e6s tou alwyos tou'tou. The expression occurs nowhere 
else ; but St Paul speaks of rbv apxpvra t»}s e^oucnas rov dcpos 
(see on Eph. ii. 2), while St John, in three utterances attributed 
to Christ, has 6 ap-ywv rov koo-jxov tovtov. In Mk. iii. 22 = Mt. 
xii. 24 and Lk. xi. 15 (Mt. ix. 34), Christ's opponents say that He 
casts out demons iv tw ap^ovn rfiv Sai/ioviW. In all these cases 
Satan is meant, and in harmony with these passages St John 
says that the whole koct/ao?, i.e. the whole of the moral and in- 
tellectual universe, so far as it is estranged from God, lies in the 
power of the evil one (see on 1 Jn. v. 19). This does not mean 
that God abdicates or surrenders any portion of His dominion 
to Satan, but that those to whom He has granted free will place 
themselves under the power of darkness.* Here it is not this 
K00-/U.0?, mundus, but 6 alwv ovros, ' this age,' seculum, that is said 
to have Satan for its god. During the time — believed by St 
Paul to be short — which would elapse before the Coming of the 
Lord, Satan reigned wherever there was opposition to the will 
of God, and this was an enormous sphere. 

St Paul speaks frequently of 6 aiwi/ oStos (i Cor. i. 20, ii. 6, 
8, iii. 18 ; Rom. xii. 2 ; Eph. i. 21), or 6 vvv alwv (1 Tim. vi. 17 ; 

2 Tim. iv. 10; Tit. ii. 12), or 6 vvv Kcupo's (Rom. iii. 26, viii. 18, 

* See the Ascension of Isaiah x. II, 12. " The point of this bold com- 
parison seems to lie in this, that as the true God by His Spirit illumines the 
minds of believers, enabling them to behold the glory of Christ in the Gospel, 
so the false god of the present age has a counter-spirit at work (or is a counter- 
spirit) which blinds the minds of the unbelieving that the light of the glory 
of Christ should not dawn upon them " (G. Vos, Princelown Biblical Studies, 
p. 251). 


xi. 5), or 6 alwv 6 eVeo-rcos (Gal. i. 4), where it is especially stig- 
matized as 7rovr)p6<;, or, in a remarkable expression which com- 
bines both terms, 6 alwv tov koo-jjlov tovtov (Eph. ii. 2). The 
opposite of this evil age or world is 6 alwv p.e\\wv (Eph. i. 21 ; 
cf. Heb. vi. 5 ; Lk. xviii. 30, xx. 35), which is more commonly 
designated 17 /?acriA.ei'a toD 0eo9, the period or realm in which God 
reigns supreme. If Satan is the ruler of this limited age, God 
is the King of the countless ages which are to follow it ; He is 
6 /3acrtXei;s twv alwrwv (1 Tim. i. 17; Tob. xiii. 6, 10; cf. Ps. 
cxlv. 13, and see J. H. Bernard on 1 Tim. i. 17). In [Clem. 
Rom.] ii. 6 it is said lortv 8k ouros 6 alwv Kal 6 fxiXXwv 8vo i^Opoi, 
and as we cannot be friends of both, we must detach ourselves 
from this one and cling firmly to the other. 

It is startling to find one who had all his life held idolatry 
in abomination, and been zealous for the glory of the one true 
God, using this grandis et horribilis descriptio Saianae (Beng.) 
and electing to apply the term #eo? to the arch-enemy of God 
and of mankind (P. Gardner, The Religious Experie?ice of St 
Paul, p. 203) ; but what he says about the worship of demons 
(see on 1 Cor. x. 20) is some explanation of his view. There was 
a Rabbinical saying, " The first God is the true God, but the 
second God is Samael," and Irenaeus (1. v. 4) says that the 
Valentinians called the devil Koo-jxoKpaTwp. See J. A. Robinson 
on Eph. vi. 12; Dalman, Words, p. 165. 

This verse contains the strongest item of evidence for what 
is called " the dualistic element in the thinking of St Paul," i.e. 
the recognition of a power or powers other than God, external 
to man, exerting influence over human affairs, and in some sense 
independent of God ; and it has been maintained that on this 
point the dualism of the N.T. is sharper than that of contem- 
porary Judaism. It may be so. Increased recognition of the 
mystery of 'the unsearchable riches of Christ' would lead to 
a deeper appreciation of ' the mystery of lawlessness.' 

Fear of giving Apostolic support to the Manichaean doctrine 
of a good God and an evil one caused various Fathers, both 
Greek and Latin, to interpret this passage of God. Irenaeus 
(ill. vii. 1) and others (Orig. Chrys. Thdrt. Tert. Hil. Aug.) 
adopt the device of taking tov ai'wvos tovtov as the gen. after 
tuv aTTLo-Twv — ' in whom God has blinded the minds of the 
unbelievers of this world ' ; and ' the unbelievers of this world ' 
is interpreted to mean those who have no part in the other 
world, the world of light and bliss. Aug. (c. Faust, xxi. 2) says 
that plerique nostrum take the sentence in this way. He and 
others seem to be aware that this is questionable exegesis ; but 
they are of opinion that, as Atto of Vtrcelli expresses it, because 
to interpret the words as meaning Satan brings us near to error, 


we must understand them as meaning God Himself. Calvin's 
comment on this is to the point ; Videmus quid faciat conte?i- 
tiotiis fervor in disputationilncs : si composito animo legissent 
illi omfies Pauli verba, net/iini eorum in mentem venisset ita in 
coactum sensum torquere ; sed quia urgebant adversarii, magis de 
Hit's propulsandis quam de inquirenda Pauli mente solliciti fuerunt. 
See Chase, The Lord's Prayer in the Early Church, pp. 88 f. 

€Tu<J>\a)o-ei' to. yorjjxaTa t&v amo-Tajc. ' Blinded the minds of 
the unbelieving.' Nothing is gained by making t. airia-r^v 
proleptic, ' so that they did not believe ' ; on the contrary, it 
spoils what is the probable meaning. It was because they 
refused to believe that Satan had power to blind them. They 
resisted the influence of light until they lost the power of appreci- 
ating it. If the adjective had been proleptic, we should have had 
a7rio-Ta. rather than raw dmo-i-ov, which is a kind of after-thought 
added to explain how the disastrous blinding became possible. 
Neither di/ey/<A?jTous in i Cor. i. 8 (see note there), nor o-v/x/xopcfiov 
in Phil. iii. 21 (see note) is parallel to tG>v a.7rio-Twv here. As in 
iii. 14, vorifxaTa here must mean ' minds ' rather than ' thoughts ' : 
to speak of blinding men's thoughts is somewhat incongruous. 
In LXX cta-ioros is very rare ; in N.T. it is specially freq. in 
1 and 2 Cor., and is almost always used of unconverted Gentiles. 
But here there is such constant allusion to the Judaizers that we 
can hardly limit tu>v a-n-io-Tuv to heathen. Cf. Tit. i. 15. 

In dictating, St Paul has packed his sentence too full, and 
the construction is so nearly broken that the meaning is in some 
respects obscure. It is not clear whether 01 aTroWvjxzvoi and 
o! aVio-roi are coextensive. If not, which of the two includes 
the other ? The latter question can be answered with some 
certainty, if it arises. It is not likely that 01 airoWvjxevoi is the 
larger class, of which only some are airto-Toi. But it is possible 
that 01 oVid-toi is a large class, some of whom, by being blinded, 
become airoXXv^vot. We must translate lv oh ' in whose case,' 
not ' among whom ' : either ' in whose case Satan has blinded 
the understandings of some who believed not ' ; or, ' in whose 
case Satan blinded their understandings because they believed 
not.' The latter is more probably correct, as being the simpler 
construction. If we adopt it, then all the olttlo-tol are blinded 
and become d7roA\i///,ej/oi, and the two classes are coextensive. 
The interest of the discussion lies in the question whether 
St Paul contemplated the possibility of ' unbelievers ' who were 
not ' perishing.' 

els to fxt) auydo-ai. The verb may be either transitive, ' to 
see,' or intransitive, ' to dawn ' ; therefore either, ' that they 
should not see the illumination of the Gospel of the glory of the 
Christ,' or, ' that the illumination of the Gospel, etc., should not 


dawn ' upon them. Both AV. and RV. take the latter meaning ; 
RV. marg. takes the former, which has in its favour the order of 
the words and the absence of avTois, which is not genuine, but 
has been inserted in some texts in order to make the latter 
meaning more possible. Qui oculos ad lucem claudunt justum est 
ut eis lux occultetur (Herveius) ; or, as Thdrt. puts it, ao-Qevovcri 
yap 6cp6a\p.oi<; iroXefuos ^Atos. The rapid sequence, ' see ' or 
'dawn,' 'illumination,' 'good-tidings,' 'glory,' 'the Christ,' 
'image of God,' shows how anxious St Paul is to give some idea 
of the amazing brightness and beauty which was lost when 
unbelievers came into the power of Satan. There is something 
stately both here and in v. 6 in the series of four genitives in 
succession. In N.T. avyd&tv occurs nowhere else, and in LXX 
it is very rare ; <£wtio-/aos occurs here and v. 6 and six times in 
LXX. It is possible that here we have a trace of the influence 
of the Book of Wisdom on St Paul ; cf. aTravyao-fxa yap eWiv 
<£wtos al8iov, /ecu £<J07TTpov cu<7]X.eo(x)TOv rrj'i toG 6eov ivepytias 
(Wisd. vii. 26). See on v. 1, 4. In the Testaments (Levi xiv. 

4), TO CpWS TOV VOfXOV TO 8o8lv €tS <f)WT L(T JJ.OV 7TaVTOS dvOpOiWOV. As 

we might expect, neither avya&iv nor ^wtict/aos has been found 
in papyri ; they deal with subjects that do not require the use of 
such words. 

rfis 86£y]s too XpioroG. The Gospel 'which contains and 
proclaims the glory of the Messiah.' This was precisely what 
the Gospel preached by the Judaizers did not do.* The addition 
of these words was perhaps suggested by the glory of Moses. 
In i Tim. i. 1 1 we have ' the Gospel of the glory of the blessed 
God.' Neither expression is inconsistent with 6 Aoyos tov cnavpov, 
which is foolishness tois d7roAAv/m'ois (see on 1 Cor. i. 18). It 
was the cross which led direct to the glory : ' He became obedient 
to the death of the cross ; wherefore also (Sio Kai) God highly 
exalted Him' (Phil. ii. 9 ; cf. Jn. x. 17 ; Heb. ii. o).f 

os io-Tiv eiKwi/ tou 0eou. Here again, as in cvw7nov tov ®eov 
(v. 2), we reach the supreme climax. This addition to the 
sentence, which is complete without it, is made in order to show 
what ' the glory of the Christ ' means ; hinc satis intelligi potest, 
quatita sit gloria Christi (Beng.). It means the glory which is 
shed abroad by the one visible Representative of the invisible 
God, a glory which cannot be seen by those whom Satan has 
blinded. See on Phil. ii. 6 and Col. i. 15, and comp. x a P aKT VP 
rrjs {i7roo-Tacre(Ds avTov (Heb. i. 3). This is one of the passages 

* It weakens the force of rrjs 56^s to treat it as a characterizing genitive, 
' the glorious Gospel of Christ ' (AV. ). 

t It is here that * the Gospel of the glory of God ' (1 Tim. i. 11) and ' the 
Gospel of the grace of God ' (Acts xx. 24) are coincident. God's grace in 
sending His Son is His special glory. 


in which St Paul comes near to the Johannine doctrine of the 
Aoyos. See Bernard, ad loc. The Alexandrian school interprets 
the txnttiv ®eov of the Adyos : see Lightfoot on Col. iii. 10, and 
Foundations, pp. 192 f. Cf. Jn. viii. 19 ; Wisd. vii. 26. 

Baljon and others suggest that tZv aTrlaruv is a gloss ; Bachmann, that 
the original reading may have been avrQv tQ>v aTviartav or simply atirwv. 
avyacrai (K B F GKL P) rather than Karavydaai. (C D E H) or diavydacu 
(A 17). After avydeai D 2 and 3 E K L P, Syrr. Vulg. Aeth. Goth, add 
avroh, which some editors accept; but NABCD'FGH 17, Lat-Vet. 
omit, and insertion to smooth the construction is more probable than 
accidental omission. For XpicrTov, C has livpiov. After rod Oeou, H 3 L P, 
Syr-Hark, add rod dopdrov from Col. i. 15. 

5. ou yap eauTous K'npiWopei'. In spite of such strong dis- 
claimers as 1 Cor. i. 13, St Paul was accused of preaching 
himself. His giving himself as a pattern to be imitated (1 Cor. 
iv. 16, vii. 7, xi. 1 ; etc.) would serve as a handle for this charge; 
see on iii. 1. It is less probable that by this accusation his 
enemies meant that his revelations were delusions or deliberate 
fictions ; he had never seen Jesus and knew nothing about Him ; 
what he called " preaching Christ " was preaching his own fancies. 
This does not suit the context very well. The yap refers to the 
preceding verses. ' I call it " our Gospel " (v. 3), because we 
preach it, but its contents are " the glory of Christ " {v. 4) ; for it 
is not ourselves that we preach, but (what is very different) Christ 
Jesus as Lord.' 'Eavrovs is emphatic by position, but nvpiovs 
is not to be understood with it. ' It is not ourselves that we 
preach as lords, but Christ Jesus that we preach as Lord ' is an 
antithesis which St Paul would not be likely to make. To 
'preach Christ as Lord' is to preach Him as crucified, risen, and 
glorified, the Lord to whom 'all authority in heaven and earth 
has been given.' To confess Him as Lord is to declare one- 
self a Christian (Rom. x. 9 ; 1 Cor. xii. 3). Kvpiov suggests the 
Sov'Aows which follows as an antithesis. 

eauTous Se Sou'Xous 6pwi\ ' While (we account) ourselves as 
your bondservants.' Grammatically, Krjpvaaofxev governs the 
second earrows as well as the first, but that is not what the 
Apostle means. He has just stated that he does not preach 
himself, which is to be understood absolutely. From no point of 
view and in no capacity does he do that ; but the position which 
he assumes in relation to his converts is not that of Saviour, but 
of a slave. In 1 Cor. iii. 5 he said Skxkovoi, ' servants ' : in 
1 Cor. iv. 1, {»7r?7peVai, 'underlings'; here he says S0GA01, 
'slaves.' Elsewhere he calls himself the SovXos of Jesus Christ 
(Rom. i. 1 ; Phil. i. 1); and the qualifying words which he adds 
here show that this is his meaning here. It is because Christian 
ministers are the bondservants of Christ that they are the bond- 


servants of those to whom they minister ; and only so far as 
service to them dois not interfere with service to Him, is it 
allowable to be bondservants to men. This is the only passage 
in which St Paul speaks of being the SovXos of his converts. See 
Chad wick, Pastor at. Teaching of St Paul, p. 12S. Cf. 1 Cor. vii. 
23, ix. 19. 

81a Mrjaoui'. Propter Jesu/n, ' for Jesus' sake.' The use of 
this name without Xpio-ToV commonly denotes our Lord in the 
time of His humiliation {vv. 10-14; l Thess. i. 10, iv. 14); see 
on 1 Cor. ix. 1 ; J. A. Robinson, Ephesians, pp. 23, 107. It is 
rare in the Pauline Epistles, but it has special point here. It is 
not in order to curry favour with the Corinthians, or to flatter 
their conceit, that he counts himself as their SoCAos, but he does 

SO for the sake Of Him who lavTOV iKtvwaev [Xopcf>r)V 8ov\ov 

kafSwv (Phil. ii. 7); for the sake of Him who commanded His 
Apostles to be ready for the meanest service (Jn. xiii. 14-16). 
Non ad gloriam nostram praedicamus Evangelium, sed ad clari- 
tatem Christi, cui obedimus, dum vobis in ministerio verbi servimus 
non propter vestrum meritum, sed propter Domini praeceptum 
(Herveius). For His sake they made themselves the servants of 
all, in order to bring the more adherents to Him; see on 
1 Cor. ix. 19. 

Some editors make vv. 3 and 4 parenthetical and treat this 
verse as a continuation and explanation of v. 2. Others, with 
more reason, make this verse a parenthesis. Clearness is not 
gained by either arrangement. The connexion (yap) of v. 5 with 
vv. 3 and 4 has been pointed out. There is perhaps yet another 
thought. ' We do not preach ourselves but Jesus as Lord ; 
therefore those unbelievers who reject our preaching reject, not 
us, but the Lord Jesus.' On the other hand, the connexion 
between v. 4 and v. 6 is close. 

This is one of the places in which it is hard to decide between Xpiarbv 
l-qaovv (BHKL, Syr-Pesh. Copt. Arm.) and 'Iyer. Xp. (KACDE, 
Latt. Syr-Hark. Goth.). FG have Kvpiov before 'Irja. Xp. P omits 
Kvpwv. Vulg-Clem. and some inferior Latin authorities insert nostrum 
after Dominum ; 'we preach Jesus Christ our Lord.' For 81a '\t}aovv, 
X*A**Cl7, Latt. {per, not propter) Copt, have 5ia 'I-qaov, 'through 

6. on. This explains why they must preach Christ and not 
themselves; 'Because the God who said, Out of darkness light 
shall shine, is He who shone in our hearts.' This is another 
reason for not treating v. 5 as a parenthesis. ' Out of darkness ' 
should come before ' light shall shine ' in English, as in the 
Greek. To omit os is a needless simplification ; c'crriv is to be 
supplied with os. The statement is in antithesis to v. 4, which 
has influenced the structure of this verse. The unbelieving 


opponents have been blinded by Satan ; the Apostle has been 
illumined by God Himself, the Creator of Light. Satan 
reduced them from unbelief to total blindness ; God has brought 
him from darkness to light. In this verse the ist pers. plur. 
must mean primarily the Apostle, for the reference to his own 
experiences on the road to Damascus and in Damascus are 
almost as clear as his reference to ' Let there be light.' With 
regard to that, it is possible that some recollection of e£av€T£i- 
Xev iv (tkot€l (puis (Ps. Cxi. 4), or of <pa>s 7roi7jcras Ik ctkotous (Job 
xxxvii. 15), has influenced his wording. He wants for his 
purpose i< o-kotovs as well as <puis : it was out of darkness, both 
physical and spiritual, that God rescued him. God blinded his 
bodily eyes for three days as a means towards healing his 
spiritual blindness. How could a man who had had these 
experiences preach himself? 

6 ciirwc, 'Ek ctkotous 4>ws XdfxiJ/ei. The Apostle reminds his 
converts of the first creative word that is recorded. The God 
who is Light (see on 1 Jn. i. 5), the nature of which is to 
communicate itself and expel darkness, and who is 'the Father 
of lights ' (Jas. i. 17), and therefore the Source of all intellec- 
tual and spiritual illumination, is the God who illuminated 
the Apostles, and in a special manner St Paul. God did not 
allow darkness to reign over the material universe. With the 
first utterance attributed to Him He dispersed it. Magnum 
opus, as Bengel remarks. It is not likely that He would 
allow darkness to prevail throughout the spiritual world. 
From the first He provided means for dispersing that also. 
The old lamps, however, were going out ; but better ones 
have taken their place, and some of them have been sent to 

os IX.apJ/ei' iv rats KapSiais f\iiu>v. ' Is He who shone in our 
hearts,' illuminating our whole moral and spiritual being. He 
who over the primeval chaos said, ' Let there be light,' and pro- 
vided sun, moon, and stars to preserve and spread it, has shed 
light into the chaos of our souls, and has thus provided instru- 
ments for the perpetual <pavepu)o-is t^s aXrjOaas (v. 2). The 
details of this process in the case of St Paul himself are told us 
to some extent in Gal. i. 15, 16. As Aapu^ei must be intransi- 
tive in the previous clause, it is probable that tXafuj/ev also is 
intransitive. Some, however, understand <pws, which is the 
nom. to Xd/xij/ei, as the ace. after eXa^ey, ' made light to shine.' 
But in class. Grk. the transitive use of Xd/x-n-eiv is poetical and 
somewhat rare. 

Trpos 4>uTicrfi6i' Ttjs yvuxreus ttjs 8oi*]S ToG 0eou. The stately 
series of genitives is parallel to that in v. 4. In both cases the 
first genitive is subjective ; ' the illumining which the knowledge 


of the glory (or, the Gospel of the glory) produces.'* In v. 4, 
<£w7ioy«>s t. ttayyeXiov cannot mean ' the enlightenment which 
produces the Gospel,' and it is unlikely that <pwr. t. yvwo-cws 
means 'the enlightenment which issues in knowledge.' The 
knowledge which has this illumining power is in the Apostles, 
imparted to them by God with a view to (71730s) their employing 
it to illuminate others. In the account of his conversion given 
by St Paul to King Agrippa he states that Christ told him of this 
purpose at the outset ; ' To this end (eis tovto) have I appeared 
to thee, to appoint thee a minister and a witness, delivering thee 
from the People and from the Gentiles, to whom I send thee, 
to open their eyes that they may turn from darkness to light, 
and from the power of Satan unto God' (Acts xxvi. 16-18). 
'With a view to illumining men with the knowledge of the 
glory of God' gives the sense. Some would limit the action of 
<^wtio-/ao? to iv rats /capStais ij/xwv, ' God shone in our hearts to 
illumine t/iem,' so that the scope of the statement does not 
extend beyond the Apostles and preachers ; but vv. 3 and 4 
clearly cover those to whom they preached, and the hearers are 
probably included here. 

iv -n-poo-wTra) Xpiorou. Like os eariv c'ikwv t. ©eoD in V. 4, this 
is an addition'to a sentence which would be complete without it, 
yet an addition which is full of meaning. Christ is the image of 
God, and in His face is revealed so much of the Divine glory as 
can be communicated to men, and it is this which Apostles 
know and have to make known. It may be that St Paul is still 
thinking of the reflexion of the Divine glory on the face of 
Moses, and hence says iv Trpoawirw Xpicrrov rather than iv 
Xjcno-Tw.f But it is more probable that he is thinking of the 
Divine glory in the face of Christ, which he himself saw on the 
road to Damascus. Elsewhere he merely affirms that he has 
seen the Lord (1 Cor. ix. 1, xv. 8), or that God revealed His 
Son to him (Gal. i. 15). Here he seems to be desiring to tell, 
as in the narratives in Acts, the splendour of the vision. Christ 
was revealed to him by God in a glory which was Divine. 
When he speaks of having knowledge ' of the glory of God in 
the face of Christ,' he is speaking of what he himself has seen. 
See Bousset, ad he. For 7iy>oo-w7ra) see on ii. 10. 

On this lofty level St Paul leaves for a while (till v. 11) the 
glorification of Apostleship, which is a different thing from 

* In the Apostles, not in St Paul alone. He is not claiming to be the one 
original transmitter of the light, any more than he claimed to be the one 
original diffuser of the perfume (ii. 14). 

t Cf. Book of Enoch xxxviii. 4 ; " They will not be able to behold the face 
of the holy, for the light of the Lord of Spirits is seen on the face of the holy 
and righteous and elect." 


glorification of himself. God does wonderful work with very 
humble instruments, and takes His instruments sometimes from 
very unexpected quarters. St Paul often remarks how true this 
is of himself. But whatever his demerits may be, they only 
enhance the glory of the Apostleship. What he has accomplished 
is due to the grace given to an Apostle, not to the abilities of 
Saul of Tarsus. 

It is often debated whether the experiences which produced 
his conversion were objective or subjective, whether there was 
any light that was seen by others and any voice that was heard 
by others. The accounts agree about the sight, but not about 
the sound. May there not be an error about both ? May not the 
whole of the experiences have been mental, and confined to the 
future Apostle ? * These questions will continue to be asked, 
and no answer to them can be proved to be true. What is 
certain is that these experiences produced in St Paul a convic- 
tion, which lasted the whole of his life and influenced his whole 
life, that he had seen and held a conversation with the risen Lord 
Jesus. In this passage he himself seems to give us both a 
subjective and an objective element. In os eXa/xif/ev iv KapStcus 
fj/Awv we have an internal experience ; in 17 So£a tov ®eov iv -n-po- 
crw7ra) Xpto-Tou we have an external one. Co in p. iv i/xoc (Gal. i. 
16) with the one and ewpa/ca (1 Cor. ix. 1) with the other 
(Klopper, ad loc). The reasonableness of believing in both 
these elements is well put by A. T. Robertson, Epochs in the 
Life of St Paul, ch. iii. ; and by J. H. Ropes, The Apostolic Age, 
pp. 107-110. See also Ramsay, The Teaching of Paul in 
Terms of the Present Day, p. 15. 

Xd/z^et (K* A D* 67**, Syrr. Aeth.) rather than U/t^cu (X'CD'EFG 
HKLP, Latt. Goth. Arm.), which was perhaps substituted because the 
wording is so different from Gen. i. 3 ; ' who commanded the light to shine 
out of darkness ' avoids divergence as to the form of the command. D* F 
G, Chrys. Tert. Ambrst. omit 6's before 'i\ap.fev, which simplifies the 
construction. C*D*F G, d e g r Aeth. substitute avrou for rod Qeov. iv 
■n-poffunruj XpHxrov (A B 17, Arm. (codd.), Orig. Chrys. Tert.) rather than iv 
irp. 'Iijcrov Xp. (K C H K L P, Syrr. Copt. Goth.) or iv irp. Xp. TijcroO 
(DEFG, Latt.). 

IV. 7-V. 10. The Sufferings and Supports of an Apostle. 

It may seem strange that so glorious a dispensation 
should be proclaimed by such frail and suffering ministers ; 
but that proves that the power of it is from God and not 

* See Cohu, S. Pant and Modern Research, pp. 7S-80 ; he gives a useful 
table of the three narratives in parallel columns. See also Weinel, St Paul, 
pp. 79-84. It is strange that the hypothesis that Wisd. vii. 25, 26 is the basis 
of the story of St Paul's conversion should be called " attractive." 


from them. They are sustained by God's power and by the 
prospect of future blessedness. The sure hope that present 
suffering leads on to eternal glory enables them to bear all 
things in the service of Christ. 

7 But this glory has another side. This illuminating power is 
entrusted to unattractive and worthless persons, as treasure is 
stored in earthen jars, in order that it may be patent to all that 
the excellence of power which we exhibit is God's gift, and does 
not emanate from us. 8 In our conflicts we suffer heavily, but 
are never utterly defeated. Often hard pressed, yet not driven 
to surrender ; in desperate plight, yet not in despair ; 9 chased 
from the field, yet not left to the mercy of the foe ; beaten to 
the earth, yet not killed outright ; 10 always carrying about in 
the body the imminent danger of dying as Jesus died, in order 
that by the continual escapes and deliverances of our bodies it 
might be manifest to the world that Jesus is still alive. n Yes, 
every day that we live we are continually being handed over to 
death for the sake of Jesus, in order that in just that part of us 
which is liable to death it might be made manifest to all that the 
living Jesus is at work. 12 So then it is His death that takes effect 
in us while it is His life which, through its power in us, takes 
effect in you. 13 There is a Psalmist who has written, ' I believed, 
therefore I spoke.' That is just our case. We have exactly the 
same spirit of faith and trust that he had, and therefore we do 
not keep silence. 14 We also speak with confidence, because we 
know that He who raised the Lord Jesus from the grave will, in 
virtue of His Resurrection, raise us up also, and will bring us 
into His presence, side by side with you. 15 For all that we do 
and all that we suffer is done and suffered for your benefit, in 
order that the grace which is bestowed on us, being augmented 
by the increasing number of those who believe with us and pray 
for us, may cause a greater volume of thanksgiving to rise both 
from us and from them to the glory of God. 

16 No wonder, therefore, that, with your salvation to work for 
and this faith to sustain us, we do not lose heart and act as 
cowards. On the contrary, although our physical powers are 
wasting away, yet what is spiritual in us is being ceaselessly 
made - fresh and strong. 17 By this I mean that our present 
afflictions, which may seem heavy and protracted, are really 


light and momentary compared with the enduring substantiality 
of glory which they are working out for us in an ever increasingly 
preponderating degree. 18 And we are sure of this, because we 
direct our gaze, not towards the fleeting things which we now 
see around us, but towards the lasting realities which to us are at 
present unseen. 

V. x I affirm this because we know well that, if the tentlike 
body which is our earthly dwelling should be taken down, God 
supplies us with a better building, a dwelling that is super- 
natural, lasting, with its site not on earth but in heaven. 2 For 
truly in this tent-dwelling we sigh and groan, desiring greatly to 
have our heavenly home put over us, 3 sure that this putting of 
it on will secure us from being found at Christ's coming without 
any house at all. 4 For verily we that are still in our tent, 
awaiting His return, have reason to sigh and groan, feeling 
oppressed because, while we shrink from the idea of losing it by 
death, we desire to have the better dwelling placed over it, in 
order that all that is perishable in the one may be swallowed up 
by the imperishable nature of the other. 6 Our feelings may 
seem to be a poor security for this, but we have a far stronger 
one. He who has schooled us for this very change is none 
other than God Himself; and He has given us, as a guarantee 
that we shall have it, no less than His Holy Spirit. 

6 Having, therefore, at all times such a sure ground for 
confidence, and knowing that so long as we are still at home in 
the body we are in a sort of exile from our home in the Lord — 
7 for here we have to guide our steps by means of faith, because 
the realities which shape our lives cannot be seen — 8 we have, I 
say, a sure ground for confidence, and in that confidence we are 
well content rather to go into exile from our home in the body, 
and take up our abode in our home with the Lord. 9 Having 
such a preference, we are not only well content to leave the 
body, but we earnestly desire that, whether we are still in it or 
already out of it, we may find acceptance with Him. 10 This 
desire, in all conditions of existence to be acceptable to Him, 
is inevitable, when we remember that, by God's decree, from 
which we cannot escape, there is not one of us but will 
have the whole of his life and character laid bare before 
Christ at His judgment-seat, in order that he may receive 
recompense for the things of which his body was the instru- 


merit, in exact requital for his conduct, whether it was meri- 
torious or worthless. 

Edmund Waller's lines on Old Age may serve as a prelude 
to this part of the Epistle. 

The soul's dark cottage, battered and decayed, 

Lets in new light through chinks that Time hath made : 

Stronger by weakness, wiser men become 

As they draw near to their eternal home. 

Leaving the old, both worlds at once they view 

That stand upon the threshold of the new. 

The subject remains the same, — the value of the Apostolic 
office; but it is regarded from a new point of view. He has 
shown the exceeding glory of the new dispensation and its 
superiority to the old, especially with regard to the courage and 
frankness exhibited by its ministers (iii. 4-iv. 6). That does 
not mean that the ministers are magnificent persons. In the 
Apostle's case, so far from external magnificence, there is 
constant weakness with frequent suffering and depression. But 
in the weakness of the preachers the Divine power of the Gospel 
becomes all the more conspicuous, and they know that they may 
count upon the necessary support here and an eternal reward 

These sufferings and compensating supports are discussed in 
three aspects ; in reference to the difficulties of ministerial work 
(7-15), in reference to the hope of resurrection (16-v. 5), and in 
reference to life, death, and judgment (v. 5-10). In the first of 
these he is possibly referring once more to his opponents' 
reproaches. They may have said that his frequent sufferings 
were a judgment on him for his false teaching about the Law. 
We know that they had laughed at his mean appearance and 
want of eloquence (x. 10). But, he now urges, the contents of 
a vessel cannot always be inferred, from the character of the 

7. "Exeter. The Apostle again and again dwells upon the 
goodly possessions of the Christian, and especially of the Christian 
minister; irtirolOrio-LV roiavrrjv (iii. 4), roiavTTjv iX-n-iSa (iii. 12), t. 
&La.Koviav TavTrjv (iv. i), Orjcravpov tovtov (iv. 7), to avTo Trvtvfxa ttJs 
7rioTews (iv. 13), oIkoSo[xt]v €/c ©eov (v. i), Trdvra (vi. 10), TavTas 
Tas c7rayyeXtas (vii. 1) ; and he often builds an argument upon 
these goodly possessions. 

"Exofiey 8e iw 0T]<jaup6i' toOok. The 8e marks the contrast 
between the glory on which he has been enlarging and the 
humiliations about to be described ; ' But there is a great deal 
to be said on the other side.' The contrast is skilfully drawn* 


i. it confirms the declaration that the preachers do not preach 
themselves, for in themselves they are despised and persecuted ; 
2. it works round to a conclusion which is much in favour of 
the Corinthians {vv. 12-15). 'This treasure ' is the illumining 
power of the knowledge of Divine glory. The power is limit- 
less, but it is stored in very unlikely receptacles. 

iv ocrTpaKLi'oi.s CTKeueCTiv. The expression ovcevos ocrrpixKivov 
occurs four times in Leviticus, and ayyos or dyyexov oo-rp. is 
common elsewhere in LXX. Here we have to determine the 
literal meaning of o-Keu'77 and from this to reach the metaphorical 
use. The word in its literal sense has a wide range. Articles 
of furniture in a house (Lk. xvii. 31), differing greatly in value 
and use (Rom. ix. 21-23; 2 Tim. i. 20), are o-Kevrj. Not only 
a vessel for holding things (Jn. xix. 29), but a sheet (Acts 
x. 11), is a ovcews. A o-kcvos is inanimate; it is an instrument 
or implement, as distinct from a £oW (Plat. Rep. x. 601 D, Gorg. 
506 D). It is doubtful whether o-KeDos in its literal sense ever 
means a body. Its metaphorical sense in N.T. is commonly 
assumed to be taken from the meaning ' vessel,' but this is not 
always correct. In Acts ix. 15, o-kcDos e/cXoy^s, 'a vessel of 
election,' 'a chosen vessel,' should rather be 'an elect instru- 
ment.' In 1 Pet. iii. 7, ws ao-deveo-Tepu> aKevei, ' as to the weaker 
vessel,' should rather be ' as to the weaker chattel ' : both 
husband and wife are articles of furniture in God's house, and 
one of them is stronger than the other. In 1 Thess. iv. 4 the 
meaning of to iavrov ctkcuos remains doubtful and does not help 
us here. In this passage ' vessel ' is certainly right ; treasure 
was frequently stored in earthen jars, a fact of which Wetstein 
gives numerous illustrations.* 

If the treasure is the illumining power of the knowledge riys 
oo^s tov ©eou, what are the vessels in which it does its work ? 
We perhaps give too limited an answer when we say, 'the bodies 
of the chosen ministers.' It is quite true that the human body 
is often spoken of as a mean vessel or vase which holds the 
much more precious mind or soul. It is one of those metaphors 
which are so obvious as to be inevitable- Cicero (Tusc. Disp, 
i. 22), vas animi. Seneca {Ad Marciam Consolatio, 11), Quid est 
homo? Quodlibet quassum vas, et quodlibet fragile . . . im- 
becillum corpus, ad omnem fortunae contumeliam projectu?n. Philo 
[Quod deterius poiiori insid. sol. § 46), to t^s *pvxys dyyeiov, to 
o-uijxa. And again (De Migr. Abr. § 35) 6 pikv yap ^ere/jos vous 

* The words are repeatedly quoted by Jerome, who tells Eustochium that 
her mother Paula often repeated them ; In languoribus et crebra infirmitate 
dicebat, Quando injirmor, tunc fortior sum. Et, Hobemus tkesaurum istum 
in vasis fictilibus {Ep. cviii. 19). He often quotes St Paul as the vas 


trepii^eTai ws iv dyyct'w tw o-w/xari. See also the parallel VVisd. 
ix. 15. Marcus Aurelius (x. 38) bids us remember that what is 
within the vessel, to evSov iyKiKpvpip.ivov is the real avOpwiro<;, and 
to TrepiKH/xevov dyyeiwSes ought not to be included. Chrys., 
Thdrt, and others think that the ocrrp. o-kcOos here means the 
human body, and that the epithet 'earthen' refers to man being 
made of the dust of the earth. The reference to the creation of 
light in v. 6 makes such an allusion not impossible ; but in that 
case we should have expected x°^ v ( " ro T ^s yy* (Gen. ii. 7) to have 
suggested either ^oikos (i Cor. xv. 47), or y^yev?;? (Wisd. viii. 1), 
or yrjivos, rather than oo-rpd/ai'os. Gideon's iSpeiat (Judg. vii. 16, 
19) have no epithet, and they were used to hide light. Tertullian 
understands the vessels here as meaning bodies ; he translates 
(De Res. Cam. 7, 44) in testaceis vasculis or vasis, and adds scilicet 
in came. Vulg. has in vasis fictilibus. 

But it is not impossible that here the o-kcvos is the whole 
personality. It was in the man as a whole, and not in his body 
in particular, that the Divine treasure which was to enrich the 
world was placed to be dispensed to others. In this work the 
body was indispensable, but it was not the only factor. The 
participles in vv. 8-10 apply partly to the body and partly to the 
mind, and they apply more to the former than to the latter, 
because the metaphors are taken from bodily contests ; and the 
epithet 00-rpa/aVois indicates the general unattractiveness and 
insignificance of the men who preached the Gospel, and not 
merely the fragile character of their bodies. The metaphor of 
earthenware as representing human beings is common in O.T. 
(Is. xxix. 16, xxx. 14, xlv. 9, lxiv. 8; Jer. xviii. 6; Lam. iv. 2 ; 
Job x. 9), and in such passages it is the whole man, and not 
merely his body, that is contemplated. Cf. 4 Esdr. iv. 11; 
quomodo poterit vas tuum capere Altissimi viam ? The epithet 
here is chosen because of the treasure, inestimable worth in a 
worthless vessel ; and ocn-pd/az/os is sometimes used in the sense 
of worthless. Epictetus applies oo-Tpd/avo? to discourse, opinions, 
pursuits, desires ; " Your utensils," he says, " are of gold, and your 
discourse of earthenware," xpvo-a o-Ktv-q, 6oTpd/avov 8k \6yov k.t.X. 
(Dis. iii. 9). 

Xva. r\ uTrep(3o\T] ri)s oui'dfAews r[ tou 0eou. ' (In order) that the 
exceeding greatness (xii. 7) of the power may be God's and not 
from us.' Here 'may be' means 'may be seen to be,' (pavrj or 
evpe6fj : in Rom. iii. 4, ytvlcrdw is used in the same sense, and in 
Rom. vii. 13, yevy?Tat. Cf. ovk d<£ ' iavrwv . . . d>s e£ iavrwv (iii. 5). 
'Of God and not of us' (AV.) obliterates the difference between 
tov ©eov and e£ f]p.uiv. ' May be perceived to belong to God 
and not to originate with ourselves ' is the meaning. Dei, non 
modo ex Deo ; Deus non modo largitur virtutem, sed semper 


praestat (Beng.). The reading Ik t. ©eou (Baljon and others) is 
pure conjecture. By v-rrepfioXri (see on i. 8) is meant that the 
power is a great deal more than is sufficient for its purpose; 
it triumphs over all opposition. The SiW/^is is the power of his 
preaching (i Cor. ii. 4), with which we may perhaps couple the 
power of his miracles, and certainly that of his endurance, — all 
the power which produced the conversion of so many in spite of 
such great obstacles. Ut sublimitas sit virtutis Dei, et non ex 
nobis (Vulg.) is misleading, the sit being misplaced. It is 
possible to translate ' that the exceeding greatness may be of the 
power of God and not from ourselves,' but the position of rj is 
against it, and virepfio\.rj without further definition is awkward ; 
superabundance of what ? Those who take the sentence in this 
way give very different answers to this question. Elsewhere 
Jerome takes the more probable construction ; ut abundantia 
fortitudinis nostrae sit ex Deo et non ex nobis {Con. Pelag. iii. 9). 
So also Augustine ; ut eminentia virtutis sit Dei et non ex nobis 
{Serm. 169, 12). God designed that the power in speading the 
Gospel should be recognized as His; He therefore chose 
humble instruments who could not be supposed to have pro- 
duced such effects by their own powers. 

8-10. The rhythm in these three verses is clearly marked by 
the balance of the clauses. We have four illustrations of the 
way in which the frailty of the instruments might have been fatal 
to any other cause, but in this case were not allowed to be so. 
The fifth instance is different. They are all taken from the 
Apostle's own experience. 

8. iv irarrl OXi^ojxefoi. We have the same words in vii. 5 ; 
'in everything pressed.' In i. 6 it was necessary to translate 
OXifioixeOa ' are afflicted,' because of the frequent ' affliction ' in 
that passage. But here the radical signification of ' pressure ' 
(Mk. iii. 9) must be retained, because of crrevo^wpow/xevoi. The 
pressure is that of persecution (1 Thess. iii. 4 ; 2 Thess. i. 6, 7 ; 
Heb. xi. 37). The indefinite iv iravri is to be understood with 
all the pairs of participles. Chrys. paraphrases, 'in respect of 
foes and friends, of those who are hostile and those who are 
of one's own household.' 'Ev ttovtC occurs ten times in 2 Cor. 
Elsewhere in Paul, 1 Cor. i. 5 only. 

00 orei'oxwpoup.ei'oi. « Not in hopeless straits,' not in a plight 
from which extrication is impossible: nunquam deest exitus 
1 Cor. x. 13); in inviis vias salutis invenimus; iv air6po<.<i irpay- 
fx.a<riv 7ro/5ous cvpi<TKop.€v (rwTr)pia<i (Thdrt.) He is speaking of 
external difficulties, not of mental anxiety : that comes next. 

Here we have ov with a participle (which is rare in N.T.) 
four times in two verses ; but there are eight other examples in the 


Pauline Epistles; see on 1 Cor. ix. 26; J. H. Moulton, p. 231 ; 
Blass, § 75. 5. We have arevox^p la, Rom. ii. 9, viii. 35. 

diropoufAevoi, 6.W ouk e£cnropoup.eyoi. Once more a play upon 
words (see on i. 13); 'in despondency, yet not in despair'; 
indigemus, sed non perinde indigemus (Tert. Scorp. 13).* There 
may be the greater anxiety and perplexity, so that one does not 
know what to do, and yet confidence that all will end well. 
Such a state of mind is quite compatible with expectation of 
death (see on i. 8). 

9. SiuKojjtecoi, d\V ouk eyKaTaXeurou.ei'oi. ' Pursued by men 
(1 Cor. iv. 12), yet not forsaken by God.' 'Pursued by foes, 
yet not left in the lurch by friends' (Plat. Symp. 179 A), might be 
the meaning, but it has less point. The ruling idea throughout 
is that God manifests His power in His servants' weakness. 
Whatever hostile agents, whether human or diabolical, may do, 
the earthen vessels are able to bear the shock and continue to 
render 'service. In LXX, the verb is used of the Divine 
promise; oi fii] <re ZyKaTaXelirw (Gen. xxviii. 15 ; Josh. i. 5 ; cf. 
Deut. xxxi. 6, 8). 

KaTaPaWou-e^oi, d\\' ouk'oi. ' Struck down, yet not 
destroyed'; struck down, either iv po/xcpala. (2 Kings xix. 7), or 
iv fxaxalpa (Jer. xix. 7), or any other weapon (Hdt. iv. 64). 

It is probable that the last two illustrations, and possible that 
all four, are taken from combatants in battle or in the arena ; 
' hard pressed, yet not hemmed in ; in difficulties, yet not in 
despair; pursued, yet not abandoned; smitten down, yet not 
killed.' But iyxaTaXcnrofAwoi must not be understood of being 
left behind in a race, nor KaTafSaWofxtvot of being thrown in 
wrestling. The four form a climax. 

10. The fifth illustration sums up the preceding four, and 
carries the climax to the supreme point, 'always dying, yet 
always alive.' The four kinds of suffering are condensed as 
r) vexpwcris tov 'Irjcrov, and the four kinds of deliverance as yj £wt/ 
t. 'I. The emphatic navTore repeats the emphatic Travrl (v. 8) 
and anticipates the emphatic det (v. 11), from which it should 
be distinguished in translation; 'at all times' (ii. 14, v. 6, 
ix. 8). 

TTjf veKpwo-iv t. 'I. The meaning of this 'putting to death of 
Jesus' is explained (yap) in the next verse. The missionaries 
were perpetually being delivered unto death for Christ's sake. 
They were never free from peril. Enemies were always seeking 
their lives, as they sought His life, and to a large extent the 

* Herveius, though he knows better, suggests for'oi, laborando 
sudamus nam poros etc, 



enemies in both cases were Jews. All this He and they en- 
dured, because it was so decreed in accordance with the will of 
God. They shared His sufferings, including the process which 
in His case ended in death, and which at any time might so end 
in their case (see on Phil. iii. 10 and i Cor. xv. 31). This 
shows that St Paul taught his converts details in the history of 
Jesus, especially His sufferings ending in death. Here he 
assumes that they know. In this late Greek the different shades 
of meaning attached to terminations become somewhat in- 
distinct. See on i. 12, 14 and on ix. 10. Here veKpwons has 
the old force of indicating a process, whereas in Rom. iv. 19 
veKpoxris means * deadness ' rather than ' putting to death ' or 
'deadening.' Epictetus says that most people take all means 
to prevent the mortification (aTrweKpcoo-is) of the body, while 
few care much about the mortification of the soul {Dis. i. 5). 
The Apostle's life, like the Lord's, was a perpetual martyr- 
dom, ending at last in actual putting to death ; with this 
difference, that Christ knew, up to the arrest in Gethsemane, 
that His hour was not yet come, whereas St Paul had no such 

Here again the Apostle expresses in mystic and paradoxical 
language his union with Christ. In his frail, weary, battered 
person he ever bears the dying of Jesus, in order that the life 
also of Jesus may be exhibited to the world. This may mean 
that the frequent deliverances from difficulty, danger, and death 
are evidence that the Crucified is still alive and has Divine power ; 
cf. i. 5 ; Col. i. 24 ; 2 Tim. ii. 12 ; 1 Pet. iv. 13, v. 1.* See on 
1 Pet. iii. 18, p. 161. Thdrt. and others explain the fva . . . 
4>oiV£pw0rj of the hope of a future resurrection and immortality. 
But iv TJj Ovrjrfj aapKL rjfjLwv in V. II, which paraphrases V. 10, 
compels us to confine the explanation to this life. From the 
repetition of tov 'Irjcrov (see on v. 5) we see that St Paul does not 
separate the historic Jesus from the glorified Christ. To him it 
is the same Jesus, t Bengel thinks that St Paul repeats the 
name Jesus, because singularitur sensit dulcedinem ejus. That 
thought inspired St Bernard's "Joyful Rhythm," Jesu dulcis 
memoria, well known through Caswall's translation, "Jesu, the 
very thought of Thee," and the Jesu dulcedo cordium of the Paris 
Breviary; to which we may add Newton's "How sweet the 

* F. A. Clarke (Sermons, p. 158) puts it thus; "As Christ's weakness 
and dying on the Cross opened the gate to a new and glorious life, so in the 
living death of His servant, the cross-bearing in the mortal flesh, there would 
be made manifest the vigour of an immortal life, the undying energy of faith 
and love." 

t Only here and in Eph. iv. 21 does St Paul put the article before 


name of Jesus sounds" {Ohiey Hymns, No. 57, ed. 1779) : but 
it may be doubted whether it is the cause of the repetition 
here. The point here is that the dying and living of one 
and the same Jesus are found in one and the same servant 
of Jesus. In 7re/n<£<fpovT£s we have an allusion to missionary 

For the first tov Tr?<rou, D* F G, d e f g have rod Xpiarov, and between 
rod and 'l-qaod, KL, Syr-Hark, insert Kvpiov. See Blass, § 46. 10, who 
points out that the art. with 'Ii?croDs is usual in the Gospels, but rare in the 
Epistles and Rev. After the first j$ cwfian, D E F G, Latt. Syr-Pesh. 
Copt, add rjfiQv. For the second t$ ffuifiari, K, Vulg. have tois (Tui/.iacru>. 

11. del yap Tjp.€i$ 01 £aJires. ' For always we who are alive are 
being handed over unto death.' Death is a monster that 
devours victims who are alive. All their life long, the mission- 
aries are being thrown, like Daniel, into peril of almost certain 
death, and are as wonderfully delivered (2 Tim. iv. 17; see on 
1 Cor. xv. 31, 32). Hence the pointed insertion of 01 (wvres : 
'we are ever a living prey.' It was natural to use napaSi86iJ.c$a 
in such a context; but the verb may have been chosen because 
tradition habitually used it of Christ being 'handed over' to His 
blood-thirsty enemies (Mk. ix. 31, x. 33, xiv. 10, 18, 21, etc.): 
we have trapahovvat ets Odvarov 2 Chron. xxxii. II. 

Sid '\i](jouv. Here Vulg. rightly has propter Jtsu/n, not, as in 
v. 5, per Jesum. The constant risking of life is well worth facing 
for His sake, and the risking is thus amply justified. For lower 
reasons it might be wrong. 

iv T|j Bi>r]Tf\ aapKi %aJc. This comes at the end in a tone of 
triumph and repeats the paradox of v. 10 in a stronger form ; so 
that, while the first half of v. 11 elucidates the first half of v. 10, 
the second half intensifies the second. In just that element of 
our nature which is liable to death, the life of Jesus is to be 
manifested. Hence the change from crcofxa to <rdp£ and the 
addition of OvrjTrj, a word found only in this group of Epistles in 
N.T. This manifestation of the life of Jesus probably does not 
refer to the transformation of the physical body into a spiritual 
body which envelops and absorbs it (v. 1-5 ; see on 1 Cor. xv. 
40-44). Such an explanation destroys the parallel between iv tw 
o-w/mri and ev 1-77 OvrjTrj aapKi. Rather it refers to the case which 
Dryden (Aas. and Achit. i. 156) describes; 

A fiery soul, which, working out its way, 
Fretted the pygmy-body to decay. 

To whom is the life of Jesus thus made manifest? Not so 
much r)fxlv as v/uv, to the converts rather than to the missionaries. 
This is plain from v. 1 2. The many deliverances of the Apostle 
and others from physical death are evidence of the power of the 


risen Jesus.* So also is the activity, and very successful activity, 
of which these frail bodies are made capable. The first half of 
v. 12 refers to the former, the second half to the latter. Ignatius 
probably had this passage in his mind when he wrote of Christ, 

8l ov iav fir] avOaLpirw? e^w/xev to airoOavuv cis to clvtov 7ra#os, to 
t,rjv avTOv ovk Zcttiv iv tjjxIv. 

For 'Irjcrou, C has Xpiarov, D* F G, d e g have 'Itjctov Xpiarov. 

12. wore. Another paradox ; 'So then, it is the death that 
takes effect in us, while it is the life that takes effect in you.' 
The antithesis is mainly verbal, for 6 6dva.To<; is wholly physical 
and r) lur) is chiefly spiritual ; ' we have the physical suffering and 
loss ; you have the spiritual comfort and gain.' Moreover, 
i) ^(nrj was active in the Apostle no less than in the Corinthians. 

Calvin and others are so surprised at this conclusion (wcn-e), 
that they think that it must be ironical. But the literal mean- 
ing is quite intelligible, and it is a mark of the Apostle's 
characteristic tact, for the conclusion which he draws is a 
compliment to the Corinthians. ' You are now in the way that 
leads to life. It is marvellous that you should owe this 
enormous blessing to so insignificant and depressed a person as 
myself: but that strange fact manifests the power of God.' 
Schmiedel thinks that St Paul is here indirectly showing that his 
sufferings are not judgments on him for exceptional sinfulness. 
But would any one see this ? Others make rj far} physical. ' I 
am always ill, while your illnesses and deaths (r Cor. xi. 30) are 
diminishing.' This interpretation gives a very low meaning to 
the statement. Herveius is also misleading, when he makes the 
sentence a rebuke ; mors, qua quotidie pro Salvatore moritnur, 
operatur in nobis vitam aeternae felicitatis ; sed e contrario vita, 
qua de/ectamini in terrenis, operatur in vobis mortem aeternam. 

The articles probably indicate the Oavaros and the £017 
mentioned in the previous verse, and in that case should be 
translated. In the true text there is no \xzv to anticipate the 
Si, so that the second clause comes as a surprise. K L and 
Syr-Hark, insert /xeV. Almost certainly eVepycn-ai is middle, not 
passive, a use not found in N.T. Even if admissible, 'is 
wrought ' makes poorer sense than ' takes effect.' 

13. ' But the fact that we have the death while you have the 
life is no reason why we should be silent.' Nullo metu suppli- 

* " As the death of Jesus, which seemed to disprove His Messiahship, 
gave occasion for the great proof of it, viz. His Resurrection, so the Apostles' 
perils, which seemed to be inconsistent with their claim to be ambassadors of 
God, really supported this claim by giving occasion for display of the pre- 
serving powers of God " (Beet). 


ciorum omitlimus loqiti ea quae credimus (Herv.). ' Trust in God 
inspires us as it did the Psalmist.' As in most of the quotations 
in the Pauline Epistles, the quotation is from the LXX, without 
material change (cf. vi. 2, viii. 15, ix. 9; see on 1 Cor. vi. 16, x. 
7) : also Swete, In t 'rod. to O.T. in Greek, p. 400. This practice 
of the Apostle is remarkable here, because, although the exact 
meaning of the Hebrew is uncertain, yet the LXX, eVioTevo-a. 
Sto iXdXrjcra, is certainly wrong. The Hebrew may mean 'I 
believed (or believe), for I will speak,' i.e. must speak, must 
confess it : or, 'I believe, though I speak it,' i.e. although I 
utter the desponding words which follow, 'I was greatly afflicted; 
I said in my alarm, All men are liars.' And there are other 
possibilities. In the Hebrew the passage is central, cxvi. 10, n. 
But the LXX, Syriac, Arabic, and Ethiopic, against clear internal 
evidence, unite Ps. cxv. with Ps. cxiv. and cut xvi. in two, making 
xvi. 10 the beginning of cxvi. (cxv.). 

e'xoi'Tes. See on v. 7 ; ' because we have,' as in iii. 12. 

to aoTo weufxa ttjs mareus. 'The same spirit of faith 
as the Psalmist ' ; quern habuerunt et illi qui saipserunt, Credidi, 
propter quod loculus sum (Aug.); not 'the same spirit as you 
Corinthians'; nor 'the same spirit among ourselves,' i.e. that all 
the preachers have the same inspiration. Chrys. appeals to this 
as evidence that the O.T. and N.T. are inspired by the same 
Spirit ; and many Fathers understand 7rre0/m here to mean the 
Holy Spirit as the bestower of faith, which is probably incorrect. 

koto, t6 y^P'W^ 01 '- This formula of quotation appears in 
papyri in reference to legal documents, and is found in one 
of about the same date as this Epistle (Deissmann, Bible Studies, 
p. 250). Here it explains to clvto 77-veu/Aa. It does not look 
forward to /cai ^eis iricrTevofxev (Meyer), as if the Apostle's belief 
was regulated by the Psalmist. As often in his quotations, St 
Paul seems to have the whole passage in his mind, although he 
quotes only a few words. 

Kal rjfxeis. ' We also, as well as the Psalmist, believe ; and 
therefore we also speak.' This is how it comes to pass that 'life 
takes effect in you.' Faith cannot be silent. 

NFG, Syrr. Arm. Goth, insert Kal before 4\d\r)<ra, BCDEKLP, 
Latt. omit. There is no Kal in LXX, and some editors treat the omission 
of Kal here as assimilation to LXX. 

14. From faith he passes on to hope, hope of the Resurrec- 
tion. His faith is based on knowledge which produces hope. 
Polycarp (ii. 2) has a loose quotation of this ; see on iii. 2. 

eiooTes. ' Because we know that He who raised up the Lord 
Jesus (Rom. viii. n) will raise up us also with Jesus.' This does 
not mean that Jesus will be raised again when we are raised, but 


that our resurrection is absolutely dependent on His, as effect on 
cause, and that in being raised we share His glory. There may 
be also the thought of the union between Christ and His 
members. The difficulty of aw caused the change in some 
texts to the simpler Sid. 

In i Cor. vii. 29, x. 11, xv. 51, St Paul regards the Second 
Advent as near, and he expects to be alive when it comes. Here 
he contemplates the possibility of not being alive. Nowhere 
does he state what will certainly be the case. It is exaggeration 
to say that we have here " the language of a man who does not 
expect to live to witness the coming of the Lord," or who has 
" the growing conviction that he would not live to witness the 
Parousia." He fears that he may not do so; that is all. 

irapaorrjcrei auv ujji.ii/. ' Will present us with you ; as a bride 
is presented to the bridegroom' (xi. 2; Col. i. 22; Eph. v. 6). 
Thdrt. and others prefer 'will present us before the judgment-seat 
(a meaning found in papyri), where we shall be approved and told 
to enter into the joy of the Lord.' Some understand £uWas 
with TTapaarqa-u, 'will present us alive' (Acts i. 3, ix. 41). It is 
probable that t<S /377/xan (v. 10 ; Rom. xiv. 10) would have been 
expressed in the one case, and £wi/ras (Rom. vi. 13) in the other, 
if this had been the Apostle's meaning. The verb is freq. in 
Paul. Comp. the absolute use of TrapiaTavai in Num. i. 5, to. 
ovofxara t&v avSpuiv oltivcs irapaaTrjaovTaL fxid' ifxwv : with Kvpi'ui 
added, Zech. iv. 14, vi. 5. 

B 17, r Vulg. Arm. omit nipiov. For <rbv 'It?o-oO (K* B C D E F GP, 
Latt. Copt. Arm. Aeth.), which is doubtless original, K 3 D 3 KL, Syrr. 
Goth, have dia ' lycrou. 

15. Td y»p T^avTa 81' ujxas. ' I say, he will present us with 
you, for all things are for your sakes.' All things that the 
Apostles and others do and suffer, as recounted in vv. 7-13, are 
done and suffered, not for their own benefit, but for that of their 
converts, and, through their converts, not to their own glory, but 
to the glory of God. Chrys. explains rd 7rdvTa of the Death and 
Resurrection of Christ, which is alien to the context, however 
true in itself. 

tea tj x^P 1 ? irXeovdaaCTa k.t.X. An obscure clause, which, like 
i. 11, may be construed in several ways, and the meaning of 
which, when construed, is not clear. Does Std twv 7r\u6v<Dv 
belong to 7rAeoi'tto-ao-a or to 7r€pi(To-£vcrr), and is 7r€pL<Tcreva-r] trans- 
itive (ix. 8; Eph. i. 8 ; 1 Thess. iii. 12) or intransitive (i. 5, viii. 
2, ix. 12)? We note the play on words between x^/" 5 an< ^ 
cvyipia-rta, and the alliteration, irXtofdo-aaa . . . 7rA€(.6Vu>c, 
which is slightly in favour of taking Sid iw TrXtiovwt/ with 
n-Aeoi/dcrao-a, and the climax from 7rA€ovdo-ao-a to Trepicro-evcry, 


which is slightly in favour of the intransitive use of the latter. 
With this guidance we may translate with Chrys., ' In order that 
the grace, being made more by means of the more, may cause 
the thanksgiving to abound to the glory of God.' So RV., 
Alford, Bachmann, J. H. Bernard, Bousset, Heinrici, Lias, 
Meyer, etc. The grace given to him by God and augmented by 
the increasing number of converts, makes both him and them 
thankful, and their thanksgiving glorifies God. The increase of 
converts encourages him, and their prayers help him, and thus 
X<xpis and evx^pi-o-TLa are increased. This makes good sense, but 
other translations are possible. (1) 'In order that the grace, 
having abounded, may, through the greater number of converts, 
make thanksgiving to abound.' So Emmerling, De Wette, Waite. 
(2) 'In order that grace, having abounded, may, through the 
thanksgiving of the greater number, superabound.' So Luther, 
Beza, Bengel, Grotius. (3) 'That grace, having increased the 
thanksgiving by means of the greater number, may abound, etc' 
This last makes 7rAeova£eu/ transitive, a use found once or twice 
in LXX and once in N.T., 1 Thess. hi. 12. It is not likely to be 
right here. The order of the Greek is against it, and it does not 
yield as good sense as the other methods. 

IV. 16-V. 5. The sufferings and supports of an Apostle are 
now considered in reference to the hope, or rather the certainty 
(et'So'res, v. 14) of resurrection and reward. This life of daily 
deliverance from death may end at any moment in death. But 
what of that? Death has been conquered once for all. The 
passage has been called " The Hymn of the Home Eternal " 

16. Aid ouk eYKaKoujiey. ' No wonder that we do not lose 
heart.' See on v. 1 and v. 6. Elevation of thought again 
affects the Apostle's style. The rhythmic swing, which can be 
noticed at the end of ch. iii. and in iv. 8 f., is easily felt here, 
and it continues till v. 5. 

&W 6t k<x£. ' But (so far from our losing heart), although 
our outward man is being destroyed.' As in v. 3, €t nai states 
hypothetically what is conceded as being actually the case. 

6 e^cj Yjjj.wk ct^GpuTTos. The expression is unique, but its meaning 
can be determined with some certainty from the correlative term 
6 ecrou av6po>TTos, which occurs here, Rom. vii. 22, and Eph. iii. 16. 
Cf. 6 7raAcuos i7p.a>v av#pw7ros, ' our old self (Rom. vi. 6 ; Col. iii. 
9; Eph. iv. 22). This use of avOpwiros, very much as we use 
' self,' is common in Paul and goes back to Plato, but 6 evros 
avOpw-rros {Rep. 589 A) is not parallel to 6 co-to avOponros : see 
A. J. Robinson on Eph. iii. 16, and cf. 1 Pet. iii. 4. 

The two expressions here, 6 efw and 6 eo-u> dvdp., correspond 


only roughly to what we call " the lower and the higher self," 
and not quite exactly to the material and immaterial parts of 0111 
nature. Our bodies, with all physical powers, emotions, and 
appetites, belong to the <l£<j> avBp., but not all immaterial elements 
belong to the ecrw avOp. The latter expression is always used in 
a good sense, of that part of us which is opposed to worldliness 
and is rooted in God. It is the highest part of our immaterial 
being; that which is capable of being the home of the Holy 
Spirit and of being ruled by Him. But in all these expressions, 
'flesh' and 'spirit,' 'body' and 'soul,' 'lower' and 'higher' 
self, it is impossible to define the differences with logical exact- 
ness; our ignorance is too great. See on Rom. vii. 14. 

Aug. {c. Faust, xxiv. 2) points out that there is here no room 
for Manichaean dualism. "The Apostle uses the inward man 
for the spirit of the mind, and the outward man for the body and 
this mortal life, but we nowhere find him making these two 
different men, made by two different powers. The two constitute 
one personality, the whole of whom was created by one and the 
same God. Nevertheless, this one person is made in the image 
of God, only as regards the inward man, which is not only 
immaterial but rational ; and it is this which distinguishes him 
from the brutes. . . . The whole of this man, both in his inward 
and outward parts, has become old because of sin, and is liable 
to death. Yet there is a renovation now for the inward man, 
when it is reformed according to the image of its Creator, by the 
putting off of unrighteousness, that is, the old man, and the 
putting on of righteousness, that is, the new man. But here- 
after, when what is sown a natural body shall rise a spiritual 
body, the outer man also shall acquire the dignity of a celestial 
condition {habitudinis) ; so that all that has been created may be 
recreated, and all that has been made be remade, by Him who 
created and made it." 

Still less is there here any room for Tertullian's strange idea 
that the soul is corporeal. 

&W 6 eaw Tjjj.cii' dvaKaifouTai. ' Yet our inward man is being 
renewed' (Col. iii. 10; dva/ccuVcoo-is, Rom. xii. 2; Tit. iii. 5). In 
class. Grk. as in LXX, avaKaivit^w (Heb. vi. 6) is more usual. 
This form of the verb, like the idioms, 6 e$a>, eo-w, 7raAatd?, kcuvos 
(veos), av8p(x>iro<s, connects Epistles, such as Ephesians and 
Colossians, whose genuineness is still, though less frequently, 
disputed, with Romans and 1 and 2 Corinthians, whose genuine- 
ness is not questioned by critics whose judgment counts. The 
verb does not necessarily mean that something which had 
perished is restored, but that in some particular that which 
ava.Ko.ivovTa.1 is being made as good as new. By comparing it 
with Sia(f)8eLpejaL we obtain the meaning of both verbs. In the 


case of the physical powers there is a ceaseless wearing away, 
under the pressure of hard work, ill health, anxiety, and persecu- 
tion ; in the spiritual powers there is a ceaseless increase of 
strength. The one process, in spite of frequent Divine deliver- 
ances, must end in death ; the other, by Divine decree, ends in 
eternal life. The force of the pres. must be preserved, 'is being 
destroyed,' ' is being renewed ' ; cf. t6v avanaivov jxzvov in Col. iii. 
10, and the significant changes of tenses in Eph. iv. 22-24. 
" How is it being renewed?" asks Chrys., and replies, " By faith, by 
hope, by zeal." The a\Xd marks strong contrast, 'nevertheless.' 
Tjp.e'pa kcu Tjfie'pa. ' Day by day ' ; there is no cessation in the 
progress ; each day shows some advance. The form of ex- 
pression is not found in LXX, nor elsewhere in N.T. It is 
commonly said to be a Hebraism (Esth. iii. 4), but papyri may 
show that it was colloquial ; Blass, § 38. 4 ; Winer, p. 581. Tert. 
{Scorp. 13) has the literal die et die and {De Hes. Cam. 40) de die 
et die ; Vulg. has the more usual de die in diem. 

There is much the same division of evidence here between iynaKovixev 
(ivK. ) and iKKaKovjxev as in iv. 1 ; see note there. A few cursives, Latt. 
Copt. Goth., Tert. omit 7}jxdov after 6 eVw. D'-' and3 E K Lhave b tauOev for 
6 iffoi ■qpLuv, and this may be the reading represented by Latt. Copt. Goth., 

17. t6 yap TrapauTtKo. i\a$p6v t. 0\. ' I mean that our present 
light amount of affliction ' ; a thoroughly classical form of diction. 
The yap introduces the explanation of the apparent paradox that 
a process of destruction and a process of renewal is going on in 
the same persons, not alternately, but simultaneously and cease- 
lessly, day by day; and thus yap becomes equivalent to 'I mean 
that.' He is stating the same fact in a different way. In this 
verse, as in 4 and 6, there is an accumulation of words of deep 
meaning, in order to express, so far as language can do it, the 
overwhelming superiority of the glory ; cf. iii. 8-1 1 and see on 
Rom. viii. 18. 

The adjectival use of irapavTina is freq. in class. Grk., e.g. 1) 
irapavTiKa Xap.-Kpor-q'i in the peroration of the famous speech of 
Pericles; "the immediate splendour of great actions and their 
subsequent glory abides in a way that no one can forget"; and 
Tr)v irapavTiKa iXiruSa, " no man among them would have given 
up for all the world the immediate hope of deliverance" (Thuc. 
ii. 62, viii. 82). The adverb occurs only here in N.T. and only 
twice in LXX (Ps. lxix. 3 ; Tob. iv. 14). It indicates a short 
amount of present time, viz. till life ends or the Lord comes, and 
here it balances antithetically alwviov in the next clause, as 
£Xacj>p6v balances /5apos and #Au^€<us balances 86^-qs. We are 
accustomed to think of glory as transient and affliction as lasting. 
But the Apostle reverses that. In comparison with the glory, 


affliction is shortlived, and permanence is on the other side.* 
Still more are we accustomed to attribute weight to affliction 
rather than to glory. The Apostle reverses that also. The 
simple and common idea of scales is in his mind ; weighed 
against one another, the glory goes down and the affliction kicks 
the beam. All the daily wear and tear of life, with its losses, 
sicknesses, and sufferings, are as nothing, and the result of the 
comparison would be much the same if that scale were empty. 
However great may be our estimate of the flAii/us, it has no 
weight or solidity against aluviov /Sapos 80^775. 

It is possible that both here and in 1 Thess. ii. 6 the Apostle 
has in his mind the other sense of /Sapos, viz. ' dignity,' gravitas ; 
e.g. of Pericles, ouSeis /Sapos ^w iaoppoirov ovS' d£i'wp.a, 77-pos 
rocravTrjv -qye/jLOviav ecpaivero (Plut. Per. 37). The Latins render 
fidpos in N.T. variously ; pondus, onus, gravitas. While /?dpos 
refers to weight and oyxos (Heb. xii. 1 only) to bulk, both may 
be burdensome; but here it is solid and lasting value that is 
meant. For the constr. to i\a.(f>pbv ttJs ^Ai^ecus see on viii. 8. 

Ka8' uirep|3oXT]i/ . . . jcaTepydl^Tcu Tjfui'. ' Worketh out for us 
more and more beyond measure ' ; supra modum in sublimitate 
operatur nobis (Vulg.) ; per supergressum in supergressum (Tert. 
bis). The verb is almost exclusively Pauline in N.T., Jas. i. 3 
and 1 Pet. iv. 3 being the only exceptions ; and in the Pauline 
Epistles it occurs almost exclusively in Romans and Corinthians, 
Eph. vi. 13 and Phil. ii. 12 being the only exceptions. Its 
meaning is ' to produce ' or ' to accomplish,' and it implies a 
prolonged process, a working out; e.g. nXuovoiv 7repi ravra 
7rpaypaTeuopeVo)v, eAarrovs 01 Karepya^dpcvoi yiyvovrat (Xen. Mem. 
iv. ii. 7). AV. here goes wrong in taking ko.& vTrepftoXrjv eis 
u7rcp/?oA^i/ with /3apos instead of with Karepya^eTcu. See Index IV. 

The Council of Trent (Sess. vi. De justific. xvi.) uses this 
passage in support of the doctrine of merttum ex condigno, taking 
Karcpya^erat in the sense of ' earns,' as if suffering constituted a 
claim to heavy compensation ; but it adds, absit tamen ut Chris- 
tianus homo in se ipso vel confidat vel glorietur, et no?i in Domino, 
cujus tamen est erga omnes homines bonitas, ut eorum velit esse 
merita, quae sunt ipsius dona. 

D* E G, Latt. Goth. Arm. insert irp6<TKaipov ical before i\a.(j>p6v. 
B C 2 , Syr-Pesh. omit four. X* C* K, Syr-Hark. Copt. Arm. Aeth. Goth, 
omit els virepfio\r)v, which Naber and Baljon suspect as accidental ditto- 

* Cf. The Apocalypse of Barnch xv. 7, 8 ; " As regards what thou didst 
say touching the righteous, that on account of them has this world come, nay 
more, even that which is to come is on their account. For this world is tc 
them a trouble and weariness with much labour, and that accordingly which 
is to come, a crown with great glory." See also xxi. 24, xlviii. 50, li. 14. 


18. p] o-KOTroiWwf rjjAwe. ' Since we do not direct our gaze,' 
or 'Provided we do not'; nobis non intuentibus (Tert. Scorp. 13)'; 
no7i contemplantibus nobis (Vulg.). If rjixwv means ' us Christians,' 
then Chrys. may be right in preferring ' provided we do not,' av 
tCjv opwfxtviDv dira.ywfj.ev lauTovs. The Latins vary between dum 
si and quia. We have seen that St Paul uses the 1st pers. plur. 
sometimes of himself alone and sometimes of himself with other 
teachers ; and he also sometimes changes quickly from the wider 
meaning to the widest of all ; Col. i. 12-14. All true Christians 
direct their thoughts and desires towards to. alm>ia, and there- 
fore, even with this interpretation of rjfxwv, 'since we do not' 
may be right. That we have fxrj and not ov proves nothing, for 
ov with participles is rare in N.T., even when the participle states 
a matter of fact. See on 1 Cor. i. 28 and ix. 26. Grammar 
might have suggested firj o-kottovo-i, but the change to the gen. 
abs. is natural, and is common in N.T. Examples in Blass, 
§ 74. 5. Cf. 1 Mace. i. 6. The construction is freq. in papyri ; 
but in class. Grk. the superfluous pronoun (rj/Mwv) is commonly 
omitted. Yet we find it in Thuc. iii. 22 ; Aa^oVre; tovs </)v'Aa/<as, 
dva to crKOTeivov jxkv ov 7rpoi86vTa>v clvtiov. 

to, p.T) pXeirofAem. The firj is quite in place, and in class. 
Grk. we should have fni] here rather than oi, ' things which to us 
are at present unseen ' ; nam multa quae non cernuntur erunt 
visibilia confecto itinere fidei (Beng.). Contrast vv. 8, 9, and 
see on 1 Cor. xiii. 12. Heb. xi. 1 we have wpayyuara ov ftXtTro- 
jxtva, and Heb. ix. it, ov raurr/s rijs KTtaews. 

The contrast is between our experiences of the world of 
sense and our hopes of the glories of the kingdom of God. 
Jewish ideas about future glory were for the most part sensuous 
and frequently political ; lofty and spiritual elements often came 
in, but they did not become supreme. Hence Christ in His 
teaching about the Kingdom admits sensuous pictures, such as 
eating and drinking, as symbolical of futifre bliss. Such language 
was before long seen to be symbolical, and St Paul here wholly 
dispenses with it. There is much force in the apparent contra- 
diction, 'fixing our gaze on the things which we cannot see.' 
The kingdom is an invisible, spiritual world, without limitations 
of time or space.* But it is possible that the much discussed 
term aiwvios has here the idea of time. The opposition may be 
between very short duration and very long duration, rather than 
between time and timelessness. Seneca (Ep. lviii. 24) says of 
things of sense ; Ista imaginaria sunt, et ad ten/pus aliquem faciem 
ferunt : nihil horum stabile, nee solidum est : et nos tamen cupimus 
tanquam aut semper futura, aut semper habituri. Imbecilli fiuidique 

* See a sermon by R. W. Church on this text in the Expositor, 3rd series, 
vi. pp. 2S-38, 1S87. 


per invalid consistimus : nrittamus animum ad ilia quae aeterna 
sunt. Again (Ep. lxi. 2) he finely says : Pa?-atus exire sum, et 
ideo fruor vita : quia quam diu futurum hoc sit non nimis pendeo. 
Ante senectutem curavi, ut bene viverem : in senectute, ut bene 
moriar. Herveius makes the contrast one between figura and 
Veritas ; Figura deperit, Veritas permanet, which agrees with the 
words which J. H. Newman chose for inscription on his tomb ; 
Ex umbris et imaginibus in veritatem. 

V. 1-5. Here again, as between i. and ii., and between Hi. 
and iv., the division of chapters is not well made. There is no 
clear break at this point, and vv. 1-5, or indeed vv. 1-10, have a 
closer connexion with what precedes than with what follows them. 
In vv. 1-5 the subject of the sufferings and compensations of 
Christ's servants in reference to the hope of the Resurrection is 

The opening words show that once more we have an explana- 
tion of what has just been stated, especially of ovk iyKaKovfxev. 
Oi'Sa//.ei/ ydp here is equivalent to etSores in iv. 14, 'because we 
know,' fide magna (Beng.). In both cases St Paul goes far 
beyond human experience, and yet he says, ' we know.' He 
could say that experience had taught him that the Lord Jesus 
had been raised from the dead, and that he himself had been 
often rescued from imminent death. But experience had not 
taught him that God will raise us from the dead, if we die before 
the Lord comes ; or that He will supply us with spiritual bodies, 
in exchange for our material bodies, if we are still alive when He 
comes. Yet he has a sureness of conviction which we may 
perhaps call a Divine intuition. He is confident that in these 
matters he possesses knowledge which transcends experience, 
and with the inspiration of a Prophet he declares what has been 
revealed to him. See on 1 Cor. xv. 20 and 51. For some there 
will be a resurrection ; for others there will be a transformation ; 
for all there will be a spiritual body suitable to the new state of 
existence. The contrast between material bodies which are daily 
being wasted and spirits which are daily being renewed, will not 
continue much longer. Cf. 1 Thess. iv. 15. 

Men of science have contended that in this last point St Paul 
is confirmed by science ; " The same principles which guide us 
from the continuous existence of the outer world to acknowledge 
an Unseen, lead us, on the assumption of our own existence 
after death, to acknowledge a spiritual body. . . . We certainly 
hold that, if we are to accept scientific principles, one of the 
necessary conditions of immortality is a spiritual body, but we 
as resolutely maintain that of the nature of this spiritual body we 
are and must probably remain profoundly ignorant" {The Unseen 


Universe, by Balfour Stewart and P. G. Tait, 4th ed. pp. 7, 8 ; 
see also p. 203). 

1. OiSafief ytfp. St Paul frequently uses this verb of things 
which are known by experience and which any Christian may 
come to know(i Cor. viii. r, 4; Rom. ii. 2, iii. 19, viii. 28; etc.), 
although for such knowledge ytvwo-Kciv would be the more suitable 
word. But here olSa/xev is used of intuitive knowledge. Haec 
sciefitia non est humani ingenii, sed ex Spiritus sancti revelatione 
manat (Calvin). Comp. the 618a yap of Job xix. 25, 27, where 
there is much which resembles this passage, and see on 1 Cor. xv. 51. 
Bousset thinks that St Paul is appealing to apocalyptic traditions 
known to him and the Corinthians, but no longer known to us.* 

on edv. ' That if our earthly tent-dwelling were taken down.' 
There is no nai, and we must not translate ' that even if, etc' He 
is merely taking the case of those who do not live to see the 
Lord's return, which he still thinks will be exceptional ; most 
people will live to see it. 

r\ emyeios ^fiwc oliaa tou o-ktjvous. ' The earthly house of our 
tabernacle.' Vulg. is interesting, but not accurate ; Scimus enim 
quoniam si terrestris domus nostra hujus habitations dissolvatur, 
quod aedificationem ex Deo habeamus. Here on is translated 
twice, by quoniam, and then superfluously by quod. Hujus is 
also superfluous, but it is meant to represent tov. In 1 Cor. 
i. 20, 6 koct/aos is rendered hoc seculutn, and in iii. 19, iv. 13, v. 10, 
xiv. 10, hie mundus.j Habitat io is trebly unsatisfactory. (1) It 
makes no sufficient contrast to aedificatio, the one being 
temporary and fragile, the other permanent and solid. (2) In 
v. 2, habitatio is used to translate the permanent oiktjtt^hov. 
(3) In v. 4, o-kt/vos is rendered tabernaculum. The metaphor of 
a tent to indicate the human body would readily occur to a 
cna7J'07Toios (Acts xviii. 3), but St Paul employs it only this once, 
and it is common enough in literature, although not in N.T. 
(cf. Jn. i. 14; 2 Pet. i. 13, 14) or in O.T. (cf. Is. xxxviii. 12). 
Modern writers may have had this passage in their minds, as in 
J. Montgomery's well-known verse; 

Here in the body pent 

Absent from Him I roam, 
Yet nightly pitch my moving tent 

A day's march nearer home. 

* It is hardly necessary to point out that there is no warrant for limiting 
the ' we' in this section (1-10) to the Apostle, as if he expected to be made 
an exception to believers in general. 

t See also Rom. v. 12. In the early versions, hie often represents the 
Greek article, and Jerome has allowed this to stand in various places in the 
Epistles which he seems to have revised much less carefully than the Gospels. 
In the Gospels he has not allowed hie mundus to stand lor 6 k6<jilos. 


'E7riyeios certainly means 'earthly' and not 'earthy' or 
'earthen'; it is opposed to lirovpavwi (i Cor. xv. 40; Phil. ii. 
10; Jn. iii. 12), and denotes what exists on earth and is con- 
nected with this world. Vulg. commonly renders it terrestris, 
which likewise cannot mean 'earthen,' but in Phil. ii. 10 and 
Jas. iii. 15 has terrenus, which might mean that. Clem. Alex. 
{Strom, v. 14, p. 703, ed. Potter) says that Plato called man's 
body yrfLvov o-Krji'os, and in Wisd. ix. 15 we have to yewSes o-Krjvos, 
but in neither case does the epithet seem to be quite congruous. 
It is probable that St Paul knew Wisdom, and that here and 
elsewhere that book has influenced his language, if not his 
thought ; the verse runs <j>6apTOV yap o-w/xa fiapvvei i/'u^^/v koX 
fSpiQei to yewSes (TKrji'os vovv iroXv^povTi^a. With this passage 
comp. Wisd. iii. 1-4, and see Sanday and Pleadlam, Romans, 
pp. 51, 52, 267. In Job iv. 19, oIkiols TrrjXivas, ' houses of clay,' 
there is no incongruity, and there the reference to the material of 
which man was made is expressed ; c£ £>v kolL airol Ik tov airov 
Trr/Xov io-p.(v. There is no doubt that rj e7uyeios oiKta tov (tk^vovs 
means the body, but some understand €7rtyeios of the earth on 
which we dwell. The genitive is one of apposition, a house that 
is a tent, a 'tabernacle-house' or 'tent-dwelling.' 

Field thinks that the use of o-Krjvos for the human body comes 
from Pythagorean philosophy. In this he follows Wetstein, who 
says that the Pythagoreans compared man's skin to the skins of 
which tents were made. Wetstein gives abundant quotations in 
which the body is called rx/dyvo?. Hippocrates, " the Father of 
Medicine," has aTroXtLTrovcra rj if/v^r) tov crwp.aTos o~K)}vos (Ap/i. 
viii. 1 8), and he may have been a disciple of Hippocrates the 
Pythagorean. Philo {De Somn. i. 20) uses the less depreciatory 
term 01*09 — tov crv/x^va t>}s i/^x^s oTkov, to crw/xa, and it is oiKia 
which is the leading term here ; tot) o-k^vovs is adjectival. An 
allusion to the camp-life of the Israelites is possible, but the passage 
is quite intelligible without it ; see Lightfoot on Phil. i. 23. The 
general meaning is that life here is only a pilgrimage. Christians 
are citizens of a realm that is in heaven, and on earth they are only 
sojourners; see Hort on TrdpoiKos and Trap€7ri8r]ixo<; in 1 Pet. ii. 11. 

The idea that life in this world is only a pilgrimage towards 
a better and permanent abode is not peculiar to Christianity. 
Cicero has it often. He says that amnios, cum e corporibus 
excesserint, in caelum, quasi in domicilium serum, pervenire ( 'I use. 
1. xi. 24) ; and again, that the soul is in the body as in a house 
that does not belong to it, aliena domus ; heaven is its home 
(Tusc. I. xxii. 51).* Again, Ex vita ita discedo tanquam ex 

* Cicero suggests that it is because corpses are buried in the ground, that 
people believe that the life of the dead is spent under the earth ; quatn opinionem 
magni crrores consecuti sunt ( 7 use. I. xvi. 36 ; see also De Rep. vi. 15, 26, 29). 


hospitio, non tanquam e domo ; commorandi enim natura diver- 
sorium nobis, non habitandi, dedit {De Sen. xxiii. 84). And Pope 
{Essay on Man, i. 97) follows him. 

The soul, uneasy and confined from home, 
Rests and expatiates in a life to come. 

So also in the well-known lines of the Emperor Hadrian, who, 
however, is doubtful about the future home ; Animula, vagula, 
blandula, hospis comesque corporis, quae nunc abibis in /oca, 
pallidula, rigida, nudu/a? See the account which Josephus 
{B.J. 11. viii. 11) gives of the creed of the Essenes; the freed 
souls are borne aloft, fAtrewpovs <f>£p€cr6ai. 

Two genitives, depending in different relations on the same 
substantive, tj/j-wv oIklo. tov o-Krjvovs, are not rare either in Greek 
or Latin, the most common instances being, as here, where one 
is of a person, the other of a thing ; Phil. ii. 30 ; 2 Pet. iii. 2 ; 
Heb. xiii. 7. Cicero (Tusc. 1. xv. 35) defines labor as functio 
quaedam vel animi vel corporis gravioris operis. 

KaTa\u'0T]. • Dissolved ' (AV., RV.), ' destroyed ' (Tyn. Cran. 
Genevan). Neither houses nor tents are 'dissolved,' although 
the human body may be. ' Pulled down ' would apply to both 
houses and tents, and would not be inappropriate to our bodily 
frames. Bengel calls KaraXvOy mite verbum, but in the case of 
buildings it commonly implies destruction (Mt. xxiv. 2 ; Mk. 
xiv. 58; Lk. xxi. 26; Acts vi. 14), being the opposite of 01/coSo- 
ixclv (Gal. ii. 18). 

<HKo8op]V £K ©eou exofJiey. If eV ®eoi5 belonged to exofxev, it 
would have been placed first or last. It belongs to oIkoSo/jh/jv, ' a 
building proceeding from God as Builder.' In 1 Cor. iii. 9 (see 
note there), 01*080/^17 is the building process, which results in an 
edifice. Here we seem to be half-way between the process and 
the result, 'a building in course of erection,' the result being 
oiKiav, a word in which there is no intimation of a process. The 
inner man is being renewed day by day, and the production of 
the spiritual body is connected with that. The shade of 
difference between the words is well preserved in AV. and RV. 
by ' building ' for oikoSo/a^v and ' house ' for olKtav, as in Vulg. by 
aedificatio and domus. In N.T., 01K080/X77 is almost peculiar to 
Paul (15/3), and chiefly in 1 and 2 Cor. (9/6). See Lightfoot 
on 1 Cor. iii. 9 and J. A. Robinson on Eph. ii. 21. By ZxofJ-w is 
meant ' we come into possession of.' 

ek ©eou. Cf. 1 Cor. i. 30, viii. 6, xi. 12. It is true that the 
ovopos, the material body, proceeds from God (see on 1 Cor. 
xii. 18, 24), but man takes part in the production of it. The 
spiritual body is wholly His creation (see on 1 Cor. xv. 38). 

Lietzmann, A. Sabatier, and Bousset would press £x°A tev t0 


mean that the spiritual bodies of those who are still in the flesh 
on earth are awaiting them in heaven, " created perhaps from all 
eternity." It is not necessary to believe that this is the Apostle's 
meaning. The present tense is often used of a future which is 
absolutely certain. The spiritual body is so certain to take the 
place of the material frame when the latter is pulled down, that 
we may be said to have it already. See on i Jn. v. 15. The 
idea of a disembodied spirit was abhorrent to both Jew and 
Gentile. A spirit which survives death must have a body of 
some kind, and it is this spiritual body which is raised. Its 
relation to the material body is real, but it cannot be 

o!iaat> &xeipoTroiT]TOf. 'A house not made with hands,' i.e., 
supernatural, immaterial, spiritual; Heb. ix. 11, 24. The human 
body is not made with hands, but it is natural and material. 
The difference is that between 7n/tt>/xcm/<os and i/^^ikos (see on 
1 Cor. xv. 44). In LXX xeipoiroirjTa is used of idols. 

aldmor. Here, as in iv. 18, the idea may be that of indefinite 
durability rather than of timelessness ; cf. Lk. xvi. 9. 

iv rots oupai/ois. It is in heaven that this supernatural 
habitation has its proper environment, but heaven is not the 
habitation. We often think of heaven as the home of departed 
spirits; but St Paul thinks of each departed spirit as having an 
oiKia of its own, the site of which is in heaven. The three 
attributes, a^ipoiroi-qTov, alwviov, and iv rot? ovpavols, are in 
antithesis to en-iyaos tov o-k^vous : iv tois oupavois does not 
belong to Zxo/xev, 'we already possess in heaven.' 

D E F G, Latt. Goth, insert a second otl before oIkoSojutiv. In English 
there is a tendency to insert a superfluous 'that' in such sentences; ' We 
know that, if the makeshift dwelling which we have in this world be pulled 
down, [that] there is a much better one to replace it.' 

2. k<u y<*P fr touto). AV. ignores the ko.( — 'For in this.' 
The koli is either intensive, 'For verily' (RV.), 'For in fact,' 
' For indeed,' introducing some important reason ; or argumen- 
tative, 'For also,' 'For moreover,' introducing an additional 
reason. Either of these makes good sense. Again, iv toutu> 
may be either 'in this tent-dwelling' {v. 1), or 'hereby,' or 
' herein,' lit. ' in this fact ' ; Jn. xv. 8 ; 1 Jn. ii. 3, 5 ; see on 
1 Cor. iv. 4. The last meaning is specially freq. in the Johan- 
nine writings, where it commonly points forward to what is 
about to be stated. The first meaning is simplest here ; ' For 

* Spenser seems to have thought that the form of the natural body is 
derived from the soul. In his Hymne in Honour of Beutie he says ; " For 
of the soule the bodie forme doth take ; For soule is forme, and doth the 
bodie make." Philo thought otherwise ; 6 ^/^repos vovs oii SeSvj/uotf/ryijKe rb 
ffQ/jia, dXXd ttTTiv ipyov Zrtpov (De Migr. Abr. § 35). 


truly in this tabernacle-house we groan.'* The words which 
immediately follow (to oiK^-n/piov k.t.X.) seem to show that St 
Paul is still thinking of the ctk^vos when he says ivrovrto. Comp. 
Rom. viii. 12, 13 and 18-23. But 'herein' makes good sense, 
looking forward to IttlttoOovvt^. 

to oiKYjnipioi' . . . emiroGourres. The participle explains and 
gives the reason for o-Tevd^o/xev : 'we groan, because we yearn. : 
St Paul has limroOdv in all four groups (1 Thess. iii. 6; Rom. 
i. n j Phil. i. 8, ii. 26; 2 Tim. i. 4). Elsewhere in N.T., Jas. 
iv. s and 1 Pet. ii. 2, where see Hort. Everywhere else in Paul 
it expresses the longing for absent friends, to which the longing 
for a permanent and glorious home is analogous. He regards 
this yearning as evidence of the reality of the thing yearned for : 
si desiderium naturae non est frustra, ?)tulto minus desiderium 
gratiae frustra est (Aquinas). In late Greek, compounds take 
the place of simple verbs without much increase of meaning, and 
in N.T. tzoQCiv does not occur. The l-m- may indicate direction ; 
cf. €Vi7rd^7/crts (vii. 7, n). In LXX -koOziv is rare, except in 
Wisdom. See Index IV. 

t6 oiKT]TTJpiov. Not a diminutive ; it denotes a permanent 
abode or home (Jude 6) ; cf. Aoyi£o//.evos r-qv ttoXiv "EAA770-1V 
oiKrjTypiov iroirjo-eiv (2 Mace. xi. 2). The difference between 
otKia and oiK^Trjpiov is that the latter implies an oIktjttjp, an 
inhabitant, while the former does not. 

eirevSuo-aaGcu. A double compound which is not found else- 
where in N.T. or LXX. Cf. i-n-evSvTr]? (Jn. xxi. 7 ; Lev. viii. 7 ; 
the A text of 1 Sam. xviii. 4). The body may be regarded either 
as a dwelling or as a garment, and here we have the two ideas 
combined; 'longing to be clothed upon with our habitation 
which is from heaven.' The more permanent dwelling is to be 
drawn over the less permanent one, as one garment is drawn over 
another, and is to take its place. In some way not described, 
the now useless ovojvos is destroyed, without being dissolved in 
the grave, as in the case of those who die before the Lord comes. 
The change from the carnal to the spiritual body is regarded as 
instantaneous (1 Cor. xv. 52), and the change is longed for. 

We may therefore be content to adopt as the more probable 
rendering ; ' For indeed, in this tent-dwelling we groan, because 
we long to put on over it our true habitation, which comes to 
us from heaven.' This last point is a repetition of e'/c ©coC in v. 1. 
In all cases it is God who furnishes the spiritual body, through 
Christ (Phil. iii. 21), but the method differs: the dead receive 
their spiritual body through resurrection, the living through 
transfiguration (1 Cor. xv. 38, 51), and it is the living who 

* See the beautiful passage in Plat. Phaedo, 66, 67. But non agnoscit 
fides philosophicum corporis a Creatore dati fastidium (Beng.). 



are described here. Comp. /u.eTao-Y^a.Ti^o/i.evos els atpOapo-Lav 
(4 Mace. ix. 22). See Briggs, The Messiah of the Apostles, p. 130. 
We may set aside as improbable, if not impossible, the sug- 
gestion that oreva£o/A€v iTwrodovvres is to be treated as equivalent 
to eTrLTroOovfjiev <TT€vdt,ovTes, the main idea being in the participle, 
and not in the finite verb. It is doubtful whether any such 
usage is found in N.T. Nor is it likely that the em in eirevSvtr- 
aa-Qai indicates mere succession ; that the clothing with the 
olK7)Tr)piov comes after the clothing with the o-zojvos. The context, 
especially v. 4, shows that the former comes over the latter and 
extinguishes or absorbs it. It is probable that fondness for 
alliteration has led to the juxtaposition of the two compounds, 
lirevhvcracrOai liMroOovvTes. 

It is not easy to decide how far this idea of clothing living 

Christians with spiritual bodies is to be identified with that of 

the bright robes which adorn the saints in glory. In some 

passages the two seem to be identical, while in others the 

identification is doubtful. In Rev. iii. 5, 18, iv. 4, the saints 

have i/xaTta Xcu/ca, in Rev. vi. n, vii. 9, 13, a-roXoX XevKat: in 

2 (4) Esdr. ii. 39, splendidae tunicae : in Herm. Sim. viii. 2, 

t^aTitr/xos XevKos. These "garments of glory," and "garments 

of life," which will not grow old {Enoch lxii. 15, 16) are a 

frequent feature in Jewish apocalypses, and in some of them we 

have an approach to what is stated here. In 2 (4) Esdr. ii. 45, 

Hi sunt qui mortalem tunicam deposuerunt, et immortalem sump- 

serunt, et confessi sunt nomen Dei ; modo coronafitur, et accipiunt 

palmas. In the Book of the Secrets of Enoch xxii. 8, "And the 

Lord said to Michael, Go and take from Enoch his earthly robe, 

and anoint him with My holy oil, and clothe him with the raiment 

of My glory." In the Ascension of Isaiah ix. 16 this raiment is 

said to be stored in heaven ; " But the saints shall come with 

the Lord, with their garments which are laid up on high {supra 

repositae sunt) in the seventh heaven ; with the Lord they shall 

come, those whose spirits are reclothed, they shall descend and 

shall be in the world (1 Thess. iv. 15-17) ; and He will confirm (?) 

those who shall be found in the flesh with the saints, in the 

garments of the saints, and the Lord will serve those who shall 

have watched in this world (Lk. xii. 37; cf. Jn. xiii. 4). And 

after that, they shall be changed in their garments [from] on 

high, and their flesh shall be left in the world." Again, ix. 9, 

" I saw those who had put off their garments of flesh and were 

now in garments from on high (exutos stolis carnalibus etexistentes 

in stolis excelsis), and they were as angels"; and ix. 17, "Then 

shall there ascend with Him many of the just, whose souls have 

not received their garments until the Lord Christ is ascended 

and they have ascended with Him " ; and xi. 40 we have the 


final charge ; " And do you watch in the Holy Spirit, to receive 
your garments, thrones, and crowns of glory, which are laid up 
in the seventh heaven." 

AV. places a full stop at the end of v. 2, RV. a colon : a 
comma is all that is needed. 

3. €? ye Kal e^Sucrdfxecoi. Here the metaphor of the garment 
becomes more distinct; '//so be that being clothed we shall 
not be found naked,' i.e. without either a material or a spiritual 
body.* This possibility is excluded by the fact that the 
heavenly oiktjtt^hov envelops the earthly cnoyvos, which is not 
destroyed until it is replaced by something very much better. 
The force of the koll is to strengthen the doubt expressed by 
ttyt, and this may be done by emphasizing the 'if.' Comp. 
Xen. Mem. III. vi. 13, Aeycis ira/x/Aeya^es Trpay/j.a, €t ye *cai rwv 
toiovtwv imfieXelo-Oai Serjcrei.. ' Of course, on the supposition 
that,' is the meaning. The Ivhva-dfjjevoi refers to the same fact 
as cVevSucrao-tfcu, for here the simple verb suffices, and its relation 
to evpTjo-o/jLeda shows that it refers to some future clothing, which, 
when it takes place, will prevent the calamity of being found 
yvfivoi, like the souls in Sheol, without form, and void of all 
power of activity.! Some would place a comma after tVSuo-cyievoi, 
and treat ivSva-d/xevoi, ov yv/xvoL as a case of asyndeton, like yaAa, 
ov ^pwp.a (1 Cor. iii. 2), 7roocrco7ra), ov KapSia (1 Thess. ii. 17); 'on 
the supposition that we shall be found clothed, not naked.' The 
construction is not admissible, and the instances quoted in 
support of it are not parallel to it, being both of them pairs of 
substantives, not an aorist participle with an adjective. Others 
would understand some such word as ' wondering ' or ' doubting ' 
before eiye, which might be implied in arev. iimroOovvTes, 'we 
groan, wondering whether we really shall be found clothed, not 

The sentence is a kind of afterthought, added to v. 2, as if 
to anticipate a misgiving, or objection. Some might suggest that 
our oTeva£o/>iev Ittltto6ovvt€^ proves no more than that we have 
a strong desire to be freed from the suffering body ; it gives no 
security for the acquisition of a better body. Such an objection 
might easily be felt by those Corinthians who doubted about 
a resurrection. The Apostle rejects it with decision. No one 
yearns for the yv/ivor?/? of being a bodiless spirit, and God has 
better things in store for us. 

* This use of yv/j.v6s is found in Plato, e.g. Cratylus 403, Gorgias 523, 

t Rom. xv. 4, irpoeypd(pri is repeated as £yp6.<p-q, Eph. vi. 13, avriarrivai 
as <rTrjvai, I Pet. i. IO, i^rjpaivriaav as ipavvwvTes (J. H. Moulton, 
p. 115). 


et ye (X C K L P) is perhaps to be preierred to etirep (B D F G 17). 
ivSvffduevoi (K B C D 3 E KL P, Vulg. Syrr. Copt. Arm. Aeth. Goth.) is 
certainly to be preferred to iKdvadfievoi (D* F G, deg, Tert.), which is 
an early alteration to avoid apparent tautology. Pseudo-Primasius adopts 
the Vulg. vestiti and yet explains expoliati cot pore. 

4. Ka! yap ol o^Tes kv tw crKr]vei. * For verily we that are still 
in the tent' — the tent-dwelling mentioned in v. 1 ; 'we who are 
in no immediate danger of being separated from our mortal body 
by death.' After the supplementary remark in v. 3, he returns 
to the contents of v. 2, viz. our present deplorable condition : 
and here the plur. seems to mean all Christians. 

oreed^ojjiev fSapoup.ei'oi. Not a mere repetition of crT£i'd£o/x€v 
£7ri7ro0owres. In the one case groaning is caused by a feeling 
of intense longing, in the other by a feeling of intense depression. 
At first sight this seems to mean, 'we groan because we are 
oppressed by the sufferings of the body.' But these sufferings 
would lead to a desire to be rid of the body,* and what follows 
shows that there is no such desire. The groaning is caused 
by the oppressive thought that death may come before the Lord 
returns, and may leave us yvp.voi, without any bodies at all. The 
use of /3apovfxevoi. here looks like another reminiscence of Wisd. 
ix. 15 ; see on v. 1 and ii. 6 (emTi/ua). Aug., after quoting these 
verses, remarks that "the cause of the burdensomeness is not 
the nature and substance of the body, but its corruptible character. 
We do not desire to be deprived of the body, but to be clothed 
with its immortality. For then also there will be a body, but it 
will no longer be a burden, being no longer corruptible " {De 
Civ. Dei, xiv. 3). For koX yap, Vulg. has Nam et in both v. 2 
and v. 4 ; Aug. is more accurate with etenim, which serves to 
subjoin a corroborative clause, ' For verily ' ; a freq. use in Cicero. 

€<{>' <3. This may mean either 'wherefore' (Lightfoot on 
Phil. iii. 12) or 'because,' liii tou'toj on, propterea quod (Rom. 
v. 12). The latter is better here. 'We feel oppressed, because 
we do not wish to be unclothed, i.e. to be divested of our body 
by death'; in other words, 'because we shrink from the idea 
of being left without a body.' f AV. and RV. transpose the 
negative, in order to smooth the construction, ' not for that we 
would be unclothed'; but the smoothness weakens the sense. 
The oi belongs to #e'A.w, and, as in the case of oi fo'Aw fyas 
dyvoetV (see on i. 8), there is something which is very far from 
being wished ; the total loss of the body is a thought of horror. 

* This desire is frequently expressed by philosophers, especially of the 
Platonic and Neo-Platonic School, but it is not expressed here. The Jewish 
belief was that the soul, furnished with a body, constitutes a man. 

t "The common i<j> yc.fut. indie, ' on condition that,' does not appear 
in the N.T." (J. H. Moulton, p. 107). 


Tantam vim habet corporis et animae duke consortium. . . . Sub 
terrena tunica gemimus, ad coelestem festi/ia/nus, illatn volumus 
accipere, istam nolumus pone?-e (Herveius). St Paul regards this 
instinctive horror of being without a body as strong evidence 
that a heavenly body will be given to us. To him, as to many 
Greeks, a disembodied spirit seemed to be utterly against nature. 
But there is no intimation here or elsewhere of a third body, an 
interim body, to be occupied between the earthly body and the 
resurrection body. 

d\\' eiret'SuaacrSai. ' But (we wish) to be clothed upon,' to 
be invested with the heavenly body before the earthly one is 
taken away, so that there may be no interval of separation 
between soul and body. 

ifa KaTaiTo0T]. ' In order that the mortality of the one may 
be swallowed up by the immortal life of the other.' In Irenaeus 
(iv. xxxvi. 6) we have Nolumus exspoliari, sed superindui, uti 
absorbeatur mortale ab immortalitate; and (v. xiii. 3) ut absor- 
beatur mortale a vita. Only what is mortal perishes; the 
personality, consisting of soul and body, survives. The Apostle 
again seems to have Is. xxv. 8 in his mind ; see on 1 Cor. xv. 
54. Theodoret says that the imperishable life makes corruption 
to vanish in much the same way as the entrance of light counter- 
acts darkness. Conversely, Chrys. says that corruption can no 
more conquer incorruption than wax can conquer fire. 

After ffK-qva, D E F G, Syrr. Copt. Aeth. Goth, add Totfry. XBC 
K L P, Vulg. Arm. omit. For i<j> <£ (all uncials) a few cursives have 

5. 6 Se KOT6pya(rd|m.eFOs TjfJias. Both AV. and RV. have 

1 Now ' for Se, yet it seems to imply a certain amount of contrast ; 
'You may think that this is fanciful, and that our feelings of 
longing or of horror prove nothing as to the reality of what is 
desired or dreaded ; but He who wrought us out for this very 
thing, viz. to expect that our mortal garb will be absorbed by a 
heavenly one, is God.' As in i. 21, ©cos comes at the close 
with great emphasis ; cf. Heb. iii. 4 and see Westcott's addi- 
tional note on 1 Jn. iv. 12. Chrys. refers KaTepyacrdfjievos to the 
creation ; it refers rather to the kcuvIj ktio-is, to our regeneration, 
as what follows shows. The Latins vary between operari, facere, 
perjicere, efficere, and consummare for Ka.Tepyd£ea6au, and Vulg. 
has all five in different places, e.g. iv. 17, xii. 12 ; Rom. vii. 18 ; 

2 Cor. v. 5 ; 1 Pet. iv. 3, operari being the usual translation, 
e.g. iv. 17, vii. 10, n, ix. 11 ; etc. But nowhere does insiruere, 
praeparare, dispo7iere, conci?mare or elaborare seem to be used. 
The fact that no less than five different translations have been 
allowed to remain is further evidence that Jerome's revision of 


the Epistles was somewhat perfunctory. In the Gospels Karep- 
ya£ecr#ai does not occur. See Index IV. and footnote on v. i. 

6 Sous ^fJuV. This explains how God prepared us for this 
sure hope of receiving a spiritual body ; ' He gave us the earnest 
of the Spirit.' That implies that He has placed Himself in the 
position of a debtor who has paid an instalment ; and He is a 
debtor who is sure to pay the remainder in full. The Spirit 
inspires the longing and is the security that our longing for the 
spiritual body, the crw^a ttjs So^/s (cf. iii. 18, iv. 17), will be 
satisfied. See on i. 22 for the doctrine that the Spirit is given 
to us as an instalment. On this difficult verse see Salmond, 
Christian Doctrine of Immortality, pp. 565-575 : also Briggs, 
The Messiah of the Apostles, p. 130, who takes a different view. 

6 do6s (K* BCD* G P67**, Vulg. Syr-Pesh. Copt. Arm. Aeth.) rather 
than 6 ko.1 dovs (N c D 2 a » dS EK L, Syr-Hark. Goth.). 

6-8. ' Confident, therefore, at all times, and knowing that 
while we are at home in the body we are in exile from 
the Lord, — for we walk by means of faith and not by means of 
what we can see, — we are confident, I say, and are well pleased 
to go into exile from the body and to go home unto the Lord.' 
The construction of v. 6 is broken by the parenthetical v. 7, and 
then a new construction is started in v. 8. 

St Paul does not mean that while we are in the body we are 
absent from the Lord ; our union with Him both in life and in 
death is one of his leading doctrines (iv. 10, n ; 1 Thess. v. 10). 
He is speaking relatively. The life of faith is less close and 
intimate than the life of sight and converse. The passage 
assumes that the dead are conscious, conscious of the Lord 
(Phil. i. 20-23; Lk. xxiii. 43; Acts vii. 59); otherwise departure 
from the body would be a worse condition, with regard to Him, 
than being in the body. In agreement with this, Polycarp (Phil. 
9), following Clement of Rome (Cor. 5), says that St Paul and 
Other Apostles eis tov 6<peiAo/xevov avrois tottov eurtv Trapa tw 
Kvpio). See on iii. 2. 

6. Gappourres ouc iravTore. Both in LXX (Prov. i. 21) and 
in N.T. (vii. 16, x. 1, 2 ; Heb. xiii. 6) Oapp&v is rare, Bapcruv 
being the common form. Vulg. varies between audere (here and 
x. 2) and confidere (vii. 16 and x. 1). Co?ifidere would be better 
here, for the notion of ' daring ' is foreign to the passage. ©appetV 
is a favourite word with the Stoics. See Epictetus, Dis. ii. 1, 
where he shows in what sense we can be both confident and 
cautious. The ow means, ' because we have God as our 
security' (v. 5), and Travrore (ii. 14, iv. 10, ix. 8) means that 'in 
every event,' whether we die soon or live till the Lord returns, 
we have this confidence. It is worth while to distinguish 


between 7ravTOT€ and d«': Vulg. has semper, and AV. and RV. 
have 'always' for both. See on iv. 10. 

Kal €i86t€s. Co-ordinately with OuppovvTes, ctSoVes looks 
onwards to ev8oKovp,€v. 

eV8T)fxoui'Tes • . . etcSn/i.oGfjiet'. Neither verb is found in LXX, 
and neither occurs in N.T. except in these verses.* Tertullian 
has immorari and peregrinari throughout. Vulg. varies the 
translation of both verbs capriciously ; dum sumus in corpore 
peregrinamur a Domino (6) ; peregrinari a corpore et praesentes esse 
ad Deum (8); sive absentes sive praesentes (9). Domi esse and 
exsulare would express the respective meanings better. Quam- 
diu domi sumus in hoc corporis habitaculo is the paraphrase of 
Erasmus ; and it is evident that St Paul is thinking of the house 
in which we dwell rather than of the city or country in which we 
dwell. But iKSrjfx.. is a great deal more than 'out of the house'; 
it means ' away from home.' The true home is with the Lord ; 
nam peregrinator pat riant /tabet, sive cito sive tardius eo perven- 
turus (Beng.). In papyri we have both ckSt^civ and a.Tro8r)p.&v, 
1 to go abroad ' and ' to be abroad,' in opposition to lv8r)p.eiv, ' to 
stay at home ' or to ' be at home.' See critical note below. 

d-iro tou Kupiou. ' Separate from the Lord ' ; cf. Rom. ix. 3. 
This is true, in spite of His constant presence (Mt. xxviii. 20) 
and of our union with Him (1 Cor. vi. 15, xii. 27); quia non 
exhibet se coram videndum, quia adhuc exulamus ab ejus regno, et 
beata immortalitate, qua fruuntur angeli qui cum eo sunt, adhuc 
carettius (Calvin). 

For iv8rjjx.ovvTes, D G have i-mSriixovvTes, and for iKS-qp-odfiev, D E G have 
airo8rjfj.ovp.ei>. For Kvplov, D G, Copt, have 9eoG. 

7. 8id mo-reus yap k.t.X. The Apostle seems to feel that 
€kS?7/x. oltto tov Kvpiov may cause perplexity, and he hastens to 
explain in what sense such an expression is true. ' It is through 
a world of faith that we walk here, not through a world of visible 
form'; and non videre prope tantundem est atque disjunctum esse 
(Beng.). In this life we have to walk under conditions of faith, 
not under conditions of what is seen. Belief, however strong, 
cannot be the same as sight ; and from a Christ whom we cannot 
see we are to that extent separated, just as a blind man is cut off 
from the world to which he nevertheless belongs ; vvv airov tois 
tou CROTCH-OS 6<t>8a\fjLo'i<i ov^ 6pw/x€v, tot€ Se Kal oif/op-eda /cat 
a-wea-op-eOa (Thdrt.). AV. and RV. give the general sense of the 
verse correctly, but eTSos cannot mean ' sight.' It means ' that 
which is seen,' species. Cf. iv ci'Sci koL ov 81 alviy/AaTuyv (Num. 

* In the Testament of Abraham 15 (p. 95, ed. James), 6 Aaw/xaros Michael 
says to Abraham, iroiyjcrov didra^iv Trepl iravTwv Zv ?x els " ^ Tt "^yy-xev 77 y/xtpa 
4i> 77 fuiWeis iK tov trufiaros tub'-riiJ.eiv Kal eVt (£7ra£ wpbs rbv Kvpiov ipxevdo-i. 


xii. 8); to Se eTSos t^? So^s Kvp'ov (Ex. xxiv. 17), species gloriae 
Domini. Haec erit species, Augustine says, quando faciet quod 
dixit, Ostendam me ipsum illi. And again, Neque enim jam fides 
erit qua credantur quae no?i videantur, sed species, qua videantur 
quae credebantur (De Trin. xiv. 2). There is a slight change 
from Sia 7rto-T€a)s to 81a ci'Sous, the former being subjective and 
the latter objective, but it causes no difficulty. In this world 
the Christian is under the condition of belief in Christ, not under 
the condition of His visible form. Here we have faith only ; 
hereafter both faith and sight.* Faith is a virtue which 
'abideth'; see on 1 Cor. xiii. 13. 

8. 0appoCfjL6i' 8e kch euSoKoGfiee. After the parenthetical ex- 
planation in v. 7 the Oappovires of v. 6 is taken up again by 
the Se, for which ' I say ' (AV., RV.) is a good equivalent. 
Without the injected explanation the sentence would have run 
OappovvTes . . . evSoKovfxev, but in his emotion at the thought 
the Apostle forgets the original construction and resumes with 
Oappovp.ev kcu ev8oi<ovp.ev, ' we are confident and are well pleased.' 
The emphatic word, as is shown in both places by its position 
and here by its repetition, is Oappelv. It takes the place of 
o-T€i/a£eiv in vv. 4 and 6. The thought which there suggested 
sighing and groaning, now that it is further considered, suggests 
confidence. Even the possibility of being left yvpLv6% for a time 
loses its terrors, when it is remembered that getting away from 
the temporary shelter furnished by the body means getting home 
to closer converse with the Lord.f The change from presents 
(€1'St///.owt£S, iK&y]fJLovpLev) to aoristS (cKS^/A^crai, ivBrj/jurjcrcu) must 
be observed, and the force of the aorists may be expressed by 
'getting.' With eKS^/^o-cu comp. 'He has got away,' which in 
the North of England is a common expression for ' He is dead ' ; 
and with ivSr]p.rjaat comp. the German heimgegangen. 

eu8oKoup,ei\ ' We are tvell pleased,' as both AV. and RV. in 
Mt. iii. 17, xii. 18, xvii. 5 ; Mk. i. n ; Lk. iii. 22 ; 1 Cor. x. 5 ; 
2 Pet. i. 17; and as RV. in 1 Thess. ii. 8. The verb is used 
both of God and of men. When used of men (xii. 10 ; Rom. 
xv. 26, 27 ; 1 Thess. ii. 8, iii. 1; 2 Thess. ii. 12), it expresses 
hearty goodwill and perfect contentment, and it is often used of 
giving consent, especially in legal transactions. This goodwill 

* Comp. Venit ad nos ex his, quos amamus, etiam absent ibus, gaudium : sed 
id leve et evanidum. Conspectus et praesentia et conversatio aliquid habet 
vivae vohiptatis : tttique si non tantum quern velis, sed qualem veil's, videas 
(Seneca, Ep. xxxv. 2, 3). 

t The approximation to this in Wisd. iii. 1-5 is worth considering. 
' The souls of the righteous are in the hand of God, and no torment shall 
touch them. . . . Because God made trial of them, and found them worthy 
of Himself.' See on vv. 1 and 4. 


and contentment is not quite the same as 6eXo/xev (v. 4) or 
eVi7ro#oui'Tes (v. 2). It is possible to long for one thing, and yet 
be content with, or even prefer, another, because one knows that 
the latter is well worth having, and perhaps better for one. St 
Paul longed to have a spiritual body, in exchange for his material 
body, without dying : but rather than remain in his material 
body he was quite ready to die. It was better to see the Lord 
than to be deprived of this bliss through being in the body ; and 
to be sure of seeing Him robbed death of its terrors. Comp. 
Proinde intrepidus horam Mam decretoriam prospice: non est 
animo suprema, sed corpori. Quidqitid circa te jacet rerum, 
tanquam hospitalis loci sarcinas specta : transeundum est. Detra- 
hetur tibi haec circumjecta, novissimum velamentum tui cutis: 
detrahetur caro et suffusus sanguis. Dies iste, quern, tanquam extre- 
mum reformidas aetemi natalis est (Seneca, Ep. ciii. 24, 25). 

Perhaps in no other case is the caprice of the Vulg. so con- 
spicuous as in the translation of evSoKelv. The verb occurs 
fifteen times in the Epistles, and it is translated in ten different 
ways; — bonam volutitatem habemus (here), placeo mihi (xii. 10), 
placuit with a dat. (1 Cor. i. 21; Rom. xv. 27; Gal. i. 15; 
1 Thess. iii. 1 ; Heb. x. 6, 38), be?ieplacitum est Deo (1 Cor. x. 5), 
probaverunt (Rom. xv. 26), complacuit (Col. i. 19), cupide vole- 
bamus (1 Thess. ii. 8), co?isensuerunt (2 Thess. ii. 12), placita 
sunt tibi (Heb. x. 8), mihi complacui (2 Pet. i. 17). And in this 
case the Gospels are not more uniform than the Epistles. The 
verb occurs six times in them, and it is translated in five different 
ways, three of which differ from all the renderings in the 
Epistles; mihi complacui (Mt. iii. 17), bene placuit a?iimae meae 
(Mt. xii. 18), mihi bene complacui (Mt. xvii. 5), complacui (Mk. 
i. 11), complacuit with a dat. (Lk. iii. 22, xii. 32). 

irpos toc Ku'pioc. Here, as in Phil. i. 23-25, his reason for 
wishing to depart from the body is the same, viz. to be with the 
Lord, <Tvv XpicrTw eu'ai" 7roAAw yu.5A.Xov Kpelcraov. But his reasons 
for wishing to remain in the body differ. There it is for the sake 
of others, because his beloved Philippians still need him. Here 
it is for his own sake, because he desires to be alive when the 
Lord comes, and thus to escape dying. In both passages he 
implies that at death there is immediate entrance into closer 
fellowship with Christ. Comp. Seneca, Ep. cii. 22 ; Cum venerit 
dies Me qui mixlum hoc divini humanique secernat, corpus hoc, ubi 
inveni, relinqicam : ipse me diis reddam. Nee nunc sine Mis sum, 
sed terreno detineor carcere. 

Once more Plato (Apol. 40, 41), followed by Cicero (Tusc. 1. 
xii. 98), to some extent anticipates Christian thought. " If 
indeed when the pilgrim arrives in the world below, he finds 
sons of God who were righteous in their own life, that pilgrim- 


age will be worth making. What would not a man give if he 
might converse with Orpheus and Musaeus and Hesiod and 
Homer? What infinite delight would there be in conversing 
with them and asking them questions!" Still more closely 
Philo (Leg. A /kg. iii. 14), "It is not possible for one who is 
dwelling in the body, in a race that is mortal, to hold communion 
with God, but God floods one who is free from the prison." 
And again (De Migr. Abr. § 34, 466 Mang.) ; " Rouse yourselves 
and seek for that migration hence which proclaims to us, not 
death, but deathlessness." Non est vivere, sed valere, vita (Mart, 
vi. lxx. 15). 

For 6appou/j.ev, K 17, Orig. Tert. have dappovvTes. For Kijpiov, D* 17, 
Vulg. have Qe6v. 

9. 816 tea! <})iXoTi)xou|ie0a. ' Wherefore also we make it our 
aim.' Both ho, which looks back to ev8oKov/xev, and /cat, which 
adds something to it, show that a new section does not begin 
here, as Calvin and Bachmann suppose. The verb may in this 
place retain its classical meaning (Haec una ambitio kgitima, as 
Beng. says) ; but in late Greek (1 Thess. iv. 11 ; Rom. xv. 20) 
it need not mean more than 'desire earnestly,' or ' make it one's 
aim ' (RV.), which is probably right here. Xenophon and Plato 
seem sometimes to use it in this sense, followed, as here, by an 
infinitive. In meaning and construction it is thus equivalent to 
o-7rouoa£eiv (1 Thess. ii. 17; Gal. ii. 10; Eph. iv. 3; 2 Tim. ii. 
15). 'We make it a point of honour,' wir setzen unsre Ehre 
darein (Bousset, Bachmann), is a translation which looks neat, 
but is not preferable to ' desire earnestly ' or ' make it our aim.' 

eiT6 eeSTjjxoui'Tes eiTe €KOT](j,ourres. Two questions have been 
much discussed with regard to these two participles. (1) How 
are they to be understood? (2) Do they belong to cpi\on- 
fjiovfxeOa or to euapeo-roi airw eiVai ? The answer to the second 
question depends upon the answer to the first. 

(1) As to the meaning of the participles there are three 
suggestions, (a) They refer to one's p/ace of abode in this world ; 
1 whether we are at home or away from home.' This interpre- 
tation may be safely rejected as having no point and as un- 
worthy of the dignity of the passage, (ft) They refer to the 
communion with Christ just mentioned, 7rpos tov Kvptov being 
understood with e'vS^/xowre? and diro tov Kupiou with ii<8r]fiovvT€ . 
This is better, but the order is against it, for the Apostle would 
hardly have mentioned the future condition before the present 
one ; he would have written elre £k8. elre iv8., and a few 
authorities have this order ; see critical note below, (y) The 
participles refer to the body just mentioned, iv t<3 o-w/mTi being 
understood with cvS^/iowtcs and «c tov o-w/AaTos with eKSry/AoCvres. 


This is almost certainly right. It makes good sense in itself and 
it fits the context. ' Whether we are at home in the body, or 
away from home out of it,' is the meaning. But exS^ovvTes is 
not to be rendered ' 'going from home,' ' migrating from the body,' 
i.e. dying. The alternative is not between staying and leaving, 
but between being in the body and being out of\hz body, between 

6v8ucra/x£j'oi and eKSvad/xa'Oi. (v. 2). 

(2) With this explanation of the participles there can be 
little doubt that they belong to euapecrroi airy ehai. It would 
hardly be congruous to say that, when we are absent from the 
body and at home with the Lord, we 'desire earnestly' or 
' make it our aim ' to be acceptable to Him ; in that blissful 
condition we are evdpeorot airy. It is in this life that we desire 
and strive to please Him. 

The meaning of the verse is, therefore, ' We aim at winning 
the Lord's approval, whether at His Coming He finds us in the 
body or already out of it.' Again we have a parallel in Seneca 
(Ep. cii. 29); Haec cogitatio nihil sordidum animo subsidere sinit, 
nihil humile, nihil crudele. Deos omnium rerum esse testes ait, 
illis nos approbari, illis in futurum parari jubet, et aeternitatem 
proponere. The whole letter should be compared with this 

eudpeoroi. ' Acceptable.' RV. has ' well-pleasing,' which is 
right in meaning, but cannot well be used by those who trans- 
late evSoKovfiiv ' we are well pleased.' The word is late 
Greek; only twice in LXX (Wisd. iv. 10, ix. 10), although 
evapeo-Telv is common. See Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 214. 
Excepting Heb. x. 6, the word in N.T. is exclusively Pauline, 
eight times in all, and in all groups, except Thessalonians. Cf. 
Eph. v. 10 ; Col. iii. 20; Phil. iv. 18. In nearly all places it is 
used of what is acceptable to God or to Christ. So also in 
Wisd. iv. 10, ix. 10, from which book St Paul may have got the 
word; see on eVtyetos in f. 1. Vulg. varies between placens 
(Rom. xii. 1, 2), beneplacitum (Eph. v. 10), placitum (Col. iii. 26), 
and placere (here). 

f g and Syr-Pesh. have the order eiVe iKd-q/jLovvres efre ivS-qnovvTes : 
see above, p. 154 sub fin. 

10. tous y^P t^tcis TjfJias. ' We have good reason for 
making this our aim, for every one of us, whether in the 
body or out of it, must be made manifest (1 Cor. iv. 5) before 
the judgment-seat of Christ.' A desire to be persons who are 
acceptable to Him must abide in us, when we remember that 
our whole life will be laid open before Him and judged accord- 
ing to its exact deserts. All Christians, without exception, are 
summed up under tov% 7nxvTas 17/ And they have not only to 


'appear' {cpatveo-Oai), but to have their whole character 'made 
manifest ' (^arepwfli/rai). It is probable that, as in the Parables 
of the Talents and of the Sheep and the Goats, being made 
manifest to one's own conscience and to other persons is 
included;* but it is manifestation to the Judge whose approval 
is desired that is specially meant. See on 1 Cor. iv. 4, 5. He 
reminds the Corinthians, who are so prone to criticize, that a 
time is coming when they themselves will be laid bare to the 
most searching criticism. ' Appear' (AV.) is inadequate. 

Set. By Divine decree which cannot be evaded. 

cfAirpocrOev tou Ptju-citos tou XpiaTou. Cf. 2 Tim. iv. I. In 
Rom. xiv. 10 it is ' the judgment-seat of God,' God being said to 
do Himself what He does through His Son (Jn. v. 22). In the 
Gospels, as here, Christ is the Judge. In the Apocalypse it is 
' He that sitteth upon the throne,' i.e. the Almighty Father, who 
judges (Swete on Rev. xx. 11). Polycarp {Phil. 6) combines 
our verse with Rom. xiv. 10 ; Travrus Set TrapacrTrjvaL tw jirnxan 
tov XpicrTov, koX CKacrTov iirep iavTov Aoyov Sovvai. See on iii. 2. 

The fiy)[xa is the tribunal, whether in a basilica for the praetor 
in a court of justice,! or in a camp for the commander to ad- 
minister discipline and address the troops. In either case the 
tribunal was a platform on which the seat {sella) of the presiding 
officer was placed. In LXX, (3rjfia commonly means a platform 
or scaffold rather than a seat (Neh. viii. 4 : 1 Esdr. ix. 42 ; 

2 Mace. xiii. 26). In N.T. it seems generally to mean the seat 
(Mt. xxvii. 19; Jn. xix. 13; Acts xviii. 12, xxv. 6, etc. Seven 
times in Acts in this sense). But in some of these passages it 
may mean the platform on which the seat was placed. On 
Areopagus the f3rjp.a was a stone platform ; octtis Kparei vvv tov 
XWov tov 'v T-fj Hvkvl (Aristoph. Pax, 680) : cf. Xen. Mem. ill. 
vi. 1. Fond as St Paul is of military metaphors, and of comparing 
the Christian life to warfare, he is not likely to be thinking of a 
military tribunal here. Other N.T. writers speak of the Divine 
judgment-seat as a 0poVos (Mt. xix. 28, xxv. 31; Rev. xx. 11; 
cf. Dan. vii. 9, 10). The idea of a judgment-seat is frequent in 
the Book of Enoch, and it is the ' Elect One ' or the ' Son of 
Man ' who sits on the throne of His glory to judge (xiv. 3, lv. 4, 

* Augustine speaks of a certain divine power, qua fid tit cuique opera sua 
vel bona vel mala cuncta in memoriam revocentur et mentis intuitu tmra 
celeritate ctrnantur, utaccuset vel excuse! scientia conscientiam, atque ita simul 
et omnes et singuli judicentur (De Civ. Dei, xx. 14). 

t Stanley is in error in stating that " when the Basilica became the model 
of the Christian place of worship, the name of /3^a (or tribunal) was trans- 
ferred to the chair of the bishop." The /37?/*a was the space inside, and 
sometimes in front of, the apse, containing the altar, the seats of the 
presbyters, and the cathedra of the bishop, the last being in the centre of the 
wall of the apse. 


lxii. 3, 5). He has been placed thereon by the Lord of Spirits 
and all judgment has been committed to Him (lxi. 3, lxii. 2, 
lxix. 27, 29). See Charles on xlv. 3. In the Assumption oj 
Moses the Eternal God rises from His royal throne and goes 
forth to judge and punish (x. 3, 7). Though nearer in date 
to St Paul (perhaps a.d. 20), this is further from him in 

iva KOfiiCTTjTat eKaoTos Ta 81a tou ctwjjl<xtos. ' In order that 
each one may receive as his due the things done by means of his 
body.' This corrects the false inference which might be drawn 
from tovs irdvTas rjpa^. We shall not be judged en masse, or in 
classes, but one by one, in accordance with individual merit. 
"St Paul does not say merely that he shall receive according to 
what he has done in the body, but that he shall receive the 
things done — the very selfsame things he did ; they are to be 
his punishment" (F. W. Robertson, Lectures on the Epp. to the 
Corinthians, p. 377). Chrys. points out that men are not much 
influenced by the prospect of losing possible blessings; the 
dread of possible pains is more influential. But present gains 
and losses are the most influential of all. Cf. ei'Sores on eKacn-o?, 
idv ti TToirjarj ayaBov, tovto jco/xtcrcrat irapa Kvpiov (Eph. vi. 8), 
and 6 yap dSiKw KOfXiaeTat o ^8(.'k?;ct£v (Col. iii. 25). In all three 
passages, Kop.L^a6aL, ' to get what is one's own,' comes to mean 
'to get as an equivalent,' 'to be requited.' Hort (on 1 Pet. i. 9) 
says that KOfxtleaOai "always in N.T. means not simply to receive 
but to receive back, to get what has belonged to oneself but 
has been lost, or promised but kept back, or what has come 
to be one's own by earning." This use is freq. in LXX also ; 

Gen. xxxviii. 20, KO/XLaaaOai tov dppa/3S)va: Lev. XX. 17, ajiapTiav 

Kop.iovvTai : Ps. xl. 15 ; Ecchis. xxix. 6; 2 Mace. viii. 33, xiii. 8; 
etc. De Wette points out that the metonymy by which we are 
said to receive back what we have done is not a mere idiom, but 
"lies deeper in the identity of the deed and its requital." In 
papyri we find the same usage. This is not always brought out 
in Vulg., which again varies greatly in its renderings. In the 
eleven passages in which Kopi^crOai occurs it uses five different 
words, some of which do not bear this meaning; referre (here), 
percipere (Eph. vi. 8; 1 Pet. v. 4 ; 2 Pet. ii. 13), recipere (Col. 
iii. 25; Mt. xxv. 27), reportare (Heb. x. 36; 1 Pet. i. 9), and 
accipere (Heb. xi. 13, 19, 39). The words from which this shade 
of meaning is absent are those which are most frequently em- 
ployed. The renderings of this clause in Tertullian, Cyprian, 
and the Vulgate are worth comparing. Tert. {Adv. Marc. v. 12) 
ut recipiat unusqutsque quae per corpus admisit, sive bonum sive 
malum; {De Res. Cam. 43) uti unusquisque ?-eportei quae per 
corpus secundum quae gessit, bonum sive malum ; {ibid. 60) ut quh 


referat per corpus prout gessit, where quis is probably a slip for 
quisque. Cypr. {Test. ii. 28 and iii. 56) ut reportet unusquisque 
sui corporis propria secundum quae egit sive bona sive mala. 
Vulg. ut referat unusquisque propria corporis prout gessit, sive 
bonum sive malum, where referat, p?-out gessit, bonum, malum 
agree with Tertullian, propria corporis with Cyprian. The latter 
expression points to a reading I'Sia for Sid, a reading which is 
attested also by defg Goth. Arm., Ambrst., and several of the 
Fathers. In the Pelagian controversy it came to the front, 
because infants have no iSia sins, and could not be supposed to 
be justly liable to punishment. 

to. 81a toG o-wfxaTos. ' Done by means of the body,' and 
therefore, as Herveius points out, dum in corpore fuit ; and these 
include words and thoughts as well as deeds, for the tongue and 
the brain are instruments in producing them. In Plato we have 
6 fxrjSkv <ppovTi£u>v twv rj&ovwv at Sid tov crc6|U,aTos elcnv (Phaedo, 
65) ; and again, oi/'ts r)fXLv b^vTarrj twv Sid tov o-w/xaro^ ep^erai 
alo-Orjcrewv, rj <pp6vr/o-L<; ovx oparai (Pkaedr, 250) : cf. at Kara, to 
o-w/Aa ^Sovai. airop-apaivovTai (Rep. 328 D). In Xenophon (Mem. 
I. V. 6) oi fj.6vov twv Sia. tov croj/xaro? r)8ovu)V eVpaTa, dAAd Kat tt}s 

Sia twv xPVH-aTiov. The Sia is probably instrumental, but it may 
be temporal, 'during his bodily lifetime,' bet Leibesleben. So 
Aug. De Civ. Dei, xvii. 4. 

irpos a 67rpa|e>'. Works are needed as well as faith, and it is 
habitual moral action (Trpdaaeiv), rather than mere performance 
and production (7roieiV), that has weight. Cf. xii. 21; 1 Cor. 
v. 2 ; Rom. ii. 1, 2, vii. 15, 19, xiii. 4, where irpdo-o-eLv is used of 
doing what is morally evil; 1 Cor. ix. 17 ; Phil. iv. 9, of what is 
morally good ; and Rom. ix. 11, as here, of both : see on Rom. 
i. 32, vii. 15, 19, xiii. 4; Jn. iii. 20, 21, v. 29, where both verbs 
occur. Vulg. distinguishes with ago for Trpdo-crw and facio for 
7roie'a). Although this cannot be pressed, for the difference 
between the two verbs is often very slight, yet Trpao-creiv is more 
appropriate here. With regard to both verb and preposition 

COmp. o fir) Troirjaa^ 7rpos to 6e\r)[jLa avTOV (Lk. xii. 29). Noble 

ancestors, even righteous ancestors, says Chrys., will not count. 
Only a man's own deeds will be of any value ; and, as Thdrt. 
adds, there will be exact correspondence between action and 
requital («aTaX/\?;Xoi;s to.9 di'TiSocreis). Cf. /caTa to. tpya (Rom. 
ii. 6; Rev. ii. 23, xx. 12). See on xi. 15. 

cite dyaGoi/ eiT6 <J>aGW. The change to the neuter singular 
is significant. It seems to imply that, although persons will be 
judged one by one and not in groups, yet conduct in each case 
will be judged as a whole. In other words, it is character rather 
than separate acts that will be rewarded or punished. It is a mis- 
take to suppose that any act, however heroic, can secure eternal 


life. We must ask, not rl irovqaas KX-qpovo/x-qa-o) ; (Lk. x. 25), but 
tl fxe Set Troitiv ; (Acts xvi. 30). It is habitual action that will be 
judged. And this explains the aorist; it is what he did during 
his lifetime that is summed up and estimated as a total. Human 
tribunals deal with crime; they have punishments, but no re- 
wards. The Divine tribunal has both. See on 1 Cor. iii. 13 
and iv. 5. 

There are two things about which the Apostle is silent. He 
does not say when the (faavepwdrjvau will take place, whether at 
death or at the Second Advent, but he seems to imply that the 
requital will follow immediately upon the manifestation. More- 
over, while he states that the period spent in the body is a time 
of probation, and that there will be a scale of requitals pro- 
portionate to our conduct here (cf. ix. 6), he says nothing about 
the possibility of further probation hereafter, and he seems to 
imply that there will be no further opportunity. But it is 
going beyond what is written to say that the idea of a ' second 
chance' is contrary to what St Paul asserts here. Here, as 
elsewhere in Scripture, that possibility is veiled. See on 1 Cor. 
x. 22. 

Here again we have Pauline doctrine partly anticipated on 
philosophical grounds by Plato (Gorgias, 523, 524). After 
telling the story how Zeus was led to decree that men must not 
be judged till after death, " because there are many who have 
evil souls clad in comely bodies," and that they must be stripped 
of these misleading coverings in order to be fairly judged, 
Socrates continues ; " This story, Callicles, I have heard and 
believe to be true, and from it I think that some such inference 
as this may be drawn. Death, it seems to me, is nothing else 
than the separation of two things from one another, the soul and 
the body. And when they are separated from one another, each 
of them has pretty much the same character which it had when 
the man was alive. If he was tall, fat, long-haired, scarred, 
misshapen, the same characteristics are found on the dead 
body, either all of them, or most of them, for some time. The 
very same thing, it seems to me, Callicles, holds good of the 
soul. When the soul is stripped of the body, all its natural 
qualities and all those which the man acquired through his 
devotion to this or that pursuit, are laid bare to view. And 
when the souls come to the judge, he takes that of some 
potentate, whose soul is full of the prints and scars of perjuries 
and crimes with which his conduct has marked it, and has many 
crooked places, because of lying and vanity, and has no straight- 
ness, because he lived without truth. This soul the judge looks 
at and sends away to a place where it must undergo the treat- 
ment which it requires." 


There is no doubt that e-n-pagev, not KOfxia-^rai, is to be under- 
stood with eu-e dya#oi/ etre 4>av\ov : it is the conduct, not the 
recompense, that is thus characterized. The recompense would 
not be called <j>av\ov, 'worthless,' whether it were reward or 
punishment, and KOfua-qTai has to. Sia tov o-w/xaros as its object. 
What a man does may be worthless, £v\a, x°P T0V -> Ka ^a-nvv ( l Cor. 
iii. 12), without being so evil as to exclude from the Kingdom. 
It may be doubted whether the Apostle is here taking account 
of those who are excluded; if so, they are quite in the back- 
ground. Excepting Jn. v. 29 there is perhaps no passage in 
N.T. in which a resurrection of the wicked is clearly indicated. 
St Paul seems to regard it as a blessing reserved for members 
of Christ. Here it is genuine Christians, tovs Travra? 17/xas, of 
whom he is speaking. All their shortcomings and failures will 
one day be exposed, and therefore they ' make it their aim ' to 
avoid such defects. 

Both Orig. and Thdrt. seem to have known the reading to. iSia tov 
o-ujulcltos, but it is found in no Greek MS. L omits to, 5i<x t. <tw/x., and 
Baljon would bracket the words as a gloss. D G have & Sid rod adifiaros 
iirpa^ev. It is difficult to decide between <pav\ov (N C 17 and other cursives) 
and ko-kov (BDFGKLP); but it is more probable that k<lk6v, as the 
usual antithesis to ayaOov, should be substituted for the_ less usual (paDXov, 
than vice versa. But <pav\ov might come from Rom. ix. II. The word 
occurs in four other passages in N.T., always of what is morally bad (Jn. 
iii. 20, v. 29 ; Tit. ii. 8 ; Jas. iii. 16) ; Aristotle has it often in this sense. 
Only in Jas. iii. 16 does Vulg. distinguish <pav\oi> from Kaic6i> : there it 
has pravum, elsewhere malum. In Eccles. xii. 14 we have avixirav tS 
woir]fia 6 Geds fi^et ev Kpiffei ikv ayadbv Kai iav ■wovi^pov. 


Two questions have been discussed, with a minuteness and 
fulness out of proportion to their importance ; and conclusions 
respecting them have been asserted, with a positiveness which 
is not warranted by the evidence which is at our disposal. Can 
what is stated here be reconciled with what is stated in 1 Cor. 
xv. 20-55 ? If not, are we to suppose that the painful experi- 
ences which troubled the Apostle in the brief interval _ between 
the writing of the two Epistles caused him to modify his beliefs 
respecting the Resurrection, the Parousia, and the Judgment? 
Or it is possible that further acquaintance with Alexandrian 
ideas, which he may have obtained through Apollos, led him to 
change his views? Again, can what is said in v. 6-10 be recon- 
ciled with what is said in v. 1-5 ? If not, how can we account 
for the Apostle's uttering two discordant views almost in the 
same breath ? 

It is to be remembered that in dealing with death, the 
condition of the departed, resurrection, and judgment, the 


language, not only of St Paul, but of Scripture generally, is 
highly symbolical, and that it is impossible to find symbols that 
are in all respects harmonious. Moreover, it is not justifiable 
to draw inferences from metaphors and treat the inferences as 
original statements. Thirdly, we are not to suppose that St 
Paul had a clearly defined theory respecting these mysterious 
topics, and that he kept this theory in mind and was careful to 
make all his statements respecting these topics in a form which 
would harmonize with the preconceived theory. He was fully 
convinced of the truth and 'importance of certain things, e.g. 
that Christ died and has been raised, that Christians who die 
will be raised, that they will be requited in accordance with 
their conduct in this life, and that neither in life nor in death 
are they separated from Christ; and each time that he has to 
handle any of these subjects he states his conviction in words 
which at the time seem to be forcible and fitting. The Epistles 
to the Corinthians are written in the glow of intense feeling, 
which varies according to the subject ; and it is unreasonable to 
interpret them as if they were parts of a carefully elaborated 
system of theology. 

"The man who wrote the great Resurrection-chapter in 
i Corinthians," says Wernle, "did not possess the capacity for 
altering his opinions which belongs to the modern theologian. 
For him, his hope, which he there expresses, is a truth for which 
he is willing to live and die. . . . The yearning to die and to 
be with Christ is for him the same thing as the hope of resurrec- 
tion. His yearning overleaps all between death and resurrection, 
and hurries to its goal for reunion with Jesus " (H. A. A. Kennedy, 
St Paul's Conception of the Last Things, p. 272). That is the 
reasonable explanation of the apparent difference between this 
passage and 1 Cor. xv. There he is dealing with those who 
rejected the Resurrection because it was incredible that the 
material body will be resuscitated. He assures these sceptics 
that the resurrection-body will be something quite different from 
the material body. The material body will be destroyed. Here 
he is dealing with the contrast between the Christian's sufferings 
in this life and his hope of future glory. The latter is so strong 
that it far outweighs the sufferings, and even drives away the 
natural horror of leaving the material body. In 1 Cor. xv. the 
argument is directed against an error which assumed an interval 
between death and resurrection. Here no such interval comes 
into view ; it is neither assumed nor denied. Those who live 
to see the Parousia will have their material bodies changed to 
spiritual bodies. Those who die before the Parousia will be 
better off than they were in this life, for they will be nearer to 
Christ. Whether there will be an interval between death and 



the reception of a body suitable to the new conditions of life is 
lost sight of.* To one who believed that the Lord was near at 
hand, and that at His Coming all would receive spiritual bodies, 
the condition of those who died before His Coming was not a 
matter of much interest, and he tells us only one thing respecting 
their condition. They are happier, because they are in closer 
communion with Christ, than they were when they were in the 
body. This implies that they are conscious ; they are not, in 
any literal sense, asleep : see on i Cor. xi. 30. 

Jewish thought on the subject seems to have gone through 
several stages, which were not always logically consecutive. 
They may be stated roughly in some such way as this. 

In Jer. li. 57 the sleep is not only said to be perpetual 
(ouwvios), but one from which the sleepers shall not wake (/jlt) 
i^cyepOwa-Lv). All rewards and penalties are given in this life; 
good and bad alike go to Sheol, which is almost equivalent to 

In Is. xxvi. and Enoch lxxxiii.-xc. there is to be a resurrec- 
tion of the righteous Israelites. 

In Dan. xii. there is to be a resurrection of the exceptionally 
righteous and the exceptionally wicked among the Israelites; 
but resurrection is of the spirit only, not of the body. This 
implies that Sheol is only a temporary abode for those who are 
to be raised, which leads to a division of Sheol. 

In 2 Mace, and Enoch xxxvii.-lxx. there is to be a bodily 
resurrection of the righteous, and perhaps of all Israelites. Part 
of Sheol is Paradise, and part is Gehenna. 

In 2 (4) Esdras and the Apocalypse of Baruch there is to be 
a bodily resurrection of both righteous and wicked ; but retri- 
bution begins immediately after death. 

With regard to bodily resurrection there are two views ; (1) 
that the material body would be resuscitated ; (2) that there 
would be a transfigured body. It is with this latter view that 
St Paul has sympathy. 

But throughout his Epistles, wherever he touches upon this 
subject, he seems to be thinking almost (if not quite) exclusively 
of the resurrection of believers, of genuine Christians. It is 
not easy to decide whether he expected a general resurrection. 
If retribution begins immediately after death, there is no necessity 

* G. B. Redman, in his essay on the Theology of St Paul in The Parting 
of the Roads, pp. 213-23S, after working through the evidence in the Epistles, 
comes to this conclusion ; " Hence the theory of a gradual development of 
St Paul's thought, involving the abandonment of the old idea of the coming 
of the Lord to inaugurate a new order of things, in favour of a conception of 
the gradual improvement of earthly conditions by the work of the Spirit, 
seems insufficiently supported by the evidence. The Advent Hope retains 
a permanent place in his scheme of Christianity." 


for a resurrection of the wicked ; and if resurrection depends 
upon union with Christ, there is no possibility of it. St Paul says 
little about it. Cf. 2 (4) Esdras viii. 38, 39 ; ' For indeed I will 
not think on the fashioning of them which have sinned, or their 
death, their judgment, or their destruction : but I will rejoice 
over the framing of the righteous, their pilgrimage also, and the 
salvation, and the reward, that they shall have'; where AV. is 
seriously misleading. St Paul held that all men, whether 
believers or not, would be judged ; but it does not follow from 
this that he looked forward to a general resurrection. 

The apparent want of harmony between the first five verses 
of this chapter and the next five verses lies in this, that in vv. 
1-5 he seems to contemplate an immediate passage from life in 
the mortal body to life in an immortal body, and to have a 
horror of physical death, which might leave him without a body 
of any kind ; whereas in w. 6-10 he says that all believers must 
be judged before entering upon immortal life, and that it is well 
worth while to migrate from the mortal body. On neither point 
is there any real contradiction. He does not speak of a great 
assize in which all souls will come up simultaneously for judg- 
ment. What he is concerned to insist upon is that every 
individual soul will be judged ; none can escape. Whether 
multitudes are before the judgment-seat together, and whether 
there is an interval between death and judgment, are questions 
which are not raised. They do not affect the main issue. On 
the other point he encourages himself and others to conquer the 
natural fear of death by remembering that parting from the 
mortal body means entering upon closer union with the Lord. 
On the passage generally the following remarks are worthy of 

" Questions about the How of the future life, about the 
conditions of existence between death and the resurrection, 
about the process of the resurrection itself, or about the nature 
of the resurrection body, have little place in Paul's doctrine. 
His concern is much more with the fact than with the mode of 
the resurrection. He suggests that there may be preservation of 
identity along with far-reaching change of form. Theologians 
have asked, What is it that makes identity ? How is the new 
body to be provided? Out of what material shall it grow? 
What shall be its relation to the present body ? How shall it 
preserve its sameness together with a difference which seems 
essential ? 

St Paul gives us to understand that the new body will be our 
body, related to the former body, but superior to it in incorrupti- 
bility, in power, in ability to discharge its function. He states 
the broad principle that ' God gives to each its own body.' And 


for his last answer he refers us to his great word 'in Christ' 
Our union with Christ is his final solution of all difficulties, his 
final reason for the certain hope of a resurrection. 

The doctrine of the resurrection is in essential harmony with 
Hebrew faith and Hebrew hope, and in essential distinction from 
Greek thought and Greek surmise. It is in the Pauline writings 
that the Biblical doctrine of a future life is seen in its sharpest 
contrasts with the Hellenic, which regarded the life of mind as 
the only real life and made man himself ultimately only a soul. 
It stands absolutely apart from the speculations of the great 
Greek sages and from the teaching of thinkers like Philo, in 
whom Hebrew thought was sunk in the wisdom of the Greek 

Paul never bases the hope of a hereafter for man on psycho- 
logical considerations. He never contemplates a simple immor- 
tality of the soul. He proceeds on the O.T. view of man as a 
being made in God's image, a free personality destined for life. 
The Pauline hope is not the Platonist hope of a release from the 
shackle and sepulchre of the body, not the hope of the survival 
of an immortal principle in man, but the hope of the endurance 
of the man himself. Its kinship is with the O.T. doctrine of the 
unity of man's nature, the royalty of his being, his affinity with 
God. It reveals a consummation which is to be realized in his 
elevation to a condition of existence in which he shall live in the 
full integrity of his being, and his body, transformed and glorified, 
shall be the perfect instrument of a perfect life " (Abbreviated 
from S. D. F. Salmond, The Christian Doctrine of Immortality ', 
pp. 570-577. See also ' Eschatology ' in Hastings, DB., and in 
Enc. Bio/., and the literature there mentioned ; J. A. Beet, The 
Last Things, 1897 and 1905 ; H. A. A. Kennedy, St Paul's Con- 
ceptions of the Last Things, 1904; J. R. Cohu, S. Paul in the 
Light of Modern Research, 191 1). 

V. 11-VI. 10. The Life of an Apostle. 

/ re-assert my sincerity, and 1 do so to enable you to 
anstver those who question it. You can show them that 
for one's work as an Apostle one has a high motive, a 
sure basis, and full credentials. 

11 With the thought of the Judgment in our minds, and 
knowing from experience what the fear of Christ as Judge means, 
we endeavour to convince men that they have good security 
against any insincerity on our part. To God, who has no 
prejudices against us, we have all along been laid as open as we 

V. 11- VI. 10] THE LIFE OF AN APOSTLE l6$ 

shall be at the Judgment ; and I trust that to the conscience of 
each one of you also our characters have been equally trans- 
parent. 12 Do not misunderstand me; I am not beginning again 
to praise myself, as some persons say that I am so fond of doing. 
What I am doing is giving you an opportunity of saying a word 
on our behalf by glorying in your own experience of us. I want 
you to have an opportunity of answering our opponents, who 
constantly boast of their superficial advantages, because they 
have no reality of character to boast of. 13 That I am not a 
selfish impostor is clear from this, that when I was beside myself, 
as these men say, it was with zeal for God, and now when I am 
sane and sober, I am working for you. There is no room for 
selfishness in either case. u I must be devoted to God and to 
you, for Christ's love keeps me from all selfish motives. 15 Long 
ago I came to the following conclusion. The Representative of 
the human race died for the sake of us all, and so His death was 
ours. Why did He die for all? In order that the living, now 
that they know that they died in Christ, should never again live 
for themselves, but should henceforth live for Him who for their 
sakes died and was raised again. There you have our motive. 

16 This being understood, whatever our opponents or other 
people may do, we ministers of Christ, from the time that we 
came to this conclusion, value no one because of his external 
qualities. Even if there was a time when we appreciated Christ 
in this way, yet, since we have been united with Christ, this has 
quite ceased to be true, and it is futile to recall it. 17 This also 
follows ; — if any man is in Christ, he is a new creature ; the old 
condition of things passed away when he entered into that 
relation, and a new condition took its place. 18 But all these 
new conditions come from God; they are His creation. Because 
of the Death and Resurrection of Christ He regarded us as 
reconciled to Himself (we ministers needed that as much as 
other men) and commissioned us to make this offer of reconcilia- 
tion to others. 19 We are to tell them that, from the first, God 
was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, namely, by 
forbearing to count against men their transgressions, and by 
depositing with us His message of reconciliation. 

20 It is on behalf of Christ, therefore, that we are acting as 
ambassadors, seeing that it is God who entreats through us. We 
beseech on Christ's behalf, Become reconciled to God. 21 Do 


you ask how this is possible ? Him who never became acquainted 
with sin, God for our sakes made to be sin, in order that we 
might become God's righteousness by being merged in Him. 

VI. 1 But I have more to say than this. We are fellow- 
workers with God in the work of converting the world. God has 
given His grace ; our part is to entreat you not to fail in profiting 
by it. 2 (For He says, ' In a season of acceptance, I gave ear to 
thee ; on a day of deliverance I succoured thee.' I tell you, the 
season of acceptance is come ; we are now at the day of deliver- 
ance.) 3 In all that we do in conjunction with Him, we strive to 
put no cause of stumbling in anybody's way, so that no one may 
have a handle for ridiculing or reviling the ministry. 4 On the 
contrary, in everything we endeavour so to frame our conduct 
that it may commend itself in a way that is worthy of God's 

The evidence that we are God's ministers may be seen 
In our abundant and varied endurance, 
Amid afflictions, necessities, and straits, 
scourgings, imprisonments, and riots, 
toilsome days, sleepless nights, foodless times ; 
In innocence of life, and in knowledge of the truth, 
in patient long-suffering, and in kindliness of heart, 
in a spirit that is holy, and in love that is unfeigned, 
in a teaching that is true, and in a power that is Divine ; 
Through weapons of righteousness for the right hand and the 

through repute and disesteem, 
through ill and good report ; 
As impostors, and yet truthful, 
as nobodies to these, and celebrities to those, 
as ever at death's door, and yet behold ! we live on, 
as chastened for our sins, yet never killed by chastisement, 
as sorrowing much, but always full of joy, 
as paupers ourselves, but able to enrich thousands, 
as having nothing, yet holding the whole world in possession. 

It is difficult to summarize this section (v. n-vi. 10) as a 
whole, and the connexion between portions of it is sometimes 
obscure. On the whole, as distinct from the sufferings and 
supports of one who has the responsibilities of an Apostle, this 
section re-asserts St Paul's sincerity, and gives further explana- 

V. 11- VI. 10] THE LIFE OF AN APOSTLE 1 67 

tions of his conduct. This is done, not so much in order to 
convince the Corinthians that they do well in admitting his 
Apostolic authority, as to supply them with sound answers to 
give to those who question it and accuse him of being a self- 
advertising impostor. He points to three things which character- 
ize his work as a preacher. The motive of it is the fear of Christ 
as our Judge and Christ's love for us as our Redeemer (n-15). 
The basis of it is the creation of new conditions and the recon- 
ciliation won for us by Christ (16-19). T ne credentials which 
attest its authority are his having been made an ambassador of 
Christ and a minister of God (v. 20-vi. 10). With these facts 
his personal sincerity and his Apostolic position can be made as 
evident to men as they are to God. 

It is strange that anyone should suppose that in vi. 3-10 St 
Paul is maintaining that, not only he himself, but all Christians, 
are free from sin. With regard to Christians in general, it is 
enough to point to the stern reproofs and warnings which he at 
times administers to his converts (xii. 20, 21 ; 1 Cor. i. n, iii. 3, 
v. 1, 11, viii. 11, x. 14, xi. 30; Gal. iii. 1 ; etc.): he knows well 
that Christians do sometimes sin grievously. With regard to 
himself, he says that acquittal by his own conscience proves 
nothing as to his innocence (1 Cor. iv. 4); therefore for him to 
claim to be sinless, because his conscience did not reprove him, 
would be vain ; and the vivid picture which he draws of the 
inward struggle between right and wrong (Rom. vii. 17-25) is 
evidently drawn from tortures which he had himself experienced. 
And how unreal would be the appeal to a future judgment (v. 10 ; 
Rom. iv. 10), if he felt sure that he had no sins to answer for ! 

In vi. 3-10 he is sketching the Apostolx ideal which he has 
set before himself, and which their knowledge of him can tell 
that he is trying to realize. There is enough of these features in 
his life for them to be able to assure others that he is really an 
ambassador and minister of God. Teachers who have none of 
these features cannot be recognized as such. Tria ergo hie agit 
Paulus : docet quae sint virtutes, quibus censeri debe?it Evangelici 
doctor es : deinde his virtntibus se praeditutn esse demonstrat : tertio 
admo?iet Corinthios, ne pro Christi semis agnoscant, qui se aliter 
gerunt (Calv.). In his own day the error about him was some- 
what different. 

It is strange that one who was so conspicuously self-sacrific- 
ing as St Paul should be charged with self-seeking and self-praise. 
But his opponents' fanatical hatred of his teaching distorted their 
judgment and depraved their consciences. They misinterpreted 
all that he said and did, and they thought that in such a con- 
flict all weapons were lawful, including insinuation, slander, and 


11. ElSoTes ouV. ' Therefore, because we are conscious of,' 
' because we feel the influence of ; an appeal to actual experi- 
ence. ' We know what the fear of the Lord means.' The ovv 
refers to the contents of v. 10. Bachmann gives illustrations 
from papyri of this use of eiSw?. 

toc 4>6(3ok tou Kupiou. The fear excited by the thought of 
standing before the judgment-seat of Christ and having one's 
whole life exposed and estimated. In O.T., ' the fear of the 
Lord ' or ' the fear of God ' is the whole of piety. It is ' wisdom ' 
(Job xxviii. 28) and 'the whole duty of man' (Eccles. xii. 13); 
cf. Deut. x. 12; Prov. i. 7, ix. 10, xvi. 6. St Paul makes 'the 
fear of Christ' a principle of conduct (Eph. v. 21), and here he 
states that he knows that his own actions are guided by it. It is 
the fear which he feels (vii. 1 ; Rom. iii. 18), not. 'the terror' 
(AV.) which Christ inspires, terrorem ilium Domini (Beza), to 
(frofiepov (Heb. x. 27, 31, xii. 21) tov Kvpiov (Chrys.), that is 
meant. Vulg. is right with timorem Domini. To translate, ' We 
persuade men as to the fear of the Lord,' i.e. teach them to fear 
Him, is perverse misconstruction. 

deOpwTrous', 0ew 8e Trec|>ai/epaju€8a. ' We persuade men, 
but we are made manifest to God.' The AV. loses the antithesis 
by separating the second clause from the first and attaching it to 
what follows ; ' We persuade men ; but we are made manifest to 
God, and I trust also, etc' The antithesis is effective and ought 
to be preserved ; ' God knows all about us through and through, 
but we have to persuade men to believe in our sincerity' ; tovs 

7repi rjfiiov i/feuSei? e^oi'ra? Sofa? kiravopOovv TreipwfieBa (Thdrt.). 
The omission of //.ev after avOpJnrovs is not owing to inadvertence 
in dictation. The contrast between men's mistrust and God's 
full knowledge is all the more forcible because no p.ev prepares 
the reader for what is coming. That tov <pofiov does not mean 
to <po/3ep6V is confirmed by ireWofj-ev. He does not say ' we 
frighten,' but ' we persuade.' The thought that he will have to 
answer for all that he does in his ministry makes him anxious to 
convince men that they need not hesitate to accept his ministry. 
He appeals to God's knowledge of him ; Deo notum esse qua 
animi sinceritate agat (Calv.) ; in Him there are no prejudices to 
be removed. And the perfect has its full force ; ' have been 
made manifest and remain so,' 'all along we have been open to 
God's view ' ; at any given moment the manifesting is complete. 
Gal. i. 10 should be compared ; apTi yap apOp^-n-ovs 7ret8u> 77 
tov ©eov ; ' For am I now trying to win men over or to win God 
over?' This may be a reply to a charge that he was always 
trying to get people over to his side. ' Yes,' he says ; 'yet it is 
not men, but God, that I wish to have on my side.' Strictly 
speaking, to talk of persuading God is inadmissible, but by a 


kind of zeugma he uses the expression in answer to an accusation. 
Here also he may be replying to criticism, such as, 'You know 
how to talk men over, but you will not be able to talk God over.' 
' Certainly,' he says, ' I try to induce men to believe in me ; the 
fear of a judgment to come makes me do so ; but to God I am 
perfectly transparent. The conviction that He sees me and that 
I must one day give account compels me to be sincere.' Here 
he avoids using irdQw of God and takes the verb used in v. 10 : 
TveWeiv may be the word used by his critics. 

Others interpret, ' We persuade men that we strive to please 
Christ who is to be our Judge.' This is not very different from 
' we persuade men that we are sincere.' Chrys. points out that 
it is a duty to remove unjust suspicions from ourselves. A 
minister is hindered in his work by being credited with misdeeds 
of which he is innocent. 

It is not likely that avdpwirovi irecOofjav means ' we persuade 
men to become Christians,' homines ad fidem adducimus (Beza). 
Such an interpretation is foreign to the context, and it makes the 
contrast between persuading men and being fully known to God 

e\iu£a) Se Kai iv Tats oweiS^o-ecrii' uuuW ire^a^epwaflai. ' And I 
hope that in your consciences also we have been made manifest.' 
Against the mistrust of men he has appealed to God, who sees 
him through and through. He trusts that he may appeal also 
to what his converts know about him. After all that he has 
explained about his motives and actions, is he not as transparent 
to them as he is to God ? The rapidity with which he alternates 
between 1st pers. plur. and 1st pers. sing, is here conspicuous, — 
■n-eWo/xev, iX-iri^o), (rwioTaVo/Aev. We cannot safely infer that all 
three have exactly the same meaning. The plur. may mean the 
Apostle as the representative of other ministers, while the sing, 
is strictly personal ; his hopes are his own. 

After ik-rrt^uy we commonly have the aor. infin. (1 Cor. xvi. 7 ; 
Phil. ii. 19, 23; 1 Tim. iii. 14), but here the previous perf. 
determines the case, the meaning in both cases being the same, 
— that his character has been, and still is, laid bare. Blass (§ 61 
note) says that 'hope' here means 'think' (as often in English) 
and hence the perf. 

tcxis (Tuvei§r\aeaii' v]idv. Their consciences, rather than their 
intellects, on which they prided themselves : conscientia enim 
longius penetrat quam carm's judicium ; conscience goes deeper 
than criticism (Calv.). St Paul says 'consciences' and not 
'conscience,' because he appeals to the individual conscience of 
each of them : pluralis habet gravitatem (Beng.). Nowhere else 
in Biblical Greek does the plural occur ; contrast i. 12; 1 Tim 
iii. 9, iv. 2 ; etc. 


12. ou irdXir eauTous owiordyo/jici' up.ii>. ' Do not think that 
we are again commending ourselves to you.' The remark has 
the same relation to v. n as iii. i to ii. 17. He sees that what 
he has just stated gives a handle to those who said that he was 
always praising himself, and he hastens to show that he has no 
such aim. He is not commending himself to them ; if the hope 
just expressed is correct, there is no need for him to do that ; he 
is' helping them to answer the cavils of his opponents. The 
accusations against him, sometimes very plausible, were a great 
hindrance to his work, and he constantly takes opportunity to 
answer them. Often, although we feel that he is referring to 
some objection, our ignorance of the nature of the objection 
renders his words obscure. Here we can see our way fairly 
clearly. See on iii. 1. 

dXXd d^op/ATjc SiSoires u/xti' Kaux^fiaTos uirep r\\i.^v. ' On the 
contrary (we say this) by way of giving you some grounds for 
glorying on our behalf.' With this free use of the participle 
comp. 6\l(S6[M€vol (vii. 5), ^iporovq6e.L<; and o-reAXo^evoi (viii. 19, 
20). Winer, p. 442 ; Blass, § 79. 10. Vulg. smooths the con- 
struction by making the participle a finite verb; sed occasionem 
damns vobis gloria?idi pro nobis. If the consciences of the 
Corinthians do recognize his sincerity, they can use their estimate 
of him in replying to his Jewish detractors. This is a hint that 
they might have done this without his having to suggest it. They 
might have said, " Each one of us has had personal experience of 
Paul and his work, and we are unanimously convinced of his 
authority and integrity." With the very doubtful exception of 
Lk. xi. 54, a^opfx-q is peculiar to Paul in N.T. (xi. 12 ; Rom. vii. 
8, 11; Gal. v. 13; 1 Tim. v. 14, as here, with StSovai). It 
means ' a basis of operations,' ' a place to start from,' and hence 
'good grounds': argumenta vobis praebemus gloriandi de nostra 
integritate ; tantum abest ut demum opus esse cotiuimidatione nostri 
putem (Beng.). In 3 Mace. iii. 2, acpopp,rj means 'motive,' a 
meaning found also in papyri, where it seems sometimes to 
mean 'excuse'; see Bachmann. Here, as in 1 Cor. v. 6, 
Kavxqp-a does not mean materies gloriandi (Meyer), but gloriatio 
(Beng,), i.e. glorying uttered. Cf. ix. 3, and see T. S. Evans on 
1 Cor. v. 6. 

Iva ex 1 ! 1 " 6 7r P05 T0 "s k.t.X. 'That ye may have (it ready) 
against those who, etc' Something is to be understood after Z\r)Te, 
either n or rt Xeyeiv, or better, either Kav^qp-a. or a<^opjxrjv. In 
deciding between the last two it is little to the point that in Rom. 
iv. 2 and Gal. vi. 4 we have Kavxqp-a «x et,/ > an d nothing to the 
point that in Rom. vii. 8, 11 we have atpop/xyv \af3e1v, for Xafietv 
and not lx«v is required for the sense. Understand a.(popp.r)v 
here ; ' that you may have this resource ready to your hand.' 

V. 12, 13] THE LIFE OF AN APOSTLE 171 

tous ev TrpoacoiTU) Kauxodp-eVous Kal p,T] iv KapSia. The resem- 
blance to 1 Thess. ii. 17 is verbal only. There the antithesis 
means that out of sight is not out of mind. Here it n.eans that 
what men see is not what God sees ; av6pwn-o^ oiperat eh irpoaomov, 
6 8e0eos oi/^erat tl<s KapSlav (1 Sam. xvi. 7). The Judaizers gloried 
in what was patent to the world, the superficial advantages which 
made an outward show, such as their descent from Abraham, 
their exclusiveness, their scrupulous keeping of the Law, perhaps 
also their intimacy with James, the Lord's brother. What were 
all these external characteristics compared with a good conscience 
and the fear of God ? Paul had the latter, as the Corinthians 
knew, for it was out of the goodness of his heart that light and 
truth had come to their consciences ; whereas the Judaizers had 
given them no evidence of their possessing these spiritual 
characteristics. As usual in N.T., we have iv after KavxaaOai, 
and fi-q with the participle. In LXX, iv is usual, but liri some- 
times occurs. Here many texts have ov instead of fir}. 

Three other ways of interpreting the opposition between 
■n-poo-wTTov and /capSta are suggested. (1) 'Who glorify me to my 
face, but not in their hearts.' This is inadmissible, for T.Kavx^p-ivov; 
cannot mean ' those who glorify me ' ; it means ' those who glory,' 
'those who glorify themselves? (2) 'Who boast in the presence 
of other people, but not in their own hearts.' This also is in- 
admissible, for the irpoo-wwov and the /capSia belong to the same 
persons, viz. those who boast, an objection which holds good 
against (1) also. (3) 'Whose boasting is seen in their faces, but 
is not felt in their hearts.' This is possible, but it is not probable. 
In N.T., as in LXX, ev after Kavxaadai introduces that in which 
people glory (x. 15-17, xi. 12, xii. 9; 1 Cor. i. 31 ; etc.).* The 
more probable meaning is, ' Who glory in external privileges, not 
in internal worth ' ; welche sich dusserer Di?ige und ?iicht der 
rechten Herzensverfassung riihmen (Bousset). But (3), with 
emendation, may be right ; ' Who glory in what is seen in their 
faces, but not in what exists in their hearts ' ; i.e. they hypocriti- 
cally profess a satisfaction which they do not feel, or they wear 
a look of apostolic virtue which they do not possess. 

ov tt6.\iv (NBCD*G67**, e Vulg. Syrr. Goth. Copt. Arm.) rather 
than 011 yap tt&Xiv (D 3 E K L). For virtp TjfiCbv, NB 17, Aeth. have virtp 
v/xQ>v, a common confusion. Kal /mtj (X B 17 and other cursives, Thdrt.) is 
probably to be preferred to Kal 01) (C U 3 E K L P) or Kal ovk (D* F G). iv 
Kapdia (X B D* F G 17, 37, Latt.) rather than KapSla (C D 3 E K L P). 

13. eiT€ yap e|e'crTr)p.ei', 0eu! - cite <7w4>, u^Iy. ' I do not 
commend myself; indeed I do nothing on my own account; for 

* We find gloriari in in the same sense ; non pudet philosophum in eo 
gloriari quod haec non timeal (Cic. Tusc. I. xxi. 48) ; in virtute recte glori- 
amur {Nat. Deor. III. xxxvi. 87). More often gloriari has no preposition or de. 


when I was beside myself, it was on God's account, and when 
I am sane, it is on yours.' The selection of this surprising 
alternative of iKcnrivai and cw^povetv was probably caused by the 
declaration of some of his opponents that he was not only para- 
doxical and obscure (iv. 3), but quite crazy. Jews thought that 
Paul went mad when he was converted on the road to Damascus, 
and i&o-TTj/xcv might refer to that. Festus had impulsively said 
that he was mad (Acts xxvi. 24), and his Judaizing critics had 
brought the same charge (xi. 1, 16), as the Jewish critics of his Master 
had done in His case (Mk. iii. 21 ; Jn. vii. 48). The Judaizers' 
charge against the Apostle was not pure invention. He claimed 
to have been 'caught up even to the third heaven' (xii. 2), to 
' speak with Tongues more than all' of them (1 Cor. xiv. 18), 
in which condition he spoke 'not to men but to God' (xiv. 2), 
and his 'understanding was unfruitful' (xiv. 14). Speaking with 
Tongues easily led to the charge of being mad (xiv. 23), and it 
may have done so in the case of one who was so frequently 
ecstatic as St Paul. If, as is probable, the 'stake for the flesh' 
from which he suffered was epilepsy, this again would cause his 
sanity to be questioned. The reply here is pointed and tactful. 
' My ecstasies concerned only God and myself; my normal 
condition is always at your service. The two together sum up 
my life, which accordingly is devoted either to God or to you.' 
De nobis potestis gloriari, quia quidquid agimus, vel honor Dei est, 
vel utilitas proximi (Herveius). 

Augustine several times refers to this passage, and he always 
takes e^e'cTTTj/iev {mente excessimus) as meaning ecstasy ; but it may 
refer to other features in the Apostle's life, as suggested above. 
In Is. xxviii. 7, l^ia-T-qa-av is used of prophets beside themselves 
with strong drink. It is not certain that i^arrjaev refers to past 
time ; it may be a timeless aorist ; RV. has ' are ' in the text and 
' were' in the margin. Cf. ^ea-rrj, ' Hew beside Himself (Mk. 
iii. 21). Winer, p. 346; Blass, § 59. 3; J. H. Moulton, p. 134; 
and see Hort on 1 Pet. i. 24. For the datives comp. Rom. 
xiv. 4, and see Blass, § 37. 2. 

Some think that both alternatives refer to a definite accusa- 
tion, one that he was mad, the other that he was worldly wise ; 
but cr<i><ppoi>elv never means the latter. A more reasonable sug- 
gestion is that i$evTi)[Atv refers to his self-commendation, which 
his critics said amounted to a mania. Cf. to Kav^aaOai trapa 
Kaipov fxavLatcriv v-rroKpeKa, " To glory out of season is to sound 
the same note as madness " (Pind. 01. ix. 39). Thdrt. adopts 
this interpretation. Other suggestions are : (1) 'E^iarrrjfxev refers 
to the vigour with which the Apostle followed his own advice of 
being ' instant cuKcupw?, ck-ai^w?' (2 Tim. iv. 2) in proclaiming 
the word. But his preaching was as well as ®eu5. (2) He 

V. 13, 14] THE LIFE OF AN APOSTLE 1 73 

is referring to the comments made on the letter which he sent 
between 1 Corinthians and this Epistle, — the severe letter, about 
the effects of which he was so anxious. If x.-xiii. formed part 
of that letter, some Corinthians might easily say, "The man must 
be mad"; and he himself foresaw the possibility (xi. 1, 16, 
xii. 6). Herveius seems to agree with Augustine in restricting 
the reference to ecstasy ; sive enim mente omnia temporalia 
excedimus, ut contemplemur aetema, Deo id facimus, sive 
ab ilia mentis ebrietate ad coi7unu?iem sensum redimus, hoc 
fit in vestram utilitatem, ut vos nimirum docere possimus. 
All that is certain is that i^io-r-qixtv refers to exceptional, and 
o-w^povov/xev to ordinary conditions, and that these two cover 
the whole of his behaviour, which, therefore, is never self- 

14. f\ yap ayd-m] tou Xpiorou cru^x* 1 T^ag. ' We are influenced, 
not only by future rewards and punishments, whether in this 
world or the next ; there is something in the present which affects 
us, for Christ's love controls us : The love which Christ has for 
us (Gal. ii. 20) keeps us back from all self-seeking, and confines 
our aims to the service of God and of our fellow-men.' In the 
Pauline Epp., the genitive of the person after ayair-q seems 
always to mean that the person exhibits, not receives, the love 
(xiii. 13 ; 2 Thess. iii. 5; Eph. ii. 4; etc.), and in them ayct7rr; 
seems never to be used of man's love to Christ or to God. In 
any case it is love and not fear {v. 12) which operates. As regards 
the meaning of o-we'xet, comp. o-ii/e^opi e/c rwv Svo, ' I am hemmed 
in on both sides, restrained from inclining either way' (Phil. 
i. 23; see Lightfoot). 'The love of Christ constraineth us' 
(AV., RV.) is doubly ambiguous ; it may mean ' our love for 
Christ urges us on.' ' Our love for Christ ' is certainly wrong, 
as v. 15 shows; and 'urges us on' is probably wrong, although 
Chrys. takes it so, as does Vulg., urget nos. The verb implies 
the pressure which confines and restricts (Lk. viii. 45, xii. 50, 
xix. 43 ; Acts xviii. 5). It is true that restriction may lead to 
concentration, which may produce an increase of activity. 
Nevertheless, restricting men is opposed to pushing them on, 
and here ' restrains us from self-seeking ' rather than ' urges us 
on to service ' seems to be the meaning. ' Urges us on to avoid 
self-seeking ' is a curious way of adopting one translation and 
keeping the meaning of the other. Bousset makes crvre'xei refer 
to iiia-Trjfjiev, 'restrains us from madness and extravagance,' 
'keeps us sane and sober'; halt uns bei Sinnen. It is more 
probable that it refers to iavTovs <rwioravo/*ev, ' restrains us from 
self-praise.' Papyri give no help; they merely repeat the 
usages found in N.T. 


15. KpiVav'Tas touto. ' Having reached this decision ' ; judicio 
verissimo. Amor et judicium non obsta?it inter se apud spiriiuales 
(Beng.). He probably refers to the period of reflexion between 
his conversion and his missionary activity (Gal. i. 17, 18). Both 
AV. and RV. (' because we thus judge '), as also Aug. (judicantes) 
and Vulg. (aestimantes) treat the aor. part, as a present. Some 
editors assign this clause to v. 14. 

on els uiT-ep tt6h't(i)v a-niQavev. ' That one died on behalf of all,' 
as their representative ; not avrl 7ravro)v, • instead of all,' as their 
substitute. He died in their interest ; cf. inrlp rjp.5)v in v. 1 2. 
Only in connexion with the metaphor of a ransom is olvtl used 
of Christ's death; Xvrpov avrl ttoA-W (Mk. x. 45 = Mt. xx. 28) : 
cf. avTLXvrpov i-rep Trdi'Twv (1 Tim. ii. 6). For v-rrep see Rom. 
viii. 32; Gal. i. 4, ii. 20, iii. 13; Eph. v. 2; Tit. ii. 14. But the 
ideas of representation and of substitution easily run into one 
another, as in Iva v-n-ep <rov p.oi Slclkovyj (Philem. 13), and in the 
formula, which is freq. in papyri, eypauj/a (or typaij/ev) v-n-ep avrov, 
the nominative to the verb being the name of the scribe who 
wrote the letter for some person who was unable to write. For 
examples see Deissmann, Light from the Ancient East, 

PP- i53> 335- 

apa oi irdrres dire'Qa.i'CH'. ' Therefore all died ' ; lit. ' the all ' 

(the 'all' for which He died) died in the dying of Him who, as 

Origen says, is the dvaK€<£dAco(ris kcu crvyKe<pd\u)(rL<; iravTOiv. l Then 

were all dead'(AV.) is inaccurate and obscures the meaning; 

and there are similar mistranslations Rom. vi. 2 and Col. iii. 3. 

'Therefore all must die' is equally erroneous and misleading. 

Seeing that the Representative of the whole race died, His death 

was their death ; and they all died in Him in the sense that His 

supreme act of love extinguished in them the old life of worldly 

interests in which the centre of gravity was self.* Although 

there is a vast difference between their death and His, yet there 

is this similarity. In each case there is the dying to the old self 

in order to rise again to something far higher ; in His case a 

dying to the life of suffering to rise to the life of glory ; in their 

case a dying to the life of sin to rise to the life of righteousness 

(Rom. vi. 6-1 1 ; Col. iii. 3). The life of love, inherent in Him, 

was kindled in them. This was the Apostle's own experience. 

Saul the persecutor was filled with consuming indignation, when 

he saw that one who had died the most shameful of all deaths 

was being proclaimed as the Messiah When the risen Jesus 

appeared to him and convinced him >hat He was the Messiah, 

he was filled with consuming love and gratitude towards a 

Messiah who, for the sake of mankind, had submitted to such a 

death. "The mixture of love and gratitude forms one of the 

* See J. A. Beet in the Expositor, 3rd series, vi pp. 140-150 (1887). 

V. 15, 16] THE LIFE OF AN APOSTLE 175 

strongest passions which can dominate the heart of man," and 
the Apostle never wearies of declaring how Christ's immense 
love for us calls for a generous return (Rom. v. 15-21, viii. 
35; Gal. ii. 20, v. 24, vi. 14; Eph. iii. 19, v. 2, 25; Tit. 
ii. 14). See P. Gardner, The Religious Experience of St Paul, 
p. 188. In N.T. apa is sometimes placed first in a sentence 
(vii. 12 ; Rom. x. 17; Gal. v. 11; etc.); rarely in LXX (Ps. 
cxxiii. 2, 3, 4, cxxxviii. 1 1 ; Wisd. v. 6) ; never in class. Grk. 
See on vii. 12. 

1W 01 £wvt€s fiTjKeri eauTots t,u><riv. 'In order that those who 
live should no longer (now that they know that they died in 
Christ) live to themselves.' How can those for whom Christ 
died go on living for themselves and not for Him? Rom. xiv. 
7-9. Does o! ^t€s mean those who are alive in the body and 
are still in this world, or those who have died to their old selves 
and are spiritually alive in Christ? The context favours the 
former meaning, and this is confirmed by iv. 17. It is not true 
that ' those who are still alive in the world ' is superfluous and 
pointless here. The £wo-iv which follows gives point ; 'that the 
living should never again live to themselves.' 

to uirep irdnw. These words probably belong to both 
participles ; and, as it cannot be said that Christ was raised 
instead of us, therefore virep 7ravrw does not mean ' instead of 
all ' but ' on behalf of all,' as xnrep fj/xwv in v. 12 means ' on our 
behalf.' Nevertheless, it is possible to translate 'for Him who 
died for the sake of all, and was raised,' or ' who died instead of 
all, and was raised.' 

AV. has 'if one died for all,' following the reading of N 8 C*, f Vulg. 
Copt. Arm. , 5rt el eh. The el might accidentally be either lost in the eh 
or produced by reduplication from it. Probably it was inserted for smooth- 
ness to anticipate &pa, as in I Cor. xv. 14, 17 ; cf. 2 Cor. vii. 12. Rom. v. 
10, 15, 17 might be in the copyist's mind. Here the insertion of el 
weakens the terseness of what is overwhelmingly attested as the original 
reading (X* B C 2 D E F G K L P, d e g Syrr. Aeth. Goth. R V.). AV. and 
RV. assign Kpivavras tovto . . . a-rridavov to v. 14. See above on the 
divisions between i. 6, 7, ii. 10, II, ii. 12, 13. 

16-19. Having stated the motive of his work as a preacher, 
the Apostle now goes on to show the basis of it in the new 
conditions produced by being in Christ and in the reconciliation 
brought about for us by Him. 

16. The verse is one of those parenthetical remarks which 
are so characteristic of St Paul, and so natural in one who 
dictated his letters ; cf. v. 7 ; 1 Cor. xv. 56 ; Rom. v. 25. There 
is no need to conjecture that he inserted it afterwards ; still less 
that a copyist inserted it. A copyist would have inserted some- 
thing much more simple, and no copy exists without it. Verse 


15 would easily suggest it,* and v. 17 is parallel to it. The 
parenthesis is quite in place. Christ died for all in order that all 
should cease to live for themselves, and should live for Him and 
for others in Him. That implies that our estimate of others 
must be based, not on the Trpoaayirov, but on the KapSia, not on 
the external circumstances which the world values, but on the 
character and the inner life. 

The details of this difficult verse are very variously explained, 
and it would be tedious, and not very profitable, to quote all the 
variations. What follows is offered as a tenable interpretation, 
and a few that seem to be less tenable are added. 

wore rifiels diro tou vuv. The pronoun is emphatic, and so also, 
in a lower degree, is the adverbial phrase. ' Wherefore whatever 
others may do, we ministers of Christ, from the time when we 
arrived at this decision (/<p<WvTes).' The others are the many 
who care chiefly for earthly considerations, in their estimate of 
men ; and it is implied that ' we ' once did so, but have been 
effectually cured. The meaning of a-n-b t. vvv is uncertain, but 
it cannot mean 'from the present moment, the time of writing,' 
and there is nothing in the context that is obvious, except the 
conclusion drawn from the death of Christ. Recognition of the 
true meaning of the death of Christ has put an end to Kara 
crapKa : now all is Kara irvt.vp.a. 

oiEa/Ae^. The verb is used in the same sense as in 1 Thess. 
v. 12, 'we appreciate, we value.' ' Agnoscere 1 hie significat 
Habere rationem aut respectum is Calvin's remark. In 1 Cor. 
xvi. 18, l-KiyiviSi(TKiT(. is used in much the same sense; see note 
there and comp. /caAtos e^ei ©eov Kai kirLtrKO-irov ciSej'cu (Ign. 
Smyr. 9). ' We value no one because of his external attributes.' 
The differences between king and clown, rich and poor, master 
and slave, genius and dunce, do not come into the estimate ; 
what counts is the person's character as a Christian. 

K<vrd crdpKa. Secundum statum veterem, ex nobilitate, divitiis, 
opibus, sapientia (Beng.). 'In the world's way,' 'by human 
standards,' 'as men know one another' are not accurate 
renderings. They make Kara. o-dp«a subjective, qualifying the 
view of the person who estimates ; whereas Kara, crapKa is 
objective, qualifying the aspect of the person who is estimated, 
' according to external distinctions,' ' by what he is in the flesh.' 

ci Kal eyi/ojKap.ei' Kara adpKa Xpiarov. ' Even though we have 
appreciated Christ after the flesh.' The change from eiSeVcu to 
yuwKciv is of little moment here: it is the change of tense that 

* The connexion is of this kind. To live for oneself means that one 
estimates others by purely external distinctions (/card crapKa) ; ever since we 
recognized the meaning of Christ's death we have ceased to assign any va'ue 
to such distinctions : it is the internal qualities that count. 


matters. A perfect is wanted, and, as tiSc'rat has no perfect, a 
change of verb becomes necessary. As usual, el kou concedes 
the point which is stated hypothetically. St Paul seems to be 
referring to some charge which had been made against him, that 
he had known Christ according to the flesh, and he admits that 
at one time this was true. Then what does St Paul mean when 
he admits that he once knew Christ Kara o-a'p«a? The phrase 
Ka-ra aapKa occurs often, in very different contexts, and no 
explanation of it will suit them all. In each case the context 
must decide (i. 17, x. 2, 3; 1 Cor. i. 26, x. 18; Gal. iv. 23; 
Rom. iv. 1, viii. 4, 5, 12, ix. 3, 5; etc.). Our answer to the 
question will depend upon the period in St Paul's career at 
which this erroneous appreciation of Christ is placed. 

Almost certainly he is alluding to some time previous to his 
conversion. On that hypothesis various explanations have been 
suggested. (1) At that time he knew Christ as an heretical and 
turbulent teacher, who was justly condemned by the Sanhedrin 
and crucified by the Romans. Consequently, he persecuted His 
adherents and caused them to be imprisoned and slain. This 
explanation seems to be the best.* (2) At that time he had 
the very carnal idea that the Messiah must be an earthly 
potentate who would conquer the Romans and set Israel free. 
But the passage implies, and the next verse shows, that it is the 
actual Christ, and not the Jewish idea of the Messiah, that the 
Apostle admits that he knew, and knew superficially and 
wrongly. (3) At that time he had seen Christ at Jerusalem or 
elsewhere. But would St Paul lay any weight on the fact (if it 
was a fact) that he had once known Christ by sight ? And what 
meaning, in that case, could aXkb. vvv ovkzti ywwcrKU) have? 
Moreover, if he had seen Christ before the Crucifixion, would 
he not have mentioned it xi. 22, 23? (4) He is admitting this 
merely for the sake of argument. ' Supposing that I have seen 
Christ in the flesh, as some of my opponents claim to have done, 
I put no value upon that accidental circumstance. On that 
hypothesis, I am in no better position as a teacher than if I had 
never seen Him.' But we do not know that any of the Apostle's 
opponents did claim to have seen Christ during His ministry, or 
that on this account they professed to be superior to St 
Paul. Nevertheless, this explanation of the passage is worth 

* P. Gardner may perhaps be claimed as a supporter of it when he says ; 
"This reference is not to the human life of Jesus, which Paul had probably 
not witnessed, but to the kind of knowledge which is only of the senses, and 
has not become a process of the spirit" (The Religious Experience of St Paul, 
p. 200). See also Headlam, St Paul and Christianity, pp. 51 f., and 
Foundations, p. 188. 



There are some, however, who think it more probable that 
St Paul is referring to a time subsequent to his conversion. (5) 
He is confessing that at an immature stage of his ministry he 
still retained some of the low ideas about Christ which he had 
inherited from Judaism. Jowett {Introduction to Thessalonians, 
pp. 8-12) strongly advocates this view. He says that St Paul 
"acknowledged a time when he had more nearly approximated 
to their (his opponents') Judaizing tenets, or in other words, 
had known Christ after the flesh. Whatever softening the 
skill of interpreters may introduce into these latter words, they 
must have a meaning ; that meaning is that there was something 
which the Apostle had left behind him, which he had once 
thought, and no longer thought, to be a part of the faith of 
Christ " (p. 9). This view has also been held by Baur, Holsten, 
and others. The objection to it is that no trace of it is to be 
found in any of the Epistles. St Paul admits more than once 
that he had been a persecuting Jew (1 Cor. xv. 19 ; 1 Tim. i. 13), 
and seems to allude to it elsewhere. But he nowhere confesses 
that he had once preached a Judaizing Gospel : in Gal. ii. 15-19 
he declares that he had done the opposite. For Beyschlag's 
criticism of this interpretation, and for other interpretations, see 
Knowling, The Witness of the Epistles, pp. 2, 3. Kirsopp Lake, 
who places the time in which St Paul knew Christ after the 
flesh in the period before his conversion, remarks that the 
Apostle " had once been an anti-Christian Jew ; but when had 
he ever been a Judaizing Christian?" (Earlier Epistles of St 
Paul, p. 224).* It is possible to take this last view also on the 
same lines as (4) in reference to (3). We may say, (6) St Paul 
is admitting this merely for the sake of argument. ' Let us grant, 
if you like, that at one time I preached much the same un- 
spiritual Gospel that my Judaizing opponents do. I certainly do 
nothing of the kind now, and therefore it is idle to reproach me 
with it. Am I right, or are they right, now ? That is the only 
question.' But it is difficult to believe that his opponents had 
asserted that at one time he had agreed with them about the 
Gospel. And, unless they had done so, why should he, even 
hypothetically, concede that he might have agreed with them? 
Their view of him was that he had gone mad from the 

We must be content to leave the exact meaning of the words 
in uncertainty ; but this much is fairly clear. The Apostle is 
alluding to some charge which had been made against him, and 
he admits that at one time it was true; but he declares that 
there is no truth in it now. This excludes the (on other grounds) 

* See also J. G. Machen in the Princeton Biblical Studies, p. 559, and 
H. R. Mackintosh, The Doctrine of the Person of Jesus Christ, p. 52. 

V. 16, 17] THE LIFE OF AN APOSTLE 1 79 

improbable view that (7) seeing Christ on the road to Damascus 
was knowing Him after the flesh. 

See the fine comment of Aug. (De Doc. Chris, i. 38), to the 
effect that this passage teaches us not to cling to the details of 
Christ's earthly life, although they were done for our salvation, 
but pass over them quickly, in order to reach Christ Himself, 
who has freed our nature from earthly things and placed it at the 
right hand of God. 

dXXd vuv oukc'ti yu'wo-KOfxei'. He might have said olBafxev, and 
it is perhaps excess of accuracy to make in this place any differ- 
ence between otSapev, ' we know,' and yLvwo-Ko/Aev, ' we come to 
know.' St Paul wants the present once more, and he naturally 
takes the present of iyvwKap.ev. The important thing in trans- 
lation is to distinguish the perfect from the present on each side 
of it. This the Vulg. does with novimus, cogtwvimus, novimus. 
The vvv means from the moment of his conversion. 

el Kal (N*BD* 17, Arm.) rather than Kal el (F G, Latt. Syr-Pesh.), 
or el 8s Kal (K 3 C 2 D 2 and 8 L P), or el St (K, Copt.) D E G add Kara vapica 
after yivwcrKO/xev. 

17. wore ei tis cf Xpiorw, Kcuer] ktictis' toi apxcua TrapfjXOei'. 
The wore may imply a second consequence from v. 15, parallel to 
the ware in v. 16 ; or it may imply a consequence from v. 16 ; or 
a consequence from w. 15 and 16 combined. It is difficult to 
decide ; but the first has this advantage, that here, as in v. 15, the 
Apostle is speaking of all Christians, whereas rjp.ei<; in v. 16 means 
St Paul and his fellow-ministers. We can deduce the case of 
the ministers from that of all believers ; but it is less logical to 
argue from the ministers to all believers. We may, however, 
argue legitimately from both combined. The sequence of 
thought seems to be this. ' If we have died with Christ to our old 
selves and have risen with Him to a new life, we share His 
spiritual life and are in Him ; and if any man is in Christ, he is a 
new creature ; the old things passed away when he became such.' 
Or we may translate, 'there is a new creation' (Gal. vi. 15), with 
much the same meaning. By ' is in Christ ' is meant ' has become 
a Christian, has become a member of Christ.' St Paul is not 
thinking of the Christ-party and hinting at the difference between 
being Xpia-Tov (x. 7 ; 1 Cor. i. 12) and iv XpiarQ. It is gratuitous 
to introduce that difference here. 

Vulg. and some Latin authorities greatly weaken the force of 
the passage by making Kaivrj ktio-is the subject of a protasis, of 
which to. apxaia iraprjXOev is made the apodosis ; ' If therefore 
there be any new creation in Christ, the old things have passed 
away,' si qua ergo in Christo nova creatura, Vetera transierunt. 
So also Tert. Adv. Marc. v. 12; si qua ergo conditio nova in 
Christo, Vetera transierunt. Cornelius a Lapide, although he 


rightly makes m masculine, has the same feeble arrangement ; si 
quis ergo mecum est in Christo regenerates, Vetera transierunt. 
This is almost tautology ; of course, if one is created anew, old 
things have passed away. Tert. adds, impleta est Esaiae prophetia. 
He means Is. xliii. 18, 19, lxv. 17, lxvi. 22. But it may be 
doubted whether the Apostle has any of these passages in his 
mind. In LXX there is resemblance in the words used, but 
there is not much affinity in the meaning. Wetstein, ad loc, and 
Schottgen, i. p. 704, show that kcuvt) /cruris was a common Rab- 
binical term for a Gentile brought to the knowledge of the true 
God (Lightfoot on Gal. vi. 15). It is a stronger expression than 
fjL€Ta.fxop(f)Ov[jLe0a (iii. 18 ; Rom. xii. 2) or 7raAiyy€i'eo-ia (Tit. hi. 5), 
though it means much the same as the latter; and Tit. iii. 5 
should be compared. 

to. dpxaia "^•apfj\0e^'• l8ou, yiyovev Kaivd. These words explain 
Kaivr] /crto-19. What took place was no less than this ; ' the old 
things passed away ; behold they are become new.' It no longer 
matters whether a man is by birth a Jew or Gentile, bond or 
free ; the one thing that is of weight is whether he has the right 
spiritual relation to Christ. Even the Commandments are made 
new when they are informed with the spirit of the Gospel.* 
The Hebraic iSov gives a tone of triumph to the passage. 
Evidently the thought of the change from old to new makes the 
Apostle enthusiastically jubilant. The Crucifixion and Resurrec- 
tion of Christ constitute for him the dividing line in the world's 
history, and if he did not foresee all the blessings which the 
Gospel would bring to mankind, he saw something of its 
immense potentialities. Out of his own experience of God's 
dealing with himself and others he declares that one who is in 
Christ is a new creature. Christ is the source of a new and higher 
life (see on 1 Cor. xv. 45 and on Rom. v. 12-19). The Apostle 
calls to mind that the narrowness and exclusiveness of Judaism, 
the intolerable burden of the Law, and the still more intolerable 
burden of sin, have passed away from those who believe in 
Christ, and that a dispensation of comprehension, freedom, and 
peace has taken their place. This is no longer the hope of a 
prophet, or the guess of an apocalyptic dreamer, but an abiding 

It is a needless narrowing of the Apostle's meaning to confine 
it, as Thdrt., to getting free from the old Nessus-garment of sin, 
to r>y? dfiapTLas aireKhvaaa-Oai yrjpas. The old feelings, desires, 
and determinations of the will are re-created and directed into 
a new channel ; cf. Phil. iii. 7. Chrys. narrows the meaning in 

* It is possible that here, as sometimes in classical Greek, apx^uos has the 
meaning of dpxaXicSs, 'antiquated,' 'old-fashioned'; haec appellalio fastidium 
aliquod ostendit (Beng. ). 

V. 17, 18] THE LIFE OF AN APOSTLE l8l 

another direction when he analyses it thus ; instead of the Law, 
the Gospel ; instead of circumcision, baptism ; instead of 
Jerusalem, heaven ; and so forth. The very essence of the new 
creation is that it is moral and spiritual, not, as is often pictured 
in prophetic and apocalyptic literature, an actual new heaven 
and new earth. It is a merit of the Book of Jubilees that it 
recognizes this. "And after this they will turn to Me in all 
uprightness and with all heart and soul, and I will create in them 
a holy spirit, and I will cleanse them, so that they shall not turn 
away from Me from that day unto eternity" (i. 23). "Mount 
Zion will be sanctified in the new creation for a sanctification of 
the earth ; through it will the earth be sanctified from all guilt 
and uncleanness throughout the generations of the world " 
(iv. 26). "And He made for all His works a new and righteous 
nature, so that they should not sin in their whole nature for ever, 
but should be all righteous each in his kind alway" (v. 12). See 
also xxiii. 26-31. 

T>' and 3 e K L P, Syr-Hark. Goth. AV. Tert. have Kaivd. rb. irdvra : 
NBCD'FG 67**, Vulg. Copt. RV. omit ret Trdvra. 

18. to. 8e -n-drra Ik tou 0eoO. ' But all these new things come 
from God.' * They are His creation. The Kawr) ktio-i? is no 
spontaneous development, and it is not man's own work on him- 
self; Apostles do not claim to be the cause of it. It is wholly 
e»c tov ©eow (v. 5, i. 21, ii. 14, iv. 6 ; 1 Cor. viii. 6, xi. 12 ; Rom. 
xi. 36). In the same breath in which he declares this, St Paul 
goes on to explain how it is that God brings this about. 

tou Ka,Ta\\d£arros ^ eauTW 81a Xpiorou. ' Who reconciled 
us to Himself through Christ.' This is the usual language of 
N.T., in which the change which brings about the reconciliation 
between God and men is regarded as taking place in them rather 
than in Him. Greeks thought of God as estranged from men, 
and it was He who needed to be won over. Jews thought 
rather that it was men who by their sins were estranged from 
God, and the sins had to be ' cleansed,' or ' purged,' or ' covered,' 
in order to bring about reconciliation (see on 1 Jn. ii. 2).f St 
Paul follows Jewish rather than Hellenic thought. It is man 
who is reconciled to God, rather than God to man ; ov yap avros 

* In ii. 16, iii. 5, v. 1, xii. 6, RV. corrects 'of to 'from,' but here it 
leaves ' of unchanged. 

t Ephraim Levine, in his essay on the Breach between Judaism and 
Christianity in The Parting of the Roads, p. 288, points out that Jews insisted 
on sincere penitence and complete reparation as necessary preliminaries to a 
reconciliation with God. He quotes Alishna Yoma ; "Sins between man 
and man cannot be atoned for till the sinner has acknowledged his guilt and 
made reparation " ; and he refers to C. G. Montefiore's article on the Jewish 
conception of repentance in thefewis/i Quarterly Review (1903). 


fjfuv Ka.TqWa.yq, aW ^yu.a9 eavria Ka.Ti]\\a.£ev' evc^ctpicre 81 rj/uv ra 
twv KaraXXaywv evayyeXia (Thdrt.). This is insisted on by 
Lightfoot on Col. i. 21, and by Westcott in his additional note 
on 1 Jn. ii. io, p. 85, also on Heb. x. 10, p. 347. It is well to 
be reminded that God is not a man that He should repent or 
change His mind, and that His unchanging love is always 
waiting for the penitent sinner. But in order to get another side 
of this vast truth we are obliged to use language which involves 
us in a seeming contradiction. Scripture speaks of God being 
angry with impenitent sinners and ceasing to be angry with those 
who are penitent. Scripture also speaks of ' propitiation ' as a 
means to reconciliation (1 Jn. ii. 2, iv. 10; cf. Rom. iii. 25; 
Lk. xviii. 13), and in this relation it is God and not man who is 
propitiated. In both cases we have to affirm or imply change in 
One who was before said to be incapable of change. As so 
often, in trying to express deep spiritual truths, we have got 
down to "the bed-rock of a contradiction." See additional note 
on Rom. v. 10, the only other passage in N.T. in which 
KaraWacro-eiv occurs of this relation between God and man. It 
can be used either of one of the two estranged parties reconciling 
the other, or of a third reconciling them both ; cf. o-waAAaWeiv 
(Acts vii. 26). St Paul also uses dTTOKaTaAAdWciv (Eph. ii. 16; 
Col. i. 20, 21) and KaraAAay^ (Rom. v. 11, xi. 15), but not 
l\do-Keo-9ai (Heb. ii. 17 ; Lk. xviii. 13) or tAaoyxos (1 Jn. ii. 2, iv. 10). 

tea! Sonros rjfxiJ' ttjc SiaKoi'iai' ttjs Kcn-aWayf]?. This is the 
climax. One who persecuted His Son and the Church, God has 
not only reconciled to Himself through His Son, but has com- 
mitted to him the ministry of reconciliation for the benefit of 
the Church. 

The rapidity with which St Paul makes changes between the 
1st pers. plur. and 1st pers. sing, has been pointed out (vv. 
11, 12), and some see rapid changes in the meaning of 17/ms 
here. In v. 16, ^ets is 'we ministers'; in v. 18, 17/xas seems to 
be 'us Christians' and to be equivalent to Koo-fxov in v. 19, while 
rjfxlv is certainly 'to us ministers,' as SiaKovtav in v. 18 and iv 
fjfui> (not eV aureus) in v. 19 show. But it is not certain that 
T//Aas in v. 18 = Koa-fiov in v. 19== 'us Christians.' St Paul may 
be continuing to think only of himself and his colleagues, and in 
that case all runs smoothly. He is deeply conscious, and is 
anxious to avow, that an Apostle has as much need as anyone 
of the reconciliation which was effected through Christ. Not 
till v. 19 does his thought go beyond the circle of preachers, 
and then he shows how they share in making the reconciliation 
of the human race, which has been won by Christ, effectual to 
individual souls. 

The use of Sia/covia of Apostles (here, iv. 1, vi. 3 ; Rom. 

V. 18, 19] THE LIFE OF AN APOSTLE 1 83 

xi. 13 ; 1 Tim. i. 12 ; and often in Acts) shows that they are not 
regarded as avOevrai. They do not act on their own independent 
authority, but are commissioned by God to continue Christ's 
SiaKovia of reconciliation. The word is found in all groups of 
the Pauline Epistles, except Thessalonians, and it evidently has 
no fixed application to any particular kind of ministry. The 
renderings in AV. and RV. vary greatly ; ' ministry,' ' minister- 
ing,' 'ministration,' 'administration,' 'serving,' 'service,' and 
' relief.' 

D 3 EKL, AV. have 'IijuoO before Xpiarov : NBCD*FGP, Latt. 
Syrr. Copt. RV. omit. 

19. ws on 0e6s tji' ef Xpiorw KocTfAoe Ka.TaWdo-awi' eauTw. The 
exact force of <Ls on is not clear. Greek commentators substitute 
kcu yap and the Latins render it quoniam qiiidem. We may 
analyse it, 'as was the case, because,' or 'how that,' or 'namely, 
that,' which is much the same as ' to wit, that ' (AV. RV.).* Of 
the four possible constructions, (1) that of AV., which agrees 
with Luther, Calvin, Beza, and Bengel, is to be rejected ; ' God 
was in Christ, reconciling the world to Himself.' Almost 
certainly, iv Xpto-rw belongs to KaTaWdo-awv, being parallel to 
Sia Xpto-rou in v. 18. The same objection holds good against 
(2) ' was reconciling to Himself the world that is in Christ,' i.e. 
those that are His members. This would require tov Iv Xpicrru 
Koa-fiov. And do those who are already in Christ need recon- 
ciliation ? (3) ' There was God, in Christ reconciling the world 
to Himself.' This is Theodoret's rendering, reading 6 ®eo's. It 
is awkward, but it puts kv Xpio-rw in the right place. (4) Almost 
certainly, rjv KaraXXdcra-wv is the analytical imperfect of which 
Lk. is so fond (i. 21, ii. 51, iv. 20, v. 1, 16, 18, etc.). This 
periphrastic tense expresses, more decidedly than the simple 
imperfect, the duration of the action. There was a lasting 
process of reconciliation ; ' God in Christ was reconciling the 
world to Himself.' The ' world' means all mankind. God did 
all that on His side is necessary for their being reconciled to 
Him ; but not all men do what is necessary on their side. Aug. 
{In Joann. Trad, lxxxvii. 2, 3, ex. 4) characteristically explains 
mundus as meaning only those who are predestined to salvation, 
the Church of the elect gathered out of the world. 

For /co'crpos without the art. comp. Rom. iv. 13; Gal. vi. 14: 
iv Kocr/xw (1 Cor. viii. 4, xiv. 10) is not quite parallel, because 
there was a tendency, which appears in papyri, to omit the art. 
after a preposition ; J. H. Moulton, p. 82. 

* In Xen. Hellen. in. ii. 14, the MSS. have dituv us 6Vt 6kvoItj, but 
editors reject the fin. In late Greek ws Sti seems to be used as equivalent to 
6ri. See Milligan on 2 Thess. ii. 2. 


(AT] Xoyi^ojieKos . . . koX 0eu.eKos. Just as tov /caraXXd^avTos 
rjixas explains how God brought about the new conditions, so 
these two participles explain how He brings about the recon- 
ciliation ; 'viz. by not reckoning to men their trespasses, and by 
having deposited with His ministers the message of reconcilia- 
tion.' Note the change from pres. part., of a process that is 
going on, to aor., of one that is complete. Although the ixrj 
Xoyi£o/j,ei/o9 (Rom. iv. 7, 8 ; Col. i. 14) is free and universal, yet 
it has to be made known to individuals, in order that they may 
appropriate it; hence the defievos kv rjfuv. By fiy Xoyi£d/x£vos He 
does His part, and by tfe'/xevo? k.t.X. He aids men to do their 
part, in the work of reconciliation. 

Both Xoyi£e<r#ai and 7rapdTTTU)fxa are favourite words with 
Paul, especially the former. IIapa7rrw/Aa is a lapse from right- 
eousness, and it sometimes indicates an offence that is less 
serious than d/xap-ria, as perhaps in Gal. vi. 1, and more clearly 
in Ps. xviii. 13, 14; but this occasional distinction cannot be 
pressed. Comp. Eph. i. 7, ii. 1, 5 and Col. ii. 13, which are 
parallel in sense to this passage; and see Westcott, Ephesians, 
p. 166 ; Trench, Syn. § lxvi. For Tra.paiTTu>p.a in the Gospels, Vulg. 
always has peccatum ; in the Epistles, always delictum, except 
Eph. i. 7, ii. 5, where it has peccatum. 

tov Xoyoy Tr]s KaTaXXayfjs. Cf. r. Xoyov 7-779 dXr/#€ias (Eph. i. 
13; Col. i. 5), Xdyov £a)r}s (Phil. ii. 16), 6 Xdyos tt}s o-MTT/ptas 
(Acts xiii. 26). "In determining the meaning of Xdyos in Paul 
one must always keep in mind 1 Cor. ii. 12 ; 'I determined not 
to know anything among you, save Jesus Christ, and Him 
crucified ' " (Harnack, The Constitution and Law of the Church, 

P- 340- 

Before r. \6yov r. KaraWayrjs, D* E G, g insert (tov) evayye\lov. 

V. 20-VI. 10. From the declaration that he is one of those 
to whom God has committed the word of reconciliation the 
Apostle goes on to show his credentials as a preacher of the 
Gospel. He is God's ambassador, fellow-worker, and minister, 
and as such has had to suffer a great deal. This again is some 
evidence of his sincerity. 

20. 'YTrep Xpiorou ou^ Trpeo-p€u'o(xev. ' On behalf of Christ, 
therefore, we are acting as ambassadors.'* Cf. v-n-ep ov Trpea-fiexmi 
iv aXdcrei (Eph. vi. 20), and see on Philem. 9. Deissmann 
(Light from the Ancient East, p. 379) points out that these 
" proud words of St Paul stand in quite different relief when we 
know that irpeo-fievo) and 7rpecr/3euTr;s were the proper words in 

* Klopper points out that inrtp Xp. cannot mean 'in Christ's stead,' which 
is not given in w. 18, 19; it means 'in Christ's interest,' Christi causam 
agens. The Apostle is God's ambassador to further the cause of Christ. 


the Greek East for the Emperor's Legate." Both verb and sub- 
stantive are found in this sense in inscriptions, the latter very 
frequently. The dignity of an Apostle comes once more to the 
front. He is the representative of Christ the Reconciler, and 
behind Christ is God. As in i. 1 ; 1 Cor. i. 1 ; Gal. i. 16, he 
holds his office, not from any human being however distin- 
guished, but from the Father. It is a high position, and it 
involves a great responsibility. "The ambassador, before acting, 
receives a commission from the power for whom he acts. 
The ambassador, while acting, acts not only as an agent, but as a 
representative of his sovereign. Lastly, the ambassador's duty is 
not merely to deliver a definite message, to carry out a definite 
policy ; but he is obliged to watch opportunities, to study 
characters, to cast about for expedients, so that he may place it 
before his hearers in its most attractive form. He is a diplo- 
matist " (Lightfoot, Ordination Addresses, p. 48). This is what 
St Paul means when he says that he becomes all things to all 
men, that he may by all means save some (1 Cor. ix. 32). 

d»S tou Oeou TrapaKaXourros. Neither ' as though God did 
beseech ' (AV.), nor ' as though God were entreating ' (RV.), 
is quite exact ; better, ' seeing that God is entreating.' The 
force of <Ls with a genitive absolute is not always the same. The 
is always gives a subjective view of what is stated by the gen. 
abs., but that subjective view may be shown by the context to be 
either right or wrong. When it is given as right, as in 2 Pet. i. 3, 
us may be rendered ' seeing that,' which RV. has in that place. 
Where the subjective view is given as wrong, u>s='as though,' 
which RV. correctly has in 1 Cor. iv. 18; 1 Pet. iv. 12; Acts 
xxvii. 30, following the Vulg. tamquam. Here it is manifest that 
God's entreating is given as a fact, yet AV. and RV. have ' as 
though,' and Vulg. has tamquam. Here Schmiedel rightly con- 
demns als ob, and with Lietzmann adopts indem. Bachmann 
agrees, with indetn ja. The fact that ' God is entreating by us' 
is a momentous one, and the declaration of it is analogous to 
the formula of the Hebrew Prophet, ' Thus saith the Lord.' 

81' Tjfjuoi/. Cf. i. 23. The ace. after 7rapa/<aA.owTos is omitted, 
as also after Seo/xeda, because he is thinking of a wider field than 
Corinth. He is an Apostle to the Corinthians (1 Cor. ix. 2), 
but to many others besides, and so both verbs are left as general 
as possible in their scope. The second half of the verse is 
addressed urbi et orbi. 

SeopeGa uTrep Xpiorou, KaTa\\ayi]Te tw 0ew. ' We beseech on 
Christ's behalf, Become reconciled to God.' " He said not, 
Reconcile God to yourselves, for it is not He that bears enmity 
but you ; for God never bears enmity " (Chyrs.). In RV. the 
reader naturally puts an emphasis on * ye ' ; ' Be ye reconciled to 


God ' ; and there should be no emphasis, for Vets * s not 
expressed. It is better, therefore, to omit it in translation. 
' Become reconciled,' efficite ut Deo reconciliemini, effects this and 
does justice to the tense. ' In Christ's stead ' (AV.) is probably 
wrong; see on iirlp TrdvTwv and vn-ep airwv in vv. 14, 15. Chrys. 
expands v-rrlp Xpitrrov thus ; ' Do not think that it is we who are 
asking you; it is Christ Himself who asks you, it is the Father 
Himself who entreats you, through us. What can be compared 
with such love ? God's innumerable benefits have been treated 
with contumely, and He not only exacted no penalty, but even 
gave His Son, that we might be reconciled. And when those to 
whom He was first sent were not reconciled to Him, but put 
Him to death, He has again sent other messengers, and it is by 
sending them that He is asking you.' By the repeated virep 
XpiaTov St Paul is characterizing the authority of an Apostle ; it 
is of the highest, but it is official, not personal. An Apostle 
does not exhort in his own name or on his own behalf; he acts 
for Christ. On the other hand, those whom they exhort do not 
work out their reconciliation by themselves; they receive it 
(Rom. v. 11). Their part in the process lies in their appreciating 
and appropriating it. 

For 8e6fie0a, D* F G, d e g, Hil. Ambrst. have deofievoi, and for KaraX- 
Xdyrjre, D* F G, d e g Goth, have KaraWay^vai. Both changes weaken 
the forcible independent clauses of the original text. 

21. tov jxt] yvoVto. dp.apxiai'. ' Him who came to no acquaint- 
ance with sin.' Aug. (Con. duns epp. Pelag. i. 23) compares our 
Lord's words to the wicked, ' I know you not ' (Mt. vii. 23), 
"although, beyond a doubt, nothing is hidden from Him." The 
asyndeton makes the announcement of this amazing paradox all 
the more impressive, a fact which was not felt by the copyists 
who inserted yap. The Apostle anticipates the question which 
his urgent KaTaXXdyrjTe is sure to provoke ; How is it possible 
for sinners such as we are to become reconciled to God ? His 
reply is as epigrammatic as it is startling. 

We cannot press the classical force of p.-y as necessarily 
indicating a subjective view, because in N.T. p.rj with participles 
is the usual construction, although ov still survives ; see on 
1 Cor. ix. 26. But here firj is probably subjective, and if so, it 
is God's view that is meant ; • Him who in God's sight came to 
no knowledge of sin.' These opening words of the paradox have 
parallels enough in Scripture (1 Pet. ii. 22; 1 Jn. iii. 5; Heb. 
iv. 15, vii. 26); and in the front of them we may place Christ's 
own challenge to His opponents, that none had ever convicted 
Him of sin (Jn. viii. 46). So far from knowing sin, He was, 
as Chrys. says, AiroBiKaiocrvvr], Righteousness itself. He had 


known sin in others, had Himself been tempted to it, but His 
conscience had never accused Him of having yielded. The 
commandments never roused in Him, as they did in His Apostle 
(Rom. vii. 7-1 1), the consciousness that He had transgressed in 
act or will. 

With the very doubtful exception of 2 Thess. ii. 3, d/mapTia in 
the sing, is not found in any other group of the Pauline Epistles. 
In this group it is found in all four Epistles (xi. 7 ; 1 Cor. xv. 56 ; 
Gal. ii. 17, iii. 22; Rom. iii.-viii. often, xiv. 23). The plur. is 
found in all four groups. St Paul rarely uses dpdpTrjp,a (1 Cor. 
vi. 18; Rom. iii. 25; elsewhere only Mk. and 2 Pet.). West- 
cott, Ephesians, p. 165. 

Note the chiasmus between rov p.rj yvo^ra apapriav and 
ajxapriav liroCrjcrev, and comp. iv. 3, vi. 8, ix. 6, X. II, xiii. 3. 

uTrep^fiwi' dfj.apTi'ai' iirolr\<yev. ' On our behalf He made to be 
sin.' Qiiis auderet sic loqui, nisi Paulus praeiret (Beng.). The 
nearest approach to this startling utterance comes also from St 
Paul, when he speaks of Christ as yevop.evo<s v-rrlp r)p.Q)v Kardpa 
(Gal. iii. 13). Both passages are probably influenced by the 
language of LXX respecting the sin-offering and the guilt-offering 
in Lev. iv., and respecting the scape-goat in Lev. xvi. The 
authority of Augustine, who states the view repeatedly, especially 
in his anti-Pelagian treatises, has caused many to solve the 
difficulty of ' made him to be dp.apna ' by supposing that djaaprta, 
peccatum, here means 'sin-offering.' Lev. iv. 25, 29 perhaps 
may be quoted in support of this ; but no support for it can be 
found in N.T., and it cannot stand here, because of apapriav in 
the previous clause, where it must mean 'sin.' Nor can the 
other suggestion of Aug. be accepted, that dp-apria may mean 
human nature, as being liable to suffering and death, which are 
the penalties of sin ; so that apapTiav eVoi^o-ev means that God 
made Christ assume human nature. This is improbable enough 
in itself; and, as before, the previous d/xapnav forbids it* We 
must face the plain meaning of the Apostle's strong words. In 
some sense which we cannot fathom, God is said to have identi- 
fied Christ with man's sin, in order that man might be identified 
with God's own righteousness. The relationship expressed by 
'Christ in us and we in Him' is part of the solution. It is by 
union of Christ with man that Christ is identified with human 
sin, and it is by union of man with Christ that man is identified 
with Divine righteousness. No explanation of these mysterious 
words satisfies us. They are a bold attempt to express what 
cannot even be grasped in human thought, still less be expressed 
in human language ; and it is rash to put our own interpretation 

* Gregory of Nyssa, who quotes the statement several times, would make 
' sin ' mean ' flesh,' the seat of sin. 


on the verse, build a theory of the Atonement upon that inter- 
pretation, and then claim for the theory the authority of St Paul. 
St Paul is giving a courageous answer to a difficult question ; he 
is not starting or summarizing a systematized doctrine of recon- 
ciliation. In his answer he has given a striking illustration of 
the truth of J. H. Newman's words, made so famous by Charles 
Kingsley; "It is not more than an hyperbole to say, that, in 
certain cases, a lie is the nearest approach to the truth." St 
Paul's words here cannot be true, and yet it is possible that they 
are the best way of stating what is true. We have once more 
got down to " the bed-rock of a contradiction." " But it raises 
one's opinion of the extraordinary sanity of Paul's judgment, and 
his insight, that he could be so near to the substitutionary view 
of the Atonement without accepting it. He was in fact kept 
from accepting it by his view of the nature of faith, which was of 
an extremely practical kind. He regarded salvation as consisting 
in the continuing of the life of Christ and sharing His obedience, 
but not in being merely justified, as in a law-court, by a fictitious 
claim to merit which one did not possess" (P. Gardner, The 
Religions Experience of St Paul, p. 195). 

Iva t)|X€ls yevuptQa. ' In order that we might become.' It is 
for our gain, not His ; the whole process is v-n-ep ^uwv. For ^/xas 
he might have said ol /xrj yvoVres SiKaioavvrjv. 

Sikcuoowtj 0eou. It is God's, not ours (Rom. x. 3) ; it is the 
righteousness which characterizes Him and which He imparts as 
a grace to man (Rom. v. 17). See on Rom. i. 17 ; also Briggs, 
The Messiah of the Apostles, pp. 123-126; Bruce, St Paul's 
Conception of Christianity, p. 176. 

iv auTw. It is in Christ, i.e. through our union with Him 
and our sharing in the outcome of His Death and Resurrection, 
and not in our own right, that we become righteous in God's 
sight. 'Ev aiiTw in this clause corresponds to virlp rjjxwv in the 
previous clause; but the same preposition could not be used in 
both places. St Paul could not have said that Christ was made 
to be sin ' in us ' ; still less that we become righteous ' on Christ's 
behalf.' See on Rom. iii. 26. 

For numerous theories of the Atonement see Ritschl, Justi- 
fication and Reconciliation, 2nd ed. 1902; H. N. Oxenham, The 
Catholic Doctrine of the Atonement, 1881 ; Dale, The Doctrine of 
the Atonement, 1875; A. Lyttelton in Lux Mundi, 1889; West- 
cott, The Victory of the Cross, 1889 ; J. M. Wilson, Hulsean 
Lectures, 1899; G. B. Stevens, Christian Doctrine of Salvation, 
1905; R. C. Moberly, Atonement and Personality, 1907. 

N S D 3 EKLP, Syrr. Arm. Aeth. Goth. AV. insert ydp after rbv : 
S*BCD*FG 17, 67**, Latt. Copt. RV. omit. Aug. (Enchir. 41) knew 
of a text in quibusdam mendosis codicibus which had b /a-Jj yvoi/s a^apTiav, 


is qui non noverat peccatum, pro nobis peccalum fecit, "as if," says 
Augustine, "for our sakes Christ commitied sin ! " 

VI. 1-10. There is once more an unintelligent division of 
the chapters: vi. 1 is closely connected with v. 20, 21, and the 
first ten verses of this chapter are a continuation of the Apostle's 
self-vindication from another point of view ; they set forth his 
conduct and his experiences as God's ambassador, and as a 
minister to whom has been entrusted the message of reconcilia- 
tion. After an earnest appeal to the Corinthians not to lose 
through neglect the grace offered to them, the spiritual exaltation 
of the Apostle once more gives a rhythmic swing to his language, 
as if he were singing a song of triumph. Magna res est, et 
granditer agitur, nee desunt ornamenta dicendi (Aug. De Doc. 
Chris, iv. 20). Way calls it a " Hymn of the Herald of Salva- 
tion." There is no good reason for supposing that St Paul here 
turns to "the better-disposed heathen believers." He is address- 
ing weak believers, who were in danger of a lapse into heathen 
laxity, through making so poor an attempt to reach a Christian 
standard of holiness. He points to the way in which an Apostle 
does his work, and to what he has to endure : these are things 
which the Corinthians can appreciate.* 

1. luyepyourrcs oe ica! TrapaKa\ou|X€i'. ' But there is more to 
be said than this (8e kolC) : as working together with God we 
entreat that you do not accept the grace of God in vain.' God 
had committed the message of reconciliation to His ambassadors ; 
St Paul had brought it to the Corinthians ; they must do their 
part and make a right use of it. Where avvepyelv (1 Cor. xvi. 16 ; 
Rom. viii. 28) or crwepyo's (i. 24, viii. 23 ; 1 Cor. iii. 9) or other 
compounds of uvv occur, it is plain that the force of the ow- 
depends on the context. But that principle is not decisive here, 
because there are several possibilities in the context. Five 
connexions have been suggested. (1) 'Co-operating with God' ; 
which is the natural inference from v. 18, 21, and it is confirmed 
by 1 Cor. iii. 9. (2) 'With Christ' ; which might be inferred 
from v. 20, ifvTvlp Xpiarov means 'in Christ's stead.' (3) 'With 
you' (so Chrys.); the Corinthians have co-operated with the 
missionaries in listening to their message, and so the Apostle is 
a fellow-worker with them. The objection to this is that the 
whole context is concerned with the preachers' part rather than 
with that of the hearers. (4) 'With other teachers' This ex- 
planation assumes that the 1st pers. plur. refers to St Paul alone. 
If it included other teachers, the cw- would be meaningless ; 

* This chapter was the Second Lesson at Evensong on 8 June 1688, after 
the Seven Bishops had been imprisoned in the Tower. See also Job xi. 14-20, 
which was part of the First Lesson. 


' co-operating with ourselves.' (5) ' With our exhortations] i.e. 
adding our example to our precept. If this had been meant, it 
would have been expressed in a plainer manner. 

els Ke^o^. ' To no profit' ; in vacuum (Vu\g.),/rustra (Beza). 
The expression is freq. in LXX (Lev. xxvi. 20; Job xxxix. 16; 
Is. xxix. 8; Jer. vi. 29, xxviii. 58), but in N.T. it is peculiar to 
Paul (1 Thess. iii. 5 ; Gal. ii. 2 ; Phil. ii. 16). It is probable 
that 8££ao-0ai is a timeless aorist after irapaKaXeiv, like Kvpwaai 
(ii. 8), 7rapa(TT?]craL (Rom. xii. 1), crvyaywiLaao-Oat (Rom. XV. 30), 
irepnraTrjo-aL (Eph. iv. 1), and may be rendered ne recipiatis 
(Vulg.). The reference is to the present time ; acceptance of 
grace is continually going on, and there ought to be good results. 
But the aorist may have the force of a past tense and be rendered 
ne reciperetis (Beza). In this case the reference is to the time of 
their conversion; he exhorts them not to have accepted the 
grace of God in vain, i.e. not to show by their behaviour now 
that they accepted it then to no profit. Chrys. seems to take it 
in the latter way, for he interprets es kIvov as losing through 
unfruitfulness the great blessings which they have received. In 
any case, v/ comes last with much emphasis; 'you, whatever 
the rest of the /coo-pos may do.' 'We are commissioned to 
preach to all mankind ; I beseech you not to let the preaching 
prove vain in your case.' 

2. As in v. 7, 16, we have a Pauline parenthesis. He 
remembers an O.T. saying which will drive home the exhorta- 
tion that he has just given, Is. xlix. 8, and he injects it. In a 
modern work the verse would be a foot-note. As usual, he 
quotes the LXX with little or no change ; cf. iv. 13, viii. 15, 
ix. 9. Here there is no change. In LXX the words are intro- 
duced with ovTws Aeyet Ka'pios, and we readily understand 6 ©eo's 
here (Blass, § 30. 4) from the context. But Xe'yei (Rom. xv. 10 ; 
Eph. iv. 8) and <pt]o-iv (see on 1 Cor. vi. 16), without subject, are 
common forms of quotation, equivalent to inverted commas. 
The conjecture is often repeated that &i£a<r8ai suggested the 
passage about xcupos Scktos. It may be so ; but a deeper reason 
is possible. The passage may have occurred to St Paul because 
of the resemblance of his own case to that of the Prophet. In 
Is. xlix. the Prophet points out that the Lord has formed him 
from the womb to be His servant, and to reconcile Israel again 
to Him ; but also to give him as a light to the Gentiles, that 
His salvation may be to the end of the earth. The servant has 
delivered his message, and a period of labour and disappoint- 
ment follows (LXX of v. 4). Then come the encouraging words 
which St Paul quotes, and comforting thoughts arise. Although 
men despise him, God will honour him by confirming his 


message; and the God who has had compassion on Israel in 
spite of their sins, will have compassion on all the nations (see 
Driver, Isaiah, p. 149; W. E. Barnes, ad loc). Word for word, 
this is true of the Apostle; and he also has his xaipos Sckto's, 
SeKTo's to all the parties concerned. In Phil. iv. 18, Scktijv means 
acceptable to God, and tw 0ew is expressed. In Lk. iv. 19, 
ScktoV means acceptable to man, and here the meaning is 
probably the same ; the time in which such benefits are offered 
is welcome to the human race. On God's side it is 'a season of 
favour,' on man's it is 'a season to be welcomed.' ElaaKoveiv, 
freq. in LXX, occurs here only in N.T. 

[Sou vOv. The Apostle at once applies the words of the 
Prophet to his readers ; they are to take the saying to heart. 
By vvv is meant all the time between the moment of writing and 
the Advent. The common application of the 'now,' viz. 'act 
at once, for delay is dangerous,' is not quite the meaning of the 
vvv here. The point is rather that the wonderful time which the 
Prophet foresaw is now going on ; the Apostle and his readers 
are enjoying it. His comment is equivalent to that of Christ, 
Lk. iv. 21, but this carries with it the warning already given, not 
to neglect golden opportunities. To some persons the vvv may 
be very short. Ex quo in came Salvator apparuit semper est 
acceptabile tempus. Unicuique tamen finitur hoc tempus in hora 
obitus sui (Herveius).* 

cuirpocrSeKTos. In LXX 8«kto? is freq., especially in the 
Psalms, and €U7rpoVSeKTos is not found, but St Paul prefers the 
compound, probably as being stronger; he uses it again viii. 12 
and Rom. xv. 16, 31; and his use of it here indicates his 
jubilant feeling; 'Behold now is the welcome acceptable time.' 
The word is found of heathen sacrifices ; KaTcuoeiv el €V7rpocrSeKTos 
7} Ovcrio. (Aristoph. Pax, 1054). 

D* F G, d e g have /ccupy yap \tyei for X^yet yap' Katp$. 

3. jj.Tj&cjiiai' iv \ir\Zevl SiSoires 7rpoaKOTrpf. The construction 
shows that v. 2 is a parenthesis, the participles in vv. 3 and 4 
being co-ordinate with o-wepyotJvres in v. 1. Aug. (De Doc. Chris. 
xx. 42) has nullam in quoquam dantes offensionem, which is more 
accurate than Vulg. nemini dantes ullam offe?tsionem. Luther 
follows in making iv p^Sevi masc, and he makes SiSovres an 
exhortation ; lasset uns aber niemand irgend ein Aergerniss geben. 
Both context and construction show that this is wrong. It is 
the exhorters themselves who aim at 'giving no cause of 
stumbling in anything whatever.' 'Ev fvqSevC embraces 7rp€cr- 

* Calvin finds meaning in the order of the clauses ; Prius tempus bene- 
volentiae ponitur, deinde dies salutis ; quo innuitur ex sola Dei misericordia 
tanquam ex fonte manare nobis salutem. 


fievofj-ev, Se6fi.(6a, irapaKaXovfxtv, and all the details of the 8ia.KOvia 
t^s /caraWayr;?. Here again, as in v. 21, the \xr\ probably has 
its subjective force ; ' not giving what could be regarded as a 
7rpocrKOTrr).' Note the Pauline alliteration ; cf. viii. 22, ix. 5, 8, 
x. 6. Nowhere else in Bibl. Grk. does Trpoa-Kow-q occur; Trpoa- 
Ko/x/xa and o-i<dv?>a\ov are the usual words. All three denote 
what causes others to stumble, in behaviour or belief, such as 
vainglory, self-seeking, insincerity, inconsistency of life. Necesse 
est ejus praedicationem negiigi, cujus vita despicitur (Greg. M.). 

ica jit] |ji(<)fiY]0T] 7] SiaKOkta. ' That the ministry may not 
be vilified,' vituperetur (Vulg.), verspottet. The verb is rare 
(Prov. ix. 7) ; St Paul, who has it again viii. 20, may have got 
it from VVisd. X. 14, i/reuSeis re I8ei£ei/ toi/s puDfjcrjaa/xivov; avrov 
(Joseph), which AV. vaguely renders 'those that accused him.' 
Heinrici quotes Lucian, Quom. hist. 33, o olSeh av, dXX' nvS' 6 
Mw/xos paopi^a-aa-Oai Suvatro, where Mw/aos is mocking criticism 
personified. Wetstein quotes Apollonius, Lex. //.cu/xr/o-orrai, 
olovel KaTa.TraigovTai' /xw//,os yap 6 paTa ipoyov Kara7raiy/xos. In 

class. Grk. the verb is mostly poetical (Horn. Aesch. Aristoph.), 
and in late prose it often implies ridicule as well as blame, with 
disgrace as a result. Here the thought of being made a laughing- 
stock may be included.* In any case, it is man's criticism and 
abuse that is meant, not Divine condemnation. The Apostle is 
not thinking of the Judgment-seat of Christ (v. 10); neither 
■n-poaKo-n-rj nor p.o)p.r]0fj would be used in reference to that. He 
may be thinking of the insults offered to him by 6 d5i/cr/cras 
(vii. 12). 

After dtcLKovia, D E F G, Latt. Syrr. Sah. Goth, add fyi»" : N B C K L P, 

Copt. omit. The insertion spoils the sense. He is thinking of the Apostolic 
office in general ; his conduct must not cause it to be reviled. In what 
was done at Corinth, the credit of the cause for which all ministers 
laboured was at stake. KV. wrongly substitutes ' our ministration ' for 
1 the ministry.' 

4. d\\' iv irarrl owiot. cauTous. ' On the contrary, in every- 
thing commending ourselves, as God's ministers should do.' 
The comprehensive iv iravrC, in opposition to iv /x^Sevt, comes 
first with emphasis; cf. vii. 11, ix. 8, xi. 9. He is glancing at 
the charge of self-commendation made against him, but here he 
uses the expression in a good sense, and therefore eam-ovs has 
not the emphatic position which is given to it in iii. 1 and v. 12. 
Vulg. has sed in omnibus exhibeamus nostnet ipsos sicut Dei 
tninistros, which is doubly wrong, making the participle into a 
finite verb co-ordinate with pnop.r]0rj, and making &La.Koi>oi accusa- 

* Nihil eitim magis ridicuhtm quam de tua apud alios exisiimatione 
vindicanda contendere quum ipse tibi Jlagitiosa ac turpi vita coniumeliam 
arcessas (Calv.). 


tive, which gives a wrong turn to the meaning. Aug. is right 
with commendantes, but wrong with minis tros. St Paul does not 
say 'commending ourselves as being God's ministers,' but 'as 
God's ministers do commend themselves,' viz. by rectitude of 
life. As in iv. 8-12 and xi. 23-31, he enumerates his sufferings, 
and in all three passages we have a lyrical balance of language 
which gives a triumphant tone to the whole. Both Augustine 
and Erasmus express detailed admiration for the beauty of this 
passage. The latter analyses thus ; totus hie sertno per contraria, 
per membra^ per comparia, per similiter desinentia, per dvaSnr- 
Xwo-eis aliaque schemata, variatur, volvitur et rotatur, ut nihil esse 
possit vel venustius vel ardentius. Both critics feel the glow that 
underlies the words. 

The Apostle leads off with one of the chief features in his 
ministry, iv xmo/jLovfj iroWrj, and then mentions three triplets of 
particulars in which the vttojjlovt) is exhibited. Respecting these 
triplets Chrys. uses his favourite metaphor of snow-showers 
(vufxiSes) ; they constitute, he says, a blizzard of troubles. Then 
come eight other leading features, still under the same preposi- 
tion (iv), the repetition of which (18 times in all) has become 
monotonous, and is therefore changed to SuL Here the stream, 
which in the last four of the features introduced with iv had 
begun to swell, reaches its full volume and flows on in more 
stately clauses. After three with Sid, we have a series of seven 
contrasts, ending with a characteristic three-fold alliteration and 
an equally characteristic play upon words. 

iv uTTOfiowfj ttoXXt]. See on i. 6 ; also Lightfoot on Col. i. 1 1 
and Mayor on Jas. i. 3. The high position given by our Lord to 
virojxovq (Lk. viii. 15, xxi. 19) and to vTro/xeveiv (Mk. xiii. 13 ; Mt. 
x. 22, xxiv. 13) accounts for the prominence given to it here 
and xii. 12. It not only stands first, but it is illustrated in 
detail ; hue spectat tota enutneratio quae sequitur (Calv.). The 
word appears in all four groups of the Pauline Epistles, chiefly 
in Rom. and 2 Cor., often with the meaning of fortitude and 
constancy under persecution. This meaning is very freq. in 
4 Mace, whereas in Ecclus. and in the Canonical Books of the 
O.T. it commonly means patient and hopeful expectation. In 
1 Thess. i. 3; 1 Tim. vi. n; 2 Tim. iii. 10; Tit. ii. 2, it is 
placed next to dyd-n-q in lists of virtues. Like dydirr], it is a word 
which, although not originally Biblical, has acquired fuller 
meaning and much more general use through the influence of 
the N.T. It is often treated as one of the chief among Christian 
virtues. Chrys. can scarcely find language strong enough to 
express his admiration for it. It is "a root of all the goods, 
mother of piety, fruit that never withers, a fortress that is never 
taken, a harbour that knows no storms " (Horn. 1 1 7). Again, 



it is " the queen of virtues, the foundation of right actions, 
peace in war, calm in tempest, security in plots," which no 
violence of man, and no powers of the evil one, can injure (Ep. 
ad Olymp. 7). These and other quotations are given in Suicer, 
s.v. Clem. Rom. {Cor. 6) places this virtue at the beginning 
and end of his praise of the Apostle ; ITavAos v7rofxovf}<; fipafielov 
VTre8ei$€iv . . . viroiJLOvri<; ycvd/xevos [leyurTos VTroypa/A/ids. Cf. 
xii. 12. 

iv GXuJ/eo-ii', iv dedyKais, iv oreyoxcopiais. This triplet consists 
of troubles which may be independent of human agency, and 
it is probably intended to form a climax ; ' afflictions ' (i. 4, 8, 
ii. 4, iv. 7), which might be avoided; 'necessities' (xii. 10), 
which cannot be avoided; 'straits,' angustiae (xii. 10), out 
of which there is no way of escape. Like aya.7rr) and virofxovq, 
6\t\fns was a word of limited meaning and use in late Greek, 
which acquired great significance and frequent employment 
when it became a term with religious associations. In 
1 Thess. iii. 7, as in Job xv. 24; Ps. cxix. 143; Zeph. i. 15, 
6\(\fn$ is coupled with avdyK-q. In the De Singularitate 
Clericorum appended to Cyprian's works, Iv dkiif/eo-iv is trans- 
lated twice, in pressuris, in tribulationibus ; see below on iv 

It is difficult to decide between trwurr&vopres (B P and some cursives), 
ffvviffT&vTes (K* C D* F G 17), and vvvi<ttwvt€S (N'D'EKL), In iii. 1 
the evidence is decisive for rvvurrdveiv, and that gives great weight to 
avvicTavovTes here. For 5t&Kovoi, D*, f g Vulg. have 8iclk6vovs. 

5. iv iTX^yais, iv <J>u\aKais, iv dicaTacJTacruHS. This triplet 
consists of troubles inflicted by men. It is doubtful whether 
there is any climax ; but St Paul might think ' stripes ' (xi. 23) 
less serious than 'imprisonments' (xi. 23), which stopped his 
work for a time, and imprisonments less serious than ' tumults,' 
which might force him to abandon work altogether in the place 
in which the tumult occurred. Clem. Rom. (Cor. 6) says of 
St Paul, £7rrd/as Secr/xd ^ope'o-as, but the only imprisonment 
known to us prior to 2 Cor. is the one at Philippi. Popular 
tumults against St Paul are freq. in Acts (xiii. 50, xiv. 5, 19, 
xvii. 5, 'xviii. 12, xix. 23-41). In 1 Cor. iv. n, the 'Apostle, 
in describing the experiences of Apostles, says KoXa^lofXiOa, 
ao-Ta.Tovfj.ev, ' we are buffeted, are homeless,' and some would 
give the meaning of ' homelessness, vagrant life ' to a.KaTao-Tao-la 
here. Chrys. seems to understand it in the sense of ' being 
driven from pillar to post,' but in N.T. the signification of the 
word is 'disorder' in one of two senses, viz. 'want of order, 
confusion' (1 Cor. xiv. 33; Jas. iii. 16), and 'breach of order, 
tumult' (here and Lk. xxi. 9). In LXX only twice, in the 
former sense (Prov. xxvi. 28; Tob. iv. 13). In De Singularite 


Clericorum we again have two words in the Latin for one in the 
Greek ; in seditionibus, in invocationibus. It is difficult to see 
what the latter can mean, and one might conjecture in co?icita- 
tionibus, the in being accidentally repeated, or in implicationibus, 
1 in entanglements.' 

iv Koirois, iv dypuiri'iais, iv ^oreiais. This third triplet con- 
sists of those troubles which he took upon himself in the 
prosecution of his mission. Thdrt. groups the first two triplets 
together as to e$o}$ev eiriovTa and aKovaLa : TvpocniQ-qcrt Se rots 
d/<ov(riois kcu tovs av6aip€Tovs ttovovs. There is order in this 
triplet also, and perhaps one may call it a climax ; koVoi disturb 
the day, aypvirvtai the night, and v^o-reiat both. St Paul re- 
peatedly speaks of koVoi as a prevailing feature in his own life 
(xi. 23, 27 ; 1 Thess. ii. 9, iii. 5 ; 2 Thess. iii. 8). While 7roVos 
indicates the effort which was required, koVos points to the 
fatigue which was incurred. Trench, § cii., suggests ' toil ' for 
tovos and ' weariness ' for kotos : but in the ordinary Greek of 
this period the difference between the two words was vanishing. 
Swete remarks that k6tto<s with its cognate kottlcLv is " almost 
a technical word for Christian work," and that in Rev. ii. 2 tov 
kottov and t?)v iirofiov^u are "two notes of excellence, self- 
denying labour and perseverance." 

iv dypu-rn'icus. Here and xi. 27 only in N.T. The word 
covers more than sleeplessness ; it includes all that prevents one 
from sleeping. At Troas Paul preached until midnight and yet 
longer (Acts xx. 7, 9). In LXX the word is almost confined to 
Ecclus., where it is freq. and commonly means forgoing sleep in 
order to work. The Apostle no doubt often taught, and 
travelled, and worked with his hands to maintain himself, by 

iv kT]o-T6iats- Not 'fasts' in the religious sense;* but, just 
as aypvTrvia is voluntary forgoing of sleep in order to get more 
work done, so vrjcnda is voluntary forgoing of food for the same 
reason. St Paul often neglected his meals, having ' no leisure 
so much as to eat' (Mk. vi. 31). We infer from xi. 27 that 
vrjarelai are voluntary abstentions from food, for there they are 
distinguished from involuntary hunger and thirst. Here the 
meaning might be that he neglected the handicraft by which he 
earned his bread (1 Cor. iv. n, 12), or that he refused the 
maintenance which he might have claimed (1 Cor. ix. 4). But 
omitting meals in order to gain time is simpler. These suffer- 
ings, voluntarily undertaken, form an easy transition to the 
virtues which are evidence that he is one of God's ambassadors 
and fellow-workers. 

* St Paul would not mention as an apostolic hardship the fasts which he 
practised for his own spiritual good (Beet). 


6. iv dyfOTTjTi. The three triplets which state the sphere of 
v-n-ofjiovrf are ended, and the virtues mentioned in w. 6 and 7 
are co-ordinate with vTrojxovr). 'AyvoT^s is mentioned again 
(probably) in xi. 3, but nowhere else in Bibl. Grk. While 
castimonia (Tert.) or castitas (Vulg.) is too narrow on the one 
hand, 17 7w xPVf Ji ° LTWl ' vTrepoij/ca (Thdrt.) is too narrow on the 
other. It means purity of life in both senses, chastity and 
integrity, the delicacy of mind which makes a man careful to 
keep a clean heart and clean hands. The six virtues in this 
verse have reference to principles of action, then lv Adyw 
aXqOeias characterizes preaching, and lv Bwdfiet ®eov sums up 
the whole of Apostolic labour. 

ev yvuxrei. Not merely practical wisdom or prudence in 
dealing with different men and different circumstances, recte et 
scienter agendi peritia (Calv.), but comprehensive knowledge of 
the principles of Christianity (viii. 7, xi. 6; 1 Cor. i. 5; Rom. 
xv. 14). 

lv jAaicpoOufjua, lv xp^cttottjti. While VTvop.ovr\ is the courageous 
fortitude which endures adversity without murmuring or losing 
neart, p.a.Kpodvp.ia is the forbearance which endures injuries and 
evil deeds without being provoked to anger (Jas. i. 19) or 
vengeance (Rom. xii. 19). It is the opposite of o^odv/xia, hasty 
cemper; cf. Prov. xiv. 17, 6£69vp.o<; Trpdcrcre.i fxera d/SoiAias. In 
Proverbs fxaKp66vp.o<; is uniformly applied to men, and the 
pa.Kp66vp.o<; is highly praised (xiv. 29, xv. 18, xvi. 32, xvii. 27); 
in the other O.T. Books it is almost always applied to God. 
Maxpo#i>/ua is late Greek and is rare, except in LXX and N.T. 
In N.T. it is freq. (ten times in Paul), and is used of both God 
(Rom. ii. 4, ix. 22 ; etc.) and men. It is coupled with xpy a " r ° Tr ]' ; 
both of God (Rom. ii. 4) and men (Gal. v. 22). See on 1 Cor. 
xiii. 4. Xprja-Torrjs, bonitas (Vulg.), benignitas (Aug.), is 'gracious- 
ness.' It is opposed to a-n-oTopLia, severitas, of God (Rom. x. 22 ; 
cf. Tit. iii. 4). In men it is the sympathetic kindliness or 
sweetness of temper which puts others at their ease and shrinks 
from giving pain ; ut nee verbo nee opere nostra aliis generemus 
asperitatem amaritu dints (Herveius). 

lv TTceup-aTi dyiw. It is scarcely credible that St Paul would 
place the Holy Spirit in a list of human virtues and in a sub- 
ordinate place, neither first to lead, nor last to sum up all the 
rest. We may abandon the common rendering, 'the Holy 
Ghost' (AV., RV.) and translate 'a spirit that is holy,' i.e. in the 
spirit of holiness which distinguishes true ministers from false. 
The Apostle sometimes leaves us in doubt whether he is 
speaking of the Divine Spirit or the spirit of man in which He 
dwells and works; e.g. iv ayiaapLiZ Trvei'p,a.Tos (2 Thess. ii. 13); 
Kara Tryev/xa ayuixrwrj^ (Rom. i. 4). This is specially the case 


with ev Trvevfi.aTL (Eph. ii. 22, iii. 5, v. 18, vi. 18). Westcott on 
Eph. iii. 5 says. "The general idea of the phrase is that it 
presents the concentration of man's powers in the highest part 
of his nature by which he holds fellowship with God, so that, 
when this fellowship is realised, he is himself in the Holy Spirit 
and the Holy Spirit is in him." See on Rom. xii. 11. It is 
worth noting that -irvev/jLa ayiov is far more freq. in N.T. than 

to 7rv€V}xa to dyioi' or to ayiov irvevfjia. 

iv dydiTT] d^u-jTOKpiTw. See on Rom. xii. 9. In 1 Tim. i. 5 

and 2 Tim. i. 5, awiroKpiTos is used of the 71-io-Tis which is one of 
the sources of dyd^ : in Jas. iii. 17, of the heaven-sent o-o<£ia : in 
1 Pet. i. 22, almost as here, of (piXaSeXcpta, "the love like that of 
brothers to those who are not brothers" (Hort). In Wisd. v. 18 
it is applied to judgment which does not respect persons ; and 
xviii. 16, to the Divine command. This seems to be the first 
appearance of the word, and St Paul may have derived it from 
that Book. Hort remarks that the word is chiefly Christian, as 
might be expected from the warnings of Christ against hypocrisy 
and from the high standard of sincerity manifested by the 
Apostles. M. Aurelius (viii. 5) has awiroKpiTOis, of saying what 
seems to be most just, but always with kind intention, and with 
modesty, and without hypocrisy. 

7. iv Xoyw dXriGems. We have the article omitted in Jas. 
i. 18, as here; so also in 8td Ao'yov £o>vto? ®eov (1 Pet. i. 23), 
a passage which perhaps was suggested by Jas. i. 18. In Eph. 
i. 13; Col. i. 5 ; 2 Tim. ii. 15, we have the full expression, 
6 Adyo? t?)s aX.-rjOeias. The genitive may be of apposition, ' the 
word which is the truth ' ; or possessive, ' the word which be- 
longs to the truth ' ; or objective, ' the declaration of the truth.' 
The last is best, — the teaching which told the truth of the good 
tidings, the preaching of the Gospel. Some think that general 
truthfulness is the meaning here ; and this fits on well to ' love 
unfeigned.' There was no insincerity either in the affection 
which he manifested or in the statements which he uttered 
(ii. 17, iv. 2). 

iv 8u^d(j.€i 0eou. This Divine power was all the more con- 
spicuous because of his personal weakness (iv. 7, xii. 9). See 
on 1 Cor. ii. 4 : neither there nor here is the chief reference, 
if there be any at all, to the miracles wrought by St Paul. In 
xii. 12, where he does mention them, iv Traarj {nrofxovfj is 
placed first among Ta arj/xela rov airoo-ToXov, and the miracles 
are secondary. Here he is referring to his missionary career 
in general, the results of which showed that he must be 
working in the power of God. If there is allusion to one 
feature in the career more than to another, it is probably to 


the exercise of the Apostolic authority in enforcing Christian 

The expression Svvap.i<; OeoG is chiefly Pauline in N.T. 
(xiii. 4 ; i Cor. i. 18, ii. 5 ; Rom. i. 16 ; 2 Tim. i. 8 ; cf. 2 Thess. 
i. n). On Iv Swd/xei ©eou (1 Pet. i. 5) Hort remarks; "What 
is dwelt on is not so much that the power of God is exerted on 
behalf of men, as that men are uplifted and inspired by power, 
or by a power, proceeding from God. 'Ev is not here instru- 
mental, but is used with its strict meaning. In one sense the 
power is in men ; but in another and yet truer sense men are in 
the power, they yield to it as something greater and more com- 
prehensive than themselves, in which their separateness is lost." 

Sid tw oTrXajf ttjs SiKcuoau'nris. 'Through ( = by) weapons of 
righteousness.' Here again the Book of Wisdom (v. 17-20) 
may have suggested the expression used : cf. 1 Thess. v. 8 ; 
Eph. vi. 13-17; and see on Rom. xiii. 12. Is. lix. 17 is 
another possible source. The change from iv to 8id is made 
partly because the frequent repetition of iv has become intoler- 
able ; but the change may point to the difference between the 
SuVa/xi? ©eou and the 07rXa used by the Sicxkovoi ©eov. ' Weapons 
of righteousness' are those which righteousness supplies and 
which support the cause of righteousness (Rom. vi. 13). 
Whether he assailed others or defended himself, it was always 
with legitimate weapons and in a legitimate cause. He adds 7w 
Se^iwi' /ecu apio-repuv to intimate that he is thoroughly equipped; 
his panoply is complete. On the right hand, etc. (AV., RV.), is 
ambiguous; 'for the right hand,' etc., is better, i.e. 'right-hand 
and left-hand weapons,' offensive and defensive armour, the 
shield being carried on the left arm. Chrys. interprets dpio-rcpd 
as afflictions, which not only do not cast down but fortify. So 
also Thdrt. ; Se£id 8e KaA.€i rd SoKovvra 6vp.rjpi], apivTepa Se rd 
ivavrCa. But the meaning of success and failure — ne prosperis 
elevemur, nee frangamur adversis — is alien to the passage and to 
N.T. usage. 

8. Sid S6£t]s Ken d-rifjuas. 'Through ( = amid) glory and 
dishonour.' The meaning of Sid has changed ; in v. 7 it marks 
the instrument, in v. 8 it marks the state or condition. We 
must give So'£a its usual rendering ; ' honour and dishonour ' 
would be n/i.755 k. d-ri/uas (Rom. ix. 21; 2 Tim. ii. 20). The 
Apostle received So£a from God and from those whose hearts 
God touched, especially from his beloved Philippians and the 
Galatians, who would have dug out their eyes to serve him 
(Gal. iv. 14). And he received plenty of dn/ua from both Jews 
and heathen. In this clause the good member of the pair comes 
first, in the clauses which follow the contrary order is observed, 


so that the first two pairs are back to back, producing chiasmus, 
as in ii. 16, iv. 3, ix. 6, x. 11, xiii. 3. An open vowel after Sid 
is avoided by this means; otherwise we should have had Sid 
aTijatas or Sid e{xf>r}fiia<;. In the couplets with d)5, the order is 
determined by the sense ; and the point of the whole series is 
that the combination of all these contradictions in the same 
persons is evidence that they stand in a special relation to God. 

Sid 8uo-<}>T}fjuas Kal eu^fxtas. ' Through ( = amid) evil report 
and good report.' This is not a repetition of the preceding clause. 
That refers to personal treatment of the Apostle ; this refers to 
what was said behind his back. It was during his absence from 
Corinth that the worst things were said of him. The next two 
couplets give specimens of the Bva-<j>rjiiCa and ev^/xid. 

ws irXdroi. Ut seductores ; in rendering ws, Vulg. varies 
between ut, quasi, and sicut. These clauses with u>s look back to 
crwicrrdvovTes iavTovs is ©eou SiaKovoi, and the thought behind 
them is, ' Our Apostleship is carried on under these conditions.' 
Their being called -n-Xdvot. by their opponents told in their favour, 
for the calumnies of base persons are really recommendations.* 
The opprobrious word combines the idea of a deceiver and a 
tramp, an impostor who leads men astray and a vagabond who 
has no decent home. The idea of seducing prevails in N.T., 
the notion of vagrancy not appearing anywhere (1 Tim. iv. 1 ; 
2 Jn. 7; Mt. xxvii. 63; cf. 1 Jn. ii. 26; Jn. vii. 12): dX^eis 
shows that 'deceivers' is the meaning here. Kai = 'and yet' is 
freq., esp. in Jn. (i. 10, 11, etc.). 

9. ws dyfooujiei'oi Kal eiriyii'&jaKouei'oi. The present participles, 
of what is habitual and constant, continue throughout these two 
verses. ' As being known to none, and becoming known to all.'f 
'Ayvoovfxevoi. does not mean ' being misunderstood, misread,' but 
1 being nonentities, not worth knowing,' homines ignoti, obscuri, 
without proper credentials ; tois /*ev ydp rjaav yi/ajpi/toi ko.1 
TrepicnrovBaa-TOi, ol Se ovSk eiSeVai avTovs rj^iovv (Chrys.). This 
was the view that contemptuous critics took of them, while from 
those who could appreciate them, they got more and more 
recognition. See on 1 Cor. xiii. 12. 

With this couplet the an/xLa and Suo-^/na received from 
opponents almost passes out of view. The four remaining 
couplets consist, not of two contradictories, one of which is false, 
but of two contrasted ways of looking at facts, both of which, 
from different points of view, are true ; 8td twv ivavrdav tyjv /xt'av 
iKepaaev apeTrjv (Thdrt.). 

* " Their enemies did them service against their wills" (Chrys.). 
t Sicut qui ignoti et cogniti (Vulg. ) ; ut qui ignoramur et cognoscimur 


w9 &TTo0rT)o-Korres kcu iSou ^wfiei'. He is not thinking that his 
enemies regarded him as a doomed man over whose desperate 
condition they rejoiced ; he is taking his own point of view 

(iv. IO, II), iv 6ava.T0i<i 7roAAa/as (xi. 23), kolO' rj/xipav airo9vrj(TKwv 

(1 Cor. xv. 13). He is moribund through infirmities of body, 
and is exposed to afflictions and dangers which may any day 
prove fatal. But he bears within himself 'the life of Jesus' 
which continues to triumph over everything, and will continue to 
do so ( 1 Cor. i. 10). The change from the participle to ko.1 ISov 
£wfxev marks the exulting and confident feeling ; ISov as in v. 2 
and v. 17. 

(i>S Trai8eu6fj,€i'oi Kal jlltj Oai'aToufiei'oi.* He regards himself as 
requiring chastening. His enemies might regard it as a sign of 
Divine displeasure, but he knows that the chastening is a merci- 
ful dispensation of God. He is probably thinking of Ps. cxviii. 
1 7, 18, ovk a.Tro6avov[jiaL aXXa t^o-ofxai . . . TratSeucov €7ratS€i;crev fj.i 
Kuptos, kou tw davdno ov 7rapeScuKeV /xe. 

10. Here, at any rate, we may suppose that he has ceased to 
think of the accusations and insinuations of his adversaries, and 
is soaring above such distressing memories. It is somewhat far- 
fetched to see in these contrasts allusions to the sneer that he 
refused the maintenance of an Apostle, because he knew that he 
was not an Apostle, and that he took no pay for his teaching, 
because he knew that it was worthless. Yet B. Weiss thinks 
that Paul and his fellow- workers had been called "doleful, 
penniless paupers," — triibselige, armselige Habe?iichtse, — and that 
he is alluding to that here. There was plenty of Xvttt] in his life 
(Rom. ix. 2; Phil. ii. 27), and in spite of his labouring with his 
hands to support himself, he was sometimes in need of help and 
gratefully accepted it (xi. 9; Phil. iv. 15). 

del xatp " 1 " 6 ?- Rom. v. 3-5; 1 Thess. v. 16; Phil. ii. 18, iii. 
1, iv. 4. Such passages illustrate Jn. xv. 11, xvi. 33. The 
thought of God's goodness to him and to his converts is an 
inexhaustible source of joy. 

iroXXous irXouTi^ovTes.f Chrys. refers to the collections for the 
poor saints ; but they made no one rich, and such an explana- 
tion is almost a bathos in a paean of so lofty a strain. It was 
spiritual riches which he bestowed with such profusion ; of silver 
and gold he had little or none. "Apart from 1 Tim. vi. 17, no 
instance of -n-Xovros in the sense of material wealth is to be 
found in St Paul's writings. On the other hand, his figurative 
use of the word has no parallel in the rest of the Greek 

* ut castigali et non mortificati (Vulg.); ut coerciti et non mortificatt 

t multos locuplctantes (Vulg.) ; multos ditantes (Aug.). 


Bible. Of fourteen instances of it, five occur in Ephesians. 
In the use of the derivatives TrXovaios, ttXovo-lw;, TrXovrdv, 
TrAouri'^etv, the same rule will be found to hold, though there 
are some interesting exceptions" (J. A. Robinson on Eph. 
iii. 8). 

u»s fiT]8e»' Ixodes. 'As having nothing'; not even himself. 
In becoming the bondservant of Jesus Christ, he had given both 
soul and body to Him, and he was no longer his own (Rom. 
i. i ; i Cor. vi. 19). The /xrjSev may have its proper subjective 
force, but this view of the case is his own, not that of his 

k<x! irdfTa KaTe'xoi'Tes. The word-play between simple and 
compound resembles that in iii. 2 and iv. 8. The compound 
implies ' keeping fast hold upon, having as a secure possession.' 
See Milligan, Thessalonians, p. 155. Bachmann quotes Ephraim ; 
ovinia possidemus per potestatem, quain in coelis et in terris 
habemus. Meyer quotes Gcmara Nedarim, f. 40. 2 ; Recipimns 
non esse pauperem nisi in scientia. In Occide?ite seu terra Israel 
dixerunt ; in quo scientia est, is est tit il/e, in quo omnia sunt ; in 
quo ilia deesi, quid est in eo ? What the Stoic claimed for the 
wise man is true of the Christian ; 7rdVTa yap i[x!hv iariv (1 Cor. 
iii. 21). "The whole world is the wealth of the believer," says 
Aug. in reference to this verse (De Civ. Dei, xx. 7) ; and in 
showing that evil may have its uses in the world he says of these 
last four verses ; "As then these oppositions of contraries lend 
beauty to the language, so the beauty of the course of this 
world is achieved by the opposition of contraries, arranged, as it 
were, by an eloquence not of words, but of things" {ibid. ix. 18). 
Jerome says on v. 10; "The believer has a whole world of 
wealth; the unbeliever has not a single farthing " (Ep. liii. 11, 
in Migne, 10). 


Under the impulse of strong feeling the Apostle has been 
opening his heart with great frankness to his converts. He now 
asks them with great earnestness to make a similar return and to 
treat him with affectionate candour. The appeal is conveniently 
regarded as in two parts (vi. n-vii. 4, 5-16), but the first part is 
rather violently interrupted by the interjection of a sudden 
warning against heathen modes of life which are sure to pollute 
the lives of the Corinthians (vi. 14-vii. 1), and would impede 
their reconciliation with the Apostle. 


VI. 11-VII. 4. Appeal of the reconciled Apostle to the 


Let me have some return for my affectionate frankness. 
Close intimacy with heathen life is impossible for you. Open 
your hearts to me as mine is ever open to you. 

11 O men of Corinth, my lips are unlocked to tell you every- 
thing about myself; my heart stands wide open to receive you 
and your confidences. 12 There is no restraint in my feeling 
towards you ; the restraint is in your own affections. 13 But love 
should awaken love in return — I appeal to you as my children — 
let your hearts also be opened wide to receive me. 

Warning against Intimacy with Heathen (vi. X4~vii. i). 

14 Come not into close fellowship with unbelievers who are 
no fit yokefellows for you. For 

What partnership can righteousness have with iniquity? 
Or how can light associate with darkness? 

15 What concord can there be between Purity and pollution ? 

Or what portion can a believer have with an unbeliever? 

16 And what agreement can God's sanctuary have with idols ? 

For we, yes we, are a sanctuary of the living God. This is 
just what was meant when God said, 

I will dwell in them and move among them, 

And I will be their God, and they will be My people. 

17 Therefore come out from the midst of them, 

And sever yourselves, saith the Lord, 
And lay hold of nothing that is unclean : 
And I will give you a welcome. 

18 And I will be to you a Father, 

And ye shall be to Me sons and daughters, 
Saith the Lord Almighty. 

VIII. * Seeing then that the promises which we have are no 
less than these, beloved friends, let us cleanse ourselves from every- 
thing that can defile flesh or spirit, and secure perfect consecra- 
tion by reverence for God. 

2 Make room for me in your hearts. Why hesitate ? In no 
single instance have I wronged any one, ruined any one, taken 
advantage of any one. 3 It is not to put you in the wrong that I 


am saying this. Do not think that. In pleading my own cause 
I am blaming no one. I repeat what I said before ; ye are in 
my very heart, and you will ever be there whether I die or live. 
4 I feel the greatest confidence in you; I take the greatest pride 
in you. And so I am filled with comfort, I am overflowing with 
joy, for all the affliction that I have to bear. 

11. To o-Top.a rjp.wi' dyewyei'. ' Our mouth is open.' In late 
Greek dve'wya is almost always intransitive (Jn. i. • 5 1 ; 1 Cor. 
xvi. 9) with the meaning of standing open. In class. Grk. the 
perf. pass, is preferred (ii. 12 ; Rom. iii. 13). There is much 
discussion as to whether these words refer to what the Apostle 
has just said or to what he is about to say. The former is right, 
but the latter may be to some extent included. He is himself 
a little surprised at the fulness with which he has opened his 
heart to them. The phrase is not a mere Hebraistic pleonasm, 
used to indicate that what is said is important (Mt. v. 2, xiii. 35 ; 
Acts viii. 35, x. 34; etc.). It is a picturesque indication that 
there has been no reserve on his part. Lata dilectio cordis nostrt, 
quae vos omnes co?nplectitur, non sinit ut taceamus ea quae prosunt 
vobis. Profectus enim discipulorum aperit os magistri (Herveius). 
His delight in them does not allow him to be silent. 

KopiVGioi. Very rarely does the Apostle address his converts 
by name (Gal. iii. 1 ; Phil. iv. 5). Nowhere else does he do so 
to his Corinthians. The whole passage is affectionately tender. 

f) KapSia f]\xu)v TreTrXd-rurrai. Just as his lips have been 
unsealed to tell them everything about himself and his office, so 
his 'heart has been set at liberty' (Ps. cxix. 32) to take all of 
them in. It has been expanded and stands wide open to receive 
them. Heat, as Chrysostom remarks, makes things expand, and 
warm affection makes his heart expand. Their hearts are so 
contracted that there is no room in them for him. Ab ore ad cor 
concludere debebant (Beng.). In his heart their misconduct is 
forgotten; their amendment and progress cancels all that, and 
sorrow is turned into joy (vii. 2-4). 

12. ou o-Teroxwpei(T0e iv Tjp.Ti'. ' There is no restraint on my 
side ; but whatever restraint there is is in your hearts.' He had 
perhaps been accused of being close and reserved. Like the 
rapid changes of expression in vv. 14-16, the change from his 
KapSia to their cnrXdyxva- is made to avoid repetition of the same 
word. In both cases the seat of the affections is meant 
1 Bowels ' is an unfortunate rendering ; the word means the upper 
part of the intestines, heart, liver, lungs, etc. " Theophilus (ad 
Autol. ii. 10, 22) uses <77rA.dy^va and KapSta as convertible 
terms" (Lightfoot on Phil. i. 8). Many things cause the heart 


to close against others, meanness, suspicion, resentment for 
supposed injury. Are they quite free from all these things? 
i Jn. iii. 17. 

13. tx]v 8e auTTji' dn-ijjuaQiac. In dictating he omits to supply 
a verb to govern this ace. Lit. ' But as the same requital,' i.e. 
' In order to give me an exact equivalent for what I give you, 
repay open heart with open heart.' 'AvTi/xio-Oia occurs Rom. 
i. 27, but nowhere else in Bibl. Grk. Various ways are 
suggested of explaining the irregular construction, but the 
meaning is the same however we regard it. The simplest 
explanation is that, after the affectionate parenthesis <I>s Te'/cvois 
Ae'yw, he forgets the opening construction. See Cornely, ad loc. ; 
Blass, § 34. 3, 6. 

ws TtVi/ois Xe'yu. ' I am speaking as to my children ' ; not ' as 
to children,' implying that they are still young in the faith and 
need to be fed with milk (v>iirioi<s, 1 Cor. iii. 1); still less 'as the 
children say,' which the Greek cannot mean. In neither case 
would T€/cva be used, but it is St Paul's usual word in speaking 
of or to his spiritual children; 1 Cor. iv. 14, 17; Gal. iv. 19; 
1 Tim. i. 2, 18; etc. By inserting these words he mitigates the 
severity of oT-evo^wpeto-^e. It is not a large demand, if a father 
claims affection from his children. 

•n-\aTuV0T)Te Kal ujxeis. ' Do you also open your hearts wide ' ; 
looking back to v. 11. The Corinthians must surely make some 
response to his open-hearted statement ; tov avrov TrXaTva/xov <Ls 
a.vTLjXLa6iav Tr\a.Tvv6r]Te. " He asks for the enlargement of their 
heart towards him ; which was to be shown in separation from 
the world " (F. W. Robertson). 

VI. 14-VII. 1. This strongly worded admonition to make no 
compromise with heathenism comes in so abruptly here that a 
number of critics suppose that it is a fragment of another letter, 
and some maintain that the fragment is not by St Paul. We 
may set aside the latter hypothesis with confidence. The fact 
that €Tepot,vyeo), fieroxr}, (rvya^wv^ens, crvvKadeo-L?, BeXt'ap, and 
/xoXvct/jlos are found nowhere else in N.T. counts for very little. 
There are more than three dozen of such words in each of the 
three Epistles, Ephesians, Colossians, and Philippians, and here 
these unusual words are needed by the subject. There is no 
inconsistency between this severe injunction and 1 Cor. v. 9 f., 
x. 2 7f. What is discouraged here is something much more 
intimate than accepting a heathen's invitation to dinner. And 
there is nothing un-Pauline in 'defilement of flesh and spirit.' 
It is true that he often treats the flesh as the sphere of sin, and 
the spirit as its opponent. But here he is using popular 
language, in which 'flesh and spirit' sum up the totality of 


human nature. What stains the whole man is an abomination 
to be avoided.* 

There is more to be said for the hypothesis that we have here 
a fragment of another of the Apostle's letters, and probably the 
one mentioned 1 Cor. v. 9. These verses might easily form 
part of the one there described. Moreover, if we abstract the 
passage, vii. 2 fits on to vi. 13 admirably; it is obviously a 
continuation, either immediate or by resumption, of the same 
topic. Nevertheless, this attractive hypothesis is a violent one.f 
There is no evidence in MS., or version, or quotation, that any 
copy of the Epistle ever lacked this passage. If it belonged 
originally to another Epistle, how did it come to be inserted 
here, if not in the letter dictated by St Paul, in one of the 
earliest copies made from it? An interpolator would have 
chosen a more suitable place. The interpolation, if it be one, 
might possibly be due to accident, the careless insertion of a leaf 
from one MS. among the leaves of another. But we require 
very strong internal evidence to justify the use of such an 
explanation; and on this point opinions differ. J Some critics 
regard the disconnexion with the context so glaring, and the 
connexion of vi. 13 with vii. 2 so obvious, that the theory of 
insertion, either deliberate or accidental, is demonstrated. 
Others contend that the connexion with the context is natural 
and close. There is perhaps some exaggeration in both these 
views. It is not incredible that in the middle of his appeal for 
mutual frankness and affection, and after his declaration that the 
cramping constraint is all on their side, he should dart off to one 
main cause of that constraint, viz. their compromising attitude 
towards anti-Christian influences. Having relieved his mind of 
this distressing subject, he returns at once to his tender appeal. 
On the whole, this view seems better than the hypothesis of 
interpolation. But this is one of the many places in 2 Cor. in 
which our ignorance of the state of things at Corinth renders 
certainty unattainable. We do not know to what kind of 

* " It is an error to suppose that Paul makes a rigorous distinction 
between the <rdp£ and the a-Q/xa and its members in relation to the seat of 
sin" (O. Cone, Paul, p. 228). 

t A. Sabatier, who rejects the less violent hypothesis that x.-xiii. is part 
of another letter, accepts this hypothesis as correct {The Apostle Paul, 
p. 177 n.). 

% Lietzmann warns us against resorting to the hypothesis of die von der 
Kritik aufgewirbelten ' fiiegenden Bliitter,' die sick an verschiedenen Stellen 
des N. T. so verwunderliche Ruheplatze ausgesucht haben solicit. Bousset 
says that reasons for excising the passage are worthy of consideration but not 
convincing, nicht durchschlagend. Calvin remarks that the Apostle, having 
regained his hold over his converts, hastens to warn them of a perilous evil. 
Perhaps it was an evil which had led to the temporary breach between 
him and his converts. 


intimacy with heathen acquaintances and customs the Apostle is 
alluding. But a sudden digression for a few minutes is more 
probable than a long pause.* In the latter case the return to 
v. 13 in vii. 2 would be less probable. See Meyer or Klopper, 
ad be. ; Zahn, Intr. i. p. 349. 

14. jit] yiveaQe eTepo^uyourres aTriorois. Here, although 
perhaps not in iv. 4, we shall be right in confining aino-Toi to 
those who do not believe the Gospel, the unconverted heathen 
(1 Cor. vi. 6, vii. 12 ff., x. 27, xiv. 22 ff.). The false apostles are 
certainly not included, and the dat. does not mean 'to please 
unbelievers.' And the metaphor in erepo^uyowTes doubtless 
comes from Deut. xxii. 10, where, among other unnatural com- 
binations, ploughing with an ox and an ass harnessed together is 
prohibited. Species are made distinct by God, and man ought 
not to join together what He has put asunder. Cf. Lev. xix. 19. 
There may also be some allusion to Deut. xi. 16, where for 
' lest thy heart be deceived ' LXX has //.r) -n-Xarwdfj 17 K<xp$ia crov, 
and what follows is a warning against idolatry, Xarpevctv 6eo7s 
€Te'poi9, 'lest thy heart be enlarged so as to embrace heathenism/ 
But the other allusion is manifest. ' Heathen belong to one 
species, Christians to quite another, and it is against nature that 
Christians should be yokefellows with them. They will not 
walk as Christians do, and Christians must not walk in their 
ways.'f The meaning is not to be confined to mixed marriages; 
intimate combinations of other kinds are condemned. But with 
characteristic tenderness and tact St Paul does not assert that 
such things have taken place. He says, ' Become not incon- 
gruously yoked with unbelievers ' ; such things may happen if 
they are not warned. Even the RV. does not preserve the 
important yiVecr#e. There is much softening in ' Do not let 
yourselves become.' Cf. [M] ovv ylveaOe avvfxeToxoL avrcov (Eph. 
v. 7). See Blass, § 37. 6, § 62. 3. The idea of £vyo's = ' balance ' 
and of scales unfairly tipped is certainly not in the phrase, 
although Theophylact takes it so ; ' be not too much inclined 
to the heathen.' St Paul had said that he himself was 
willing to behave as a heathen to heathen (1 Cor. ix. 21 ; cf. 
Gal. ii. 19), but not in the way of sharing or condoning their 

tis yap f 167 ^ 1 ! >' The absolute incongruity between Christians 
and pagans is emphasized by quickly delivered argumentative 

* Wir haben uns hinter v. 13 eine lange Pause im Dictieren zu denken 

t Cf. Plautus, Aulularia, II. ii. 51 f., Nunc si filiam locassim tneam tibi, 
in mentem vevit, Te bove?n esse, et me esse asellum : ubi tecum conjunctus 
siew, Ubi onus nequcam ferre parilcr, jaccam ego asinus in Into ; Tu me bos 
haua magis respicias. Here the dat. implies that the diriaroi will dominate. 


questions, as in xii. 17, 18. They are illustrations of the 
Apostle's rhetorical power. The first four questions are in pairs ; 
the last being a conclusion to the series and a premiss for what 
follows. The great variety of expression is no doubt studied, 
and it is effective. But inferior MSS. here and there spoil the 
effect by assimilating the constructions. ' For what partnership 
has righteousness with lawlessness, or what association can there 
be between light and darkness ? ' The change from //.eroxv to 
Koivwvia is for the sake of change, and we need not look to any 
important difference of meaning, as that fxeroxv implies that each 
partner has a share, e.g. of the profits, whereas every member of 
a society enjoys the whole of what is koivov, as the use of a park 
or building. 

Here, as in v. 8 ('honour and dishonour'), AV. makes a 
verbal antithesis which does not exist in the Greek. We require 
1 righteousness with lawlessness ' (2 Thess. ii. 7 ; 1 Jn. iii. 4) or 
'with iniquity' (Rom. iv. 7, vi. 19). Although ^roxq is a 
hapaxleg., /tETe'^w occurs five times in 1 Cor. 

Trpos ctkotos. We have four different constructions in the 
five sentences, all for the sake of variety ; two datives, dat. 
followed by irpos, gen. followed by -n-po?, dat. followed by /x«t<£. 
The Trpos after koivwv. is late Greek ; cf>vaiKiq Icttlv fj/uv Kowwvia 
7rpos dA.A17A.ous (Epict. Dis. ii. 20) ; cf. Ecclus. xiii. 3. Light and 
darkness as a spiritual antithesis is freq. in N.T. and elsewhere 
(Rom. xiii. 12 ; Eph. v. 8 ; 1 Jn. ii. 9 ; Acts xxvi. 18 ; Is. xlii. 16 ; 
etc.). In N.T., o-kotos is neuter. 

15. Tts $€ aup,<|>wn(]<Tis Xpiorou irpos BeAiap ; In the first couplet 
of questions we have abstract terms, in the second, concrete; 
' And what concord is there of Christ with Belial ? ' The Head 
of the Heavenly society is opposed to the Head of the infernal 
kingdom, the Pattern of perfect purity to the representative of 
devilish abominations. But is it possible that ' Beliar ' here is 
Antichrist? 'What harmony can there be of Christ with Anti- 
christ ? ' The antithesis is attractive rather than probable ; but 
Bousset treats it as certain, and Antichrist is here represented as 
the devil incarnate. The Sun of righteousness and the Prince 
of darkness is the probable antithesis. In O.T. ' Belial ' is often 
mentioned as meaning ' worthlessness,' ' ruin,' ' desperate wicked- 
ness.' Later, 'Belial' or 'Beliar' or 'Berial' comes to be a 
name for Satan or some Satanic power. In the Book of Jubilees 
(i. 20) Moses prays, " Create in Thy people an upright spirit, 
and let not the spirit of Beliar rule over them to accuse them 
before Thee." In the Testaments it is connected with various 
evil spirits, e.g. of impurity \Reub. iv. 11, vi. 3 ; Sim. v. 3), wrath 
{Dan i. 7, 8), and so forth. " Choose, therefore, for yourselves 


either the light or the darkness, either the law of the Lord or the 
works of Beliar " {Levi xix. i). 

The interchange of X and p is not uncommon ; e.g. KXlfiavos and icpl- 
fiavos, y\<J)(T(ra\yos and y\tl>o~aapyos. Alcibiades had a lisp which turned 
p into X, saying 6Xas for opas, /c6\a£ for Kopat, k.t.X. (Aristoph. Vesp. 45). 
' Inferior texts here have BeXfaX, or BeMa^, or BeXia/3 : Vulg. Belial. In 
LXX it is translated dvo/nrnna, dvo/xta, air out aula., irapdvofxos, and in the A 
text dcre/37;j. For the Beliar myth see Charles, Ascension of Isaiah, pp. 
livf. Xpio-rou (X B C P, defCopt.) is to be preferred to Xpiory (DEG 
K L, g Syrr. ). Note that d e differ from D E. 

tis fxepis tticttw |ict& dmorou ; Here we have a verbal anti- 
thesis, and AV. obliterates it; 'he that believeth with an infidel? 
Better, ' What portion hath a believer with an unbeliever ? ' (RV.). 
Comp. 1 Tim. v. 16 and Acts xvi. 1 with Jn. xx. 27. Mepis 
suggests that there is a whole to be shared (Acts viii. 21). Cf. 
/xeTCL ixofxpiv ttjv /tept'Sa aov erCdeis (Ps. xlix. [1.] 18). It is certain 
that tticttw does not mean ' one who is faithful,' viz. God ; 7tio-tos 
KvpLos lv Tots Xdyot? avTov. Fidelis Dominus in omnibus verbis suis 
(Ps. cxliv. [v.] 13).* 

16. tis Se (TUCKaTaOeoris rau ©eou fieTa eiSwXwy ; In this final 
question, which has no pair, there is no new construction ; 
' What agreement hath God's sanctuary with idols ? ' The noun 
is a technical term with the Stoics ; it is not found elsewhere 
in Bibl. Grk., but i< o-wicaTafJecrews, " according to agreement " 
Occurs in papyri. Cf. ov o-WKaraOrjcrr] fxera rov olSlkov (Ex. 
xxiii. 1). Manasseh had put a graven image of Ashera in the 
house of the Lord, and Josiah removed and burnt it (2 Kings 
xxi. 7, xxiii. 6). Ezekiel tells of other abominations (viii. 3-18), 
for which unsparing punishments were inflicted by God. The 
history of Israel had shown with terrible distinctness that God 
allowed no agreement between His house and idols. This 
shows that vaov is not to be understood before dSwXwv, as if the 
opposition was between the temple of God and a temple of idols. 
The absolute incongruity is between God's sanctuary, in which 
not even an image of Himself might be put up, and images of 
false gods ; also perhaps between dead idols and the temple of 
the living God. By the introduction of idols the temple ceases 
to be a temple of God. 

Tjjxcts y<*P va °s 0eo " to'M-cf £wrn>s. ' The Most High dwelleth 
not in temples made with hands ' (Acts vii. 48, xvii. 24). The 
only suitable temple of the living God is the souls of living 
beings who can adore and love Him. 'And such are we.' The 
17/xets (see crit. note) is very emphatic. The Christian Church, 

* "There is much danger in applying this law. It is perilous when men 
begin to decide who are believers and who not by party badges" (F. W. 


rather than the individual Christian (i Cor. vi. 19), is here 
regarded as God's sanctuary. What is it about us that is divine? 
asks Seneca ; Quaerendum est quod non fiat in dies deterius, cui 
non possit obstari. Quid hoc est ? animus ; sed hie rectus, bonus, 
magnus. Quid aliud voces hunc, quam Deum in humano corpore 
hospitantem? Subsilire in coelum ex angulo licet; exsurge modo } 
et te quoque dignum finge Deo (Ep. xxxi. 9, 10). Calvin states 
the same fact somewhat differently ; In Deo hoc speciale est, qui 
quemcunque locum dignatur sua praesentia, etiam sanctificat. As 
in Jn. ii. 21, 6 vaos rov cra>//.aTos avrov, we have vao? rather than 
Upov, when human beings are spoken of as shrines for God to 
dwell in. The vao's was the most sacred part of the Upov, which 
included buildings for other uses than that of worship and also 
open spaces. Cf. 1 Cor. iii. 16, 17, vi. 19; Eph. ii. 21. Nads 
is from vaUiv, 'to dwell.' 

We ought certainly to read wets . . . icr/xiv (N* B D* L P 17, 67**, 
d e Copt. Aeth. ) rather than v/ids . . . ia T e (K 3 CD 3 EFG K, Vulg. 
Syrr. Arm.), which probably comes from I Cor. iii. 16. The confusion 
between Pixels and v/xeis in MSS. is freq. Cf. vii. 12, viii. 8, 19; I Cor. 
vii. 15. N* has vaol, an obvious correction. 

Ka0us earey 6 0e6s. We have first a paraphrase and then a 
quotation of the LXX of Lev. xxvi. 11, 12, with a mixture of 
other passages. Cf. Is. Hi. 11 ; Ezek. xx. 34, xxxvii. 27 ; 2 Sam. 
vii. 14 ; but the remarkable tvoi/ajcra) ev aurots is not in any of 
them. It is much stronger than ' walk among them ' or ' taber- 
nacle among them.' The introductory words show in each case 
what passage the Apostle has in his mind. KaOws elirev 6 ©cos 
points to Lev. xxvi. 12, Ae'yei Ku'ptos to Is. Iii. 5 or Ezek. xx. 33 
or xxxvii. 21, and Ae'yei Kvpios -n-avTOKpaTuip to 2 Sam. vii. 8. Cf. 
Ezek. xi. 17 ; Zeph. iii. 20 ; Zech. x. 8. 

iced eo-ofxai auTwc Oeds. This privilege depends upon their 
willingness to accept Him ; Deus natura onmium est, voluntate 
paucorum (Pseudo-Primasius). 

17. 810 e|e'X0aTe. The Sid introduces the practical conclusion 
to be drawn from vv. 14-16, and to make it as impressive as 
possible it is expressed in language taken from the utterances of 
Jehovah in O.T. The withdrawal is to be moral and spiritual, 
not local; it is not meant that Christians are to migrate from 
heathen cities. And the aor. imperat. shows that the with- 
drawal is to be immediate and decisive, as in Rev. xviii. 4, where 
Swete remarks that " the cry efeAfle, i&XOere, rings through the 
Hebrew history ; in the call of Abram, in the rescue of Lot, in 
the Exodus, in the call to depart from the neighbourhood of the 
tents of Dathan and Abiram, etc." Cf. Eph. v. n; 1 Tim. 
v. 22. See Index IV. 



dica0apTou p) a-rrr€a0€. In Heb. it is an unclean person. 
Here the adj. may be masc. or neut. Luther, AV., RV. follow 
Chrys. in regarding it as neut. 

€io-Se'£oficu upas. ' Will receive you with favour? The com- 
pound verb is found in LXX, esp. of God's promises, but no- 
where else in N.T. St Luke, both in Gospel and Acts, often has 
air oSixo/xat. in the same sense = ' welcome.' 

18. coro/icu ujiiK €is. This may mean ' I will become to you ' 
(Mt. xix. 5 ; Eph. v. 31); but more probably the €19 means 'for, 
to serve as (Heb. i. 5, viii. 10 ; Eph. i. 12) father.' There is to 
be a family likeness and family affection between God and them. 
Cf. Jubilees i. 24. They have been called out of their original 
home, and their new one will more than compensate them. If 
the friendship of the world means enmity with God (Jas. iv. 4), 
the only N.T. passage in which tf>i\£a occurs, — it is likely to be 
true that separation from the world will lead to friendship with 
God. The second Isaiah (xliii. 6), with characteristic insight, 
penetrates to the truth that there are daughters of God as well as 
sons of God. But this truth was only dimly recognized until 
Christianity raised woman from the degradation into which she 
had been thrust, not only in heathen cities, like Corinth, but 
even among the Chosen People. With the wording comp. 
2 Sam. vii. 14. 

Xe'yei Ko'pio? Ilan-oKpaTup. 'Saith the Lord All-Ruler' or 
' All-sovereign.' See Swete on Rev. i. 8, the only other book in 
N.T. in which Tra.vTOKpa.Twp occurs. There and in O.T. it is 
freq. It indicates One who rules over all rather than One who 
is able do all things, 6 7ravToSwa/*os (Wisd. vii. 23, xi. 17, xviii. 15). 
The promises of such a Potentate are no mean thing, and they 
are sure to be fulfilled. 

VII. 1. Here again, as between i. and ii., and between iii. 
and iv., and between iv. and v., and between v. and vi., the 
division between the chapters is not well made. As the ovv 
shows, vii. 1 belongs closely to what precedes. It closes the 
digression which warns the Corinthians against fellowship with 
heathen modes of life ; and then we have a resumption of the 
tender appeal in which his beloved converts are implored to 
make some response to the frankness with which he has opened 
his heart to them. 

1. TauTas oSV Ixodes t&s i-nayyekias. Tairras comes first with 
emphasis; 'These, then, being the promises which we have.' 
They are so incalculably precious, and so sure to be fulfilled if 
they are properly met. 

dyairrjToi. With us this affectionate address has become 


almost a canting expression in sermons, and it means very little. 
But the Apostle is not prodigal in his use of it, and with him it 
means a great deal ; twice in i Cor. (x. 14, xv. 58), once again in 
2 Cor. (xii. 19); twice in Phil. (ii. 12, iv. 1); once in Rom. (xii. 19). 

Ka0apiCTW|jL6i/ eauTous. He again softens the severity of his 
words, as in ws tckvois \£yu (v. 13); this time by including him- 
self among those who need cleansing. Baptism cannot be 
repeated, and earnest Christians would not need a repetition of 
it; but all in their walk through life become soiled and need 
frequent cleansing (Jn. xiii. 10). He who looks for a fulfilment 
of the gracious promises must strive to be KaOapbs oXos. If we 
are to have God to dwell in us, we must purify the dwelling. If 
we are to have Him as a Father, we must strive to acquire some 
likeness to Him. The verb is not peculiar to Bibl. Grk. It 
occurs in Josephus {Ant. xi. v. 4) and is found in inscriptions 
(followed by S.tt6, as here and Heb. ix. 14) in much the same 
sense as in this verse, of the necessity for purification before 
entering a holy place. Deissmann, Bib. St. p. 216. Cf. 6.tto 
7racr^s d/xapnas KaOapicrov KapSiav (Ecclus. xxxviii. 10). Index IV. 

diro ■n-ai'Tos jjlo\uct/jioO. ' From every kind of defilement.' 
The noun implies an evil stain, foul pollution ; in LXX in 
connexion with idolatry (1 Esdr. viii. 80 [84]; 2 Mace. v. 27; 
cf. Jer. xxiii. 15). In the Testaments (Symeon ii. 13) we have 
aTTocrx^ o-to 7ravi-os fxoXvo-fxov. On the date of the Testaments 
see Lightfoot, Galatians, p. 320. Here there may be a reference 
to ttjv twv ctSwAwv KOLvwvLav, but not to that exclusively. The 
noun occurs nowhere else, but fxoXvvu is freq. in O.T. and N.T. 
Trench, Syn. § xxxi. ; VVetst. ad loc. 

aapKos kch weujia-ros. Man may be defiled in either flesh or 
spirit, and in either case there must be cleansing. The two 
together sum up human nature, and the intercommunion of the 
parts is so close, that when either is soiled the whole is soiled. 
St Paul is using popular language covering the material and 
immaterial elements in man, and it is manifest that he is not 
under the influence of the Gnostic doctrine that everything 
material is ipso facto evil. He says that the flesh must be 
cleansed from every kind of pollution. Gnostics maintained 
that it was as impossible to cleanse flesh as to cleanse filth. In 
either case the only remedy was to get rid of the unclean matter. 
See P. Gardner, Religious Experience of St Paul, p. 165. He 
quotes Reitzenstein ; " All the different shades of meaning 
which weD/iAa has in Paul's writings may be found in the magic 
papyri. . . . Paul has not developed for himself a peculiar 
psychology, and a mystic way of speaking in accordance with 
it, but speaks in the Greek of his time" (Die Hellenislischen 
Mysterienreligionen, pp. 42, 137). Epictetus (Dis. ii. 3) has a 


similar thought ; "When you are conversing with others, know 
you not that you are exercising God ? Unhappy man, you carry 
God about with you, and know it not. You carry Him within 
you, and perceive not that you are polluting (/xoXvvwv) Him with 
unclean thoughts and filthy acts. If an image of God were 
present, you would not dare to do any of the things which you 
do. But when God Himself is present within and sees all, you 
are not ashamed of thinking such things and doing such things, 
ignorant as you are of your own nature and subject to the anger 
of God." Nestle's proposal to take only crap/co's with /xoXvo-pov 
and transfer kcu irve.vp.aro<; to ayiwavv-qv need not be more than 
mentioned.* The latter constr. is intolerable. With p.oX. 
crapKOS k. irv^vjiaTO'i comp. ayia tu awfxaTL k. to Trvz.vp.aTi (i Cor. 
vii. 34). It is uncritical dogmatism to assert that St Paul would 
never have used such an expression as ' defilement of flesh and 
spirit' See on v. 5. 

e-iriTeXourres dyicoowY]^ The mere cleansing oneself from 
defilement is not enough. It is right that the unclean spirit 
should be cast out ; but the place which he has occupied must 
be filled with such things as will make it impossible for him to 
return ; there must be a process of self-consecration always 
going on. This is the meaning of ' bringing to completeness 
(viii. 6, 11; Phil. i. 6) a state of holiness' (1 Thess. iii. 13; 
Rom. i. 4). Cf. Zech. iv. 9. In LXX, dyiwo-wi; is used 
generally of God. In the Testaments (Levi xviii. n) we are 
told that the saints who enter Paradise will eat from the tree of 
life, /cat Trvev/JLO. ayLwavvrjs eo~Tai i-rr' airois. Here it is the divine 
quality of dyiwo-wr? that fits Christians to become God's sanctuary 
and to have Him as their Father. 

iv <|>6f3a> 06oG. Not in the fear or love of men. The iv may 
mark either the sphere in which the perfecting of holiness takes 
place or the means by which it is accomplished ; cf. iv rfj 
■n-apovaia, iv rfj TrapaKXyjaei (v. 7). 'The fear of God' or 'the 
fear of the Lord ' is repeatedly given in O.T. as the principle of 
a good life; so esp. in Psalms (ii. 11, v. 7, etc.) and Proverbs 
(i. 7, 29, viii. 13, etc.). It is the whole duty of man (Eccles. 
xii. 13). "He who tries to do any good thing without the fear 
of the Lord," says Herveius, "is a proud man." Cf. v. n j 
Rom. iii. 18; Acts ix. 31, x. 2, 35. In Eph. v. 21 what is said 
in O.T. of Jehovah is in a remarkable way transferred to Christ, 

iv (j)6/3u) XpiCTTOV. 

2-4. The return to the affectionate appeal in vi. n-13 is 
as sudden as the digression at vi. 14. He has concluded the 

* The proposal lias been anticipated by Augustine (De Doc. Chris, iii. 2), 
who points it out as possible, but does not adopt it. 


warning against what would hinder complete reconciliation and 
gladly resumes tender language. XcDprja-are ?;/xas goes back at 
once to irXaTvvOrjTe kolI vfj.el<;. It shows still more clearly what 
he means by their opening wide their hearts ; they are to open 
them to him. 

2. XwprjactTC rjfjias. Capite nos (Vulg.), Accipite nos (Beza). 
The latter is better, but does not give the exact sense. . ' Make 
room for us ' in your hearts is the meaning. 'Not all men have 
room for the saying,' that it is not good to marry (Mt. xix. n). 
Cf. Mk. ii. 2, and ovk i^wpei avrovs 7] yrj /caTOiKeiv ayxa (Gen. 
xiii. 6).* The asyndeton throughout these verses is expressive 
of the eagerness with which he dictates the telling sentences. 
He rapidly negatives reasons which might make them hesitate to 
open their hearts to take him in. 

ouSeVa TjSiKrjo-oifj.ei'. The ovSiva comes first in each case with 
emphasis, and the aorists imply that there has not been a single 
case in which he has wronged, ruined, defrauded, any of them. 
Evidently he had been accused or suspected of something of the 
kind; but here again we are in ignorance as to the facts to 

which he alludes. Cf. iv. 2 and ovk ck Tr\dvr]<; ouSe i£ a.Ka6apo-ta<s 

oioe iv SdAo) (1 Thess. ii. 3). We have a similar protest in the 
Apostle's speech at Miletus (Acts xx. 26, 27); cf. 1 Sam. xii. 3 ; 
Num. xvi. 15. Those who think it improbable that he is 
alluding to charges actually made by the Corinthians take the 
words as playfully ironical, or as a hit at the Judaizing teachers, 
who had injured the Corinthians with their corrupt doctrine and 
perhaps lived in Corinth at their expense. See on iv. 2. 

ouSeVa e<}>0eipafjiei'. ' We ruined no one,' a vague expression, 
which we cannot define with certainty. It may refer to money, 
or morals, or doctrine. Calvin is too definite ; corruptela quae 
fit per falsam doctrinatn, which may or may not be right. He 
might be said to have ruined people who had had to abandon 
lucrative but unchristian pursuits. The Judaizers declared that 
his doctrine of Christian freedom was thoroughly immoral ; and 
some of his disciples, who misinterpreted his teaching, gave the 
freedom an unchristian and immoral meaning. 

ouSeW £7rX€oi'eKTr)crajjt,e!/. ' We took advantage of no one.' 
'Defrauded' (AV.) is too definite, as implying financial dis- 
honesty ; and we are not sure that there is any such allusion in 
any of the three verbs. If x.-xiii. is part of a letter written 

* Several of the Latin commentators, misled by Capite nos, take this as 
meaning mente capite, intelligite, ' Consider what I say.' Others interpret, 
'Consider me, take me as an example.' The Greek cannot mean this. 
T heopbylact is right ; B^acrde rnxas TrXariws Kal /at] <TTevoxopu>/J.e6a iv v/mv. 
Bengel expands 7;yuas thus ; vestri amantes, vestra causa laetantes. 


before this letter, cVXcoveKTijcra/xev may refer to xii. 17, 18. 
Excepting the difficult passage 1 Thess. iv. 6, the verb is peculiar 
to 2 Cor. in N.T., and in LXX it is rare ; irAeove^ia is more freq. 
in both LXX and N.T. See Trench, Syn. § xxiv. With the 
rhetorical repetition of ovSiva comp. that of /cdyw in xi. 22, and 
of fir] 7ravTes (seven times in all) in 1 Cor. xii. 29, 30. 

3. irp&s KdTclKpurii' ou Xe'yw. ' It is not for condemnation that 
I am saying this.' He does not wish to find fault with any one ; 
they must not think that; he is merely defending himself. This 
seems to show that in v. 2 he is answering accusations which 
had actually been made, either by some Corinthians or the false 
teachers. In spite of what people say of him, there is no reason 
why they should not open their hearts to take him in. Cf. 77730s 
ivTpotrvjv vfuv A.eyw (i Cor. vi. 5)- 

irpoeipY]Ka yap. He has not said these words before or any- 
thing that is exactly equivalent to them; indeed in iv. 12 he has 
said what is very different. But he has spoken of the bonds of 
affection which bind him to them, and he now speaks of these 
ties in a very emphatic way. Cf. xiii. 2 ; Gal. i. 9 ; 3 Mace. 

iv reus xapSiats f\u.tx)v care els to crvvairoQave.iv kcu cuv^e. 'Ye 
are in our hearts to share death and to share life'; i.e. 'You 
are in our hearts, whether we die or live.' The general meaning 
is clear enough, but, as in Rom. viii. 39, there is a rush of 
emotion which does not allow the Apostle to choose his words 
carefully. He probably means that neither death nor any 
experience in life can extinguish his affection for them ; but he 
may mean that he is ready to share either death or life with 
them. He will (if need be) die with them, and he cannot live 
without them. This is the mark of a good shepherd (Jn. x. 12). 
Perfecta charitas profectuni vel detrimentutn aliomm credit esse 
suum (Herveius). It is evident that here St Paul is including 
his colleagues in the fjfxuv. In v. 2, as in vv. n, 12, Timothy 
and others may have dropped out of sight, but here, if rjfxwv 
meant himself only, he would have said iv 177 KapSia. See on 
iii. 2, and Lightfoot on 1 Thess. ii. 4, where we have a similar 
case. Probably he includes others in all four verses. The 
interchanges between ' I ' and ' we ' in vv. 2 to 4 are quite 
intelligible. We cannot infer from ' dying ' preceding ' living ' 
that dying with Christ in faith in order to live with Him is 
meant (v. 15). The reason for putting 'dying' first is not clear; 
but it may point to his being iv Oavdrois 7roAA<x/as (xi. 23). In 
Athenaeus, vi. 249 (quoted by Wetstein), the more usual order is 
observed ; tovtovs 8' ol fiao-iXeis c^ovtri o-v^wvTas Kal awaTrodvrj- 


irpbs tear, ov \iyu (X B C P) rather than ov jrpii /car. \tyuy (D E F G K L), 
which is an obvious correction. B omits iart. ffw^iju (NB'CDEFG) 
rather than vvfiv (B 3 K L P). 

4. iroXXi] p.ot irapprjo-ia irpos k.t.X. Note the alliteration, 
of which St Paul is fond, esp. with the letter it. It is probable 
that Trapprjo-La. here means 'confidence' (i Tim. iii. 13; Heb. 
x. 19), rather than 'boldness of speech' (iii. 2). 'Great is my 
confidence respecting you ; great is my glorying on your behalf.' * 
The confidence is the result of their obedience and affection as 
reported by Titus, and this feeling of confidence manifests itself 
in glorying. He is very proud of them and is not afraid to say 
so, for they will not come short of his praise. He has told them 
(v. 12) that they ought to glory on behalf of their teachers, and 
he tells them (here and viii. 24) that he is ready to glory 
respecting his converts. Kai^cris (see on i. 12), 7rapa/c\?7o-6s 
(see on i. 3), and 8\Cif/is (see on i. 4) are specially freq. in this 
Epistle, and the frequency should be marked in translation. 

■7r€ir\TJpw|j(,cH Ttj TrapaK\Y)aet. ' I am filled with the comfort ' ; 
' I was then and I am still ' (perf.). The usual constr. is with 
the gen. (Acts ii. 28, xiii. 52; Rom. xv. 13; etc.); but the dat. 
occurs in late Greek ; 6 /SacriXeis x a P£ ireirXrjpat/jiivos (3 Mace, 
iv. 16). Cf. 2 Mace. vi. 5, vii. 21 ; Rom. i. 29. tt] x a P?- ' I am overflowing with the joy.' 
A double climax; 'overflowing' is more than 'filled,' and 'joy' 
is more than ' comfort.' The article should probably be trans- 
lated ; it points to the comfort and the joy caused by the report 
brought by Titus. The compound verb is very rare ; only here 
and Rom. v. 20 ; not in LXX. We have similar alliterations 
with tt in viii. 22, ix. 5, 8, xiii. 2. 

em. Trdcrr) ttj 0Xi\J»ei. ' Amid all my affliction.' The hri does 
not mean that the affliction was the basis of the comfort and joy, 
a paradox (xii. 10) which here would have no point; but that, in 
all his great trouble, he was able to have abundant comfort and 
joy. He at once goes on to explain the cause ot this happiness. 

En qualiter affectos esse omnes pastores conveniat (Calvin). 

VII. 5-16. The Reconciliation completed. 

This part of the chapter is all of one piece ; but for con- 
venience we may divide it into three, according to the subject 
matter. The Apostle speaks first of his longing for the arrival 
of Titus, and of his relief at the tidings which he brought (5-7), 
especially about the great offender and the Apostle's painful 


Cf. T6re aT^atrai iv irapprjixlo. voXKy 6 dUaios (Wisd. v. 1): Xd/3eTe 
<TKv\a Kal /J.CTO. vapprjaias (1 Mace. iv. 18) : also Heb. iii. 6, iv. 16, x. 35. 


letter (8-12); and finally he speaks of the joy of Titus at being 
able to bring such good tidings (13-16). 

The close parallel with the description of Timothy's mission 
to Thessalonica, and the Apostle's anxiety, followed by joy at 
the happy result (1 Thess. iii. 1-9), should be noted. 

6 For indeed, even after I had got as far as Macedonia, my 
poor suffering frame found no relief, but at every turn I found 
something to distress me ; round about me were bitter conflicts 
for and against me, within me were haunting fears as to how it 
would all end. 6 I was almost in despair ; but God, who is ever 
ready to comfort the depressed, comforted me then by the 
arrival and company of Titus. 7 Yes, and not only by his arrival 
and company, but also by the comfort with which you comforted 
him in his intercourse with you ; for he gave a most welcome 
report of how you longed for reconciliation with me, how you 
lamented the trouble that you had caused, how eagerly you 
espoused my cause ; so that this still further increased my joy. 

8 Because, although I know that I gave you pain by the letter 
which I sent you, I cannot bring myself to regret it. When I 
saw that that letter gave you pain, although only for a season, 
I was inclined to regret it ; 9 but now I am very glad, — not glad 
because you were pained, but because your pain issued in 
repentance. For you were pained in God's way and not in the 
world's way, and it was His will that you should not be the worse 
for anything that we did. 10 For the pain which is directed in 
God's way leads to a repentance whose fruit is salvation, a 
repentance which can never be regarded with regret; whereas 
the pain which the heathen world inflicts on those who belong 
to it works out into moral ruin. u For see ! it was this very 
thing, your being pained in God's way, and not anything else, 
which did so much for you. See what earnestness it worked out 
in you, how keen you were to clear yourselves from just reproach, 
how indignant with the chief offender, how alarmed as to what 
the consequences might be, how eager for my forgiveness and 
return, how zealous in condemning evil, how stern in punishing 
it. In every one of these points you put yourselves right and 
purged yourselves from complicity in this distressing matter. 
12 So then, although I did not let things slide but wrote severely 
to you, it was not in order to get the wrong-doer punished, nor 
yet to have the wronged man avenged. No, I wrote in order to 


bring out clearly before you all what a genuine interest you do 
take in us; I wrote as in God's sight, with a full sense of 
responsibility. 13 It is this right conduct of yours and my own 
consciousness of having meant well that is such a comfort to me. 
But over and above our own comfort we were the more 
.exceedingly glad at the gladness of Titus ; for refreshment and 
repose have come to his spirit, thanks to all of you. 14 For 
I told him how I gloried in you, how proud I was of you, and 
I have had no reason to be ashamed of what I said. You have 
not come short of my commendation of you. Just as all that 
we said to you was said in truth, so all that we said before Titus 
in praise of you has turned out to be quite true. 15 And he feels 
as we do. His inmost heart goes out the more abundantly 
towards you, as often as he recalls the ready obedience of all of 
you, and how timidly and nervously anxious you were in the 
reception which you gave him. 16 I am indeed glad that in 
every particular I can be of good courage in respect of you. 

5. Kai yap i\Q6vTwv irjucoi' eis MaKeSoyiai/. ' For indeed when 
we were come into Macedonia.' He is going back to ii. 13, 
where he tells us that even the excellent opening for preaching 
the Gospel which he found at Troas could not keep him there, 
because of his intense anxiety about Corinth, and so he crossed 
to Macedonia in order to meet Titus the sooner and learn how 
the Corinthians had taken his rebukes. So that we may regard 
the whole of ii. 14-vii. 4 as a digression. The fact that it exists 
makes the hypothesis that vi. 14-vii. 1 is a digression all the 
more probable. It is St Paul's way to dart off to some important 
side-topic and then return to what he had previously been saying. 
He would probably land at Philippi. But coelum non animum 
mutat; he is just as feverishly anxious in Macedonia as he had 
been in Troas. 

ouSefuav e.ayy\Ktv aveviv Tj <rap£ r\[i.dv. In ii. 13 he says ovk 
ecr^Ka avecriv tw rrvevfiaTL fiov. If there were any reason for 
wishing to get rid of either that passage or this, we should be 
told by some critics that it is impossible that St Paul, who else- 
where opposes o-dp£ and Trvevfjca, can have written both. See 
above on p-oXva/xov crapKos Kai Trvev/xaTos (v. 1). Language was 
made for man, not man for language. The use of words in 
a technical sense does not bar the writer irom using them else- 
where in a popular sense. Here f] crap£ is the sphere, not of sin, 
but of suffering. Intense anxiety affects both flesh and spirit. 
In both passages we have the perf. ; cf. i. 9 ; Rom. v. 2. In all 
four places we might have expected the aor., and hence the 


reading eo-^ev here. See on i. 9 and ii. 13. For avecriv see on 
ii. 13 ; also Index IV. 

iv iracTL 0\if36p,eeoi. ' In every way pressed,' as in iv. 8. He 
was experiencing every kind of tribulation. The participle 
without any verb is irregular, but intelligible and not rare ; cf. 
ix. 11, xi. 6, and other instances quoted in Moulton, p. 182. 
Here irapeKXyjdrjfxev might be understood, but it is not required. 
'Ev TravTi is very freq. in 2 Cor., and often first with emphasis ; 
vi. 4, ix. 8, xi. 6, 9. What follows explains iv iravri: the pressure 
was both external and internal. 

ZfaBev fidxai. What these conflicts in Macedonia were we 
cannot tell; Chrysostom thinks they were with unbelievers. 
The asyndeton is impressive, as in w. 2-4. 

ZarwQev <j>6|3oi. The conflicts would produce fears as to the 
issue, but his chief fears, as the context shows, were about the 
state of things at Corinth. Mental perturbations, Augustine 
points out, are not wrong. " The citizens of the Holy City of 
God, who live according to God in the pilgrimage of this life, 
fear and desire, grieve and rejoice. . . . That fear of which the 
Apostle John says, ' Perfect love casteth out fear,' is not of the 
same kind as that which the Apostle Paul felt lest the Corinthians 
should be subdued by the subtlety of the serpent ; for love is 
susceptible of this fear, yea, love alone is capable of it * {De Civ. 
Dei, xiv. 9). 

t<TXn K * v (X C D E L P) rather than tax ev ( B F G K), a correction, 
because the perf. seemed to be out of place. CFG, Latt. Syrr. have tax- 
after &vecnv. 

6. &W 6 irapaKaXwi/ tous Tcnreicou's. ' But He who comforteth 
the downcast.' The context shows that 'the lowly' (RV.) is 
here not the meaning of t. Ta7reivovs. It means ' those that are 
cast down'(AV.), 'the dejected, the depressed'; these rather 
than the lowly require to be comforted. In Ecclus. xxv. 23 
a wicked woman is said to produce KapSta raweivri /ecu 7rpoo-u)7roi> 
aKv6p<x)irov, which RV. renders ' abasement of heart and sadness 
of countenance.' The wording here (cf. i. 3) comes from Is. 
xlix. 13, tous Ta7T€ivoi>s tov Xaov avTOV TraptKaXecrev. Cf. Is. 
xl. 1, 11, li. 3, 12, lxi. 2, lxvi. 13. 

iv tyj irapouo-ia T. ' By the arrival and company of T.' The 
word implies not only the coming but the staying ; a -n-apova-ia 
lasts some time. Deissmann {Light from the Anc. East, pp. 
372, 382) has shown that it was a technical term to denote the 
visit of a potentate or his representative, and hence its ready 
transfer to the Second Advent. No such meaning attaches to it 
here. St Paul is not suggesting that the return of Titus to him 
was of an official character, but perhaps he desires to intimate 
that the coming meant a great deal to himself. The Iv is instru- 


mental rather than local, it gives the means rather than the 
sphere of the comforting ; cf. lv <j>6ft(a ®eoC (v. 1). 

7. e'<j>' upf. The exact meaning of this is uncertain ; perhaps 
'over you' is safest, indicating that the Corinthians were the 
basis of the comfort. Comp. the parallel passage, 1 Thess. iii. 7. 

avayyiWwv %If. ' While he told us.' The actual making of 
his report was a comfort to Titus. In strict grammar we ought 
to have dvayyeAAov-ros, but the participle is attracted to the verb, 
almost inevitably. 

i-nnr6Qr](nv. We have to conjecture the object of this 
' longing ' ; to be on good terms once more with the Apostle 
may be right, or perhaps to see him again. The noun is very 
rare in Bibl. Grk. (v. n \ Ezek. xxiii. n), but iirnroOiiv occurs 
in all groups of the Pauline Epp. and is not rare in LXX. 

68upjAov. 'Lamentation' (Mt. ii. 18) for having caused so 
much distress. 

lr\\ov. 'Zeal' (v. 11, ix. 2) for the Apostle against those 
who had attacked him, or eagerness to carry out his wishes. 
Trench, Syn. § xxvi. For the exclusively Pauline fyiwv between 
the art. and the noun (thrice in this verse) see on i. 6 and xii. 19. 

wore fxe p.SXXoi' x a P'O l ' ai - The fxaXXov may be understood in 
several ways. (1) 'So that I rejoiced still more'; the meeting 
with Titus delighted him ; the report that Titus gave of the 
Corinthians increased his delight. (2) ' So that I rejoiced rather 
than was merely comforted.' (3) ' So that I rejoiced instead of 
being distressed.' The first is best. The threefold vjhuv throws 
light on the meaning. It was the Corinthians' longing, the 
Corinthians' lamentation, the Corinthians' eagerness which 
inspired Titus with such joy. Previously the longing, lamenta- 
tion, and eagerness had been St Paul's, and it was a delight to 
his emissary to find similar feelings in the Corinthians. With 
characteristic tact the Apostle attributes his own happiness to the 
comfort which the Corinthians had given to Titus and which 
Titus had communicated to him. He does not tell the Corin- 
thians that he had doubted as to how they would take his letter, 
and how great had been his anxiety as to its possible effect. The 
position of jxaWov and the contents of v. 13 favour (1) rather 
than (2) or (3). 

8. on el Kal e\uT7Y]<ra cV tyj ItticttoXtj, ou jx€Tap.e\ 
' Because, though I made you sorrowful (see on ii. 2) in my letter, 
I do not regret it.' That he pained them by what he wrote is 
treated as a fact ; el Kai rather than ko1 d : see on iv. 3. The 
difference between /xera/xe'Ao/mi (Mt. xxi. 30, 32, xxvii. 3 ; Heb. 
vii. 21 from Ps. cix. [ex.] 4) and ^eravoea) (xii. 21 ; Acts ii. 38, 
iii. 19 ; etc.) is fairly represented by the difference between 


'regret' and 'repent,' but no hard and fast line can be drawn, 
such as that the former refers to transitory feelings respecting 
details, while the latter implies moral choice affecting the whole 
life. Either verb is used either way. But, as the derivations 
show, fxeravoio) has the richer and more serious meaning. Trench, 
Syn. § lxix. 

ei kou fi€Te|ae\6fjLT)v. See crit. note below. Whether we read 
/3Xe7rw or /3/\£7rwv, we may take vvv x^'p 10 as the apodosis of ei /ecu 
[xer., and treat what lies between as a parenthesis. This is some- 
what awkward when written, but might easily be given in dicta- 
tion. 'Though I was inclined to regret it — I see that that letter, 
though but for a time, made you sorrowful — now I rejoice.' We 
may put it more smoothly thus ; ' I see that that letter gave you 
pain, though only for a while ; at the time I was inclined to 
regret having written it, but noxv I am very glad.' 'E/cei'v?; puts 
the letter away from him ; it is remote from his present attitude. 
It is quite clear that he had written a letter about which he had 
had misgivings and regrets ; he could have wished that he had 
not written it. It is difficult to agree with those who think that 
he could ever have had such feelings about i Corinthians. 
Could he for a moment have regretted having written such a 
letter ? There must have been another letter of a much more 
painful character. See on i. 17, ii. 3, 9. If 2 Cor. x.-xiii. is part 
of that letter, it is easy to point to passages which he might 
sometimes wish that he had never written.* 

The arrangement given above is that of Tisch., WH., and the 
American Revisers, but RV. gives it no recognition, perhaps 
because of its apparent awkwardness. AV. capriciously renders 
lirio-ToXr) first ' letter ' and then ' Epistle,' and treats eXxnvqcrev as a 
perf., as if the pain still continued, which the Apostle certainly 
did not mean to imply. 

irpos S>pav. The pain will not last ; there is nothing that need 
rankle ; the present letter will entirely extinguish it. Gal. ii. 5 
and Philem. 15 show that the expression may be used of either 
a short or a long time, either a few minutes or several months. 
The main point is that an end is certain. Cf. 7rp6s xaipov (1 Cor. 
vii. 5; Lk. viii. 13), Trpos SXiyov (1 Tim. iv. 8), and Trpos Katpbv 
wpas (r Thess. ii. 17). It is possible that el kcu Trpos wpav 
iXvirrjcrev fyias should be taken together, ' although it pained you 
for a season,' and that the sentence is left unfinished. Perhaps 
some such words as ' has had excellent effects ' ought to have 
followed. However we unravel the confused constr., the general 
sense is clear. 

* " We must remember that we have not the letter in its entirety. Are 
not the passages which he most repented those which have disappeared?" 
(Rendall, The Epp. of St. Paul to the Corinthians, p. 69). 


After iv ry iiri<TTo\rj D* E* F G, d e f g add fiov. B inserts 54 between 
el and Kat. X D 2 E F G K L P, f g Syrr. Copt, insert yap after /3\<?7ra>. In 
all three cases we may omit. Lachmann and Hort would follow Vulg. 
(videns) and read j3\eirwv, p\eirw having been read as /3\e7rw. Videns, like 
the insertion of yap, may be an attempt to smooth the constr. 

Only to those who believe in verbal inspiration in the most rigid sense 
could this verse cause any difficulty, other than that of reading and constr. 
There is no need even to ask the question, " Mow could an inspired Apostle 
ever regret what he had written?" Such questions belong to views about 
Holy Scripture which criticism has demonstrated to be untenable. The 
Apostle himself would scarcely have understood what such a question 
meant. If he did, he might ask, "Do you suppose that I never make a 

9. d\\' on e\uirrj0r|Te els fierdvoiav. With much delicacy, he 
makes them rather than himself the cause of his present happi- 
ness. It was not his letter, the writing of which was no pleasure 
to him, but their way of receiving it, which produced so much 
joy. He claims no credit for it. 

€\uTrrj0r|T6 y^P KaTI * Q *° v - ' For you were made sorrowful in 
God's way ' ; i.e. as God would have you sorrowful ; not ' owing 
to the grace of God,' 'thanks to His help.' Cf. Rom. viii. 27 ; 
4 Mace. xv. 2. ' God's way ' is opposed to man's way and the 
devil's way. 

Iva. iv ixT]%e.v\ ^T|p.iw0T]Te e£ Tjp.wv. Such was God's intention ; 
'that in nothing ye might suffer loss (1 Cor. iii. 15 ; Lk. ix. 25) 
at our hands.' If he had not urged them to change their course, 
that would have been great loss to them and great blame to him. 
God did not will either his negligence or their loss. It is un- 
natural to make Iva depend upon dXX otl iX. eh [xevdvoiav* 

10. (xeTdVoiav els oxjTrjpiai' dfAeTafJt,e\T)Toe. The adj. belongs to 
fxiTavotav. There is no need to say that salvation brings no 
regret. To make this clear we must repeat ; ' repentance unto 
salvation, a repentance which bringeth no regret' (RV.), or 
' repentance which bringeth no regret, repentance unto salvation.' 
'Repentance not to be repented of (AV.) is a pleasing verbal 
antithesis, like 'righteousness with unrighteousness' (vi. 14), but 
neither is justified by the Greek. f Vulg. has paenitentiam in 
salutem stabilem ofieratur, and stabilem can be taken readily with 
salutem without perpetrating a truism \ but stabilis is not an 

* It is remarkable that fierdvoia occurs only four times in the Pauline 
Epistles, twice in these two verses and once in Rom. ii. 4 and 2 Tim. ii. 25, 
while /xeravoiw occurs only in 2 Cor. xii. 21. This does not imply "the 
almost complete omission of the twin Rabbinic ideas of repentance and 
forgiveness " (C. G. Montefiore, Judaism and St. Paul, p. 75). These words 
are rare, but the thought of forgiveness, such as he himself had won, is often 
present as reconciliation to God. 

t Superest ne rursus provinciae, quod da»masse dicitur, placeat, agatque. 
poenitentiam poenitentiae suae (Plin. Ep. vii. 10). 


accurate rendering of a/j.erap.i\r]To^. In Rom. xi. 29 Vulg. has 
sine paenitentia for a/xer. Ets o-wTrjpiav is freq. in Paul, being 
found in all groups (Rom. i. 16, x. 1, 10; Phil. i. 19; 2 Thess. 
ii. 13 ; 2 Tim. iii. 15), but nowhere does he weaken o-wr-qpia by 
giving it an epithet. 

y\ ok tou Kocrfiou Xuttk] SaVa-roy KaT£pYa£€Tcu. c But the sorrow 
of the world worketh out death.' The Revisers adopt the 
reading Karepya^Tai (see below), but make no difference between 
it and epya^ercu, and Vulg. has operator in both places ; 17 Kara 
®€ov XvTr-q ' works ' or ' promotes ' awTrjpia, fj t. n6o-p.ov X. ' works 
out' or 'produces' 66.vo.tov. Cf. Rom. vii. 13.* Perhaps the 
reference is chiefly to sorrow for sin, and Cain, Esau, and Judas 
may be illustrations of the wrong kind of sorrow. But we need 
not confine the verse to that. Sorrow for worldly losses and 
troubles does not lessen them ; indeed sorrow for sickness may 
aggravate the disease and prevent recovery ; but sorrow for sin 
may cure the sin. Affliction which is not taken as discipline, but 
resented as unreasonable, hardens and deadens the soul : sub- 
mission to God's will brings peace. Moreover, men regret the 
sorrow which they feel for worldly losses, but they do not regret 

the SOrrOW which cures sin. Cf. curiv alo-yyvri kirayovara a/xo.pTtav, 

Kal ccttiv alcrxyvri Sd£a kcu. x^P l< * (Ecclus. iv. 21). In the Testa- 
ments {Gad v. 7) there seems to be a reminiscence of this 
passage ; 17 yap Kara 6ebv a\r)6ys p.e.ra.voia . . . oSrjyel to 8ta/3ouAtov 
7rpos o-oiT-qpiav. See Heinrici-Meyer. 

ipy&^erai (X* B C D E P 37) after\i]Tov is to be preferred to 
KarepyaZeTai (N 3 G K L), which is assimilation to the next clause. 

11. l8ou y^P- He wants them to see how they themselves 
afford an example of the right kind of Xv-rrrj and its fruits. ' For 
behold, this very thing, your being sorrowful in God's way, what 
earnestness (see on viii. 7) it worked out in you.' He looks back 
to what was said in v. 7, and in his desire to give them full credit 
for the excellent change in them he adds a great deal to what 
was said before ; in v. 7 we have three particulars, here we have 
seven. He is brimming over with affectionate delight. f The 
repeated 6XK6. means ' but moreover,' '■but over and above this,' 
and the same effect is produced in English with either c yea' or 
'nay.' Blass, § 77. 13. 

&\\a aTroXoyicu'. Not merely earnestness instead of their 
previous indifference ; but 'self-vindication.' They were anxious 
to exculpate themselves and show that they had not abetted the 
offender or condoned his offence. 

* See the Essay and the Sermon on these words by F. Paget, The Spirit 
of Discipline, pp. I f. and 51 f. 

t A steady reformation is a more decisive test of the value of mourning 
than depth of grief" (F. W. Robertson). 


dyai'dicTriaii'. Indignation at the shame brought upon the 
Church. 'AyavaKTcw occurs several times in the Synoptists, but 
here only does the noun occur. Cf. Thuc. 11. xli. 3. 

<j>6|3ov. Ne cum virga venirem (Beng.); but we need not 
restrict it to that. God's judgments may be included. Indeed 
it is unlikely that St Paul would put fear of himself in the 
foreground. 'Happy is the man that feareth alway' (Prov. 
xxviii. 14). 

emTr60r)ortK. Yearning for the Apostle's favour and return. 
Yearning for their own improvement, quo desideratis in melius 
provehi (Herveius), is less probable. 

j^jW. Zeal for God and the Apostle and against the evil 
which dishonours both. 

ckSiktio-ii'. Avenging, in punishing the offender, about 
which there had been difficulty (ii. 6). It is placed last, possibly 
for that reason, or possibly because St Paul does not now 
regard it of great importance. Enough had been done to 
vindicate the authority which had been outraged. 'EKSt/070-is is 
from IkSikos (i Thess. iv. 6; Rom. xiii. 4) through ckSikcw (x. 6; 
Rom. xii. 19). Hort (on 1 Pet. ii. 14) says, " In both LXX and 
N.T. eKSi/070-is stands for both 'avenging' or 'vindication,' and, 
as here, for 'vengeance,' 'requital.' This sense is specially 
abundant in Ecclus." Bengel and Meyer arrange the last six 
items in pairs, dealing respectively with the shame of the 
Church, feeling towards the Apostle, and treatment of the 
offender. But the grouping is perhaps fanciful : dyavaKT^o-is 
may have reference to the offender, and tfjXos to the Apostle. 
The grouping is probably not intended by St Paul. 

iv iray-i-l oweorrjo-aTe eau-rous. ' In everyone of these points 
ye approved yourselves.' See on v. 5. He acquits them of all 
responsibility for the offence which was committed. At first 
they had been to blame. By not protesting against the outrage 
they had seemed to acquiesce in it, but all this had been put 
right by their reception of Titus and submission to Paul's 

dy^ous ilvai tw irpdyfiaTi. ' To be pure in the matter,' to be 
purged from all complicity in it, because they no longer felt any 
sympathy with it. St Paul does not say yeveaOai but civdt : he 
does not wish to hint that they had not always been dyvoi. 
'Ayvds marks predominantly a feeling, and Ka.6a.p6s a state 
(Westcott on 1 Jn. iii. 3). The indefinite tw -n-payixaTL points to 
a disagreeable subject which he does not care to specify ; the 
Corinthians know all about the unhappy business. Neither the 
use of this vague term (1 Thess. iv. 6) nor ayvovs (xi. 2) is any 
argument for the incredible identification of this offender (ii. 5) 
with the incestuous Corinthian (1 Cor. v. 1). 


After \vTT7)0rji>ai, X 3 D E K L P, d e Vulg. add i/t&s. N* B C F G 17, 

g omit. Kareipyda-aTo (X B'CGKL P) rather than Ka.Trjpydaa.TO (B*D E). 
Before v/jliv, X a C F G P, f g Vulg. Syrr. read iv. X* B D E L K omit. 
NBC D*F G, f g omit the iv before ry irpa.yiJ.aTi, which is probably an 
insertion to ease the construction. 

12. cipa ei ica! eypavj/a u/jlik. ' So then, although I did write to 
you.' The subject seems to be closed, and yet the Apostle does 
not end here. The excellent results of the mission of Titus and 
St Paul's intense joy have been fully described, but something 
more is added as a sort of explanatory appendix. He goes on 
to explain why he wrote the letter which has borne such good 
fruit. There was one point in which it had partially failed, for 
the Corinthians had not treated the offender in the way in which 
he had expected ; they had been more lenient than he had 
perhaps suggested. But he has assured them that he is content 
with what was done and does not desire anything further (ii. 5 f.) ; 
and he now tells them that his main object in writing was not 
to get the offender punished, or the person who was offended 
righted, but to give them an opportunity of showing how loyal 
they really were to himself. We may regard it as almost certain 
that the person offended was himself. His whole treatment of 
to Trpayfia is in harmony with this view. This is another allusion 
to the severe letter. 

The dpa, here is equivalent to wore with a finite verb; 'so then,' 
'accordingly,' 'consequently.' In class. Grk. it is almost invariably sub- 
joined to another word, as in 1 Cor. vii. 14; Rom. vii. 21 ; Gal. iii. 7; 
etc., and is hardly ever placed first, as here; I Cor. xv. 18 ; Rom. x. 17 ; 
Gal. v. 11. 

oux £ven£v tou dSiKrjcrai'Tos. St Paul is always exhibiting 
Hebrew modes of thought and language. In Jewish literature 
we often have two alternatives, one of which is negatived, with- 
out meaning that it is negatived absolutely, but only in com- 
parison with the other alternative, which is much more important. 
'I will have mercy, and not sacrifice' (Hos. vi. 6) does not 
prohibit sacrifice ; it affirms that mercy is much the better of 
the two. Cf. Mk. ix. 37; Lk. x. 20, xiv. 12, xxiii. 28. Here 
St Paul does not mean that he had no thought of the offender 
or the offended person in writing ; he means that they were not 
the main cause of his doing so. His object was to get the 
Corinthian Church out of the false position in which it was in 
reference to himself. That was the thing for which he chiefly 
cared, and in comparison with that all other ends were as 
nothing. Cf. 1 Cor, i. 17. Is it possible to believe that the 
letter to which allusion is here made is 1 Corinthians ? 

It is still less possible to believe that toC dSi<o;crai'Tos is the 
incestuous person of 1 Cor. v. 1. St Paul would hardly have 


regarded such a sin as a personal injury to an individual ; it was 
a monstrous injury to the whole of the Corinthian Church. 
But there is a stronger reason than this. If 6 d8i/o;o-a9 is the 
man who had his father's wife, then 6 uSiicrjOek must be the man's 
father, who was alive when the son committed incest with his 
father's wife. Disorderly as the Corinthian Church was, it is 
difficult to believe that one of its members would be guilty of 
taking his father's wife while his father was living, and that the 
rest of the Church, so far from being scandalized, were as much 
puffed up with self-complacency as usual (see on i Cor. v. 2). 
What is said about forgiving the offender (iv. 5 f.) is strangely 
worded, if he was an offender of such heinousness. 

It is possible that 6 dSiK^eis was Timothy (Hastings, DB. iv. 
p. 768), but almost certainly it was St Paul himself (DB. iii. 
p. 711)-* That hypothesis satisfies all requirements, especially 
with regard to the reserve with which he speaks of the matter. 
The Corinthians would understand. Who o dSi/070-as was was 
known to them, but is unknown to us. He was probably a 
turbulent Corinthian who in some outrageous and public manner 
had defied the Apostle's authority. Now that the Corinthians 
had withdrawn all sympathy from him and had submissively 
sought reconciliation with St Paul, it did not matter whether the 
punishment inflicted by the congregation had been adequate or 

&W eyeKcyTou <j)arepo)9f]i'ai tc\v ctttouStjv ujiwv' tyji' uirep r\y.uv irpos 
ujias. Not for either of these ends, 'but in order that your 
earnestness on our behalf might be made manifest unto you.' 
If the same translation is to be given to eveKcv in all three places, 
we may say, ' not in order to punish the wrong-doer, nor yet in 
order to avenge the wronged, but in order, etc' The main 
object was to get the Corinthians to realize their true state of 
mind respecting the Apostle. In the friction and excitement 
of the recent crisis they had fancied .that they could part from 
him with a light heart; but his letter showed them what casting 
him off would mean, and they found that the ties which bound 
them to him could not be so easily broken. They cared for 
him too much for that. 'Unto you' is simpler and more 
telling than 'among you' or 'with you' (1 Thess. iii. 4) for 
tt/oos i^Ss. It was unto themselves that this revelation had to 
be made ; they did not know the state of their own hearts 
till the shock of the letter came. With vfiwv . . . irpos {yxas 
comp. i. 11. 

ivuiriov toG 0eoG. Placed last with emphatic solemnity, as in 
iv. 2 (see the last note there). The words are to be taken with 

* Bousset says with reason ; so gibt diese Wendung nur darm einen er- 
traglichen Sinn, wenn tnan annimt, dass Paulus stlbst der Betroffene sei. 



ey/jai/'a : he wrote with a deep sense of responsibility. God 
would judge of his reason for writing and of the words which he 

In this verse we twice have in MSS. the common confusion between 
rifieis and iifiels. The reading of Vulg., sollicitudinem nostrum, quam pro 
vobis habemus, and of T. R. , r. o-kovoi\v rjfiQiv t. virtp vn&v, is inconsistent 
with the context. He did not write to manifest his zeal for them, but to 
bring out their zeal for him. The <nrov5ri in this verse is the same as in 
v. io. B C D 2 E K L P, e Syrr. Copt, have t. a-ir. vfj.Qv r. inrtp tj/awp. 

13. 8ia touto irapaK€K\r)p.e9a. ' For this cause (because our 
good purpose was accomplished in bringing your loyalty to 
light) we have been and are comforted.' These words, with a 
full stop after them, should have been given to v. 12. Chry- 
sostom ends a Homily with them, and he begins another (xvi.) 
with the words which follow. A teacher is comforted by the 
progress of his pupils, a spiritual ruler by the loyalty of the 
ruled ; and spiritual rule is the highest of all arts. 

'Em 8c ttj irapaKX^crci y]jjiu)i\ ' But over and above our 
personal comfort' The 84 is certainly rightly placed here (see 
below), and it bars the rendering of Luther, Beza, and AV., 
which takes eVt r. 71-. with the preceding Tra.paKZKXrjp.z6a, reading 
ifiwv for rjfxwv, ' we were comforted in your comfort.' This does 
not fit the context. 

irepicTCTOTepug p.aXXoi' exdprjfi.ei' * 1 " T f) X a P? Titou. ' My own 
comfort was great; in addition to it came the more abundant 
joy at the joy of Titus.' The strengthening of the comparative 
with a pleonastic /jlolXXov is not rare ; fxdXXov irepicraoTepoi' 
€K7jpvcr<T0v (Mk. vii. 36) ; 7roA./\o> yap jxaXXov Kpetcrcrov (Phil. i. 23). 
It is found in class. Grk. Blass, § 44. 5 ; Wetstein on Phil. i. 23. 
In xii. 9 juaAAov does not strengthen ^Stora, but belongs to 


on dcaTTCTrauTai to -nveufjia auTOu diro -rr&VTUv up.aii'. ' Because 
his spirit has been refreshed, thanks to all of you.' Cf. ave-n-avcrav 
yap to i/jiov 7rvcvp.a (1 Cor. xvi. 18; see note there). In Philem. 
7, 20 we have tci o-n-Xayyya for to 7n'€v/xa. " The compound 
avairavco-6ai expresses a temporary relief, as the simple Traveardai 
a final cessation" (Lightfoot), a truce as distinct from a peace. 
It is refreshment and relief which Christ promises to the weary 
and heavy laden, not a permanent removal of their burdens, 
avavravcru) v/xas (Mt. xi. 28). For <z7ro where vivo might have 
stood, 'at the hands of rather than 'by,' cf. iroXXa. TtaOeiv oVo 
twv 7rpco-f3vT4pa)v (Mt. xvi. 21; also Lk. vii. 35, xvii. 25 ; Jas. i. 
13). Blass, § 40. 3. This Travriav ifxwv is repeated in v. 15. 
The whole Corinthian Church had had a share in making this 
happy impression on Titus, and he was deeply grateful to them 
for it. The Apostle is careful to let them know this, because 


Titus is to return to them to carry out the arrangements for the 
collection for the poor at Jerusalem (viii. 6, 16). 

84 is certainly to be retained after 4irl, and to be omitted after irepurao- 
ripm, with NBCDFGKLP, Latt. Goth. The insertion after vepunr. 
has very little authority. A few cursives and Arm. omit 5^ altogether. 
F K L, Copt, have ry irapaKX-qcrei. vfi&v, another confusion of the two 
pronouns, as in v. 12. 

14. on ei ti auTw UTrep ujiwy K€icauxT]fJiai, ou KaTflcrxuVGrH'. ' For 
if in anything I have gloried to him on your behalf, I was not put 
to shame.' This is added in explanation of the great relief which 
the conduct of the Corinthians had been to Titus. Titus had 
accepted the mission to Corinth with serious misgivings; his 
overtures might be rejected with contempt and violence. St 
Paul had praised the Corinthians to him, and had assured him 
that the strained situation would pass, because they were 
thoroughly sound at heart. St Paul is now able to tell them 
that his praise of them had been completely justified by their 
subsequent conduct. He was 'not put to shame' (RV.) by 
being proved to be utterly mistaken about them. Titus had 
found that the Apostle's high estimate of them was correct. The 
Corinthians were rightminded people who knew how to listen to 
reason and respect authority. He had told them to welcome 
and obey Titus, and they had done so ; and this had quite won 
Titus' heart. For KiKauyrjixai see on ix. 2. 

<£>s irdi'Ta iv dXrjfleia k.t.\. ' As we spake all things to you in 
truth, so our glorying also before Titus was proved to be truth.' 
For €7ri='in the presence of,' 'before,' cf. i Cor. vi. i, 6; Mk. 
xiii. 9; Acts xxv. 9. The introductory dAAa means, 'On the 
contrary ; so far from my being put to shame, etc' He appeals 
to his own truthfulness and sincerity, which had been challenged 
at Corinth and had been proved to be real : fyuv and eVi TtVou 
balance one another, and there is a sort of chiasmus ; iv aX-qOda 
v/xlv . . . eVt Tltov aXrjOzia. The first a.\r)6ua. is subjective, the 
second is objective. 

ir&vTo. (ODEKLP, Latt.) rather than irdvTore (CFG, g Copt.). 
C D E P, Latt. have vfxiv iv Skydelq. by assimilation of order to iirl T. d\. 
No v before iirl T. (N* B). 

15. teal Ta otrk&yxva aurou. ' And so his heart goes out to 
you the more abundantly,' i.e. still more than before he came to 
you and had this happy experience.* They received him as the 
Galatians received St Paul (Gal. iv. 14), in spite of the stern 
letter which he brought. Hence his affection for them when he 
recalls it all. Cf. ai KapSun avT&v €ts irovr}piav (Dan. xi. 27, 

* But it is possible that TcepiaeoTipm is simply * very abundantly ' and 
implies no comparison with any other occasion. 


ttji' ttAvtw ujiwc uTraKoi^i/. These words indicate that Titus 
had very definite demands to make, and that compliance with 
them was universal. There was no thought of rebellion against 
the Apostle or his delegate. 

jieTa. <|>6(3ou kcu Tpopou. This strong expression suggests 
something more than that they were afraid that they coufd not 
do enough to please him. St Paul himself had confessed to 
having had this feeling when he first begun his work in Corinth 
(i Cor. ii. 3), and in him it meant a nervous anxiety to do his 
duty* No other N.T. writer uses the phrase, and this seems to 
be its meaning in the four places in which it occurs. The other 
two are Eph. vi. 5 and Phil. ii. 12, where see Lightfoot. In 
Eph. vi. 5 this 'fear and trembling' is opposed to 'eye-service.' 
In Is. xix. 16, ev <po/?a> kcu iv Tp6[xu> means actual terror. 

16. Xatpw on iv ir&vTi 0appw iv iip.Lv. A joyous conclusion to 
the whole section (vi. 11-vii. 16), added impressively without 
any connecting particle. The ow, 'therefore' (AV.) is one of 
those freq. insertions made by scribes and translators (here Goth. 
Arm.) for the sake of smoothness, and such smoothness generally 
involves weakness. It does not much matter how we take on, 
whether ' I rejoice that,' or ' I rejoice because.' The translation 
of Oappla is more important; 'I am of good courage' (RV.), as 
in x. 1, 2, rather than 'I have confidence' (AV.). If x.-xiii. is 
part of the painful letter which preceded i.-ix., this verse may 
refer to x. 1, 2. There he is of good courage in standing out 
against some of them ; here he is of good courage about the 
present obedience of all of them, and (as he hopes) about their 
readiness to help in raising money for the poor at Jerusalem. 
This verse prepares the way for the request which he is about to 
urge in viii. and ix. Their past good works and present loyalty 
give him courage in pressing this matter upon them. See on 
i. 23, ii. 3, 9, iv. 2, v. 13, vii. 2 for other instances in which these 
first nine chapters seem to refer to passages in the last four. 
Whatever may be the truth about this or any other possible 
reference, the Apostle's mood and judgment must have changed 
extraordinarily, if, after dictating these verses (13-16), he dictated 
xii. 20, 21 as part of the same letter. 

iv up.ii'. 'Concerning you'; cf. dTropov/xai iv vplv, 'I am 
perplexed about you ' (Gal. iv. 20) ; lit. ' in your case.' Others 
explain that the root of the courage or the perplexity is in them, 
and translate 'through you.' The difference is not very great. 

The reconciliation between the Apostle and the Corinthians 
is now complete ; and with this verse the first main division of 

* "In the same spirit with which a young man of character would work, 
who was starting in business on capital advanced by a friend " (Denney). 


the Epistle (i. 12-vii. 16) ends. Shut sapiens medicus jam paene 
sanata vulnera lenissimis medicametitis curabat, ut prion's increpa- 
tionis usura sanaretur (Herveius). 

Before leaving this chapter we must notice once more its 
exuberant and passionate tone. The Apostle " lets himself go," 
and can hardly find language in which to express his appreciation 
of the present attitude of the Corinthians towards himself and 
Titus, and his consequent joy over them and over the joy which 
they have produced in Titus. Words expressive of comfort, 
rejoicing, glorying, boldness, and courage occur with surprising 
frequency, as if he could not repeat them too often. We have 
TrapaKaXeu) four times, 7rapa.KXt]<jL<s thrice, x at '/ 3C0 f° ur times, x a P^ 
twice, Kairnc^cris twice, Kav^ and 7rapp7)(ria and 0appS> once 
each. With regard to the good conduct of the Corinthians we 
have £77X05 twice, (X7rov8rj twice, /xerarota twice, (pofios twice, 
together with v-n-aKorj and other terms of approbation. And all 
this is within the compass of fifteen, or rather of thirteen verses. 
It is all the more necessary to notice this because of the very 
marked change of tone which is at once evident directly we leave 
this part of the Epistle and begin to study the next two chapters. 
The change of subject causes a sudden cessation of this over- 
flowing enthusiasm and generosity of language. So far from 
letting himself go, the Apostle manifestly feels that he is treading 
on delicate ground, and that he must be cautious about what he 
says and the language in which he says it. The Epistle is full 
of rapid changes of feeling, perhaps caused in some cases by 
breaks in the times of dictating. Here it is the new subject that 
causes the change. 


This is the second of the main divisions of the Epistle, and 
it may be divided into five sections, which, however, are made 
for convenience of study, without any assumption that they were 
intended by the Apostle. In viii. 1-7 he sets forth the Example 
of Liberality set by the Macedonian congregations; viii. 8-15 
he points to the Example of Christ and indicates the proportion 
to be observed in contributing; viii. 16-24 he informs the 
Corinthians that this new Mission to them is to be entrusted to 
Titus with two others ; ix. 1-5 he exhorts them to have every- 
thing ready when he comes; and ix. 6-15 he exhorts them to be 
liberal, for their own sakes and for the good of the Church. 

The subject of this Palestine Relief Fund is mentioned in 
four places in N.T. ; 1 Cor. xvi. 1-3 ; these two chapters ; Rom. 
xv. 26, 27; Acts xxiv. 17. Paley {Horae Paulinae, ii. 1) has 


shown how these four passages fit into one another and explain 
one another, and his arguments well repay study. The fact that 
St Paul mentions the collection of this fund in three of his four 
great Epistles, and that in this one he devotes so large a portion 
of the letter to the subject, is evidence that he took a very keen 
interest in the matter and was most anxious that the collection 
should be a success ; and there was no place in which it was 
more important that the collection should be a generous one 
than at Corinth. The distress at Jerusalem was great ; that was 
an argument that could be urged everywhere. But it was 
specially fitting that it should be pressed home in Gentile 
Churches ; for seeing that the Gentiles had been admitted to 
share the spiritual possessions of the Jews, it was not unreason- 
able that the Jews should be admitted to a share of the worldly 
possessions of the Gentiles. If this was freely done, the union 
of Jew and Gentile in Christ would be shown to be a very real 
and practical thing, and would be made all the more binding in 
future. "This collection formed the one visible expression of 
that brotherly unity which otherwise was rooted merely in their 
common faith" (Harnack, Mission and Expansion, i. p. 183). 
It was specially desirable that Corinth should come to the front 
in this matter. Here Judaizing teachers had been at work, 
claiming to have the sanction of the Mother Church at Jerusalem, 
and denying that St Paul had any such sanction ; they said that 
he had no authority from the Twelve and was disowned by them. 
Therefore, if he succeeded in raising a good sum in Corinth for 
the Jerusalem poor, it would show Christians in Palestine that 
his authority in Corinth was an influence for good, and show his 
detractors that he was on good terms with the Mother Church. 
But perhaps his chief aim was to strengthen the ties which bound 
Gentile Christians and Jewish Christians together. See notes on 
1 Cor. xvi. 1-4. It is there pointed out that St Paul uses seven 
different words in speaking of this collection. Excepting Aoyi'a, 
which is peculiar to 1 Cor. xvi. 1, all are found in 2 Cor., viz., x<*pis 
(1 and 2 Cor.), Koivcona (2 Cor. and Rom.), BiaKovia, aSporr)?, 
eiXoyta, and Aeu-oupyta (2 Cor. only). Theodoret notes that 
4>i\ai>6po>7TLa is not used in this sense. What is still more remark- 
able, St Paul does not use apyvptov, or apyvpos, or xpvcrtov, or 
Xpwo's in this connexion : he seems to avoid the mention of 

His thus asking the Corinthians to bring to a generous 
and speedy conclusion the collection which they had begun to 
make before their recent attitude of rebellion against the Apostle, 
was of course strong evidence that he regarded the old happy 
relation between himself and them as being completely restored. 
He could not easily have given them a more convincing proof 


of his complete confidence in them. But at the same time there 
was risk in doing so. After restoring friendly relations with 
persons who have been cherishing resentment against us, we do 
not think it politic to begin at once to ask favours or to remind 
them of their duties; and yet this is just what the Apostle 
feels bound to do with the Corinthians, to whom he has only 
just become reconciled. One sees that he feels the difficulty of 
the situation. He desires to be, and to seem to be, confident of 
success ; confident that his beloved converts will do all that he 
wishes them to do, and all that they ought to do, in this matter. 
And yet he does not quite feel this confidence.* It looks as if 
the Corinthians were not very generous givers in this or in other 
things (xi. 8, 9, xii. 13 ; 1 Cor. ix. 11, 12, xvi. 4). No one from 
Corinth is mentioned Acts xx. 4. That may be accidental ; yet 
it may mean that what was subscribed at Corinth was so insignifi- 
cant that it did not require a special delegate, but was entrusted 
to one of the others. Be this as it may, St Paul evidently feels 
his way cautiously, weighing his words and careful about his 
arguments. The thought of the malice of the Judaizing teachers 
is still in his mind, and he knows that he has to deal with ex- 
citable people. No word of his must give a handle to the former 
or provocation to the latter. It was probably owing to the 
Judaizing teachers that the collection had hung fare. They 
would oppose any scheme that St Paul advocated. 

There is no good reason for suspecting that these two 
chapters are part of another letter, different from both the first 
seven chapters and the last four. They follow the seventh chapter 
quite naturally, and the change of tone is thoroughly intelligible. 
The tone is similar to that in the Epistle to Philemon. In both 
cases he makes a request with diffidence, delicacy, and courtesy, 
but at the same time with firmness, with the conviction that it 
ought to be granted, and the hope that it will be. And in both 
cases the favour which he asks is not a personal one ; he will not 
be the richer, if it is granted. He pleads for others, assuring 
those who can grant the favour that they themselves will be the 
better for granting it. 

VIII. 1-7. The Example of the Macedonian Churches is 
worthy of imitation. 

1 Now I should like to justify this expression of the good 
courage which I feel respecting you all. Let me make known 

* " Vkabiliti, la souplesse de langage, la dexttriti tpistolaire de Paul, 
itaient employees tout entieres a cette oeuvre. II trouve pour la recommander 
aux Corinthiens les tours les plus vifs et les plus tendres " (Renan, Saint Paul, 

P- 453)- 


to you, my Brothers, the grace of God which has been and still 
is being exhibited very remarkably in the Churches of Mace- 
donia. 2 In the midst of an ordeal of affliction which has served 
to bring out their genuine Christianity, their overflowing happi- 
ness, combined with quite desperate poverty, has issued in a 
rich stream of simpleminded generosity. 3 For I can testify that 
up to the very limits, yes, and beyond the limits of their very 
slender means, they have given freely, and this without one word 
of suggestion from me. 4 So far from my asking them to help, 
they begged us most urgently to be allowed the privilege of 
taking part in the work of ministering to the necessities of their 
fellow-Christians in Jerusalem. 5 I should be misleading you if 
I were to say that in this they acted just as we expected that 
they would ; one does not expect much from very poor people ; 
they did far more than we expected. It was their own selves 
that they gave first and foremost to the Lord and also to us, 
and they made the offering in both cases because it was so willed 
by God. 6 The result of their double self-dedication was this. 
I urged Titus that, as he had been the person to start the raising 
of a relief-fund on a former visit, so he would now go once more 
and complete among yourselves this gracious undertaking. 
7 Well now, as in everything ye are found to be abundant, — in 
faith, and utterance, and knowledge, and every kind of zeal, and 
in the love which unites your hearts with ours, — do see to it 
that in this gracious undertaking also ye are found to be abun- 
dant. The possession of so many rich gifts may well bear this 
noble fruit, and you ought not to fall short of your endowments. 

1. rcwpi^ojjLei/ 8e vjxiv, d8e\(j>oi. ' Now I proceed to make 
known to you, brethren.' ' Moreover' (AV.) is certainly wrong. 
As in Rom. xv. 14, xvi. 17; 1 Cor. i. 10, iv. 6, vii. 29, xii. 1, 
etc., the 8e and the address mark a transition to something more 
or less different from what has preceded, and here Si perhaps 
suggests some such connexion as ' Now do not let the joy which 
I have just expressed prove vain,' or ' Now I must pass on from 
the happiness which you have brought me to the happiness 
which I had in Macedonia.' IYu>pi£w ifjuv intimates that what 
he is about to communicate deserves attention (Gal. i. 11; 
1 Cor. xii. 3, xv. 1, where see note). The phrase is found only in 
the Epistles of this group, but the verb is freq. in N.T. See on 
i. 8. 

Ti)V x^P 11 ' T0 " ©eo" rr\v SeSojieVTjv iv t. Ikk\. t. Mok. 'The 


grace of God which has been given in the Churches of Mace- 
donia.' God's grace has been and still is operating there, pro- 
ducing in the converts a marvellous degree of Christian 
generosity. Not 'bestowed on the Churches' (AV.), but 'given 
in' them (RV.). Contrast 1 Cor. i. 4. It was among the 
Christians there that this grace was exhibited. St Paul probably 
means the ancient kingdom of Macedonia, in which Philippi, 
Thessalonica, and Beroea were situated, rather than the Roman 
province, which included Thessaly and Epirus. The Romans 
had been very hard on these Macedonians; they had taken 
possession of the gold and silver mines which were rich sources 
of revenue, and had taxed the right of smelting copper and iron ; 
they had also reserved to themselves the importation of salt and 
the felling of timber for building ships. The Macedonians said 
that their nation was like a lacerated and disjointed animal 
(Livy, xlv. 30). On the top of this had come persecution in the 
case of Christian converts. But God had enabled these im- 
poverished people to do great things for their fellow-Christians ; 
no doubt, with the grace of God, the Corinthians would do the 

2. on Iv TroXXfj 0X''v|/ews. 'That in much testing of 
affliction.' The 6V1 depends on yvwpL^o/xev, ' we make known to 
you that.' For SoKtp.rj see on ii. 9 ; here it seems to mean 
'testing' rather than 'proof (RV.); cf. Rom. v. 4. With the 
general sense comp. Jas. i. 3 ; 1 Thess. iii. 3. Affliction tested 
the Macedonians and showed what genuine Christians they 
were. The test was severe and prolonged (ttoAA?/) ; oiol yap 

d— Aws iOXifiqcrav, dXX. outcos ws ko.1 SoKifiot yivecrdai 81a r)}s 

l-ofjLorr)<; (Chrys.). For sufferings of the Thessalonians see 
1 Thess. i. 6, ii. 14. 

t) iTepiao-eia tr\% x a P*s au7w. 'The abundance of their joy'; 
a strange thing to be found ' in much testing of affliction.' But 
few things are more characteristic of the Christians of the 
Apostolic Age than their exuberant joy. Both substantive and 
verb are freq. in N.T., and there is plenty of evidence elsewhere. 
This abiding and conspicuous effect of ' the good tidings ' was 
one leading cause of the Gospel's rapid success. Its missionary 
power was then, and is still, where it exists, very great. Those 
who witness great joy in people whose lives are full of trouble are 
led to think that such people are in possession of something 
which is well worth having. Ilepio-o-eta (x. 15 ; Rom. v. 17) 
is a rare word in literature, but it is found in inscriptions (Deiss- 
mann, Light from the Anc. East, p. 80). The repetition of aviuv 
in this verse has rather a heavy effect ; but the Apostle desires 
to make quite clear that the joy and the poverty and the liber- 


ality are found in the very same people, and that it was the joy 
and the poverty which produced the liberality. The poverty, 
extreme though it was, neither extinguished the joy nor pre- 
vented the liberality. 

r\ K<xTa pdOou? tttwx 6 ^ oiutwv. 'Their down-to-depth poverty.' 
Perhaps a phrase of St Paul's own coining. It does not mean 
that their poverty was going deeper and deeper, but that it had 
already reached the lowest stage. Strabo's avrpov koiXov Kara. 
(3d6ovs is quoted in illustration. Cf. Kara Ke<pa\r}<; (i Cor. xi. 4). 
There is an effective oxymoron in 17 irrwx^a hrepicrtreva-ev «is to 
7tAo£tos. Cf. The widow's two mites given out of her want 
(Lk. xxi. 4), and one Christian having this world's good while 
another has only need (1 Jn. iii. 17). 

to itXoutos rfjs dTrXoTTjTos auTui'. ' The riches of their liber- 
ality.' The passage from 'single-mindedness ' or 'simplicity' to 
' liberality ' as the meaning of 6.^X6^$ is not quite obvious. 
In LXX it means 'innocency ' (2 Sam. xv. 11 ; 1 Chron. xxix. 17 ; 
Wisd. i. 1 ; 1 Mace. ii. 37, 60), generally, if not quite always. 
In N.T. it is peculiar to Paul, and in xi. 3 it seems to mean 
'innocency ' or 'simplicity.' But in these two chapters (ix. 11, 
13) and in Rom. xii. 8 (see note there) it seems to mean that 
simplicity of purpose which is directed towards relieving the 
necessities of others, and hence to denote 'generosity ' or 'liber- 
ality.' * St Paul speaks of the richness, not of their gifts, which 
could not have been large, but of their minds. Munificence is 
measured, not by the amount given, but by the will of the giver. 
Excepting 1 Tim. vi. 17, ttXovtos is always used in the Pauline 
Epp. of moral and spiritual riches ; and here, as in Eph. i. 7, 
ii. 7, iii. 8, 16; Phil. iv. 19; Col. i. 27, ii. 2, the best texts make 
7tXoi)tos neut. In Rom. ix. 23 and Eph. i. 18 it is masc, as 
perhaps elsewhere in N.T. 

t6 ttXoGtos (K* B C P) rather than rbv tt\ovtov (K 3 DFGK L). 

3-5. on kcito, oucap.ii' . . . Sid 0eXi]jut,aTOS 0eou. It will be 
convenient to take the whole of this long sentence first, and then 
examine the separate clauses ; the constr. is irregular, owing to 
prolonged dictation. ' For according to their power, I bear 
witness, and beyond their power, of their own accord, with much 
entreaty beseeching of us the favour and the fellowship of the 
ministering to the saints ; and [this] not in the way that we 
expected, but it was their own selves that they gave first of all 
to the Lord and to us, through the will of God.' Three things 

* Simplicitas malignitati oppo7iitur (Calvin). In the Testaments the 
word is freq., esp. in Issachar, e.g. 7rdVra yap iriuTjat xal d\i(iop.£vois trap- 
eiXov £k tuv d'ya^cDi' rrjs yrjs iv dirX 6t>;ti Kapdias fxov. But the usual meaning 
is 'simplicity,' 'innocence,' rather than 'liberality.' 


have been already stated with regard to the help given by the 
Macedonian Christians. It was rendered (1) in a time of great 
affliction, (2) in spite of great poverty, (3) with great joy. The 
Apostle now adds four more particulars. The help was rendered 
(4) to an extent quite beyond their small means, (5) of their own 
free will, (6) so much so that they begged to be permitted to take 
part in ministering to their fellow-Christians, (7) placing them- 
selves at the disposal of St Paul in a way quite beyond his ex- 
pectation. The long and awkward sentence requires to be 
broken up, and this almost necessarily involves inserting a few 
words. But AV. is not quite consistent in putting what is 
inserted in italics ; for ' take upon us ' {v. 4) and ' this ' {v. 5) 
should be in italics as well as 'their,' 'they were,' and 'they 
did.' Moreover, ' that we should receive ' (v. 4) is no part of the 
true text (see below). In RV. ' this grace ' {v. 4) is in excess of 
the Greek, which has ' the grace.' But, in order to make the 
meaning clear it is almost necessary, with RV., to have ' they 
gave ' twice, although it comes only once in the Greek. 

3. fjiapTupu. Nowhere else is the word used absolutely, as 
here; cf. Gal. iv. 15; Rom. x. 2; Col. iv. 13; Rev. xxii. 18. 
With this parenthetical insertion of a confirmatory statement 
comp. ws tckvois Aeyw (vi. 13), Aeyw v/xiv (Lk. xiii. 24), and the 
classical 618a, olixai, 6pas. Blass, § 79. 7. 

irapd. SuVajni'. Somewhat stronger than V7rlp Svvafj.iv (i. 8), 
which K L P have here; it implies not only 'above and beyond,' 
but 'against, contrary to ' (Heb. xi. 11). It was a sort of contra- 
diction to their poverty to give so much. The words do not 
belong to avBaiptroi, ' spontaneous beyond their power,' but to 
the belated Z8wKav* 

au9aipeToi. The word occurs nowhere in Bibl. Grk., excepting 
here and v. 17. In Xen. Anab. v. vii. 29 we have it of self- 
elected commanders, but it is more often used of things which 
are spontaneously accepted, death, slavery, etc. (Thuc. vi. 40). 
Cf. avOaLptTm (2 Mace. vi. 19 ; 3 Mace. vi. 6), in the same sense 
as aWaiptToi here, viz. of persons acting spontaneously. The 
combination Zkovctlws koI avOaipirw^ is freq. in papyri. Of course 
this excludes only the Apostle's asking ; w. 1 and 5 show that 
the Divine prompting is fully recognized. 

4. Sedjjievoi ^jAwy tt\v X®-P iV Kai T *l" tolWBKiov ttjs Siaiton'as. 
'Begging of us the favour, viz. the sharing in the ministering to 
the saints.' The Macedonians entreated to be allowed the 
privilege of fellowship in so good a work. Cf. 1 Thess. ii. 3. St 
Paul had possibly been unwilling to take much from people who 

* The supra virlutem of Vulg. has led to needless discussion as to whether 
it is right to give supra virlutem ; napa dwafjuv is rather supra vires. 


were SO poor. Ou^ rjixus airuv lhf.rj6rjjj.ev, dAA' aurol fjfxwv 
(Chrys.). AV. here is much astray; rrjv \°-P lv IS not tri e gift 
for the Apostle to receive, but the favour for him to grant, 
viz. allowing the Macedonians to help. Cf. Acts xxiv. 27, 
xxv. 3. They knew that it was more blessed to give than 
to receive. The kcu is probably epexegetic. An ace. of a 
substantive after Seo/xcu is unusual, although tovto Biofiai v/xwv is 

ttjs SiaKoiuas tt]s eis tous dyious. ' The charitable ministering 
to the Christians.' This is a freq. meaning of SiaKovLa (ix. 1, 12, 
13 ; Acts vi. 1, xi. 29, xii. 25), a word which occurs more often 
in 2 Cor. and Acts than in all the rest of the N.T. He adds ek 
tous dyt'ous to explain the motive of the Macedonians ; it was 
because help was wanted for Christians that they were so urgent 
in asking to be allowed to contribute ; sic mavult dicere qaam 
1 pauperes' ; id facit ad impetrandam (Beng. on 1 Cor. xvi. 1). 
Deissmann {Bib. St. p. 117) thinks that this use of ets instead of 
the dat. comm. is Alexandrian rather than Hebraistic ; it is found 
in papyri. 

Si^aadai ^uas after ayiovs is an unintelligent gloss found in a few 
cursives and other inferior authorities. 

5. o kcu ou KciOws r]\irlcra\iev. ' And they did this, not as we 
expected (but far beyond our expectations).' To confine this to 
their giving spontaneously is probably a mistake. What follows 
shows what is meant. Cf. ov to. v/xwv dAAd u/xas (xii. 14). 

dXV eauTous e'SaiKai/ irpwrov. The emphasis is on Iolvtovs by 
position. ' On the contrary, it was their own selves that they 
first and foremost gave to the Lord and to us.' Cf. Ex. xiv. 31. 
IIpajTov here does not mean 'before I asked them,' and prob- 
ably does not mean ' before they gave money.' It means ' first 
in importance'; the crowning part of their generosity was their 
complete self-surrender. They placed themselves at the Apostle's 
disposal for the service of Christ. It is possible that this means 
no more than a general disposition to do all that was within their 
power ; but it may refer to " personal service in the work of 
spreading the Gospel, such as was given by Sopater of Beroea, 
Aristarchus and Secundus of Thessalonica, and Epaphroditus of 
Philippi " (J. H. Bernard). To these we may add Jason and 
Gaius, who were Macedonians, and perhaps Demas. With t<3 

Kvpiut kcu i)[uv COmp. too 7rvevfJLa.Ti tw dyiw /cat rjfjdv (Acts XV. 28). 

8id 0e\Y)|maTos ©eou. Some confine this to kcu r)jxiv, but it 
belongs to the whole clause ; their offering of themselves was 
governed by the will of God ; see v. 1. 

B has TjXiriKa/jLei/, which may be safely rejected ; the aor. is quite in 


6. els to TrapciKaXe'cTcu %as Titov. We are still under the 
influence of the rather hard-worked eoWav, which totam periochae 
structuram sustinet (Beng.). ' It was their own selves that they 
gave ... so that we entreated Titus, that, just as he started 
(the collection) before, so he would also complete among you this 
gracious work also.' The ets to implies some such connecting 
thought as ' I was so encouraged by the generosity of the Mace- 
donians that I thought I would send Titus to you.' We hardly 
need kcu in both places, but the pleonasm would easily be made 
in dictating. The second kcli, however, may mean that there 
were other things which Titus had started. The rare verb 
Trpoa'rjp^aro implies that Titus has been at Corinth before he 
took the severe letter alluded to in vii. 12. This is some 
confirmation of the view that he, rather than Timothy, was the 
bearer of 1 Cor. But he may have been in Corinth before 1 Cor. 
to start the collection. In 1 Cor. xvi. 1 the Xoyta is mentioned 
as a subject already known to the Corinthians; see note there. 
They may have asked about it. See on xii. 18. B here has 
iv-qplaro, a verb which occurs Gal. iii. 3 and Phil. i. 6, in both of 
which passages it is combined with eViTcAea), and in both of them 
Lightfoot thinks that a sacrificial metaphor may be intended, 
for both verbs are sometimes used of religious ceremonials, the 
one of initiatory rites and the other of sacrifices and other sacred 
observances. See Westcott on Heb. ix. 6.* The Iva gives the 
purport rather than the purpose of the entreaty or exhortation, 
and tva ZmTekear) is almost equivalent to a simple infinitive ; cf. 
1 Cor. iv. 3, xvi. 12. 

els o/Jtas. 'Among you'; lit. 'towards you,' 'in reference to 

Kal n^ x&pw To-imp. 'This gracious work also.' This has 
no reference to tv)v x f */ KV to ^ ®tov (v. 1) : it is not ' the grace of 
God ' which Titus is to make efficacious, but the gracious efforts 
for the poor Christians that he is to bring to a fruitful conclusion. 
Nor is it likely that there is any reference to the good work done 
by Titus in reconciling the Corinthians to the Apostle ; that 
would hardly be spoken of as x^P ts - It 1S remarkable how 
frequently Tavrrjv, Tawy, or TavTrjs recurs in this connexion ; w. 
7, 19, 20, ix. 5, 12, 13. In ix. 1 cts tov<5 dytoDS takes its place 
for variety. The precise force of k<u, ' as well as something else,' 
remains doubtful. 

7. dXV <3<nrep iv irairl Trepioo-eu'eTe. ' But there is another 
and a stronger consideration. What God has enabled the Mace- 
donians to do is one incentive ; you must also remember what 

* The meaning here might be that he treated the collection as a religious 
act, a sacrifice to God. 


He has done for you. You abound in everything; do not fall 
short of your great powers.' 

morei. Faith in Christ, such as every believer has. See on 
Rom. i. 17, pp. 31 f. 

X6yw Kal yvucrei. These were specially valued at Corinth ; St 
Paul treats both as Divine gifts, and, except in his Epistles and 
2 Pet., yvcocrts is rarely so regarded in N.T. There is probably 
no reference to speaking with Tongues. See on 1 Cor. i. 5, 
which to a considerable extent is parallel to this. 

CTirouSfj. The word combines the ideas of eagerness, earnest- 
ness, and carefulness. AV. employs seven different terms in 
translating it ; in the Epistles, ' carefulness,' ' care,' ' diligence,' 
' forwardness,' ' earnest care,' and ' business ' ; in the Gospels, 
'haste.' Even the Revisers use four; in the Epistles, 'earnest 
care,' ' earnestness,' and ' diligence ' ; in the Gospels, ' haste.' 
These variations show the wide compass of the word. 

T|j e| ujxcov iv f\iuv dyairT). The reading is doubtful, and the 
meaning in either case is not quite certain, whether we read ifjiwv 
iv rj/xiv or rjiJLwv iv vfuv. Neither ' the love which comes from 
you and dwells in us,' nor ' the love which comes from us and 
dwells in you,' is a phrase which has a very clear meaning. 
The love which wins love in return may be meant, and that may 
be expressed by either reading ; ' your love for us which binds us 
to you ' seems to suit the context. The love, like the faith, etc., 
is in the Corinthians. 

Iva Kal iv Taurr] tt) x&P 11 " 1 ir - This shows clearly the meaning 
of T7]v x<*P lv t°vt*iv in v. 6. The Iva is probably elliptical, and 
we may understand irapaKaXC) from v. 6, or a similar verb. The 
elliptical Iva is then a gentle substitute for the direct imperative, 
as in the letter of the Jerusalem Jews to those in Egypt, 2 Mace, 
i. 9 J /ecu vvv tva ayrjT€ toc9 r/fiipas tt}s <TK7)V0Trr}yLa<s tov Xao-iXcu 
fiyvos. Cf. also Gal. ii. 10; Eph. v. 33; Mk. v. 23. This use 
of tva is found in papyri. The dXXa is against making Iva 
co-ordinate with the Iva in v. 6 ; and in any case this would be an 
awkward constr. 'AAAd is at rather than sed; it marks, not 
opposition, but the transition from statement to exhortation 
(Mt. ix. 18; Mk. ix. 22 ; Lk. vii. 7). Tau'77? is emphatic by posi- 
tion ; ' in this gracious work also,' as in faith, utterance, know- 
ledge, and love. He is anxious not to seem to be finding fault. 

VIII. 8-15. 1 give no orders. The Example of Christ need 
only be mentioned. Each of you must decide how much he 
ought to give. 

8 Do not think that I am issuing commands. I am not 
dictating to you. Not at all. I am merely calling your attention 


to the enthusiasm of the Macedonians in order to prove how 
genuine is your love also. ( 9 There is no need to give orders to 
you. You know how gracious the Lord Jesus Christ was. He 
was so rich in the glory of the Godhead ; yet all for your sake He 
became so poor, in order that you, yes you, might become 
spiritually rich.) 10 I say I am not giving orders ; it is just a 
view of the matter that I am offering you in what I write. This 
surely is the proper way in dealing with people like you, who 
were first in the field, not merely in doing something but in 
cherishing a desire to help, and that was as far back as last year. 

11 But now do carry the doing also through, so that your readi- 
ness in desiring to help may be equalled by your way of 
carrying it through, so far, of course, as your means allow. 

12 For if the readiness to give is forthcoming, and to give in 
proportion to one's possessions, this is very acceptable : no one 
is expected to give in proportion to what he does not possess. 
18 I do not mean that other people should be relieved at the cost 
of bringing distress on you, but that there should be equality of 
burdens. At the present crisis your surplus goes to meet their 
deficit, 14 in order that some day their surplus may come to meet 
your deficit, so that there may be equality. 15 This is just what 
stands written in Scripture ; — 

' He who gathered his much had not too much, 
And he who gathered his little had not too little. 

8. Ou ko.t' emTayV Xe'yw. ' Not by way of command am I 
speaking.' Kot liziray-qv is a Pauline phrase, and it is used 
in two different senses. With a negative, as here and 1 Cor. 
vii. 6 (see note), it means 'not by way of command'; there is 
nothing dictatorial in what he says ; he is not issuing orders or 
laying down rules. Without a negative and with a following gen., 
e.g. ®eov, as Rom. xvi. 26; 1 Tim. i. 1 ; Tit. i. 3, it means 'in 
accordance with God's command,' equivalent to Sid feA^a-ros 
®eov (i. 1, viii. 5 ; 1 Cor. i. 1 ; Eph. i. 1 ; Col. i. 1 ; 2 Tim. i. 1). 
Vulg. is capricious ; here, non quasi imperans ; 1 Cor. vii. 6, non 
secundum imperium; Rom. xvi. 26, secundum praeceptum ; so also 
1 Tim. i. 1 and Tit. i. 1. Cf. Philem. 8, 9. 

d\\d . . . SoKifxd^wt/. 'But as proving (xiii. 5), by means of 
the earnestness of others, the sincerity of your love also.' No 
verb has to be supplied ; Xeycu continues. The mention of the 
zeal of the Macedonians will show that the Corinthians' love is 
as real as theirs. Excepting Lk. xii. 56, xiv. 19; 1 Pet. i. 7; 


1 Jn. iv. 1, SoKi/jid^o) is a Pauline word, and it is found in all four 
groups, 17 times in all. Whereas ireipdfa is sometimes neutral, 
but generally means testing with the sinister object of producing 
failure, ZoKifxa^u is sometimes neutral (as in Lk.), is never used in 
the sense of ' tempt,' and often as here, means ' prove ' with the 
hope of a favourable result, or with the implied idea that the 
testing has had such a result. Hence it acquires the sense of 
'approve' (Rom. ii. 18, xiv. 22), and is never used of the attempts 
of Satan to make men fail. AV. in translating uses ' examine,' 
'try,' 'discern,' 'prove,' 'approve,' 'allow,' 'like'; RV. uses 
some of these and adds 'interpret' (Lk. xii. 56). Vulg. has 
comprobo here, but everywhere else in N.T. probo or temto. The 
meaning here is that St Paul is quite sure that the good example 
of the Macedonians will be followed at Corinth. See Trench, 
Syn. § lxxiv. ; Cremer, Lex. s.v. 

Kol to ttjs u(ji€Tepas aydTrrjs yn^crioi'. ' Whatever is genuine in 
your love also.' St Paul is fond of the substantival adj. followed 
by a gen. ; to puapbv tov ®eov, to VTrepi^ov r^s yiwcrew?, to ^prjcrTov 
tov ®eov. Cf. iv. 17. We have a similar expression Jas. i. 3, to 
SoKipuov v/awv t?}s 7TLo-Teu><;, and still more similar in 1 Pet. i. 7, if 
to 8oki/xov be the right reading. Deissmann (Bib. St. pp. 250, 
259) cites an inscription of Sestos which has -n-pb -irXeio-Tov 
0£/u,evos to 7rpos ttjv 7ra.Tpt8a yinjaLov. See Blass, § 47. I. IV^crios 
means 'not supposititious,' 'legitimate,' 'genuine,' and fyurrepas 
answers to hipwv, both being emphatic* 

9. yiywo-KeTe yap. The yap introduces the reason why he 
issues no orders ; there is no need. The Corinthians have their 
own loyal affection ; they have the example of the Macedonians ; 
and, if that were absent, they have the far more constraining 
example of Christ. The yap in itself is almost proof that 
ytvwo-K€Te is indicative, which is probable on other grounds. 
Scitis enim gratiam (Vulg.). 

tou Kupiou t\y-& v I^ctou [XpioroG]. B omits Xpio-Tou, but it is 
probably original. The full title adds to the impressiveness of 
the appeal ; Domini nostri Jesu Christi (Vulg.) ; ' the free gift of 
our Lord Jesus Christ.' 

81' up.a§. Placed first with great emphasis. There is not 
only the example of a self-sacrificing life, but of a sacrifice made 
on behalf of the Corinthians. Christ not only claimed obedi- 

* Vulg. has vesirae caritatis ingenium bonnm comprobans. If this is a 
corruption ofingenuum, the corruption must be very early, for it is found in the 
earliest commentators as well as in the most ancient MSS. Augustine loosely 
renders the words by vesirae caritatis carts simum. It is to the world at 
large that the genuineness of their love is to be proved ; St Paul needed no 


ence by declaring Himself to be the Legislator of a new Church 
and the Supreme Judge of all mankind, He also inspired intense 
affection and devotion by laying men under an immense obliga- 
tion. He was One whom it was impossible for men to benefit 
by conferring on Him earthly advantages, and yet, being so 
great and rich, He sacrificed for over thirty years more than men 
can at all comprehend, in order to do them good ; Ecce Homo, 
ch. v. sub fin. The pre-existence of Christ is plainly taught here, 
as in Gal. iv. 4 (see Lightfoot). See on Rom. viii. 3, 4 and Col. 
ii. 9 f. ; also on 1 Cor. x. 4. 

£iTTu>xe\Jcrev -jrX.ouai.os Stv. Egenus f actus est, cum esset dives 
(Vulg.). The wv is imperf. part., and the aor. points to the 
moment of the Incarnation. Previous to that He was rich 
(Jn. xvii. 5) ; at that crisis He became poor. That was the 
immeasurable impoverishment (Phil. ii. 6-8). That for years 
He lived the life of a carpenter, and that when He left His 
Mother's house He had not where to lay His head, is of small 
account, and would be a very inadequate interpretation of 
e7rrwx ei " Ta/ - He was not like Moses, who renounced the luxury 
of the palace in order to serve his brethren ; He never had any 
earthly riches to renounce. " His riches were prior to His earthly 
life in a pre-existent life with God. He became poor when He 
entered the world, with a definite purpose to enrich His disciples, 
not in earthly goods, but in the same riches He Himself originally 
possessed in the heavenly world" (Briggs, The Messiah of the 
Apostles, p. 121).* Here is the supreme incentive to benevo- 
lence; to being willing, nay, eager, to give up a great deal in 
order to help others. ' This ineffable surrender was made for 

Xva. ufjiets rp ckcivou tttojx^^ ir\ourr]CTT]Te. Both pronouns are 
emphatic; ' that you, through His poverty, might become rich,' 
viz. with the heavenly riches of union with God in Christ and 
the assurance of eternal life. Jl/eum ergo paupertas ilia patri- 
monium est, et infirmitas Domini mea est virtus ; maluit sibi in- 
digere, ut omnibus abundaret (Ambrose on Lk. ii. 41). Perhaps 
the main lesson of the verse is that Christ gave Himself, and in 
all genuine liberality something of self must be given. Cf. Jn. 
xvii. 22, 24; Rom. viii. 30; 2 Tim. ii. n, 12. 

This motive for liberality is remarkable as being made so 
incidentally, as if there was no need to do more than mention it. 
It was so well known, and it was so unanswerable. Perhaps we 
ought hardly to call it a parenthesis ; but such a description is 
only a slight exaggeration. The Apostle at once returns to the 
point about which he is nervously anxious. He is not giving 

* This is a natural and permissible view of the Incarnation, but it is not 
the deepest. See W. Temple, Foundations, pp. 219, 245. 



commands as an authority who must be obeyed; that would 
spoil everything. He is laying his o-vn views before them, and 
they must act of their own free will. 

We have again the common confusion between ■tyuets and v/neis. Read 
8i V/J.S.S (X B D F G L P, Latt. Syrr. Copt. Goth. ) rather than Si ^/xas (C K), 
which makes sense, but very inferior sense. To read 7]/xeripas (some cursives) 
in v. 8 spoils the sense. 

10. Kai Y^pp iv tou'tw SiSoifu. ' And it is an opinion that I am 
offering you in this,' not a command. Here, as in 1 Cor. vii. 25, 
where yvujxrj is contrasted with eVtray^, Vulg. has consilium for 
the former. He has told them before (1 Cor. vii. 40) that he 
believes that his opinion is worth considering. Like tovto in the 
next sentence, iv tovtu> is ambiguous. It may mean either 'in 
what I am saying' or ' in this matter of the relief fund.' 

touto yap u\xlv crupj>Epei, ol'Tii'es k.t.X. ' For this is expedient 
for people like you, who, etc' Lit. ' for you who are of such a 
character as, etc' Tovro may mean simply ' This giving liberally 
which I suggest to you ' ; and in that case o-v/x^ipu means ' is for 
your good morally.' But tovto may also mean (and with rather 
more point in connexion with the preceding sentence and v. 8), 
' To offer an opinion, and not give a command, is the method which 
is suitable to people like you, who were to the front, not only in 
doing something, but also in desiring to do something, as long 
ago as last year.' People who have not even a wish to move 
are the kind of people to whom one issues commands. Herveius 
understands tovto as meaning ' To win the riches of Christ by 
imitating His poverty is well worth your doing.' This is a more 
elaborate form of the first interpretation. The force of om«s 
must in any case be preserved. 

But why is doing placed in this position, as if it were inferior 
to willing? To say that in morals it is the will that is of value, 
and not what is accomplished, is not satisfying. It is not prob- 
able that St Paul had any such thought. Nor is it very satis- 
factory to suppose that in dictating he inadvertently transposed 
the two verbs. We get a better explanation if we suppose that 
he wished to say that the Corinthians were the very first in the 
field, not only in setting to work, but in intending to set to work. 
This explanation does not require us to give to the 7rpo- in 
7rpoevr;p£ao-0e the meaning ' before the Macedonians,' which is 
perhaps too definite ; but, if that is the force of the preposition, 
the explanation has all the more point. The change from the 
aor. Troiyjo-ai to the pres. 0e'Aeiv is to be noted, indicating the 
difference between some particular action and the continual 
wishing to act. This may perhaps intimate that the acting has 
ceased, and that only the wishing remains. They had been first 
in both, but now others were before them in acting. There are 


two other explanations, ' not only to do, but to do it willingly,' 
and 'not indeed with the doing, but at any rate with the willing.' 
Both make good sense, but neither can be got out of the Greek 
as we have it. There must be conjectural emendation of the 
text in order to justify either; and if we are to make conjectures, 
the simplest is the transposition of the two verbs, as is done in 
the Peshitto Syriac. 

diro irepuCTt. ' From last year,' i.e. ' as long ago as last year.' 
Not 'a year ago,' as AV. and RV., which implies twelve months 
ago. If, as is probable, 2 Cor. was written late in the year, and if 
St Paul is reckoning, either according to the Jewish civil year, or 
according to the Macedonian year, then ' last year ' might mean 
the spring of the same year, according to our reckoning. If he 
is following the Olympiads, which he might do in writing to 
Corinthians, this way of expressing himself would be still more 
easy. The Macedonian year is said, like the Jewish civil year 
(Tisri), to have begun about October ; and counting by Olympiads 
the year would begin in the summer. Therefore in all three 
cases a person writing in November might speak of the previous 
January-April as 'last year.' When 1 Cor. was written the 
collection of money at Corinth had hardly begun (1 Cor. xvi. 1 f.). 
On this point turns the interval between 1 Cor. and 2 Cor. 
Here we are told that 'last year' the collecting had begun. 
Does this imply an interval of much less than a year or of much 
more than a year ? See Introduction ; also K. Lake, Earlier 
Letters of St Paul, p. 140. The expression otto irepvai is found 
in papyri, and the combination probably belongs to the language 
of the people ; Trpoirepvcri and linripvo-i are also used in the like 
sense. Deissmann, Bib. St. p. 221. 

Tpoev/jp£cur0e (N B C K L P) rather than iv^acrBe (D F G) ; cf. v. 6. 

11. vvn 8e icai to TroiTJcrai emTeXeo-are. 'But now complete 
the doing also, that as there [was] the. readiness to will, so there 
may be the completion also according to your means.' It would 
be a sad thing that those who were foremost in willing should 
be hindermost in performing ; they must bring their performance 
into line with their willingness. There is no verb expressed with 
Ka.6d.7rep 17 7rpo9vp.La row OiXeiv. We may supply either 'was' 
or ' is.' Each Corinthian would know whether he still possessed 
this Trpodvp-La. The stronger form vwi intimates that there should 
be no more delay ; ' precisely now and not later.' It is rare else- 
where in N.T., but freq. in Paul, generally as here in the usual 
temporal sense, but sometimes logical, as 1 Cor. xiii. 13; cf. 
Heb. ix. 29. 

eKToG Zyew. Ambiguous; it might mean 'out of that which 
ye have ' (AV.) ; which has little point : if they give, it must be 


out of what they possess. The next verse shows that it means 
'in proportion to what you possess.' Evidently the readiness 
to give had for some time not been very great, certainly not 
since the rupture between the Apostle and the Corinthians, 
and now he does not wish to alarm them. He had put 
before them the example of the Macedonians, who had 
given 'beyond their means' (v. 3). He assures the Corin- 
thians that he is not suggesting that they ought to give beyond 
their means ; but they no doubt see that they ought to give, 
and he urges them to do so without further delay. Except- 
ing Acts xvii. 11, TrpoOvfiia is peculiar to 2 Cor. {vv. 12, 19, 
ix. 2). 

12. el yap t) 7rpo9ujju'a TrpoKeirai. ' For if the readiness is there 
(lit. ' lies before us '), it is acceptable according as [a man] may 
have, and not according as [he] has not' The ns is not original, 
but perhaps it ought to be supplied (RV.). Otherwise 77 irpodvftia 
personified is the nom. to exv and ex 61 - Cf. Tobit iv. 8, which 
is one of the offertory sentences in the English Liturgy. It 
is not likely that 77-po/cerrai here means ' precedes,' ' be first ' 
(AV.), prius adsit (Beza). The amount that a man may have 
is indefinite, lav Ixv '• ms not having is a definite fact (ovk 
«?X £ 0- ^ n Rom. xv. 31 €V7rpo'crSe/cros is again used in reference 
to the Palestine relief fund. See on vi. 2, and Hort on 
1 Pet. ii. 5 ; also Index IV.* 

i&v (B C D 3 E K P) rather than &v (K D* F G L). K B C* D F G K P 
omit rts, which C 2 L have after 'ixv and D F G after ?x a - 

13, 14. ou yap Iva. aXXtos aewis. Something is often under- 
stood before Iva: 'I mean' (AV.), or 'I say this' (RV.), or 
'the object is' (Waite and others), etc. But the ellipse is just 
as intelligible in English as in Greek, and in English no con- 
junction is needed ; ' Not that there is to be relief for others, 
pressure for you : but according to equality, etc' For aWis 
see on ii. 13 ; also Index IV. 

d\\' e£ iCTOTrjTos. These words may be taken either with 
what precedes or with what follows. Although ottos ylv-qrai 
io-ott/s occurs at the end of the next sentence, it is perhaps best 
to take dXX.' i£ io-o'tt^tos at the beginning of it. Place a colon at 
■ pressure for you ' and continue ; ' but according to equality — at 
the present season your abundance to meet their want, that their 
abundance also may meet your want, so that the result may be 

* In his letter to Eustochium {Ep. cviii. 15) Jerome quotes thus ; Non ut 
aliis refrigerium, vobis autem tribttlatio, sed ex eqitalitate in hoc tempore, ut 
vestra abundantia sit ad illorum inopiam, et illorum abundantia sit ad 
vestram inopiam. 


equality.'* There is to be reciprocity, mutual give and take, so 
that in the end each side has rendered the same kind of service 
to the other. We need not bring in here the thought in Rom. 
xv. 27 of Gentiles giving material help in return for spiritual 
help. Here the help on both sides is material. The Apostle 
contemplates the possibility of Corinthian Christians being in 
distress, and of Jerusalem Christians sending money to relieve it. 
Vulg. supplies words which are not in the Greek; and something 
must be supplied ; vestra abundantia illorum inopiam suppleat ; 
ut et illorum abundantia vestrae inopiae sit supplementum. Beza has 
suppleat in both clauses. 'Ev t<3 vvv naipw as in Rom. iii. 26, xi. 5. 
to ujAwr Treptcro-eujjia ... to uu.wi' uaTeprju.a. This use of i/xwv 
between the art. and the noun is freq. in Paul ; see on i. 6 and 
cf. 1 Cor. vii. 35, ix. 12. 

The 5<? after v/juu (N 3 D E G K L P, Vulg. Goth. Arm.) is probably an 
insertion for the sake of smoothness; S*BC 17, de, Aeth. omit. Note 
D E and d e. 

15. The quotation hardly illustrates more than the idea of 
equality of some sort ; not the equality which is the result of 
mutual give and take, which is a voluntary process, but that 
which is the result of the same measure being imposed on all, 
which is not voluntary. In LXX we have ovk lirXzovaaev 6 to 
7roXv and 6 to ZXolttov ovk rj\a.TTovr]o-ev (Ex. xvi. 18). Some 
Israelites were eager to gather much manna; others through 
modesty or indifference gathered little. When they came to 
measure it, they all found they had exactly the prescribed 
amount. St Paul perhaps suggests that the equality which had 
to be forced upon those Israelites ought to be joyfully anticipated 
in the new Israel. The Corinthian Christians ought spontaneously 
to secure themselves against getting more than their share of this 
world's goods by giving to the Jerusalem Christians before there 
was any need to require help from them. 

K(x0ws yeypaiTTai. Cf. ix. 9 ; 1 Cor. i. 31, ii. 9; Rom. i. 17; 
etc. This form of citation is in Paul confined to Corinthians 
and Romans, and it is very freq. in Romans. 

6 to iroXu k.t.X. Qui /nullum, non abundavit, et qui modicum, 
?wn minoravit (Vulg.). 'He who gathered his much had not 
too much, And he who gathered his little had not too little.' 
In one sense this equality holds good in the other world also 
(Mt. xx. 9, 10) ; quia omnes habebunt vitae aeternae aequalitatem 
(Herveius). But it does not follow from this that there will be 
no distinctions in that life. 

* 'At the present season' is emphatic, and Lewin thinks that it may refer 
to the Sabbatic year, "during which the means of the Jews were so stinted, 
that even the Romans for that year remitted the tribute (Jos. Ant. xiv. x. 
6)." More probably it refers to the prolonged poverty of the Hebrew Church. 


In what follows we have the business arrangements respect- 
ing the collection for the fund. It is a kind of iTrio-ToXrj 
cxv(TTaTiKr\ (iii. 1) for the officials. 

VIII. 16-IX. 5. Titus and two approved colleagues will 
help you to organize the fund. There shall be no room for 
suspecting underhand dealing. Give a hearty welcome to 
the three, and have everything ready in good time. 

16 But thanks be to God, who is putting into the heart of 
Titus the same eager zeal that I myself always entertain. 17 I 
am not speaking at random. He not only readily responds to 
my appeal, but being from the first full of zealous eagerness, it 
is of his own unprompted choice that he is setting off to go to 
you. 18 And I am sending with him as a colleague that brother 
whose services in spreading the Gospel have won him the praise 
of all the Churches. 19 And, what is more, this brother has 
been elected by the Churches to be our fellow-traveller in this 
work of benevolence which is being administered by us to pro- 
mote the honour of the Lord Himself and increase my own 
readiness. 20 I want to make quite sure that no one shall be 
able to criticize or suspect our conduct in the matter of this 
charity-fund which is being administered by us. 21 For I aim at 
doing what is absolutely honourable, not only in the sight of the 
Lord, but also in the sight of men. 22 And with Titus and the 
brother just mentioned I am sending another brother of whose 
eager zeal 1 have had many proofs in many particulars ; and in 
the present matter his zeal is in a very special degree eager, by 
reason of the special confidence which he has been led to place 
in you. 23 If anyone wishes to know about Titus, he is my 
intimate colleague and my fellow-labourer in all work for you ; 
and as to the two brethren who accompany him, they are apostles 
of Churches, an honour to Christ. 24 Give them therefore a con- 
spicuous proof of your affection and of the good reason that I 
have to be proud of you ; so that the Churches from which they 
come may know how well you have behaved. 

IX. 1 For, in the first place, with regard to the ministration to 
the poor Christians at Jerusalem, it is really superfluous for me 
to be writing to you; 2 for I know your readiness, about which 
I am always boasting on your behalf to the Macedonians. 
1 Achaia,' I tell them, ' has been ready since last year.' And your 


zeal has been a stimulus to most of them. 8 And, in the second 
place, I am sending Titus and his two colleagues to make sure 
that my boasting about you is not stultified in this matter of the 
relief-fund ; that you might be quite ready, as I used to tell the 
Macedonians that you were. 4 For it would be disastrous if 
Macedonians were to come with me and find you unprepared. 
That would bring utter shame to me — to say nothing of you — 
for having expressed this great confidence in you. 6 To avoid 
this possible discredit I thought it absolutely necessary to entreat 
these three brethren to go to you before me, and get into order 
before I come the bounty which you promised before, so that 
all may be ready in good time as really a bounty and not as a 
grudging and niggardly contribution. 

16. Xdpis 8e tw ©ew to SiSom k.t.X. 'But thanks be to 
God who is perpetually putting the same earnest care on your 
behalf in the heart of Titus.' Vide quam late pateat hoc officium 
gratias agendi (Beng.). Cf. ii. 14, ix- 15; 1 Cor. xv. 57 ; Rom. 
vi. 17. We had SiSorai lv rah KapSiai? in i. 22 ; cf. Jn. hi. 35 ; 
1 Mace. ii. 7, v. 50; 3 Mace. ii. 20. The iv implies that what- 
ever is given remains where it is placed. The changes of mean- 
ing in this chapter with regard to x^P ts should be noted (vv. 4, 
6," 7, 19 of the relief-fund; but vv. 1, 9, 16 quite different). 
'The same earnest care' probably means 'that I have on your 
behalf,' rather than ' that you have for the relief-fund,' or ' that 
Titus had for the Thessalonians.' There is a delicate touch in 
vTrlp i'fxwv. The Corinthians might think that the zeal of Titus 
for the relief-fund was zeal on behalf of the Jerusalem poor ; but 
it was really on behalf of the Corinthians. They would be the 
chief losers if a suitable sum was not raised in Corinth. 

dioovTL (S'BCK P, g) rather than dovn (N 3 D;E G L, d e Vulg.). 

17. on ri]v p.ey ■n-apdxXTjCTii' e8e|aTO. 'For, to begin with, 
he welcomes our appeal.' This and the next two verbs are 
epistolary aorists, which must be rendered as presents in English. 
Cf. ii. 3, ix. 3. 

CTirouSaioTepos 8e uirdpxuv k.t.X. ' Secondly, in his character- 
istic earnestness, of his own accord he is going forth to you.' 

18. oweirep.ij/ap.ei' 8e rbv aSeX^oy jact' aurou. ' And we are 
sending together with him the brother, whose praise for pro- 
claiming the Gospel rings through all the Churches'; lit. 'whose 
praise in the Gospel is through all the Churches'; der das Lob 
hat am Evatigelio durch alle Gemeinen (Luther). As in Gal. ii. 
12, a verb compounded with crw is followed by /xera. The point 


of a description of the two brethren who are to accompany 
Titus (vv. 18-23) i s tnat St Paul is not sending to the Corinthians 
persons of no repute.* Both of them are tried men who have 
done good service. Lietzmann thinks that in the original letter 
the names must have been given, and that they were afterwards 
omitted, possibly because these two delegates proved to be not 
very acceptable at Corinth. But if the two were as yet unknown 
at Corinth, to mention their names would be of little use ; this 
letter was to go with them, and Titus would introduce them. 
It was, however, of importance that the Corinthians should know 
how highly the Apostle and others thought of them. 

There have been many conjectures as to the first of the two 
brethren ; Barnabas (Chrys., Thdrt), Luke (Origen, Bom. 1. in 
Luc, Ephraem), and (in modern writers) Silas, Mark, Erastus, 
Trophimus, Aristarchus, Secundus, and Sopater of Beroea. On 
the whole, Luke seems to be the best guess, and it is evidently 
assumed in the Collect for St Luke's Day. Bachmann and 
G. H. Rendall strongly support it. If Luke was left at Philippi 
from the time when St Paul first visited it to the time of his 
return to it, a period of about six years, he might have become 
a favourite in Macedonia and be an obvious person to select to 
collect alms for Jerusalem in Gentile Churches. Rendall regards 
it as " hardly short of demonstrable that this was none other 
than S. Luke" (p. 79). Renan rejects it (p. 455 n.). But of 
course ev ™ evayyeXtio cannot refer to St Luke's Gospel, which 
was not yet written. Souter takes tov a8e\<j>6v in the literal 
sense as meaning the brother of Titus {Exp. Times, xviii. pp. 
285, 3 2 5-336). 

19. ou \t.6vov 8e d\\d k.t.X. 'And not only [is he praised 
through all the Churches], but he was also appointed by the 
Churches to be our fellow-traveller in this work of grace which 
is being administered by us to promote the glory of the Lord 
Himself and our readiness.' There are some doubtful points 
here. (1) To which word does 7rpos tt/v k.t.X. belong? To 
XeipoToi'?7#6is or to StaKovov/xiin}} Was this brother appointed to 
promote the glory, etc. ? Or is the fund being administered for 
this purpose ? The latter seems more suitable, and is adopted 
in Vulg. (2) Has irpos the same sense in reference to TrpoOv^iav 
rj/xwv as to rrjv . . . 86$av? Both AV. and RV. make a change 
of meaning, which is somewhat violent, but not impossible in a 
dictated letter. Yet no change is necessary. We may render 
7r/3os either 'to show' or 'to promote' in both cases. 'To shozv 

* St Paul often gives commendations of this kind ; to Timothy and 
Stephanas (1 Cor. xvi. 10-15), Phoebe (Rom. xvi. 1), Tychicus, Onesimus, 
and Mark (Col. iv. 7-10), Zenas and Apollos (Tit. iii. 12-14). 


the glory and our readiness' is simple enough ; but 'to promote 
the glory and our readiness ' makes good sense and may be 
right, if the clause be taken with xapoi^eis. The appointment 
of this efficient colleague tended to increase the glory of God 
and the Apostle's readiness. His enthusiasm was made still 
greater when the prospects of success were increased by giving 
Titus such a helper. The constr. of x el P OTOl ' r l^ € ^ IS irregular ; 
we want exeipoTovrjO-q. Cf. OXifiojxevoi (vii. 5), and crreAAo/xevoi 
{v. 20). Blass, § 79. 10. XeipoTovtio is an interesting verb ex- 
hibiting three marked stages in its history; (1) 'elect by show 
of hands'; (2) 'elect' in any way; (3) 'appoint,' whether by 
election or not. Elsewhere in N.T. Acts xiv. 23 only. It is 
certain that the verb is used by contemporary writers for appoint- 
ment without election ; and the substantive also. Josephus has 
the verb of God's appointing David to be king {Ant. vi. xiii. 9) 
and of Jonathan being appointed high priest by Alexander {Ant. 
xm. ii. 2). Philo uses x €i P 0T0V ^ a OI " Pharaoh's appointment of 
Joseph to be governor of Egypt {De Josepho, § 21, Mang. p. 58). 
Similar usage is found in inscriptions. Neither here nor in 
Acts does it mean the imposition of hands in ordination, iTrlOeo-is 
w x ct P^ v > or tne stretching out of the hands previous to imposi- 
tion, which is a much later use. In Acts xiv. 23 the ordination 
of the presbyters is implied in Trpocrev^d/xevoi, not in x eLa " rov V~ 
aavre<;. In Acts Vulg. has constituo, here ordino; AV. has 
' ordain ' in Acts and ' choose ' here ; RV. has ' appoint ' in both. 
oWk&t]|i.os. 'To go abroad with us,' 'to be our companion 
in travel,' a subordinate, not a colleague, like Barnabas. Here 
and Acts xix. 20 only. Vulg. has comes perigri?iationis here and 
comites without perigrinationis in Acts, where o-uvc/cStz/aovs is used 
of Aristarchus and Gaius. Hence some think that it refers to 
Aristarchus here (Redlich, 6". Paul and his Companions, p. 217). 

iv T7j x°-P LTl (B C P, f Vulg. Copt. Arm. Aeth.) rather than <rvv rrj \- 
(SDFGKL,deg, Syrr. ). B C D* G L, Latt. Copt, omit avrov before 
tov Kvplov. F and a few cursives, followed by T.R., have v/jlwv after 
irpodvj-uav, an obvious correction, to agree with v. n and ix. 2, where the 
vpodv/xia is in the Corinthians. Baljon conjectures Kara irpod. tj/xuv. 

20. o-reWop.ei'oi touto, pr] tis f\pa-s jAGjjirjo-TjTcu. ' Taking pre- 
cautions about this, that no man blame (vi. 3) us in the matter 
of this bounty which is being administered by us.' The participle 
explains why this colleague has been given to Titus, and in con- 
struction it belongs to StSovrcs (v. 12) is some- 
what similar in constr. Cf. Wisd. xiv. 1 ; 2 Mace. v. 1 ; also 
2 Thess. iii. 6, the only other passage in N.T. in which crTeXXop.a.1 
occurs. From meaning ' tighten,' o-tcAXo) comes to mean ' hold 
back,' ' check,' and areXXofxaL means ' draw back from ' ; cf. 
vTTOfTTeXXui (Gal. ii. 13), and see Westcott on Heb. x. 38. Here 


Vulg. has devitantes and in 2 Thess. iii. 6 subtrahatis vos : To 
(TTiXkecrOai avA tov ^copt'^ecr^at TeOeiKe (Thdrt.). 

Tfj dSpoTYjTi. Plenitudine (Vulg.). From ' fulness and firm- 
ness ' in the human body and speech it comes to mean any kind 
of 'abundance.' Wetstein says it occurs four times in Zosimus 
of ' munificent giving,' which is the meaning here. The Apostle 
assumes that the amount raised will be large, and he must 
secure himself against all possibility of suspicion that he ad- 
ministered it dishonestly.* He might have repeated iv rfj ^apm 
ravrrj (vv. 7, 1 9), but he prefers an unusual word (nowhere else 
in Bibl. Grk.) to show that he feels sure that the Corinthians 
will be bountiful. 

21. TrpocooGfAci/ yap Ka\<£. He is quoting LXX of Prov. iii. 4, 
/cat irpovoov KaXa ivwTrtov K.vpiov kcu avOpwiruv, where the Heb. 
gives, ' And thou shalt find favour and good understanding 
in the sight, etc.' See Toye, ad loc. St Paul quotes the text 
again Rom. xii. 17, irpovoovp.tvoi KaXa. ivurmov iravrwv avOpoiirwv, 
as a reason for not being revengeful, in both cases following LXX 
rather than the Heb. ' For we aim at things honourable ' ; lit 
' we take forethought for ' ; cf. Wisd. vi. 8. Caput autem est in 
omni procuratiotie negotii et muneris publici, ut avaritiae pellatur 
minima suspitio (Cic. De Off. 11. xxi. 75). Coram Deo sufficit 
bona conscientia, sed coram hominibus necessaria est bona fama 
(Herveius). Not to care what others think of us may be unfair 
to them. It would have been disastrous to his converts for 
them to be able to suspect the Apostle of dishonesty. Qui 
fidens conscientiae suae negligit fa?nam suam crude/is est, says 
Augustine (Serm. 355). That St Paul was merely establishing a 
precedent, to protect future bearers of charitable funds from 
suspicion, is not probable. He knew that his critics would 
suspect him. Cf. Ep. of Polycarp, vi. 1. 

Trpovoov/xev yap Kaka (X B D F G P, Latt. Syrr.) rather than -n-povoovfxevoi. 
KaXa ( K L) co-ordinate with ffTeXKdfxevot., or than irpovoou/Aevoi yap /caXd 
(C, Copt. Goth.). 

22. aui'Trepl/ap.ei' 8e auTois. ' And we are sending (epistolary 
aor.) together with them our brother whom we have proved to 
be in earnest many times in many things.' ' Our brother ' of 
course does not mean the brother of St Paul,f any more 
than 'the brother' in ». 18 means the brother of Titus. In 

* Moffatt compares Byron's remark to Moore in 1822; "I doubt the 
accuracy of all almoners, or remitters of benevolent cash." Philo tells of the 
care that was taken to have trustworthy men to carry the temple-tribute 
(De Monarch, ii. § 3, Mang. 224, sub fin.). Schiirer greatly enlarges Philo's 
statement (Jewish People, II. ii. p. 289). 

t If he had a brother, he could not have made use of him as a check on 
himself. We know of no brother. 


both cases ' brother ' means ' fellow-Christians.' Giving him a 
name is pure guesswork ; some conjecture Tychicus, others 
Apollos. The freq. alliteration with tt is conspicuous in this 
verse. Cf. i. 5, vii. 4, viii. 2, ix. 8, n, etc. 

vui'l 8e ttoXu atrouSaioTepot'. ' But now much more in earnest 
by reason of much confidence to you-ward.' In this way it is easy 
to continue the alliteration. See on i. 15 for the Pauline word 
■7r€Trot6r](TL<;, which no doubt means the envoy's confidence (RV.) 
rather than the Apostle's (AV.). The latter would require a 
pronoun to make it clear. But this mention of the envoy's 
confidence respecting them does not prove that he had been in 
Corinth. What he had heard about them might make him eager 
to come. See Index IV. 

23. eiTe uirep Titou . . . 6iT€ d8e\(J>ol i^|xwv. The COnstr. is 
broken in dictating. ' Whether [anyone asks] about Titus, he is 
my partner and fellow-worker to you-ward ; or our brethren [be 
asked about], they are apostles of Churches, a glory to Christ.' 
Titus is to represent the Apostle; the two brethren are to 
represent the Macedonian Churches. Cf. 1 Cor. xi. 7. He does 
not say 'Apostles of Christ'; that was true of himself and the 
Twelve, who had received their commission direct from our Lord, 
but it was not true of these two brethren who were merely 
messengers or delegates of Churches, as Epaphroditus of Philippi ; 
legati, qui publico nomine pium exsequuntur officium (Beng.). 
See Harnack, Mission and Expansion, i. pp. 319, 327. Never- 
theless, to be selected by their Churches was a guarantee for their 
characters and capacities. In these two verses he brings the 
commendatory section to a close. For elre . . . ctrc see on 
i. 6 ; cf. 1 Cor. iii. 21, xiii. 8. Its use without a verb is classical. 
Blass, § 78. 2. See Hastings, DB. and DCG. art. ' Apostle.' 

24. ttji' ow eVSeiliy . . . eVSei^aaGe. See crit. note below. 
' Demonstrate therefore to them the demonstration of your love 
and of our glorying on your behalf to' the face of the Churches.' 
'Show the proof (AV., RV.) does not preserve the repetition, 
which is probably deliberate. Vulg. has Ostensionem ergo . . . 
ostendite. It is easily preserved in English ; ' Exhibit to them 
the exhibition,' ' Manifest to them the manifestation.' The 
Corinthians are urged to show that their own love is genuine and 
that the Apostle's pride in them is fully justified. "EvSet^ts in 
N.T. is a Pauline word (Rom. iii. 25, 26 and Phil. i. 28 only), 
and it is not found in LXX. It means ' an appeal to facts,' 
demonstratio rebus gestis facta. 

€19 irpoaomoi' TWf £kk\t\<j\.C>v. ' To the face of the Churches ' ; 
i.e. as if the congregations to which they belong were present. 
They are representative men ; delegates, who will report to the 


Churches that elected them what they see and hear at Corinth, 
to which they are coming with high expectations ; and the 
Corinthians must take care that there is no disappointment. 
This last clause is added with solemnity ; it points to a host of 
witnesses, in whose presence the Corinthians will virtually be 
acting. The Apostle has suggested a variety of motives, from 
the example of Christ down to respect for their own reputation, 
for being generous. 

It is not easy to decide between ivdelfrade (N C D 2 and 3 E** K L P, 
f Vulg. Syrr. Copt. Arm. Aeth.) and ivoeiKvvfievoi (B D* E* G 17, deg 
Goth.). WH. prefer the former, with the latter in marg. Tisch. prefers 
the latter, which would be likely to be corrected to ivSei^aarde. The 
Kal before els irpbawwov r. 4kk\., 'and before the Churches' (AV.) has 
very little authority (only a few cursives). 

IX. 1. Here again (see on vii. 1) the division between the 
chapters is not well placed. As the yap shows, ix. 1 is closely 
connected with what precedes. The Apostle continues to make 
arrangements respecting the collection. He has assumed all 
along that what has been begun will not be allowed to drop, and 
he has suggested reasons for a liberal contribution. He now 
begs them, whether they give much or little, to have all in 
readiness before he himself arrives. 

As in the case of vi. 14-vii. 1, we have again to consider the 
hypothesis that a fragment of another letter has somehow or 
other been inserted here. It is urged that ix. 1 does not explain 
viii. 24, and therefore the yap cannot refer to viii. 24, and that in 
ix. we have repetitions of things which have been already said in 
viii. Repetitions in letters are common enough, especially when 
the writer is very much in earnest and has to feel his way with 
caution. " The tautological urgency of the appeal does not show 
a plurality of epistles, but a lack of certainty as to the result " 
(Reuss). The yap, as we shall see, is very intelligible. Indeed, 
if the division between the chapters had not been so misplaced, 
no one would have proposed to separate ix. 1-5 from viii. 16-24. 
Schmiedel divides the paragraphs between viii. 23 and 24, giving 
24 to what follows.* Hypotheses of stray leaves from other 
documents being imbedded in N.T. writings are to be received 
with much scepticism, unless they are supported by strong 
external evidence, as in the case of Jn. vii. 53— viii. 1 1. Some 
critics suggest that it is ch. viii. that has been interpolated. But 
there is no evidence in any MS., or version, or series of quotations, 
that 2 Corinthians ever existed without viii. or without ix. 

* Halmel insists that the omission of Tavrrjs and addition of els tovs 
aylovs in ix. I (as in viii. 4) proves that in ix. 1 we begin a different and 
independent appeal. The inference is not strong : els tovs aylovs takes the 
place of Taisrr)s. 


Cyprian quotes from both, and commentators, both Greek and 
Latin, comment on both without betraying doubt about the 
genuineness of either. It will be found that ix. helps us to 
understand viii. See Massie, pp. 60, 61. 

1. riepl pif y«P ""}s StaKoi'ias €is tous dyious. The /xlv antici- 
pates Se in v. 3 ; the ydp looks back to the conclusion of viii. 
Cf. 1 Cor. xi. 5, xii. 8. ' I have commended the envoys to you 
rather than commanded you to give (viii. 8), for, with regard to 
the ministration to the saints, in the first place (/xeV) it is super- 
fluous for me to be writing (pres. not aor.) to you.' The similar 
statements in 1 Thess. iv. 9 and v. 1 should be compared ; also 
iv. 13. For SiaKovia eis t. dy. see on viii. 4. In neither place 
does the cis limit the ministration to the transmission of the 
money. C, Arm. omit ydp as unintelligible. 

-irepicrcroi' p.01 ionr. Ex abundanti est mihi scribere vobis 
(Vulg.) ; better, supervacaneum est. We often do this ; especi- 
ally in cases in which we are deeply interested. We begin, 
'I need not say'; and immediately we do say, perhaps at some 
length : croepcos Se tovto Trout, wore /xaXXov avTovs lirunraaacrOai 
(Chrys.). On the art. with ypd^tiv see Blass, § 71. 2, and comp. 
vii. 11 ; Phil. ii. 6, iv. 10. 

2. oI8a yap Trp irpoGup-taf 6p.wi\ He has stated that he knows 
that they thought of doing something and began to do some- 
thing in the previous year, and he assumes that they are still 
anxious to do something ; solet enim se meliorem praebere ille, de 
quo bene sentitur ab alio (Herveius). But we are not to suppose 
that St Paul deliberately gave the Corinthians praise which he 
knew that they did not deserve, in order to induce them to be 
liberal ; still less that this is a right thing to do. 

r\v uirep up-we Mcuce'Soo-iy. ' Of which I am continually 
glorying on your behalf to the Macedonians.' He is staying in 
Macedonia, and habitually praises the Corinthians to them. As 
Theodoret remarks, Atd Kopiv#iW tovs MaKcSo'ras, Sta Se 
MaKeSdvw tovs Kopiv#ious, irrl ttjv aya8r]v ipyaaiav Trpoerpaf/ev. 
It would be grievous indeed, if the Corinthians now failed to 
imitate the Macedonians, to whom the Corinthians had been 
held up as a pattern. ' See that you who taught them do not 
fall behind your own disciples.' Ka^xw/xat with ace. of the thing 
gloried in is not rare (vii. 14, x. 8, xi. 30). Often in Paul 
Kcu>xw/xai is used in a good sense, not merely when the glorying 
is in God or in Christ (Rom. v. 11, xv. 17 ; 1 Cor. i. 31 ; etc), 
but also when it is in men (here, vii. 14 ; 2 Thess. i. 4 ; Phil. ii. 16). 
The Apostle also glories in his own infirmities and afflictions 
(xii. 9; Rom. v. 3). Here he seems to have some misgivings as 
to whether he may not have praised the Corinthians to the 


Macedonians somewhat too warmly. The report which Titus 
brought from Corinth had delighted him so greatly, that his 
glorying about the collection may have been somewhat in excess 
of the facts. 

'Axcua Trapeo-Kcu'aoTai euro ire'pucu. He is quoting what he says 
to the Macedonians ; ' Achaia has been prepared since last year' 
(see on viii. io). As in i. i, 'Achaia' probably means Corinth 
and the neighbouring district ; he purposely includes Christians 
outside Corinth, perhaps to avoid exaggeration. Corinth had 
done something the previous year, but apparently not very much. 

to ujj.wk £t]\os. Again we have the Pauline arrangement of 
vfxtov between art. and noun; cf. i. 6, vii. 7, 15, viii. 13, 14, etc. 
In N.T., as in LXX and in class. Grk., £>}A.os is usually masc, 
but here and Phil. hi. 6 the neut. form is well attested. It is 
found also in Ign. Tral. 4. Clem. Rom. Cor. 3-6 uses both 
masc. and neut. indifferently. Here the meaning is uncertain, 
but ' your zeal ' is more probable than ' emulation of you,' quae 
ex vobis est aemulatio (Aug.). 

Tjpe'0io-e. 'Stimulated.' In Col. iii. 21, the only other place 
in N.T. in which the verb occurs, it is used in a bad sense, 
' provoke,' ' irritate.' In LXX and in class. Grk. the latter sense 
prevails. 'Provoke' has both meanings, but commonly the bad 
one. Aldis Wright {Bible Word Book, p. 482) gives examples of 
the good meaning. 

t6 (K B 17) rather than 6 (CDFGKLP). ifiQv (SBCP, f Vulg 
Copt. Arm. ) rather than <?£ v^Qiv ( Goth. ). 

3. e-n-epj/a 8e tous doeXcjWg. ' In the second place (Se) I am 
sending (epistolary aor., as in viii. 17, 18, 22) the brethren,' viz. 
Titus and his two colleagues.* The Se corresponds to the /xev 
in v. 1. He need not urge them to give ; he is sending these 
three to organize their giving. D E, Copt, have €7re'/At/fa/xev. 

Xva jjiTi t6 Kauxrjp.aiifj.wi/. ' That our glorying on your behalf 
may not be made void in this particular.' He had praised the 
Corinthians for many good qualities, and he does not want his 
boast to be proved an empty one in the matter of the relief-fund. 
He is not afraid that they will refuse to give, but he is afraid 
that they may be dilatory for want of organization. It will pro- 
duce a bad impression if the money is not ready when it is 
wanted. He carefully limits his anxiety to ' this particular.' 

Xva xaGous KXcyof imp. tjt€. ' That, just as I repeatedly said 
(to the Macedonians) you may be prepared.' The second Iva is 
co-ordinate with the first; cf. Gal. iii. 14. 

* Possibly only the two colleagues are meant. Titus was going of his own 
initiative (viii. 17). Without viii. 16-24, these verses (3-5) would be rather 


4. iav IX0WCTH' cruv Iftol MaiceooVes. The brethren who go 
with Titus may or may not have been Macedonians. Their 
finding the collection not yet complete does not matter so much. 
But it will look very badly, when St Paul comes to fetch the 
money, if Macedonians come with him and find that very little 
has been collected. There is nothing here to show that the 
situation is different from that in viii., — that there St Paul is 
not coming to Corinth very soon, and that here he is coming 
very soon. 

dirapacriceudCTTous. A late and rare form, here only in N.T. 
The usual form is airapdcrKevo<s. Neither word occurs in LXX. 

Kcn-aio-xu^wfjiev %€i$. He puts his own shame first ; but of 
course the disgrace would be theirs rather than his. He asks 
them to spare him, which is a better plea than appealing to their 
own interests, which are just touched parenthetically. Multa 
confusio est, si pro te qui te diligit erubescat (Pseudo-Primasius). 
'We, to say nothing of you, should be put to shame' (vii. 14; 
Rom. x. 11). See Index IV. 

iv Tii] oTroordcrei toutt|. The word has a very varied history, 
but only one or two points need be noted here. From meaning 
1 standing ground ' or ' foundation ' it comes to mean ' ground of 
hope or confidence ' (Ruth i. 1 2 ; Ezek. xix. 5), and hence ' hope ' 
or ' confidence.' In LXX it represents fifteen different Hebrew 
words. In Heb. iii. 14 (see Westcott) it means the resolute con- 
fidence which resists all attack. Here it means the Apostle's 
confidence in the character of his converts. They must not 
make people think that he has been too sure of them. Cf. xi. 
17 ; Heb. xi. 1. In this verse St Paul makes it quite clear that 
he means to visit Corinth again. 

\tyuixev (X B C 2 L P, f Vulg. Syrr. Copt.) rather than Xfyw (C* D F G, 
d e g). After ravry, N° D'EKL P, Syrr. Arm. Goth, add rrjs /cauxwewy, 
from xi. 17. X* BC D* G 17, 67**, Latt. Copt. omit. 

5. irpoe\8w(Tif . . . TrpoKaTapTicr&Kri ttjc irpo€irt]YYeXp.eVr|i' 
euXoyiai'. ' To go to you before me and get into order before I 
come the bounty which was promised before (Rom. i. 2).' In 
this way, or by having ' in advance ' in all three places, the repe- 
tition, which is no doubt deliberate, may be preserved in English. 
See on xiii. 2. It is not quite clear that the participle means 
'promised long before' by the Corinthians. It might mean 
' announced long before ' by St Paul. With avayKalov ^y^o-d/x^v 
comp. 2 Mace. ix. 21. 

cuXoytai'. From being used of good words it comes to mean 
good deeds ; from men blessing God and one another and God 
blessing men it comes to mean a concrete blessing or benefit, 
whether bestowed by men or by God (judg. i. 15 ; Ezek. xxxiv. 
26). Here it means a benefit bestowed by men on men. What 


the Corinthians give will be a blessing to the Jerusalem poor 
(Gen. xxxiii. n; Josh. xv. 19). He is not hinting that liberal 
giving will bring a blessing to them in this life or will be rewarded 
in the next; he is thinking of the good done to the recipients. 
In Rom. xvi. 18 evXoyia has the rare sense of ' flattering speech.' 
It is remarkable that St Paul, who uses so many words in con- 
nexion with this benevolence to poor Christians, Kotvwvta, 
SiaKovta, x°^P ts > aSpor^s, Aeiroupyia and eiXoyta, nowhere speaks of 
it as (piXavOpwiria: that word he uses of God's love to man (Tit. 
iii. 4). Luke has it of man's love to man (Acts xxviii. 2).* 

ws e&Xoyiav ica! p] u>s TrXcoceliai/. Here RV. makes a change 
for the worse. 'As a matter of bounty, not of covetoas- 
ness' (AV.), is better than 'not of extortion' (RV.). In the 
next verse ^etSo/AeVws as well as in euAoytais applies to the 
Corinthians, and <£e<.8op.eWs is parallel to ws 7rXeove^av as lir 
evXoyiai<; is to ws evXoyiai'. ' Not of extortion ' makes irXeove&a 
apply to the Apostle and his three envoys ; ' that this might be 
ready, because you are so willing to give, and not because we 
force you to do so.' The meaning rather is ' that this may be 
ready as a generous gift and not as a grudging contribution.' 
IIAcovdfia is " The disposition which is ever ready to sacrifice 
one's neighbour to oneself in all things " (Light foot on Rom. i. 
29). It has therefore a much wider sweep than fyiXapyvpia 
(Trench, Syn. § 24), and in the case of giving it means keeping 
for one's own use what one ought to bestow on others. That 
is the meaning here.f But Chrysostom and Beza (ut extortum 
aliquid) take it as RV. 

ets hii.o.'i (X C K L) rather than irpbs vfias (B D F G). irpoeTr^yyeX 
fiivqv (XBCDFGP) rather than irpoKaT-qyyeKixiv-qv (K L). The ko.1 
before fj.r) ci>s is probably original ; but S* F G, Latt. omit. D E have ko.1 
although de omit. 

IX. 6-15. Give liberally and cheerfully, for your own 
sakes and for the sake of the zvhole Church. 

6 Now remember this sure law ; He who sows sparingly, 
sparingly shall also reap, and he who sows on principles of 
bounty, on principles of bounty shall also reap. 7 Let each man 
give just what he has resolved in his mind to give, neither 
impulsively, because he takes no thought, nor regretfully, because 
he thinks that he cannot avoid giving. It is one who gives joy- 
ously that God loves and blesses. 8 Do not regard this as an 
impossible standard. God can and will help you to attain to 

* Deissmann {Bib. St. p. 144) proposes to read Xoylav here instead of 
evXoylav. There is no authority for it. 

■)■ Wie eine Stgtnsgabe nicht wie eine Habsuchtsgabe (Schmiedel). 


it. He can shower earthly blessings in abundance upon you ; 
and so, when you find that on all occasions you have all suffi- 
ciency in all things, you will have abundant means for accom- 
plishing all kinds of good work. 9 This is exactly what stands 
written about the charitable man in Scripture ; 

He scattered, he gave to the needy, 
His good deeds shall never be forgotten. 

God not only can do this ; He certainly will do it. 10 He who so 
bountifully supplies seed for man to sow, and thus gives bread 
for him to eat, will certainly supply and multiply benefits for 
you to sow, and will make the harvest which springs from your 
good deeds to be a full one ; u you will be enriched on every 
side, so that all kinds of liberality will be open to you ; and this 
liberality of yours, which I hope to administer, will be sure to 
make the recipients very thankful to God. 12 For the ministra- 
tion of this truly religious service of yours does a great deal more 
than increase the supply of the wants of our fellow-Christians ; it 
does that, but it also, through the chorus of thanksgivings which 
it occasions, produces something more for God. 13 This charit- 
able ministration of yours is a proof of your Christian char- 
acter, and it gives those who profit by it two grounds of thank- 
fulness to God ; viz. the genuine loyalty with which you confess 
your adherence to the Gospel of Christ, and the consequent 
liberality of your contribution to themselves, which is a benefit 
to the whole Church. u They themselves, moreover, will respond 
by offering prayers on your behalf, longing for closer union with 
you, on account of the overflowing grace of God which has been 
manifestly poured upon you. 15 Thanks be to God for effecting 
such brotherly love between Jew and Gentile in the Church, a 
precious boon of which it is impossible to state the worth. 

The paragraph is a closely united whole and is closely con- 
nected with what precedes. Having begged the Corinthians not 
to spoil his praise of them by exhibiting unreadiness now, but 
to give without further delay, he puts before them three motives 
for giving liberally and joyfully. 1. Giving in a right spirit is a 
sowing which is sure of a harvest. Dare non est amittere sed 
seminare (Herveius). 2. God is able and willing to bestow the 
right spirit and the worldly wealth with which to exhibit it. 3. 
What they give will not only be a relief to the recipients, but 
it will fill them with gratitude to God and with affection for the 



donors. In a few details the exact meaning is not always clear, 
and in several places the grammatical construction is rugged or 
even broken. These blemishes are due to the deep feeling with 
which the Apostle advocates a cause which he has greatly at 
heart to those who have not been very enthusiastic about it, and 
who quite recently have been ill-disposed to himself. We must 
also remember that he is dictating, and in so doing may lose the 
thread of the construction. 

6. ToGto 8e. The Se is merely transitional; 'Now' rather 
than 'But.' With toSto we may supply a verb which is some- 
times expressed, such as, Ae'yw, Aeyo/xev, <pw«, or ""^i voeire, 
\oyi£,e<r8e, avaXoyio-aaOe : either, ' Now this I say,' or ' Now con- 
sider this.' Cf. 1 Thess. iv. 15; Gal. iii. 17 ; 1 Cor. vii. 29, xv. 
50 ; Phil. ii. 5 ; 2 Tim. ii. 7 ; etc. But tovto or Udvo without 
a verb is freq. in class. Grk. Blass, § 81. 2 ; Winer, p. 746. The 
emphatic tovto calls attention to what follows ; it is a well- 
established and important law. Lachmann takes the tovto on 
to ?/cao-Tos, ' Now let each man do this ' or ' give this,' making 
6 o-irelpuv . . . 6epio-ei a parenthesis, which is an awkward and 
improbable construction. 

6 (Tireipwv 4>ei8o(ieV(«)S, ^eiSojjieVws Kol 0epio-€i. The chiasmus IS 
effective ; ' He who sows sparingly, sparingly will also reap.' 
St Paul is fond of chiasmus ; ii. 16, iv. 3, vi. 8, x. n, 12, xiii. 3 ; 
1 Cor. iii. 17, iv. 10, viii. 13, xiii. 2. Comp. 'One man spends, 
yet still increases ; another withholds what is proper, but it tends 
only to want' (Pro v. xi. 24). Ut sementem feceris, ita metes (Cic. 
De Orat. ii. 65). Nowhere else in N.T. or LXX does the rare 
adv. (petSofxevois occur, but cf. Swpcov Be 6 <pei8dyU.evos (Prov. xxi. 14). 
The harvest at which the return for the sowing will be repeated 
is the end of the world (Mt. xiii. 39), and the return, good or 
bad, is bestowed by Christ (v. 10; Gal. vi. 7; Eph. vi. 8; Col. 

iii. 25). 

he euXoyiais. ' On principles of blessing,' or ' On conditions,^ 
or ' For purposes of blessing.' Cf. ttjv Ik ®eov SiKaioo-vvrjv iirl 
T77 7rt'o-T€i (Phil. iii. 9), and 6 ©eos c/mo-ev tov av$pwirov lir 
&<p6apo-ia (Wisd. ii. 23), and Traces rj&OW iir ayaf9(P tt)j/ eVicpaviW 
yeyevfjo-OaL (2 MaCC V. 4). Papyri show that iir ayaOip was a 

common colloquial expression, and Itt dya&ns also occurs. The 
plur. here indicates abundance, and the adverbial phrase may be 
rendered ' generously,' ' bountifully ' ; cf. Ecclus. xliv. 23. 

The Apostle has already shown (viii. 12) that generosity does 
not depend upon the amount given, but upon the mind and 
means of the giver ; and we need not wonder that he here puts 
before his converts the prospect of a rich reward hereafter as a 
motive for being generous. Low motives, if not immoral, are 


admissible, esp. in dealing with those to whom high motives do 
not always appeal. Our Lord makes use of them (Mt. vi. 4, 6, 
18 ; Lk. xiv. 14), as does St Paul elsewhere (1 Tim. vi. 17-19). 

Instead of £if ev\oylais, iir evXoyiais, D has iv evKoylq., i$ evXoylas, G 
has eV evXoylq, e-rr ev\oylq., Cyprian in benediclione, de benedictione. But 
it is clear from <j>eido[i£i>ws, <petdop.(vus that X B C etc. are right in having 
iirl in both places, and the plur. would be more likely to be changed to the 
sing, than vice versa. 

7. eKctoros Ka0ojs irpoT]'pr)Tcu ttj KapSia. ' Each man just as he 
has determined in his heart' As in Rom. v. 18, the ellipse of 
the verb makes the sentence more forcible. Each must make 
up his mind seriously as to what he ought to give, and then give 
joyously. There must be neither thoughtless nor unwilling 
giving. Students of Aristotle's Ethics are familiar with vpoaip- 
eio-Oai of deliberate choosing, as also with avrdpKeia (v. 8) ; both 
words are freq. there, but occur nowhere else in N.T. Even if 
bnvoprjym (v. 10) be allowed some weight, the use of such 
words is not very strong evidence that St Paul had acquaintance 
with Aristotelian philosophy. From philosophic schools these 
expressions had passed into the common language of the day, as 
Darwin's language has done among ourselves. Cf. The sluggard's 
hands ' deliberately refuse to do anything,' ov yap Trpoaipovvrat <d 
X«pes avrov 7roieiv ti (Prov. xxi. 25); also irpXv r/ yvwvai ambv r/ 
irpoekio-Qat Trovrjpd (Is. vii. 15); and with 177 KapSia cf. o vtos p.ov 
TrpoeiXaTO rfj if/vyy Trpf Ovyarepa vp.wv (Gen. xxxiv. 8). 

Ik Xu'ttyis ii ££ dcdyKTis. These are not alternatives, but 
different ways of stating the same fact. The man who gives l£ 
avdyKrjs gives ck AvV?;?. By public opinion or other influences 
he is forced to give, and therefore he gives with pain and regret. 
He cannot give willingly, and therefore cannot give joyfully. 
Cf. 'Thy heart shall not be sad (ov Xvir^Oya-r] rfj KapSta crov) 
when thou givest' (Deut. xv. 10, where see Driver). 

ikapbv ydp ooTYif dya-im o' Geos. The first word is emphatic; 
hilarem, Dei similem (Beng.). ' For it is a joyful giver that God 
loveth.' The quotation is from the LXX addition to Prov. 
xxii. 8, avSpa IXapov kol Sottjv cvXoyet 6 ©eo?. St Paul is quoting 
from memory. He would not deliberately have changed eiXoyel 
to dyaira. Nowhere else in N.T. does iXapo's occur, but it is 
fairly freq. in LXX in the Sapiential books. Wetstein quotes 
a Rabbinical saying, to the effect that receiving a friend with 
a cheerful countenance and giving him nothing is better than 
giving him everything with a gloomy countenance. Seneca 
remarks that to give with doubt and delay is almost as thankless 
as to refuse. Nam quum in beneficio jucundissima sit tribuentis 
voluntas, qui nokntem se tribuisse ipsa cunctatione testatus est, non 
dedit sed adversus ducentem male retinuit. Multi autem sunt quos 


liberales facit fronds infirmitas. Optimum est, antecedere desi- 
derium cujusque, proximum sequi (De Berief. ii. i ). The classical 
form is Zor-qp or Scoryp. 

irpor/pTjrai (KBCP 67**) rather than irpoaipeirai (D E K L). 

8. SumTci 8e 6 0e6s. ' Now God is able ' ; that is indisput- 
able. To give joyfully when one has little to spare may seem 
difficult, but with God all things are possible. He ' is able to 
make every grace abound unto you.' He can give the desire to 
be generous and the means of being generous. It is specially 
the latter that is meant here. Datur nobis, et habemus, non ut 
habeamus, sed ut bene faciamus. Omnia in hac vita, ettam 
praemia, sunt semina fidelibus, in messetn futuram (Beng.). The 
man with a bountiful heart finds that God supplies him with 
something to bestow ; 6 ®eos oxf/erai. iavr<2 Trp6j3arov €ts 6\oK<ip- 
Trojcnv (Gen. xxii. 8). As in iv. 1 5 Trepio-aevu) is transitive ; here 
it must be, and there it probably is. 

iv -rracTi TrdrroTe irao-ar auTapKeiai/. ' Always having all 
sufficiency in all things, may abound to all good works ' ; lit. ' to 
every good work,' or 'every kind of good work.' But, as in 
v. 5, vi. 3, vii. 4, viii. 22, it is worth while to keep the repetition 
and alliteration as far as possible. In Plato {Menex. 347 A) we 

have fJLrjSeU /j/riSt'va /xr/Sa/xov 0.81*7/077 followed by Sia iravros iraaav 
7ravTW? irpoOvjxiav ireipao-de e'x^- AvrapKeia, ' self-sufficiency,' is 
being independent of external circumstances, especially of the 
services of other people. The result is contentment, for the less 
a man needs or desires in the way of external goods, the easier it 
is for him to be contented. This does not mean the avoidance 
of society or the refusal of the blessings of civilization, as the 
Cynics taught ; * these things are necessary for self-development : 
but it does mean being able to do with a small amount of these 
advantages. The meaning here is that the less a man requires 
for himself, the greater means he will have for relieving the wants 
of others. In 1 Tim. vi. 6 (cf. Phil. iv. 11) the meaning is, not 
'sufficiency,' but 'contentment.' 

SwareT (K B C* D* F G) rather than dvvards (C 2 D 2 and » ;E K L P). 
Here, as in Rom. xiv. 4, the more usual word has been substituted for a 
rare one. In xiii. 3, the only other passage in N.T., Sward is undisputed. 
Both in N.T. and LXX Swards is very freq. ; in LXX Swariw does not 


9. KaGws Ye'YP a ' irTai - ' Even as it stands written.' There is 
exact correspondence between what has just been stated and 
what is said of the charitable man, ' the man who fears the Lord,' 

* 'ApicTKei S' airroh Kal XtriSj fiiovv, KaOairep Aioytvqs, 6s ?0a<r/ce Oeu>v /xh 
tSiov ehai fnjSevbs Se'urdai, tQv Si Oeols b/xoLwv rd 6\iyuv XPV^ etv (Diog. Laert. 
vi. 105). 


in Scripture. It is possible to carry on 6 ©cos from v. 8 as the 
subject in the quotation, and it is not fatal to this view that in 
Ps. cxii. 3, 9, the good man, and not God, is the subject. Quota- 
tions are often made, and with the more effect, with a complete 
change of application. Moreover, in Ps. cxi. 3, ' His righteous- 
ness standeth fast for ever ' is said of God, and LXX is the same 
in both places. Nevertheless, the context here is in favour of 
understanding the quotation as a description of the benevolent 

eo-KopTUCTcc, eSwKec tois Tti\n\(riv. ' He scattered, he gave to 
the needy.' ' Scattering ' is the opposite of ' sowing sparingly ' ; 
it is, as Bengel says, verbum generosum, implying giving with a 
full hand. But he is less happy in adding sine anxia cogitatione 
quorsum singula grana cadant. The really charitable man takes 
anxious care that his benevolence is not made mischievous by 
being misapplied ; he gives, not to anyone who will receive, but 
to the needy. Herveius is better ; dedit non indiscrete omnibus, 
sed cum ratio?ie solis paupeiHbus. Per hoc removetur vitium 
avaritiae contrarium, id est prodigalitatis. In N.T. (Mt. xii. 30 
= Lk. xi. 23 ; Jn. x. 12, xvi. 32), as in LXX, o-Kop7ri£w commonly 
means 'disperse, put to flight.' 

Nowhere else in N.T. does ttcV^s occur, and therefore it is all 
the more necessary to distinguish it in translation from tttw^os, 
which is freq. in the Gospels, but is used by St Paul rarely, and 
only in this group of Epistles (Rom. xv. 26; Gal. ii. 10, iv. 9). 
Both words are found in conjunction, several times in Ezekiel, 
and more often in the Psalms, where the familiar 'poor and 
needy' is frequent. Yet no English Version makes any distinc- 
tion here; nor does the Vulgate, which has no fixed rendering 
where the two words are found together. It varies between 
egenus et pauper and pauper et inops, and once has mendicus et 
pauper. See Index IV. Of the two words tttw^os (tttwcto-w, ' I 
crouch') is the stronger, ' abjectly poor.' Trench, Syn. § xxxvi. ; 
Hatch, Bibl. Grk. p. 73. With the general sense comp. Prov. 
xi. 25. The righteous man does not keep for selfish use what 
was meant for the benefit of many. 

r\ Sikcuoowt] cxutoG jxeVei els top cuwea. ' His righteousness 
abideth for ever.' Both subject and predicate of this simple 
sentence are ambiguous. 'H SiKaioa-vvrj may mean either ' right- 
eousness' in the wider sense; or 'almsgiving' as a form of 
righteousness, and according to Jewish notions a very important 
form; or 'prosperity' as a reward for righteousness, 'blessing,' 
which seems to be its meaning in Ps. cxii. 9 ; cf. Ezek. xviii. 20 ; 
Is. lviii. 8. ' Righteousness leads to prosperity, and prosperity 
promotes almsgiving,' is perhaps the sequence in thought. In 
Mt. vi. 1 the original reading BiKaiocrvvr) was changed by some 


copyists to iki.rffxoavvr], because they supposed that Sikcuoo-vvy) 
was used there in the narrower sense. Cf. Deut. xxiv. 13. 
Mivei €is tov alwva is also ambiguous, for it may refer to the life 
to come or be limited to this life, and the 'abiding' or 'standing 
fast ' may be literal or may refer to perpetual remembrance by 
man or God. In LXX of both Psalms the expression is €19 tov 
aiwra rov aiaivos. It is unlikely that St Paul omits tot) aiwvos in 
order to limit the meaning to this life, for eis tov alwva may 
include the life to come (Jn. viii. 51, xi. 26, xii. 34; etc.). He 
himself commonly uses the plur. cis tows aiwra?, sometimes 
adding twv alwvwv (Gal. i. 5 ; Phil. iv. 20 ; etc.) and sometimes 
not (Rom. i. 25, ix. 5 ; etc.). 

Among possible meanings for the whole statement these merit 
consideration ; (1) the righteous acts of the good man continue 
as long as he lives, for God always supplies him with the means ; 
(2) the prosperity which rewards his righteousness continues as 
long as he lives ; (3) his goodness will always be remembered 
among men ; (4) his goodness will always be remembered and 
rewarded by God both here and hereafter ; (5) the effects of his 
goodness will live for ever, influencing generation after genera- 
tion. Wickedness will be destroyed, but righteousness can 
never perish. Of these five the two last are best, and of these 
two the last is perhaps not sufficiently obvious; the fourth is 
simpler and is a principle often insisted on in Scripture. 

G K, f g add tov aluivos from LXX. 

10. 6 Se iin)(ppv]yGjv o-irepjuia tu cnretporn k.t.X. He is con- 
tinuing the argument that, in the long run, bounty is not ruinous 
to those who practise it. He has shown that God can reward it, 
and he now points out that we may believe that He will do so. 
He again resorts to Scripture, Is. Iv. 10 and Hos. x. 12. 

nod apToi' els Ppwo-iv. The clause is amphibolous, but no 
doubt should be taken with what precedes (RV.), not with what 
follows (AV.) ; 'Now He that bountifully supplieth seed to the 
sower and bread for eating, will supply and multiply what you 
sow.' It seems to be right to make a distinction between im- 
Xop-qyiu) and x o pyy* w > although in late Greek compound words 
are often no stronger in meaning than simple ones (Bigg on 2 Pet. 
i. 5). Cf. Gal. iii. 5 ; Col. ii. 19, in both of which passages tVi- 
Xopyyiu) means 'supply bountifully,' and eVi^o/j^yta has a similar 
force Eph. iv. 16 and Phil. i. 19 (Lightfoot on Gal. iii. 5). Xop- 
■qyeu), freq. in LXX, is found in N.T. here and 1 Pet. iv. 1 1 only. 
The won! passed through three stages; (1) 'lead the chorus'; 
(2) ' supply the chorus ' for a drama, a Aeu-oupyta which cost the 
persons who undertook it a large outlay ; (3) ' supply anything 
plentifully,' as here. Even the simple verb suggests generous 


behaviour. Aristotle several times uses Ktxopyyypwos in the 
sense of 'well furnished,' 'well fitted out' {Eth. 1. viii. 15, x. 15, 
x. vii. 4 ; etc.). 

Rather more important than the change from i-mxoprjyw to 
Xoprjyrjcrei is the change from (nrep/xa to <nropov, for the former is 
seed in the literal sense, whereas (nropos is here used of the gifts 
which must be scattered generously, and which God will supply 
and augment. The possessions of the Corinthians are given by 
God, and He augments them with a view to their being employed 

Both external (see below) and internal evidence can show 
that the three verbs are futures indicative and not optatives. A 
wish does not suit the context. 

St Paul does not seem to make much, if any, difference 
between Kav'x^o-is (i. 12, vii. 4, 14, viii. 24, xi. 10, 17) and Kavxnp-a 
(i. 14, v. 12, ix. 3), and in late Greek the difference between -crts 
and -fxa in verbal substantives is not very distinct. But in the 
case of /Spdjcris and 7rocm (1 Cor. viii. 4; Rom. xiv. 17; Col. 
ii. 16) as compared with (3pwp.a and irofia (1 Cor. iii. 2, vi. 13, 
x. 3, 4; Rom. xiv. 15) he appears to observe the usual differ- 
ence, the former being 'eating' and 'drinking,' the latter 'food' 
and ' drink.' Here /?pwo-is is ' eating ' rather than ' food ' ; partem 
ad manducandutn (Vulg.) rather than panem ad escam (Beza). But 
elsewhere Vulg. has esca or cibus for /fyaxm as well as for fopufia. 

au|r|aei to, ye^fjiaTa ttjs SiKaioau'nf]s vy.S)v. From LXX of 
Hos. x. 12 ; 'will make the fruits of your righteousness to grow.' 
Neither LXX nor Heb. give exactly the thought which St Paul 
has here, yet either might suggest the thought. His chief 
borrowing is the expression yevyfiara StKcuocnVq?. The Heb. 
gives, ' Sow for yourselves righteousness ; reap the fruit of love ; 
break up your fallow ground ; since there is (still) time to seek 
Jehovah, till He come and rain righteousness upon you,' or 
possibly ' to the end that the fruit of righteousness may come to 
you ' (see Harper, ad loc). If we may take the first two com- 
mands as meaning 'Sow for yourselves righteousness and ye 
shall reap in proportion to your love,' and conclude ' to the end 
that the fruit of righteousness may come to you,' we come close 
to what St Paul inculcates here. LXX is very different ; ' Sow 
for yourselves unto righteousness; reap unto fruit of life; light 
for yourselves unto light of knowledge ; seek the Lord until the 
produce of righteousness comes for you.' 

Here, as in 1 Cor. iii. 6, 7, ai^avut is transitive ; so always in 
LXX. Cf. x. 15 ; Col. i. 6, 10; 1 Pet. ii. 2. In N.T. it is often 
intransitive (Eph. ii. 21, iv. 15 ; Mt. vi. 28; etc.). The change 
is thought to begin with Aristotle. Many verbs, mostly con- 
nected with motion, make this transition. Winer, p. 314; Blass, 


§ 24. Tivrjfia is freq. in LXX of vegetable produce; cf. Mt. 
xxvi. 29 and parallels. Here of the rewards of liberality. 

awepixa. (X C D 2 and 3 E K L P) rather than <rir6pov (BD*FG), by 
assimilation to what follows. x o PVYV^ei . . . irXrjdwel . . . av£rj<Tei 
(N*BCD*P, Latt. Copt.) rather than x°pyYO ffal • • • wX^flifrai . . . 
av^aai (N°D C FGKL), yevruxara (NBCDFGKLP) rather than 
yevvfifxa Ta " Papyri confirm the spelling with one v, and the derivation 
from ylvo/jLcu, as coexisting with the double v, and the derivation from 
yevv&u. Deissmann, Bib. St. pp. 109, 184. Cf. Mk. xiv. 25 ; Mt. xxvi. 
29 ; Lk. xxii. 18. In Mt. iii. 7, xii. 34, xxiii. 33, and Lk. iii. 7, ytvvqiLa. 
is right. Blass, § 3. 10. 

11. iv -rrarrl Tr\oim£6p.ei>oi. ' Ye being enriched in everything. 
The constr. is uncertain, but the meaning is clear. It is awk- 
ward to make vv. 9, 10 a parenthesis and connect irXovT^ofxevoi 
with £x 0VT€S -n-epLaarevrjTe in v. 8, for in v. 10 a new argument 
begins. Yet WH. follow Bengel in adopting this arrange- 
ment. It is less violent to connect 7tAouti£o'/a€voi with the 
preceding vpidv : the transition from gen. to nom. would be 
easily made in dictating. Cf. Sofd£ov7£s (v. 13), ciSo'tcs (i. 7), 
6\i(36ix€voi (vii. 5), o-reWofxevoL (viii. 20). Winer, p. 716; Blass, 

§ 79- IO - , , TT 

els iravav dir\oTT]Ta, tjtis KaTepydi^Tcu k.t.a. Unto every 

kind of liberality (see on viii. 2), which is such as to (viii. 10) 
work out (vii. 10, 11) through us thanksgiving to God.' It is 
difficult here to give airXoTr)*; the meaning of 'simplicity,' 'single- 
ness of mind,' which some prefer ; Biederkeit, Herzenseinfalt, 
Einfalt. Here, as in viii. 2, Vulg. has simplicitas, Beza benigtiitas. 
' Being enriched unto singleness of heart ' is a strange expression, 
and it does not make it less strange to explain 'singleness of 
heart ' as ' the absence of selfish motives.' The meaning is that 
the Corinthians will be endowed with a generosity which will 
enable the Apostle to excite gratitude in those who profit by it. 
With oY rjLiwv comp. rfj SiaKOVovixivrj v<j)' rjfiwv (viii. 1 9, 20).* It 
does not make much matter whether we take tw ©eo} with «vxa- 
pLo-TLav or Karepyd^Tai. : the former is simpler. Datives are 
normal after such words as evxapia-TLa, ei>xQ, Trpoo-evxy, x»P ts - 
Here B reads ©eov. There is no break in the paragraph here, 
as i( v. 12 was the beginning of a new point; the verse merely 
explains what has just been stated, that charitable work promotes 
devout feeling towards God. There should be no full stop at 
end of v. n. 

12. on rj SiaKoeia tt)s XciToupyias rauTT]s. ' Because the minis- 
tration of this public service not only helps to fill up the wants 

* Some understand hi tj/xwv as meaning, 'through us weak mortals' ; but 
it probably means no more than • through us who have to administer the 


of the saints, but it also is abounding through many thanksgivings 
to God.' 'The ministration of this public service' means 'the 
ministering which you render to others by undertaking a work 
of general benevolence.' The genitive is epexegetic. When 
Barnabas and Saul take relief from Antioch to Jerusalem in the 
famine-year, it is called SiaKovia (Acts xi. 29, xii. 25). Aen-ovpyia 
is used here in a sense closely akin to its classical meaning of 
the 'aids' which wealthy citizens had to render to the public in 
financing choruses for dramas (see on v. 10), fitting out triremes, 
training gymnasts, etc. These pub i 'ica munera were enforced by 
law, but St Paul uses the word of voluntary service. The Jews 
gave the term a religious meaning,* ' the public ministrations of 
priests (Heb. viii. 6, ix. 21; Lk. i. 23; and often in Num. and 
Chron.) and of Levites' (Ex. xxxviii. 19) [xxxviii. 21]; cf. 
1 Chron. xvi. 4, 37. "The words A-eiToupyo's, -&v, -Ca, are 
used in the Apostolic writings of services rendered to God and 
to man, and that in the widest relations of social life " (Westcott, 
Hebrews, p. 231). See on Rom. xv. 27, where the verb is used 
of this very contribution; also Lightfoot on Phil. ii. 17, 30. 
The haKovia here is not the administration of the fund by St 
Paul (that is a subordinate detail), but the service of the Corin- 
thians in raising the fund. What Athenian citizens who had the 
means were made to do, Gentile Christians will be glad to do, in 
order to render service to society and to God. Christians, a 
little later, gave these words a special religious meaning in con- 
nexion with the Eucharist, while retaining the Jewish usage 
respecting public worship of any kind. It is doubtful whether 
here any idea of ' sacrifice ' ought to be included. See on v. 10. 

Trpoo-aeaTrXripoucTa. 'Filling up in addition,' 'helping to fill'; 
cf. xi. 9. The Corinthians were not the only contributors. 

to 0ew. As in v. 11, this comes at the end with special 
force. There it seems to belong to ev^apto-nW rather than to 
KaTepyd&TaL ; and that is in favour of taking it with evxapia-Tiwv 
here ; but there is no certainty in either case. It may belong 
to evx- in either case or in neither. If taken with the verb, 
it is a dat. com?n. ' for God,' and in that sense St Paul would 
perhaps rather have said ets rrjv 86£av tov ©eov (iv. 15); see also 
1 Cor. x. 31 ; Rom. xv. 7. To take ra 0e<3 with euxapio-riav 
does not destroy the antithesis between irpoa-ava-KXr^povcra and 
TrepLcraevovaa, nor that between twv dyiW and tw @e<5. B has 
tw Xpicrrw here for t<3 ©ew. IIoAAuJv may be ' of many people,' 
but 'many thanksgivings' is simpler, per ??iuttas gratiarum 
actiones (Vulg.). 

* This use, however, was not peculiar to the Jews. Papyri of 165-160 B.C. 
show that it was common in Egypt, esp. of the services in the Serapeum 
(Deissmann, Bib. St. p. 140). 


13. 8ia T?j$ 8oKip.T|S ttjs oiaKoyias Taunts oo£d£oires tov 0e6V. 
We again have an anacoluthon with a nom. participle ; see above 
on TrXovnCofjievoL (v. 1 1), with which, however, So£d£ovr€s cannot 
be connected, for 7rAoim£d/zevoi refers to the Corinthians and 
So£a£oires to the Christians at Jerusalem, who are the people 
that offer the many thanksgivings in v. 12. The anacoluthon is 
simple enough in any case, but it is rather more simple if ttoXXuv 
evxapLo-Ttwv means ' thanksgivings of many people ' rather than 
' many thanksgivings.' In any case this verse explains why 
Palestine Christians give thanks to God ; • seeing that through 
the proof (see on ii. 9) of this ministration of yours they glorify 
God.' The relief of want is one good point in benevolence, but 
only one ; the glory of God is another ; and it is greatly to the 
glory of God to change the spirits of others from despondency to 
joyous thankfulness to Him. Affliction tested the reality of the 
Macedonians' Christianity (viii. 2), benevolence will be a proof 
in the case of the Corinthians. 

em tt) uTTOTayfj . . . kcu dirXoTTjTi ttjs KOieoma?. In the 
fulness of his feeling the Apostle gives a compressed fulness of 
expression, the general meaning of which is certain, but the exact 
construction of which cannot in all particulars be disentangled 
with certainty. He has just stated what would be the occasion 
of the saints' thankfulness. He now states two reasons for it, 
Corinthian loyalty to the Gospel, and Corinthian generosity to 
themselves. They had been suspicious of Corinthian loyalty ; 
many Jewish Christians had feared that converts from heathen- 
ism were turning Christian liberty into pagan licentiousness. 
The brethren in Jerusalem would now see that Gentile converts 
were as good Christians as Jewish converts ; and generosity was 
generosity from whatever quarter it came. It does not make 
much difference whether we take eis to evayyiXiov with ttj 
vTrorayfj or T7j<s 6fxo\oyia<;, and both Vulg. (in oboedientia confes- 
sions vestrae in evangelium Christi) and RV. ('the obedience 
of your confession unto the Gospel of Christ') leave it open. 
Beza (de vestra testata submissione in evangelium Christi) and AV. 
(' your professed subjection unto the Gospel of Christ ') decide 
for T17 VTrorayfj. The other is better ; cf. ttjv ek tov Xpicnrov tov 
©eov'bfioXoyiav (Just. M. Try. xlvii. 266 D). ' Confession ' needs 
some further definition here. Later it was used of the confession 
made at baptism ; see Suicer s.v. and aiTOTao-o-ojxaL. 

We have a similar doubt as to whether eU alrovs kcu cts 
7rdvTas should be taken with tt)s Koivwvtas or airkorqTi, and here 
again connexion with the nearer noun is better (AV., RV.); 
'and for the sincere kindness (v. ri, viii. 2) of your contribution 
(viii. 4) unto them and unto all.' Cf. Koivwvi'av nva iroLrjo-ao-dai 
cts tov>s 7TT(DX0VS (Rom. XV. 26), and irrl rfj kolvwvio. ifiwv eis to 


evayytXiov (Phil. 1. 5), where the meaning is 'your co-operation 
in aid of the Gospel.' See also Rom. xv. 26-31, and Hastings, 
DB. art. ' Communion.' Whether kcu ets Trdvra<s be a sudden 
afterthought or not, it points out to the Corinthians that a 
benefit conferred on the brethren at Jerusalem is a benefit to the 
whole body of Christians (1 Cor. xii. 26). 

14. Kal auTwy Serjcrei uirep up-aW eiuiroGouVTWi' up.a$. ' While 
they themselves also, with supplication on your behalf, long after 
you.' There is little doubt that we have here a gen. absol. (cf. 
iv. 18) stating the response which the Palestinian Christians will 
make to the generosity of their Corinthian brethren. The 
possibility of making Se^o-ei depend on «rt in v. 13, or on 
So£d£ovre<y, or on -irepLo-a-evova-a (in which case the whole of v. 13 
is a parenthesis), is not worth considering; the word implies 
" special petition for the supply of wants," and is often used of 
intercession. See Lightfoot on Phil. iv. 6 ; Trench, Syn. § li. 
The dat. here is not instrumental, not 'by,' but 'with'; the 
intercession accompanies their longing. The avrwv is emphatic 
by position. B E have virlp 17/xaJv. For 8070-15 see Index IV. 

8id tV 6iT€p(3aXXou(Tai' x < *P lk ' T0 " ® eo " *4>' "H^ K - Note the 
change of constr. from Sid cum gen. in v. 13 ; also the change 

of meaning in x"/° ts fr° m X"-P LV T0 ^ ® e0 ^ to x®-P l<; T< ? ® e< ?* The 
clause explains the reason of the longing; 'on account of the 
exceeding grace of God upon you.' In viii. 1 it was the grace 
of God which enabled the Macedonian Christians to be so 
generous ; the Palestinians will see that a similar grace is operat- 
ing strongly at Corinth. The Apostle is very generous in his 
praise of both parties, of the Corinthians for their great generosity, 
and of the Jewish Christians for their gratitude to God, not 
merely for the relief given to them, but also for the genuineness 
of the Christianity found in the donors. The praise, esp. of the 
Corinthians, may seem to be somewhat extravagant ; but St 
Paul is not praising what has taken place, but what he hopes 
and believes will take place.* It is a glorious picture which he 
has before his eyes. Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians 
abandoning their mutual distrust and dislike, which sometimes 
ended in bitter hostility, and drawing close together in mutual 
appreciation and love. 

15. Xdpts tw 0ew. This glorious picture causes him to burst 
out into an expression of deep thankfulness to God. He sees 
in it an earnest of that unity of Christendom for which he has 

* There is evidence that it did take place. Forty years later Clement of 
Rome, in addressing the Corinthians (ii. 1), praises them as tj5lou SioSvres f) 
\an(3avovTes, which he would hardly have done had the historic collection 
been a failure at Corinth. 


laboured so perseveringly ; ' neither Jew nor Greek,' but ' all one 
in Christ Jesus' (Gal. iii. 28; 1 Cor. xii. 13; Col. iii. 11). The 
Jewish Christians thank God for the goodness of their Gentile 
brethren, and to this thanksgiving the Apostle utters a deep 
Amen in the brief but profound doxology contained in this verse. 
It is based on hope rather than on fact, and on the more remote 
rather than on the immediate and obvious results of his plead- 
ing. His intense thankfulness is not so much for the relief of 
the sufferings of the Jewish Christians in Palestine, as for the 
effect on Christendom of their being relieved by Gentile 
Christians in Europe. "It will disarm suspicion; it will be a 
practical proof of the reality and power of the Gospel, it will 
strengthen the sense of brotherhood, it will turn distant strangers 
into earnest, eager friends, who pray for their benefactors and 
long for a sight of their face " (McFadyen, 2 Corinthians, p. 375). 
We may compare the interjected thanksgiving 1 Cor. xv. 57, and 
the similar expressions of praise Gal. i. 5 ; Rom. ix. 5, xi. 33 ; 
1 Tim. i. 17. 

tt] dc€K8nf]Yi]Ta) auTou Swpea. 'For His ineffable gift'; it is 
one which is incapable of expression by speech. The epithet is 
found nowhere else in LXX or N.T. Clement of Rome uses it, 
apparently of laws of nature ; " the inscrutable (6.v^iyyia(na, 
Rom. xi. 33) depths of the abysses and the unutterable statutes 
(avei<8L7]yr]Ta KpLjxaTa) of the nether regions" (Cor. xx. 5). It is 
also found in Arrian ; tt)j/ avcK^irjyqrov To\fx.av (Exp. Alex. p. 3 1 o). 
Cf. av€K\d\r]Tos (1 Pet. i. 8) of joy in Christ, and aAaA^™? 
(Rom. viii. 26) of the groanings of the Spirit in intercession. All 
three words are rare. It is rash to say that so strong a word 
could not be used by St Paul of anything less than God's 
supreme gift in sending His Son for man's redemption. A 
thanksgiving for that has only a very far-fetched connexion with 
the context. On the other hand, the thought of the complete 
realization of his highest hopes for the unity of Christendom as 
the natural fruit of mutual goodwill between Gentile and Jewish 
Christians is quite sufficient to account for this outburst of 
fervour. Chrysostom remarks ; " If God's gift is indescribable, 
what madness it must be to raise curious questions about His 
Being. When what He bestows is ineffable, what must He be 
Himself." Of the two explanations as to what the gift was for 
which St Paul was so intensely thankful, Chrysostom inclines 
to the less probable, that it was the gift of His Son for man's 

Swpea. Here, as elsewhere in N.T., the word is used of a 
Divine boon (Rom. v. 15, 17; Eph. iii. 7, iv. 7; Heb. vi. 4; 
etc.) ; the more freq. Swpov is used of offerings to God (Mt. v. 
23, 24, xv. 5, xxiii. 18, 19; etc.) and gifts to men (Rev. xi. 10). 


X s C 2 D 2and8 EKLP, Syrr. Copt. Arm. insert Si after x*P«- N* 
B C* D* F G 17, Latt. Goth. omit. Connecting particles are often in- 
serted by scribes and translators for smoothness, and the 5^ is probably not 
genuine. If we omit it, the sentence is an exclamation of thankfulness, 
closing the subject ; and thus we have an intelligible conclusion to ch. ix. 
But if the 5^ is genuine, the sentence looks as if it were unfinished, and the 
want of connexion between ix. 15 and x. I becomes glaring. This would 
be a point in favour of the theory that i.-ix. is a letter of which the original 
conclusion has been lost, and which has been joined to another letter of 
which the original beginning has been lost. Kennedy, Hermathena, xn. 
xxix., 1903, p. 365. 

Here the second main division of the Epistle ends. The 
whole of it (viii., ix.) is taken up with the subject of the collection 
for the poor at Jerusalem. On the interesting question whether 
the remaining four chapters are part of the same letter, or 
belonged originally to the severe letter which the Apostle wrote 
after 1 Corinthians and before 2 Cor. i.-ix., see the Introduction, 
§ IV. 5, and the note on vii. 8. Here it may suffice to quote 
the words ot two recent commentators, both of whom think that 
the latter hypothesis is hardly necessary. 

"The most cursory reader cannot fail to perceive an abrupt 
difference in tone, as he passes from ch. viii. f. to ch. x. The 
former chapters were complimentary and affectionate ; this and 
the following chapters are heated, polemical, and in part ironical. 
There, the Corinthians were his beloved ' brethren,' of whom he 
was proud, and of whose generosity he was not afraid to boast ; 
here, there are enemies in the camp — enemies who have been 
challenging his authority, and detracting from his credit, and who 
will therefore have to be summarily dealt with. They will have to 
be convinced, by its impact on themselves, that Paul's authority is a 
very real thing, and that he is just as capable of exercising it before 
their eyes as he is by means of correspondence" (McFadyen, p. 376). 

The other commentator allows that there is an "abrupt 
change of tone and subject at x. 1, where there is no manifest 
connexion with what goes before, and after a peaceable discussion 
of the fruits to be expected from the collection, we are suddenly 
plunged in a piece of vehement polemical writing against ad- 
versaries, the quarrel with whom has already been adjusted in 
the earlier chapters " (Menzies, p. xxxv). 

It is very difficult to see how viii. and ix. " prepare for the 
polemic against the Judaistic opponents " in x.-xiii. Is asking 
for money a good preparation for an incisive attack ? 


Whatever view may be taken of the origin of these four 
chapters, it is universally admitted that the third main portion of 


the Epistle, in the form in which it is found in all extant 
authorities, begins here. Having with much tenderness and 
affection effected a complete reconciliation between himself and 
his rebellious converts at Corinth (i.-vii.), and having felt his 
way, with diffidence amounting almost to misgiving, to an urgent 
request for bountiful support to the collection for the poor 
Christians at Jerusalem (viii., ix.), he now, without any ex- 
planation of the change of topic and tone, suddenly begins a 
vehement assertion of his Apostolic authority as superior to 
that of those who oppose him, ending with something which 
is almost a declaration of war against those who shall have 
failed to submit when he pays his next visit to them, which will 
be soon. 

Like the earlier parts of the Epistle, this portion is written 
under the influence of strong feeling, but, as again is universally 
admitted, the feeling is of a very different kind. Instead of 
yearning affection and a desire not to seem to be straining his 
Apostolic authority (i. 23, 24, ii. 4, iv. 15, v. 12, 13, vi. n-13, 
vii. 2-4, viii. 8, ix. 1, n), he now exhibits fierce indignation and 
asserts his authority to the uttermost. Although there is no 
clear evidence that in his indignation he had carefully arranged 
the subject-matter of his invective, we can trace changes of 
subject, and there seem to be three main divisions ; 1. the 
Apostle's authority and the area of his mission (x. 1-18) ; 2. the 
'glorying,' a folly which has been forced upon him (xi. i-xii. 10) ; 
3. his credentials and his final warnings (xii. 11-xiii. 10). For 
convenience of investigation we can make further sub-divisions, 
but this does not imply that such sub-divisions were in the 
Apostle's mind when he dictated the letter. He takes up charges 
which have been brought against him and answers them as they 
occur to him. 

X. 1-6. Reply to the Charge of Cowardice. 

When I come to Corinth, I may be obliged to take strong 
measures against those who disturb the peace of the Church. 

1 Now this is an intensely personal matter. I, Paul, in all 
earnestness appeal to you by the meekness and unfailing fairness 
of Christ, — I, whom you accuse of grovelling when face to face 
with you, and of being fearlessly outspoken only when I am far 
away : 2 I pray you not to drive me, when I do come to you, to 
be fearlessly outspoken with the sure confidence with which I am 
persuaded that I can muster courage against certain persons who 
are persuaded that we think and act on worldly and carnal 


principles. 3 True that it is in the world and in the flesh that 
we do think and act, but it is not on worldly and carnal principles 
that we conduct our campaign. 4 For the weapons of our 
campaign are not those of feeble human flesh. No, they are full 
of power, in God's service and with His blessing, for the demoli- 
tion of the strongholds which defy His Gospel ; 5 seeing that we 
demolish confident persuasions and every high structure that is 
being lifted up to oppose the revelation which God has given of 
Himself, and by making captives of every rebellious device bring 
them into submissive obedience to the Christ. 6 We are quite 
prepared to punish all disobedience, whenever your obedience is 

1. Autos 8e ey" riaGXos. It is sometimes suggested that St 
Paul here takes the pen from his amanuensis and writes the rest 
of the letter with his own hand, as he tells us that he did in the 
case of his concluding salutations (2 Thess. iii. 17; 1 Cor. 
xvi. 21 ; Col. iv. 18). It is likely enough that he sometimes 
wrote other portions of his letters. Gal. vi. n seems to imply 
that the last eight verses, and possibly more, were written with 
his own hand, and we may infer from Philem. 19 that in writing 
that short and very intimate letter he did not employ an aman- 
uensis at all. But we cannot safely infer from avros eyw that 
here he dismisses his amanuensis and begins to write himself; 
no such inference can be drawn from Rom. vii. 25, ix. 3, or 
xv. 14, in all which places at-ros eyw occurs. If it means this 
here, what does it mean in xii. 13? It is possible that avros eyw 
dismisses Timothy. Hitherto Timothy has been associated with 
him in writing the letter (i. 1) as being one of his colleagues in 
forming the Corinthian Church ; but now he is about to speak 
of purely personal matters with which Timothy has nothing to 
do. It is Paul and not Timothy who has been misrepresented 
and calumniated, and it is Paul alone who answers the slanders ; 
the responsibility and the authority are his. It is some confirma- 
tion of this view that, whereas in the first nine chapters he 
commonly uses the 1st pers. plur., while the 1st pers. sing, is 
exceptional, in these four chapters the sing, is the rule, and the 
plur. is exceptional. Nevertheless, this does not carry us very 
far, for in this chapter the plur. is freq. ; see also xi. 12, xii. 19, 
xiii. 4-7. Moreover, this explanation gives rather a full meaning 
to avros eyw. Another possibility is that en;™? eyw merely pre- 
pares the way for the words which follow ; ' The very Paul, who 
seems to you so meek and mild when he is face to face with you, 
and so resolute and brave when he is far away, this same Paul 


exhorts you, etc' For this we should perhaps have avTo's = 6 


The best parallel to auro? eyw IlauXos is Gal. v. 2 ; "iSe eyo> 
XlaCAos Xeyu v/uv, where cyw IlauA-os is partly an assertion of 
authority,! partly an indirect refutation of calumnies (see Light- 
foot). Here the awrds makes the refutation more emphatic and 
perhaps somewhat scornful. St Paul rarely introduces his name 
in the body of a letter, and where he does it always has special 
emphasis (1 Thess. ii. 18 ; Eph. iii. 1 ; Col. i. 23 ; Philem. 19). 
In Gal. v. 2 and Eph. iii. 1 it cannot be meant to exclude those 
who are named in the opening salutation, for no one is coupled 
with the Apostle in the salutation. 

Those who regard 2 Cor. as only one letter sometimes 
endeavour to find a connexion between ix. and x. in some such 
way as this ; ' I exhort you to be kind and considerate to the 
brethren in Jerusalem because of the gentleness and consider- 
ateness of Christ ; and I pray God that I may not be forced to 
do more than exhort.' But this reads into the words a good deal 
which is not expressed. The subject of the collection is abso- 
lutely dropped; in these four chapters there is no further 
allusion to it. And it is difficult to see how "the grateful 
ending" of ix. "affords an easy platform of approach to the 
unpleasant matter " of x.-xiii. It is more reasonable to say that 
"the writer moves on, without indicating any connexion, to 
another matter " (Denney). Whatever be our view of these four 
chapters, it is clear that we have a fresh start. The preceding 
topic is now dropped and another one is begun. Three elements 
which are conspicuous in the four chapters find expression in 
these two introductory verses; the strong personal feeling, 
indignation at the calumnies of his opponents, and the intimation 
that, if the opposition continues, he will not spare. See on 
1 Cor. iv. 21, where the same question is raised. 

irapaKaXw ufjias. The extraordinary change of tone which 
suddenly begins here is sometimes explained by the assertion that 
in the first two-thirds of his letter the Apostle is addressing the 
loyal Corinthians, and in the last third his opponents. Of this 
change of address there is not the smallest intimation ; in both 
portions we have v/Aets and VSs throughout, and in both portions, 
as in 1 Cor., the whole Corinthian Church is addressed. In v. 2 
the opponents are mentioned separately as nvas. The sudden 
change is in the Apostle's attitude towards the Corinthians. And 

* Cassian expands thus : ' I whom you know to be an Apostle of Christ, 
whom you venerate with the utmost respect, whom you believe to be of the 
highest character and perfect, and one in whom Christ speaks.' 

t "BM0a<ris 7-775 dirooroXiKTjs d£tas (Thdrt. ). There is something of defiance 
in the expression. 


TrapaKaXw is here ' exhort ' rather than ' entreat ' ; it has almost a 
minatory tone, ' I strongly advise you.' In v. 2 he lowers the 
tone to 'beseech.' 

8ia rfjs irpauTTiTog ical £irieiKias. This appeal has nothing 
to do with the collection ; it refers to the warning entreaty which 
follows. In Aristotle irpaoTys is the mean between opyiAdV^s and 
aopy-rjaia, and the opposite of x a ^ €7r 6Tr)s (Eth. Nic. 11. vii. 10, 
iv. v., Hist. An. ix. i. 1). Plutarch (Peric. 39, Sertorius, 25, 
Caes. 57) combines it with liruiKeia, as St Paul does here, and 
makes it the opposite of awoToixia. " The Scriptural 7rpaoT^s is 
not in man's outward behaviour only ; nor yet in his mere natural 
disposition. Rather is it an inwrought grace of the soul, and 
the exercises of it are chiefly towards God (Mt. xi. 29 ; Jas. i. 21). 
It is that temper of spirit in which we accept His dealings with 
us without disputing or resisting " (Trench, Syn. § xlii.). 'Ettici- 
xeta is that ' sweet reasonableness ' (Matthew Arnold) which pre- 
vents summum jus from becoming summa injuria, by admitting 
limitations and making allowances for special circumstances : 
TrpaoTrjs virtus magis absoluta, e7ri€iK£ia magis refertur ad alios 
(Beng.). Cf. 2 Mace. x. 4. Vulg. is capricious in its renderings 
of both terms. Here it has modestia for eirteuceta, but Acts 
xxiv. 4 dementia. Here and in some other places it has man- 
suetudo for irpavTrjs, but Gal. vi. lenitas, Eph. iv. 2 and 2 Tim. 
ii. 25, modestia. In O.T. we find reverentia and tranquillitas 
(Wisd. ii. 19, etc.). 

The appeal shows that St Paul must have instructed the 
Corinthians as to the character of the Redeemer, whose words 
and actions must therefore have been known to himself. The 
Gospels were not yet written, but the oral tradition was there 
in its fulness. That the Messiah would be 7rpai5s had been fore- 
told (Zech. ix. 9), and He had proclaimed Himself to be so (Mt. 
xi. 29), and had declared the blessedness of those who are so 
(Mt. v. 5). The appeal reads somewhat strangely as a prelude 
to one of the most bitter and vehement paragraphs in the 
writings of St Paul. What follows reads rather like an echo of 
the wrath of the Lamb. We might have expected him to say 
'lrjcrov (iv. 10, 11 ; Rom. viii. 11 ; 1 Thess. iv. 14) when speaking 
of the earthly life of Christ. But Xpio-Tou may have point, 
because some of them professed to be in a special sense XjoiotoB 
(1 Cor. i. 12). 

os kcito. TrpoCTuiroi' p.ey Taireieos iv u(ui\ Here TaTretvos is used 
in a bad sense, which is unusual. He is quoting the words of 
his accusers at Corinth. They had said that, when he was there, 
he was a Uriah Heep, very humble and cringing and artful ; when 
he was away from them, he could pluck up his courage and be 
very resolute — on paper. See on vii. 6. 


Here and throughout both LXX and N.T. we should read n-padriys 
|N*BGP 17) rather than vpadrris (N'CDE K L). In LXX both irpaus 
(Num. xii. 3 and often in Psalms) and ra-weivhs (Prov. iii. 34 ; Zeph. ii. 3 ; 
Is. xi. 4) are used to translate the same Hebrew, anav. 

2. Seofiai 8e to firj irapwc 0appr)crcH. The appeal to the meek- 
ness and gentleness of Christ influences the Apostle himself, and 
he drops from magisterial exhortion to earnest entreaty. RV. 
does not sufficiently mark this with ' intreat ' and • beseech,' nor 
Vulg. with obsecro and rogo, while AV. does not mark it at all, 
but has ' beseech ' for both verbs. Aeo/xat 8e takes up 7raoaKaXw 
and repeats it in a lower key ; ' I exhort, nay I beseech you, 
that I may not when present show courage.' Lit. ' I beg of you 
the not, when I am present, showing courage.' Chrys. has py 
fxe dvay/cao-Tjre. On the constr. see Blass, § 71. 1; irapwv is 
attracted to the nom. of Seo/jUU. Cf. ep.adov avrdpKrj<; elvai (Phil, 
iv. 11), <f)d(TKovTes elvai crocpoL (Rom. i. 22). Bachmann follows 
Riickert and B. Weiss in thinking that Se'o/xai is addressed to 
God, which is not probable. As 8eo pat must be distinguished in 
translation from 7rapa><a\w, so also must Oapprjaai from roXp.rja-ai, 
and here again AV. ignores the change. The change of word 
is probably neither accidental nor merely for the sake of variety, 
but marks the difference between the feigned courage which his 
critics attributed to him and the uncompromising boldness which 
he is confident of exhibiting if his opponents render it necessary. 
He beseeches them so to behave that he may be spared the 
distress of proving that he can be unflinching when he is face 
to face with them. 

■nj TreTroi0rjo-ei ^ Xoyi^ojxai ToXfAfjcmi k.t.X. ' With the confidence 
(i. 15) wherewith I count on being bold against certain persons 
who count of us as, etc' The Corinthians of course would under- 
stand who the nvas, quosdam, whom he does not care to mention, 
are, cf. iii. 1 ; 1 Cor. xv. 12. They are a malignant coterie in 
the Church which he is addressing. The thought of them 
changes his tone once more, and he again becomes minatory. 
We must give the same rendering to \oy[£op,ai and Xoyi£oju,eVous, 
both of which are midd. and not pass. Nevertheless there is a 
difference of signification, the one meaning ' I reckon ' = ' I expect,' 
the other meaning ' who reckon ' = ' who suppose.' The verb is 
very freq. in Paul, esp. in Rom. and 2 Cor. Vulg. here has qua 
existinwr audere in quosdam, qui arbitrantur nos, etc., using two 
different verbs and taking \ as passive. It uses both 
these verbs elsewhere, and also cogito {vv. 7, n, iii. 5; etc.), 
reputo (v. 19; Gal. iii. 6; 2 Tim. iv. 6; etc.), imputo (Rom 
iv. 3, 8), cui accepto fero (Rom. iv. 6), and aestimo (Rom. viii. 36, 
ix. 8). Rom. iv. 3 is remarkable, for in Gen. xv. 6 Vulg. has 


d>S koto, adpKa TrepnraTouKTas. ' As if our conduct were guided 
by carnal principles'; see on Rom. viii. 4. His opponents 
attributed to him unspiritual and worldly motives and conduct ; 
that he was capricious and shuffling, verbose and vainglorious, 
at once a coward and a bully, and so forth. That they accused 
him of unchastity is not probable ; had they done so, he would 
have been more definite. Nor is there any reference to his 
physical infirmities. See on i. 17, last note; and for the 
Hebraistic -n-eptTaTelv of daily conduct see on iv. 2 and 1 Cor. 
iii. 3, also on avia-Tpd.cjirjfx.ev, 2 Cor. i. 12. The metaphor which 
follows suggests that Kara 0-ap/ca refers, among other things, to a 
charge of being a coward. 

3. iv <rapKi yap irepnraTourres. ' In the flesh (emphatic) ho doubt 
we walk, but not according to the flesh do we carry on our war- 
fare.' The yap implies a tacit contradiction ; ' That is not true, 
for, although of course we walk in, etc' Like all human beings, 
he is subject to the limitations and weaknesses of humanity, such 
as timidity, indiscretion, love of influence ; cf. iv. 7 ; Gal. ii. 20 ; 
Phil. i. 22. An Apostle, in his missionary work, has to reckon 
with these drawbacks, but they do not regulate his conduct. They 
constitute the condition in which he must labour, but they are not 
its regulating principle. Its principles are not worldly but spiritual. 

That a Christian's life is warfare is often pointed out by St Paul 
(vi. 7; 1 Thess. v. 8; Rom. xiii. 12, 13; Eph. vi. 11-17; 1 Tim. 
i. 18 ; 2 Tim. ii. 3, 4). Cf. Wisd. v. 17-20, a book with which St 
Paul seems to have been familiar. The metaphor would be natural 
enough, even if the Apostle had not had frequent experience of 
Roman soldiers. Here it has special point, if he is rebutting 
a charge of cowardice ; and he is certainly beginning to carry war 
into his opponents' camp. Durandus {Rationale Divinorum 
Officiorum, iv. 16), after saying that " when the Epistle is read 
we do not kneel but sit," adds that " Soldiers, however, are 
accustomed to stand when the Epistles of Paul are read, in 
honour of him, because he was a soldier." See V. Staley, Studies 
in Ceremonial, p. 80. 

4. In form this verse is a parenthesis to confirm the truth of 
the preceding statement, and KaOaipovvTes in v. 5 goes back in 
grammatical constr. to aTpaTe.v6fx.zda in v. 3. But in idea KaOai- 
powrei is obviously connected with 77-pos KaOalpeaiv in v. 4, and 
the const, of v. 3 seems to be forgotten. 

to, yap oirXa tt)s orpaTei'as r)a<av. ' For the weapons of our cam- 
paign are not fleshly.' He probably refers to the artifices which 
his critics said that he employed in gaining converts. Adopting 
crrpaTias as the right spelling (see below), we must treat it as 


equivalent to o-rpGu-eia?, 'campaign,' not o-rpanas, 'army.' 
" It is really superfluous to collect proofs of the fact that a-rpareia 
could also be written oTparia." (Deissmann, Bib. St. p. 132). 
For crapKtKa. see on i. 2 ; for oVAa, on vi. 7. 

Su^a-ra tu ©ew. It is the idea of power that is wanted in 
opposition to the weakness of the flesh. The extraordinary 
effectiveness of the weapons is evidence that there is something 
more than mere human force in them ; and hence perhaps the 
use of Sward rather than Trvevp,aTu<a, the common antithesis to 
o-apKiKa. The force of the dat. is uncertain ; either ' for God,' ' in 
God's service' {dat. com.), or 'before God,' 'in His eyes' (RV.). 
From the latter the transition would be easy to the Hebraistic 
use for 'exceeding,' as in dcrreTos r<2 ©eu), 'exceeding fair' (Acts 
vii. 20). Erasmus has afflatu Dei, Beza divinitus, ' divinely 

irpos KaOcupecrii' by^p^&Tbiv. ' To the demolition of strong- 
holds,' the fortresses which hinder the success of the campaign, 
i.e. all the prejudices and evil practices which resist the influence 
of the Gospel. In LXX, esp. in Maccabees (cf. 1 Mace. v. 65), 
byppwpja. is freq., but occurs nowhere else in N.T., and possibly 
St Paul is thinking of Prov. xxi. 22 ; 7roAeis oyvpas hrifiy) o-o<po? 
kcu KadelXc to 6)(ypwp.a icp w liv£TToi6y)<rav 01 dcre/^ets. Thackeray 
(St Paul and Jewish Thought, p. 239) quotes 7rpo? ye rr\v rov 
oYvpa>p.aTos rovrov KaOatpecriv from Philo, De Con/us. Ling. 26. 
There is probably no special reference to the " fences about the 
Law," or the Law itself, although the Law was often a great 
obstacle to the success of Christian missionaries. 

It is difficult to decide between ffrparias (SCDG) and ffTparetas (B). 

5. Xoyto-fAous KciGcupoGrres. The constr. is doubtful. We can 
take it back to irtpnraTovvTes and arpo.r(.v6p.^Qa., making v. 4 a 
parenthesis (AV., RV., WH.) ; but St Paul so frequently has 
nominative participles without any regular connexion (OXifiofievoi, 
vii. 5 ; areXXop-evoL, viii. 20 ; 7rA.ovri£op,evoi, ix. 11), that it is likely 
that we have a similar feature here ; ' Seeing that we demolish 
seducing reasonings,' i.e., sophistries and plausible fallacies with 
which Jews and Gentiles evaded the teaching of the Apostles. 
Cf. Prov. xxi. 30. There is nothing personal in the warfare 
which the Apostles wage. They assail arguments and ideas in 
order to win over those who hold them. They do not attempt 
to destroy the reasoners in order to stop the arguments. And in 
demolishing reasonings St Paul did not use Tn66i<; o-o<pias 
Aoyots, though some missionaries did according to their ability; 
the spiritual power with which he was endowed sufficed. It is 
not likely that Aoyio-p.ovs is meant to refer to Aoyc^o^cVous, and 
in translating the one we need not consider the other. These 
specious and arrogant Aoyurpot belong to a class of which he goes 


on to speak. Cf. Rom. ii. 15, the only other passage in which 
Aoyio-yuo* is found in N.T. 

■nay u\|/w|xa eTrcup6fj.eeoc ' Every high thing that is lifting 
itself up.' In xi. 20 i-rraip. is midd., and so it probably is here. 
The metaphor is from walls and towers standing defiantly, rather 
than barriers hastily thrown up to check progress ; but the pass, 
is possible, that is ' erected,' ' set up/ as a towering obstacle. 

Kcn-d ttjs yvuaews too ©eou. 'In opposition to the knowledge 
of God,' that true knowledge of Him which comes through 
acquaintance with One who was the image of God (iv. 4). St 
Paul is sure that he possesses this. Cf. to yvwarov tov ®eov 
(Rom. i. 19), and TrXavacrdai. Trepi ttjv toi) ®eov yvwcriv (Wisd. xiv. 
22). St Paul's acquaintance with the Book of Wisdom has been 
already noted. See on v. 4 and v. 1. 

cuxn°.Wri£oi'Tes. Military metaphors still continue, and in 
N.T. this metaphor of ' making prisoners ' or ' taking captive ' is 
peculiar to St Paul (Rom. vii. 23 ; 2 Tim. iii. 6). In Lk. xxi. 
24 there is no metaphor. These two military expressions are 
found in conjunction 1 Mace. viii. 10; ^'^uaAwTtcrav Tas ywaiKas 

avrwv, . . . /cat KaOelXov to. o^vpai/xaTa avrwv. Cf. to KaXAos 
avTfjs rlxftaAarncre i/'w^v avrov (Judith xvi. 9). In Eph. iv. 8 we 
have aixjJ-a.\<DTev<j), from Ezek. xii. 3. Both forms of the verb are 
very freq. in LXX ; alxp-aXwrCC^ is used by Josephus, Plutarch, 
Arrian, etc. 

iray fOT]u.a. 'Every device'; see on ii. 11. Neither here, 
where Luther's alle Vernnnft has led some people astray, nor 
1 Cor. iv. 4, where AV. has done the like, does St Paul express 
disapproval of human reasoning, or deny the right to think for 
oneself. It is those Xoyia-poC and voi^fxara which oppose or 
corrupt the truth to which he here declares hostility. But 6appS> 
cis vfj.a<; (v. 1) does not justify our taking ets ryv viraKorjv with 
■n-av v6rjp.a, ' every device against the obedience ' ; for this we 

should have had Kara, as in kclto. rrjs yi/wo-cais. 

eiS Tt)y uTrctKorji' tou Xpiorrou. These words go with ai^/xaXcuTi- 
£oi'T€?, ' taking every opposing design prisoner and bringing it into 
the condition of submissive obedience to the Christ.'* Cf. Lk. 
xxi. 24. Submission to Christ is the new land into which they 
are carried captive ; 1 Kings viii. 46; Judith v. 18; Tobit i. 10. 
That the imagery of the passage was suggested by the wars of 
Pompey against Mithridates and the Pirates (Stanley) is less 
likely than that the wars of the Maccabees were in the Apostle's 
mind. But no actual campaign is needed to suggest the 
metaphors. Cf. Rom. i. 5. 

* This is what Deissmann has called the "mystic genitive," where 'of 
Christ' almost='in Christ' ; cf. 2 Thess. iii. 5 ; Eph. iii. 19, v. 21 ; Col. iii. 
15 (S( Paxil, p. 141). 


6. Kd! lv €Toi(xw exom-es eKouajcmi k.t.X. ' And being quite 
prepared to avenge all disobedience, whenever your obedience 
shall have been completed.' This reads oddly after vii. 4, 16. 
There he is enthusiastic about them ; here their obedience is 
still incomplete. See also viii. 7. The fyuov is emphatic; he 
fully expects that, after the interval which he means to allow, the 
Corinthian Church will be found to be obedient to Christ and 
submissive to His Apostle. But there may be exceptions, and 
with such cases he is prepared to deal severely. We have cTot/j-ws 
l^w, xii. 14, and lv ctoi^w lyu> is found in Philo, Polybius, etc. 
See Wetstein. Such expressions, like Swa/uu, are usually followed 
by the aor. infin. (xii. 14; Acts xxi. 13, xxiii. 15, etc.).* The 
legal expression, eKSiKrjcrai, ' to do justice,' may be compared with 
those in i. 22, ii. 6, 8, vii. n, 12. The play on words between 
KaQaipovvTes and lTra.ipop.evov and between VTranor) and TrapaKorj 
may be compared with those noted in i. 13, iii. 2, iv. 8, vi. 10, 
vii. 10, viii. 22. Note also the emphatic repetition in wav . . . 
7raarav, and the alliteration in exovre-s eKSi/ojcrai and izacrav 7rapaK0rjv. 
Alliteration with it. is specially freq. (ix. 8, 11). In LXX ira.po.Kori 
is not found, and in N.T. it occurs only here, Rom. v. 19, and 
Heb. ii. 2, and St Paul would probably have used d7rei#ta. (Rom. 
xi. 30, 32 ; Eph. ii. 2, v. 6 ; Col. iii. 6) here had he not wished 
to make a verbal antithesis to viraKo-q, for irapaKor), ' failing to 
listen' or 'listening amiss,' implies less deliberate disobedience 
than d7rei#ia.t 

These two verses exhibit the Apostle's severity and considera- 
tion, and his authority is manifest in both. The threat of severity 
anticipates xii. 20-xiii. 1, and if these four chapters are part of 
the lost letter which was sent before 2 Cor. i.— ix., then ii. 9 may 
refer to this passage. The claim to a Divine commission and to 
the power to decide what is contrary to the knowledge of God is 
conspicuous here as in ii. 14, iv. 6, v. 18. In what way he will 
punish those who still oppose him when he comes is not stated. 
He is probably thinking of the Judaistic teachers, anticipating 
that those whom they have misled will submit and return to 
their allegiance, but that these alien teachers will not do so.j: 
He passes on to deal with some of the sneers which they had 
employed in order to undermine his authority, and some of the 
claims which they had made in order to establish their own. 

* iToifj.6Ta.Ta £x w an ^ ii iTolfxov ?x w j followed by infin., are found in 

f Lachmann's proposal to put a full stop after irapaKo-^v, and take Srav 
. . . i) viraKorj with what follows, is extraordinary. ' Whenever your obedi- 
ence shall have been completed, look at what lies before your eyes ' is scarcely 
sense ; and the usual punctuation makes excellent sense. 

X If this is correct, then these verses were written before iii. I, which 
seems to imply that the Judaizing teachers had left Corinth. 


Some of the latter may have been true enough. They came 
from the country of the Messiah and from the primitive Christian 
congregation. They had personal acquaintance with some of the 
Twelve and with James, the Lord's brother. That they had 
known Christ Himself is less probable. 

X. 7-11. Reply to the Charge of Weakness. 

My Apostolic Authority will be found to be as effective in 
fact as it looks on paper. 

7 It is at the outward appearance of things that you look. 
There may be a certain person who is convinced in him- 
self that he is Christ's man. Well then, let him, on second 
thoughts, be persuaded of this with himself, that just as truly 
as he is Christ's, so also are we. 8 That is no idle boast; 
for even supposing that I glory somewhat extravagantly about 
our authority, which was given me by the Lord for your 
upbuilding and not for your demolition, I shall not be put to 
shame as an impostor when I come to Corinth. 9 I will not say 
more than that, that I may not seem (as it were) to terrify you 
by means of my letters. 10 For I know what people say; 'Oh, 
yes, his letters are impressive and forcible enough ; but his 
personal appearance is weak, and his manner of speaking is 
worth nothing.' u Let the man who talks in this manner be 
persuaded of this, that such as we are in word by means of 
letters, when we are absent, just such also, when we are present, 
are we in act. Our words and our conduct exactly correspond. 

7. Ta KCIT& irpdo-Gnrw j3\eireTe. It is impossible to decide 
with any certainty whether fiXe-vere is imperative or indicative 
(cf. Jn. v. 39, xiv. 1 ; 1 Jn. ii. 27, 29, iv. 2), and, if we decide 
for the indicative, whether it is interrogative or categorical (cf. 
xii. 5, 11, 19 ; 1 Cor. vi. 4, 6, vii. 18, 21, 27). All three render- 
ings, 'Ye look' (RV.), 'Do ye look?' (AV., RV. marg.), and 
'Look ye' (Vulg. videte), make good sense. Wiclif, Tyndale, 
and the Genevan agree with the last, and commentators, both 
ancient and modern, are much divided. If ySAeVere were im- 
perative, it would probably have come first; but this is not 
decisive. Let us follow RV. ' It is at the things which lie before 
your face that you are looking.' They ought to take a more 
comprehensive view, and also try to see a little below the surface. 
If self-commendation, plausibility, and adroitness suffice, then 
the Corinthians are quite right in accepting the Judaizers, but 


they ought to look to more solid things than that. One can get 
much the same meaning, if /JAeVeTe is imperative, 'Look at the 
facts ; not what these teachers say, but what you all can see.' 
Das, was vor Augen liegt—ja das J ass t ins Auge (Bachmann). 

€i tis ■n-eiroiGep' lauTw, 'If any man trusteth in himself that he 
is Christ's, let him count (v. 2) this again, with himself, that 
even as he is Christ's, so also are we.' It is ' in himself,' ' in his 
own mind,' that he has his confidence, and just there he ought 
also (ttolXlv) to make his reckoning. The vague tis, like the 
vague rti/as (v. 2), points to the Apostle's opponents, but the 
sing, tis is no proof that he is now thinking of a particular 
individual. Cf. xi. 4, 20. It is scarcely possible that Xpiarov 
€ii/at has any reference to the Christ party (1 Cor. i. 12). St 
Paul would not use language which would almost inevitably be 
understood to mean that he was a member of the ' Christ ' 
party. These parties seem to have died out ; for there is 
no mention of them in 2 Cor., not even in xii. 20, where he 
speaks of strifes and factions. We may conclude that the 
rebukes in 1 Cor. proved effectual. Xpio-Tov etvcu here means 
being Christ's man, servant, or minister. With 71-aAiv comp. 
1 Cor. xii. 21, and with icj> eavrov, 1 Cor. vi. 1. 

D* E* F G, d efg add 5ov\os after the first Xpiarov. i<p' kavrov (N B 
L, Latt. intra se) rather than d</>' eavrov (C D E G K P). Xpiarov after 
ilfieis (D 3 EKL, Copt.) is probably not genuine; NBCD*FGP, 
Latt. omit. 

8. idv T6 yap . . . Confirmatory evidence that he is 
Christ's minister in as true a sense as his opponents are. Cf. 
Rom. xiv. 8. He begins with an 'if,' but he ends with a 
confident assertion. Even if he should use stronger language 
than he has done about his authority, there is not the least 
prospect that he will be put to shame as a convicted impostor. 
There will be ample justification of his claims. It is not certain 
that TTtpia-aoTepov refers to vv. 3-6, 'more abundantly than I 
have just done ' : it may mean no more than ' somewhat 
abundantly.' In any case we notice here his abstention from 
denying that his opponents are in any sense Christ's ministers. 
All he says is that he can give ample evidence that he is a 
minister of Christ, invested with His authority. Contrast xi. 
13-15. In this verse we have the transition from the plur. to 
the sing. It is still ' our authority,' but the glorying is his own. 
The mixture of sing, and plur. continues for a while, and then 
in xi., xii., xiii. the sing, prevails. 

T)s 4'owKee 6 Ku'pios eis oiKoSofUjv kcu ouk €is KaOaipeaif up-am 
' Which the Lord gave me for your upbuilding and not for your 
demolition.' We must have the same rendering of KaBaip. here 
and in vv. 4 and 5. Here 'building you up and not casting 


you down ' seems more effective; but we talk of 'demolishing' 
arguments (Aoyio-jum's) rather than of 'casting them down.' 
Exactly the same expression is found again xiii. io, and in both 
places it fits the context so well that there is no need to suspect 
an editorial insertion from either place to the other. The aor. 
refers to the commission given at Saul's conversion (Acts ix. 6, 
15, xxii. 15, xxvi. 16). The clause may intimate that his critics 
said that his teaching was destructive, or that he holds that theirs 
is destructive. But we cannot be sure of either ; it may be a 
plain statement of fact. 

ouk aiaxuvQ-qao^ai. 'I shall not be put to shame,' by being 
exposed as a pretentious boaster. The change from subjunc- 
tive to indicative (' shall not,' not ' should not ') marks his 
confidence. That will never happen. Some commentators 
here add, as to be understood, 'and I do not say anything 
stronger than this,' in order to account for the Iva which follows. 
The constr., thougl not quite regular, is intelligible enough. 

B G 17, Syr-Pesh. Copt, omit re after idv. We may safely omit ko.1 
before irepLaaorepov with N*BCD*E*GP, Latt. Copt. Syr-Hark. 
Kavxncuiia.1 (B C D F K) rather than Kavxyo'o/j.a.t. (X L P). C* P, Syr- 
Pesh. Copt, omit 7)p.wv after e^ovaias, perhaps as apparently out of 
harmony with the sing. verb. D 3 E G K L ins. tj/jllv after 6 nvpios, P before 
it ; NBC D* 17, d e omit. Note the divergence between E and e, which 
usually agrees with d independently of the Greek ol E. 

9. Iva. jjlt) 86£w k.t.X. This depends on v. 8 as a whole, not 
on any one clause or word. To make ». 10 a parenthesis and 
carry on Iva to v. 11 is an intolerable constr. ; ' That I may not 
seem ... let such a one, etc' But it is perhaps in order to 
ease such a connexion that Chrys. inserts hi and Vulg. autem * 
after Iva, for if Iva has no connexion with v. 8, IVa /at) So'^w is 
felt to be very abrupt. Ne videar without autem would be 

d>9 av cK<j>oPeti/ ojias. 'As it were, to terrify you.' The 
compound verb has a strong meaning, ' to scare you out of your 
senses,' and to tone this down <I>s aV is prefixed; quasi perterre- 
facere vos. It is freq. in LXX (Job vii. 14, xxxiii. 16; Wisd. xi. 
19, xvii. 6, 19; etc.), esp. in the phrase ovk earai 6 iK(po/3wv 
(Lev. xxvi. 6; Deut. xxviii. 26; Mic. iv. 4; Zech. iii. 13; Ezek. 
xxxiv. 28, xxxix. 26), but is found nowhere else in N.T. It is 
doubtful whether we ought to count this as a very rare instance 
of av c. infin. We perhaps ought to write <Lo-aV, which occurs in 
mod. Grk. ; as also craV, = 'as,' 'like,' or 'when.' Moulton, 
p. 167. 

8id twc emcrroXwK. ' By tny letters.' We know certainly of 
two letters, 1 Cor. and its predecessor (1 Cor. v. 9). Unless 
* Ut autem non existimer tamquam terrere vos per epistolas. 


these four chapters are part of the severe letter (i. 23, ii. 3, 9, 
vii. 8), we know of three before these words were written, and 
there may have been others. But the strict injunctions about 
fornicators in the first letter (1 Cor. v. 9), and the severe sentence 
on the incestuous person in 1 Cor. (v. 3-5), would justify the 
expression 'terrifying by my letters,' without the addition of 
another severe letter. 

10. 4>Y]aif. It is difficult to decide between <pr)a-tv and </>ao-iV 
(see below). The us {v. 7) and 6 toioStos {v. ii) might cause 
<£aariV to be corrected to cpyjmv. On the other hand, <f>rja-iv 
might be corrected to <pamv, because the context shows that this 
contemptuous criticism of the Apostle's letters was not confined 
to an individual. In either case we have interesting con- 
temporary evidence of what some people thought of the 
Apostle's letters and of his personal effectiveness. Either tftrjariv 
or (fiao-iv might be rendered ' it is said,' on dit, man sagt. Winer, 

P- 655- m 

Papeiai koi laxopai. 'Weighty and powerful.'* The truth 
of this is seen by the description of the effect of the severe 
letter in vii. 8-1 1, a description which must be truthful, for it is 
sent to the Corinthians themselves, who knew the facts. His 
critics could not deny the solid and effective character of his 
letters. Bapeiai probably does not mean 'burdensome,' 
'grievous' (Mt. xxiii. 4; Acts xx. 29 ; 1 Jn. v. 3), but 'weighty,' 
'impressive' (Mt. xxiii. 23 and perhaps Acts xxv. 7); yet the 
latter meaning is less common. Illustrations in Wetstein. Used 
for persons, /?apushas commonly a bad signification, 'oppressive,' 
'cross-grained'; but it sometimes means 'dignified,' 'grave,' like 
o-e^vos. Cf. 1 Thess. ii. 6. Yet it is possible that the two 
epithets are not meant to be complimentary ; they might mean 
that in his letters he was tyrannical and violent. 

rj 8e Trapouo-ia toO <xwjiaTo$. 'Bodily presence (AV., RV.) 
can hardly be improved; but 'personal presence,' 'personal 
appearance,' 'personality' have been suggested. There is 
chiasmus in the contrasted epithets, da-Oevrj's being the antithesis 
of lo-xvpai and l£ov6evqn.£vo<i of fiapeiau, and each pair helps to 
determine the meaning of the other. It is not certain that 
there is here any allusion to the personal appearance of the 
Apostle; that he was short and insignificant, "an ugly little 
Jew," and that he had revolting infirmities, such as ophthalmia 
and epilepsy. The contrast seems rather to be between the 
character of his letters and the character of the man himself. 

* German renderings vary considerably ; gewichtig und gewaltig (Bach- 
mann) ; schwer und wuc/itig (Bousset) ; wuchtig und kraftvoll (Lietzmann) ; 
gewichtig und stark (Heinrici-Meyer). 


In his letters he was bold as a lion and firm as a rock ; when he 
came face to face with you, he gave way at once, trying to please 
everybody (1 Cor. ix. 20), and what he said was not worth 
listening to (see on 1 Cor. ii. 3).* This looks like a reference to 
the intermediate and unsuccessful visit. 

€^ou9ek-Ti(j.eVos. ' Despised,' ' of no account ' (1 Cor. i. 28, 
vi. 4; Eccles. ix. 16; Mai. ii. 9; Dan. iv. 28; 2 Mace. i. 27). 
No doubt the Apostle's powers were not always the same ; his 
letters show that. At times his eloquence seemed godlike 
(Acts xiv. 8-12), but he had not the brilliancy of Apollos, and 
he did not keep Eutychus awake (Acts xx. 9). Ramsay, St 
Paul, p. 84, Church in the Roman Empire, p. 57. "A person- 
ality of such polar contrasts made a very different impression on 
different people. Seldom perhaps has any one been at once so 
ardently hated and so passionately loved as St Paul " (Deissmann, 
St Paul, p. 70). As Bousset remarks, the personality of St Paul 
must have indeed been great, if, in spite of infirmities which 
would be specially distasteful to Greeks, he nevertheless was to 
them ' the Apostle.' 

Of the descriptions which have come down to us of the 
personal appearance of the Apostle the only one which is at all 
likely to be based upon early tradition is the well-known one in 
the Acts of Paul and Thekla, a document which Ramsay 
{Church in Pom. Emp. xvi.) assigns to the first century. These 
Acta exist in Syriac, Latin, Greek, and Armenian, and the 
Syriac is believed to embody the earliest form of the story. The 
description in the Syriac is as follows ; " A man of middling 
size, and his hair was scanty, and his legs were a little crooked, 
and his knees were projecting (or far apart) ; and he had large 
eyes, and his eyebrows met, and his nose was somewhat long ; 
and he was full of grace and mercy ; at one time he seemed like 
a man, and at another he seemed like an angel." The 
Armenian version says that he had blue eyes and crisp or curly 
hair. Later writers give him an aquiline nose. See F. C. 
Conybeare, Monuments of Early Christianity, p. 62 ; Smith and 
Cheetham, D. of Chr. Ant. ii. p. 1622; Farrar, St Paul, exc. 
xi. ; Kraus, Real. Enc. d. Christ. Alter, ii. pp. 608, 613. 

oX itn<jro\oX fdv (N* B, r) rather than aX filv iir. (N'DFGKLP, 
Latt.). (p-qalv (SDEFGKLP, de Copt.) rather than <f>afflv (B, f g r 
Vulg. Syrr.). Note the divergence between F and f. 

11. touto XoyiXeffGco. ' Count this.' It is worth while to have 
the same rendering in vv. 2, 7, 1 1 ; RV. has ' count,' ' consider,' 
'reckon.' Tovto is emphatic, 'just this.' 

toioutos. Not 'the person in question,' but 'such a one,' 
6 \6yos would include the thought as well as the expression. 


'a person of this kind.' The Apostle is not alluding to a 
definite individual, but quoting a current criticism. 

oTo£ eafxei' tw Xoyw. ' What we are in word by letters when 
we are absent, such are we also in act when we are present.' 
Menzies and Moffatt follow AV. in supplying ecro/xe^a with 
tolovtoi, which confines the meaning to his intended visit to 
Corinth. RV. is almost certainly right in supplying ia-fiev, 
which makes the statement apply to his whole character and 
conduct. He is not one in whom the inconsistency of writing 
forcibly and acting feebly is found. So Alford, Bachmann, 
Bernard, Lietzmann, McFadyen, Schmiedel. The antithesis 
between A.dyw and epyw, so freq. in Thucydides, is found Rom. 
xv. 18; and Acts vii. 22 we have Swai-os ev Aoyois kcu cpyois 
airov. In the antithesis here, we again have chiasmus ; t<3 
Xoyw airoi'Tes, 7rapovTes t<3 epyw : cf. iv. 3, vi. 8, ix. 6, xili. 3. 
Baljon needlessly suggests that 8l eVicn-oAaJv is a gloss. 

12-18. A passage, the difficulty of which was very early 
felt, and hence the variations in the text, some of which are 
obviously the result of efforts to make things clearer. That St 
Paul deliberately wrote obscurely in order to avoid making 
definite charges against his assailants (Theodoret) is not 
probable.* He is satirical, and we must beware of taking his 
irony literally. Under cover of mock humility he shows that he 
is a very different kind of person from those who criticize him 
from a pinnacle of assumed superiority. They say that at close 
quarters he is a coward. Well, he must own that he has not the 
courage which they possess. He does not venture to put him- 
self on a level with people who sing their own praises and try to 
get themselves accepted at their own valuation. Conduct of 
that kind is folly. His glorying has limits not of his own 
choosing ; they are the limits of the sphere assigned to him by 
God, who sent him to Corinth. And he was the first in the field 
there. He did not come after others had laboured there and 
take the credit of what they had done, although there are people 
who have tried to reap where he has sown. He hopes that as 
the Corinthians' faith increases he will be able to enlarge his 
sphere of influence and carry the Gospel to regions farther 
West, always avoiding the fields of other men's labours, so as not 
to seem to plume himself on work which was not his own. 

The Western text (D* F G, d e f g, Ambrst.) omits oi awiacnv 
(crwLovcTLv), T7/*€ts Se, and then the sentence aXXa airol k.t.X. 
runs ; ' but we measuring ourselves by ourselves and comparing 
ourselves with ourselves are not going into spheres beyond our 

* aaa<pu>s &irav rb x^PVM-"' tovto yiypa<pev, ivapyus A£y£cu rods airlovs oti 


measure and glorying there, etc' This makes good sense and 
runs smoothly, with avroi carrying on the constr. of oi ToApu- 
jiiev: and it may be an instance of what WH. call "Western 
non-interpolations" (ii. pp. 175 ff.). But more probably the 
omission is an attempt to make the original text clearer. The 
Apostle is not likely to have declared that he made himself his 
standard of excellence. To adopt the reading vvviovaiv and 
make it a dat. (a-vviovaiv) agreeing with iavrols — 'compare our- 
selves with ourselves, unwise people, as they hold us to be ' — is 
objectionable for the same reason, and in that case we should 
have T015 fxij (tvvlovo-lv. We must retain -fj/xeh Si, and then 
avrot refers, not to the Apostle, but to his critics.* And we may 
safely reject the reading ov avvio-acnv ( X *), which would mean 
that 'they compare themselves with themselves without being 
aware that they do so,' which is very poor sense. 

X. 12-18. The Area of his Mission includes Corinth. 

Self-praise is worthless ; but I do claim that Corinth 
lies in the sphere of work which God has assigned to me. 

12 I am accused of being a coward. Well, I really cannot 
muster courage to pair myself or compare myself with certain 
persons who are distinguished by much self-commendation. 
They fix their own standard of excellence, and are lost in admira- 
tion of themselves and one another for conforming to it. That 
is really not very sagacious. 18 We, however, who do not fix our 
own standard, will not glory beyond our legitimate limits, but 
will keep within the limits of that sphere which God has assigned 
to us as a limit, and which certainly meant that we should extend 
our labours so as to include you. 14 For we are not, I repeat, — 
as would be the case if we had no commission to come as far as 
you, — we are not straining to exceed the limits of our province. 
Why, we pressed on even to you, and were the first to proclaim 
in Corinth the Glad-tidings of the Christ. 15 Our glorying does 
not go beyond legitimate limits, does not take credit for what 
other men have done. But we do cherish a hope that, as your 
faith goes on growing, we may through you get an enlargement 
of influence — still keeping to the sphere allotted to us — an 
enlargement on a great scale ; 16 viz. to carry the Glad-tidings to 

* Bousset takes the opposite view ; that oi awiaaiv i]jxeh 5^ is an insertion 
to ease the sense, ein Notbehelf. 


the region beyond you, without glorying (as some people do) in 
another man's sphere of labour of things already done before we 
came. 17 But in any case there is only one right way of glorying ; 
he who glories, let him glory in the Lord who alone can make 
work fruitful. 18 For he who, instead of giving all glory to God, 
commends himself, is not the man that is accepted; the only 
one who wins real approval is he whom the Lord commends. 

It will perhaps be as well to give a paraphrase of vv. 12 and 
13 on the hypothesis that the Western text is correct, and it is 
preferred by some commentators. 

12 You may call me a coward, for I really do not possess 
boldness enough to pair myself or compare myself with certain 
persons who are distinguished by much self-commendation. On 
the contrary, I fix my own standard and compare myself with it, 
13 and so my glorying will never go beyond legitimate limits, but 
will keep, etc. 

12. Ou y^P ToXp.wfjiei' evKpimi r\ owKptrai eauTois. One 
suspects that for the sake of a play upon words the Apostle has 
used an expression which might otherwise have been clearer. 
' For we have not the boldness (v. 2) to pair or to compare our- 
selves with some of those who commend themselves.' The play 
on words (IvKplvai 17 crwKplvai) is as obvious here as in vv. 5, 6, 
and the meaning of Ivxpivai seems to be 'judge amongst,' 
' estimate amongst,' ' class with,' and it is stronger in meaning 
than awKpivai, so that ' pair ' and ' compare ' fairly well preserves 
the similarity of sound and change of meaning. ' I could not 
venture to put myself in the same class with, or even compare 
myself with,' is the sarcastic declaration. Vulg. gives the sense, 
without preserving any play of words ; non enim audemus inserere 
aut comparare nos. Beza has nos adjungere ved conjwigere, which 
sacrifices the sense in order to preserve the play. Bengel's 
aequiparare aut ccmiparare is better than either this or inserere aut 
conserere. Cf. Wisd. vii. 29; 1 Mace. x. 71. St Paul had been 
accused of singing his own praises (iii. 1); he here intimates that 
this is just what his critics are fond of doing. 

d\\a auTol iv eauTois eauTous p.€Tpourre$. If we retain ^fteis Se 
in v. 13, and it is best to do so, the olvtol must refer to the hostile 
critics ; ' But they themselves measuring themselves by them- 
selves.' They are a "mutual admiration and self-admiration 
society " (Waite). They set up their own conduct as a standard 
of excellence, and find their conformity to it eminently satis- 
factory and admirable. They are a community of Pecksniffs. 
Calvin takes the monks of his own time as an illustration ; sibi 


enim intus plaudebant, non considerantes quibus virtutibus constaret 
vera laus. 

ou truviamv. 'Are without understanding ' ; they are amoves 
(Eph. v. 17), who are not intelligent enough to put two and two 
together. These self-satisfied critics, who have no external 
standard, but judge everything by comparison with their own 
practice, come very far short of wisdom. Non inte/hgunt, says 
Augustine, adding neque quae loquuntur neque de quibus affirtnant 
(from 1 Tim. i. 7). Others supply, ' how ridiculous they are,' or 
'what they are talking about,' or 'what are the marks of a true 
Apostle.' But oi avnacrtv needs no supplement. Cf. oviru> voelre 
ovSe arvvUre; (Mk. viii. 17). 

The spelling evupi. and avvKpi. is supported by B* D* ; for the former G 
has Kptvai. Naber's suspicion of dittography is not needed ; the play on 
words is thoroughly Pauline. D E add iavrovs after the first verb, while 
X* omits iavrovs before /xerpovvres. avviaaiv (X 1 B 17) rather than 
ffWLovcnv (D S EKLP) or crvviaainv (N*). D* F G, defgomit ov aw. 
Tl/iels 6£, but the words should be retained with X B D 3 E K L P, r Syrr. 
Copt. Arm. Aeth. Goth. 

13. Tjfiets 8e ouk els to. aueTpa KauxTjcrofxeGa. ' But we will not 
glory beyond our measure.' He does not fix his own standard, 
and he does not exceed the limits fixed for him ; moreover, he 
has a settled determination never to exceed these limits. Eis Ta 
ayuerpa is indefinite ; it may refer to the excessive self-admiration 
of his opponents, or it may mean 'in respect of things beyond 
our scope ' ; but this is less probable. Cf. «is to. (jloXutto.. 

dXXa KaT& t6 (AETpoK Tou Ka^oVog k.t.X. ' But according to the 
measure of the length which God apportioned to us as a measure, 
to reach as far as even you.' RV. and other authorities render 
kolvwv 'province,' and the rendering is so suitable to the context 
that we may perhaps regard it as admissible ; a specified sphere, 
definitely marked out, is the meaning required, and ' province ' 
expresses this very well. But>v is generally used of length, 
and to ixirpov tov KavoVos would mean ' the length of one's tether,' 
the length of the radius from one's centre. In this case it would 
mean the distance which God told the Apostle to go in his 
missionary work. But seeing that *avwv means (1) the rod 
which measures, and (2) the amount which is measured, and 
seeing that fixing the bounds of territory may require measuring 
rods, it is possible that kclvwv may be used of the territory thus 
measured. Lightfoot on Gal. vi. 16, the only other place in N.T. 
in which the word occurs, seems to take this as certain. There, 
however, the term is used of line, and not of surface ; ' all those 
who shall guide their steps by this rule.' * In Judith xiii. 6 it 

* We use ' line ' in a similar sense. To be the Apostle of the Gentiles was 
St Paul's ' line,' and it extended to Corinth. 


seems to mean a bed-pole. More akin to the use here is 4 Mace, 
vii. 21, 7rpos okov rbv rijs (fukoo-ocpias Kdvova €u<re/3ws (pikoo-oepwv, 
where Kavova might be rendered ' sphere, 5 or ' province,' although 
'rule' may be better. Westcott, Canon of N.T., App. A, gives 
a history of the word. 

oS Zpipiaev tjjjui/ 6 0eos fAeTpou. ' Which God apportioned to 
us as our measure.' St Paul did not determine his own province 
any more than his own standard of excellence. God did that. 
Cf. 1 Cor. vii. 1 7 ; Rom. xii. 3 ; Heb. vii. 2. Some editors 
bracket fxirpov as probably a gloss, but e^epta-ev fiirpov is another 
alliteration, and St Paul is harping on the idea of ' measure.' 
Vulg. omits ; quam mensus est nobis Deus. Both ov and fxirpov 
are attracted in case to toC kovovos. 

e4>i.Ke'o-0cu axpi Kal d\t.w. This was what God intended ; that 
his line should ' reach as far as even you ' ; pertingendi usque ad 
vos. This was indisputable. St Paul was the first to preach the 
Gospel in Corinth, and it was God who had turned him from a 
persecutor into a preacher. The verb is common enough in 
class. Grk., but it is found nowhere else in N.T., and perhaps 
nowhere in LXX. 

ovk (KBD*GKL P) rather than oi X i (D 3 E). els tol d/xerpa (N B D 3 
K LP) rather than els rb dfierpov (D* G) in immensum (Latt). iQiniadai 
(N B G K L P) rather than acpiKtadai (D E F). 

14. We again have several doubtful points to consider ; text, 
arrangement, and punctuation are all uncertain. At the outset 
all these must be regarded as tentative. 

ou yap d>9 p.r]. Adopting this reading, we will treat the verse 
as not a mere parenthesis to explain v. 13, and will connect 
v. 15 with©. 14; moreover, we will regard no part of v. 14 as 
interrogative. ' For we are not overstretching ourselves, as (we 
should be doing) if we did not reach unto you, for as far as even 
you we were the first to come in the Gospel (viii. 18; Rom. i. 9) 
of the Christ, not glorying beyond our measure, etc' Or, with- 
out supplying anything, we may take the first part of v. 14 thus ; 
' For we are not, as if we did not reach unto you, overstretching 
ourselves.' If the reading d>? yap /xy is adopted, then the first 
part must be a question ; ' For are we overstretching ourselves, 
as if we did not reach unto you?' 'Are we exceeding our 
commission in claiming authority in Corinth ? ' Facts speak for 
themselves ; he founded the Church there. 

It is not certain that cpOdvu here, as in 1 Thess. iv. 15, retains 
its class, signification of 'come first,' 'precede,' 'anticipate.' In 
later Greek it commonly means simply 'come' (1 Thess. ii. 16; 
Rom. ix. 31 ; Phil. iii. 16) ; so in papyri and perhaps here (RV.). 
Nevertheless, the fact that he not only came as far as Corinth 
with the Glad-tidings, but was the first to do so, has point. 


Unless v. 14 is treated as a parenthetical explanation of v. 13 
(WH.), we need only a comma at the end of it. 

oi yap iis^(NDFGKLM, Latt. ) rather than ws yap ix-f) (B and two 

15, 16. These verses are connected with v. 14 rather than 
with v. 13. The clumsiness of expression is due to dictation, 
in which the sentence has become unduly prolonged. The 
Judaizing teachers had intruded into his province and taken 
credit for what was his work, and he aims at showing that he 
himself has done nothing of the kind. 

ouk els Ta ap.eTpa k.t.X. 'Not glorying beyond our measure 
in other men's labours, but having hope that, as your faith grows, 
we shall be magnified in you according to our province unto 
still greater abundance, so as to preach the Gospel unto the 
regions beyond you, and not to glory in another man's province 
in respect of things ready to our hand.' At present Corinth is 
the Western limit of his sphere of missionary work. When the 
Corinthian Church is more firmly established, he hopes to extend 
his labours still farther into Europe. 

15. lv \iy\v. The words are amphibolous, but they have 
more point if they are taken with /xeyaXwOrjvai. They are 
almost superfluous if taken with av$avo/xevr)s (Luther, Calvin); 
if their faith increases, it must increase in them and among 
them ; but it is not superfluous to remind them that it lies in 
their power to make it quickly possible for him to extend his 
sphere of work. Both Kav^wfjavoi and e^ovTes are participia 
absoluta, of which St Paul makes freq. use. See on viii. 20. 
With peyaXwOvjvai comp. Phil. i. 20, with ivepicro-uav, viii. 2. 

16. eis ret u-rrepeKeiea upoy. The expression may be coined 
for the occasion, for vireptKuva has been found nowhere else.* 
It may have been a current popular word which has not found 
its way into literature ; iireKeiva (Acts vii. 43 and LXX) is 
classical. A little later St Paul had intentions of going to Rome 
and Spain (Rom. xv. 24, 28), and such ideas may have been in 
his mind when he wrote this letter. Regarding Antioch as his 
original centre, he might vaguely describe such regions as to. 
vTrtpeKtLva in reference to Corinth. But, if these chapters are part 
of the severe letter written at Ephesus, ' the parts beyond Corinth ' 
would be a natural expression for Rome and Spain. See 
Introduction, p. xxxiii. 

iiayyekiaaaBai. In these verses (14-16) we have evayye'A.101/ 
and €uayyeAt£, expressions and ideas which are in a high 
degree Pauline. The former occurs in all groups of the Epistles, 
* Thomas Magister condemns it as a vulgarism used only by ol avpcpaices. 



60 times in all, and indeed in every Epistle, excepting that to 
Titus. The latter is found chiefly in this group, but also in 
1 Thess. and Eph., 20 times in all, and its usual meaning is 
' preach the Gospel,' whether evayyeXiov be added (xi. 7) or not ; 
but in a few passages it means simply 'preach,' and hardly 
differs from K-qpva-aoi (Gal. i. 23; Eph. ii. 17, iii. 8; 1 Thess. 
iii. 6). Eia.yyeA.iov more often than not has no defining adjective 
or genitive, as here and viii. 18; contrast ii. 12, iv. 4, ix. 13, 
xi. 7 ; and seeing that the verb is a technical word to indicate 
the work of a Christian missionary, the noun indicates the sub- 
stance or contents of mission preaching. In other words, it is 
"God's plan of salvation, contained in the O.T. as a promise, 
and realized through Jesus Christ" (Harnack, Constitution and 
Law of the Church, pp. 292 f.). 

els to. eToi/xa Kau)c>io-acr9ai. ' To glory in respect of things 
ready to our hand,' i.e. ' done by other persons before we came 
on the scene and claimed the credit of it,' a condensed expres- 
sion, the meaning of which would be obscure without the 
context. The constr. /cav^. eis is found in Arist. Pol. v. x. 16. 
We know that St Paul on principle avoided centres where other 
missionaries had been working (Rom. xv. 20); he was com- 
missioned to be always a pioneer, and he regarded his extra- 
ordinary success as a proof that he was commissioned by God. 
It was never his desire to find things ready to his hand, still less 
to claim the merit for what had been already done. Indeed 
there was no merit to be claimed even when, in the province 
apportioned to him, great results were produced. Therefore he 
again quotes (see on 1 Cor. i. 31) an adaptation of Jer. ix. 24. 

17. 6 8e Kauxwjiei'os. ' But he that glorieth, in the Lord let 
him glory ' ; that is the only safe principle. If faith has been 
planted and made to grow, it is God who gives the increase. It 
is probable that 6 kv/hos here means God rather than Christ. 
But it is remarkable with what readiness N.T. writers transfer 
what in O.T. is said of Jehovah to Jesus Christ, and this may be 
a case in point. See on 1 Cor. xv. 10; Rom. xv. 17; Eph. 
iii. 7 ; and cf. Gal. ii. 8 : in all these passages St Paul carefully 
disclaims merit for what he has been enabled to accomplish. 

18. ou yap 6 eauTO*' owioTdVwi', eiceleos earie Sokijaos. ' For it 
is not the man who commends himself that is the one to be 
accepted ' (Se'xo/xai) as of sterling character. See on 1 Cor. 
ix. 27, xi. 19; ckcivos as in Rom. xiv. 14. St Paul had been 
forced by the attacks made on him to glory about himself, but 
it was not on this self-praise that he relied. The Corinthian 
Church was his letter of commendation, and over and above 
this there was the manifest blessing which God both in Corinth 


and elsewhere bestowed upon his work. His assailants had no 
such confirmation of the praise which they bestowed on them- 
selves. Cf. iyKO}/XLat,eT(D ae 6 kou fj.r] to o~ov o-royua, dAAorpios 
Kal pr} to. era. x^V (Prov. xxvii. 2). Augustine {in Ps. cxliv. n. 7) 
says, Ecce inventum est, quomodo et te laudare possis et arrogans 
non sis. Deum in te lauda, non te ; non quia tu es talis, sed quia ille 
fecit te ; non quia tu aliquid potes, sed quia potest ille in te et per te* 

XI. 1-XII. 10. The Apostle continues his comparison of 
himself with the Judaizing teachers who oppose him. He has 
just shown that, if any question of intrusion is raised, it is not he 
who has intruded into their proper area of activity, but they who 
have intruded into his. He goes on to show that in other 
respects he can say at least as much for himself in claiming to 
be an Apostle as these teachers can do. He has worked without 
payment, which he has not only not asked for but refused ; his 
labours have been greater and his sufferings far greater than 
theirs ; and he has received very special revelations and visita- 
tions from God. But first of all he justifies himself for entering 
into this comparison at all (xi. 1-6). All this glorying about 
oneself is odious folly, and, seeing that he has just been 
maintaining that self-praise is no recommendation, it seems 
grossly inconsistent. But the boastings of his opponents have 
forced him to adopt this course ; and, as the Corinthians have 
shown much toleration to them, he asks them to show a little to 
him, when he answers fools according to their folly. He harps 
all through on the folly of it (xi. 1, 16-21, xii. 1, n), but he is 
willing to make a fool of himself to save them from disaster. 
Possibly di/e'x€o-0ai d<£p. was a phrase used by his critics. The 
difference between him and his critics is this ; that they, without 
being aware of it, are fools ceaselessly, because folly has become 
a second nature to them ; whereas he deliberately plays the fool 
for a few minutes, because their folly can be met in no other way. 

XL 1-6. The Folly of Glorying 1 and the Reason for it. 

Forgive my foolish boasting, which is caused by anxious 
affection. I fear lest these self asserting impostors should 
seduce you from Christ. 

1 1 wish that you could bear with me in a little somewhat of 

folly. (It is, of course, foolish to boast ; but you stand a good 

•"Two feelings are compounded all through this passage; an intense 
sympathy with the purpose of God that the Gospel should be preached to 
every creature ; and an intense scorn for the spirit that sneaks and poaches 
on another's ground, and is more anxious that some men should be good 
sectarians than that all men should be good disciples " (Denney, p. 309). 


deal of it from other people.) Well, I know that you do bear 
with me. 2 The truth is that I am jealous over you with God's 
own jealousy ; for I betrothed you to one husband exclusively. 
My aim was to present the Church of Corinth as a pure virgin- 
bride to the Christ. s But I am sadly afraid lest somehow, as 
the serpent utterly deceived Eve by his craftiness, so your 
thoughts should be corrupted and led astray from the single- 
minded devotion and pure fidelity which should be observed 
towards Christ. 4 And my fear is not groundless, for if the 
intruding alien (and I hear that there are such people) is 
proclaiming another kind of Jesus such as we did not proclaim, 
or you are receiving a different kind of spirit such as you did 
not receive from us, or a different kind of Gospel such as you 
did not accept at our hand, — then you bear with a person of this 
kind with quite beautiful toleration ! B I ask you to be equally 
tolerant towards me ; for I am persuaded that in nothing have 
I been inferior to those pre-eminent apostles of yours. 6 Granted 
that, as compared with them, I am untrained in speech, yet in 
the knowledge that is worth having I am not untrained. No ; 
in all things we have made that plain among all men in our 
relations with you. 

1. "0<j>€\oi' ivei-^evdi fiou fiiKpof Ti &4>poawY)S. 'Would that 
ye bore with me in a little somewhat of folly.' The sudden 
outburst looks like the beginning of a new topic, but, as has 
been shown above, the connexion with what precedes is close. 
He is again guarding himself against the charge of vanity and 
self-praise. The unaugmented 2nd aor. 6cf>e\ov in late Greek is 
a mere particle, hardly more than ' Oh,' expressing a wish as to 
what might happen, but is almost too good to come true, as 
here, or what might have been the case, but was not. Here and 
Rev. iii. 15 it is followed by imperf. indie. ; in Gal. v. 12 by fut. 
indie, where, as here, there is a touch of irony ; in 1 Cor. iv. 8 
by aor. indie, and there also there may be irony. The aor. 
indie, is freq. in LXX, esp. in the phrase o<j>e\ov a.Tre6dvo/xev 
(Ex. xvi. 3; Job xiv. 13; Num. xiv. 2, xx. 3). In 2 Kings 
v. 3 no verb is expressed. In class. Grk. the augmented w</>e/W 
is usually followed by the infin. The meaning here is ' would 
that ye bore,' or ' Oh that ye could bear,' not ' would that ye had 
borne' (Calvin). Blass, § 63. 5. We have deppoavvr), w. 17, 21 ; 
Mk. vii. 22 ; in 1 Cor. we have pupia. (i. 18, 21, 23, ii. 14, iii. 19). 

The constr. of the two genitives is disputed. In Bibl. Grk. 
ave'xo/xai commonly has gen. of either person or thing, but the 


acc is sometimes found, as in class. Grk. Here the avix^o-Qt fiov 
in the next clause makes it almost certain that the first fiov is the 
gen. after dvci'xeo-tfe, and then typoo-wry; is the gen. after fiiKpov 
ti, which is the acc. of reference. But it is possible to take 
fxiKpov ti as the acc. after dveix«J-0e and make both genitives 
depend upon fiu<6v n* This, however, is clumsy and improbable. 
d\\d kou d^€'xeo-0e' fiou. As in x. 7, we are in doubt as to 
whether the verb is indicative or imperative, and most English 
Versions decide for the latter, as if the Apostle were repeating 
his wish in the form of a prayer. ' I wish you would — nay, do.' 
In either case the dAAd corrects what has just been said, while 
Kdi emphasizes what is now said, and one gets more of a correc- 
tion and as much room for emphasis if one takes avexecrOc as 
indicative. He has just expressed a wish as if it were not very 
likely to be fulfilled, and then he corrects himself; 'Well, I 
ought not to speak like that ; you do bear with me ' ; or, ' But 
there is no need to wish; of course you do bear with me.' 
Blass, § 77. 13, prefers the other alternative. 

6$e\ov (NBMP) rather than &4>e\ov (D 3 FGKL). &vetxe<r0e (NB 
DFGKLMP) rather than fyelxto-Oe (some cursives), ti &<ppoo-vv7is 
(KBDEM 17) rather than ry 6.<ppoavvQ (K L) or a<ppoo-vvi}$ without ti (P). 

2. £tj\w yap upas ©eou £tjXu>. 'For I am jealous over you 
with a divine jealousy.' The exact meaning of ©eou is uncertain, 
but it implies that the honour of God is involved in the matter. 
Something will depend on the meaning which we give to ^Aw 
and £?/Au>, whether ' am zealous with zeal 'or 'am jealous with 
jealousy.' Such renderings as 'zeal for God's glory,' or 'zeal 
such as God loves,' or 'very great zeal ' (cf. tov ©eov, i. 12, and 
t(3 ®ew, x. 4) are unsatisfactory, and ' I love you with very great 
love' is impossible. Lightfoot on Gal. iv. 17 suggests that 'I 
take interest in you with a divine interest ' is the meaning here ; 
but what follows indicates that jealousy rather than zeal is 
meant, jealousy in the higher sense, as when we are jealous 
about our own or another person's honour. St Paul assumes for 
himself the part of the person who has arranged the betrothal, 
and who watched jealously over the bride's conduct in the 
interval before the marriage, which is to take place when Christ 
returns at the 7rapouo-ia.f In O.T. Israel is represented as the 
spouse of Jehovah, who is jealous of anything like unfaithfulness 
(Is. liv. 5, 6, lxii. 5 ; Jer. iii. 1 ; Ezek. xvi. 23-33) ; but there is 
no third person who is concerned with this relationship. In 

* Lietzmann contends that if avix^Qe had not followed, no one would 
have taken the first fiov with dm'xectfe, and that St Paul does not mean this ; 
in the second sentence he has without thinking changed his construction. 

t (jLvqareias yap £o~ti Kcupbs 6 irapwv Kaip6s' 6 5£ tQiv TracTaStav Irepos, Ura? 
Xiyuaiv, avto-TT) 6 vvy.<plos (Chrys.). 


most cases it was the parents who arranged the betrothal, and 
St Paul is here regarding himself as the parent of the Corinthian 
Church (xii. 14; 1 Cor. iv. 17). In Hos. ii. 19, 20 the relation- 
ship between Jehovah and Israel is represented as betrothal 
rather than marriage, but again there is no third person ; Jehovah 
acts for Himself, just as in Eph. v. 27 Christ presents the Church 
to Himself, without the intervention of any Apostle. 

rjpjioo-djATii' yap ty a s evl deSpi. 'For I betrothed you to one 
husband.' In class. Grk. the midd. would be used of the man 
betrothing himself, and in Prov. xix. 14 it is used of the woman, 
irapa Se Kvptov app.6^eraL yvvtj dvSpi : the act. would be used of 
betrothing another person, either avSpl rrjv (Hdt. ix. 
108) or Kopa. avSpa (Pind. Pyth. ix. 207). In the Testaments 
(Iss. i. 10) Rachel says to Leah, Mr) Kavx& M^ So£a£e creavTrjv, 
on £>€ irporzpov o-ov f)p[x6(TaTo ('IaKoj/3), in accordance with classical 
usage. But here the context fixes the meaning (Winer, p. 323), 
and the midd. may indicate the Apostle's interest in the matter ; 
as TrpopvrjaTwp koI ydp.ov //.eonV^s (Thdrt.) he was jealously 
anxious that nothing should interfere with the marriage. The 
betrothed woman must devote herself exclusively to her destined 
Husband, and must not allow her thoughts to be diverted to any 
other. The b/i implies this, and is probably aimed at those 
who were distracting the Corinthians from their loyalty to the 
Christ preached by St Paul. Bachmann with Beza and Bengel 
takes evl avSpc with Trapao-njo-ai, ' to present a pure virgin to one 
husband, viz. the Christ'; but that leaves rjpp.oud.prjv without 
anything to fix its meaning, and it would inevitably mean, 'I 
betrothed you to myself.' See Hastings, DB. and DCG. artt. 
' Bride ' and ' Bridegroom.' 

TrapGe'eoe dyi'Tji' irapaoTTJo-ai Ttj> Xpiorw. 'To present a pure 
(vii. 11 ; Phil. iv. 8 ; 1 Tim. v. 22) virgin to the Christ.' Neither 
AV. nor RV. put 'you' after 'present' in italics; it is not 
required in English any more than in the Greek. 

Here again, as in the concluding verses of x., it is clear that 
St Paul is addressing the whole Church of Corinth, and not the 
rebellious minority. Cf. w. 7-n. The statement that in i.-ix. 
the loyal Corinthians are addressed, and in x.-xiii. the disloyal, 
and that this explains the extraordinary change of tone, is not in 
harmony with the facts. 

3. 4>o|3oufjicu 8c \xr) irus. Timeo autem ne forte. He does not 
express either complete trust or complete distrust. Cf. xii. 20; 
Gal. iv. 11. He has just expressed his own share and interest 
in their relationship to the Christ. Of course it must and will 
be maintained; but (8e) there are perils about which he has 


&s 6 o<Jhs ii^ir^o-ev Eua*'. ' As the serpent deceived Eve.' 
The compound verb is strong in meaning, and perhaps justifies 
the insertion of 'utterly' or 'completely.' In 1 Tim. ii. 14 the 
compound marks a distinction between Adam and Eve; she 
was ' entirely deceived,' but he was not even ' deceived ' ; what 
he did, he did to please himself and his wife. Nowhere else 
in N.T. is Eve mentioned. In LXX the compound is very 
rare, and in Gen. iii. 13 we have 6 oc£is rinaTrjaiv /x,c. In N.T. 
it is confined to St Paul (1 Cor. iii. 18; Rom. vii. n, xvi. 18; 
2 Thess. ii. 3 ; 1 Tim. ii. 14), who is fond of compounds with 
eK (x. 9, xi. 12, 33, xii. 15 ; 1 Cor. v. 7, 13, vi. 14, xv. 34; etc.). 
In N.T. aTTa-raw is rare (Eph. v. 6 ; 1 Tim. ii. 14 ; Jas. i. 26). 

Thackeray {Relation of St Paul to Contemporary Jeivish 
Thought, p. 55) perhaps goes too far in saying that in these 
verses (3-15) we have "very strong reasons for presuming an 
acquaintance on the part of St Paul with the Rabbinical legend 
found in the Apocalypse of Moses and elsewhere, that the serpent 
seduced Eve to unchastity and that Cain was their child ; also 
that Satan, after having first taken the form of a serpent, after- 
wards took that of an angel." Menzies regards it as certain that 
" Paul knew a Haggadah or legend of this kind." Heinrici in 
Meyer gives reasons for doubting this. Had St Paul said 177 
iiri6vfj.{a airov and expressed what follows with more resemblance 
to the legend, his acquaintance with it would have been more 
certain.* Assuming that he knew it, there is no evidence that 
he believed it. He uses legends as illustrations of truth; see 
on 1 Cor. x. 4. 

lv tt) iracoupyia aurou. 'In his craftiness' (see on iv. 2). 
'Subtilty' (AV.) is no doubt meant to connect this with 'the 
serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field ' (Gen. fii. 1) ; 
but there LXX has ^poi't/xwraros.f The legend says that it was 
because the serpent was the wisest animal that Satan took its 
form. The identification of the serpent with Satan is not found 
earlier than Wisd. ii. 24, and it is not certain that it is found 
there. ' By the envy of the devil death entered into the world,' 
may refer to Cain's envy leading him to kill Abel. Clement of 
Rome {Cor. iii.) takes it so; as does Theophilus {Ad Autol. ii. 
29). Cf. 1 Jn. iii. 12. See Gregg on Wisd. ii. 24. 

<J>0apfj to, yorjixara ufAwy euro ttjs\6ty]tos. 'Your thoughts 

* There is no trace of this legend in Enoch xxxiii. 6, lxix. 12, ox Jubilees 
iii. 1S-26, or the Apocalypse ofBaruch xlviii. 42, or 4 Esdras i. 5, 6, 21-26, 
or Tobit viii. 6. See Bachmann, ad loc. p. 361. Is it a priori probable 
that St Paul would allude to such legends in writing to Gentiles? 

t Aquila had 6 6</>is ty travovp-yos. It was perhaps part of the iravovpyla 
of the Tudaizers, that in Corinth they did not attempt to enfore circumcision, 
an attempt which had not been very successful in Galatia and which would 
not be likely to succeed at Corinth. 


(ii. 11, iii. 14, iv. 4, x. 5) should be corrupted (vii. 2 ; 1 Cor. xv. 
33 ; Eph. iv. 22) from the simplicity (viii. 2, ix. 11, 13) and the 
purity (vi. 6 only) that is toward (viii. 22) the Christ.' Note 
that it is the Christian community as a whole, and not any 
individual Christian, that is the spouse of the Christ. The 
Apostle's fear that the community will be seduced is very strange 
after the satisfaction expressed in the first seven chapters. The 
dTrd implies that the corruption issues in seduction and separa- 
tion ; cf. Rom. vii. 2, ix. 3. If xai t>}s dyvorqros is genuine, it 
refers to the chaste conduct of the TrapQivos ayvrj during the 
interval between betrothal and marriage. Like the serpent, the 
false teachers were promising enlightenment as the reward of 
disloyalty and disobedience. See Denney, p. 323. 

N BD* G P 17, degr, Copt, omit ovru before <p9aprj> and neither 
ovtoj (D 2 and 3 E K L M, f Vulg. Syrr.) nor tpd&pei. (K L P) is likely to be 
original, ical ttjs ayvor-qros after a7rX6r?jTos (X* B F G 17, g Goth. Aeth.) 
is strongly attested. But X 3 D 3 K L M P, f Vulg. Syrr., Clem. Alex, omit, 
and D* E d e have ttJs ayvoTrjTOS Kal ttjs atr\6T7]Tos, which suggests that 
the words may be a gloss inserted in two different places. Note the 
divergence of f from F. N G M omit t6v before Xpiffrdv. 

4. el u.kv y^P ° ep^ou-e^os ctXXoi' '\r]<rouv Krjpuo-crei. ' For if 
indeed the intruder is preaching another Jesus, whom we did 
not preach, and ye are receiving a different spirit which ye did 
not receive, or a different gospel which ye did not accept, ye 
bear with him quite beautifully.' Cf. Mk. vii. 9. The con- 
cluding words are sarcastic, and for this the p.iv at the outset 
prepares us. ' If indeed a person of the following description 
presents himself, then your toleration of his vagaries is quite 
lovely. Don't you think that you might show a little toleration 
to one who has proved to you that he is an Apostle of Christ ? ' 
The wording is obscure, because we do not know the exact 
character of the teaching to which St Paul alludes ; but what is 
suggested as rendering and meaning makes good sense. It is 
rash to insist on allusion to some prominent individual ; like tis 
and toioCtos (x. 7, 10), the sing, is generic. Cf. Gal. v. 10; Mt. 
xviii. 17. 'People who act in this way' is the meaning, and in 
6 ipxofJLwos there is probably no allusion to the familiar title of 
Messiah (Mt. xi. 3; Lk. vii. 19, 20; Jn. vi. 14; etc.). St Paul 
goes great lengths in his sarcasms, but he is not insinuating that 
the Judaizers claimed Messianic authority. By 6 ipxop-wos is 
meant qui suis ipsius auspiciis tamqua?n magister venit, quicunque 
ilk est (Comely). We may reasonably conjecture that 'Irjo-ovs, 
Truevp.a, evayyeXiov, which are a somewhat strange triplet, were 
leading terms in the teaching of the Judaizers. 'I^o-oOs rather than 
X/hoto's, for Judaizers would not use Xpio-To's as a proper name. 
The aorists, l<rjpv^ap.€v, iXdfitre, i8e£a(r6e, refer to the time 


when the Apostle converted the Corinthians, and they should 
be rendered as aorists. And e'Sefao-fc, 'accepted,' which is 
necessarily a voluntary act, should be distinguished from iXafierc, 
'received,' which is not necessarily such. Vulg. has accepistis 
and recepislis, which may serve. 

It is possible that not much difference is intended by the 
change from 6X\ov to hepov, yet the change should be marked 
in translation ; and this neither Vulg. nor AV. does, either here 
or Gal. i. 6, 7, where see Lightfoot. The change here may be 
caused by the change from a person to what is regarded as 
impersonal. Thus Acts iv. 12, ovk ecmv iv dXXw ovSevl 17 awrrjpLa' 
ouSe yap oio/xd iariv Irepov k.t.X. There are passages, and this is 
one of them, in which it is not easy to decide what St Paul means 
by TrvzvpLa. Sometimes we are not sure whether he is speaking of 
the human spirit or of the Divine Spirit ; and when he is speaking 
of the Divine Spirit, it is not always clear how far he regards the 
Spirit as personal. A qualifying epithet or genitive often decides 
the first question, but not always the second ; and where neither 
is found the first question may remain open. This is specially the 
case in the expression iv Tvv(.vp.aTi (Eph. ii. 22, iii. 5, v. 18, vi. 18 ; 
Col. i. 8). The distinction between personal and impersonal was 
less distinctly drawn than it is now, and it is safer not to 
make the Apostle's language more definite than he makes it 
himself. On the human side he has no definite scheme of 
psychology ; on the Divine side no theological system like the 
Quicunque vult. As to the TrvtO/m erepov here we may say that 
what he offered to the Corinthians was the spirit of freedom 
(iii. 17; Gal. v. 1, 15) and of joy (1 Thess. i. 6; Gal. v. 22; 
Rom. xiv. 17), and that what the Judaizers offered was a spirit of 
bondage (Gal. iv. 24; Rom. viii. 15) and of fear (Rom. viii. 15).* 
The general question is well handled by Headlam, St Paul and 
Christianity 1 pp. 95-115; Abbott, Johannine Grammar, p. 518. 

KaXws dve'xeaGe. 'You bear with him quite beautifully ' ; an 
ironical statement. Cf. Mk. vii. 9. If dWxeo-0e is the right 
reading, then we must translate, ' If he preaches . . . you would 
bear with him ' ; and in that case St Paul has changed his constr. 
in order to make the conclusion less harsh, for tLvdytaOz implies 
that el zKrjpvcnjev has preceded ; and it is possible that dvecxeo-Oe 
has been corrected to dve'^eo-fle to agree with d K-qpvaaet. But 
neither dvei'xeo-tfe nor avexeaOt justifies ' ye might well bear with 
him' (AV.). Winer, p. 383. Some would make the sentence 
interrogative, and in that case there is no sarcasm, but the koAws 

* " The same remark applies to 'theosophy,' 'spiritualism,' and other 
'gospels.' It will be time to take them seriously when they utter one wise or 
true word on God or the soul which is not an echo of something in the old 
familiar Scriptures" (Denney, p. 324). 


is understood literally. ' If people come and behave in this way, 
is it seemly that you should tolerate them ? in putting up with 
them do you act KaXws ? You are pledged to Christ and His 
cause, and people come and try to disturb your fidelity ; can you 
listen to them without dishonour?' Cf. KaXws in 1 Cor. vii. 
37, 38. This makes good sense ; but there is so much irony in 
this part of the Epistle, that to make the sentence categorical and 
KaXw? sarcastic is more in harmony with the general tone of the 
context : pseudoapostolis nihil non permittebant (Calvin). 

'Jyirovv (NBDEFKLMP and most versions) rather than Xpio-r6v 
(G, f g Vulg.)- We should probably read ivixetr&e (B D* 17) rather than 
dvdxevOe (X D 3 E G K L M P) or rjvdxeaOe (some cursives). 

5. Xoyi^ofiai y^P p]$ey fionreptjK^cu r&v \nrep\lav d-jrooroXwy. 
'For I count (x. 7, 11) that I am not a whit behind those pre- 
eminent apostles.' The ydp looks back to the appeal just made ; 
1 You tolerate these people ; you surely can tolerate me ; for I 
am at least as good as they are.' The very unusual expression 
01 inrepXiav airoaToXoi has been explained in two very different 
ways, and the rendering of the rare adv. i-n-epXiav varies according 
to the interpretation of the whole phrase. Baur and many others 
have supposed that this is a hit at the leaders among the Twelve, 
that such as the ' pillar-Apostles ' of Gal. ii. 9 are meant, and that 
we have here a powerful piece of evidence in support of the 
theory that in the Apostolic Age there was strong opposition 
between Petrine and Pauline influences. On this hypothesis 
such renderings as ' pre-eminent,' ' very chiefest,' ' supreme,' are 
preferred.* Protestant controversialists have used this interpre- 
tation as an argument against the supremacy of St Peter, to whom 
St Paul is supposed to claim to be in every point an equal ; and 
Romanists, instead of showing that the interpretation is erroneous, 
have accepted it and argued that, although St Paul claims equality 
in gifts, yet he says nothing about jurisdiction. 

It is improbable that St Paul would use such an expression 
as ol vnepXiav diroaToXot of any of the Twelve. Baur's hypothesis 
about the conflict between Petrine and Pauline tendencies in the 
Apostolic Age is now almost everywhere abandoned, and there is 
little doubt that the phrase in question is a sarcastic description 
of the Judaizing leaders, who claimed to be acting with the 
authority of the Twelve against one who had no such authority. 
St Paul speaks of them as 'superlative,' 'superfine,' ' superextra,' 
' overmuch ' apostles. ' These precious apostles of yours ' might 
represent the contemptuous tone of the words. It is possible 

* RV. retains ' very chiefest,' which commits one to the theory thatsome 
of the Twelve are meant. The Latin renderings vary. Vulg. has simply 
magni ; others have praegrandes, qui supra modum, qui valde, qui supra quam 
valde, apostoli sunt. Beza has summi. 


that virepXtav was current in colloquial language, but the Apostle 
may have coined it for himself; cf. virepdyav (2 Mace. viii. 35, 
x. 34, xiii. 25) and the classical v-n-epdvo) (Arist., Polyb.) and 
virepev (ev).* He is fond of compounds of virep, as this letter 

shows ; VTrepaLpop-ai, {nrepfidWio, VTrepf3a\\ovTW<;, v7repeKeiva, virep- 

Treptcrcrevtu. The suggestion that he is here using a phrase coined 
by his opponents, and turning it against them, is not wholly 
incredible; but it does not seem probable that they would 
employ such an expression to designate any of the Twelve, or 
that, if they did, he would borrow it.f That he should frame it 
as a mock-heroic description of his unscrupulous critics is more 
probable. Gal. ii. 6-9 is not parallel, and is not evidence that 
St Paul sometimes spoke disparagingly of the Twelve. 'Pre- 
eminent ' may serve as a neutral rendering, which does not at 
once commit one to either interpretation. 

Vulg. renders vareoew in a variety of ways ; here minus facio, 
xii. 11 minus sum, elsewhere desum, egeo, deficio (Index IV.). The 
perf. here, as in Heb. iv. 1, indicates past and continuing in- 
feriority. ' Being inferior to ' and ' coming short of must involve 
the idea of comparison, and hence the gen. ; cf. Rom. hi. 23. 

For ydp B has 5<?, perhaps to correspond with ftiv in v. 4. D* E, d e r 
add iv vfiiv after iiCTep-qKivai. 

6. el 8e «al i8iwtt)s tw Xoyw. The Apostle at once makes 
an admission that in one particular it may be the case that he is 
inferior to the Judaizing teachers. Here d koi, as distinct from 
teal el, represents the possibility as a fact (iv. 3, v. 16, xii. 11 ; 
1 Cor. iv. 7), although it is not certain that St Paul always 
observes this distinction. ' But though I am untrained in oratory, 
yet in knowledge I am not so.' 'iSidrnjs (1 Cor. xiv. 16, 23, 24; 
Acts iv. 13) means one who confines himself to his own affairs, 
•m i'Sia, and takes no part in public life ; and such a person was 
regarded by Greeks as wanting in education and likely to be 
unpractical and gauche. The word also came to mean one who 
had no technical or professional training, with regard to some 
particular art or science ; unskilled, a layman or amateur, as 
distinct from an expert or professional. And that is the meaning 
here ; the Apostle admits that he is not a trained rhetorician, 
not a professional orator, and he perhaps implies that some of 

* virepXlav is quoted as occurring in Eustathius, 1184, 19. 

t Among the surprising things in the Bampton Lectures of 1913 is the 
contention that "Peter had been paying a visit of such duration to Corinth 
as to have created a following who boasted themselves distinctively, as being 
the disciples of one whom they looked upon as a 'super-eminent Apostle'" 
(p. 78). That St Peter had visited Corinth is assumed from 1 Cor. i. 12, 
ix. 5 ; and from 1 Cor. ix. 6 it is assumed that Barnabas had been there also. 
The evidence is not strong. 


his opponents have this advantage. That any of them were 
causidici, accustomed, like Tertullus (Acts xxiv. i), to plead in 
court, is not probable ; but they may have pointed out to the 
Corinthians, who highly valued gifts of speech, that a true 
Apostle would be likely to possess more power in that particular 
than he exhibited (x. 10). See Knowling on Acts iv. 13 ; 
Wetstein on 1 Cor. xiv. 16 ; Suicer, Thesaurus, s.v. ; Trench, 
Syn. § lxxix. 

dXV ou ttj ypcSrci. He might be a poor speaker, but he 
knew what he was talking about. He did not profess to teach 
them things of which he himself was ignorant. As regards the 
mysteries of revelation, the essential truths of the Gospel, and 
their relation to human life here and hereafter, he was no self- 
made smatterer, but an expert and a specialist, trained and 
inspired by the Lord Himself. This yi/aJcns is prima dos apostoli 
(Beng.). With the constr. comp. 1 Cor. iv. 15. 

d\\' iv Trarrl (jmyepwo-afTes iv irao-ii' eis up.a$. ' But in all 
things we made it manifest among all men to you-ward.' 'Ev 
7ra.vTL is specially freq. in the first nine chapters of this letter 
(iv. 8, vi. 4, vii. 5, 16, viii. 7, ix. 8, 11) ; elsewhere it is rare {v. 11, 
1 Thess. v. 18). It means ' in every particular,' ' in every respect.' 
It is not likely that Iv irao-iv is neut., which would make it a mere 
repetition of iv ttovti, although some take it so ; ' in all things . . . 
among all men' is the meaning. His teaching has been public; 
there has been no secrecy about it, and anyone can form an 
opinion of its character and of the Apostle's relation to his hearers. 
He has a Divine commission to manifest the truth to every man's 
conscience (iv. 2). In that he is no i'Siwt^s. 

Here again we have a participle used absolutely, without any 
regular constr., as in i. 7, vii. 5, viii. 20, 24, ix. 11, 13 ; and it is 
not clear what it is that is made manifest, but probably t^v 
yiwu/ is to be understood ; what has been revealed to him has 
been passed on to them. 

D*, d e f g omit 5^ between el and ko.1. D* E d e g add el/ii after 
IdLWTijs. (pavepdicravres (N B F G 17, g) rather than (pavepwdivres (N s D 3 
EKLP.r Syrr. Copt.) or QavepwOeis (D*, def). F G, f g r Vulg. Syr- 
Pesh. omit iv -waaiv, as superfluous, if neut. In different directions corrup- 
tions in the text are suspected. Some would omit el 5e Kal . . . yvuxret. as 
a gloss. Others would expand what follows ; iviravrl tt&vto. (pavepdiaavTes 
iv ira<nv Kal els i^tas : cf. ix. 8, II ; I Cor. ix. 22, x. 33, xii. 6. The text 
is quite intelligible without either of these conjectural emendations. It is 
not quite clear what text is followed in AV. ; perhaps d\\' iv iravrl <pavepw- 
6ivres els lipids, but els vpias can hardly mean 'among you.' The reading 
QavepwOeis is an evident attempt to make the participle agree with ISidirris, 
and the addition of eavrovs after (pavepuxravTes (M) is a correction of a 
transitive participle without an object expressed. There is no difficulty, 
however, in supplying rr\v yvwaiv from the previous clause. The meaning 
is not intricate ; ' Though I lack eloquence, I do not lack knowledge ; on the 
contrary, I was always able to impart knowledge publicly to you.' 


XT. 7-15. Glorying about refusing Maintenance ; the 
Contrast with his Critics. 

/ had good reasons for refusing maintenance. This 
was one of many points of contrast between me and the false 

7 Or did I commit a sin in degrading myself by working for 
my bread with my hands to raise you up from the degradation 
of idolatry, in that without cost to yourselves no less a thing than 
God's inestimable Gospel was preached to you by me ? 8 1 
actually took from other Churches the cost of my maintenance — 
it seemed like robbery — in order to be able to minister gratui- 
tously to you. 9 And when I was staying with you at Corinth 
and my resources failed, even then I ' sponged ' on no one. No 
Corinthian was squeezed to maintain me, for my necessities were 
fully supplied by the brethren who came from Macedonia. That 
was only one instance. In every emergency during my stay I 
kept myself from being burdensome to you, and I mean to 
continue to do so. 10 It is the truth of Christ that speaks in me 
when I say that from being able to glory in preaching without 
payment I will never allow myself to be barred in any region of 
Achaia. u Why have I formed this resolution ? Do you think 
that it is because I care nothing about you? God knows 
whether that is true or not. 

12 But I shall persist in acting just as I am acting now about 
this, in order to cut the ground from under those who desire to 
have a ground for hoping that in the apostolate which they 
boastfully claim they may be found working on the same terms 
as we do, both of us accepting maintenance. 13 I will give them 
no such opening, for such teachers are sham apostles, whose 
whole work is a fraud, while they put on the appearance of 
Apostles of Christ. u And no wonder ; for Satan himself, the 
arch-deceiver, puts on the appearance of an angel of light. 15 It 
is no amazing thing, therefore, if his ministers also put on an 
appearance as being ministers of what they call righteousness. 
Such professions will not profit them. Their doom will be in 
accordance with their acts. 

7. "H djxapTiav eiroiiqo-a . . . up; c Or did I commit a sin in 
abasing myself that you might be exalted, because I preached to 


you God's Gospel for nothing?' This use of ^ to emphasize a 
question is not rare (i Cor. vi. 2; Rom. ii. 4, iii. 29, vi. 3); it 
introduces an alternative which those who are addressed are not 
likely to accept. ' If you do not admit what I have just stated, 
are you prepared to assert this ? ' The extreme expression, 
' commit a sin ' (found nowhere else in Paul), is, of course, 
ironical; it is used without irony 1 Pet. ii. 22; 1 Jn. iii. 9; see 
Westcott on 1 Jn. iii. 4 on the difference between d/xapT. ttomw 
and rrjv d/xapr. TToiioi. He uses this strong language because his 
refusing to accept maintenance had been made a charge against 
him.* He states his reasons for refusing, 1 Cor. ix. 6-16 (see 
notes there) ; but his enemies may have said that the real reason 
was that he was too proud to do as other Apostles did, or that 
he refused, because he knew that he was not really an Apostle. 
We know from Didache xi. that the right of missionaries to 
maintenance for a short time was generally recognized c. a.d. 
100, in accordance with Christ's directions (Mt. x. 10; Lk. x. 7). 
But St Paul always insisted on supporting himself by the handi- 
craft which was so common in his Cilician home of making 
cilidum, a fabric of goats' hair, used for making tents (Acts 
xviii. 3) and other coverings (1 Thess. ii. 9 ; 2 Thess. iii. 8; 
2 Cor. xii. 14-18). In his speech at Ephesus (Acts xx. 34) he 
may have held up 'these hands' to show how hardened they 
were by his habitual handiwork. We must remember that nearly 
all his first converts were poor (1 Cor. i. 26), and that few were 
in a condition to give prolonged hospitality to a missionary. 

But not until he writes 2 Cor. does the Apostle intimate that 
anyone found fault with him for this habitual independence. At 
Corinth it would be easy to rouse prejudice against it. Greek 
sentiment would not allow a free citizen to undertake manual 
labour for anything less than dire necessity (Arist. Pol. iii. 5); 
and there was also a general feeling that teachers ought to be 
paid. The professional teachers of philosophy in Greece took 
large fees, and for this turning of instruction into a trade and 
selling wisdom for money, Socrates (Xen. Mem. 1. vi. 1), Plato 
(Gorg. 520; Apol. 20), and Aristotle (Eth. Nic. ix. i. 5-7) 
condemned them. The Sophists replied that those who taught 
gratuitously did so because they knew that their teaching was 
worth nothing. It is likely enough that the Judaizers uttered 
similar sneers against St Paul. Hence his asking if this practice 
of his was a ' sin ' in the eyes of the Corinthians. 

ifAauTOk TcnreivwK tea ujieTs 6i{/co0t)t€. They might think it an 
undignified thing for an Apostle to 'work night and day' 
(1 Thess. ii. 9) with his hands at a rough craft ; but he was 

* Bachmann doubts this ; but why does the Apostle defend the practice, 
if he had not been censured for it? See Ramsay, Cities of St Paul, p. 231. 


only following the example of the Carpenter (Mk. vi. 3), and 
humbling himself in accordance with His admonitions (Mt. 
xviii. 4, xxiii. 12; Lk. xiv. 11, xviii. 14). Yet he humbled 
himself, not with a view to his own subsequent exaltation, but 
' in order that ye might be exalted,' by being raised from the 
death of heathen sins to the life of righteousness. Acting in 
this way can hardly be stigmatized as afxapriav iroiwv. ' Be 
exalted' means a great deal more than 'be made superior to 
other Churches.' 

Swpeav to tou Geou euayyeXiov. Emphatic juxtaposition ; 
' God's Gospel, that most precious thing,-— -for nothing ! ' Else- 
where we have to euayye'Aiov tou ®eov (1 Thess. ii. 2, 8, 9 ; Rom. 
xv. 16) and to €u. tou Xpio-rov (ii. 12, ix. 13, 14; 1 Cor. ix. 12; 
etc.); but here, as in 1 Pet. iv. 17, tou 0«ou is emphatic by