€SS9269
3D3T109 S.TSVHOIW “LS 4O ALISHSAINN
— te
τὰς by TS Gad
ed Se
5 yphcuk aE
THE EXPOSITOR’S ΕΚ TESTAMENT
EDITED BY THE REV.
W. ROBERTSON NICOLL, M.A., LL.D.
EDITOR OF “THE EXPOSITOR,” “THE EXPOSITOR'S BIBLE,” ETC.
VOLUME IIL.
NEW YORK GEORGE H. DORAN COMPANY
a aad” a ae a ΨΨΟΝ
a } t
A,
ae δι
ΠΟΥ͂Ν
v ; : wate ~ .
te
Poe EXPOSITOR'S SREEK TESTAMENT
I
THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS
BY THE VERY REV.
J. H. BERNARD, D.D.
DEAN OF ST. PATRICK’S, DUBLIN
II THE EPISTLE TO THE .GALATIANS
BY THE REV.
FREDERIC RENDALL, M.A.
III THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS
BY THE REV.
5. Ὁ. F. SALMOND, D.D. IV THE EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS
BY THE REV.
H. A. A. KENNEDY, D.Sc.
V THE EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS
BY PROFESSOR
A. S. PEAKE, M.A.
NEW YORK GEORGE H. DORAN COMPANY
, : PR ; One
RA is ‘ a ats ie ,
5 = oy δ Ε x 5 Ω Ζ 9 a Ξ
TO THE
CORINTHIANS
INTRODUCTION.
CHAPTER I. THE TIME AND PLACE OF WRITING.
1. In the case of no book of the New Testament is it more essential to a true understanding of its language, that we should have a clear view of the circumstances under which it was composed, than in the case of 2 Corinthians. It is the most autokiographical of all St. Paul’s letters, and it abounds in personal allusions, which it is difficult, at this distance of time, to appreciate, and of which some will probably always remain obscure. It glows with the heat of fervid life,! and was evidently written under the influence of strong emotion. And, if we do not assign it to its true place in St. Paul’s life, we are likely to miss a good deal of the force of its earnest and eager words. It is, therefore, desirable to enter into more detail as to the occasion of its composition than was necessary in the case of a treatise like the Epistle to the Romans, the argu- ments of which are largely independent of the circumstances of the author at the time when it was written.
2. In the nineteenth chapter of the Acts we find that Ephesus has become St. Paul’s headquarters; the centre of interest has been shifted from Jerusalem and Antioch, and the Apostle’s labours are being mainly spent upon Asia Minor. Corinth, however, occupies a considerable share in his thoughts; and, during the period of over two years which he spends at Ephesus, communica- tions with the Corinthian Church are being carried on. It is the sequence of events during this period and the subsequent six months that we have to examine. Such an examination of the order in which events followed one another might be made without any determination of the absolute dates of any ; but it is convenient to
‘See Hort, ¥udaistic Christianity, p. 98.
4 INTRODUCTION
indicate here the system of chronology which has been adopted. Provisionally, the dates assigned to the principal events of St. Paul’s life by Mr. Turner! will be taken as a basis for investigation. It is now pretty generally agreed among scholars that the dates formerly accepted, e.g., by Wieseler and Lightfoot, are two years too late; but this does not, of course, affect materially the accuracy of Light- foot’s conclusions as to the order in which the several incidents of the Apostle’s career took place. Indeed, the scheme of recon- struction of St. Paul’s history while at Ephesus, which has approved itself to the present editor, is in the main that put forward by Lightfoot,? although his dates have not been followed. This scheme is not without difficulties ; but it is dependent on fewer subsidiary hypotheses than any other which has been proposed, and it possesses special claim to consideration from the fact that it is an attempt to explain the documents as they stand without resort to the heroic measures of dissection which some critics have found it necessary to adopt. ,
3. I start, then, with the assumption that St. Paul’s sojourn of over two years at Ephesus’ (Acts xix. 10) lasted from December, 52, or January, 53, to March or April, 55, and I proceed to examine his communications with Corinth during that period. The Church at Corinth had been founded by the Apostle on his second missionary journey, late in the year 50 (Acts xviii. 1 f.) ;* but, all too soon after its foundation, it became apparent that the laxity of morals, for which Corinth was notorious, was showing itself in the lives of the Christian converts. Men do not easily shake themselves free from evil traditions and associations ; and the power of the new faith took time to establish itself there as elsewhere. When the restraints imposed by the Apostle’s presence were removed, various scandals betrayed the moral weakness of these clever Greeks who had welcomed the new teaching but a short time before. It would appear that while St. Paul was at Ephesus bad news reached him from Corinth as to the morals of his converts; and in consequence of this he paid to that city a brief disciplinary visit, of which indeed no account has been given by St. Luke, but which is alluded to in St. Paul’s Epistles (see especially 2 Cor. xii. 21, where we are informed
* See article ‘‘ Chronology of N.T.” in Hastings’ Bible Dictionary.
2 See Biblical Essays, pp. 222, 274.
310 is probable that the ‘three months ” of ver. 8 is to be reckoned in addition to the “‘two years”’ of ver. 10; cf. τριετίαν, Acts xx. 31.
*On the Church at Corinth, see the first chapter of Prof. Findlay’s Introduction οἱ Corinthians (vol. ii., p. 729 ἢ).
INTRODUCTION 5
that it was in consequence of the lax morality of the Corinthians that he visited them in grief).
4, The reasons for holding that this visit (which we shall call the “Intermediate Visit’’) took place are as follows. We have seen that St. Paul’s first visit to Corinth is recorded in Acts xviii. Another visit is mentioned in Acts xx. 3, viz., that which was sub- sequent to the two Canonical Epistles to the Corinthians, and which was in contemplation while he was writing both. Its date was 55-56. But it appears from 2 Cor. xii. 14, xiii. 1, that this was his third visit; and hence a visit to Corinth must have been paid between the years 50 and 55 (probably towards the end of the period, say in the autumn of 54), of which no account is given in the Acts.2 It is all but impossible to fit in this visit if we do not suppose it to have been paid from Ephesus; and it would have been an easy matter for St. Paul to have undertaken this. Ephesus was only a week or ten days’ sail from Corinth, and on the receipt of ill news it would have been the most natural thing in the world that he should thus cross the A?gean hastily to set matters right. It appears distinctly from 2 Cor. ii, 1 that this visit was a painful one, and such as he would not wish again to have experience of. And, further, the language of xii. 21, xiii. 2, suggests that the trouble which caused this Painful Visit was not faction or schism, but unchastity of life among his converts.
5. St. Paul thereafter returned to Ephesus and wrote, probably after no long interval, a letter which is now lost. It is mentioned in 1 Cor. v. 9; and it contained, he tells us, injunctions to the Corinthian Christians “to keep no company with fornicators,” in- junctions (probably) suggested to him by what he had seen on his recent visit. That visit had been one of stern rebuke rather than of counsel ; and it is quite intelligible that on his return he should desire to put in writing his deliberate advice. There is no indication that anything had happened up to this point which suggested the rise of schisms or of party spirit at Corinth. Indeed it may well have been that his visit, ἐν λύπῃ (2 Cor. ii. 1), was the proximate cause of the schisms with which the Church at Corinth was soon to be troubled ; for the attempt to enforce discipline for lapses in morality
1 This, indeed, has been denied by Paley (Hore Paulina, chap. iv., § xi.) and, recently, by Prof. Ramsay (St. Paul the Traveller, p. 275) and Dr. Robertson (Hastings’ Bible Dictionary, vol. i., p. 494) ; but I cannot think that their explanations of 2 Cor. xii. 14, xiii. 1, as alluding to a visit intended, but not paid, are satisfactory.
2 The language of 1 Cor. xvi. 7, οὐ θέλω yap ὑμᾶς ἄρτι ἐν παρόδῳ ἰδεῖν, seems to suggest that his last visit to Corinth had been a brief and hasty one.
6 INTRODUCTION
would naturally stir up party opposition, and would stimulate dis- affection on the part of the less stable members of the little community. The Lost Letter, then, consisted mainly of rules as to conduct, and was not concerned, so far as we know, with the question of schism, which had probably not yet arisen.! Two other topics, however, it may have touched upon, viz., the Apostle’s plans of travel and the collection for the poor Judzan Christians. We must not lose sight of the fact that St. Paul’s plans were in the main determined during these years by his purpose of making a collection to relieve the needs of the poorer converts in Judza and of bringing it in person to Jerusalem. Now, as to his plans of travel, it is plain that the route mentioned in 1 Cor. xvi. 5, and actually adopted in the sequel (Acts xix. 21), was not the route which the Corinthians expected him to take. At one time he had wished to travel from Ephesus to Corinth—Macedonia—Corinth— Jerusalem, a route which would twice give them the benefit and the privilege of seeing him while he was in Europe (2 Cor. i. 15, 16). This plan seems to have been communicated to them before 1 Corinthians was written ; and it is obvious to suggest that it was announced in the Lost Letter. Again, it will appear (see § 7) from a consideration of the structure of the First Canonical Epistle to the Corinthians that the Corinthians in their letter which preceded it had asked for details about the manner in which the collection for the Judzan Christians was to be made. In other words, they had already been informed by St. Paul that such a collection was being erganised ; and so we are led round to the suggestion that this information also was contained in the Lost Letter.
6. We now proceed with the history. Some time after the Lost Letter had been despatched bad news again came from Corinth, and this of two kinds. First, members of Chloe’s household (ot Χλόης, 1 Cor. i. 11, cf. also 1 Cor. xi. 18) reported that factions had arisen, and that a Peter party and an Apollos party were setting themselves up in opposition to the party of Paul. Some indeed went so far as to call themselves, par excellence, the ‘‘ Christ party ” (1 Cor. i. 12). And, secondly, a rumour reached Ephesus that an abominable case of incest had occurred among the Christians at Corinth (1 Cor. v. 1). This was much worse than any of the moral lapses which the Apostle had previously rebuked in person or by letter; it was a wickedness
1 This is an argument which should not be overlooked for placing the Inter- mediate Visit before the Lost Letter, or at any rate before the First Canonical Epistle.
INTRODUCTION 7
which even the heathen did not tolerate. About the same time that these distressing reports reached Ephesus, a dutiful message to St. Paul was brought from Corinth by Stephanas, Fortunatus and Achaicus (1 Cor. xvi. 17). These envoys seem to have brought with them a letter asking for advice on certain points of conduct and discipline, viz., about Marriage, Celibacy, the use of Idol-meats, the Gifts of the Spirit, and the Collection,? with each of which the Apostle deals separately in his reply under a distinct heading, beginnning περὶ δέ... It is interesting, because so natural,? that the Corinthians seem to have made no mention in their letter of the schisms and disorders which had arisen among them.‘
7. It was in consequence of the reports which had reached him, as well as in reply to this letter of the Corinthian Church, that St. Paul wrote the First Canonical Epistle. Of this the early part is entirely taken up with warnings against schism (chaps. i.-iv.), and with a stern rebuke for the sins of the flesh into which they had fallen, and of which the Church had not taken cognisance (chaps. v., vi.). The remainder of the Epistle is mainly occupied with the letter of the Corinthians to him, taking up their points in order: περὶ δὲ ὧν ἐγράψατε, καλὸν ἀνθρώπῳ γυναικὸς μὴ ἅπτεσθαι (1 Cor. vii. 1); περὶ δὲ τῶν παρθένων (1 Cor. vii. 25); περὶ δὲ τῶν εἰδωλοθύτων (1 Cor. viii. 1); περὶ δὲ τῶν πνευματικῶν (1 Cor. xii. 1); περὶ δὲ τῆς λογίας (1 Cor. xvi. 1), It thus appears, and it is important to bear it in mind, that chaps, vii.-xvi. of 1 Corinthians are of the nature of an appendix or excursus, and that chaps. i.-vi. constitute the letter proper, as con- taining the Apostle’s special message to the Corinthian Church at this juncture. His language in reference to the party spirit which was manifesting itself is grave and uncompromising (1 Cor. iii. 12-15), and he writes about his own position in a spirit of depression (1 Cor.
1See Cicero, pro Cluentio, 6, 15.
2Lewin (St. Paul, vol. i., p. 386) and Findlay (Expositor, June, 1900) have tried to reconstruct this letter ; but beyond the general fact that it dealt with certain topics we have no data upon which to go.
3566 Paley, Hore Pauline, chap. iii., 8 i.
4 Mention may be made here of an apocryphal letter of the Corinthians to St. Paul and his supposed reply, which are extant in Armenian and in Latin. An English translation by Lord Byron will be found in Stanley’s Corinthians, vol. ii., p. 305. These letters do not correspond in any way to the lost correspondence discussed above (1 Cor. v. 9, xvi. 17), and, although they were admitted into the Armenian and Syrian canon, have no claim to authenticity or genuineness. They were originally incorporated in the apocryphal Acts of Paul (see Sanday, Encycl. Biblica, vol. i., p. 907).
8 INTRODUCTION
iv. 11-13); but when he begins to speak of the bad living of his converts, and to comment on the shocking news which had reached him, his tone is one of severe and unsparing rebuke. He is astounded that such a scandal as has been mentioned to him (1 Cor. v. 1) should be endured for a moment, and he bids them excommunicate the offender at once (1 Cor. v.5). Inthe Lost Letter he had warned them against associating with persons who lived impure lives, but now it has actually become necessary to rebuke them for tolerating the company of a man who is living unchastely with his stepmother (1 Cor. v. 1). They must ‘‘put away the wicked person” from among themselves (1 Cor. v. 13). It is their duty to “judge them that are within,” and it is a scandalous thing that such wrongs as a Christian father endures when his son has robbed him of his wife should be brought for adjudication before heathen tribunals.1 The Christian community should exercise its own spiritual prerogative (1 Cor. v. 4), and decide such cases without the interference of heathen lawyers (1 Cor. vi. 1-7). The wickedness of sins of the flesh only appears in its true light when judged on Christian principles (1 Cor. vi. 15 ff.), and it is by these that the fitting punishment should be determined.
8. Such is the language and the drift of the body of 1 Corin- thians. The allusions to the Passover feast (1 Cor. v. 7, 8, cf. xv. 20, 23) make it probable that it was written about Easter, and the year was, according to the system we have adopted, 55 a.p. This is a consequence of 1 Cor. xvi. 8, from which it appears that when it was composed it was St. Paul’s intention to leave Ephesus after the ensuing Pentecost. Thus the letter was written during the last months of his stay at that city.2 Nothing is said as to the bearers of the letter; but 2 Cor. xii. 18 seems to indicate that Titus
1The Roman law under which a prosecution for adultery would be made was the lex Fulia de adulteriis, passed by Augustus, 17 B.c. It is probable, how- ever, that native Greek law would be enforced at Corinth. This also recognised adultery as an indictable offence; the damages allowed in any special case being assessed at the discretion of the judges.
*The subscription in the received text states that it was written at Philippi; but this is a-manifest mistake, probably due to a misunderstanding of the words Μακεδονίαν yap διέρχομαι ἱπ x Cor. xvi. 5. Ver. 8 of the same chapter is conclusive as to the place of writing. This subscription further adds that the letter was carried to Corinth by the envoys Stephanas, Fortunatus and Achaicus along with Timothy; but this again seems to be a misapprehension, although there is some justification in x Cor. xvi, 18 for the supposition that the envoys who had brought the Corinthian letter to Ephesus took back the answer (see above). For Timothy’s movements see § 13 note.
OO ψμυ οιἰἰπππ σ σοι
»Ψ.
mime
INTRODUCTION 9
and an unnamed brother (see note in loc.) were entrusted with it. This is confirmed by 2 Cor. ii. 13, vii. 6, passages which explain how St. Paul’s grave anxiety as to the reception which the Corin- thians would give to his letter of warning and rebuke was allayed by the news which Titus brought him about it (see notes zn /oc.).}
9. I have already remarked that the directions about the collec- tion to be made at Corinth (1 Cor. xvi. 1) were given in answer to enquiries on the subject sent by the Corinthian Christians, and presuppose that his correspondents were already sensible of the obligation which rested upon them of helping the poor brethren of Judza. It is only the manner in which the collection is to be made that is now prescribed for the first time (Easter, 55). And we have also seen (§ 5) that the information as to St. Paul’s plans of travel given in 1 Cor. xvi. 5 was such as to cause the Corin- thians keen disappointment.2 He then announces that he will come vid Macedonia, and that he may possibly winter at Corinth (1 Cor. xvi. 6). This plan was carried into effect. He left Ephesus about April, 55, shortly after the riot which was stirred up by Demetrius, and proceeded to Macedonia (Acts xx. 1) υἱᾶ Troas (2 Cor. ii. 12). Here he had arranged to meet Titus on the return of the latter from his mission to Corinth; but he was disappointed. We do not know how long he waited for Titus; but after an interval during which “a door was opened unto him” (2 Cor. ii. 12) he crossed over to Macedonia in much anxiety of spirit. At last they met at some undefined point in St. Paul’s Macedonian tour of in- spection (Acts xx. 2), not improbably at Philippi, as Neapolis the port of Philippi was the natural place of embarkation for Troas. Thus St. Paul would be likely to meet Titus at Philippi on his way to their rendezvous. Further, Philippi was a place where St. Paul
1See, on this question, Lightfoot, Biblical Essays, p.280f. Titus is mentioned nine times in 2 Corinthians, and evidently had a special interest in and connexion with Corinth. That his name does not appear in 1 Corinthians is no more sur- prising than that it does not appear in Acts. It is likely that it was the ability with which he conducted himself as the bearer of 1 Corinthians, and as St. Paul’s representative at that critical moment at Corinth, that first marked him out as fit to be a leader in the Church.
2Dr. Robertson says (Hastings’ Bible Dictionary, vol. i., p. 493) that 1 Cor. xvi. 5, 6 is “4 passage totally out of correspondence with the situation presupposed in 2 Cor. i. 23. Moreover, in defending his change of plan (2 Cor. i. 15-23) St. Paul would not have failed to appeal to the clear statement of his intentions in 1 Cor. xvi. 5.” I cannot understand where the difficulty comes in. The Corin- thians took umbrage at the message of 1 Cor. xvi. 5; appealing to it would have had no point. St. Paul’s line of defence is quite sound (see § 12 below).
ΙΟ INTRODUCTION
had many good and staunch friends; and it was a suitable centre from which to visit the Christian communities formerly founded by him.}
10. Titus reported in the first instance that the Corinthians had loyally responded to the appeal made by St. Paul in 1 Cor. v. and vi. as to their treatment of the case of incest. They had taken the case into their own hands, and had punished the offender with extreme severity (2 Cor. ii. 6 ff.). They had gone so far in their zeal to assert the spiritual prerogative of the Church, in which St. Paul deemed himseif to have an important share (2 Cor. vii. 12; cf. 1 Cor. v. 4, συναχθέντων ὑμῶν καὶ τοῦ ἐμοῦ πνεύματος), that it was now desirable to offer counsels of forbearance (2 Cor. ii. 6 f.). rather than to inflame their indignation against the offender. The really important end which the Apostle had in view when writing 1 Cor. v. had been gained, vzz., he had convinced the members of the Church that it was their duty to take cognisance of grave moral offences. Quite possibly the civil courts might have decided equit- ably as to the measure of the penalty to be inflicted for the ἀδικία ; but the primary purpose of his sharp rebuke was not to secure due retribution in this particular instance (ody εἵνεκεν τοῦ ἀδικήσαντος οὐδὲ εἵνεκεν τοῦ ἀδικηθέντος, 2 Cor. vii. 12), although this was doubtless necessary, but to awaken the sleeping conscience of the Church to pass judgment in all cases of moral lapse, as was its inherent right and privilege. The Church at Corinth was an Apostolic Church, It had been founded by St. Paul. Though ‘‘absent in body” he was “present in spirit’? at the deliberations of its members (1 Cor. v. 3). And to vindicate the spiritual authority of the Church founded by him was, in effect, to vindicate his authority. Thus he can go so far as to say that the main purpose of his stern letter of rebuke (1 Cor.) was ἕνεκεν τοῦ φανερωθῆναι τὴν σπουδὴν ὑμῶν τὴν ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἐνώπιον τοῦ Θεοῦ (2 Cor. vii. 12, where see note). To manifest their zeal for St. Paul’s authority was to manifest their sense that Christian standards of living were widely different from heathen standards, and it was further to recognise that the Church has spiritual authority “to bind and to loose”. In exhibiting their zeal for him, their founder, they had made clear their recognition of this great principle. If it be said that to read this into 2 Cor. vii. 12 is to go beyond the tenor of the words used, it must be replied
1The subscription to 2 Corinthians, Πρὸς Κορινθίους δευτέρα ἐγράφη ἀπὸ Φιλίππων τῆς Μακεδονίας διὰ Τίτου καὶ Λουκᾶ, would be a confirmation of this conclusion, if any reliance could be placed on these colophons to the Epistles. See notes on 2 Cor, viii. 18, xiii. 14,
a ec en, Te — a ta en ee 5
INTRODUCTION 11
that St. Paul’s language in the earlier letter sufficiently shows the high spiritual authority which he would have the Corinthians attach to the deliberate decisions of their assembled leaders. “In the name of our Lord Jesus, ye being gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of the Lord Jesus” (1 Cor. v. 4). The words “ and my spirit” indicate not only his sympathy for them, but his assurance that the decisions to which such an assembly would be guided would be even as the decisions promulgated by his own apostolic authority which was “ not from men, neither through man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father ”.}
11. The second matter which Titus reported was not so satis- factory to St. Paul. Titus explained, as it would seem, that the’ Corinthians were much distressed at the news that the Apostle’s plans of travel had been changed (2 Cor. i. 16, 17), and that they were ready in consequence to impute to him instability of purpose which amounted to fickleness. St. Paul’s answer is found in 2 Cor. i, 23, ii. 4. He did not carry out his former intention of crossing direct from Ephesus to Corinth because he thought it better that there should be a short interval, during which they might mend their ways, before he again addressed them. His last visit (the “Intermediate Visit’) had been ἐν λύπῃ ; and it was undesirable that his next visit should be of the same character. So instead of visiting them at once, he wrote a severe letter (1 Cor.), and proceeded to Macedonia in the first instance, reserving his visit to Corinth until they should have had time to profit by his written rebukes. In this change of plan there was no display of fickleness; his one desire was to edify them and to do what was best for their true welfare.
12. And, thirdly, Titus had no good news to bring about the factions in Corinth, concerning which St. Paul had already written
(1 Cor. i. 12-18, iii. 1-6). When he despatched the First Canonical
Epistle he was already aware that his authority had been called in question at Corinth, and that some were passing unfavourable judg- ments upon his acts (1 Cor. iv. 3-5). Already he had bidden the rebellious party not to be too ready to judge by the superficial appear- ance of things, but to distrust their hasty conclusions about him (1 Cor. iv. 5, 10-14). He had written mildly, but with authority, as became an Apostle. ‘‘ Be ye imitators of me” he had twice repeated (1 Cor. iv. 16, xi. 1). And he had assured them that when he came, as he certainly would come (1 Cor. xi. 34), to Corinth, those who had ventured to rebel would be treated with severity, if they did not
1Gal. i. 1.
12 INTRODUCTION
repent (1 Cor. iv. 18-21). But Titus seems to have reported that the factious opposition to St. Paul’s authority was even more bitter than it was before 1 Corinthians was written. The Apostle’s post- ponement of his visit gave the malcontents courage to break out into open defiance (2 Cor. x. 10-12).
13. On learning all these facts from Titus, in part consoling, in part most distressing, St. Paul wrote the Second Canonical Epistle to the Corinthians, associating the name of Timothy with his own in the address at the beginning.! The principal person entrusted with the carriage of the letter was, as was natural, Titus (2 Cor. viii. 17), whose former mission had been so prudently and honourably discharged (2 Cor. xii. 17, 18). With Titus were associated two
1 It will be convenient to state at this point the view of Timothy’s movements which has been adopted. We learn from 1 Cor, iv. 17, xvi. 10, that he was sup- posed by St. Paul to be on his way to Corinth when the First Canonical Epistle was written, and that the Apostle expected him to return to Ephesus with “ the brethren ” who were the bearers of that letter (1 Cor. xvi. 11), It does not appear that he was entrusted with any special mission to the Corinthian Church, the language of 1 Cor. iv. 17, “who shall put you in remembrance of my ways which be in Christ,” being suggestive rather of informal conference than of a formal embassy, and that of 1 Cor. xvi. 10, 11 implying, as it would seem, that Timothy is to be welcomed at Corinth only as a passing visitor on his way back to the Apostle’s side. Now it is natural to identify this journey made by Timothy with that recorded in Acts xix. 22, where St. Paul is said during the last weeks of his stay in Ephesus to have “ sent into Macedonia two of them that ministered unto him, Timothy and Erastus”. Timothy had been associated with St. Paul on his first visit (about the year 50) to the cities of Macedonia (Acts xvii. 14, 15, xviii. 5), and he was evidently a suitable lieutenant to send in advance to prepare the way for the Apostle’s second visit. Most probably the business of the collection in Macedonia was entrusted to him to organise. And the date of this journey of Timothy to Macedonia (January or February, 55) well agrees with the date which must be assigned to the journey referred to in 1 Cor. iv. 17, xvi. 10. The plan seems‘to have been to visit the churches of Macedonia (this, the important purpose of the journey, is all that is mentioned in Acts) and then to return to Ephesus by sea from Corinth (this, as the only point in the journey interesting to the Corinthians, is alone mentioned in 1 Cor.). Erastus, Timothy’s fellow-traveller on this occasion, bore the same name as the city treasurer at Corinth, whom we find there about February, 56 (Rom. xvi. 23), as well as at a later period (2 Tim. iv. 20) ; and it is highly reasonable to identify him with this important member of the Corinthian Church, and to suppose that when we find him with Timothy he was on his way home. Timothy is also found at Corinth in St. Paul’s company when the Epistle to the Romans was written (Rom. xvi. 21); but we have nothing to show us whether or no he had got so far during the preceding spring. It is on the whole probable that he found so much to do in Macedonia that he stayed there during the whole spring and summer of 55 (so Light- foot, Biblical Essays, p.276f.). At any rate we meet with him next in Macedonia (and probably, as we have seen, at Philippi) in St. Paul’s company about the month of November, 55, when 2 Corinthians was despatched (2 Cor. i. 1).
‘ . —s ὌΝ —_ - - πα τ δ΄. “τὰν το
~
INTRODUCTION 13
uthers, possibly Luke and Barnabas, but of their names we cannot be certain (2 Cor. viii. 18, 22, where see notes). The Epistle being despatched, St. Paul travelled slowly through Macedonia, arriving at Corinth in due course as he had promised (1 Cor. xvi. 5, 6), and staying there three months (Acts xx. 3). This period probably covered December, 55, and January and February, 56. In consequence of a Jewish plot he then returned through Macedonia instead of sailing direct for Syria as he had intended to do (Acts xx. 3); and starting from Philippi “after the days of unleavened bread” (Acts xx. 6), i.e., March 18-25, he arrived in Jerusalem in time for the Pentecost festival of the year 56.
14. The account which has been given above of the sequence of events during St. Paul’s sojourn at Ephesus assumes that the First Canonical Epistle to the Corinthians is the “ Painful Letter ” to which the Apostle alludes in 2 Cor. ii. 4, vii. 8, 12; and it has been urged by several critics that it does not answer to the de- scription there given.1 The two allusions are as follows: “ Por out of much affliction and anguish of heart I wrote unto you with many tears; not that ye should be made sorry, but that ye might know the love which I have more abundantly unto you” (2 Cor. ii. 4); and “ For though I made you sorry with my epistle, I do not regret it although 1 did regret ; for I see that that epistle made you sorry, though but for a season. . . . So although I wrote unto you, I! wrote not for his cause that did the wrong nor for his cause that suffered the wrong, but that your zeal on our behalf might be made manifest unto you in the sight of God” (2 Cor. vii. 8, 12). It is said that “ from beginning to end of 1 Corinthians there are no traces of anguish of heart and much affliction, either in utterances expressing these feelings or in the style of the Epistle itself”’.2 1 believe that the passages which have been quoted in § 8 demonstrate the inaccuracy of any such assertion. Critics have strangely overlooked in this connexion the fact that chaps. vii.-xvi. of 1 Corinthiansare mainly taken up with answering the queries which his correspondents had put to St. Paul; and that the body of the letter proper is contained in chaps. i.-vi. It is in these earlier chapters that we are to look for traces of mental anguish and depression, and I hold that they are plainly there to be found, and that the note of identi- fication afforded by 2 Cor. ii. 4 is answered by such passages
1 E.g., this objection was raised by Klépper (1870) and has been repeated by Waite in the Speaker's Commentary, by Robertson (Hastings’ Bible Dictionary, vol. i., p. 494) and by Kennedy (2 and 3 Corinthians, p. 64 £.), as well as by others.
2 Kennedy, loc. cit., p. 65.
14 INTRODUCTION
as 1 Cor. iii. 12-15, iv. 11-13, v. 1-6, 13, vi. 5, 9-11. Had the structure of 1 Corinthians been sufficiently attended to, I cannot think that this objection would ever have seemed forcible. And so with 2 Cor. vii. 8. It has been urged against the identification of the « Painful Letter ” with 1 Corinthians that “it is scarcely comprehen- sible that St. Paul should have said, even in a moment of strong excitement, of so costly a monument of Christian truth as the First Epistle is, that he repented for a while of ever having written it ’’.} But this is to exaggerate the measure of the Apostle’s regret. He merely says (2 Cor. vii. 8) that fora moment he regretted having given them pain by what he had written, i.e., he regretted the severe sentences which he had penned; but not that he lamented the composition of the whole Epistle. The earlier part of the Epistle, which is, 1 repeat, the core of the letter, is extremely severe, and especially chaps. v. and vi.2_ In the phrase ‘‘ the Painful Letter” there is, in fact, a latent fallacy. The language of 2 Cor. ii. 4, vii. 8, would be sufficiently accounted for if any part of the letter to which he refers seemed to St. Paul (for the moment) to be unduly severe, or if any section of it had caused unexpected grief to the Corinthians.
15. An objection of a somewhat similar character is that the language used in 2 Cor. ii. 6-11 cannot be taken as referring to the punishment of the offender of 1 Cor. v. 1-5, inasmuch as the mild treatment suggested by St. Paul in the later Epistle would be quite inadequate to the offence.* Not to dwell on the fact that unrelenting severity is not a Christian virtue, and that Titus may have reported some extenuating circumstances of which we know nothing, I believe that the considerations brought forward above in § 10 go a long way to break the force of this objection. The intimate connexion between the fifth and sixth chapters of 1 Corinthians has not been sufficiently recognised by commentators, and thus the primary pur- pose of St. Paul’s message of rebuke has been misconceived. He was more anxious to awaken the sleeping conscience of the Church at Corinth, and to prevail upon its members to exercise their powers of spiritual discipline, than to adjudicate between the wronged father and the offending son. Excommunication was the only suitable penalty for the latter’s grave offence, but St. Paul had never meant
1 Waite, Speaker’s Commentary, p. 383.
2Compare also the great severity of the incidental remark in 1 Cor. xv. 2 ἐκτὸς εἰ μὴ εἰκῆ ἐπιστεύσατε. That he should suggest such a possibility show; how much he is depressed as he writes.
‘This is urged by Schmiedel and Jiilicher amongst others,
INTRODUCTION ις
to convey (although the Corinthians had misunderstood his counsel) that the ban could not be taken off by the same authority which had imposed it, if evidence of penitence were forthcoming. Indeed the identification of ὁ ἀδικήσας in 2 Cor. vii. 12 with the offender of 1 Cor. v. 1 seems to be not doubtful when the language and purport of the earlier passage are considered. I have already pointed out (§ 10) that the aim of the Apostle in writing 1 Cor. v. and vi. was not merely that the offender should be excommunicated, but that the scandal of such a case being brought by Christians before a heathen court should be avoided. Consider, further, St. Paul’s language. Some persons, he says (1 Cor. iv. 18, 19), ‘‘were puffed up” (ἐφυσιώθησαν) as though he were not coming; 1.e., they made little of his authority in his absence. The same word (πεφυσιωμένοι) is used (1 Cor. v. 2) of the action, or rather the inaction, of the Christian community in reference to the case of incest; and in this matter he declares ‘‘ Your boasting is not good” (οὐ καλὸν τὸ καύχημα ὑμῶν, 1 Cor. v. 6). That is to say, their καύχημα consisted in their resistance to his apostolic authority; they were “ puffed up,” and so they had not dealt with the offender as they would have done had they followed his teachings (1 Cor. v. 2). It is with reference to this that he says in the later letter, εἰς τοῦτο γὰρ καὶ ἔγραψα, iva γνῶ τὴν δοκιμὴν ὑμῶν, εἰ εἰς πάντα ὑπήκοοί ἐστε (2 Cor. ii. 9). Again, the sentence which he directs to be pronounced upon the offender is παραδοῦναι τὸν τοιοῦτον TH Σατανᾷ εἰς ὄλεθρον τῆς σαρκός (1 Cor. v. 5); but when he bids them be merciful and forgive, his reason is ἵνα μὴ πλεονεκτηθῶμεν ὑπὸ τοῦ Σατανᾶ (2 Cor. ii. 11). The man was only «delivered over to Satan,” eis ὄλεθρον τῆς σαρκός (1 Cor. v. 5); but care must be taken lest Satan rob the Church of his soul (2 Cor. ii. 11). The reference to Satan in the later Epistle is pointless, unless we bear in mind the tenor of the sentence in the earlier one. And there is another phrase perhaps worthy of attention. The offender is called ὁ ἀδικήσας in 2 Cor. vii. 12, and the injured person is ὁ ἀδικηθείς. If we turn back to 1 Cor. vi. we find that the words ἀδικεῖν and ἄδικος (1 Cor. vi. 8, 9) are specially used of the carnal offences which St. Paul has there in view. The point of his rebuke in that chapter is that it would have been better for the offended father to have suffered wrong (ἀποστερεῖσθε ; cf. for the force of this 1 Cor. vii. 5) than to have brought the matter before the heathen tribunals. And when St. Pau! speaks of the Corinthians as having proved them- selves in the end to be dyvods τῷ πράγματι (2 Cor. vii. 11), the last words recall the ἐν τῷ πράγματι of 1 Thess. iv. 6, where the refer- ence is to adultery, the language used being strikingly like that of
16 INTRODUCTION
1 Cor. vi. 8. There are also some other links connecting the ‘‘ Painful Letter’’ with 1 Corinthians which should not be overlooked. In 2 Cor. ii. 4 St. Paul is careful to explain that the letter which was written with tears was written οὐχ ἵνα λυπηθῆτε, ἀλλὰ τὴν ἀγάπην ἵνα γνῶτε ἣν ἔχω περισσοτέρως εἰς ὑμᾶς. It might be expected therefore that the Painful Letter should exhibit some trace οὗ this overflowing ἀγάπη. And such a trace is conspicuously present in the last words of 1 Corinthians, ἡ ἀγάπη pou μετὰ πάντων ὑμῶν ἐν Χριστῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ (1 Cor. xvi. 24). No other letter of St. Paul’s has so affectionate a farewell. It was plainly added for some special reason. But if we identify this letter with the “ Painful Letter,” 2 Cor. ii. 4 gives an excellent reason for its addition. And, once more, the reference in 2 Cor. iii. 1 f. te a former self-commendation which the Apostle had indited finds its best and simplest explanation if we bring it into connexion with 1 Cor. ix. 1 f. ;
16. Something must now be said about other schemes of re- construction of the history which have been proposed by recent writers. It is unnecessary to rehearse them 811,1 but the discussion of one or two of the most plausible may serve to bring the difficulties of the problem into clearer relief, and to supply tests by which the adequacy of the solution that has been adopted may be estimated. In England, the editor of 1 Corinthians in this Commentary, Pro- fessor Findlay,? and Professor Sanday*® (not to speak of German writers) interpolate a second lost letter from St. Paul to the Corin- thians between the First and Second Canonical Epistles. They hold it probable that the embassy of Timothy to Corinth vid Macedonia {Acts xix. 22, 1 Cor. iv. 17, xvi. 10) succeeded so far as this, that Timothy reached Corinth, but that his mission was not a success as regards the healing of disorders there. In consequence of the bad report brought back by Timothy, St. Paul wrote a second lost letter and sent it by the more capable hands of Titus.* It is the return of Titus from this mission which St. Paul awaited with such anxiety at Troas (2 Cor. i. 13), and the missive which Titus bore was the Painful Letter to which the Apostle alludes in 2 Cor. ii. 4, vii. 8.
1An elaborate account of the various theories which have been propounded will be found in an article by Hilgenfeld in his Zeitschrift fir wissenschaftliche Theologie (1899), and a comparative table is given by Schmiedel in the Hand Kommentar, pp. viii, ix. Cf. also Jilicher’s Einleitung for a good discussion.
*See vol. ii., p. 736 f., and Hastings’ Bible Dictionary, vol. iii., p. 711 ff., 5.2, * Paul”
ὃ Encycl, Biblica, vol. i., p. got f.
‘On this hypothesis Titus was not the bearer of 1 Corinthians.
INTRODUCTION 17
Another scheme agreeing with this, in so far as it refuses to identify the Painful Letter with 1 Corinthians, has recently been expounded by Dr. Robertson.! This writer holds that after the despatch of 1 Corin- thians by the hands of Titus, St. Paul changed the plan of travel announced in that letter (1 Cor. xvi. 5) and decided to take the route Ephesus—Corinth—Macedonia—Corinth, which would give the Corinthians a δευτέρα χαρά; that painful news having been brought back by Titus from Corinth, the Apostle reverted to the plan announced in 1 Cor. xvi. 5, as he was unwilling to visit Corinth so soon under the circumstances; that he wrote a severe letter, now lost, of which Titus was again the bearer; and that it was on Titus’ report of the result of this second mission that 2 Corinthians was written and entrusted to the same capable messenger.
17. On both these theories the same observation may be made at the outset. They are highly complicated. Quite apart in the one case from the assumption (for which there is no evidence) that Timothy reached Corinth and that his mission there was a failure, and from the assumption in the other case® that the language of 2 Cor. i. 15 cannot be explained unless we suppose St. Paul to have changed his mind as to his route twice after the despatch of 1 Corin- thians, both theories presuppose events and documents of which no historical trace has survived. Doubtless we must not assume that all the facts have been recorded ; it may be necessary to introduce some hypotheses in order to co-ordinate the fragments of history at our disposal. Nevertheless, the theory which depends on the fewest hypo- theses has the best claim to acceptance, provided that it covers the facts. Now the writers whose theories have been indicated in § 16 agree in interpolating a letter between 1 Corinthians and 2 Corin- thians, which has utterly vanished out of knowledge. Such an interpolated letter was suggested by Bleek as long ago as 1830, and its actuality has been assumed by many critics since in Germany as wellas in England. No doubt the phenomena may be accounted for by an artifice of this sort. We may put anything we please into a letter of which we know nothing; there is no way of proving our speculations to be wrong. But the necessity for so large an hypo- thesis must be glaringly evident before the hypothesis can be justified.
1 Hastings’ Bible Dictionary, vol. i., p. 495, 5.0. “2 Corinthians ’”’,
2 Dr. Sanday seems also to favour this idea of a double change of intention as to his route on the part of St, Paul (Encycl. Btblica, vol. i., p. 903). See § 16 above.
VOL. IIL 2
18 INTRODUCTION
And it has not been proved, as we have seen (§§ 14, 15), that the ‘‘ Painful Letter” of 2 Cor. ii. 4, vii. 8, cannot have been the First Canonical Epistle to the Corinthians. It is upon this supposed impossibility that the whole edifice of theory rests, and the base does not appear—to the present writer at least—to be broad enough to bear the superstructure,
CHAPTER Il. THE INTEGRITY OF THE EPISTLE,
1. Our discussion has hitherto taken for granted the unity of the Epistle (2 Cor.) with which we have to do. But this has been repeatedly questioned, and the arguments alleged in support of the composite character of the document require to be considered in detail. So far back as 1767 Semler urged that the Epistle could be resolved into three parts: (1) chaps. i.-viii. + Rom. xvi. 1-20 + chap. xiii. 11-13; (2) chaps. x.-xiii. 10; (3) chap. ix.; of which he held (2) to be posterior to (1). After a struggling existence the analysis attracted fresh interest when Hausrath in 1870 took it up in part and advocated the distinctness of chaps. x.-xiii. from chaps. i.-ix. Schmiedel (in the Hand Kommentar) defended this view in 1890, and Clemen has since adopted it, and indeed regards it as an established result of criticism.1 The theory has not had many advocates in England, but it has been vigorously supported by Dr. J. H. Kennedy in his work entitled The Second and Third Epistles to the Corinthians (1900). By no writer has the matter been more carefully and acutely investigated, and his arguments demand attention.
2. Dr. Kennedy’s view of the sequence of events during St. Paul’s stay at Ephesus is as follows: 1. Titus was sent on a mission to Corinth to preach and to continue St. Paul’s work (2 Cor. xii. 18) at some period after the Apostle’s first visit (Acts xvili.1), 2. Lost Letter tothe Corinthians. 3. Mission of Timothy to Corinth (1 Cor. iv. 17, xvi. 5). 4. 1 Corinthians written from Ephesus about April, 54. 5. St. Paul stayed at Ephesus because of the greatness of the opportunity there (1 Cor. xvi. 8). 6. He formed a fixed purpose of visiting Jerusalem with the offerings which were being collected (Acts xix. 21). 7. Bad news came from Corinth. 8. St. Paul accordingly paid a brief disciplinary visit
1See Theologische Literaturzeitung, 22nd Dec., 1900; and cf. Clemen’s work entitled Die Einheitlichkeit d. paulin. Briefe.
20 INTRODUCTION
to that city. 9. On his return he wrote from Ephesus the Painful Letter, of which the end is preserved to us in 2 Cor. x.-xiii. 10. Mission of Timothy to Macedonia (Acts xix. 22). 11. Mission of Titus to Corinth to subdue the rebels there. 12. On Titus’ report of the success of his mission St. Paul wrote from Macedonia about November, 55, a letter of which we have the beginning preserved in 2 Cor. i.-ix., the rest being lost. 13. This letter was forwarded to Corinth by Titus and two unnamed companions, the bearers being entrusted also with the business of the collection (2 Cor. viii. 6). It will be recognised at once that this is a highly complicated scheme. Dr. Kennedy has to assume three missions of Titus to Corinth instead of two, the number which commentators have generally recognised; and he has, in like manner, to find room for two missions of Timothy, one to Corinth (1 Cor. iv. 17) and a second, quite distinct from this, to Macedonia (Acts xix. 21). In addition, he has to push back the date of 1 Corinthians by a year, in order to give time for all the incidents of which he finds traces in the Epistles; and he splits up 2 Corinthians into two fragmentary letters. We shall consider these points separately.
3. First, then, as to the missions of Titus. Dr. Kennedy takes in close connexion the two verses 2 Cor. viii. 6, 7, and translates (p. 122), “1 summoned (? exhorted) Titus that as he had made a beginning, so he might accomplish in you this grace also; yea that as ye abound in everything, in faith and utterance, and in all diligence, and in your love towards us, so ye may abound in this grace also”, This translation is probably right (see note in loc.) ; but the inference which its author derives from it is by no means inevitable. Dr. Kennedy holds that the words prove that the furtherance of the collection for Jerusalem was the purpose of Titus’ later visit only, and formed no part of his commission in the earlier visit. But this cannot be maintained. Such an interpretation will harmonise with Dr. Kennedy’s scheme of Titus’ visits (see above); but the passage is quite consistent with the other view that Titus’ two visits to Corinth were made as the bearer of the two Canonical Epistles, For in what St. Paul says, the emphasis is on the contrast between προενήρξατο and ἐπιτελέσῃ. A beginning had been made by Titus in the matter of the collection; he is now to finish his work, that the Corinthians may be as conspicuous for their liberality as they already are for other graces. Dr. Kennedy objects to this that it is incon- ceivable that St. Paul when sending Titus with a strong message of rebuke should also have instructed him to obtain money contribu- tions. ‘Such a course,” he says, “ would have been as inconsistent
INTRODUCTION 21
with wise diplomacy as with the self-respect which formed so marked a feature in St. Paul’s character.”! But to argue thus is to over- look the fact that St. Paul’s instructions about the collection in 1 Cor. xvi. 1-5 were given in answer to queries addressed to him on the subject by the Church of Corinth. The first part of the letter which Titus carried was taken up with rebuke; but there was nothing undiplomatic in the fact that St. Paul sent his answers to these queries by the same hand. In fact to have withheld his answer would have only given offence.?
4, We have now to consider the evidence adduced for the dis- section of 2 Corinthians. First, it is urged that there is not only a change of tone at x. 1, but that the way in which the chapter opens shows that something has been lost which immediately preceded it. Αὐτὸς δὲ ἐγὼ are the first words, and δέ (it is said) marks an anti- thesis. The passage “contains an allusion to an objection which had been brought against the Apostle, which it brings before us not as if the subject were now for the first time introduced, but as if it had been already mentioned”.? Rather should we say that δέ marks the transition to a new subject, a usage to which we have an exact parallel in viii. 1 of this very Epistle; where after the words which conclude chap. vii., χαίρω ὅτι ἐν παντὶ θαρρῶ ἐν ὑμῖν, St. Paul passes to his next topic with the words γνωρίζομεν δὲ ὑμῖν. Another parallel is found at 1 Cor. xv. 1, where in like manner a new subject is introduced by the words γνωρίζω δὲ ὑμῖν. It is unnecessary to assume, as some have done, that the change of tone here was caused by the arrival at this point of a messenger from Corinth bringing tidings later and less favourable than that brought by Titus. This may, indeed, be so; but the hypothesis is not needed. It is hardly likely that any of St. Paul’s more important letters were written or dictated at a single sitting ; and the change of tone is sufficiently accounted for by a change of mood such as every busy and over-burdened man is subject to, especially
1 Loc. cit., p. 124.
2 These considerations also break the force of Dr. Kennedy’s main argument for the early date of 1 Corinthians. It is plain that the business of the collection had been set on foot before the date of that letter, in which counsel is given as to the best method of carrying it on; and thus the phrase ἀπὸ πέρυσι (2 Cor. viii. Io, ix. 2), in which so much difficulty has been found, receives adequate explanation. The Corinthians would truly be said in November, 55, to have “ made a beginning ” a year ago, and St. Paul’s boast to the Macedonian Christians that Achaia had been ‘prepared for a year past’? was quite justifiable (see note in /oc.).
3 Kennedy, Joc. cit., p. 96.
22 INTRODUCTION
if his health is not very robust (cf. 2 Cor. i. 8, 9, and xii. 7). The Second Epistle to the Corinthians is not a formal treatise like the Epistle to the Romans; it is a personal letter, and in such letters we have no reason to expect either systematic arrangement of topics or pedantically uniform treatment.
5. This consideration helps us, too, to dispose of the difficulty that the Jast four chapters contemplate an openly rebellious minority at Corinth, the existence of which is not emphasised in the first nine chapters. It was entirely natural that Titus’ report being of a mixed character, partly good and partly bad, St. Paul’s letter based upon it should show traces at once of his gratification and of his grief. And, indeed, chaps. i.-ix. are not without indications that his authority was not cheerfully accepted by all the Corinthian Christians. His defence against the charge of fickleness (i. 15-17) shows that the charge had been made; the mention of οἱ πλείονες in ii. 6 (cf. iv. 15) shows that a minority did not heartily concur in the sentence which was inflicted, although, as a matter of fact, all had acquiesced in his view that the Church should take cognisance of the moral scandal which had occurred;! he more than hints in ii. 17 that ot πολλοί make merchandise of the word of God, and his remark loses point if none such were to be found at Corinth ; that τινες, ‘some persons,” make use of commendatory letters (iii. 1) is brought up to their disparagement ; the comparison between the ministries of the Old and New Covenants in iii. 6 f. is indirectly aimed at the Judaising party (xi. 22, 23); so, too, those who boast ἐν προσώπῳ καὶ οὐ καρδίᾳ (v. 12) are his Corinthian opponents ; and, lastly, the force of the antitheses in vi. 8-10 depends on the fact that corresponding statements to his discredit were being made at Corinth. The situation was simply this. The Church as a whole (and, indeed, unanimously, cf. vii. 15, 16) had taken the action he desired in the case of the offender; but there remained a turbulent minority who resisted his authority in other matters. The evil of unchastity does not here need special consideration; it was always present at Corinth.
6. It is time to adduce the passages upon which defenders of the theory that chaps. x.-xiii. constitute a part of the Painful Letter mainly depend. The case is best put by Dr. Kennedy,? who produces
11 cannot think that Dr. Kennedy’s view (loc. cit., p. 102) that the ‘* minority ” here indicated were out-and-out supporters of St. Paul who were anxious to go farther even than he, will commend itself to many minds.
2 Loc. cit., p. 81 f.
ee ὁσδδς, ϑσσο σαν,
—
2 a —— τὸ
| συν ks
᾿ _—" Mico oe rie ‘a
Se ae Eg ee a Sa -- =: ee a ὧἂὐς ae eg χ —— iii = a
~
iT i a * { ἥ ΧΩ η ἢ a , ia fi ‘ εἶ we ἢ] Li " J Ly oy: 4 A 3 ¢ Ἄ ἣ my \. Hia® we
γ᾿. r= -
INTRODUCTION 23
three pairs of parallels between the first nine and the last four chapters of the Epistle. (a) In xiii. 10 the Apostle wrote διὰ τοῦτο ταῦτα ἀπὼν γράφω, iva παρὼν μὴ ἀποτόμως χρήσωμαι ; and to this it is said that ii. 3, καὶ ἔγραψα τοῦτο αὐτὸ, ἵνα μὴ ἐλθὼν λύπην ἔχω, refers. But this reference is by no means inevitable; it is quite as natural to suppose that the effect of the Painful Letter (which | take to be 1 Corinthians) having been so salutary, as is indicated in ii, 3, the Apostle would again try the effect of a written threat of severe dealing. (Ὁ) In xiii. 2 we have προείρηκα καὶ προλέγω ὡς παρὼν τὸ δεύτερον καὶ ἀπὼν νῦν τοῖς προημαρτηκόσιν καὶ τοῖς λοιποῖς πᾶσιν, ὅτι ἐὰν ἔλθω εἰς τὸ . πάλιν οὐ φείσομαι, to which i. 23 corresponds well if we suppose it written at a later date, viz., φειδόμενος ὑμῶν οὐκέτι ἦλθον εἰς Κόρινθον. On the other hand, it is plain that the texts may be taken up by another handle; and we may understand their sequence to be that the Apostle having said at i. 23 that he had not come to Corinth before as he wished to spare them, he explains at xiii. 2 with plain sternness that when he does come he will not spare. There is nothing gained in lucidity or in force by the hypothesis that xiii. 2 represents the earlier statement and i. 23 the later. (c) Again, in x. 6, St. Paul says of himself: ἐν ἑτοίμῳ ἔχοντες ἐκδικῆσαι πᾶσαν παρακοήν, ὅταν πληρωθῇ ὑμῶν ἡ ὑπακοή, while at ii. 9 he writes, εἰς τοῦτο γὰρ καὶ ἔγραψα ἵνα γνῶ τὴν δοκιμὴν ὑμῶν, εἰ εἰς πάντα ὑπήκοοί ἐστε. Here it is not to be gainsaid that an excellent sense emerges from counting x. 6 to be prior to ii. 9, which seems, when taken in connexion with vii. 15, 16, to speak of unanimous obedience on the part of the Christians at Corinth. But the character of this obedience has been indicated above in § 4. So far as the specific case as to which St. Paul had written the Painful Letter was concerned, the “ obedience”’ had been that of “all”; but there remained a faction which was disobedient at heart, and until they should have yielded to his authority it could not be said that their ‘‘ obedience” was “fulfilled”. As to these three pairs of parallel passages, then, it is not the case that a satisfactory explanation can be provided only by the ex- pedient of recognising chaps. x.-xili. as prior to chaps. i.-ix.; on the contrary, they yield a consistent sense when the Epistle is inter- preted as a continuous whole. A remarkable commentary upon the danger of relying too much on coincidences of language of this sort is afforded by the fact that exactly an opposite inference to that with which we have been dealing has been drawn by another critic, Drescher. This writer, like Schmiedel and Clemen and Kennedy, regards chaps. x.-xiii. as distinct from chaps. i.-ix.; but he is led from internal evidence, as it appears to him, to count the Nine Chapters
24 INTRODUCTION
as earlier in date than the Four.! When internal evidence leads competent scholars to such entirely divergent conclusions, it is a natural inference that the arguments on which they rely do not amount to demonstration.
7. It is further to be borne in mind that the theory which regards chaps. i.-ix. and chaps. x.-xiii. as parts of distinct letters which have been joined together by mistake depends on the concurrence of several improbable hypotheses. We have to suppose not only that chaps. i.-ix. are a fragment of a longer letter which has lost its concluding pages, and that chaps. x.-xiii. are a fragment of a longer letter which has lost its opening pages, but that in each case the mutilation happened to come at a point where a new sentence began a new page. This isa most unlikely thing to happen. Take any book or manuscript at random and count the number of places where the tearing away of pages does not leave a clause incomplete. The number will be small indeed.?- But the measure of the improbability of this happening must be twice repeated before we reach the improbability of 2 Cor. i.-ix. and 2 Cor, x.-xiii. being both fragments. For neither 2 Cor. ix. 15 nor 2 Cor. x. 1 is an incomplete sentence. It has been argued indeed (see above, ὃ 4) that 2 Cor. x. 1, αὐτὸς δὲ ἐγὼ. . . , points to some preceding argument which is not to be found in 2 Cor. ix. The argument is unconvincing; but what is here dealt with is the improbability that a tearing of the MS. should have left no trace on the grammatical coherence of the sentence which followed the mutilation. In fact, it is not too much to say that the phenomena of the existing document cannot be explained as resulting from the mere juxtaposition of two fragments of other letters. We have to postulate, in addition, an editor who trimmed the ragged edges and brought the end of chap. ix. and the beginning of chap. x. into grammatical sequence by emendation of the texts which the two fragments presented. And beside all this we have yet to reckon with the improbability, be it great or small, that the two fragments belonging to distinct letters should have become joined together under the mistaken impression that they were parts of one whole.
1 Studien und Kritiken, Jan., 1897. Krenkel takes the same view, and holds that chaps. x.-xiii. form a letter later in date than chaps. i.-ix. This was also Semler’s view.
*A good illustration is afforded by the end of St. Mark’s Gospel. It is generally (though not universally) believed that a page has been lost at the end, and that the present conclusion is by another hand. But one of the strongest arguments for this view is that ver. 8 is incomplete, and that it ends ἐφοβοῦντο γάρ, i.e., “ for they were afraidto...”. There is no such incompleteness apparent at 2 Cor. ix. 15.
ii ea ee ee ena ee γος are
+
μον ἢ
INTRODUCTION 25
Under these circumstances we fall back on the prima facie case, which is that the Second Epistle to the Corinthians is an ens integrum, and we proceed to bring forward some of the positive lata which point to its unity.
8. First, attention should be directed to passages in chaps. x.- xiii. which point back to passages in chaps. i.-ix. (a) In xi. 15 St. Paul writes that the false apostles, whom he calls Satan’s διάκονοι, are trying to pass themselves off as διάκονοι δικαιοσύνης, 7.€., as ἀπόστολοι Χριστοῦ (ver. 13). Now there is nothing in the context to suggest such a phrase as διάκονοι δικαιοσύνης, and it does not, as a matter of fact, occur in any other of St. Paul’s letters or in the N.T. outside this Epistle or in the LXX. The one passage which explains it is iii. 7-11, where the Ministry of the Old Covenant is declared to be less glorious than that of the New, and where ἡ διακονία τῆς δικαιοσύνης is set over against ἡ διακονία τῆς κατακρίσεως. Unless the readers of xi. 15 were aware that St. Paul used the phrase “the ministry of Righteousness ” as descriptive of the ministry of the Gospel, the title διάκονοι δικαιοσύνης would have had no special mean- ing for them. Thus we conclude that the discussion of iii. 7-11 is presupposed by the use of the title in xi. 15. (δ) The charge which his opponents brought against St. Paul at Corinth is thus described by him in xii. 16, ὑπάρχων πανοῦργος δόλῳ ὑμᾶς ἔλαβον. They had called him a πανοῦργος, ‘‘a crafty man,” and suggested that his dealings in the matter of money were full of guile (δόλος). At iv, 2 he refers to the same charge, μὴ περιπατοῦντες ἐν πανουργίᾳ μηδὲ δολοῦντες τὸν λόγον τοῦ Θεοῦ. The meaning of the latter clause, “handling deceitfully the word of God,” is fixed by the parallel in li. 17, καπηλεύοντες τὸν λόγον τοῦ Θεοῦ, which shows that the δόλος repudiated by him was crooked dealing in regard to money, “ making a traffic” of the Gospel. (c) The passages just cited from the earlier part of the letter have other echoes in the later part. In ii. 17 those who make merchandise of the word of God at Corinth are οἱ πολλοὶ, and he speaks of his opponents again as πολλοί in xi. 18. His declaration in ii. 17 is that he preaches ἐξ εἰλικρινείας (cf. i. 12), and in iv. 2 that it is τῇ φανερώσει τῆς ἀληθείας ; so in xi. 6 he says
_ οὗ himself, ἐν παντὶ φανερώσαντες ἐν πᾶσιν εἰς ὑμᾶς. And, lastly, the
asseveration of his sincerity in ii. 17, κατέναντι Θεοῦ ἐν Χριστῷ λαλοῦμεν, is repeated in xii. 19, the only other place where it occurs in his Epistles. (d) In x. 5 he speaks of bringing every thought into Captivity, eis τὴν ὑπακοὴν τοῦ Χριστοῦ, and of his readiness to avenge all disobedience, ὅταν πληρωθῇ ὑμῶν ἡ ὑπακοή. Seven verses before, in ix. 13, he had written of the ὑποταγὴ τῆς ὁμολογίας ὑμῶν εἰς τὸ
26 INTRODUCTION
εὐαγγέλιον τοῦ Χριστοῦ; and the language is sufficiently similar to suggest that x. 5 was written while the phrases of ix. 13 were still in his mind. (6) The concluding summary of the Epistle (xiii. 11) is important (see note in loc.). The exhortations yatpere... παρακαλεῖσθε are specially noteworthy, for they exactly reproduce the two leading thoughts of its earlier part, Rejoice .. . be com- forted. It is difficult to understand how the words are to be explained on the hypothesis that they sum up the message of the Painful Letter. They are entirely harmonious with chaps. i.-ix., but not harmonious at all with chaps. x.-xiii. “Comfort in affliction” is (as Dr. Plummer points out!) the keynote of the first part of the Epistle, “boasting in weakness” being the keynote of the second part. παρακαλεῖσθε is an appropriate summing up of much that is contained in chaps. i.-ix., but is irrelevant as regards chaps. x.-xlii.2 And thus, as we find in xiii. 11 a summary of 2 Corinthians as a whole, we conclude that it is a single document, and is not made up of parts of two letters which have been joined together by mistake.
9. In the next place the linguistic parallels between chaps. i.-ix. and chaps. x.-xiii. are in many instances so close as to render it difficult to believe that the Epistle is not an ens integrum. (a) The phrase ἑαυτὸν συνιστάνειν only occurs once in the N.T. outside 2 Corinthians, viz., at Gal. ii. 18, and there the meaning is quite different (παραβάτην ἐμαυτὸν συνιστάνω = “1 prove myself a trans- gressor’’) from anything in 2 Corinthians. Not only does the phrase occur in both parts of this Epistle (iii. 1, v. 12, x. 12, 18), but it always implies a bad kind of self-commendation, as contrasted with the similar phrase συνιστάνειν ἑαυτὸν (iv. 2, vi. 4, vii. 11), which is used throughout in a favourable sense. (b) ὑπόστασις only occurs twice in St. Paul, and each time in the same phrase, ἐν τῇ ὑποστάσει ταύτῃ [5.6.,) τῆς καυχήσεως), which is found once in the earlier (ix. 4) and once in the later (xi. 17) part of 2 Corinthians. (c) St. Paul uses ταπεινός Of himself in vii. 6 and x. 1; the word only occurs once again in the Pauline letters (Rom. xii. 16). (4) νόημα occurs five times in 2 Corinthians and in both parts of the Epistle (ii. 11, iii. 14, iv. 4, x. 5, xi. 3), and is always used in a bad sense. In the only other place of its occurrence in the N.T. (Phil. iv. 7) there is no suggestion that νοήματα must be bad. (e) ἀγρυπνία
1Smith’s Bible Dictionary, vol. i., p. 657. 2Semler seems to have had some suspicion of this, for he joins on chap, xiii. 11-13 to the first part of the Epistle in his scheme of dissection,
INTRODUCTION 27
occurs in vi. § and xi. 27, but nowhere else in the N.T. (/) mpoo- ἀναπληροῦν occurs in ix. 12 and xi. 9, but nowhere else in the N.T. (g) ἕτοιμος occurs both in ix. 5 and x. 6, 16; only once again in St. Paul (Tit. iii. 1). (4) δυνατεῖν is found in ix. 8 and xiii. 3; only once again in St. Paul (Rom. xiv. 4). (7) θαρρεῖν occurs in v. 6, 8, vii. 16 and x. 1, 2, but not elsewhere in St. Paul. It is true that in x. 1, 2 it is used to express stern confidence in himself (θαρρῶ εἰς ὑμᾶς), and in vii. 16 to express hopeful confidence in his corre- spondents (θαρρῶ ἐν ὑμῖν) ; but this does not alter the fact that he does not use the word in any sense in any other Epistle. (7) πλεονεκτεῖν Occurs in ii. 11, vii. 2 and xii. 17, 18; only again in St. Paul in 1 Thess. iv.6. (k) παρακαλεῖν occurs thirteen times in chaps. j.-ix. and four times in chaps. x.-xiil.; that is, with unusual frequency in both parts of the Epistle. It is the word used throughout of the Apostle’s directions to Titus (viii. 6, 17, ix. 5 and xii. 17). Other words and phrases occur with marked frequency in both parts of the Epistle, such as ἐν παντί, καυχάομαι, περισσότερος (-ws), etc. ; but while such phenomena fall in with the conclusion we have already reached, they are hardly significant enough to be registered as supplying independent arguments. But, on the whole, the linguistic facts powerfully support the traditional view, viz., that the Second Epistle to the Corinthians is a single document and not a patchwork of two or more detached pieces.
10. It is further to be borne in mind that neither MSS. nor versions lend any countenance to these disintegrating theories. They all, from the earliest times, treat the Epistle as a whole, as Irenzeus explicitly does more than once. He quotes ii. 15, 16 (Her., IV., xxviii., 3) and xiii. 7, 9 (He@r., V., iii., 1) as alike contained in the secunda ad Corinthios. No doubt the union of fragments is sup- posed to have taken place long before his time. Nevertheless the fact that there is no trace of it in literature is significant. “Τῆς attestation of the N.T. text is so varied and so early that a displace- ment of this magnitude could hardly fail to bear traces of itself.” }
11, One section of the Epistle (vi. 14-vii. 1) has been regarded as an interpolation by many writers who accept the Epistle in other respects as a complete document from the hand of St. Paul. And it is not to be denied that this section comes in awkwardly in its present place. It is much more like what we would expect a frag- ment of the Lost Letter (1 Cor. v. 9) to be than a genuine part of the Epistle before us. Nevertheless, I am not satisfied that a case
‘ Sanday, Encycl. Biblica, vol. i., p. 906.
28 INTRODUCTION
has been made out for its rejection; and I have given (in the notes in loc.) the reasons which seem to me to justify the Pauline authorship of the section, and plausibly to explain its insertion at this particular point. It is not impossible (though for the hypothesis there is no external authority) that the section is a marginal gloss which has crept into the text at a very early period, or a postscript written in the margin by St. Paul or his amanuensis. But, on the whole, I believe that it ought to be retained.
CHAPTER III. THE HISTORY STYLE AND CONTENTS OF THE EPISTLE.
1. The external tradition as to the circulation and authority of the Second Epistle to the Corinthians is abundant from the year 175 onward. It is quoted by Irenzus of Gaul repeatedly (e.g., Her., iii., 7, ‘‘aperte Paulum in secunda ad Corinthios dixisse,” etc.) ; by Athenagoras of Athens (de resurr. morte, xviii.) ; by Theophilus of Antioch (ad Autol., i., 12, iii, 14); by Tertullian of Carthage (de Pudicitia, 13 et passim); by Clement of Alexandria (frequently, e.g., Strom., iii., 14, iv., 6), witnesses representing Churches widely separated from each other. Again, the Epistle is mentioned in the Muratorian Fragment; it was in Marcion’s Canon, and there is no evidence that it was absent from any list of N.T. books or any collection of Pauline letters. Before 175 ap. the evidence is not copious, but it is distinct. The letter to Diognetus (v. 12) quotes chap. vi. 8-10; and the elders cited by Irenzeus, who represent (at latest) the generation preceding him, quote chap. xii. 4 (Her, V., v., 1). Finally, Polycarp (ad Phil., ii., 4, and vi., 1) quotes chap. iv. 14 and viii. 21, thus providing proof of the use of the Epistle before the year 120. That it seems to have been used by the Sethites and and Ophites would point to a similar conclusion,!
11t is somewhat remarkable that the Epistle is not quoted by Clement of Rome when writing to the Church at Corinth. He cites (§ xlvii.) the First Epistle, and the Second, if known to him, would have supplied him with many apposite texts, powerfully supporting his appeal for unity. But no solid argument can be based on Clement’s silence, especially when it is remembered that we should look in vain in his letter for traces of Galatians, Colossians, Philippians, and 1 and 2 Thessa-:
᾿ς lonians, as well as of 2 Corinthians. These letters may not have been known in
Rome at the time; or Clement may have been personally unacquainted with them; or he may not have been familiar enough with their contents to quote from them. Any of these explanations is adequate, without resorting to the
_ hypothesis (cf. Kennedy, 2 and 3 Corinthians, p. 142 ff.) that Clement does not quote the canonical 2 Corinthians because it was not yet in existence as a whole,
but only survived in the form of fragments of the great Apostle’s correspondence with Corinth.
30 INTRODUCTION
2. External evidence is, however, of little importance in the case of a letter which so clearly betrays its authorship as 2 Corinthians does. It is unmistakably Pauline, in the tone and character of its teaching, no less than in its style and vocabulary. No Epistle lets us see more of the working of the Apostle’s mind, or gives us a clearer view of his personality (see above, chap. i., § 1). It is distinc- tively a letter rather than an ebistle ; that is, it was written to meet an emergency that had arisen at Corinth, and there is no trace that the writer was conscious that it would take a permanent place in literature. Herein lies at once its charm and its difficulty; and herein, too, is the explanation of the absence of systematic and con- sistent arrangement, such as might fairly be expected in a formal treatise. It reflects the varying moods of the writer; and the broken constructions and frequent anacolutha show that it was written at a time of mental agitation and excitement.
3. We count it unnecessary to produce here the proofs of the Pauline character of the style and diction of the Epistle.’ They are apparent throughout, and the marginal references to the text have been specially prepared with a view of bringing out the linguistic parallels between 2 Corinthians and the other Pauline letters.? Among the words peculiar in the N.T. to this Epistle are the following: ἀβαρής, ἀγανάκτησις, dyrétys, ἀγρυπνία, ἁδρότης, ἄμετρος, ἀνακαλύπτειν, ἀνεκδιήγητος, ἀπαρασκεύαστος, ἀπειπεῖν, ἀπόκριμα, ἄρρητος, αὐγάζειν, αὐθαί- ρετος, βελίαρ, δίψος, δόλιος, δυσφημία, ἐγκρίνειν, ἐκδαπανᾶσθαι, ἐκδημεῖν, ἐκφοβεῖν, ἐλαφρία, ἐντυποῦν, ἐπενδύεσθαι, ἑτεροζυγεῖν, εὐφημία, ἱκανότης, καθαίρεσις, κάλυμμα, καπηλεύειν, καταβαρεῖν, κατάκρισις, καταναρκεῖν, κατάρτισις, κατοπτρίζεσθαι, μετοχή, μολυσμός, μωμεῖσθαι, νυχθήμερον, ὀχύρωμα, παραυτίκα, παραφρονεῖν, πεντάκις, πέρυσι, προαμαρτάνειν, προε- νάρχεσθαι, προκαταρτίζειν, προσαναπληροῦν, προσκοπή, πτωχεύειν, σαργάνη, σκῆνος, σκόλοψ, στενοχωρεῖσθαι, συγκατάθεσις, συλᾷν, συμπέμπειν, συμφώ- νησις, συναποστέλλειν, συνυπουργεῖν, συστατικός, ὑπερέκεινα, ὑπερεκτείνειν, ὑπερλίαν, φειδομένως, φωτισμός, ψευδαπόστολος, ψιθυρισμός.
4. That the Epistle falls of itself into three parts is evident to the most casual reader. (1) From i. 1 to vii. 16 the writer is
*Those who desire to learn what has been urged against the Pauline author- ship may be referred to Dr. Knowling’s Witness of the Epistles, chap. ii., ““ Recent Attacks upon the Hauptbriefe” ; see especially p, 192. But it is quite outside the plan of this commentary to take notice of every extravagance of criticism. (See also vol. ii., p. 753 above.)
* Note that in the marginal references the LXX numbering of the Psalms and of the other O.T. books has been followed; and that “ here only” means that the word so designated does not occur again in the N.T.
INTRODUCTION 1᾽)
~
occupied with the reflections which are suggested by the report brought by Titus as to the response of the Corinthian Church to the injunctions of the First Epistle in the matter of the incestuous man. In this section there is a digression of great doctrinal import- ance on the Ministry of the New Covenant (iii. 7-iv. 15), followed by some profound thoughts about the life after death (iv. 16-v. 10) ; and a minor digression (vi. 14-vii. 1) about the dangers of inter- marriage with the heathen; but the main topic of these chapters is his thankfulness at the news he has received, which consoles him in his many troubles. Again and again he bids them be sure of his sincerity and single-mindedness. (2) Chapters viii. and ix. ᾿ deal with the collection which was being made for the poor Chris- tians in Judza, a subject which had been much in his thoughts during the preceding year. (3) The last four chapters are taken up with a vindication of his apostolic authority, which was neces- sary to put forward plainly before his next visit to Corinth. There was a party in that city calling themselves by the name of Christ (x. 7), who made light of St. Paul’s apostolic claims and were trying to undermine his authority. The Church as a whole had acquiesced in St. Paul’s directions given in 1 Cor. v.; but a minority of malcontents were troublesome and calumnious, and needed re- pression. A detailed analysis of the letter is subjoined.
ANALYSIS OF THE EPISTLE.
I. The obedience of the Corinthians to the instructions of the First Epistle.
Introductory— Address (i. 1, 2). God’s consolations and the sympathy of sorrow (i. 3-7). His recent peril (i. 8-11). His sincerity of purpose— They must acknowledge it (i. 12-14). His change of plan was not due to fickleness (i. 15-22). The real reason of the postponement of his visit (i. 23-ii. 4), The offender has been sufficiently punished (ii. 5-11). He rejoices to hear that his reproof has been loyally received (ii. 12-17). The Corinthians are his “ Letter of Commendation ” (iii. 1-3). His success, however, 1s due to God (iii. 4-6). Digression on the Ministry of the New Covenant— It is more glorious than that of the Old (iii. 7-11). It is more open (iii. 12-18). He, accordingly, delivers his message plainly (iv. 1-6).
Il,
ΠῚ,
‘INTRODUCTION
His bodily weakness does not annul the effects of his ministry (iv. 7-15). He is sustained by a glorious hope (iv. 16-18). His expectation of a glorified body hereafter, and his desire to survive until the Second Advent (v. 1-5). In any case to be with Christ is best (v. 6-8). We must remember the Judgment to come (v. 9, 10). He reiterates his sincerity of purpose (v. 11-13). The constraining power of his ministry (v. 14-16). In Christ all is new (v. 17-19). As Christ’s ambassador he prays them to be reconciled to God (vy. 20-Vvi, 3). The conditions and characteristics of his ministry (vi. 4-10). He affectionately declares his sympathy and claims the same from them (vi, 11-13). {Parenthetical warning against familiar association with the heathen (vi, 14-vii, I).] He claims their sympathy again (vii. 2-4). He repeats his joy that his reproof has been loyally received (vii. 5-12). Titus also rejoiced to bring such tidings (vii. 13-16).
The Collection for the Judzan Christians.
The liberality of the Macedonian Churches (viii. 1-7). He counsels, though he will not command, the imitation of it (viii. 8-15). The mission of Titus and his two companions (viii. 16-24). Its purpose, that the collection may be made ready (ix. 1-5). Liberal giving is (a) blessed of God (ix. 6-11), and (δ) calls forth the bless- ings of the recipients (ix. 12-15).
The Vindication of his Apostolic Authority.
He entreats them not to force him to use his authority (x. 1-6). Despite all appearances it is weighty and is Divinely given him (x. 7-18). He begs them to bear with the statement of his claims at length (xi. 1-4). He is in no way inferior to his adversaries (xi. 5-15). His Apostolic labours and trials (xi. 16-33). His vision, of which he could boast, if he chose (xii. 1-6). His “ thorn in the flesh”’ (xii. 7-10). This testimony should have proceeded from the Corinthians (xii. 11-13). That he did not claim maintenance was disinterested (xii. 14-18). The purpose of this “ glorying ” is their edification (xii. 19-21). If he comes again, he will not spare (xiii. 1, 2). Christ is his strength: let them see to it that He is theirs also (xiii, 3-to), Conclusion— Final exhortations (xiii. 11). Salutations and benediction (xiii. 12, 13),
CHAPTER IV.
THE TEXT.
1, The uncial manuscripts whose readings are cited, in all important cases, in the critical notes are the following :—
8. Codex Sinaiticus (sec. iv.), now at St. Petersburg, published in facsimile type by its discoverer, Tischendorf, in 1862. The symbol ἐς is used to indicate the corrections intro- duced by a scribe of the seventh century, δ᾿" denoting the autograph of the original scribe.
A. Codex Alexandrinus (szc. v.), at the British Museum, pub- lished in photographic facsimile by Sir E. M. Thompson (1879); it is defective from chaps. iv. 13 to xii. 7 of our Epistle.
B. Codex Vaticanus (sec. iv.), published in photographic fac- simile in 1889 under the care of the Abbate Cozza-Luzi.
C, Codex Ephraemi (szc. v.), the Paris palimpsest, edited by Tischendorf in 1843. The text of our Epistle is wanting from chap. x. 8 to the end.
Ὁ. Codex Claromontanus (szc. vi.), a Greco-Latin MS. at Paris, edited by Tischendorf in 1852. D> and De denote the readings introduced by correctors of the seventh and ninth centuries respectively. The Latin text is represented by d; it follows the Old Latin version with modifications.
EB. Codex Sangermanensis (sec. ix.), a Greco-Latin MS., now at St. Petersburg, formerly belonging to the Abbey of Saint-Germain-des-Prés. Its text is largely dependent upon that of D. The Latin version, e (a corrected copy of d), has been printed, but with incomplete accuracy, by Belsheim (18 5).
P. Codex Augiensis (szc. ix.),a Greco-Latin MS., at Trinity College, Cambridge, edited by Scrivener in 1859. Its Greek
text is almost identical with that of G, and it is therefore VOL. III.
34 INTRODUCTION
not cited save where it differs from that MS. Its Latin version, f, presents the Vulgate text with some modifica- tions.
G. Codex Boernerianus (sec. ix.), a Greeco-Latin MS., at Dres- den, edited by Matthzi in 1791. Written by an Irish scribe, it once formed part of the same volume as Codex Sangallensis (8) of the Gospels. The Latin text, g, is based on the O.L. translation.
H. Codex Coislinianus (sec. vi.), fragments of which survive in several libraries. Of our Epistle chap. iv. 2-7 is at St. Petersburg, and chaps. x. 18-xi. 6 and xi. 12-xii, 2 at Mount Athos. These latter fragments were edited by Duchesne in 1876; the readings of the former are given by Tischendorf.
K. Codex Mosquensis (sec. ix.), edited by Matthzi in 1782.
L. Codex Angelicus (sec. ix.), at Rome, collated by Tischendorf and others.
M. Codex Ruber (szc. ix.), at the British Museum; it derives its name from the colour of the ink. It contains of this Epistle chaps. i. 1-15 and x. 13-xii. δ.
O. This is a fragment (sec. vi.), at St. Petersburg, containing
chaps. i. 20-ii, 12. Codex Porphyrianus (szc. ix.), at St. Petersburg, collated by Tischendorf. Its text is deficient for chap. ii. 13-16.
R. Codex Cryptoferratensis (szc. vii.), a palimpsest fragment containing chap. xi. 9-19, edited by Cozza in 1867, and cited by Tischendorf.!
ἐν;
The tendency of these MSS. to fall into groups will be apparent on a cursory inspection of the apparatus criticus. The readings of DEG are, as a rule, “Western”; while $$B represent (as usual) a weight of authority that cannot be rejected without much hesitation. The lacune in A and C prevent the affinities of the “ Alexandrian” group SACLP from being as apparent here as in other Epistles (cf. Sanday-Headlam, Romans, p. Ixxi).
? The following uncial authorities for our Epistle are as yet inedited :— S. At Mount Athos (szc. viii. ?), contains, inter alia, chaps. i. 1-xi. 23. ¥. A ninth-century Codex at Mount Athos. It is said to be complete.
“. Codex Patiriensis (sec. v.), at Rome (Vat. Gr. 2061). It contains chaps iv. 7-vi. 8 and vii. 15-x. 6 of our Epistle
INTRODUCTION 35
2. The minuscule or cursive manuscripts are very numerous, and only a few of special interest are occasionally cited in the critical apparatus. 17, the “queen of cursives” (sec. ix.), is at Paris ; 37 (sec. xv.) is the well-known Leicester Codex = Ev. 69; and 73 (szc. xi.) is at Upsala.
3. Versions. Of these the Latin claims special attention. The versions d, e, f, g have been described above. We have also of the Old Latin the fragmentary Codex Frisingensis (r) of the sixth (?) century, containing of our Epistle chaps. i. 1-ii. 10, iii. 17-v. 1, vii. 10-viii. 12, ix. 10-xi. 21, xii. 14-21, xiii. 2-10. The symbol m marks the readings found in the Speculum, which represents the text of the Spaniard Priscillian. The Vulgate (vg) of the Pauline Epistles differs but little from the prae-Hieronymian Latin.
In Syriac we have the Peshitto (sec. iii.?) and the Harclean version (szc. vii.). The margin of the latter often preserves better readings than are found in its text.
Of Egyptian versions we have the Bohairic or the North Coptic, and the Sahidic or South Coptic, the language of Upper Egypt. These versions are to be dated probably about the third century.
It has not come within the scope of this edition to cite the patristic authorities for the variants recorded; for a full conspectus the student must be referred to Tischendorfs Novum Testamentum Grace (8th edit.), on which the following apparatus criticus is based.
4, In accordance with the general plan of the Expositor’s Greek Testament the “received text”’ (see vol. i., p. 52) is printed at the head of the pages but the commentary follows the reading, which has appeared to the editor to be, on the whole, most probably original.
Among the Patristic Commentaries on the Epistle perhaps the most important are those of Chrysostom, Ambrosiaster and Primasius. Modern commentaries are very numerous. Stanley’s notes are often illuminating and picturesque; Alford is careful and thorough, as usual; and Waite (in the Speaker’s Commentary) provides a useful discussion of the main questions which the Epistle suggests. Of German commentaries Schmiedel’s (in the Hand Kommentar) is by far the most complete. It is a brilliant and scholarly piece of work, and is indispensable to the student who wishes to have detailed information as to the various schemes by which St. Paul’s history has been reconstructed for the years 53-55 A.D. Schmiedel’s general view (see p. 19 above) that chaps. x.-xiii. con- stitute part of a letter distinct from and later than chaps. i.-ix. has not commended itself to the present editor; but his notes are full of
36 INTRODUCTION
learning and suggestiveness. Schnedermann’s edition of the Epistles to the Corinthians (in Strack-Zéckler’s Kommentar) has also been found useful at some points. Bengel’s Guomon and Field’s detached Notes have, of course, been diligently consulted.}
In this edition the interpretation which has seemed on the whole the best has been set down, without (as a rule) discussing at length the rival theories. It would have been easy to crowd the notes with references to other editors; but it has seemed better to economise space in this direction, and so to find room for a larger number of references to St. Paul’s other writings.
September, 1900,
‘See also Prof. Findlay’s account of the Commentaries on 1 Coninizene vol. ii,, Ρ. 752 above).
ΠΑΥΛΟΥ TOT ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΟΥ͂
H ΠΡΟΣ
ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ
ἘΠΙΣΤΟΛΗ ΔΕΎΤΕΡΑ.
I. 1. ΠΑΥΛΟΣ ἀπόστολος ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ,, " διὰ " θελήματος "Θεοῦ, Rom. x.
καὶ Τιμόθεος ὁ ἀδελφὸς, τῇ "ἐκκλησίᾳ τοῦ " Θεοῦ τῇ οὔσῃ ἐν Κορίνθῳ, Eph. i. 1; Col. i. 1; 4 Tim. i. 1.
1; chap. viii. 5; Ὁ Acts xx. 28; 1 Cor. i. 4; σ᾿ Thess. ii. 14, etc.
1 ADEGKL and most vss. have "Ino. Xp.; better Χριστον Ἴησου with BMP 17.
CuaPpTer I, ADDRESS, vv. I, 2.—The usual form of address at the beginning of a Greek letter was A. B. χαίρειν (see Acts xxiii. 26); and this is adopted by St. James in his Epistle (Jas. i. 1), and is followed, among other Christian writers, by Ignatius in his letters (πλεῖστα χαίρειν is his ordinary formula). St. Paul, original in this as in all else, struck out a form for himself. He replaces χαίρειν by χάρις καὶ εἰρήνη (1 Thess.), which in subse- quent letters is expressed more fully, as here, χάρις καὶ εἰρήνη ἀπὸ Θεοῦ πατρὸς ἡμῶν καὶ Κυρίου ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ. (In x and 2 Tim. he adds @\eos.) The simple greeting of ordinary courtesy is thus
ed with a deep religious meaning. Grace is the keynote of the Gospel; and peace, the traditional and beautiful saluta- tion of the East, on Christian lips signifies not earthly peace merely, but the peace of God (Phil. iv. 7). The first instance of the combination of χάρις with εἰρήνη is noteworthy, viz., they are coupled in the Priestly Benediction at Num. vi. 24.— ἀπόστολος Xp. ᾽Ἴη.: St. Paul’s letters are all semi-official, except perhaps that to Philemon; and thus they usually begin with the assertion of his apostolic office. This it would be especially necessary to emphasise in a letter to Corinth, where his authority had been questioned quite recently (x. τὸ ff.), and where the names
of Apollos and Peter had formerly been set in opposition to his (1 Cor. i. 12).— διὰ θελήματος Θεοῦ : he is ever anxious (see reff.) to explain that his apostleship was not assumed of himself; it is a mis- ston from God; he is a σκεῦος ἐκλογῆς.--- καὶ Τιμόθεος ὁ ἀδελφός : Timothy now ΕΝ the place at St. Paul’s side which was filled by Sosthenes when 1 Cor. was written (1 Cor. i. 1), Timothy had been despatched to Macedonia (Acts xix. 22) to go on to Corinth (1 Cor. iv. 17), but St. Paul seems to have had a suspicion that he might be prevented from arriving there (1 Cor. xvi. 10). From the facts that we now find him in Macedonia, and that there is no mention of him in chap. xii. 16-18, it is likely that he was pre- vented from reaching Corinth by some causes of which we are unaware.—rq] ἐκκλησίᾳ τοῦ Θεοῦ «.r.A.: the letter is addressed primarily to the Christian con- gregation at Corinth, and secondarily to the Christians throughout Achaia. It is thus a circular letter, like that to the Galatians or Ephesians, and so at the end we do not find salutations to individuals, as in τ Cor. and in the other letters addressed to particular Churches. The words τῇ οὔσῃ ἐν Κορίνθῳ suggest the idea of settled establishment; the Church at Corinth had now been for some time
in existence.—év ὅλῃ τῇ ᾿Αχαΐᾳ: the
38
ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOY=2 B
L
ς Actsix. 13; σὸν τοῖς " ἁγίοις πᾶσι τοῖς οὖσιν ἐν ὅλῃ τῇ ᾿Αχαΐᾳ" 2. χάρις ὑμῖν
1 Cor. xvi.
τ ρα" καὶ ν 4, ix. τ; Phil 3. εὐλογητὸς ὁ * Θεὸς καὶ “ πατὴρ τοῦ d Ps. ixxxviii.
εἰρήνη ἀπὸ Θεοῦ πατρὸς ἡμῶν Kai Κυρίου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ.
"Κυρίου ἡμῶν "Ἰησοῦ
"Χριστοῦ, ὁ πατὴρ τῶν ‘ οἰκτιρμῶν καὶ " Θεὸς πάσης " παρακλήσεως,
53: Lk i 4. ὁ "παρακαλῶν ἡμᾶς ἐπὶ πάσῃ τῇ ᾿θλίψει ἡμῶν, εἰς τὸ δύνασθαι i, 25, ix.5, ἡμᾶς παρακαλεῖν τοὺς ἐν πάσῃ θλίψει, διὰ τῆς παρακλήσεως ἧς ς,
e Rom. xv. δ; Eph. i. 3; chap. xi. 31; 1 Pet. i
5; Phil. ii. 1; 2 Thess. ii. τ6. b Isa. li. τα, Ixvi. 13.
Roman province of Achaia included the whole country which we call Greece (ex- cluding Macedonia), and it is in this large sense that the name is used here (cf. ix. 2 below). :
Ver. 2. ἀπὸ Θεοῦ πατρὸς κιτ.λ.: this coupling of the names of God our Father ‘and the Lord $esus Christ as alike the source of grace and peace is most signi- ficant in its bearing upon St. Paul’s Christology (cf. xiii. 13). ;
I. The Obedience of the Corin- thians to the Instructions of the First Epistle (i. 3—vii. 16). This is the main topic of the first section of this Epistle. Vv. 3-7: THANKSGIVING; GoD’s CONSOLATIONS AND THE SYMPATHY OF Sorrow. St. Paul’s habit is to begin his letters with an expression of thank- fulness for the Christian progress of his correspondents. The only exceptions are the Epp. to Titus and to the Gala- tians (in this case he had received bad news from Galatia). In 1 Tim. i. 12 the cause of his thankfulness is the exhibition of the Divine mercy to himself; and this Epistle begins with a like thought, from which he passes (ver. 14) to his confident belief that the Corinthian Christians are still his καύχημα. It was especially im- portant that a letter which was so largely taken up with rebuke and with the asser- tion of his apostolical authority should begin with a message of sympathy and hopefulness (vv. 11 ff.
Ver. 3. εὐλογητὸς ὁ Θεὸς x.7.d.: blessed is the God and Father of our Lord Fesus Christ. Note that rot Κυρίου is depen- dent on Θεός as well as on πατήρ; cf. Eph. i. 17, and John xx. 17, Rev. i. 6. This ts the starting-point of the Christian revelation, that the Supreme is ‘the God and Father” of Jesus Christ; He
is εὐλογητός (FIND), the Object of
His creatures’ blessing. The verb is not expressed, but the analogy of 1 Pet. iv. 11 would indicate that ἐστίν rather than ἔστω should be understood. A doxology is not a prayer, but (cf. Matt. vi. 13, and
f Isa. lxiii, 15, 16; Rom. xii. 1. g Rom. xv. i Ver. 8; chaps. ii. 4, iv. 17, vi. 4, viii. 2, 13.
John xii. 13, a close parallel) a thankful and adoring statement of the Divine goodness and power.—6 πατὴρ τῶν οἰκτιρμῶν: the Father of mercies, 56.» from whom merciful acts proceed; oix- τιρμός, compassion, is the very charac- teristic of a Father’s providence; see reff. and Luke vi. 36.---καὶ Θεὸς πάσης παρακλήσεως: and God of all comfort, sc., from whom every consolation pro- ceeds. We have παράκλησις applied to God in O.T., ¢.g., in Ps. xciii. 19, at παρακλήσεις cou ἠγάπησαν τὴν ψυχήν μου; and the word is adopted in the N.T. for the Divine comfort not only St. Paul (see reff.), but by St. Luke (it. 25 and Acts ix. 31), and by St. John, who describes alike the Spirit (John xiv. 16, xv. 26, xvi. 7) and the Son (1: John ii. 1) as the παράκλητος.
Ver. 4. ὁ παρακαλῶν ἡμᾶς κ.οτιλ.: who comforteth us in all our affliction (the def. art. indicating trials actually existing). The verb παρακαλεῖν has three shades of meaning, (a) to beseech, eighteen times in St. Paul, (δ) to exhort, seventeen times, (c) to comfort, thirteen times, of which seven are in this Epistle, where the word occurs altogether seven- teen times. Cf. ver. 6, ii. 7, 8, v. 20, vi. I, vii. 6, 7, 13, Viii. 6, ix. 5, x. 1, xii. 8, 18, xiii. 11.—els τὸ δύνασθαι «.7.X.: to the end that we may be able to comfort them that are in any affliction (sc., any that may happen to arise). This is the final purpose of God’s gifts of grace, viz., that they may not only be a blessing to the individual, but through him and as reflected from him to his fellows.—is παρακαλούμεθα: through the comfort wherewith we ourselves are being com- forted of God. ἧς, for ἥν, has been at- tracted into the case of παρακλήσεως (cf. 1 Cor. vi. 19, chap. x. 13, Eph. ii. το).
Ver. 5. ὅτι καθὼς περισσεύει κ.τ.λ.: for as Christ’s sufferings flow over abun- dantly to us, even so our comfort also aboundeth through Christ. hat the Christian is a fellow-sufferer with Christ is frequently urged by St. Paul (Rom.
ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYS B 39
παρακαλούμεθα αὐτοὶ ὑπὸ τοῦ Θεοῦ 5. ὅτι καθὼς περισσεύει τὰ * Cf Chap.
2-——7.
παθήματα ' τοῦ Χριστοῦ εἰς ἡμᾶς, οὕτω διὰ Χριστοῦ 5 περισσεύει Eph iii καὶ ἡ παράκλησις ἡμῶν. 6. εἴτε δὲ "θλιβόμεθα, "ὑπὲρ τῆς ὑμῶν. Chaps. LF
παρακλήσεως καὶ σωτηρίας, τῆς ἐνεργουμένης ἐν ᾿ὑπομονῇ τῶν 4x1 ms αὐτῶν παθημάτων ὧν καὶ ἡμεῖς πάσχομεν - εἴτε παρακαλούμεθα, ὑπὲρ Lage id
τῆς ὑμῶν παρακλήσεως καὶ cwrynptiast: 7. καὶ ἡ ἐλπὶς ἡμῶν ™BeBata n ΡΝ ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν - εἰδότες ὅτι ὥσπερ ὅ " κοινωνοί ἐστε τῶν παθημάτων, οὕτω ἘΣ
1 DE have ro παθημα.
* The uncials have του Χριστον; tov is omitted by a few minuscules only.
3 B 17 omit the first και σωτηριας.
* The order of clauses in the latter part of the verse is variously given in the MSS. The received text (followed by the A.V.) is devoid of MS. authority and was manu- factured by Erasmus. The choice lies between (1) eure παρακαλουμεθα ὑπερ τῆς πυημων παρακλήσεως (omitting kat σωτηριας) τῆς evepyouperns εν ὑυπομονῃ των αυτων παθηματων wy και ἡμεις πάσχομεν και ἡ ελπις . . - vpwv, which is attested by SACMP, 1, the Peshitto and Bohairic vss.; and (2) της evepyoupevns εν ὑυπομονῃ
τῶν AUTWY TT ειτε οἵ BDEGKL, d, e, f, g, and Tisch., W.H. and the R.V.
αθηματων wy Kat ἡμεις πασχομεν, και ἡ cAmis ἡμων βεβαια υπερ υμων- ακαλουμεθα, ὑπερ τῆς υμων παρακλησεως και σωτηριας, Which is the order e Harclean.
We follow (1), which is adopted by
δ For womep (DbcKL, etc.) read ws, with NABCD*E*MP, etc.
viii. 17, Phil. iii, 10, Col. i. 24; see esp. chap, iv. 10, 11 below, and cf. Matt. xx. 22). Here he dwells on the thought that this fellowship in suffering implies also the consolation and strength which flow from union with Christ; cf. 1 Pet. iv. 13.
Vv. 6, 7. We follow the reading of the Revisers (see crit. note) and trans- late: But whether we be afflicted, it is for your comfort and salvation; or whether we be comforted, it is for your comfort, which worketh in the patient endurance of the same things which we also suffer : and our hope for you is stead- fast; knowing that as ye are partakers of the sufferings, so also are ye of the comfort. This is an expansion of the εἰς τὸ δύνασθαι κιτιλ. Of ver. 4: the
Apostle’s afflictions and consolations’
alike are for the sake of his converts; they and he have a common fellowship. in Christ, with all which that involves of sympathy with each other. The nearest parallel (see reff.) is Eph. iii. 13, διὸ αἰτοῦμαι μὴ ἐνκακεῖν ἐν ταῖς θλίψεσίν
υ ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν, ἥτις ἐστὶν δόξα ἫΝ 3
or the constr. εἴτε . . . εἴτε cf. chap. v. 13 and 1 Cor. xii. 26. Note that ἐνεργεῖσθαι is always in the N.T. middle, not passive, and is used intransitively (see Rom. vii. 5, chap. iv. 12, Gal. v. 6, Eph. iii. 20, Col. i. 29, 1 Thess. ii. 13); when the verb is used of God it is always in the active voice (1 Cor. xii. 6, Gal. ii.
8, etc.).—év ὑπομονῇ: ὑπομονή means expectation or hopeful waiting in the canonical books of the LXX; but is often used for steadfast endurance in Ecclus, and in 4 Macc. (see 4 Macc. xvii. 12). It is a favourite word with St. Paul in this latter sense, in which it is always used in the N.T. (cf., ¢.g., Luke xxi. 19, 1 Tim. vi. 11); for the juxtaposition of ὑπομονή and παράκλησις see Rom. xv. 5.--τῶν αὐτῶν παθημάτων: the suffer- ings which the Corinthian brethren must endure are here represented as the same as those of the Apostle; i.e., the reference is not to any special affliction such as that alluded to in ver. 8, but to the troubles which came upon him in the general discharge of his Apostolic office and upon all those who were engaged in the struggle against Judaism on the one side and heathendom on the other.
Ver. 7. καὶ ἡ ἐλπὶς «.1.A.: and our hope for you is steadfast, knowing (we should expect εἰδότων, but cf. Rom. xiii. 11) that as ye are partakers of the suffer- ings (see reff. for κοινωνός with a gen, objecti), so also are ye of the comfort. The main idea of this section is well given by Bengel: ‘“*Communio sanctorum ... egregie representatur in hac epistola”.
Vv. 8-11. His Recent Perit. Ver. 8. ot yap θέλομεν «.7.A.: for we would not have you ignorant, brethren, about (for ὑπέρ with gen. in this sense, cf,
40
ΠΡΟΣ KOPIN@IOYS B ae
o Acts xix. καὶ τῆς παρακλήσεως. 8. οὐ γὰρ θέλομεν ὑμᾶς ἀγνοεῖν, ἀδελφοὶ,
᾿δπὲρ 1 τῆς θλίψεως ἡμῶν τῆς γενομένης ἡμῖν " ἐν τῇ “᾿Ασίᾳ, ὅτι καθ᾽,
135 Cer. » ὑπερβολὴν * ἐβαρήθημεν ὃ ὑπὲρ δύναμιν, ὥστε * ἐξαπορηθῆναι ἡμᾶς
δδαρν, Θεῷ τῷ ΝΎ Ρ y. Oe τῷ
7; Gali ἐσχήκαμεν, ἵνα μὴ ᾿ πεποιθότες ὦμεν ‘eq’ *éautois, GAN’ “ ἐπὶ τῷ " ἐγείροντι 4 τοὺς νεκρούς - 10. ὃς ἐκ τηλικούτου θανάτου
vie ἐρρύσατο ἡμᾶς καὶ ῥύεται," " εἰς ὃν "ἠλπίκαμεν ὅτι ὁ καὶ ἔτι Ἷ : a sHereonly. t Lk. xviii.g., ἃ ΡΒ. ii. 12; Jer. xvii. 7. v Chap. iv. 14; Rom. viii 11; 1 Cor. vi. 14, etc. w Rom. vii. 24; Col. i 13; 1 Thess. i, 10. x John v. 45; 1 Pet. iii. 5
1 BKLM have ὑπερ τῆς OX., probably the autograph; but περι (a natural altera-
tion) has the support of SACDEGP 17.
2 \ecDbcEKL, the Syriac and Bohairic give ἡμῖν; om. ἡμῖν S*ABCD*GMP 17
and the Latins.
3 DEGKL, d, e, f, g, vg. and the Syriac vss. give «Bap. υπερ δυναμιν εἐβαρηθημεν, with RABCMP 17, r
*G has emt Ocov Tov eytpovra.
Suv. ; better vwep
5 DcEGKLM, f, vg. and the Harclean give pverar; ρυσεται has the stronger
support of Ὁ ΒΟΡ 17, g, and the Bohairic.
6 ort is omitted in BD*M; G, g insert it after και; all other authorities support
received text. 7 DbG and a few cursives omit ert.
chap. viii. 23, xii. 8, 2 Thess. ii. 1) our affliction which happened in Asia, that we were weighed down exceedingly, beyond our power, insomuch that we despaired even of life. Having spoken in general terms of the Divine comfort in times of trouble, he goes on to mention his own particular case, the ‘affliction which befel him in Asia”. What was this? Asia almost certainly means Ephesus, where he had lately been exposed to many adversaries (x Cor. xv. 32, xvi. 9). We naturally think of the tumult recorded in Acts xix. 23 ff.; but the language here used is so strong that he must have been exposed to something worse than a tem- riot. He was ‘‘weighed down beyond his power” (ὑπὲρ δύναμιν, a phrase which he never uses elsewhere, and which is specially remarkable from the pen of one who always gloried in the Divine δύναμις granted to him, of which he said πάντα ἰσχύω ἐν τῷ ἐνδυνα- μοῦντί με, Phil. iv. 13); he ““ despaired of life,” and yet he describes in this very Epistle (iv. 8) his general attitude in tri- bulation as “ perplexed, yet not despair- ing”. Nor have we knowledge of any secution at Ephesus so violent as to justify such language, though no doubt the allusion may be to something of the kind, Whatever the “affliction” was, the Corinthians were acquainted with it, for St. Paul does not enter into details,
but mentions it only to inform them of its gravity, and toassure them of his trust in his ultimate deliverance. On the whole, it seems most likely that the reference is
to grievous bodily sickness, which brought
the Apostle down to the gates of death (see ver. 9, and cf. chap. iv. 10 and xii. 7 ff.). Such an affliction would be truly ὑπὲρ δύναμιν ; and it would be necessary to contemplate its recurrence (ver. το). St. Paul in this Epistle, with unusual frequency, uses the plural ἡμεῖς when speaking of himself; sometimes this can be explained by the fact that Timothy was associated with him in the writing of the letter (i. 1), but in other passages (e.g., ver. I0, v. 13, 16, x. 7, II, 15, xi. 21) such an explanation will not suit the context, which demands the individual application of the pronoun.
Ver. 9. ἀλλὰ αὐτοὶ K.T.A.: nay, we ourselves had the sentence of death in our- selves; 1.6., the danger was so great that the sentence of death had been already pronounced, as it were. ἀπόκριμα might mean ‘‘answer,’’ as the Revisers trans- late it (they give sentence, with the A.V., in their margin); cf. the verb ἀποκρίνειν- But in the other places where this rare word is found (e.g., Jos., Ant., xiv. το, 6, and an inscription of 51 A.D., quoted by Deissmann, Neue Bibelstudien, p. 85) it stands for an official decision or sentence, Cf. κρίμα θανάτου, “the sen-
I
8—12.
ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOY= B 41
4 ῥύσεται, 11. "συνυπουργούντων καὶ ὑμῶν 1 ὑπὲρ 5 ἡμῶν ® τῇ δεήσει, te oui ἵνα ἐκ πολλῶν "προσώπων τὸ εἰς ἡμᾶς χάρισμα διὰ πολλῶν 2 Here only.
" εὐχαριστηθῇ ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν."
a Prov. viii. oandreff. low.
12. Ἢ γὰρ "καύχησις ἡμῶν αὕτη ἐστὶ, τὸ μαρτύριον τῆς “συνειδή- > Chaps. iv.
15, ix. 12.
σεως ἡμῶν, ὅτι ἐν ἁπλότητι ὁ καὶ " εἰλικρινείᾳ Θεοῦ,7 οὐκ ὃ ἐν σοφίᾳ ¢ τ Cor. xv.
σαρκικῇ, ἀλλ᾽ ἐν χάριτι Θεοῦ * ἀνεστράφημεν ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ, περισσο-
d Eccl. x. 20; Wisd. xvii. 11 only in LXX; οἵ. Rom. ἰδ. rg. f Ezek, xix. 6; Eph. ii. 3; 1 Tim. iii. 15.
10, 17. only; οἵ. Phil. i. το.
1A has ἡμῶν for υμων- 5. AG have υμων for ἡμῶων-
31; chaps. vii. 4, 14,
Viii. 24, xi. e1 Cor. v. 8; chap. ii. 17
3 D*G have περι for ὑπερ. 4 GM, d, e, g, give ev πολλῳ προσωπῳ.
5 evy. ὑπερ ἡμῶν is read by SACD*GM 17 nd the vss.; BDcEFKLP have vpev,
6 ἀπλοτητι NCDEGL, the Latin and Syriac vss.; but the better supported reading is αγιοτητι of S*ABCKMP 17, 37, 73, and the Bohairic (see note).
7 S8ABCDEM have του Θεου; GKLP omit του. 8 BM 37, 73, £, vg. and the Harclean read και ovx ev; W.H. place και in brackets.
tence of death” (Ecclus, xli. 3). The tense of ἐσχήκαμεν is noteworthy; it seems to be a kind of historical perfect, used like an aorist (cf. chap. ii. 13, xi. 25, Rev. v. 7, viii. 5, fora similar usage).— ἵνα μὴ πεποιθότες x.7.A.: i.¢., “the gravity of the danger was such as to im- press upon me the vanity of putting my trust anywhere save in God, who has the power of life and death”. God can “raise the dead” (see chap. iv. 14); much more can He bring the dying from the gates of death.
Ver. 10. ὅς ἐκ τηλικ. κιτιλ.: who delivered us out of so great a death, and will deliver (reading ῥύσεται). The form of words recalls Rom. xv. 31 and 2 Tim. iv. 17, 18, which would give some sup- port to the theory that the great peril in question was persecution at the hands of opponents ; but (as we have said on ver. 8) it seems more probable that the Apostle’s deliverance was from a danger- ous illness. It is possible, indeed, that we have here a reminiscence of Job Xxxiii. 30, ἐρύσατο τὴν ψυχήν pov ἐκ θανάτου, which would confirm this inter- pretation. Note that the preposition is
ἐκ, not ἀπό; ἀπό would only indicate
deliverance from the neighbourhood of a danger; ἐκ indicates emergence froma danger to which one has actually been exposed (see Chase, Lord’s Prayer in the Early Church, pp. 71 ff.). Cf. with the whole phrase 2 Tim. iv. 17, 18, ἐρύσθην ἐκ στόματος λέοντος, ῥύσεταί pe ὁ κύριος k.T-A.—els ὃν ἠλπίκαμεν : towards whom we have set our hope. εἰς with the acc. (see reff.) expresses the direction towards which hope looks; ἐπί with the dat. after
ἐλπίζειν (τ Tim. iv. 10, vi. 17) rather indi- cates that in which hope rests. Cf. Ps. iv. 6, ἐλπίσατε ἐπὶ κύριον. The perfect ἠλπίκαμεν here has its full force, viz., “towards whom we have set our hope, and continue to do so”; cf. 1 Cor. xv. 19, 1 Tim. v. 5, vi. 17.—Kal ἔτι ῥύσεται: the force of ἔτι (if indeed it be part of the true text: see crit. note) is to carry the mind on to the perils of the future, as distinguished from those of the present : He will continue to deliver us. Ver. 11. συνυπουργούντων καὶ ὑμῶν κιτιλ.: 2” also helping together on our behalf by your supplication ; 1.e., appar- ently, “helping me”. St. Paul claims that the sympathy of his converts with him shall be exhibited by their prayers forhim. δέησιφ is prayer for a particular object, as contrasted with the more general προσευχή (Eph. vi. 18).—tva ἐκ πολλῶν προσώπων K.t.A.: that from many faces (sc., as if upturned in thanksgiving) thanks be given on our behalf through many for the gift bestowed on us. πρόσωπον came to mean “person” in later Greek, but it never can be thus translated in the N.T., save in the phrase λαμβάνειν πρόσωπον (Luke xx. 21, Gal. ii. 6) or θαυμάζειν πρόσωπα (Jude 16), “to respect the per- son’? of anyone. Even in these passages λαμβάνειν πρόσωπον is aHebraism which originally meant “raise the face’’ (see Plummer on Luke xx. 21). πρόσωπον is used ten times elsewhere in this Epistle in its ordinary sense of ‘ face”’ (chap. ii. 10, iii. 7, 13, 18, iv. 6, v. 12, Vili. 24, X. I, 7, xi. 20; cf. also 1 Cor. xiii. 12, xiv. 25, Gal. i. 22). Hence we cannot follow the English versions in translating ἐκ
42
g1 Cor. xiii. PF
a iv ap, τέρως δὲ πρὸς ὑμᾶς. xvi. 18; chaps. vi.
τ 1 BG om. αλλ᾽,
ΠΡΟΣ KOPIN@IOYS B ra
13. οὐ γὰρ ἄλλα γράφομεν ὑμῖν ἀλλ᾽} ἢ 3 ἃ ἀναγινώσκετε, ἢ ὃ καὶ " ἐπιγινώσκετε, ἐλπίζω δὲ ὅτι καὶ ὁ ἕως τέλους
7A om. ἢ α.
5 B and a few cursives omit q καὶ ewtyvwoxere (through homceoteleuton); GK, the Latin, Peshitto and Bohairic vss. omit y.
* SSABCD*EG and most vss. omit kat; ins. DCKLMP and the Harclean.
πολλῶν προσώπων “ by many Petras x in this verse, an additional difficulty in the way of such a rendering being that it would require ὑπό, not ἐκ. πρόσωπον is a ὕες and the image in the writer’s mind is that of faces upturned in prayer, the early Christian (and the Jewish) atti- tude of prayer being one of standing with uplifted eyes and outstretched arms (cf. Ps. xxvii. 2, Matt. vi. 5, 1 Tim. ii. 8, and Clem. Rom.,§ 29). The general thought, of the united thanksgivings of many persons, is found twice again in the Epistle in somewhat similar contexts rin τε). χάρισμα and εὐχαριστεῖν (the passive is found here only in N.T.) are favourite words with St. Paul, the former occurring sixteen times in his Epistles and only once elsewhere in the N.T. (x Pet. iv. ro).
Vv. 12-14. THEY MUST ACKNOWLEDGE HIS SINCERITY OF PURPOSE. that he has always been frank and open in his dealings with the Corinthian Chris- tians: cf. 1 Thess. ii. 3.— yap καύχησις x.t.A.: for our glorying is this. Note καύχησις, not καύχημα, as at ver. 14, which is rather the thing boasted of than the act of boasting. καυχάομαι and its cognates are peculiarly frequent in this Epistle (see Introd., p. 27).---τὸ pap- τύριον τῆς συνειδήσεως ἡμῶν: viz., the testimony of Our conscience. μαρτύριον is the thing testified to by conscience, as contrasted with μαρτυρία, the act of testimony. συνείδησις, ‘ conscientia,” represents the self sitting in judgment on self, a specially Greek idea, and taken over by St. Paul from Greek thought; the word is a favourite one with him, both in his Epistles and in his speeches (Acts xxiii, I, xxiv. 16).---ὅτι ἐν ἁγιότητι κα εἰλικρινείᾳ Θεοῦ : that in holiness and sincerity of God (cf. chap. iv. 2). The received reading, ἁπλότητι, probably arose from the fact that while eatpet occurs four times in this Epistle, and is a specially Pauline word, ἁγιότης is rare, only occurring in the Greek Bible twice elsewhere (2 Macc. xv. 2, Heb. xii. 10), The etymology of εἰλικρινεία (see reff.)
He claims |
is uncertain; but the meaning is not doubtful. The force of the genitive τοῦ Θεοῦ is somewhat the same as in the phrase δικαιοσύνη Θεοῦ (Rom. iii. 21) ; the holiness and sincerity which St. Paul claims as characterising his conduct are Divine qualities, and in so far as they are displayed in men they are God’s gift, as he goes on to explain.—oix ἐν σοφίᾳ σαρκικῇ K.T.A.: not in fleshly wisdom, but in God’s grace, sc., which had been vouchsafed to him for the due discharge of his apostolic office (Rom. i. 5, xii. 3, xv. 15, x Cor. iii. 10, Eph. iii. 2). Especially in the Corinthian letters does St. Paul insist on this, that his power is not that of human wisdom (x Cor. ii. 4, 13, chap. x. 4). The word σαρκικός is found five times in his letters, and only twice elsewhere in N.T. It signifies that which belongs to the nature of the σάρξ of man, as contrasted with odpxwos, “made of flesh,’’ which is the stronger word (cf. iii. 3 below).—avertpadnpev ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ: did we behave ourselves in the world, sc., the heathen world (cf. 1 Cor. v. 10, Phil. ii. 15).--περισσοτέρως πρὸς ὑμᾶς: and more abundantly to you- ward, sc., perhaps because his oppor- tunities at Corinth had been greater than elsewhere of displaying the holiness and sincerity of the Christian life.
Ver. 13. οὐ yap ἄλλα K.t.A.: for we write none other things unto you than what ye read (ἀναγινώσκειν always means ‘*toread’’ in St. Paul’s Epp. and through- out the N.T.) or even acknowledge; 1.¢., there is no hidden meaning in his letters ; he means what he says, as to which doubts seem to have been prevalent at Corinth (chap. x. 10,11). The play upon words ἀναγινώσκετε . . « ἐπιγινώσκετε cannot be reproduced in English. St. Paul is fond of such paronomasia; see, 6.254 γινωσκομένη .. . ἀναγινωσκομένη, chap. iii. 2; φρονεῖν, ὑπερφρονεῖν, σω- φρονεῖν, Rom. xii. 3 ; συνκρίνω, ἀνακρίνω, t Cor. ii. 13, 14; ἐργαζόμενοι . . . περιεργαζόμενοι, 2 Thess. iii. rx; οὔ, for other illustrations 1 Cor. vii. 31, xi. 31, xii, 2, Phil. iii, 2, Eph. v. 15, and chaps
13—16.
ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYS B 43
ἐπιγνώσεσθε, 14. καθὼς καὶ ἐπέγνωτε ἡμᾶς " ἀπὸ ἢ" μέρους, Sri 105. xviii
20; Rom.
‘kavxnpa ὑμῶν ἐσμεν, καθάπερ καὶ ὑμεῖς ἡμῶν, ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τοῦ 4 25, χν.
Κυρίου ! Ἰησοῦ.3
24; y
bs ᾽ 2 15. καὶ ταύτῃ τῇ " πεποιθήσει ἐβουλόμην πρὸς * chap if. 5
s
ὑμᾶς ἐλθεῖν πρότερον," ἵνα δευτέραν χάριν" ἔχητε, τό. καὶ Lf) 1 Cape. x ὑμῶν διελθεῖν εἰς Μακεδονίαν, καὶ πάλιν ἀπὸ Μακεδονίας ἐλθεῖν Sie τ
x. 2; Eph. iii, 12; Phil. iii. 4 only.
1 Num. xx. 18; Rom. xv. 28.
1 του κυριου ἡμῶν is read by NBGMP, f, g, vg., the Bohairic and Peshitto. pov is (wrongly) omitted by ACDEKL, d, e and most cursives.
3 D*EGMP and nearly all vss. add Xpicrov after Ἰησου; om. N*ABCDbcKL
(tightly).
83 DEGKL and most vss. have ελθειν προς υμας ; but NABCMP and the Harclean
support the received order.
4 προτερον should come after εβουλομην, with nearly all the uncials; the received text follows the order of KL and the Bohairic.
5 We retain χαριν, which is found in §$*ACDEGK; but NcBLP have xapayv, which is adopted by W.H., and is mentioned in R.V. margin.
δ exynre ADEGKL; better σχήτε with S$BCP (see on ii. 3). 7 AD*GP have απελθειν ; διελθεῖν SBCDcEKL.
iv. 8, x. 12 below. ἀλλ᾽ ἤ is equivalent to “except”; cf. Job vi. 5, Isa. xlii. 19. --ἐλπίζω δὲ ὅτι «.7.A.: and I hope that
ye will acknowledge unto the end, sc.,
unto the day of the Lord’s appearing (as in τ Cor. i. 8), when the secrets of all hearts shall be revealed.
Ver. 14. καθὼς καὶ ἐπέγνωτε κ.τ.λ.: as also ye did acknowledge us in part; i.¢., some of them made this acknowledg- ment, but not all (1 Cor. τὶ ἌΣ καύχημα ὑμῶν ἐσμεν: that (not ‘ be- cause hy oeuvre κὰν glorying (cf. ν. 12); that is, the Corinthian Church was proud of its connexion with the great Apostle, and still “gloried” in him.— καθάπερ καὶ ὑμεῖς ἡμῶν κ.τιλ.: as ye also are ours, in the day of our Lord Fesus. Lest this assertion of his single- mindedness and integrity should seem to claim any undue superiority to his fellow Christians at Corinth, he hastens to add, parenthetically, with remarkable tact, that if he is their “ glory’? so are they his. He constantly thinks thus of his converts; cf., @g., Phil. ii, 16 and σ᾿ Thess. ii. 19, 20.—év τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τοῦ Κυρίου Ἰησοῦ: “Α day of the Lord,” ‘The Day of the Lord” are common ex- pressions in the prophets; cf. Isa. xiii. 6, οἱ Jer. xlvi. 10, Ezek. xxx. 3, Zech. xiv. 1, Joeli. 15, ii. 1, 11, 31 (cited Acts ii. 20), etc. And the phrase is taken up by St. Paul (x Thess. v. 2, 1 Cor. i. 8, v. 5; cf. Phil. i. το, 2 Tim. i. 12), and is applied to the Second Advent of Christ; cf. also 2 Pet. iii, το, and Matt. xxiv. 42.
Vv. 15-22. His CHANGE oF PLAN WAS not DuE To FICKLENESS. καὶ ταύτῃ τῇ πεποιθήσει ἐβουλόμην tA. : and in this confidence (sc., that they would acknow- ledge his sincerity) I was minded to come before (sc., before he went to Macedonia) unto you, that ye might have a second benefit. The circumstances seem to have been as follows. While St. Paul was at Ephesus (Acts xix.) his intention had been to cross the AZgean to Corinth, thence to visit Macedonia, and then to come back to Corinth on his way to Judza with the contributions which he had gathered (cf. 1 Cor. xvi. 3, 4). The Corinthians would thus have enjoyed a “second benefit” (cf. Rom. i. 11, xv. 29), inasmuch as he would have visited them both on his way to Macedonia, and on his return journey. This project he had communicated to them, probably in the letter which is lost (x Cor. v. 9). But he received bad news from Corinth (1 Cor. i. 11), and he wrote 1 Cor. in reply. In this letter (x Cor. xvi. 5) he incidentally mentioned that he had changed his plans, and that he now proposed to travel from Ephesus to Corinth vid Macedonia, the route which he adopted in the sequel (Acts xx. 1 ff., chap. il. 12, vii. 5). When the Corinthians heard of this, they began to reproach him with fickleness of pur- pose (chap. i. 17), and the charge came to his ears. We have his defence in the verses (15-22) before us.
Ver. 16. προπεμφθῆναι: ‘to be set forward on my journey”. The practice
44 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYS B 1.
mActsx¥.% πρὸς ὑμᾶς, καὶ ὑφ᾽ ὑμῶν ἢ προπεμφθῆναι εἰς τὴν ᾿Ιουδαίαν. 17.
xx. 38, xx
~
5; om. τοῦτο οὖν Boudeudpevos! μή τι dpa τῇ " ἐλαφρίᾳ ἐχρησάμην ; ἢ ἃ Cor. xvi. 9 βουλεύομαι, " κατὰ " σάρκα βουλεύομαι, ἵνα q παρ᾽ ἐμοὶ τὸ “ ναὶ
6, 11; Tit. iii. 13. n Here only;
lv.
7 a 2 4 ᾿ . cf ag ὑμᾶς οὖκ ἐγένετο “ vat Kat o
ναὶ καὶ τὸ οὗ οὗ; 18. πιστὸς δὲ ὁ Θεὸς, ὅτι ὁ λόγος ἡμῶν ὁ πρὸς
19. 6 γὰρ τοῦ Θεοῦ υἱὸς ᾿Ιησοῦς
o Here only Χριστὸς * ὁ ἐν ὑμῖν δι᾿ ἡμῶν " κηρυχθεὶς, δι᾿ ἐμοῦ καὶ Σιλουανοῦ καὶ
in Paul,
p John viii. 15; Rom. viii. 4, 12, 13; chaps. v. 16, x. 5, xi. 18. iii, 16.
q Mt. v. 37; Jas. v. 12. rx Tim.
1 The better reading is BovAopevos, with NABCGP, f, vg. and the Bohairic;
BovAevopevos DEK, d, e, g and the Syriac.
3 eyevero of $cDbcEKL is probably a (mistaken) correction of ἐστιν, which is read by )*ABCD*GP 17, the Latin and the Bohairic vss.
5, S$ABCP, 17 have o του Θεου yap; text follows the later authorities DEGKL.
4 Ἴη. Xp. has the support of SCBDEGKLP; but S{*AC (a strong combination) give Χρ. Ἰη. The order of words is therefore doubtful, but we prefer Xp. Ἴη. on the
whole.
of speeding fellow-Christians on their journeys, of “ seeing them off” in safety, is often mentioned in Acts, and is incul- cated more than once as a duty by St. Paul (see reff.).
Ver. 17. τοῦτο οὖν βουλόμενος κ-.τ.λ.: when therefore I was thus minded, did I shew fickleness? ‘The article τῇ before ἐλαφρίᾳ can hardly be pressed so as to convey the meaning “that fickleness
which you lay to my charge”; it is.
merely generic.—4 ἃ βουλεύομαι κ-.τ.λ.: or the things that I purpose, do I pur- pose according to the flesh, that there should be with me the Yea, yea, and the Nay, nay? That is, ‘‘Are my plans made like those of a worldly man, that they may be changed according to my own Caprice, Yes to-day, No to-morrow?” His argument is that, although the details of his original plan had been altered, yet in spirit and purpose it was unchanged; there is no room for any charge of in- consistency or fickleness. His principles of action are unchangeable, as is the Gospel which he preaches. He had pro- mised to go to Corinth, and he would go, For a similar use of the phrase κατὰ τῶν κατ see reff., and cf.chap.v.16. The reduplication val val... οὔ οὔ is not altogether easy to explain; but we have val ναὶ repeated similarly in Matt. v. 37, and perhaps we may also compare the ᾿Αμὴν, ᾿Αμήν of St. John’s Gospel (e.g., x. 1). Some critics (e.g., Steck) have regarded val val... οὔ οὔ here as an actual quotation from Matt. v. 37. But apart from the fact that this opinion rests on a quite untenable theory as to the date of this Epistle (see Introd., p. 12),
the context of the words will not lend itself to any such interpretation (see above).
Ver. 18. πιστὸς δὲ ὁ Θεὸς ὅτι κιτιλ.: but as God is faithful, our word, ete. For the construction, cf. the similar forms of asseveration ζῇ κύριος ὅτι, ‘as the Lord liveth”? (1 Sam. xx. 3, 2 Sam. ii. 27), and ἔστιν ἀλήθεια Χριστοῦ ἐν ἐμοὶ ὅτι, “45 the truth of Christ is in me’ (xi. το). For πιστός as applied to God, see Deut. vii. 9, 1 Cor. i. 9, x. 13, 1 Thess. v. 24, 2 Thess. iii. 3, 2 Tim. ti, 13, and cf. τ᾿ Sam. xv. 20.--- λόγος ἡμῶν ὁ πρὸς ὑμᾶς οὐκ ἔστιν Ναὶ καὶ Οὔ: our word (sc., my personal communications about my journey, as well as the message of the Gospel) towards you is not Yea and Nay. I donot deceive you or vacillate in my purpose: οὕ. ii. 17.
Ver. 19. He has appealed to the faithfulness of God, and this suggests the thought of the unchangeableness of Christ.—é τοῦ Θεοῦ yap vids «.T.A.: for the Son of God, Christ Fesus, who was proclaimed among you by us. The position of τοῦ Θεοῦ before γάρ (as in the true text) brings out the sequence of thought better, as it brings Θεοῦ (the connecting word) into prominence.—8v’ ἐμοῦ καὶ Σιλουανοῦ καὶ Τιμοθέου : even by me and Silvanus and Timothy. These
ree brought the Gospel to Corinth (Acts xviii. 5), and were closely associ- ated during the Apostle’s labours in that city (1 Thess. i. 1, 2 Thess. i. 1). Sil- vanus is only another form of the name Silas; he was a prophet (Acts xv. 32), and apparently, like St. Paul, a Roman citizen (Acts xvi. 37), and shared the
oni ea
ee iin ~
17—22.
ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYS B
45
Τιμοθέου, οὐκ ἐγένετο ναὶ καὶ οὔ, ἀλλὰ vai ἐν αὐτῷ γέγονεν " 20. " ppg δ τ ὅσαι γὰρ " ἐπαγγελίαι " Θεοῦ, ἐν αὐτῷ τὸ ναὶ, Kai! ἐν αὐτῷ τὸ ἀμὴν, 1. αι.
τῷ Θεῷ πρὸς δόξαν δι᾿ ἡμῶν.
21. ὁ δὲ "βεβαιῶν ἡμᾶς 2 σὺν ὑμῖν εἰς Χριστὸν, καὶ "χρίσας ἡμᾶς, Θεός "
Rom, xv. 8; 1 Cor. i. 6, 8; Col. ii. 7; cf.
22. 6% καὶ “σφραγισάμενος ii. 7: ὦ ;
ἡμᾶς, καὶ δοὺς τὸν " ἀῤῥαβῶνα τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις ἡμῶν. u Acta ἐν. δ),
Heb, i. g. Eph. i. 14.
1 και ev a
v John vi. 27; Eph. i. 13, iv. 30; Rev. vii. 3, 4.
w Gen. xxxvili. 17; chap. v.5;
DbcEKL and the Harclean; 810 και δι᾽ avrov has the stronger
support of SsABCGP 17, the Peshitto and the Bohairic. 3 C and the Harclean stand almost alone in reading vpas ovv ἡμῖν; B has vpas
συν υμιν and vpas at the end of the verse.
3 $cBCcDELO have o και σφρ.; G and the Latins have και o opp.; while
Oe an 17 and the Bohairic omit o altogether.
.H, enclose it in brackets.
Apostle’s perils during the whole of his second missionary journey (Acts xv. 40— xviii. 18). We hear of him again at Rome (1 Pet. v. 12).---ὐὐκ ἐγένετο ναὶ καὶ οὔ, ἀλλὰ ναὶ ἐν αὐτῷ γέγονεν: was not Yea and Nay, but in Him is (sc., has been and continues to be) Yea. There is no doubtfulness or vacillation in the words of Christ (Matt. vii. 29, John xii. 50); and He continually emphasised the positive and certain character of His τά by the introductory formula ᾿Αμὴν, ἀμήν. More than this, however, is involved here. Christ, who is the Object and Sum of St, Paul’s preaching, is unchangeable (Heb. xiii. 8), for He is not only ‘‘true” (Rev. iii. 7), but “the Truth”? (John xiv. 6): He is, in brief, ὁ ᾿Αμήν (Rev. iii. 14), and so it may be said that an Eternal ‘* Yea” has come into being (γέγονεν, through His incar- nate Life) in Him.
Ver. 20. ὅσαι yap ἐπαγγελίαι x.7.A. : for how many soever be the promises of God, in Him is the Yea. Not only was Christ a διάκονος περιτομῆς . . . εἰς Td βεβαιῶσαι τὰς ἐπαγγελίας τῶν πατέρων (Rom. xv. 8), but He is Himself, in His own Person, the true fulfilment and re- capitulation of them all (cf. Gal. iii. 8).— διὸ καὶ δι᾽ αὐτοῦ τὸ ᾿Αμήν k.t.A.: where- fore also through Him is the “ Amen,” to the glory of God, through us. The reading of the received text conceals the force ofthese words, It is because Christ is the consummation, the “Yea” of the Divine promises, that the ‘“*Amen” is specially fitting at the close of doxolo- {9 in public worship (1 Cor. xiv. 16).
he thought of the fulfilment of God’s
romises naturally leads to a doxolo (Rom. xv. 9), to which a solemn ’Apyy, the Hebrew form of the Greek vat, whose
Tisch. retains it before και, but
significance as applied to Christ has just been expounded, is a fitting climax. δι᾽ ἡμῶν in this clause includes, of course, both St. Paul and his correspondents; it refers, indeed, to the gency practice of Christians in their public devotions. Ver. 21. ὁ δὲ βεβαιῶν x.7.A.: now He that stablisheth us with you into Christ and anointed us is God, etc. For the form of the sentence cf. chap. v. 5. The ultimate ground of St. Paul’s steadfast- ness in Christ is God Himself; and having been led on to say this, he adds σὺν ὑμῖν, in order to introduce (as he does at every opportunity in the early part of the Epistle) the idea of unity between him and his Corinthian converts. The play on words Χριστόν .. . χρίσας is obvious; the only other place in the N.T. where the idea is found of the “anointing” of the Christian believer by God is 1 John ii, 20, 27, ὑμεῖς χρίσμα ἔχετε ἀπὸ τοῦ ἁγίου. Deissmann has pointed out (Bibel- studien, p. 104) that βεβαιόω and dppa- βών (see note below) are both technical terms belonging to the law courts (cf. Lev. xxv. 23, LXX), and that βεβαιῶν is here deliberately used rather than κυριῶν (Gal. iii. 15), or any other such word, Ver. 22. S καὶ σφρ. ἡμᾶς x.7.A.: who also sealed us (sc., all Christians), and gies us the earnest of the Spirit in our earts. The aorists, σφραγισάμενος . . - Sovs, point to acts completed at a definite moment in the past; and this can only mean the moment of baptism. This, too, is the best explanation of the parallel passages, Eph. i. 13, iv. 30. The gift of the Holy Spirit is repeatedly mentioned as consequent on baptism (Acts ii. 38, xix, 6); and the σφραγίς, or “seal” of baptism, is a common image .in early Christian literature (¢.g., [2 Clem.,] § 8,
46
x 1 Cor. vii.
ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYS B
I, 23—24.
23. ἐγὼ δὲ μάρτυρα τὸν Θεὸν ἐπικαλοῦμαι ἐπὶ τὴν ἐμὴν ψυχὴν,
; ch nik δ, δι ὅτι "φειδόμενος ὑμῶν οὐκέτι ἦλθον εἰς Κόρινθον. 24. " οὐχ ὅτι 4. : ς ᾿ ’ : y Chap. ili. *xupredopev ὑμῶν " τῆς πίστεως, ἀλλὰ συνεργοί ἐσμεν τῆς χαρᾶς ὑμῶν,
12, ἷν. ὲ 17; 2 Thess. iii. 9.
z Rom. vi. 9, 14, vii. 1, xiv. 9; 1 Tim. vi. 15.
1 G has οὐκ, which also seems to have been read by the Peshitto, Bohairic and
ἃ, e, g of the Latins.
2 DEG and the Latins give the order rns πίστεως ὑμων.
ware +++ THY σφραγῖδα ἄσπιλον). The seal” of = Church is given by St. Paul (2 Tim. ii. 19) as “The Lord knoweth them that are His” (Num. xvi. 5), and “Let every one that nameth the Name of the Lord depart from unright- eousness” (Isa. lii. 11; of. Num. xvi. 26, Isa. xxvi. 13). The ἀρραβών (see an ex- haustive note in Pearson, On the Creed, viii.), i.¢., Pay, is a first instalment, given in pledge of full payment in due course; see reff. and cf. Rom. vili. 16, τὸ πνεῦμα συνμαρτυρεῖ τῷ πνεύματι ἡμῶν ὅτι ἐσμὲν τέκνα Θεοῦ : here is the ἀπαρχή τοῦ πνεύματος (Rom. viii. 23). For the constr. διδόναι ἐν cf. Ezek. xxxvi. 26, John iii. 35, Acts iv. 12, chap. viii. 1, 16.
Ver. 23—ii. 4. THE REAL REASON OF THE POSTPONEMENT OF HIS VISIT ΤῸ CoRINTH WAS THAT HE DID NOT WISH HIS NEXT VISIT TO BE PAINFUL, AS THE LAST HAD BEEN.—Vert. 23. ἐγὼ δὲ pdp- τυρα τὸν Θεὸν ἐπικ. K.TA.: Sut (Sc, whatever my opponents may say) I invoke God as a witness against my soul, 56.» if I speak falsely; cf. Rom. i. 9, Gal. i. 20, Phil. i. 8, 1 Thess. ii. 5, 10. For ἐπί used in this way cf. εἰς μαρτύριον ἐπ᾽ αὐτούς (Luke ix. 5). The A.V. and R.V. “upon my soul” do not bring out the sense clearly. —8t. φειδόμενος ὑμῶν «.t.A.: that to spare you I came not again to Corinth, i.e., “1 paid no fresh visit,” “1 gave up the thought of coming”. The A.V., “I came not as yet,” is here quite misleading (cf. xiii. 2 and 1 Cor. iv. 21).
Ver. 24. This verse is parenthetical, and introduced to guard against mis- understanding. οὐχ ὅτι κυριεύομεν ὑμῶν τῆς πίστεως: not that we have lordship over your faith. This is not the depart- ment of his Apostolic authority (cf. Luke xxii. 25, 1 Pet. v. 3).—éAAa συνεργοί «.t-A.: but we are (only) fellow-workers in (producing) your joy; a parenthesis within a parenthesis, not necessary to the sense, but added to emphasise once more his sense of the common ties between
him and the Corinthians (cf. Rom. xvi. 3, Chap. viii. 23, Col. iv. 11).---τῇ γὰρ πίστει ἑστήκατε: for by your faith ye stand. If it were dominated by the authority of another, it would not be thus the instrument of their steadfastness. Another (inferior) interpretation is, “ As regards your faith ye stand,” #.e., “1 have no fault to find with you so far as your faith is concerned ”’; but the parallel, Rom. xi. 20, seems to fix the dative as instrumental.
CuapTeR II.—Ver.1. ἔκρινα δὲ ἐμαυ- τῷ τοῦτο κιτιλ.: but I decided this for my own sake, that I would not come again to you with sorrow ; i.e., 1 deter- mined that my next visit should not be painful, as my last was. The juxtaposi- tion of πάλιν with ἐν λύπῃ (see crit. note) requires that interpretation. Hence
the former visit in St. Paul’s mind could
not have been his first visit to Corinth (Acts xviii. 1 ff.), for that was not ἐν λύπῃ. And thus we are forced to con- clude that another visit was paid from Ephesus, of which no details have been preserved (cf. xii. 14, xiii. τὴ. The con- ditions of the scanty evidence available seem best satisfied by supposing that St. Paul’s second visit to Corinth was paid from Ephesus during the period Acts xix. 10, Alarming news had probably reached him, and he determined to make enquiries for himself. On his return to Ephesus he wrote the letter (now lost) alluded to in 1 Cor. v. 9, in which he charged the Corinthians *‘ to keep no com- pany with fornicators”’, Subsequently to this he again received distressing intelli- gence (1 Cor. i. 11, v. I, etc.), whereupon he wrote the first canonical Epistle (see Introd., p. 7).
Ver. 2. εἰ yap ἐγὼ κιτιλ.: for if I make you sorry, who then is he that makes me glad, but he whois made sorry by me? His argument is; When I make you sorry, it is that you may repent (see chap. vii. 9), and so gladden me: my change of purpose was not prompted by the desire of giving pain, but on the con.
: ;
1. 1-5. ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYS B 47
"τῇ yap "πίστει "ἑστήκατε: II. 1. "ἔκρινα δὲ ἐμαυτῷ τοῦτο, * om. x
20; cf. "τὸ μὴ πάλιν ἐλθεῖν 3 ἐν λύπῃ πρὸς ὑμᾶς. 2. εἰ γὰρ ἐγὼ λυπῶ τ ai. ὑμᾶς, καὶ τίς ἐστιν ὃ ὁ " εὐφραίνων pe, εἰ μὴ ὁ λυπούμενος ἐξ ἐμοῦ ; 2 αὶν 3. καὶ ἔγραψα ὑμῖν “ " τοῦτο ὅ “ αὐτὸ, ἵνα μὴ ἐλθὼν λύπην ® exw! ἀφ᾽ 13. ὧν ἔδει με χαίρειν - ἅ πεποιθὼς “ἐπὶ πάντας ὑμᾶς, ὅτι ἡ ἐμὴ χαρὰ το; aa
πάντων ὑμῶν ἐστιν. 4. ἐκ γὰρ πολλῆς "θλίψεως καὶ ἦ συνοχῆς - one, xt
—— ---«. gee - 2 — - ἌΣ lo Sa ΝΡ. Ψ,. “ 2) SE " == eS oe ree =
6 ; καρδίας ἔγραψα ὑμῖν διὰ πολλῶν δακρύων, οὐχ ἵνα λυπηθῆτε, ἀλλὰ vii. 11.
τὴν ὃ ἀγάπην ἵνα γνῶτε ἣν ἔχω περισσοτέρως εἰς " ὑμᾶς.
2 Thess. im. 2 e Refi. i. » 3:
5. Εἰ δέ τις λελύπηκεν, οὐκ ἐμὲ λελύπηκεν, ἀλλ᾽ " ἀπὸ " μέρους, f Job xxx.
χχὶ.25. g Reff. i. 14.
1B 17, the Bohairic and Harclean have yap; D* has ve; all other authorities Se.
2s8ABCKLOP place ελθειν after υμας ; DEG and the Peshitto read ελθεὶιν προς vpas, and the Bohairic has to py ελθειν προς υμας εν λυπῃ (omitting παλιν). The received order is found in a few cursives only.
3 SscDEGKLOP, etc., give ἐστιν; om. $§*ABC and the Bohairic. 4 secCcDEGKL, the Syriac and (most) Latin vss. have vpty, which is omitted by
S$*ABC*OP 17 and the Bohairic.
5 CO give avto rovro (cf. vii. 11); A and the Bohairic omit avro. 6 DEG and a few other authorities have λυπὴν em: λυπὴν (from a reminiscence of
Phil. ii. 27).
7 exw NWcDEGKL ; better σχω, $*ABOP (see on i. 15).
8 G has wa γνωτε THY ἀγάπην.
trary by my fear that, if I visited you as I had intended, you would sadden me: I should have had to grieve, and be grieved by those who are the source of my purest joy. With the introductory καὶ tis, “Who then,” the implied answer being ‘* No one,” cf. Mark x. 26, καὶ τίς δύναται σωθῆναι, and chap. ii. 16.
Ver. 3. Kal ἔγραψα τοῦτο αὐτὸ : and I wrote this very thing ; i.e., 1 communi- cated my change of plan (1 Cor. xvi. 5 ff.). So ἔκρινα τοῦτο in ver. 1. (The translation ‘‘ just for this reason,” taking τοῦτο αὐτό adverbially, is also admis- sible; cf, 2 Pet. i. 5).—tva μὴ ἐλθὼν λύπην «.t.A.: lest when I came I should have sorrow from them from whom I ought to rejoice. ἀφ᾽ ὧν is for ar ἐκείνων ad’ ὧν; cf. τ Pet. ii. 12, iii. 16.— πεποιθὼς ἐπὶ πάντας ὑμᾶς K.T.A.: hav- ing confidence in you all, that my joy is the joy of you all; i.e., having confidence in the perfect sympathy between himself and his correspondents. He could only be made glad if they were made glad;
‘and so to visit them for the purpose of
rebuking them would be as painful to him as to them. Observe the repeated πάντας ... πάντων : despite the factions in Corinth (x Cor. iii. 4) he must think of them all as his friends (cf. xiii. 13).
9 G has προς vpas.
Ver. 4. ἐκ yap πολλῆς θλίψεως x.7.X. : for out of much affliction and anguish of heart I wrote to you with many tears. This describes the state of mind in which he wrote 1 Cor., if the view of the situa- tion which has been adopted in this com- mentary be correct (see Introd., p. 13).— διὰ πολλῶν δακρύων : we have διά used, somewhat similarly, with the genitive of the attendant circumstances, in Rom. ii. 27, iv. II, viii. 25, xiv. 20, chap. v. 7, Heb. xii. 1, Rev. xxi. 24, etc.—odx ἵνα λυπη- θῆτε κιτ.λ.: not that ye should be made sorry, but that ye should know the love which I have so abundantly to you, ἀγάπη, as a grace especially to be ex- hibited in Christian intercourse, is re- peatedly dwelt on by St. Paul. The word has been described as ‘“ ecclesi- astical ᾿" and as having been first intro- duced to literature in the LXX. But it has been recently found in papyri of the Ptolemaic period (Deissmann, Bibel- studien, p. 81), and it thus appears that the LXX only took over a word already current in the speech of Greek Egypt. Here the position of ἀγάπην before ἵνα gives it special emphasis; c/., for a like order, Acts xix. 4, Rom. xi. 31. περισ- σοτέρως may mean ‘more abundantly,” sc., than to other Churches; but it is
48 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYS B It.
be These ἵνα ph " ἐπιβαρῶ πάντας ὑμᾶς. 6. 'ἱκανὸν τῷ ἢ τοιούτῳ ἡ ' ἐπιτιμία Thess. iii αὕτη ἡ ὑπὸ "τῶν " πλειόνων - 7. ὥστε Ἀ τοὐναντίον μᾶλλον ' ὑμᾶς
8 only.
ag Sree er 5 χαρίσασθαι καὶ παρακαλέσαι, μήπως τῇ περισσοτέρᾳ λύπῃ " κατα- ἢ τὸ fil. ποθῇ ὁ τοιοῦτος. 8. διὸ παρακαλῶ ὑμᾶς “ κυρῶσαι εἰς αὐτὸν ἀγάπην.
2s t= 2. k 1 Cor.v. 5;
g. εἰς τοῦτο yap καὶ ἔγραψα,; ἵνα γνῶ τὴν " δοκιμὴν ὑμῶν, εἰ * εἰς
chaps. x. 11, xi. 13. I Wied, ΕΝ. τὸ only οἱ 6 Mar. 9 7 m 1 Cor. ix. 19, x. 5, xv. 6; chaps. 3 Ma
iv. 15,ix.2; Phili.rgy, on Gal ii. 7; 1
et. iii. 9 only;
ce. iii, 22. ο Chaps. ii. 10, xii. 13; q Gal. itt
Eph. iv. 32; Col. ii. 13, iii. 13; Lk. 42. px Cor. xv. 54 (Isa. xxv. 8); chap. v.
15; Gen. xxiii. 20; Lev. xxv.g0. f
Rom. v. 4; chaps. viii. 2, ix. 13, xili. 3; hil. ἢ μὰ δῶν
1 AB and the Peshitto (which W.H. follow here) omit μαλλον, but it is found in all other authorities; DEG 17 place it after vpas.
3 G inserts vpev (vobis, f, g, and so the Bohairic) after eypawa.
8 6, g prefix πάντων to upev.
4 AB 17 have 9, which W.H. place in their margin; almost all other authorities
have εἰ.
quite legitimate to take it as used without any special comparative force (cf. x. 8).
Vv. 5-11. THE OFFENDER HAS BEEN SUFFICIENTLY PUNISHED: THE APOSTLE ACQUIESCES IN THEIR REMISSION OF THE PENALTY OF 1 Cor. v. 1-5.—Ver. 5. εἰ δέ τις λελύπηκεν K.T.A.: but if any one, 50.» the incestuous person of 1 Cor. v. 1, his name being suppressed with a rare deli- cacy of feeling, hath caused sorrow, he hath caused sorrow, not to me, sc.,1 am not the person directly aggrieved, but to some extent (that I press not too heavily on him) to you all. That is to say to the words ἀπὸ μέρους are added by the Apostle ἵνα μὴ ἐπιβαρῶ (sc., αὐτόν). The sentence has been otherwise con- strued “he hath not caused sorrow to me [alone], but [only] in part [having caused sorrow to you also]: [this I add] that I may not press heavily on you all,” sc., by representing myself as the only person aggrieved. But this would re- me εἰ μή instead of ἀλλά, and, further,
oes not suit the context so well as the rendering given above, which treats tva μὴ ἐπιβαρῶ as parenthetic.
Ver. 6. ἱκανὸν τῷ τοιούτῳ κ.τιλ.: sufficient to such an one (the word used in 1 Cor. v. 5 to indicate the offender is this punishment (which was in ‘cto by the majority. The directions given by the Apostle for dealing with the offender had probably been carried out with harsh- ness and severity ; he now suggests that the punishment might be remitted, and the guilty man forgiven, ἐπιτιμία in the Attic orators is used for “" the possession of political rights,” but it came to mean (see reff.) penalty or requital ; the punish- ment (see 1 Cor. v. 5) would seem to have been of a disciplinary, and not merely punitive, character; it was pro-
bably like the formal excommunication of a later age (cf. also 1 Tim. i. 20), and involved the exclusion of the guilty person from the privileges of the Christian Society. That it was inflicted only by “ the majority ” (for so we must translate τῶν πλειόνων ; see reff.) is sufficiently accounted for by remembering the pre- sence of an anti-Pauline party at Corinth, who would not be likely to follow the Apostle’s instructions. The construction ἱκανὸν . . . ἡ ἐπιτιμία (ἐστι, rather than ἔστω, is the verb to be supplied) affords an instance of a neuter adjectival pre- dicate set over against a feminine subject (cf. Matt. vi. 34); ἱκανὸν seems to be used here like the Latin satis.
Ver. 7. ὥστε τοὐναντίον μᾶλλον κιτιλ.: so that contrariwise ye should rather forgive him and comfort him (cf., for the sentiment, Ecclus. viii. 5, Col. iii. 13, Eph. iv. 32). We should expect some verb like δεῖν, but it is perhaps sufficiently suggested by ὥστε. χαρίζεσθαι is gene- rally found in the N.T. in the sense of ‘¢ to bestow a favour”; but it conveys the special meaning ‘to forgive”’ in the pas- sages referred to above.—pyjrws τῇ περ- vocotépg λύπῃ K.T-A.: lest such an one should be swallowed up with his excessive sorrow, sc., should be driven to despaiz through overmuch severity. Again (see on ver. 4 above) we are not to press the comparative force of περισσοτέρᾳ.
Ver. 8. διὸ aie γ ὑμᾶς «TA. : wherefore I beseech you (or ‘‘exhort you,” see on i. 4) to confirm your love toward him. Authority “to bind” and “to loose” had been committed to the Apostles (Matt. xviii. 18); St. Paul had exercised the former function (1 Cor. v. 5), and he now discharges the latter. The various meanings of παρακαλεῖν
6—12. ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYS B
49
10. ᾧ δέ τι ᾿ χαρίζεσθε, καὶ ἐγώ καὶ γὰρ" ἀφ phil ii. 8 only. Reff. ii. 7.
11. ἵνα μὴ “ πλεονεκτηθῶμεν ὑπὸ τοῦ “ Σατανᾶ " οὐ γὰρ αὐτοῦ τὰ ἡ Cape: vil *vonpata ἀγνοοῦμεν. 2, xii. 17, 12. Ἐλθὼν δὲ εἰς τὴν Τρωάδα εἰς 2 τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τοῦ Χριστοῦ, καὶ Thess. iv.
18; 1 Ζ on Υ. w Rom. xvi. 20; 1 Cor. v. 5, vii. 5; ort xi. 14, xii. 7; 1 Thess. ii. 18; 2 Thess. ii. 9; τ Tim. i. 20, v. 15. x Chaps. iii. 14, iv. 4, x. 5, xi. 3; Phil. iv. 7 only; Bar. ii. 8; 3 Macc. v. 30.
πάντα " ὑπήκοοί ἐστε. ἐγὼ εἴ! τι κεχάρισμαι, ᾧ κεχάρισμαι, δι᾿ ὑμᾶς, ἐν “προσώπῳ Χριστοῦ, |
1 The better reading is καὶ yap eyw o κεχαρ. εἰ τι κεχαρ.» with SABCGO, etc. ; received text DbKL 17, the Harclean, etc.
2G and the Latin vss. have δια το evayyeAtov; DE δια τον evayyeAtov.
have been noted above (on i. 4); it is interesting to observe here how the word is used in one sense in ver. 7, and in another in close sequence in ver. 8 (cf. the two senses of παραδίδωμι in 1 Cor. xi. 23). For ἀγάπη see on ver. 4 above.
Ver. 9. εἰς τοῦτο yap K.t.A.: for to this end also did I write, viz., that I might know the proof of you, whether ye were obedient in all things; i.e., his object in writing the former letter (1 Cor.) was not only the reformation of the offender, but the testing of the Cor- inthians’ acceptance of his apostolic authority (cf. vii. 12). For the constr. εἰς τοῦτο yap... iva... cf. Rom. xiv.9. It is hard to decide between the readings el, ‘‘ whether,” or ἦν ‘“ where- by” (see crit. note); but the general sense is the same in both cases. A com- parison of this verse with vii. 12 has led some critics to doubt whether chaps. ii. and vii. really refer at all to the offender of 1 Cor. v. 1; for the expressed object of St. Paul’s communication was to prove the loyalty of the Corinthians to himself. And thus it is supposed that the indi- vidual in view is some bitter personal opponent of St. Paul (see Tertullian, de Pudic. xiii. f.). But vv. 5-9 seem quite consecutive, and we find it more natural to interpret ver. 5 in reference to 1 Cor. v. 1 ff. And vii. 12 seems clearly to dis- tinguish 6 ἀδικηθείς from St. Paul him- self (see Introd., p. 15).
Ver. το. ᾧ δέ τι χαρίζεσθε x.7.X.: but to whom ye forgive anything, I for-
ive also; for what I also have forgiven Gf I have forgiven anything) for your sakes have I forgiven it in the face of Christ. This is not a general principle, but a statement of the Apostle’s feelings at the present juncture ; if they are willing to forgive the offender, so is he. Whether he advocates punishment or forgiveness it is always δι᾽ ὑμᾶς, ‘for your sakes,” and it is ἐν προσώπῳ Χριστοῦ, “in the sight
VOL, III.
of Christ”. “τρόσωπον (see on i. 11) is a face,” and so ἐν προσ. Xp. is a stronger way of saying ἐνώπιον Χριστοῦ (cf. chap. iv. 2, viii. 21, Gal. i, 20); the Apostle claims that his acts of condemnation and forgiveness are done as “in the presence of Christ”. Both A.V. and R.V. render ‘tin the person of Christ,” which would mean that St. Paul had acted as Christ’s delegate. But the usage of πρόσωπον in 2 Cor. is against this interpretation.
Ver. 11. ἵνα μὴ πλεονεκτηθῶμεν «.7.A. : lest we, sc., you and I together, be robbed by Satan; i.e., lest we drive sinners to despair and so let Satan capture them from us. ‘“ The offender was to be delivered over τῷ Σατανᾷ εἰς ὄλεθρον τῆς σαρκός (1 Cor. v. 5)—care must be taken lest we πλεονεκτηθῶμεν ὑπὸ τοῦ Σατανᾶ, and his soul perish likewise ’’ (Alford). Observe that in St. Paul’s writings (except chap. xii. 7; see reff.) Σατανᾶς takes the article, ‘the Satan,’”’ the adversary; it has not yet come to be regularly used as a proper name (but cf. Matt. iv. το, Mark ili. 23). —ot γὰρ αὐτοῦ x.7.A.: for we are not ignorant of his devices. νόημα ‘uae reff.) is generally (always in this Ep.) used in a bad sense, of the thoughts of man’s unregenerate heart. Here τὰ νοήματα are the designs of the adversary of souls.
Vv. 12-17. HE WAS DISAPPOINTED AT NOT MEETING TITUS IN TROAS, BUT HE REJOICES NOW TO LEARN THAT HIS MESSAGE OF REPROOF HAS BEEN LOYALLY RECEIVED IN CORINTH.—Ver. 12. ἐλθὼν δέ κιτιλ.:; but (the particle δέ marki the resumption of his original subject) when I came to Troas, for the purposes of the Gospel of Christ (cf. ix. 13). He stayed there seven days preaching and teaching on his return from Greece (Acts xx. 6-12). We are not to press the article and translate “the Troad”; cf. Acts xx. 5, 6, where we have ἐν Τρῳάδ, and εἰς τὴν Τρῳάδα used of the same
ζο
y 1 Cor. xvi. 9; Col. iv.
: Rev. fi. δ: of.
Isa. xlv.1.” ἀποταξάμενος αὐτοῖς, ἐξῆλθον εἰς Μακεδονίαν.
z Rom, xvi
ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYS B
Il.
θύρας μοι " ἀνεῳγμένης "ἐν "Κυρίῳ, 13. οὐκ ἔσχηκα " ἄνεσιν τῷ πνεύματί μου, τῷ μὴ εὑρεῖν 2 με Τίτον τὸν ἀδελφόν μου - ἀλλὰ
14. “ τῷ δὲ " Θεῷ
12; 1Cor.*ydpig τῷ πάντοτε “θριαμβεύοντι ἡμᾶς év*® τῷ Χριστῷ, καὶ τὴν
ἔχ, τ; Eph ii. 21. a Acts xxiv.
“ὀσμὴν τῆς γνώσεως αὐτοῦ ἦ φανεροῦντι δι’ ἡμῶν ἐν παντὶ τόπῳ.
;chaps. 15. ὅτι Χριστοῦ " εὐωδία ἐσμὲν τῷ * Θεῷ ἐν τοῖς " σωζομένοις καὶ ἐν
i, 5, vii 13; 2 Thess. i. 7 only. vi. δὰ vii. 25:1 Cor. xv. 57; chaps. viii. 16, ix. 15.
Phil. iv. 18 (Gen. viii. 21; Lev. i. 9) only; cf. Cant. i. 3. g Acts ii. 47; 1 Cor. i. 18, xv. 2; 1 Pet. iii. 21.
xi. 6.
b Mk. vi. 46; Lk. ix. 61, xiv. 353: Acts xviii. 18, 21 only. ο
ς Rom. vi. e John xii. 3; Eph. v. 2;
d Col. ii. | bee f Chaps. iii. 3, iv. 10, 11, V. 10, I1, Vii. 18,
1 Most authorities have τῳ py εὑρεῖν; to LP; tov ΟΞ 73; ev τῳ DE 17.
3 ευρισκειν D*.
lace in consecutive verses. Troas would
a natural place of rendezvous, as it was the point of embarkation for Mace- donia (see Acts xvi. 8); and here St. Paul had expected to meet Titus, who had been sent from Ephesus to Corinth, with an unnamed companion, as the bearer of 1 Cor. om mgt P. phe θύρας μοι ἀνεῳγμένης ἐν Κυρίῳ: and a ον oa opened Yor me in the Lord. This is not the “ door of faith” (Acts xiv. 27), but the door of opportunity at Troas (see reff. above), which he describes here as *‘opened,” a phrase which he had used a short time before of his prospects of usefulness at Ephesus (1 Cor. xvi. 9). It is open ἐν Κυρίῳ; that is the sphere, as it were, of his apostolic labours (see reff.).
Ver. 13. οὐκ ἔσχηκα ἄνεσιν τῷ πν.: I had no relief for my spirit. So he Says again (vil. 5) ἐλθόντων ἡμῶν eis Μακεδονίαν οὐδεμίαν ἔσχηκεν ἄνεσιν ἧ σὰρξ ἡμῶν. We are not to lay much stress on πνεῦμα being used here and σάρξ there (yet cf. chap. vii. 1); σάρξ in the later passage is used of the whole mortal nature of man, which is subject to distress and disappointment; and πνεῦμα here is a general term for the “mind” (cf. Rom. i. 9, viii. 6, xii. rz, x Cor. ii. 11, v. 3, xiv. 14, chap. vii. 1, 13, etc., for St. Paul’s use of πνεῦμα for the human spirit, and see on iii. 6 below). For the tense of ἔσχηκα, see on i. 9.— τῷ μὴ ἐὑρεῖν «.t.A.: because I found not Titus my brother: but taking my leave of them (sc., the disciples at Troas) I went forth into Macedonia, ἐξέρχεσθαι is the word used in Acts xvi. 10, xx. 1 of “ going out” of Asia to Macedonia; cf. vili. 17.
Ver. 14. τῷ δὲ Θεῷ ts K.T.A.: διέ thanks be to God, Pig Toetead of giving details of the information which Titus
8 17, 37, 73 have ev Χριστῳ Ἴησου.
4 K omits τῳ Seg.
brought to him in Macedonia (chap. vii. 6), he bursts out into a characteristic doxology, which leads him into a long digression, the main topic of the Epistle not coming into view again until vi. 11.— τῷ πάντοτε θριαμβεύοντι: who always, sc., even in times of anxiety and distress, leadeth usin triumph in Christ. θριαμ- βεύειν, ‘to lead as captive in a triumphal procession,” occurs again in this sense Col. ii. 15. The rendering of the A.V., “‘which causeth us to triumph,” though yielding a good sense here (and despite the causative force of verbs in -eve), must be abandoned, as no clear instance of θριαμβεύειν in such a signification has been produced. The splendid image before the writer’s mind is that of a Roman triumph, which, though he had never seen it, must have been familiar to him as it was to every citizen of the Empire. He thinks of God as the Victor (Rev. vi. 2) entering the City into which the glory and honour of the nations (Rev. xxi. 26) is brought; the Apostle as ‘in Christ”—as a member of the Body of Christ—is one of the captives, by means of whom the knowledge and fame of the Victor is made manifest. He rejoices that he has been so used by God, as would appear from the tidin which Titus has brought him.—r«at τὴν ὀσμὴν τῆς γνώσεως x«.t.A.: and maketh manifest through us the savour of the knowledge of Him (sc., of Christ) in every place, sc., at Corinth as as in Troas and Macedonia. It is possible that the metaphor of the ὀσμή is suggested by and is part of that of the triumph; ¢.g., Plutarch (Zimil, Paul. c. 32) says that the temples were “full of fumigations” during the passage of the procession, But ἢ εὐωδίας is a frequent LXX phrase (see reff.).
Ver. 15. ὅτι Xp. εὐωδία κιτιλι; for
13--- 17.
ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥΣ Β
51
τοῖς * ἀπολλυμένοις " 16. οἷς μὲν ὀσμὴ | θανάτου 2 εἰς θάνατον, οἷς ®t Cor. i.
δὲ ὀσμὴ ῖ ζωῆς 3 εἰς ζωήν, καὶ πρὸς ταῦτα τίς ᾿ἱκανός; 17. οὐ γάρ ἐσμεν, ὡς οἱ 3 * πολλοὶ ᾿ καπηλεύοντες τὸν λόγον τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἀλλ᾽ ὡς “
18; Chap. iv. 3; 2 Thess. ii. 10, etc.
i Reff. ver. 6,
ἐξ ™eiduxpwvetas, ἀλλ᾽ ὃ ὡς ἐκ Θεοῦ, κατενώπιον δ tod’ Θεοῦ, * ἐν k Romy. 15,
" Χριστῷ λαλοῦμεν.
1 Here only.
1 oopny DE.
19, xii. 5; 1 Cor. x.
17, 33. m κοί i. 12. n Rom. ix. 1; clap aL 19.
θανατου . . . ζωης DEGKL, etc.; better εκ θανατον . . . ex ζωης SABC 17
and the Bohairic.
3 o. λοιποι DEGL, g and the Syriac vss.; better, as in text, οἱ πολλοι, with
NABCK, d, e, f, vg. and the Bohairic.
4G, the Latin and Bohairic vss. omit the second ws. 5 6, d, e, f, g and the Harclean omit the second aA’, δ SScDEGKL have xarevwmiov; better κατέναντι (cf. Rom. iv. 17 and chap. xii. 19)
with s¢*ABCP 17.
7 S¢cDbcEGKLP give τον Θεου; better om. του with *ABCD* (cf. xii. 19).
we are a sweet savour of Christ unto God. Not only “through us” is the ὀσμή made manifest; we ourselves in so far as we realise and manifest our mem- bership of Christ are, in fact, that εὐωδία. The influence of the lives of the saints is sweet and penetrative, like that of in- cense. From this verse comes the phrase **the odour of sanctity ’.—év τοῖς σωζο-
ένοις καὶ κιτ.λ.: among them that are eing saved and among them that are perishing. It is difficult to understand why the American Committee of Revisers objected to this rendering, and translated “are saved... perish”. The force of the present participles ought not to be overlooked (see reff.) ; men in this world are either in the way of life or the way of death, but their final destiny is not to be spoken of as fixed and irrevocable while they are in the flesh. Free will involves the possibility alike of falling away from a state of grace, or of repent- ance from a state of sin. But for men of either class is a Christian life lived in their midst, a εὐωδία Χριστοῦ.
Ver. 16. οἷς μὲν ὀσμὴ «.t.A.: to the one a savour from death unto death ; to the other a savour from life unto life ; _ and yet it is the same ὀσμή in both cases; cf. Luke ii. 34. ἐκ θανάτου εἰς θάνατον may be illustrated by Rom. i. 17, ἐκ πίστεως εἰς πίστιν (sce also chap. iii. 18); emphasis is gained, according to the Hebrew idiom, by repeating the important word. The Rabbinical parallels given by Wetstein and others show that the meta- phor of this verse was common among Jewish writers’ they called the Law an
s
aroma vitae to the good, but an aroma mortis to the evil.—xal πρὸς ταῦτα τίς ἱκανός: who then is sufficient for these things ? sc., to fill such a part as has been just described (for nal... τίς see on ver. 2 above). St. Paul’s answer is not fully expressed, but the sequence of thought is this: “it might be thought that no one is sufficient for such a task; and yet we are, for we are not as the many,” etc.; an answer which he is care- ful to explain and qualify in ver. 5 of the next chapter, lest he should be accused of undue confidence.
Ver, 17. οὐ γάρ ἐσμεν ὡς x.T.A.: for we are not as the many, viz., the ordinary teachers with whom you meet. The indirect reference is to his opponents at Corinth, though they are not named. At least he is more worthy to fill the high office of which he has been speaking than many who would be only too glad to usurp his authority; cf. chap. iv. 2, 1 Thess. ii. 3, 5 for similar comparisons.— καπηλεύοντες τὸν λόγον τοῦ Θεοῦ: who adulterate the word of God, i.e., the Divine message as revealed in the Gospel (the usual sense in the N.T. of ὁ λόγος τοῦ Θεοῦ; cf. iv. 2 and 2 Tim. ii. 15). κάπηλος (Ecclus. xxvi. 29) is “ta huck- ster,’ and is used in Isa. i. 22 of one who adulterates wine; so the primary sense of καπηλεύειν is “to make merchandise of” (R.V. margin), which readily passed into “to corrupt” or “‘adulterate” for the purposes of trade.— GAN ὡς ἐξ εἶλι- κρινείας «.1.A.: but as of sincerity (our subjective attitude of mind), but as of God (the objective source of our message
52 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOY= B Ἔν fae «Chaps. vy. TTT. 1. "APXOMEOA πάλιν "ἑαυτοὺς" συνιστάνειν; et? μὴ χργζομεν, 185 ¢f- ὥς ὃ τινες, "συστατικῶν ἐπιστολῶν πρὸς ὑμᾶς, ἢ ἐξ ὑμῶν συστατικῶν; awa $, ἡ ἐπιστολὴ ἡμῶν ὑμεῖς ἐστε, “eyyeypappérm ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις
vii. 11.
bHere only. ἡμῶν,δ γινωσκομένη καὶ ἀναγινωσκομένη ὑπὸ πάντων ἀνθρώπων"
c Ver. 3;
Lk. x20 3. “havepodperot ὅτι ἐστὲ ἐπιστολὴ Χριστοῦ διακονηθεῖσα ὑφ᾽ ἡμῶν,
only; 1
Mace. xiii. ἐγγεγραμμένη © οὐ μέλανι, ἀλλὰ Πνεύματι * Θεοῦ " ζῶντος, οὐκ ἐν ἃ Rett. ii. x4. ᾿ πλαξὶ “λιθίναις, ἀλλὰ ἐν " πλαξὶ " καρδίας ἴ ™! σαρκίναις.
6 Deut. v.
26: Acts xiv. 15; Rom. ix. 26; chap. vi. 16; ile gu i.g; 1 Tim. iii. 15, en
Deut. iv. 13, etc g Heb. ix. 4 only.
1; Heb. 16 only.
f Exod. xxxi. 18;
xi. 19, xxxvi. 26. Rom. vii. 14; 1 Cor. iii.
1 BD* 17 have συνισταν ; FG συνισταναι; all other authorities συνιστανειν. 2 εἰ μη AKLP; better ἡ μη with $$BCDEG and the primary vss,
5 AD* have wowrep.
« D*EGKLP, d, e, g and the Syriac have συστατικων (G, g add επιστολων) ; better om. with S$ABC 17 and the Bohairic.
5 $8 17 have καρδιαις υμων.
6 B 67**, f, vg. have καὶ eyyeyp.
7 FK and most vss. support καρδιας ; better καρδιαῖς with SABCDEGLP and the Harclean. W.H. suggest that the second πλαξι was introduced through a
primitive clerical error.
and of our commission to speak), in the sight of God (sc., in the consciousness of His presence ; cf. ver. 10 above), speak we in Christ, sc., as members of Christ's Body, in fellowship with Him. This solemn and impressive confirmation of what has been said is repeated, chap. xii. 19, κατέναντι Θεοῦ ἐν Χριστῷ λαλοῦμεν.
CuaPTerR III.—Vv. 1-3. THE Cor- INTHIANS ARE 51. PAUL’s “ EPISTLE OF COMMENDATION ”.—Ver. I. ἀρχόμεθα πάλιν ἑαυτοὺς συνιστ. : are we beginning again (sc., as, for instance, in 1 Cor. ix. 15, xiv. 18, xv. 10, or possibly he alludes to i. 12 above; cf. chap. v. 12, x. 18 below) to commend ourselves ? His oppo- nents seem to have made this charge, which he is careful to repudiate again (x. 12; cf. xii, 11) The phrase éavrov συνιστάνειν (or συνιστάναι, for both forms occur) is found four times in this Epistle (see reff.), and always in a bad sense, the prominent place of éavrév sig- nifying that there has been undue egotism; on the other hand, συνιστάνειν ἑαυτὸν, which occurs three times (see reff.), is always used in a good sense, of that legi- timate commendation of himself and his message which every faithful minister will adopt. Neither form occurs elsewhere in the N.T. (unless Gal, ii, 18, παραβάτην ἐμαυτὸν συνιστάνω, be regarded as an exception).— ph χρήζομεν «.7.A.: or do we need, as some do (i,é., the ot πολλοί of ii. 17; τινες is his usual vague descrip- tion of opponents; see 1 Cor, iv. 18,
xv. 12, chap. x. 2, Gal. i. 7, x Tim. i. 3, 19), epistles of commendation to you or
from you? Greek teachers used to give
ἐπιστολαὶ συστατικαί (Diogenes Laert., viii. 87) ; for such commendatory mention cf. Acts xv. 25 (of Judas and Silas to the Church at Antioch), Acts xviii. 27 (ot Apollos to the Church at Corinth), Rom. xvi. I (of Phoebe to the Churchat Rome), chap. viii. 16-24 (of Titus and his com- panions to the Church at Corinth); cf. also 1 Cor. xvi. 3. St. Paul scouts the idea that he, who first brought the Gospel to Corinth, should need to present formal credentials to the Corinthian Church; and it would be equally anomalous that he should seek recommendations from them (ἐξ ὑμῶν). He has testimonies to his character and office far superior to any that could be written on papyrus. These can be pointed to if any object that his Apostolic office was self-assumed, and that he delivers the Gospel message in his own way and on his own authority (Gal. i. 12).
Ver. 2. ἡἧ ἐπιστολὴ ἡμῶν «7A. ὁ δι are our epistle. They are his credentials. o 1 Cor, ix. 2, where he tells them that
ey are the “seal” of his apostleship. Note the emphasis laid on ἐπιστολή by its
osition in the sentence.—éyyeypappévy ταῖς καρδίαις ἡμῶν : written in our hearts, i.¢., in the heart of me, Paul (cf. vii. 3); a somewhat unexpected, and, as it were, parenthetic application of the metaphor, suggested by the memory of
΄
eS ee δον Δ
ee er,
a. le
1—6.
ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYS B
53
k Reff. i. 15.
4. " Πεποΐθησιν δὲ τοιαύτην exopev* διὰ τοῦ Χριστοῦ πρὸς τὸν FG tS Θεόν" 5. οὐχ ὅτι ᾿ἱκανοί ἐσμεν ἀφ᾽ 2 ἑαυτῶν λογίσασθαί ὃ τι,’ ὡς ὅ τὰ Here
only.
ἐξ ἑαυτῶν, ἀλλ᾽ ἡ ™ixavdrns ἡμῶν ἐκ τοῦ Θεοῦ, 6. ὃς καὶ "ἱκάνωσεν 2 Col. i. 12 ἡμᾶς " διακόνους ἢ καινῆς " διαθήκης, οὐ *ypdpparos,’ ἀλλὰ * πνεύ- ο C/. Eph.
p Mt. xxvi. 28; Lk. xxii. 20; 1 Cor. xi. 25; Heb. viii. 8 (Jer. xxxi. 31), ix. 15.
1 Α has εχω.
ili. 7; Col. i. 23. q Rom. ii. 29, vii. 6.
2 adh eavtwv is placed as in text by KL and the Harclean, and after λογισασθαι τι by ADEGP and the Latins; its true place is before uxavor ἐσμεν with Ὁ ΒΟ 73 and the Bohairic; 17 and the Peshitto omit ad’ εαυτων altogether,
3 CDEG give λογιΐζεσθαι for λογισασθαι of HABKLP. 4B om. τι ; P has the order τι AoyiLeo Gar.
5 C om. ὡς as unnecessary for the sense.
6 αὐτων BG for εαντων.
717 has ov γραμματι adAa πνευματι, which the Latin vss. follow.
his labours among them which had left fi
an indelible impression upon his heart.— γινωσκ. καὶ ἀναγινωσκ. «.T.A.: known and read of all men, This is the legiti- mate application of the metaphor, and is expanded in the next verse. The letter written on St. Paul’s heart was not open to the world; but the letter written on the heart of the Corinthians by Christ through St. Paul’s ministry was patent to the world’s observation, as it was re- flected in their Christian mode of life. Facts speak louder than words. For the jingle yweoKo +++ ἀναγινωσκομένη cf. Acts viii. 30, Reig ὃ ἀναγινώσ- κεις, and see the note on i. 13 above.
Ver. 3. φανερούμενοι ὅτι ἐστὲ κ.τ.λ.: being made manifest that ye are an epistle of Christ (sc., written by Christ), minis- tered by us (the Apostle conceiving of himself as his Master’s amanuensis).— ἐγγεγραμμένη οὐ μέλανι κ-.τ.λ.: written not with ink, but with the Spirit o the living God ; not in tables of stone but in tables that are hearts of flesh. This “writing”? which the Corinthians ex- hibit is no writing with ink on a papyrus roll, but is the mystical imprint of the Divine Spirit in their hearts, conveyed through Paul’s ministrations; cf. Jer. Xxxi. 33, Prov. vii.3. And this leads him to think of the ancient ‘‘ writing” of the Law by the “finger of God” on the Twelve Tables, and to contrast it with this epistle of Christ on tables that are not of stone but are “ hearts of flesh” (see reff.). For σάρκινος (cf. λίθινος, ὀστράκινος) see on i. 12 above.
Vv. 4-6. Hts success IN THE MINIs- TRY OF THE NEw COVENANT IS ALTO- GETHER DUE TO Gop.—Ver. 4. πεποί- θησιν δὲ τοιαύτην K.7.A.: and such con-
dence have we through Christ towards God (cf. Rom. iv. 2, v. 1 for a like use of πρὸς Tov Θεόν). That is ‘we are suffi- cient for these things”’ (see ii. 16, 17); but he hastens to explain the true source of his confidence.
Ver. 5. ὅτι ἱκανοί «.7.A.: not that we are sufficient of ourselves to judge anything as from ourselves ; sc., to judge rightly of the methods to be followed in the discharge of the Apostolic ministry ; there is no thought here of the natural depravity of man, or the like. For the constr. οὐχ ὅτι . .- cf. i. 24 and reff. λογίζεσθαι is here used in its widest sense of carrying on any of the ordinary processes of reasoning (cf. x. 7, xii. 6). The repetition ἀφ᾽ ἑαυτῶν . .. ἐξ ἑαυτῶν emphasises the statement of the need of God’s grace. St. Paul’s habit of dwell- ing on a word and coming back to it again and again (an artifice which the Latin rhetoricians called traductio) is well illustrated in this passage. We have ἱκανοί, ἱκανότης, ἱκάνωσεν ; ypap-
a (following ἐγγεγραμμένη in ver. 2) ; ιακονηθεῖσα, διάκονος, διακονία ; and δόξα eight times between vv. 7-11. With the sentiment 4 ἱκανότης ἡμῶν ἐκ τοῦ Θεοῦ, cf. 1 Cor. xv. 10 and chap. xii. 9.
Ver. 6. ὃς καὶ ἱκάνωσεν κ-.τ.λ. : who also (‘qui idem”; cf. 1 Cor. i. 8) made us sufficient as ministers of the New Covenant—[ministers] not of the letter cae the Law), but of the Spirit ; for the etter killeth, but the Spirit giveth life. The Apostle’s opponents at Corinth were probably Judaisers (xi. 22), and thus the description of his office as the διακονία καινῆς διαθήκης leads him to a compari- son and a contrast of the Old Covenant
and the New. The “covenants” (Rom.
54 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOY= B III.
ry yi. ματος τὸ γὰρ γράμμα ἀποκτείνει,; τὸ δὲ "πνεῦμα "Lwomoret. 7. vill. 113 Tf δὲ ἡ διακονία τοῦ θανάτου ἐν γράμμασιν,2 " ἐντετυπωμένη ἐν ὅ
Cor. xv.
5; of-1 λίθοις, ἐγενήθη ἐν δόξῃ, ᾿ ὥστε μὴ δύνασθαι ἃ ἀτενίσαι τοὺς υἱοὺς
et. iii. 18
and Rom. Ἰσραὴλ “eis τὸ πρόσωπον Μωσέως “ διὰ τὴν δόξαν τοῦ προσώπου
viii. 10. s Here only. t Exod. xxxiv. 29-35-
u Acts L το, fii. 4, vi. 15, vil. 55, xi. 6, xfii. 9.
1B has awoxrever; but NGKP 17 have απόοκτεννει, and ACDEL amoxteva;
Lachmann conjectured amoxratvet.
2 BD*G and the Peshitto have γραμματι. 3 KecDbcEKL, d, e, f support ev λιθοις ; om. ev N*ABCD*GP 17, g. 4 The more accurate spelling is Mevoews (NBCGKL, etc.) ; and so at vv. 13, 15.
ix. 4, Eph. ii. 12) between Jehovah and Israel were the foundation of Judaism. They began (not to speak of the Covenant with Noah) with the Covenant of Circum- cision granted to Abraham (Gen. xvii. 2) and repeated more than once (Gen. xxii. 16, xxvi. 3), which is often appealed to in the N.T. (Luke i. 72, Acts iii, 25, vii. 8, etc.). This was not abrogated (Gal. iii. 17) by the Covenant of Sinai (Exod. xix. 5; cf. for its recapitulation in Moab, Deut. xxix. 1), which, as the National Charter of Israel, was pre-eminently to a Hebrew “tthe Old Covenant”. The
eat prophecy of a Deliverer from Zion Isa. lix. 21) is interpreted by St. Paul Rom. xi. 27) as the ‘‘covenant” of which the prophet spoke in the next verse ; and Jeremiah, in a ot (xxxi. 31-33) from which the Apostle has just now (ver. 3 above) borrowed a striking image, had proclaimed a New Covenant with Israel in the future. The phrase had been consecrated to the Gospel, through its employment by Christ at the Institution of the Eucharist (Matt. xxvi. 28, Luke xxii. 20, 1 Cor. xi. 25); and in that solemn context it bore direct allusion to the Blood of Sprinkling which ratified the Old Covenant of Sinai (Exod. xxiv. 8). Itis of this ‘‘ New Covenant” that St. Paul is a διάκονος (Christ is its μεσί- της, Heb. ix. 15); #.¢., he is a διάκονος οὐ γράμματος ἀλλὰ πνεύματος, not of the letter of the Law (as might be wrongly inferred from his statement in ver. 3 that the ἐπιστολὴ Χριστοῦ was “ ministered "[διακονηθεῖσα] by him), but of the “‘ Spirit of the living God” (ver. 3). This is a much more gracious διακονία, inasmuch as the Law is the instrument of Death (ef. Rom. v. 20, vii. 9, viii. 2, in all which passages the Apostle brings into closest connexion the three thoughts of the Law, Sin, and Death), but the Spirit of God is the Giver of Life (see reff. and
cf. Gal. iii. 21, where he notes that the law is not able, ζωοποιεῖν, ‘ to give life ”). It will be observed that the article is wanting before καινῆς διαθήκης, as it is before γράμματος and πνεύματος ; but we pv | not on that account with the Revisers translate "ὦ new covenant”. The expression ‘* New Covenant,” like the words “ Letter”’ (for the Law) and ‘*Spirit” for the Holy Spirit, was a technical phrase in the theology of the day; and so might well dispense with the article. The contrast between ‘ letter” and “Spirit” here (so often misunder- stood, as if it pointed to a contrast be- tween what is verbally stated and what is really implied, and so justified an appeal from the bare “letter” of the law to the principles on which it rests) is exactly illustrated by Rom. vii. 6, where St. Paul declares that the service of a Christian is ἐν καινότητι πνεύματος καὶ οὐ παλαιό- THTL γράμματος, ἱ.6.. “in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter”. And (though not so plainly) the same contrast is probably intended in Rom. ii. 29. InSt. Paul’s writings πνεῦμα, when used for the human spirit, is contrasted with σῶμα (x Cor. v. 3), σάρξ (2 Cor. vii. 1) and νοῦς (x Cor. xiv. 14), but never with γράμμα. This is a technical term for the “ Law” (like γραφή, Scripture; cf. ver. 7, ἐν γράμμασιν), and is proper! set over against the “Spirit” of G whose office and work were first plainly revealed in the Gospel.
Vv. 7-11. DIGRESSION ON THE MINIs- TRY OF THE NEw Covenant. If 18 (a) MORE GLORIOUS THAN THAT OF THE OLD. —Ver. 7. εἰ δὲ ἡ διακονία κιτ.λ.: καρ κα the Ministration of Death (see ver. 6), written, and engraven in stones, came into existence in glory, etc. The refer- ence is to the glory on the face of Moses (see reff.) when the Tables of the Law were brought down from Mount Sinai,
ea Mi sats a Pet ne eed τα πο
7—11.
ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYS 8
55
αὐτοῦ τὴν καταργουμένην, 8. πῶς οὐχὶ μᾶλλον ἡ διακονία τοῦ ¥ Chap. vii.
πνεύματος ἔσται ἐν δόξῃ ; 9. εἰ γὰρ ἡ ' διακονία τῆς “ κατακρίσεως ¥ δόξα," “ πολλῷ “μᾶλλον περισσεύει ὃ ἡ διακονία τῆς διακαιοσύνης
év* δόξῃ.
"τούτῳ τῷ * μέρει, ἕνεκεν ὅ τῆς " ὑπερβαλλούσης δόξης.
only.
om, ν. 9, 10; 1 Cor, xii. 22; Phil. i. 23,
10. καὶ γὰρ οὐδὲ ὅ δεδόξασται τὸ δεδοξασμένον *éy ii. 12 an
ver. II.
11. εἰ γὰρ Χ ot ah Cok
τὸ καταργούμενον διὰ δόξης, "πολλῷ "μᾶλλον τὸ μένον ἐν δόξῃ. ii. 16.
14; Eph. i. 10, ii. 7, iii. 19 only; 2 Macc. iv. 13.
1 BDbEKLP, f, g and the Bohairic support ἡ Stax. ; Ty διακον The external evidence is thus evenly balanced, but the
d, e and the Syriac vss.
Chap. ix. z Reff. ver. 9.
NACD*G 17,
form of the sentence inclines us to the received text.
2 D*EG supply ἐστιν after Sofa.
5 DE, d, e, g and the Syriac vss. give περισσευσει. *SScDEGKLP support ev δοξῃ; δ ABC omit ev. 5 Only a few cursives (and d, e, f, g) support οὐδε; all uncials and the Bohairic
have ov.
5 For ἕνεκεν read e.vexey with NABDEGP.
St. Paul argues that for two reasons the glory of the New Covenant is greater, (i.) the former διακονία was one of con- demnation, the latter of righteousness (ver. 9), and (ii.) the glory of the former was only a transient gleam, while that of the latter abides for ever (ver. 11). Of the first Tables which Moses broke in anger it is said that the bag, θη τ
αφὴ Θεοῦ κεκολαμμένη ἐν τοῖς πλαξίν Exod. xxxii. 16) ; it is merely said of the second Tables that Moses wrote upon them ‘the words of the Covenant, the Ten Commandments” (Exod. xxxiv. 28). Nevertheless the tradition (see Philo, Vit. Mos., iii., 2) was that the second Tables, like the first, were not only “ written” but “ engraven” (ἐντετυπωμένη), as the Apostle has it.—dorre μὴ δύνασθαι x.7.A. : so that the Children of Israel could not (sc., through fear, Exod. xxxiv. 30) look steadfastly upon the face of Moses on account of the glory of his face, transient asit was, καταργεῖσθαι is nearly always, if not always (for 1 Cor. ii. 6 is doubtful), passive in St. Paul (Rom. vi. 6, vii. 2, 1 Cor. xiii. 8, xv. 26, Gal. v. 4), and as it must be taken passively in ver. 14 below, there is a good deal to be said for re- garding it as passive here and in νυ. 11, 13 (as the A.V. does; note, however, that the translation “" which was to be done away” in this verse is wrong). Yet the sense seems to require the middle voice “which was passing away,” sc., even as he spoke to the people. The position of τὴν καταργουμένην gives it emphasis. Pfleiderer is guilty of the extravagant supposition that the whole story of the
Transfiguration (cf. Luke ix. 28 ff.) is built up on the basis of this passage (cf. μεταμορφούμεθα, ver. 18), the disappear- ance of Moses and Elijah, leaving Jesus alone with His disciples, indicating that the glory of the Old Covenant was pass- ing away (καταργουμένην) !
Vv. 8, 9. πῶς οὐχὶ μᾶλλον κι.οτ.λ.: how shall not rather the Ministration of the Spirit be with glory? For if the Ministration of Condemnation be glory (if we read τῇ διακονίᾳ we must render, with the American Revisers,‘‘has glory”), much rather doth the Ministration of Righteousness exceed in glory. %. Rom. v. 16, Td μὲν yap κρίμα ἐξ ἑνὸς εἰς κατάκριμα, τὸ άρισμα ἐκ πολλῶν παραπτωμάτων εἰς Meautnnes and Rom. viii. 1, οὐδὲν yap viv κατάκριμα τοῖς ἐν Xp. "In. The phrase διάκονοι δικαιοσύνης is used again at xi. 15, as descriptive of the ministers of the New Covenant; it is an essential point of Pauline theology that “righteousness ” is not of the “law” (Gal. ili. 21). The argument is a minori ad majus.
er. 10. Kal yap οὐ δεδόξασται : for that which hath been made glorious, sc., the Ministration of the Old Covenant, hath not [really] been made glorious in this respect, viz., on account of the sur- assing glory (of the Ministration of the ew Covenant) ; #.e., the surpassing glory of the second made the glory of the first seem nought. The phraseology of Exod. XXxiv. 35 πρόσωπον Μωσῆ - + « δεδόξασται) is still in the Apostle’s mind. ἐν τούτῳ τῷ μέρει has been otherwise explained as equivalent to ‘in this in-
ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYS B ΠῚ,
56 go gy 12. ἔχοντες οὖν τοιαύτην ἐλπίδα, πολλῇ "παρρησίᾳ χρώμεθα 13. i. 12, vi καὶ οὐ καθάπερ "Μωσῆς ἐτίθει “κάλυμμα ἐπὶ τὸ "πρόσωπον éautod,} i 20 ; Col. πρὸς τὸ μὴ “ ἀτενίσαι τοὺς υἱοὺς Ἰσραὴλ “ εἰς τὸ 3 τέλος ὃ τοῦ καταρ- Tim. iii younévou 14. ἀλλ᾽ " ἐπωρώθη τὰ ‘vonpata αὐτῶν ἄχρι γὰρ τῆς b Exod Me ojpepov* τὸ αὐτὸ κάλυμμα ἐπὶ" τῇ Sdvayvdoe τῆς " παλαιᾶς “τ᾿ διαθήκης μένει ph '᾿ἀνακαλυπτόμενον, ὅ τι ἐν Χριστῷ καταργεῖται"
5, ς flere only. e Mk. vi. 52, viii. 17; John xii. πιὰ Rom. xi. 7 only. f Reff. ii. 11.
ff. . J A é 3 ait Aen Tim. iv. 13 only; Neh. viii. 8. h Here only. i Ver. 18 only; cf. Job xii. 22.
1 \§DEK support eavrov; better αὐτου ABCGLP 17. (Yet B has eavrov, Exod.
XXxxiv. 35.) 2 D*G om. To before τελος.
3 A, f have προσωπον for τελος (a manifest error due to the προσωπον in the line
before).
4 Better onpepov npepas (cf. Acts xx. 26, Rom. xi. 8) with $ABCDEGP and most vss.; the received text in omitting npepas follows KL and the Peshitto.
5 DEG have ev for em.
stance of Moses”; but it seems (see ref.) to be merely a redundant phrase, added for the sake of emphasis, intro- ducing ἕνεκεν τῆς ὕπερβ. δόξ.
Ver. 11. εἰ γὰρ τὸ καταργ. K.T.A.: for if that which passes away was with glory, much more that which abtdeth ἐς in glory. The difference of prepositions διὰ δόξης . . . ἐν δόξῃ should not be overlooked; the Ministration of the Old Covenant was only with a transient flush of glory, that of the New abides in glory (cf. esp. Heb. xii. 18-27). It is true that St. Paul sometimes changes his pre- positions in cases where we find difficult to assign a sufficient reason (e.g., διά and ἐκ, Rom. iii. 30, Gal. ii. 16); but that is no reason for confusing the force of διὰ and ἐν, when the preservation of the distinction between them adds point to the passage (cf. Rom. v. το, where διὰ and ἐν are again confused in the A.V.). See further on vi. 8,
Vv, 12-18. THe MINISTRY OF THE New Covenant 18 (δ) OPEN, NOT VEILED, AS WAS THAT OF THE OLD. The illustration from the O.T. which is used in these verses has been obscured for English readers by the faulty render- ing of the A.V. in Exod. xxxiv. 33. It would appear from that rendering, viz., “till Moses had done speaking with them he put a veil on his face,” that the object of the veil was to conceal from the people the Divine glory reflected in his face. But this is to misrepresent the original Hebrew, and is not the rendering given either by the LXX or by modern scholars. The R.V substitutes when for
6 τι should be written ott, as by Tisch. and W.H.
till in the verse just quoted, thus bringing out the point that the veil was used to conceal not the glory on the face of Moses, but its evanescence ; it was fading even while he spoke, and this by his use of the veil he prevented the people from perceiving. When he “went in unto the Lord” again he took the veil off. The Apostle applies all this to the Israel of his
day. Stilla veil is between them and the
Divine glory—a veil “‘ upon their hearts” which prevents them from seeing the transitoriness of the Old Covenant; yet, as it was of old, if they turn to the Lord, the veil is removed, and an open vision is granted. St. Paul is fond of such alle- gorisings of the history of the Exodus; cf, ¢.g., I Cor. x. 2, Gal. iv. 25.
Ver. 12. ἔχοντες οὖν τοιαύτην κ-.τ.λ.: having therefore such a hope (sc., of the glorious Ministration of the Spirit, ver. 8; cf. vet. 4) we use great boldness of speech. The verses which follow are parentheti- cal down to ver. 18, where the subject is again we, i.e., all Christian believers, as contrasted with Jews.
Ver. 13. καὶ οὐ καθάπερ x.t.A.: and (we put no veil upon our face) as Moses put a veil upon his face, The construc- tion is broken, but the sense is obvious; cf., for a somewhat similar abbreviation, Mark xv. 8, ὁ ὄχλος ἤρξατο αἰτεῖσθαι καθὼς ἐποίει αὐτοῖς.--πρὸς τὸ μὴ ἀτενί- σαι κιτιλ.; to the end that the children of Israel should not look steadfastly on the end of that which was passing away, sc., the evanescence of the glory on Moses’ face. The A.V., “could not steadfastly look to the end of that which
12—17.
ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYS B
57
15. ἀλλ᾽ "ἕως " σήμερον, yvixa! ἀναγινώσκεται 5 Μωσῆς, κάλυμμα k Ecclus.
ἐπὶ thy καρδίαν αὐτῶν κεῖται 16. ' ἡνίκα δ᾽ ὁ ἂν ™ ἐπιστρέψῃ πρὸς
Κύριον, '᾿ περιαιρεῖται τὸ |‘ κάλυμμα.
xvii. 7; Matt.
od ase Ὁ xxvii. 8; 17. ὃ δὲ Κύριος τὸ Πνεῦμά ap
xxxiv. 34. m Exod, xxxiv. 31.
1DEGKLP support ἡνικα avayw.; better nvixa av αναγιν. with SABC 17. 2 GKL support ἀναγινωσκεται ; better ἀαναγινωσκηται with SABCDEP, 3 D*EG, the Latins and the Bohairic place keira: before emt τὴν καρδιαν αὐτων.
4 $$cBDEGKLP support δ᾽ av; but $§*A 17 give Se eav.
was abolished,” evidently takes τέλος as standing for Christ, the fulfilment of the Mosaic law (Rom. x. 4). But this is not suitable tothe context. πρὸς τό with an infinitive is sometimes found to express the aim or intention (never the mere re- sult), as, ¢.g., Eph. vi. 11, 1 Thess. ii. 9, 2 Thess. iii. 8.
Ver. 14. ἀλλ᾽’ ἐπωρώθη τὰ νοήματα αὐτῶν : but their minds were blinded, $c., in reference to what they saw (cf. Rom. xi. 25); they took the brightness for an abiding glory (cf. Deut. xxix. 4). mw@pos, which primarily means a kind of marble, came to mean, in medical writers, a hardening of the tissues; and hence we have πωρόω, (1) to petrify, (2) to become insensible or obtuse, and so (3) it comes to be used of insensibility of the organs of vision, to blind. (See J. A. Robinson in ¥ournal of Theological Studies, Oct., 1gol, and cf, reff. above.)—&xpt yap τῆς σήμερον ἡμέρας «.7.A.: for until this very day at the reading of the Old Covenant the same veil remaineth unlifted ( for it is only done away in Christ). (1) Some com- mentators take μὴ ἀνακαλυπτόμενον as a nominative absolute, and translate ‘the same veil remaineth, it not being revealed that it (sc., either the veil or the Old Covenant) is done away in Christ”. But the order of the words seems to force us to take the present participle with μένει —it having a merely explanatory force and being almost redundant. (2) Again both A.V. and R.V. (text), while trans- lating the first part of the clause as we have done, render ὅ τι ἐν Xp. καταργεῖται “‘which veil is done away in Christ”’. But it seems indefensible thus to take 8 τι as equivalent to 8. (3) Field arrives at yet another rendering by taking κάλυμ- pa per synecdochem for the thing veiled, which is here declared to be the fact that the Old Covenant is done away in Christ. Herenders ‘‘ the same mystery remaineth unrevealed, zamely, that it is done away in Christ”. But it is a grave objection
C omits ay.
to this that τὸ κάλυμμα has to be taken in a sense different from that which it has all through the rest of the passage. (4) We prefer, therefore (with Schmiedel and Schnedermann), to read ὅ τι as ὅτι, for, and to regard the phrase ὅτι ἐν Xp. καταργεῖται as parenthetical: ‘ until this day the veil remains unlifted (for it is only in Christ that it is done away)”; t.¢., the Jews do not recognise the vanish- ing away of the glory of the Law, which yet is going on before their eyes. How completely Judaism was dissociated in St. Paul’s mind from Christianity is plain from the striking phrase ἡ παλαιὰ διαθήκη (here only found; but cf. ver. 6), by which he describes the religious system of his own early manhood, which had only been superseded by ἡ καινὴ διαθήκη thirty years before he wrote this letter. ἀνάγνωσις is (see reff.) the public reading of the Law in the synagogues; it seems, however, unnecessarily ingenious to see here, with Schmiedel, an allusion in τὸ κάλυμμα to the covers in which the Synagogue Rolls were preserved.
Ver. 15. ἀλλ᾽ ἕως σήμερον κ.Ῥτιλ.: but unto this day, whensoever Moses (sc., the Law; cf. Acts xv. 21) is read, a veil lieth upon their heart. It will be observed that the image has been changed as the application of Exod. xxxiv. 29 ff. pro- ceeds: in that history the veil was upon the face of Moses; here it is upon the heart of the people, as God speaks to them through the medium of the Law (see above on ver. 2 for a similar change in the application of the metaphor sug- gested by the word ἐπιστολή).
Ver. 16. ἡνίκα δ᾽ ἂν κιτιλ.: but whensoever it, i.e., Israel, shall turn to the Lord, the veil is taken away ; a para- phrase of Exod. xxxiv. 34, ἡνίκα δ᾽ ἂν εἰσεπορεύετο Μωσῆς ἔναντι Κυρίου λα- λεῖν αὐτῷ, περιῃρεῖτο τὸ κάλυμμα ἕως τοῦ ἐκπορεύεσθαι.
Ver. 17. δδὲ Κύριος τὸ πνεῦμά ἐστιν: but the LorD, t.e., the Jehovah of Israel,
58 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYE B IL, 1 nx Kings ἐστιν" οὗ δὲ τὸ " Πνεῦμα " Kupiou,! ἐκεῖ 3 " ἐλευθερίαᾳ. 18. ἡμεῖς δὲ 2 Kings πάντες, » ἀνακεκαλυμμένῳ προσώπῳ τὴν “δόξαν Κυρίου * κατοπτριζό- καί, 1 (LE μένοι, τὴν αὐτὴν "εἰκόνα " μεταμορφούμεθα ® ἀπὸ δόξης εἰς δόξαν, oat βίῃ o Rom. viii. 2x; 1 Cor. x. 29; Gal. ii. ace I, 1% p Reff. ver. 14. Cf. Exed.
xxxill. 19. r Here ὑπ ἐς om.
t Matt. xvii. a; Mk. ix. 2; xii. 2 only.
s Rom. viii. a9; x
q . xi. 7, xv. 49; chap. iv. 4; Col. i. 15, iii. 10.
1 L has τὸ αγιον instead of Κυριου, and two cursives omit Κυριου. Hort suggested that Kuptov is a primitive error for Κυριον; but this seems quite unnecessary; see
note below and reff.
2 Om. exes NABCD* 17, r, the Peshitto and the Bohairic; it is thus inadequately supported and, moreover, is not in St. Paul’s style (cf. Rom. iv. 15, v. 20).
3 A perapopdpoupevor.
spoken of in the preceding quotation, is the Spirit, the Author of the New Covenant of grace, to whom the new Israel is invited to turn (cf. Acts ix. 35). It is quite perverse to compare 1 Cor. xv. 45 (where it is said that Christ, as “the last Adam,” became πνεῦμα ζωο- ποιοῦν) or Ignatius, Mag.,§ 15, ἀδιάκριτον πνεῦμα ὅς ἐστιν ᾿Ιησοῦς Χριστός, and to find here an “ identification” of Christ with the Holy Spirit. ὁ Κύριος is here not Christ, but the Jehovah of Israel spoken of in Exod, xxxiv. 34; and in St. Paul’s application of the narrative of the Veiling of Moses, the counterpart of 6
Κύριος under the New Covenant is the.
Spirit, which has been already contrasted in the preceding verses (vv. 3, 6) with the letter of the Mosaic law. At the same time it is true that the identifica- tion of “the Lord” (i.¢., the Son) and “the Spirit” intermittently appears afterwards in Christian theology. See (for reff.) Swete in Dict. Chr. Btog., iii., 115a.—ob} δὲ τὸ πνεῦμα κιτιλ.: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there ἐς liberty ; sc., in contradistinction to the servile fear of Exod. xxxiv. 30; cf. John viii. 32, Rom. viii. 15, Gal. iv. 7, in all of which passages the freedom of Christian service is contrasted with the bondage of the Law. The thought here is not of the freedom of the Spirit’s action (John iii, 8, x Cor. xii. 11), but of the freedom of access to God under the New Cove- nant, as exemplified in the removal of the veil, when the soul turns itself to the Divine glory. ‘‘ The Spirit of the Lord” is an O.T. phrase (see σε). We now return to the thought of ver. 12, the openness and boldness of the Apostolical service.
Ver. 18. ἡμεῖς δὲ πάντες κιτιλ.: but we all, sc., you as well as I, all Christian believers, with unveiled face (and so not
as Moses under the Old Covenant), re- Jlecting as a mirror the glory o. the Lord, sc., of Jehovah (see reff.), which is the glory of Christ (cf. John xvii. 24), are transformed into the same image, sc., of Christ (see reff.), from glory to glory (ἷ.6.»
a echo and without interruption, and so unlike the transitory refiection
=
[9] ry 9 € Vivine giory on e face oO OSES 5
n ‘glory is continuous, as becomes the Work of the Spirit from whom it springs (John xvi. 14, Rom. viii. 11). The meaning of κατοπτρίζεσθαι (which is not found else- where in the Greek Bible) is somewhat doubtful. (i.) The analogy of 1 Cor. xiii. 12, of Philo, Leg. All., iii., 33 (a passage where Exod. xxxiii. 18 is paraphr
and which therefore is specially apposite here), and of Clem. Rom., § 36, would support the rendering of the A.V., “ be- holding as in a glass” (¢.¢., a mirror). This is also given in the margin of the R.V., and is preferred by the American Revisers. But such a translation is not appropriate to the context, for the Apostle’s thought is not of any indirect vision of the Divine glory, but of our freedom of access thereto and of per- ception thereof. It seems better there- fore (ii.) to render with the R.V. (follow- ing Chrysostom) reflecting as in a mirror. And so the image conveyed is “ that Christians having, like Moses, received in their lives the reflected glory of the Divine presence, as Moses received it on his countenance, are unlike Moses in that they have no fear, such as his, of its vanishing away, but are confident of its continuing to shine in them with increasing lustre (cf. iv. 6 below); and in this confidence present themselves without veil or disguise, inviting enquiry
ee . δ ω
IV. I—3.
καθάπερ' ἀπὸ Κυρίου Πνεύματος.
ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥΣ B 59
IV. 1. Διὰ τοῦτο ἔχοντες thy * Lk xviii διακονίαν ταύτην, καθὼς ἠλεήθημεν, οὐκ "ἐκκακοῦμεν,32 2. ἀλλ᾽ "ἀπει-
υἱ 9; Eph. iii. 13; 2
πάμεθα τὰ " κρυπτὰ τῆς “αἰσχύνης, μὴ " περιπατοῦντες " ἐν ‘ravoupyia, Thess. iii,
13; and
μηδὲ “δολοῦντες τὸν λόγον τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἀλλὰ TH " φανερώσει τῆς ver. 16.
b Here only,
le 81 a k a 5 ob x. 3. ἀληθείας * συνιστῶντες * ᾿ ἑαυτοὺς πρὸς πᾶσαν ἢ συνείδησιν ἀνθρώπων Beas
‘évdmov τοῦ ' Θεοῦ. 3. ei δὲ " καὶ ἔστι κεκαλυμμένον τὸ " eday- 1 πος
d Phil. iii. 19; Jude 13; cf. Rom. vi. a1; Eph. v. 12. f Chap. xi. 3; 1 Cor. iii. igi Eph. iv. 14; οἵ, chap. xii. 16.
25; 1 Pet. iii. 4.
om. vi. 4; Eph. v. 2; Col. iii. 7, etc.
g Here only ; Ps. xiv. 3, xxxv. 3. x. 12, 18. k Reff. i. 12.
rf of, chap. viii. ar.
1B has καθωσπερ.
h 1 Cor. xii. 7 only. 1 Rom. xiv. 22; chap. vii. 12; Gal. i.a0; 1 Tim v. 4, 21; 2 Tim. iv. m 1 Cor. iv. 7; cf. chap. iv. 16, νυ. 16, vii. δ, 14; οἵ. Rom. ii. 16, xvi. 25; 1 Cor. xv. 1; 2 Tim. ii. 8,
xiv. 86 Acts xxi. 21; i Chap. vi. 4, vii. 11; οὗ, chap. iii. 1, v. 12,
ni Thess. i. 5; 2 Thess. ii
3 The better orthography is εγκακουμεν SABD*G 17.
5 DcEKL give συνιστωντες ; better συνισταντες SCD*G 17, followed by Tisch., or συνιστανοντες A(?)BP, adopted by W.H.
instead of deprecating it, with nothing to hold back or to conceal from the eager gaze of the most suspicious or the most curious” (Stanley). The words Κυρίον πνεύματος will bear various renderings: (a) the Lord of the Spirit, which is not apposite here, (b) the Spirit of the Lord, as the A.V. takes them and the Latin commentators generally, (c) the Spirit, which is the Lord, the rendering of Chry- sostom, which is given a place in the R.V. margin, and (d) the Lord, the Spirit, πνεύματος being placed in apposition to Kvplov, neither word taking the article, as the first does not after the prep. ἀπό. We unhesitatingly adopt (d), the render- ing of the R.V., inasmuch as it best brings out theidentification of Κύριος and πνεῦμα in ver. 17. It is worth noticing that the phrase in the “‘ Nicene” Creed τὸ πνεῦμα + + « τὸ Κύριον τὸ ζωοποιόν is based on the language of this verse and of ver. 6 above.
CHAPTER IV.—Vv. 1-6. HE DELIVERS WITH FRANKNESS HIS MESSAGE OF CHRIST THE TRUE LiGHT.—Ver. 1. διὰ τοῦτο ἔχοντες «.7.X.: wherefore, having this Ministration, sc., of the New Covenant, even as we received mercy (i.e., ‘even as we were mercifully granted it,” a favourite thought with St. Paul; cf. 1 Cor. vii. 25, 1 Tim. i. 13, 16), we faint not; cf. 2 Tim. i. 7, ob yap ἔδωκεν ἡμῖν ὃ Θεὸς πνεῦμα δειλίας. He is still an- swering the question, ‘“‘ Who is sufficient for these things?” (ii. 16); but he, again, in the verses which follow, diverges from this main thought to answer the charge of insincerity which his opponents had brought against him. The tone of vv. 1-6 is very like that of 1 Thess. ii. 1-12, which offers several verbal parallels.
Ver. 2. ἀλλ᾽ ἀπειπάμεθα τὰ κρυπτὰ κιτιλ.: but we have renounced (the “ in- gressive aorist”; cf. ἐσίγησεν, Acts xv. 12) the hidden things of shame; cf. Rom. xiii. 12, Eph. iv. 22, The stress is on τὰ κρυπτά; it is the openness and can- dour of his ministry on which he insists (cf. John iii. 20).—ph περιπατ. κιτιλ.: not walking in craftiness (see x. 3 and reff. above; περιπατεῖν = versari), nor handling deceitfully (οὐδὲ ἐν δόλῳ, 1 Thess. li. 3, cf. chap. ii. 17) the Word of God, s¢., the Divine message with which we have been entrusted (cf. the charge brought against him and referred to in xii, 16, vis., that being πανοῦργος he had taught the Corinthians δόλῳ) ; but by the manifestation of the truth (cf. vi. 7, Vii. 14), sc., by plain statement of the truths of the Gospel in public preach- ing, commending ourselves (here is our Letter of Commendation, iii. 1, and cf. note there) to every man’s conscience (lit. ‘*to every conscience of men,” 7.¢., to every possible variety of the human con- science ; cf. 1 Cor. ix. 22) in the sight of God, The appeal to conscience can never be omitted with safety, and any presenta- tion of Christianity which is neglectful of the verdict of conscience on the doc- trines taught is at once un-Apostolic and un-Christlike, These verses (1-6) have been chosen as the Epistle for St. Matthew’s Day, probably on account of the apparent applicability of ver. 2 to the circumstances of St. Matthew’s call and his abandonment of a profession which was counted shameful. But of course ἀπειπάμεθα does not imply that St. Paul had ever been guilty of using crafty artifices such as he here repudiates once and for all,
60 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOY=: B IV.
ο Of seen γέλιον " ἡμῶν, ἐν τοῖς " ἀπολλυμένοις ἐστὶ κεκαλυμμένον" 4. ἐν οἷς ὁ pJoha xii. Θεὸς τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου ἢ ἐτύφλωσε τὰ “νοήματα τῶν ἀπίστων, εἰς
40;1 John
ii. τὰ only; τὸ μὴ " αὐγάσαι ἷ αὐτοῖς 2 τὸν "φωτισμὸν τοῦ εὐαγγελίου τῆς δόξης
Isa. xlii.
19. q Reff. ii. 11.
τοῦ Χριστοῦ," ὅς ἐστιν εἰκὼν τοῦ ‘Ocod.* 5. οὐ γὰρ ἑαυτοὺς
τἭετε only; * κηρύσσομεν, ἀλλὰ “ Χριστὸν 5 ᾿Ιησοῦν Κύριον - ἑαυτοὺς δὲ δούλους c
xiii. 24, xiv. 56.
s Ver. 6 only; οἵ. Job iii. 9; Ps. xxvi. 1, Ixxxix. 8, etc. iii. 18 wu Acts viii 5; 1 Cor. i. 23; Phil. i. 15.
t Wisd. vii. 26; reff.
1 S$BGKLP support αυγασαι; CDEH have καταυγασαι, and A 17 διαυγασαι. 2 DbcEKLP and the Syriac vss. add avrous after avy.; om. SABCD*GH 17, d,e,
f, g, τ, etc. 5 C has xvptov for Χριστου.
* $ocLP and the Harclean add του aopartov (from Col. i. 15) after Θεου. 5 BHKL, the Peshitto and Bohairic support iB Ἴησ.; SACDE, the Harclean,
d, e, f, τ, etc., give "In. Xp. Ku. ; G, g give Kv. "In. Xp.; P has ‘ly. ν “ὦ Κυ.). the Jews (except, perhaps, Titus i. 15).—
Ver. 3. εἰ δὲ καὶ «.7.A.: but even if our gospel (sc., the good news we preach ; see reff.) ts veiled (returning again to the metaphor of iii. 12-18), ἐέ ἐς veiled in them that are perishing ; i.e., the fault lies with the hearers, not with the preacher (cf. vi. 12, and see Rom. i. 28). Blass (Gram. of N.T. Greek, § 41, 2) points out that ἐν τοῖς ἀπολλυμένοις is almost equivalent to “‘ for them that are perish- ing” (cf. chap. viii. 1 and 1 Cor. xiv. 11 for a like use of ἐν).
Ver. 4. ἐν οἷς ὁ Θεὸς τοῦ αἰῶνος: among whom the god of this world, sc., Satan. αἰών is an “age,” a certain limit of time, and so ὁ αἰὼν οὗτός (1 Cor. i. 20, ii. 6) is ‘this present age,” over which the devil is regarded as having power (cf. Eph. ii. 2, vi. 12). We have the expression ai βασιλεῖαι τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου in Ignatius (Rom., 6). Wetstein quotes a Rabbinical saying, ‘‘ The true God is the first God, but Sammael (i.e., the evil angel who was counted Israel’s special foe) is the second God”. Many early writers, beginning with Origen and Irenzus, through dread of Gnostic specu- lations, dissociate ὁ Θεός from τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου, which they join with τῶν ἀπίσ- των. But this is a mere perversity of exegesis, suggested by controversial pre- judice. Beliar is twice called “the ruler of this world”’ in the Ascension of Isaiah (ed. Charles, pp. 11, 24).—érvdhwoe τὰ νοήματα τῶν ἀπίστων : hath blinded (the “Ἰπρταβδῖνε aorist ” again ; fi ver. 2) the minds (cf. iii. 14) of the unbelieving. Out of sixteen occurrences of the word ἄπιστος in the Pauline Epistles, fourteen are found in the Epp. to the Corinthians; it consistently means “ unbelieving,” and is always applied to the Acathen, not to
εἰς Td μὴ αὐγάσαι x.t.X.: to the end that the light (lit. ‘the illumination”) of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the Image of God, should not dawn upon them. This is the force of αὐγάσαι, even if, as we seemingly must do, we omit αὐτοῖς from our text; αὐγή is the ‘‘dawn,” and αὐγάσαι is to be taken in- transitively. The R.V. marginal render- ing ‘that they should not see the light,” etc., does not suit the context so well.
The A.V. “the light of the glorious
gospel of Christ” is inadequate, as it does not bring out the force of the phrase τοῦ εὐαγγελίου τῆς δόξης. δόξης is the genitive of contents (cf. the similar phrase, 1 Tim. i. 11); the substance of the good tidings preached is the δόξα, the glorious revelation of Christ (cf. ver. 6 below). That Christ is the Image or εἰκών of God is the statement of St. Paul. which approaches most nearly in form to the Adyos doctrine of St. John (see reff. and, for the general sense, 1 Cor. xi. 3, Phil. ii. 6; cf. Heb. i. 3). P. Ewald, who maintains that St. Paul was acquainted with a Johannine tradition of our Lord’s words, finds in vv. 3, 4 reminiscences of conversations reported in the Fourth Gospel. Thus we have in consecutive verses (John viii. 44, 45) ὑμεῖς ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς τοῦ διαβόλου é +++ οὐ πιστεύετέ μοι, and the expres- sion ὁ Θεὸς τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου is compar- able with ὁ ἄρχων τοῦ κόσμου τούτον (John xii. 31, xiv. 30, xvi. 11). The parallels are certainly interesting; cf. also the phrase εἰκὼν τοῦ Θεοῦ with John viii. 19, 42.
Ver. 5. οὐ yap ἑαυτοὺς «tA.: for we preach not ourselves, but Christ Fesus
om ee pe . era - eee dee Be eee ---- .-.--... τ oe ᾿ ee πε ος τς, Se ee 04 ΟΦ ΡΌΗΝΟ βου το ΠΟΤ τοὶ Spa pe 4.5... <I Sap ee 5 τ ΟΣΜΌΣΝΣ mong ᾧ- - ce ts : — SS τ ΜῊ}... Ἂ en τς ρα Bs 4
oe
ΩΣ ὙΦ
ὡς oe
a es oe)
_—
Pen πον » -᾿
.--.. ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥΣ B 61
ὑμῶν! διὰ Ἰησοῦν. 6, ὅτι ὁ3 Θεὸς ὁ εἰπὼν ἐκ σκότους φῶς = ae Adpapau,* ὃς ἔλαμψεν ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις ἡμῶν, πρὸς φωτισμὸν τῆς W See oni. ᾿ γνώσεως τῆς "δόξης τοῦ ® Θεοῦ ἐν “προσώπῳ Ἰησοῦ ἴ Χριστοῦ. x Gol ts ἢ 7. Ἔχομεν δὲ τὸν "θησαυρὸν τοῦτον ἐν 7 ὀστρακίνοις 7 * σκεύεσιν, πω it ἵνα ἡ "ὑπερβολὴ τῆς δυνάμεως ἢ τοῦ Θεοῦ, καὶ μὴ ἐξ ἡμῶν - 8. ἢ ἐν 20; Lev. " παντὶ " θλιβόμενοι, ἀλλ᾽ οὐ " στενοχωρούμενοι - * ἀπορούμενοι, GAN’ z Ps. ii. 29;
— Ses, os
Acts ix. οὐκ " ἐξαπορούμενοι - 9. διωκόμενοι, ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ *éyxatahermdpevor* 15; Rom. ix. 21; 1 Pet.iii.7. a Reff. i. 8. b Chap. vii. 5; reff. below. c Chap. vi. 12 only; cf. chap. vi. 4, xii. 10, and Josh. xvii. 15; Isa. xlix. 19. di] ohn xiii. 22; Acts xxv. 20; Gal. iv. 20 only. e Chap. i. 8 τῷ ὃ f Rom. ix. 29 (Isa. i. 9); 2 Tim. iv. το, 16; Heb. xiii. 5