Indoctrination: The Gospel as an Aroma of Christ – In 2 Corinthians1:21 to 2Co 2:17 we again get a glimpse of what a man looks like who is walking in a mature level of sanctification. It is important to note that this passage gives us a perspective of the role of the Holy Spirit as He uses God’s servants to indoctrination believers in this sanctified lifestyle. We immediately see a man who has dedicated his life to Christian service. He is attempting to impart a blessing upon God’s children through the knowledge of Christ. His role is to establish them in the faith. Paul first explains how they are established by faith in Christ (2Co 1:21 to 2Co 2:4), then he illustrates his efforts to establish them by charging them to forgive the offender and receiving him back into fellowship (2Co 2:5-11). Paul then compares the ministry of teaching the doctrines of Christ with the analogy of a sweet-smelling fragrance being dispersed abroad. It brings life to those who received it and death to those who reject it (2Co 2:12-17).

Outline Here is a proposed outline:

1. Explanation 2Co 1:21 to 2Co 2:4

2. Illustration 2Co 2:5-17

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

Paul’s Seal of the Holy Spirit (His Anointing) In 1Co 1:21 to 1Co 4:16 Paul explains the role of the Holy Spirit in his spiritual journey of serving the Lord. This passage will open with the statement that he has been sealed with the Holy Spirit, the guarantee of his inheritance (2Co 1:22) and his discussion on his glorification will close with the same statement (2Co 5:5). Paul will explain how his has been called to indoctrinate them in the faith (2Co 1:21 to 2Co 2:17), and how the calling of the Gospel excels over that of Moses (2Co 3:1-18), and how he is determined to persevere (2Co 4:1-16) in order to reach his eternal home in Glory.

Outline – Note the proposed outline:

1. Indoctrination 2Co 1:21 to 2Co 2:17

a. Explanation 2Co 1:21 to 2Co 2:4

b. Illustration 2Co 2:5-17

2. Calling 2Co 3:1-18

a. Explanation 2Co 3:1-6

b. Illustration 2Co 3:7-18

3. Perseverance 2Co 4:1-16

a. Explanation 2Co 4:1-6

b. Illustration 2Co 4:7-16

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

Paul’s Apostolic Kindness.

Paul continues his explanation:

v. 1. But I determined this with myself, that I would not come again to you in heaviness.

v. 2. For if I make you sorry, who is he, then, that maketh me glad but the same which is made sorry by me?

v. 3. And I wrote this same unto you, lest, when I came, I should have sorrow from them of whom I ought to rejoice, having confidence in you all, that my joy is the joy of you all.

v. 4. For out of much affliction and anguish of heart I wrote unto you with many tears, not that ye should be grieved, but that ye might know the love which I have more abundantly unto you.

Paul had declared that he had reconsidered his intention of visiting them first and changed his plan about coming in order to spare them. And he here adds another point for their consideration: But I decided this for my own sake, not to come to you again in sorrow. His next visit was not to be the painful experience which his last was. It appears, then, that Paul had made a short visit to Corinth during his long stay at Ephesus and had been deeply hurt and grieved by conditions as he found them there. He had been obliged to use severity, to cause them sorrow. 1Co 4:21. And so he asks, in all gentleness: For if I make you sorrowful, who, then, is it that makes me glad, that cheers me, unless it is he that has been made sorrowful by me? His love for the Corinthians had caused him to rebuke their sins and faults, to cause them sorrow, for he had in mind their repentance which would, in turn, gladden his heart. But if he had come at the time he first intended to visit them, the very people upon whom he depended to cheer him, to be a source of satisfaction and joy to him, would have caused him pain once more, since the abuses which he wanted to have removed were at that time still being tolerated by them. In doing his duty as their spiritual father, in inflicting upon them the chastisement which conditions merited, he would be deprived of the joy which the Corinthian Christians, as his children, afforded him. But as matters stood, his letter had indeed caused sorrow, but things had meanwhile been adjusted, and Paul was spared the personal intercourse of sorrow.

This thought is brought out still more fully in the next verse: And I wrote you this very thing, lest in coming I should have sorrow from them from whom I ought to have cheer, firmly persuaded concerning you all that my joy is that of you all. The desire to spare them and to save himself pain had prompted the apostle to send his censure in writing, as he did in the first letter. This course made it easier for both parties: it saved him an unpleasant experience, a factor all the weightier since their relation to him should at all times have been of a nature to cheer him. Just how much that meant for him appears from the fact that he was fully persuaded, that he felt the utmost confidence in them all, that his joy was the joy of them all. He was sure of the bond of sympathy between them; they would want to see him cheerful and happy at all times, and he, considering them all as his friends, would surely be willing to spare them a distressing experience.

The state of mind in which he wrote his first epistle the apostle did not care to experience again: For out of great affliction and anxiety of heart I wrote to you with many tears. Many sections of the first letter might seem harsh and conducive to anything but a feeling of joyfulness; but his very love for the Corinthians made his lamentation about their harm and his fear for their peril all the greater. He had held himself in check purposely, lest his opponents bring the charge of impulsiveness and uncontrolled feeling. But for all that, the accompanying circumstances were such as just stated by the apostle, his purpose in telling of them at this time being: Not that you should be made sorrowful, but that you might know the lore which I so abundantly have toward you. Just as the love of the mother is most tender toward the sickly and weak child, just as the shepherd shows the depth of his love especially in his seeking of the one that is lost, so Paul in his care for all congregations, chap. 11:28, yet had a special love for the Corinthians, because they were most in need of love and caused him the most anxiety. The same pastoral love is today exhibited in thousands of cases with probably as little appreciation on the part of those that are the objects of this loving care.

Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann

EXPOSITION

Continuation of his reasons for not coming to them direct from Ephesus (2Co 2:1-4). Their treatment of the incestuous offender (2Co 2:5-11). His thankfulness at the news which Titus had brought from Corinth (verses 12-17).

2Co 2:1

But I determined this. The division of chapters is here unfortunate, since this and the next three verses belong to the paragraph which began at 2Co 1:23. The verb means, literally, “I judged,” but is rightly rendered “determined,” as in 1Co 2:2; 1Co 7:37. He is contrasting his final decision with his original desire, mentioned in 2Co 1:15. With myself; rather, for myself; as the best course which I could take. That I would net come again to you in heaviness. The “again” in the true reading is not placed immediately before the verb, but it seems (as Theodoret says) to belong to it, so that the meaning is not “that I would not pay you a second sad visit,” but “that my second visit to you should not be a sad one.” There have been interminable discussions, founded on this expression and on 2Co 13:1, as to whether St. Paul had up to the time of writing this letter visited Corinth twice or only once. There is no question that only one visit is recorded in the Acts (Act 18:1-18) previous to the one which he paid to this Church after this Epistle had been sent (Act 20:2, Act 20:3). If he paid them a second brief, sad, and unrecorded visit, it can only have been during his long stay in Ephesus (Act 19:8, Act 19:10). But the possibility of this does not seem to be recognized in Act 20:31, where he speaks of his work at Ephesus “night and day” during this period. The assumption of such a visit, as we shall see, is not necessitated by 2Co 13:1, but in any case we know nothing whatever about the details of the visit, even if there was one, and the question, being supremely unimportant, is hardly worth the time which has been spent upon it. If he had paid such a visit, it would be almost unaccountable that there should be no reference to it in the First Epistle, and here in 2Co 1:19 he refers only to one occasion on which he had preached Christ in Corinth. Each fresh review of the circumstances convinces me more strongly that the notion of three visits to Corinth, of which one is unrecorded, is a needless and mistaken inference, due to unimaginative literalism in interpreting one or two phrases, and encumbered with difficulties on every side. In heaviness. The expression applies as much to the Corinthians as to himself, he did not wish his second visit to Corinth to be a painful one.

2Co 2:2

For if I make you sorry. The verse may be rendered. “For if I pain you, who then is it that gladdens me except he who is being pained by me?” The “I” being expressed in the original, is emphatic, and the verse has none of the strange selfish meaning which has been assigned to it, namely, that St. Paul thought “the grief which he had caused to be amply compensated for by the pleasure he received from that grief.” It has the much simpler meaning that he was unwilling to pain those who gladdened him, and therefore would not pay them a visit which could only be painful on both sides, when the normal relation between them should be one of joy on both sides, as he has already said (2Co 1:24). The singular, “he who is being pained by me,“ does not refer to the offender, but to the Corinthians collectively. Who is he then, etc.? The “then” in the original is classically and elegantly expressed by , and (comp. Jas 2:4).

2Co 2:3

And I wrote this same unto you. And I wrote. He meets the tacit objection. If you shrink from causing us pain, why then did you write to us in terms so severe? The “I wrote” may be what is called the epistolary aorist, and will then be equivalent to our “I write:” “What I write to you now has the very object of sparing you a painful visit.” If the aorist has its more ordinary sense, it refers to the First, and not to the present Epistle; and this seems the better view, for the “I wrote” in 2Co 2:9 certainly refers to the First Epistle. This same thing; namely, exactly what I have written (whether in this or in the former Epistle). The words, “this very thing,” may also, in the original, menu “for this very reason,” as in 2Pe 1:5, and like the in 2Pe 1:9. Unto you. These words should be omitted, with , A, B, C. When I came. The emphasis lies in these words. He preferred that his letter, rather than his personal visit, should cause pain. In you all. It is true that in the Corinthian Church St. Paul had bitter and unscrupulous opponents, but he will not believe even that they desired his personal unhappiness. At any rate, if there were any such, he will net believe that they exist, since “love believeth all things, hopeth all things” (1Co 13:7).

2Co 2:4

For. He proceeds to assign the anguish which his First Epistle had caused him as a proof of his confidence that, as a body, they loved him as he loved them. If they had regarded each other with indifference, his letter would not have been written to them, as it were. in his heart’s blood. Out of much affliction and anguish of heart. The word for “anguish” means “contraction,” “pressure,” “spasm” (Luk 21:25). The expression may seem far too strong to be accounted for by the tone of the first letter. Hence some have supposed that he is referring to some other letter now last; and others that ch. 10-13. of this letter, where the whole tone of affection and tenderness suddenly changes into one of impassioned irony and indignation, really belonged to this intermediate letter. There is no need, however, for these hypotheses. In 1Co 5:1-6:11 he had spoken of the errors of the Church with strong reprobation, and the anguish with which he wrote the letter may have been all the more deeply felt because, in expressing it, he put on his feelings a strong restraint. With many tears. I wrote “out of” anguish, and that anguish showed itself through the tears which bathed my cheeks as I wrote. Such tears, says Calvin, “show weakness, but a weakness more heroic than would have been the iron apathy of a Stoic.” It must, however, be remembered that, in ancient times, and in Southern and Eastern lands, men yielded to tears more readily than among Northern nations, who take pride in suppressing as far as possible all outward signs of emotion. In Homer the bravest heroes do not blush to weep in public, and the nervous, afflicted temperament of St. Paul seems to have been often overwhelmed with weeping (Act 20:19, Act 20:31; 2Ti 1:4). Not that ye should be grieved. The “not,” by a common Hebrew idiom, means “not only,” “not exclusively.” His object in inflicting pain was not the pain itself, but the results of godly repentance which it produced (2Co 7:11). The love. In the Greek this word is placed very emphatically at the beginning of the clause. More abundantly. I loved you more than I loved other converts, and the abundance of my love will give you a measure of the pain I felt. The Philippians were St. Paul’s best-beloved converts; but next to them he seems to have felt more personal tenderness for the members of this inflated, wayward, erring Church than for any other community, just as a father sometimes loves best his least-deserving son. There was something in the brightness and keenness of the Greek nature which won over St. Paul, in spite of its many faults.

2Co 2:5-11

The results of his letter in their treatment of the incestuous offender.

2Co 2:5

But if any have caused grief. The word “pain” or “grief” which has been so prominent in the last verses, naturally reminds St. Paul of the person whose misdoings had caused all this trouble. The “any” is in the singular. He hath not grieved me, but in part, etc. Of the various ways of taking this verse, the most tenable seems to be this: “If any one has caused pain, he has not pained me but partly (not to weigh down too heavily) all of you. St. Paul is denying that the feelings with which he hat community (2Co 7:11). The phrase, “that I press not too heavily,” refers then to the offender: “I will not say outright that he has grieved not me, but all of you, because I do not wish to bear too hard on him”, “but I will say that he has grieved you and me alike to some extent.” The phrase, “in part,” occurs also in Rom 11:25.

2Co 2:6

Sufficient to such a man is this punishment. What the punishment was we do not know, but of course the Corinthians knew that what St. Paul had directed them to do was to summon the Church together, and there,by excommunicating the man, “to hand him over to Satan.” But this handing over to Satan was, as we have seen, designed solely for a merciful purpose, and to awaken his repentance, so as to secure his ultimate salvation (1Co 5:4. 5). Whether the Corinthians had done exactly as St. Paul bade them is uncertain; but whatever they had done is here acquiesced in by St. Paul, and even if they had dealt more leniently with the offender than he originally intended, he here not only refrains from urging them to use greater severity, but even exhorts them to a still more absolute condonation. St. Paul’s object had not been that they should take a particular course of action, but that they should bring about a desired result. The result had been achieved, and now the matter might rest. To such a man. St. Paul mercifully abstains from recording his name or from thrusting him into unnecessary prominence before the assembly in which the letter would be read. The apostle evidently entered into the Jewish feeling that there is a criminal cruelty in needlessly calling a blush of shame into a brother’s face. This punishment. The word epitimia, which occurs here only in the New Testament, but is also found in Wis. 3:10, means “punishment,” as in later Greek, and is not used in its classical sense of “rebuke” (Vulgate, objurgatio); but the mildness of the word, perhaps, implies that the Corinthians had not resorted to the severest measures. Which was inflicted of many; rather, by the majority. The verb is expressed in the original, and St. Paul seems to allude to the steps taken, whatever they were, with a certain dignified reticence. It is obvious that there were still some opponents of St. Paul in the Church, who retained in this matter their “inflated” sentiments of spurious independence; and this may, perhaps, have driven others into too rigid an attitude of severity.

2Co 2:7

Contrariwise; i.e. contrary to the line taken or to the view expressed by the severer portion of the community. Rather. The word is omitted in A and B. To forgive him. The word is used of the mutual attitude of gracious forbearance which ought to exist among Christians(Forgiving one another,” Eph 4:32; Col 3:13), so that they might be not only Christians, but as Gentiles ignorantly called them, Chrestians (” kind-hearted,” Eph 4:1-32 :82). And comfort; i.e. “strengthen,” “encourage.” The “him” is emitted in the Greek, with the same delicate, compassionate reticence which leads St. Paul to speak of this person “a man of such of a kind.” In Gal 6:11 St. Paul suddenly breaks off the course of his remarks to give similar advice in a tone of peculiar solemnity; and in 2Th 3:15 he warns against any excess in the severity which he enjoins in the previous verse. Such a one. Like the indefinite “one” in 1Co 5:5. In the Greek it is compassionately placed last in the clause. Should be swallowed up. The same metaphor, of being swallowed in an abyss, occurs in 1Co 15:54. In 1Pe 5:8 it is said that Satan is ever striving to “swallow up” men. With overmuch sorrow; rather, with the, or his, excessive grief. Despair might drive the man to suicide, or apostasy, or the wretchlessness of unclean living.

2Co 2:8

To confirm your love toward him; literally, to ratify towards him, love.

2Co 2:9

For to this end also did I write. This is another reason which he gives for the severe tone of his First Epistle. It was written

(1) to avoid the necessity for a painful visit (2Co 2:3);

(2) to show his special love for them (2Co 2:4); and

(3) to test their obedience.

The proof of you. Your proved faithfulness (2Co 8:2; 2Co 9:13; 2Co 13:3; Rom 5:4); your capacity to stand a test.

2Co 2:10

To whom ye forgive any thing. In the original there is a conjunction, “but.” It would, perhaps, be pressing it too much to imply that their “forgiveness” showed that they had not accurately stood the test of perfect obedience; yet it is difficult to read the whole passage without suspecting that St. Paul, while by temperament he leaned to the side of mercy, is here showing a spirit of generous self-suppression m accepting the course which the Corinthians had followed, although it had, in some way or other, diverged from his exact directions. To whom, Obviously, again, a purposely indefinite reference to the incestuous person. I forgive also. The power of “binding” and “loosing,” of “forgiving” and “retaining,” had only been given to the apostles representatively and collectively, and therefore to the Christian Church (Joh 20:23) in its corporate capacity. The Corinthian Church had in this case decided to forgive, and St. Paul ratifies their decision. For if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave it. The reading here varies between , what, and , to whom, which in dictation might be easily confused. The order of the words also varies. The best reading seems to be expressed by the version, “For what I also have pardoned, if I have pardoned anything (I have pardoned it) for your sakes.” This represents the reading of , A, B, C, F, G, etc., and is followed by the Revised Version. There seems to be here an intentional vagueness, and reference to circumstances of which we are not informed, which might, perhaps, have given room for wounded feelings in any one less magnanimous than St. Paul. The line he took in this matter was taken for their sakesthat is all he says, he adopted it as the best relatively, whether it was absolutely the best or not. In the person of Christ; literally, in the face of Christ; which seems to mean “in the presence of Christ,” as though he were looking on at what I did. It may be doubted whether the word prosopon ever means “person” in the New Testament, except in a secondary sense.

2Co 2:11

Lest Satan should get an advantage over us; literally, lest we should be overreached by Satan, which would have been the case if our severity had resulted in the desperation of the offender, and not in his deliverance. We are not ignorant of his devices. So too in Eph 6:11 we are told of the “crafty wiles of the devil.”

2Co 2:12-17

Outburst of thanksgiving for the news brought by Titus.’

2Co 2:12

Furthermore, when I came to Troas. “Furthermore” is too strong for the “but” of the original. There is an apparently abrupt transition, but the apostle is only resuming the narrative which he broke off at 2Co 2:4 in order that he might finish the topic of the painful circumstance in which his First Epistle had originated. To Troas. Not “the Troas.” St. Paul had to do with the city, not with the district. The city (now Eski Stamboul), of which the name had been changed from Antigonia Troas to Alexandria Troas, was at this time a flourishing colony (Colonia Juris Italici), highly favoured by the Romans as representing ancient Troy, and therefore as being the mythological cradle of their race. He visited it on his being driven from Ephesus after the tumult, a little earlier than he would naturally have left it. He had visited Troas in his second missionary journey (Act 16:8-11), but had left it in consequence of the vision which called him to Macedonia. He now stopped there on his journey through Macedonia to Corinth, which he had announced in 1Co 16:5. And a door was opened unto me of the Lord; literally, and a door had been opened to me in the Lord; i.e. and I found there a marked opportunity (1Co 16:9) for work in Christ. Some commentators, in that spirit of superfluous disquisition and idle letter-worship which is the bane of exegesis, here venture to discuss whether St. Paul was justified in neglecting this opportunity or not. Such discussions are only originated by not observing characteristic modes of expression. St. Paul merely means” circumstances would otherwise have been very favourable for my preaching of Christ; but I was in such a state of miserable anxiety that I lacked the strength to avail myself of them.” He was no more responsible for this state of mind, which belonged to his natural temperament, than he would have been responsible for a serious illness. To say that he ought to have had strength of mind enough to get the mastery over his feelings is only to say that Paul ought not to have been Paul. The neglect to use the opportunity was a “hindrance” which might in one sense be assigned to God, and in another to Satan. Moreover, that the opportunity was not wholly lost appears from the fact that St. Paul found a flourishing Christian community at Troas when he visit, d it on his return from this very journey (Act 20:6, Act 20:7), and that he stayed there at least once again, shortly before his martyrdom (2Ti 4:13). Indeed, it was probably at Troas that his final arrest took place. Of the Lord; rather, in the Lord; i.e. in the sphere of Christian work.

2Co 2:13

I had; literally, I have had. The perfect vividly realizes the scene through which he had passed. I had no rest. St. Paul had evidently told Titus to come from his mission to Corinth and meet him at Troas. But either St. Paul reached the town earlier than he intended, or Titus had been delayed. Now, the apostle was so intensely eager to know how his rebukes had been receivedthe name of “Corinth” was so deeply engraven on his hearthe could so ill endure the thought of being on angry terms with converts which he so deeply loved, that the non-appearance of Titus filled him with devouring anxiety and rendered him incapable of any other work. In my spirit; rather, to my spirit. It was the loftiest part of St. Paul’s naturehis spiritwhich was utterly incapacitated from effort by the restlessness of his miserable uncertainty about the Corinthian Church. The disclosure of such feelings ought to have had a powerful influence on the Corinthians. We see from 1Th 3:5, 1Th 3:9 that St. Paul yearned for tidings of his converts with an intensity which can hardly be realized by less fervent and self-devoted natures. I found not Titus my brother. Not only “the brother,” but “my brother;” the man whom in matters of this kind I most trusted as an affectionate and able fellow worker (2Co 7:6; 2Co 8:6; 2Co 12:18). Titus, though not mentioned in the Acts, is the most prominent person in this Epistle, and it is evident that St. Paul felt for him a warm affection and respect (2Co 7:13, 2Co 7:15; 2Co 8:16, 2Co 8:17; 2Ti 4:10). Taking my leave of them; i.e. of the Christians in Troas. The word for “taking leave” is also found in Mar 6:46. Into Macedonia. As he had intended to do (1Co 16:5; Act 20:1). He had doubtless told Titus to look out for him at Philippi, and expected to meet him there on his way to Troas.

2Co 2:14

Now thanks be unto God. The whole of this Epistle is the apostle’s Apologia pro vita sua, and is more full of personal details and emotional expressions than any other Epistle. But nothing in it is more characteristic than this sudden outburst of thanksgiving into which he breaks so eagerly that he has quite omitted to say what it was for which he so earnestly thanked God. It is only when we come to 2Co 7:5, 2Co 7:6 that we learn the circumstance which gave him such intense relief, namely, the arrival of Titus with good news from Corinth about the treatment of the offender and the manner in which the first letter had been received. It is true that this good news seems to have been dashed by other remarks of Titus which, perhaps, he withheld at first, and which may only have been drawn from him, almost against his will, by subsequent conversations. But, however checkered, the main and immediate intelligence was good, and the apostle so vividly recalls his sudden uplifting out of an abyss of anxiety and trouble (2Co 7:5) that the mere remembrance of it awakens a thankfulness to God which can only find vent by immediate utterance. Now thanks be unto God. The order of the original is more forcible, “But to God be thanks.” The remembrance of his own prostration calls into his mind the power and love of God. Which always causeth us to triumph; rather, who leadeth us in triumph. The verb thriambeuo may undoubtedly have this meaning, on the analogy of choreuo, I cause to dance, basileuo, I cause to reign, etc.; and other neuter verbs which sometimes have a factitive scribe. But in Col 2:15 St. Paul uses this word in the only sense in which it is actually found, “to lead in triumph;” and this sense seems both to suit the context better, and to be more in accordance with the habitual feelings of St. Paul (Gal 6:17; Col 1:24), and especially those with which these Epistles were written (1Co 4:9-13; 2Co 4:10; 2Co 11:23). St. Paul’s feeling is, therefore, the exact opposite of that of the haughty Cleopatra who said, , “I will not be led in triumph.” He rejoiced to be exhibited by God as a trophy in the triumphal procession of Christ. God, indeed, gave him the victory over the lower part of his nature (Rom 8:37), but this was no public triumph. The only victory of which he could boast was to have been utterly vanquished by God and taken prisoner “in Christ.” The savour of his knowledge. The mental vision of a Roman triumph summons up various images before the mind of St. Paul. He thinks of the streets breathing with the fragrance of incense offered upon many a wayside altar; of the tumult and rejoicing of the people; of the fame and glory of the conqueror; of the miserable captives led aside from the funeral procession to die, like Vercingetorix, in the Tullianum at the foot of the Capitoline hill. He touches on each of these incidents as they crowd upon him. The triumph of L. Mummius over the conquest of Corinth had been one of the most splendid which the Roman world had ever seen, and in A.D. 51, shortly before this Epistle was written (A.D. 57), Claudius had celebrated his triumph over the Britons and their king Caractacus, who had been led in the procession, but whose life had been spared (Tacitus, ‘Ann.,’ 13:36). The savour of his knowledge; i.e. the fragrance of the knowledge of Christ. By us. The details of the metaphor are commingled, as is often the case in writers of quick feeling and imagination. Here the apostles are no longer the vanquished who are led in procession, but the spectators who burn and diffuse the fragrance of the incense. In every place. Even at that early period, not twenty-five years after the Crucifixion, the gospel had been very widely preached in Asia and Europe (Rom 15:18, Rom 15:19).

2Co 2:15

We are unto God a sweet savour of Christ. The undeveloped metaphor involved in these words is that “we and our preaching diffuse to God’s glory the knowledge of Christ which is as a sweet savour.” The apostles are identified with their work; they were as the incense, crushed and burned, but diffusing everywhere a waft of perfume. St. Paul is still thinking of the incense burnt in the streets of Rome during a triumph”Dabimusque Divis Tura benignis” (Horace, ‘Od.,’ 2Co 4:2.51)though his expression recalls the “odour of a sweet smell,” of Le 2Co 1:9, 2Co 1:13, 2Co 1:17 (comp. Eph 5:2); see on this passage the excellent note of Bishop Wordsworth. In them that are saved, and in them that perish; rather, among those who are perishing and those who are being saved (comp. Act 2:47). The odour is fragrant to God, though those who breathe it may be variously affected by it.

2Co 2:16

The savour of death unto death; rather, a savour from death to death. To those who are perishing, the incense of the Name of Christ which our work enables them to breathe, seems to rise from death, and to lead to death. They (for here again the outlines of the metaphor shift) are like the doomed captives, who, as they breathed the incense on the day of triumph, knew where that triumph would lead them before the victors can climb the Capitol. To them it would seem to bring with it not “airs from heaven,” but wafts from the abyss. So Christ was alike for the fall and for the rising again of many (Luk 2:34). To some he was a Stone of stumbling (Act 4:11; Rom 9:33; 1Pe 2:8), which grinds to powder those on whom it falls (Mat 21:44). This contrast between the intended effect of the gospel as the power and wisdom of God, and its accidental effect, through man’s sin and blindness which converts it into a source of judgment, is often alluded to in the New Testament (1Co 1:18, 1Co 1:23, 1Co 1:24; Joh 3:19; Joh 9:39; Joh 15:22, etc.). St. Paul is fond of intensified expressions, like “from death unto death,” as in Rom 1:17; “from faith to faith,” etc. (2Co 4:17). Savour of life unto life; rather, a savour from life, as before. It came from the Source of life; it is issued in the sole reality of life. Similarly the rabbis spoke of the Law as “an aroma” alike of death and of life. “Why are the words of the Law likened to princes (Pro 8:6)? Because, like princes, they have the power to kill and to give life. Rays said to those that walk on its right, the Law is a medicine of life; to those that walk on the left side, a medicine of death“ (‘Shabbath,’ f. 88, 2; ‘Yoma,’ f. 72, 2) Everything is as a two-edged sword. All Christian privileges are, as they are used, either blessings or banes (Wordsworth). And who is sufficient for these things? St. Paul always implies that nothing but the grace of God could enable him to discharge the great duty laid upon him (2Co 3:5, 2Co 3:6; 1Co 15:10).

2Co 2:17

For we are not as many; rather, as the many. This clause is introduced to show how much courage and effort the work requires. “The many” might, by Greek idiom, mean “the majority.” The apparent harshness of the assertion that the majority of teachers in the apostolic age dealt untruly with the Word of God, led to the substitution of , the rest, in some manuscripts (D, E, F, G, L). But “the many” here means “the many antagonists of mine,” who preach a different gospel (Gal 1:6). It must be remembered that conceit, Pharisaism, moral laxity, and factions were all at work in the Corinthian Church. Which corrupt. The Word means who are merely” trafficking with,” “adulterating,” “huckstering,“ the Word of life. The word occurs in the LXX. of Isa 1:22; Ec 26:29; and Plato applies the same metaphor to the sophists, who peddle their wisdom about. The substantive kapelos means “a retail dealer,” and especially a vintner, and the verb kapeleuo is always used in a bad sense, like the English “to huckster.” Such deceitful dealers with the gospel are described in 2Pe 2:3, and in one of the Ignatian letters they are called Christemporoi, Christ-traffickers. Such were those who altered the perspective of the gospel, lowered its standard, and adulterated it with strange admixtures. Their methods and their teaching are constantly alluded to in these Epistles (1Co 1:17, 1Co 1:31; 1Co 2:1-4; and 2Co 10:12, 2Co 10:15; 2Co 11:13-15, etc.), But as of sincerity, but as of God. lake one who speaks from the sincerity of his heart (2Co 1:12; 2Co 4:2) and by the inspiration of God (1Co 14:25). Before God speak we in Christ. The sphere of our teaching as of our life is Christ; and our work is done

“As ever in our great Taskmaster’s eye.”

HOMILETICS

2Co 2:1-11

The uniting force of Christian love.

“But I determined this with myself,” etc. The subject which these words suggest is the uniting force of Christian love. We see it here uniting all its subjects in a common sympathy, a common punishment, and a common forgiveness. Here is Christian love

I. UNITING ALL ITS SUBJECTS IN A COMMON SYMPATHY. “But I determined this with myself, that I would not come again to you in heaviness. For if I make you sorry, who is he then that maketh me glad, but the same which is made sorry by me?” The language of Paul in the first four verses implies that the “heaviness” of one would be the heaviness of all, the sorrow of one the sorrow of all, the grief of one the grief of all, the joy of one the joy of all. And this is what Christian love does in all its subjects, wherever it exists. To whatever Church they belong, it gathers them together in one, it binds them together as attraction binds the material universe into one magnificent and harmonious system. What one feels all feel, all affections are drawn to a common centre, all hearts point to a common home. The pulsations of all throb in harmony and make music in the ear of God.

II. UNITING ALL ITS SUBJECTS IN A COMMON PUNISHMENT. “But if any have caused grief, he hath not grieved me, but in part; that I may not overcharge you all. Sufficient to such a man is this punishment, which was inflicted of many.” In the whole passage from 2Co 2:5-10 Paul’s reference is to that incestuous person of whom he wrote in his First Epistle (see 1Co 5:1-5), and whose excommunication or “punishment” he secured. The retribution which that man received was not the work of any one of them, but all joined in it. They all sympathetically concurred in it, and thus it was inflicted on many. They all loathed the same wrong and all endured the same punishment. True punishment for wrong is the work of love, not vengeance. Therefore punishment is not for destruction, but for restoration. The punishment that destroys the criminal is Satanic, not saintly; devilish, not Divine. Restoration is the work of love, the work of God. This is here distinctly stated. “So that contrariwise ye ought rather to forgive him, and comfort him, lest perhaps such a one should be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow.” It would seem from the language of the apostle that the punishment they had inflicted on this guilty person had produced a deep penitential sorrowlest he “should be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow.” His punishment had answered its purpose, therefore restore him and “confirm your love toward him.”

III. UNITING ALL ITS SUBJECTS IN A COMMON FORGIVENESS. “To whom ye forgive anything, I forgive also,” As if Paul had said, “You and I are so united in loving sympathy that those whom you forgive I forgive.” Observe here three things.

1. That forgiveness is the prerogative of Christian love. There is no love that has the true spirit of forgiveness but Christian. It is the highest form of love; higher than gratitude, esteem, adoration. It is the “new commandment.”

2. That in the exercise of forgiveness there is a consciousness of Christ. “For your sakes forgive I it in the person of Christ.” He who has Christly love in him has the very consciousness of Christ, feels as he feels, “one in the presence of Christ.” How often does Christ urge his genuine disciples to proclaim forgiveness where there is genuine repentance! “Whatsoever is loosed on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

3. That the forgiving spirit thwarts the purposes of the devil. “Lest Satan should get an advantage of us; for we are not ignorant of his devices.” Forgiveness is not, then, the prerogative of priests, but the prerogative of Christian love. A truly Christly man represents Christstands, so to say, in his stead; and “Christ hath power on earth to forgive sins.”

2Co 2:12-16

The preaching of the gospel.

“Furthermore, when I came to Troas,” etc. The subject of these verses is the preaching of the gospel. Notice

I. THE DIFFICULTIES CONNECTED WITH IT. “Furthermore, when I came to Troas to preach Christ’s gospel, and a door was opened unto me of the Lord, I had no rest in my spirit, because I found not Titus my brother: but taking my leave of them, I went from thence into Macedonia.” Just at the time when the apostle was about opening his mission at Troas, and the prospect of usefulness seemed most suitable, he encountered a serious difficulty, and that difficulty was the absence of Titus, whom he fully expected. The disappointment cost him such great anxiety that he resigned his purpose, retired from the scene, and wended his way in another direction. Strange that an inspired man should have met with such a disappointment, and stranger still that a disappointment should have so disheartened him that he relinquishes for a time the grand message with which Heaven had especially entrusted him. Antecedently we might have supposed that a man going forth in a true spirit to preach the gospel would encounter no difficulties, that Heaven would sweep away all obstructions from his path; but not so. Perhaps no class of men encounter more difficulties in their mission than ministers. Many become so baffled, confounded, and depressed that, like Jeremiah, they exclaim, “I will speak no more in thy Name.”

II. THE TRIUMPHS ACHIEVED BY IT. “Now thanks be unto God, which always causeth us to triumph in Christ, and maketh manifest the savour of his knowledge by us in every place? The grandest of all victories is the victory over sin. He who conquers the moral foes of one soul achieves a far grander triumph than he who lays a whole army dead upon the battle plain. There is no grandeur, but infamy, in the latter conquest. It is here taught that these victories were achieved whenever they preached. “Always causeth us to triumph.” Wherever they preached, “in every place,” and always through God, “thanks be to God.” He is the Author of their victory; he constructed the weapon, he instructed the soldiers, he inspired and gave effect to the strokes.

III. THE INFLUENCES RESULTING FROM IT. “For we are unto God a sweet savour of Christ, in them that are saved, and in them that perish.” Observe:

1. The manward aspect of gospel preaching.

(1) It quickens some. “To the other the savour of life unto life.”

(2) It destroys others. “To the one we are the savour of death unto death.” These effects occur wherever the gospel is preached.

2. The Godward aspect of gospel preaching. “We are unto God a sweet savour of Christ.” Whatever the results of preaching, baneful or beneficial, it is acceptable to God if rightly discharged. Ay, the preaching of the gospel is the cause of immense good and the occasion of great evil. Like the waters of the sea, the light of the firmament, the breeze of the atmosphere, it is the Divine cause of good; but man, through the perversity of his nature, may make it the occasion of his ruin.

IV. THE SOLEMNITY CONNECTED WITH IT. Paul felt its solemnity and exclaims, “Who is sufficient for these things?” Who, of himself, is “sufficient” to expound the meaning of the gospel, to exemplify the spirit of the gospel, to inwork into human souls the eternal principles of the gospel? Paul adds in another place, Our sufficiency is of God.”

2Co 2:17

The way in which the gospel should be preached.

“For we are not as many, which corrupt the Word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ.” The words suggests the way in which the gospel should be preached.

I. WITH CONSCIOUS HONESTY. “As of sincerity.” This is a state of mind in direct antagonism to all +duplicity. No man who is not true to his convictions and to himself can preach the gospel. He must be a true man who would preach truth, a loving man who would inculcate love. To have conscious honesty he must preach his own personal convictions of the gospel, not the opinions of others.

II. WITH CONSCIOUS DIVINITY. “As of God, in the sight of God.”

1. He must be conscious that God sent him. From God, not from schools, sects, Churches, or ecclesiastics, but direct from God himself.

2. He must be conscious that God sees him. “In the sight of God.” This consciousness will make him humble, earnest, fearless, caring nothing for the frowns or smiles of his audience.

III. WITH CONSCIOUS CHRISTLINESS. “Speak we in Christ.” To be “in Christ” is to be in his character, in his Spirit. “The love of Christ constraineth me,” etc. He who is conscious of the Spirit of Christ within him will be free from all self-seeking, all sordid motives, all cravings for popularity and fame.

HOMILIES BY C. LIPSCOMB

2Co 2:1-11

Further explanations and directions touching matters lust discussed.

The most copious writer in the New Testament is the man whose inward constitution and life are most fully brought into view. If the fact itself is noteworthy, the art of its management is even more significant. Didactic treatises would have excluded this method of blending the abstract and the concrete, and therefore the epistolary form which St. Paul adopted. What do we mean by this form? Much more, indeed, than a facile and graceful way of communicating facts and truths. In the Epistle we have the personality of the writer interblended with doctrine, duty, experience; so that in St. Paul’s case we have not merely the gospel as a body of facts and truths, but the gospel in the consciousness of a leading exponent, and, in some respects, the most prominent representative of certain phases of that gospel. Gentile Christianity, as distinguished from the earlier Judaic Christianity, could never have been understood except for this intermingling of Christianity as a system and Christianity as a life in the history of our apostle. Both the conditions met in him as they met in no other apostle. The two things must not be confounded. Many in our day fall into this error and speak of Christianity as if it were only “a life.” It is a life, but it is something else besides and something antecedent to life. Now, the epistolary style, and still more its method of thought, allow full play to the wholeness of Christianity. Its dogmas are preserved. Its experimental and practical forces are maintained. Its individuation is provided for. And thus, while seeing the system, we see also its life in the soul. If the psalmist, King David, is the signal representative of formal and spiritual Judaism in the Old Testament, St. Paul is the corresponding figure in the New Testament. At this point we are able to estimate the very great and specific value of the Second Epistle to the Corinthians. Beyond any of his writings, this unfolds the author, and does it with such masterly skill and on so comprehensive a scale as to give a twofold insight into his system and life. What an extension of the “Acts”! No St. Luke could have done this. It was the “Acts” in their secret headsprings in the man, and the man only could record what they were. The account of his personal feelings is resumed in this chapter. Not only for their sakes, but for his own, the visit had been postponed, since he was unwilling to come in sorrow. The “rod” would have been painful to him; they were to exercise discipline under the directions of his letter and thus forestall an occasion of grief to him. If he had made them sorry, who but they could give him joy? This was the reason for his writing, the reason too of deferring his visit; and thus the two things had been designed to cooperate in one result. A controversy is like a disease; the mode of treatment must be varied to suit its stages. No doubt personal presence, conversations, direct appeals, are best at some times for adjusting difficulties; at other times, letters are preferable. The discernment of the apostle prompted him to write and then to await the effect; and it was all in the interest of peace and for his and their consolation. Inspired by this confidence, he had written them a severe rebuke. It was a most painful duty; it was a duty, however, of love; and because of this coincidence, conscience and affection being at work in his soul, he had suffered most keenly. “Out of much affliction and anguish of heart I wrote unto you with many tears.” The great soul was not afraid of words nor of the critics of words. He had a rare kind of courage. It was the boldness to say how much he thought and how much he felt, and to send forth his words laden with the meanings they had for him, that they might convey exactly those meanings to others. The love was not overstated, for it was a father’s love towards the children of his heart: “More abundantly unto you.” Evidently his paramount aim is to assure the Corinthians of his warm affection for them. Other feelings are held in abeyance; no mention now of suspicions, jealousies, backbitings, and other wrongs, by which he had been tortured; only the love, the impassioned love, he cherished for those whose sorrow and joy were his sorrow and joy. How naturally the way is prepared for what follows! “If any have caused grief [referring to the incestuous person], he hath not grieved me, but in part, that I may not overcharge you all.” The Revised Version,” If any hath caused sorrow, he hath caused sorrow, not to me, but in part (that I press not too heavily) to you all.” Conybeare and Howson, “As concerns him who has caused the pain, it is not me that he has pained, but some of you (some, I say), that I may not press too harshly upon all.” Many commentators read it thus: “If any have caused grief, he hath grieved not me, but more or less (that I be not too heavy on him) all of you.” What is the point of interest is the light in which St. Paul now regarded the offender and the punishment inflicted upon him. Punishment had been punishment; it had expressed righteous indignation, upheld official order, vindicated the holy authority of law. It had been effectual in bringing the flagrant sinner to repentance and had proved a warning to others. But were the effects to stop here? A great work had been done and yet other results were possiblewere most desirable. Precisely here the farsighted wisdom of St. Paul attracts our admiration. Discipline of a mechanical or of a military kind is cheap enough. True reformatory and saving discipline is a costly thing, requiring forethought and afterthought, the looking “before and after,” which has won its place among the aphorisms of statesmanship. Much fruit falls and rots just as the ripening season approaches, Special care was needed, so the apostle argued, lest Satan should spoil the wholesome act in the sequel. “Sufficient to such a man is this punishment, which was inflicted of many.” “Sufficient” leads the sentence. And the “many” has its weight, since in nothing is the power of the many so much felt as in condemnation.

“There is no creature loves me,
And if I die, no soul shall pity me.”

This is Gloster perfected in King Richard. St. Paul urges the forgiveness of this gross offender. On the contrary, “Ye ought rather to forgive him, and comfort him, lest perhaps such a one should be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow.” Make evident your love to him; so he beseeches them. If he is restored to their affection, this would prove that the Church was “obedient in all things.” All through he keeps the dignity and authority of the Church in commanding view, and, as he had laid a most solemn duty on its conscience, so now he recognizes its high relationship in the matter of reconciliation. Would the brethren forgive him? So would be, and that too in the most impressive manner”in the sight of Christ.” The reasoning of the apostle at this point ought to make a most profound and lasting impression on Christian thinkers. Sincere motives and upright intentions do not always preserve good men from terrible blunders in administering Church discipline. All unawares, the imagination exaggerates, right feeling becomes jealous of itself, motives are looked at askance, a spurious consistency sets up its tyrannical claims, and, in no long time, law parts company with authority, and equity is crushed by justice. No attitude in which St. Paul appears before us is so finely characteristic of high manhood as when he pleads for extreme thoughtfulness and tender consideration in the use of legitimate power. Who ever suffered from the numberless forms of injustice as he did? Who died daily as he did? The “beasts” at Ephesus were not merely such as do physical violence, but in their utter want of all moral sensibility to truth and right. Yet this was not the worst. Ask a man who has had a large experience in public life what has occasioned him the greatest amount of vexation, and he will tell you that it was the misrepresentation and carping criticism and wilful littleness of spirit pursuing him continually which had most embittered his career. St. Paul was subjected to these annoyances through all the middle period of his apostolic life. And what did he learn from them? To be distrustful of his own heart, to keep an open and vigilant eye on his infirmities, to be specially guarded as to the ambitious uses of power, and to foreclose every avenue to his soul through which an entrance might be effected of a fanatical temper in rebuke, in the management of Church troubles, and in the relation sustained to the other apostles. In the case of the Corinthian offender we see his lofty bearing. Ready to forgive, glad to forgive, yet he waits till he can say to the Church, “If ye forgive anything, I forgive also.” And hear his reason, “Lest Satan should get an advantage of us: for we are not ignorant of his devices.” Never could he have been St. Paul, apostle of the Gentiles, without this intense conception intensely realized of Satan as an infernal agent of prodigious power and unceasing activity. In his theology, in his way of looking at men and things, in his calculation of the forces to be met in the great conflict, it would have been inexplicably strange had he ignored or depreciated this gigantic spirit of evil. Elsewhere we have his allusions to Satan in other aspects of his character. Here he is the schemer, the wily plotter, the adroit strategist, observant of every movement, and on the alert forevery opportunity. St. Paul was not afraid to acknowledge that in this matter at Corinth Satan might even yet turn things to his advantage. Recall the words (1Co 5:5), “To deliver such a one unto Satan, for the destruction of the flesh;” and yet they were to labour and intercede “that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.” And now, this repentant and forgiven man, should they not save him from the snares of Satan?save themselves, too, from being overreached by the arch-enemy of Christ and all goodness?L.

2Co 2:12-17

Coming to Troas (disquietude; defence of his apostleship)

Quite abruptly St. Paul mentions that he came to Troas. Why he left Ephesus he does not say, but we infer it was because of his anxiety to see Titus, and hear from him how his letter to the Corinthians had been received. There was a fine opening at Troas to preach the gospel, and yet he was greatly disquieted as Titus did not meet him. “Taking my leave of them, I went from thence into Macedonia.” Here he met Titus, though, in the excitement of joy, he fails to state it. The sudden outburst of gratitude, “Thanks be unto God,” expresses his exultation over the good tidings Titus had brought from Corinth, so that here, as is frequently the case, we get the outward history of events from the biography of the apostle’s heart. All he had expected, and even more, had been realized, and he breaks forth in thanksgiving.

“Ye that in waters glide, and ye that walk
The earth, and stately tread or lowly creep,
Witness if I be silent, morn or ev’n,
To hill or valley, fountain or fresh shade,
Made vocal by my song, and taught his praise.”

St. Paul was not a silent man in his happiness. No depth of emotion satisfied him unless it could be imparted to others. On this occasion his soul found utterance in thanking God, “which always causeth us to triumph in Christ.” A military triumph rises before him; the victorious general is returning to the capital; the long procession moves before his eye; and, in the train, the captives brought home are conspicuous. Such a captive is the apostle following the chariot of his Lord. “Yet (at the same time, by a characteristic change of metaphor) an incense bearer, scattering incense (which was always done on these occasions), as the procession moves on” (Conybeare and Howson). Christ is the fragrance; “we are unto God a sweet savour of Christ.” Whether men are saved or lost, Christ is Christ, and the fragrance cannot perish. There will be a “savour of death unto death” and a “savour of life unto life;” but, in either issue, the glory of God’s government is maintained. For, so far as we can see into the relations of Christ to man and of man to Christ, the fundamental fact in each aspect of the subject is human freedom. Of his own freewill Christ took upon himself our flesh and blood, suffered, and died; and of our own free will, made such by him and acted on as such by the Holy Spirit, we accept his atonement. If we reject the offered mercy, the act of our rejection testifies to the infinitude of the mercy, and the “savour of Christ” is none the less “sweet” in itself, “And who is sufficient for these things?” Here is no one-sided gospel, that accommodates conscience to taste, and allows a compromise between duty and inclination. Here is a gospel that is the “savour of death unto death” and of “life unto life.” Who is competent to maintain its stern truthfulness by preaching both these doctrines? The test of a faithful minister lies in the wise and earnest use of each class of facts. Is anything so difficult? Take the natural intellect; take the natural affections; take language as the vehicle of expression; and by what power of culture can a preacher be found who can set forth the gospel in its twofoldness of “death unto death” and “life unto life”? St. Paul, in the seventeenth verse, answers the question as to sufficiency. Now, as always, it is not simply the gospel which is the power and wisdom of God, but his way of preaching it. He declares that “many corrupt the Word of God;” not of this number is he. And where does the danger of corruption exist? In not holding with a balanced mind the “death” and the “life,” so as to shun overstatements and understatements in each instance. To preach after St. Paul’s manner, one must have sinceritythe truth unmixed with human speculations; he must preach what God has revealed as to his Law and its righteousness, no more, no less; and he must preach it in Christ, himself in Christ, his gospel in Christ, and so preach as to spirit and temper and manner that the fragrance shall breathe in all his words.L.

HOMILIES BY J.R. THOMSON

2Co 2:3, 2Co 2:4

Sympathy in grief and joy.

How far from a formal or mechanical ministry was that of the apostle! He entered into the circumstances and the feelings of those for whom he had laboured. Nothing which affected their interests was indifferent to him. Some in his position would have said, “We have done our duty; it is no affair of ours how they act; why should we trouble ourselves regarding them?” Not so St. Paul. When the Corinthians acted unworthily, his sensitive heart was distressed; when they repented, that heart bounded with joy. This was not altogether the effect of natural temperament; it was the fruit of true fellowship of spirit with his Lord.

I. THE SPIRIT OF SYMPATHY IS THE SPIRIT OF CHRIST AND OF CHRISTIANITY. In the earthly life of our Saviour we behold evidences of this spirit. He rejoiced in men’s joys; he wept by the grave of his friend; he sighed and groaned when he met with instances of unspirituality and unbelief. It was pity which brought him first to earth and then to the cross of Calvary. Similarly with the precepts of the New Testament. The lesson is often virtually repeated, “Rejoice with those who do rejoice, and weep with those who weep.”

II. THE SPIRIT OF SYMPATHY IS SOMETIMES THE OCCASION OF SORROW.

1. The spectacle of a professing Christian falling into sin awakens commiseration and distress in the mind of every true follower of Christ.

2. The spectacle of a Christian conniving at sin, or regarding it with comparative unconcern, is painful in the extreme to one solicitous for Christian purity.

3. Sorrow, from whatever cause, awakens sorrow in a mind sensitive as was that of Paul.

III. THE SPIRIT OF SYMPATHY IS SOMETIMES THE OCCASION OF JOY. Even amidst personal difficulties and opposition encountered in his ministry Paul was not indifferent to the joys of his converts. And when those whose conduct had pained him came to a better mind and afforded him satisfaction, he rejoiced with them in their happiness. If there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner that repenteth, surely he most resembles the Father of spirits and his immediate attendants whose heart is lifted up with exhilaration and delight by anything that manifests the growth and victory of the Divine kingdom upon earth.T.

2Co 2:11

The devices of Satan.

The course of St. Paul with regard to the Christian Church at Corinth was one of great difficulty. A flagrant case of immorality demanded his decided interference. Yet he wished to deal, both with the offender and with those who made too light of his offence, in such a way as not to endanger his personal influence over the Corinthian Christians generally. If he were too lax or too severe, in either case he would give his enemies an opportunity to malign him. And he knew that there were Judaizing teachers who were ready to attribute the immorality to Paul’s doctrines of grace. So that the apostle trod a very difficult path, which Satan had set with snares on either hand. He needed to be on his guard against the insidious machinations of the enemy, and he gave the Corinthians to understand that such was his attitude.

I. SATAN‘S DEVICES ARE MANY AND VARIED. The resources of an earthly foe ought not to be underestimated by a general who would gain the victory; and if the tactics vary with circumstances, vigilance and self-possession, courage and care, are all needed. Satan besets Christians with many temptations; if he cannot tempt them into conscious sin, he will endeavour to entrap them into some error of judgment and conduct which may give him an advantage over them.

II. SATAN‘S DEVICES ARE SKILFUL AND CRAFTY. In the temptation of our Lord this was abundantly manifest, and the Saviour gave his disciples to understand that they would be called upon to endure the assaults of the same unsleeping foe. Against his ever varying tactics, against his all but inexhaustible resources, it becomes, therefore, every Christian soldier to be upon his guard.

III. SATAN‘S DEVICES ARE THE MEANS OF SNARING MANY OF THE UNWARY. Some who once ran well have been hindered. Some who have resisted one enemy have fallen beneath the attack of another. The annals of every Church, however pure, tell of those against whom the adversary has directed his blows only too successfully. “Let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.”

IV. SATAN‘S DEVICES NEED TO BE WITHSTOOD WITH WATCHFULNESS AND PRAYER. It is something not to be ignorant of them. The unwary and unthinking are entrapped through very ignorance. Yet knowledge is no sufficient protection. A distrust of our own ability and a reliance upon superior power and wisdom are indispensably necessary in order to safety and deliverance. Well may the inspired counsel be received with gratitude and acted upon with diligence, “Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil.”T.

2Co 2:12

An open door.

Men are prone to think what doors are open to them to enter, through which they may pass to their own profit, or advancement, or pleasure. Paul’s was an unselfish and benevolent nature. He was a true follower of Christ, who came, not to do his own will, and not to be ministered unto, but to minister. Again and again, in the course of his life, his heart was gladdened by the spectacle of a door of holy service set open before him by God’s providence, inviting him to enter in and in the name of the Lord to take possession.

I. THE OPEN DOOR LEADS TO OPPORTUNITIES OF WORK FOR CHRIST. To the true Christian this is more desirable than aught beside. Paul went nowhere but some door opened before him. A synagogue was open; he entered it, and reasoned out of the Law or the prophets. A marketplace thronged with citizens afforded him opportunity for preaching the true God and the eternal life. Even a prison door, when it closed upon him, did not shut him off from human souls. It is well that Christians should think, not so much of their own interests, as of the service of their Master.

II. THE OPEN DOOR IS SET OPEN BY DIVINE PROVIDENCE. “Opened of the Lord” is the apostle’s expression. We may not see the hand, but we should not ignore it. When God himself makes a way, his doing so is a command to his people to adopt and to follow it. When he opens, “no man can shut.”

III. THE OPEN DOOR IS A DOOR OF PROMISE TO THOSE WHO WILL ENTER IN. Why is the door set open? Is there no purpose in this? Surely it is a want of faith to hold back when the Lord himself so manifestly encourages his servants to “go in and possess the land.”

IV. THE OPEN DOOR WILL BE SHUT AGAINST THOSE WHOSE NEGLIGENCE OR DISOBEDIENCE HINDERS THEM FROM ENTERING IT. As the door of salvation will be closed against those who fail to enter in, so the door of service will be shut to exclude those who turn aside when the hand of God has opened it and has beckoned them to enter, but has beckoned them in vain.T.

2Co 2:14-16

The solemnity of the ministry.

A Roman triumph, to which the apostle refers in this passage, was the most magnificent of earthly pageants. The conqueror, in whose honour it was given, was an illustrious commander, who had defeated an enemy or gained a province. The route traversed by the triumphal procession lay through Rome to the Capitol itself. The spectators who feasted their eyes upon the sight were the vast population of the city. Before, the victor passed onwards the captives taken in the campaign, and the spoil which had been wrested from the foe. Behind, followed the army, flushed with victory and rejoicing in the insolence and pride of military might. The conqueror himself, mounted aloft upon his car, was the centre of observation and attraction. Every mark of honour was paid to him. Sacrifices were offered by the priests to the gods to whose favour victory was ascribed. Incense bearers marched in the procession, and fragrant clouds ascended, floating in the air and mingling with the shouts and with the strains of martial music. And in the temples sacrificial offerings were accompanied by the presentation of the odorous incense.

I. THE TRIUMPHS OF THE GOSPEL. The warfare of the Word is against the sins of the rebels who have defied the authority of the Most High. In apostolic times the progress of the gospel, though often opposed and often checked, appealed to the view of Paul as a triumphal progress. God, who had triumphed over the enemies whom he converted into his friends and companions, made them, as his representatives, triumph in their turn, and admitted them to share his triumph over the enemies of truth and righteousness.

II. THE INCENSE BEARERS IN THE TRIUMPHAL TRAIN. There is a prodigality of wealth in the imagery here employed. Paul and his fellow ministers were themselves both captives and also incense bearers”unto God a sweet savour of Christ.” As the Son of the Eternal is infinitely acceptable to his Father, so those who share his mission and purpose, and faithfully publish his gospel, are well pleasing to him, as the odour of the fragrant incense to the nostril.

III. THE ACCOMPANIMENTS AND RESULTS OF THE GOSPEL TRIUMPH. These are twofold and opposed.

1. To the perishing the ministry is a sentence of death. Some captives were taken aside and put to death in cold blood as the procession approached the Capitoline hill. The incense to such was deadlyan odour premonitory of a violent and miserable death. Thus the proclamation of the gospel, in itself an unspeakable blessing, is actually the occasion of the condemnation of unbelievers, who reject and despise it.

2. To those in course of salvation the ministry is a message of life. Welcome and pleasant alike to God and man, the glad tidings of redemption tell of life to those whose desert is death. A welcome and delightful fragrance to the saved, it promises participation in the glorious victory and the eternal reign of the Divine Redeemer.T.

2Co 2:14

The triumph.

The emotional and susceptible nature of the Apostle Paul was quick to recognize either opposition or success. And when it occurred to him, in the providence of God, to meet with instances in which his message was gratefully welcomed and he himself was cordially appreciated, his heart was filled with joy, and he was eager to utter forth gratitude and praise. When elated with prosperity in his evangelistic work, he felt that God was always making him to triumph. His spiritual successes were to him more glorious than the triumph which the victorious general enjoyed upon his return to Rome, when he ascended the Capitoline hill, with his fellow-warriors in the procession and his captives in his train. What an inspiration do these words of the apostle afford to those who are engaged in the service of the Saviour, and are experiencing the vicissitudes of earthly ministry!

I. IF THERE IS WARFARE, THERE WILL BE VICTORY. The Christian life is a warfare, involving effort, danger, and resistance. Much more manifestly does this figure apply to those who preach the gospel, especially as evangelists among the heathen, the degraded, the unbelieving. Such stand in need both of spiritual courage and el spiritual weapons. And in the stress of the conflict, in the noise and tumult of warfare, it is well for them to remember that the issue is not uncertain, that conquest is close at hand.

II. IF THERE ARE ENEMIES, THEY WILL BECOME EITHER CAPTIVES OR, BETTER STILL, ALLIES AND FELLOW SOLDIERS. When spiritual opponents are many and daring, and when their onset is sore and perhaps alarming, the heart of the soldier of Christ may sometimes sink within him. But he is required to estimate the fortunes of the war, not by human probabilities, but by Divine predictions. Of those who oppose themselves none shall prevail. Some shall be vanquished and put to shame. Others shall confess the justice and the grace of Christ, shall lay down the arms of rebellion, shall enlist in the spiritual host, shall take to them the armour of God.

III. IF THERE IS DISAPPOINTMENT, THERE WILL BE RECOMPENSE. Paul knew often enough what it is to be cast down. The higher the hope, the bitterer the sorrow when that hope is frustrated. It sometimes happens that, where the Christian warrior spends all his strength, and attacks the enemy with courage and perseverance, there he experiences the most humiliating rebuff. Then let him be assured that different experience is in store for him. Foes shall yield, whose stubbornness, it seemed to him, no power could subdue. Victory shall be to the faithful and to the brave.

IV. IF THERE BE A SHARING OF CHRIST‘S CROSS, THERE SHALL BE ALSO A SHARING OF HIS THRONE. Our Lord, the Captain of our salvation, knew by experience the power of the enemy. And can it be expected that with us all will be prosperous? Shall we not be followers of him, and know the likeness of his death? Thus shall it be given to him that overcometh to sit down with him upon his throne.T.

2Co 2:16

Who is sufficient?

Those to whom the ministry of the gospel of Christ is merely a profession, who regard the offices of religion as a routine, who consider chiefly such emoluments and advantages as may be connected with it, read these words with astonishment and without sympathy, But those who think as Paul thought of the ministry, with a wondering amazement at the grace of God and at the provision made in Christ for the passage of that grace to man, those who realize the preciousness of the soul and the solemnity alike of life and of eternity, cannot but cherish a conviction that, for a service so high and holy as the ministry of God’s Word, no human qualification can suffice.

I. THE INSUFFICIENCY OF HUMAN POWER. To understand this we must regard:

1. The deficiencies of the human agent. No minister has an adequate view of the Saviour he preaches; none has a sufficiently keen sympathy with the souls of his fellowmen; none has a power of persuasion commensurate with the necessities of the case; none has the burning zeal for God which was perfectly displayed by Christ alone.

2. The peculiar difficulties of the work to be accomplished. The ignorance, the levity, the prejudices, the wilfulness, the gross sinfulness of men,all must be taken into account if we would have a just conception of the magnitude of the great task which is entrusted to the Christian minister.

II. THE SUFFICIENCY OF DIVINE GRACE.

1. This is revealed to those, and to those alone, who are sincerely conscious of their own powerlessness and the inadequacy of all human aid.

2. God’s own commission is an assurance that he will not withhold the assistance needed. The work is his; his is the call and his the authority.

3. God, by his Spirit, assists all lowly and faithful agents in his service, strengthening the feeble, so that by their means, however seemingly inadequate, great results are accomplished.

4. By the same invisible but marvellous agency God overcomes the obstacles encountered in the sinner’s heart, and makes the word of man effectual because the vehicle of the power and grace of Heaven.T.

HOMILIES BY E. HURNDALL

2Co 2:4

The pains of rebuking.

I. THESE ARE VERY REAL TO GRACIOUS NATURES. Some delight to castigate; but they are not gracious or noblethey are rather fitted to feel the rod than to wield it. An affectionate parent often suffers more than his chastened child; a faithful pastor than the rebuked Church member. Paul said that if he came to Corinth he would not spare; before he came, he did not spare himself. There was grief at Corinth, but as much or more in Macedonia. Joy in causing suffering is a mark f degradation. We condemn pleasure obtained from cruel sports; pleasure obtained from wounding minds is even more barbaric and revolting. We may feel compelled to rebuke, and that sharply. We can never be justified in extracting joy from the suffering occasioned.

II. WHEN REBUKE IS PAINFUL TO THE REBUKER IT IS MORE LIKELY TO PROVE EFFICACIOUS TO THE REBUKED.

1. There is evidence of qualification to rebuke. The rebuke does not spring from personal feeling.

2. Undue harshness will be avoided.

3. A gracious tenderness is likely to permeate the severest rebuke.

4. If known to the rebuked, a salutary influence will be exercised. Nothing is more irritating or hardening than to be rebuked by one who evidently enjoys his office. But if the one who points out our fault is evidently deeply pained himself, we must be very obdurate if we are insensible to such an appeal. The wayward child is conquered, not by the rod in his mother’s hand, but by the tears in her eyes.

III. THE OBJECT OF RIGHT REBUKING IS NOT THE PAIN OF THE REBUKED. This should ever be kept in mind. We are not judges to pass sentences of mere punishment. We may grieve our fellows, but only for their good. We may cause pain, but only as a means to something else. Castigation is a beginning, not an end. We have effected nothing except failure if we have merely caused sorrow. It is a thankless task indeed merely to make men sad. It is a noble one to make them sad that we may make them holier.

IV. RIGHT REBUKING IS EVIDENCE OF MUCH LOVE. Not to suffer sin upon our neighbour is a great duty; but the best natures are apt to shrink from reproving. Great love will compel them, as it did Paul. We often cannot show our love more conclusively. It may not at once be apparent to men, but it will to Godand to men by and by. The strongest evidence of Paul’s love for the Corinthian Church was exhibited in the rod which he held over it. So of God himself: those whom he loves he chastens. (Heb 12:6).H.

2Co 2:5-11

Restoring the backslider.

I. CHURCH DISCIPLINE SHOULD BE ADMINISTERED BY THE CHURCH. “This punishment which was inflicted by the many” (2Co 2:6). Not by an individual, be he the pope himself, nor by priests or clergy, but by the whole body of the individual Church or a majority of its members. A Christian has a right to be judged by his peers.

II. CHURCH DISCIPLINE SHOULD EVER HAVE IN VIEW RESTORATION. Its object is not to punish the offender so much as to do him good, and at the same time to preserve the Church’s purity. Church discipline should not be regarded as a final act towards the backslider, but with it should ever be associated prayers and hope that the severance may be brief. The Church rejects that she may accept; she casts out that she may receive back again. So Church discipline should never be of a character to hinder repentance or to render restoration impossible.

III. CHURCH DISCIPLINE SHOULD BE ADMINISTERED WITH GREAT DISCRETION,

1. On the one hand, it may be too slight and not produce suitable effects.

2. On the other, it may be so excessive as to drive the offender to despair.

3. In either case Satan will gain an advantage (2Co 2:11), which he is ever seeking and has often found when the Church or its leaders have attempted the delicate task of discipline. The Church’s discipline of persecution and intolerance has served the devil’s purposes admirably in many a dark century. And the Church’s discipline of indifference and false charity has done similar service in many a century boasting of its light and breadth of thought and liberty.

IV. PENITENCE ON THE PART OF AN OFFENDER IS A STRONG ARGUMENT FOR PROMPT RESTORATION TO FELLOWSHIP. The duty of restoration is not so fully recognized as it might be. Often it is the predilection of the powers that be, rather than the condition of the offender, which determines whether he shall be restored or not. But when the honour of the Church has been vindicated, and the offender is undoubtedly contrite, the way of duty is clear. A Church which will not restore then, deserves to be excommunicated itself,

V. RESTORATION IS NOT TO BE TO TOLERATION, BUT TO LOVE. The love is to exist whilst the discipline is being inflicted. It is to manifest itself’ unreservedly when discipline is removed. Many are restored to suspicion, coldness, contempta restoration which paves the way for a more fatal fall. If God forgives some professing Christians as they forgive others (and this is their frequent prayer), their share of the Divine forgiveness is likely to be a very slender one.H.

2Co 2:14-17

The constant triumph of the faithful minister.

I. HE TRIUMPHS BECAUSE WHEREVER HE GOES HE MAKES KNOWN GOD AND CHRIST. This is a true triumph. If he succeeds in doing this he has a great successthe success of performance of duty and of fulfilment of the Divine will. Moreover, the kingdom of God is almost certain to be extended. Apparent failure, when more closely examined and tried by the test of time, will often be found to be success.

II. HIS TRIUMPH IS NOT DEPENDENT UPON THE RECEPTION OF HIS MESSAGE.

1. To some his word is a savour from death unto death. The Christ proclaimed is to them a dead Christ, and his gospel lifeless and powerless, leading them only to denser spiritual death. This is very disheartening when viewed under one aspect. But Christ is preached, the work is acceptable to God, the Divine mercy is vindicated, and the responsibility of the disastrous issue rests solely on the rejecters. The excellence of the truth is demonstrated by its rejection on the part of the vile and sin-loving.

2. To others his word is a savour from life unto life. Here the triumph is unquestioned by all. A tiring Christ is recognized, and one who has life-giving power.

III. HE TRIUMPHS ONLY AS HE IS FAITHFUL. For only so does he honour God and set forth the truth as it is in Jesus. The faithful minister:

1. Does not corrupt the Word of God (2Co 2:17). Many do

(1) by false interpretation,

(2) bias,

(3) insinuation,

(4) omission,

(5) addition.

Prompted by

(1) gain,

(2) applause,

(3) carnal, preferences.

2. But

(1) distrusts himself, crying, “Who is sufficient for these things?

(2) uses utmost sincerity;

(3) gets his message from God”of God” (2Co 2:17);

(4) speaks as in the sight of God;

(5) speaks in Christ, in communion with him as the Head.

IV. His TRIUMPH IS OF GOD. He is led in triumph by God (2Co 2:14). God has triumphed over him, and now God triumphs through him. His sufficiency is of God (2Co 3:5). He has no power when he only has his own; he has all power when he has God’s.H.

HOMILIES BY R. TUCK

2Co 2:1-4

The sorrow of faithful love.

The apostle has still in mind the unfaithful member who had brought so sad a disgrace upon the whole Church. His conduct in the matter, especially in changing his mind when he was fully expected at Corinth, had been misrepresented, and made the occasion of accusations against him as a fickle-minded, self-willed man. He therefore here explains why he did not visit Corinth while it remained uncertain how the offending member would be treated. He had no thought but for the truest well being of the Corinthian Church. He could not leave them to go on in sin. He could not bear to think that those whom he had instructed in Christ were indifferent to sin. Love, feeling sorrow for the sinning member and for the dishonoured Church, cannot be satisfied without earnest warnings about the sin and efforts to remove it. Such efforts carry and express both the sorrow and the love. Illustrate by the patient, gracious pleadings of God with sinning and backsliding Israel, as given in the prophets Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Hosea.

I. SUCH SORROWING LOVE CAN PERSONALLY SUFFER. Here it led the apostle to act in a way which brought to him the bitterest form of suffering, even the suspicion and mistrust of his very friends. Even that he would bear, if but his desire for the spiritual welfare of the Corinthian Church could be realized. “Men might think that it had cost him little to write sharp words like those which he has in his mind. He remembers well what he felt as he dictated themthe intensity of his feelings, pain that such words should be needed, anxiety as to their issue, the very tears which then, as at other times, were the outflow of strong emotion. Those who were indignant at his stem words should remember, or at least learn to believe this, and so to see in them the strongest proof of his abounding love for them.” The heart of St. Paul was in this matter as the heart of him who said, “As many as I love I rebuke and chasten.” Illustrate what a pressure on personal feeling it is for the parent or teacher to chasten. They often suffer much more than do those whom they feel called to smite. Even the misunderstanding, and even the temporary hatred, of those whom we would benefit, must be borne, in our earnest endeavours to deliver them from the dominion and defilement of their sins.

II. SUCH SORROWING LOVE CAN DEAL SEVERELY WITH THE SINNER. It is never love to pass by sin. It is no true love that touches the sin too lightly and gives inefficient and unworthy apprehensions of it. St. Paul seemed to be too severe. He could not be. The case called for an extreme of severity. It was not merely that the offence was an open and scandalous one, but, what was even worse, the Church seemed to be pervaded by a false sentiment concerning it, and manifested no distress in having the guilty member among them. In some way, St. Paul felt, he must arouse them to a sense of their shame. Strong language, refusal to give them a personal visit, anything that would waken a sense of sin, were necessary. It had been the time for sternest rebuke. And still love needs to use severity. For some forms of sin the gentler persuasions are inefficient; men must be roughly shaken out of their self-confidences, and their pride must be humbled and broken. The Church of modem days so gravely fails of her witness and her duty because she has no “discipline,” no severe dealings for her grave offenders: She has no love to burn against transgressors.

III. SUCH SORROWING LOVE CAN SHOW FINE CONSIDERATION FOR THE FEELINGS OF OTHERS. Paul did not wish to make his second visit to Corinth in grief, and if he had carried out his first plan that would have been the almost inevitable result. He would wait, delaying his visit, so that he might have the chance of seeing them with a smile on his face, after receiving the tidings of their heeding his warning and putting away the sin. “The second reason St. Paul alleges for not coming to Corinth is apparently a selfish oneto spare himself pain. And he distinctly says he had written to pain them, in order that he might have joy. Very selfish, as at first it sounds; but if we look closely into it it only sheds a brighter and fresher light upon the exquisite unselfishness and delicacy of St. Paul’s character. He desired to save himself pain because it gave them pain. He desired joy for himself because his joy was theirs. He will not separate himself from them for a moment; he will not be the master and they the school; it is not I and you, but we; ‘my joy is your joy, as your grief was my grief.'” Do we love enough to rebuke and punish those whom we love?R.T.

2Co 2:5-11

The Church’s dealings with unworthy members.

“The main defence of the apostle against the charge of fickleness in the nonfulfilment of his promise was that he had abstained from going to Corinth in order to spare them the sharp rebuke lag must have administered had he gone thither. A great crime had been committed; the Church had been compromised, more especially as some of the Corinthians had defended the iniquity on the ground of liberty, and St. Paul had stayed away after giving his advice, that not he, but they themselves, might do the work of punishment. He gave sentence that the wicked person should be put away, but he wished them to execute the sentence. For it was a matter of greater importance to St. Paul that the Corinthians should feel rightly the necessity of punishment, than merely that the offender should be punished.” We notice

I. THE SINNER WITHIN THE CHURCH GRIEVES THE WHOLE CHURCH. If one member suffer, all the members suffer with him; and if one member sin, the whole Church ought to, feel grieved and distressed by the sin. St. Paul argues that, if a Church fails to clear itself of complicity with the wrong of its members, the guilt of such wrong attaches to it as well as to him. No man within Christ’s Church can be alone in his sin, for we are “members one of another.” The judgment of the Church may be the means of winning the penitence of the erring member.

II. THE SINNER WHEN PENITENT SHOULD FIND THE LOVE AND FORGIVENESS OF THE WHOLE CHURCH. In relation to him there should be harmonious and united Church action. Yet, in actual fact, the wrong doing of individuals too often creates party feeling. Some take the side of the wrong doer and prevent the full exercise of Church discipline.

III. SUCH FORGIVENESS OF THE CHURCH MAY EXPRESS GOD‘S FORGIVENESS. It is only becoming, and only efficient, as following upon God’s forgiveness. And it has its special use in being the earthly assurance of the Divine forgiveness and acceptance. The Church can give no absolution; it can only find expression for the absolution which God has already granted to the penitent, and add its forgiveness of the wrong so far as it disturbed Church relations. In the proper expression of Church feeling towards moral offenders, the Apostle Paul, as a recognized Church leader, herein sets an efficient example. He is as jealous for the Church’s honour and mercifulness as he is for the restoration of the penitent offender.R.T.

2Co 2:11

Satanic devices within the Church.

The reference here made to Satan must be regarded as figurative. It should not be used as an argument for the existence of a supreme evil spirit, however the existence of such a spirit may be assumed. St. Paul has elsewhere used the figure of “delivering unto Satan” (1Ti 1:20). By this we are to understand a solemn excommunication or expulsion from the Church, possibly with the infliction also of some bodily disease. The offender was to be left to feel all the physical and social consequences of his wrong doing, in the hope that, through suffering, he might be brought to a sense of his sin. Satan is thought of as the power which leads men into vice and then torments them when they have followed the leadings. The apostle conceives of God as overruling the very sin, and consequent suffering, for good, through them bringing the sinner to a hopeful penitence and humility of heart. There was, however, this danger to be recognized and guarded against. Satan might, as it were, outwit the Church, in its dealing with erring members, and make the suffering following on sin produce remorse rather than repentance. “Penitence works life, remorse works death. The latter is more destructive even than self-righteousness, for it crushes, paralyzes, and kills the soul.” There must consequently be a judicious limitation of the punishment, and a watchfulness for the first opportunity of showing mercy and granting restoration. “Not to release the offender from the bondage when he was truly penitent would be to afford the enemy of souls an opportunity of which he would not be slow to avail himself. Nothing is so likely to plunge a man into every kind of crime as despair.” For St. Paul’s experience of Satanic schemes, devices, and strategy, comp. 2Co 12:7; 1Th 2:18; Eph 6:12. We may treat the subject in its wider and more general applications if we illustrate the following and other ways in which Satan may be said to get advantage within a Church:

I. BY OVERMASTERING INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS. Failure does not come to the Church as a whole, but to individuals in it. All are exposed to temptation and evil. We must be in the world, and Christian men may yield themselves to the power of the “lust of the flesh, the lust of the eye, and the pride of life.” Some of the gravest of our Church anxieties arise from the moral failure of individual members. Illustrate cases occurring in youth time; but especially cases in men’s middle life, when the passions for wealth, sensuality, or drink often gain an overmastering energy. Show also the force that may be gained by the suddenness of the temptation, and by the condition of spiritual unwatchfulness in which the man may be found. The forms of failure which we usually find are dishonesty, immorality, or self-indulgence in meat or drink. But, by the law that those in the Church are members one of another, the failure of one is the shame, and should be the distress and grief, of all. Satan disturbs and injures a whole Church if he can gain influence over one member; and to do this is ever “one of his devices.”

II. BY SECURING THE HARSH AND UNLOVING TREATMENT OF THOSE WHO FAIL. Perhaps it would be true to say that Satan never more certainly gets the advantage over Churches than when he makes them exaggerate punishment, overpress discipline, and fail to temper judgment with mercy. The action of a Church must be exactly in harmony with the action, when he was with us on earth, of the Church’s Lord. He was quick and keen to discern sin. He was swift and severe to punish sin. But he was watchful for signs of gracious influence effected by the punishment, and ready at once to restore and forgive the penitent. He never “breaks the bruised reed or quenches the smoking flax.” Man’s punishments are always in danger of running to excess. Man cannot judge motives or read hearts, and so he too often fails to recognize soon enough when discipline has accomplished its work. Explain the evil influence exerted by unwillingness to forgive members of a family or of a Church; and show that a most mischievous conception of God himself, and wrong relations with him, would follow if we were not quite sure that he is “ready to forgive.”

III. BY MAKING A CHURCH INDIFFERENT TO THE MORALITY OF ITS MEMBERS. Laxity, carelessness about purity of life, uprightness of relations, and consistency of conduct, often do creep into Churches, and they are among the most grievous of “Satan’s devices.” Illustrate from the evil work done by Carnal Security, in the town of Mansoul, as described in John Bunyan’s ‘Holy War.’ The evil influence is felt, not only by the erring brethren, who come under no kind of correction, but are left to go on in sin, until “sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death;” but also by the Church, which is defiled before God by the taint on its good name, and which fails to be duly sensitive to the Divine honour. Illustrate by the lesson that was taught in the failure of Israel at the siege of Ai, when the “accursed thing” was in their camp.

IV. BY PERSUADING A CHURCH TO MAKE ITS FORGIVENESS A FORMALITY, NOT A FULL RESTORATION. Too often tills grave mistake is made: the offender is formally restored to membership, but he is not really taken back into the love and trust of the brethren, and he receives no signs of restored confidence and no help back to goodness. He is a blighted man, and it seems to him that his slip or fall can never really be forgotten, never really be wiped out, and therefore he must hang down his head among the brethren to his dying day. The Church’s forgiveness and restoration must be like God’s, a help to the erring one towards realizing the glorious completeness of God’s forgivings, forgettings, and restorings. For he casts our sins behind his back, and into the depths of the sea. “As the punishment of man is representative of the punishment and wrath of God, so the absolution of man is representative of the forgiveness of God.” Impress, in conclusion, the extreme painfulness of the possibility that, in regard to her discipline, the Christian Church may be out-manoeuvred by Satan, and come really to do his work.R.T.

2Co 2:12, 2Co 2:13

Providential doors.

Introduce by describing the leading instances of providential deliverance, care, and guidance in the life of the Apostle Paul. Especially dwell on the cases in which his life was preserved from peril and from the plots of his enemies. The reference made in our text is rather to the gracious way in which his missionary journeyings and missionary spheres had been opened before him; and the illustration may be taken from the singular way in which doors were opened and shut, when the Divine will was for the apostle to preach the gospel in Europe (see Act 16:6-9). For the figure of a “door” for an “opportunity,” see Corinthians 16:9; Rev 3:8. The truth of the Divine providence ordering our lives is not one that is so familiar to us as it was to our fathers. Possibly our warmer thought of God’s fatherly care has taken the place of the colder conception of an impersonal providence. Still, it may be well to revive the older notion and make it glow with Christian sentiment and feeling.

I. THE ORDERING OF PROVIDENCE FOR EVERYBODY. Irrespective of religious state and relations. Illustrations of this are found in all times of danger, disease, or calamity. Some are taken and some are left. We constantly read of remarkable providential escapes.

II. THE SPECIALTY OF PROVIDENCE FOR CHRISTIANS. It may in part be that Christians more readily recognize the hand of God in their rescuings and guidances, but we may also believe that God gives a special protection to his own. Such a belief may be a great comfort to us, but it must be kept from becoming exaggerated and extravagant. The Christian cannot always be preserved, because his suffering may be for the good of the whole.

III. THE ATTITUDE IN WHICH CHRISTIANS SHOULD STAND TOWARDS THE EVER ACTIVE PROVIDENCE. It may be shown to include

(1) earnest watchings;

(2) patient waitings;

(3) prompt actings;

(4) full and unhesitating obediences; and

(5) thankful rejoicings.R.T.

2Co 2:15, 2Co 2:16

The twofold issues of a preached gospel.

Heroes, in the older days of the apostle, were usually great generals, leaders of mighty armies, conquerors of other nationsmen whose “glory” came from desolated cities, down-trodden races, wasted harvests, and crushed and bleeding hearts. And such heroes were permitted to have a “triumph,” as it was called. A triumphal procession was arranged in their honour, and to this event the Roman generals looked as to the very goal of their ambition. Magnificent and thrilling scenes they must have been. The general was received, at the gates of the imperial city, by all that was noble and grave and venerable among the officials, and he was led from the gate through the crowded and shouting streets to the Capitol. First marched the ancient men, the grave senators of the Roman council, headed by a body of magistrates. Then came the trumpeters, making the air ring again with their prolonged and joyous blasts. Then followed a long train of carriages and frames laden with the spoils brought from battlefields or plundered from conquered cities, the articles which were most remarkable for their value, or rarity, or beauty being fully exposed to view. There might be seen models of the forts or cities which had been captured; gold and silver statues, pictures, handsome vases, and embroidered stuffs. Then came a band of players on the flute, and then white bulls and oxen destined for sacrifice; and incense bearer, waving to and fro their censers, and sending forth their sweet savour. Then were seen caged lions and tigers, or monstrous elephants, or other strange creatures, brought as specimens from the captive lands. And then the procession filled with pathos, for there followed the leaders of the conquered foe, and the long train of inferior captives, all bound and fettered, and altogether a sad and humiliating sight. At last came the great conqueror, standing in a splendid chariot, drawn by four milk-white horses, magnificently adorned, the conqueror bearing a royal sceptre, and having his brow encircled with a laurel crown. After him marched his great officers, the horse soldiers, and the vast army of foot soldiers, each one holding aloft a spear adorned with laurel boughs. And so the procession moved on through the crowded, shouting streets until it reached the Capitoline hill. There they halted, dragged some of those poor captives aside to be killed, and then offered their sacrifices and began their triumphal feast. St. Paul’s mind was evidently full of such a scene as this, and he took his figures from it. He says that God permits us, as apostles and ministers, always to triumph with Christ. We are, through grace, always conquering generals. But St. Paul fixed his thoughts chiefly on those miserable, naked, fettered captives, who were going on to death. He could not help thinkingWhat was the sound of the clanging trumpet and the piping flute to thempoor hopeless ones? What was the savour of sweet incense in the air to thempoor agitated ones? Some among them may indeed have had the promise of life, and to them the savour of the incense would be sweet; it would be “life unto life.” But so many of them knew what their fate must be; they dreaded the worst; they trembled as they came nearer to the ascent of the hill; and as the wind wafted the savour of the incense to them they could but sadly feel that it was a savour of “death unto death.” And the apostle thought of his life work of preaching the gospel. It was even thus with the savour of the gospel triumph. To some it was death, to others it was life. Not, indeed, at the arbitrary will of some proud general, but as the necessary issue of the relations in which men stand to a preached gospel; for “he that hath the Son hath life, and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life, but the wrath of God abideth on him.”

I. THE PROPER RESULT OF A PREACHED GOSPEL IS LIFE. It was God’s gracious purpose that men, “dead in trespasses and sins,” should have life, and have. it more abundantly. In his Son Jesus Christ life and immortality are brought to light. In the early days God set before men life and death, and, with all holy persuasions, urged them to choose life and good. This was the one absorbing purpose and endeavour of the Lord Jesus. While he was here he was ever doing one thingquickening life, restoring life, renewing life: the life of health to those afflicted, of reason to those possessed with devils, of knowledge to ignorant disciples, and even of the body to those smitten and dead. And the apostles carried his gospel forth into all the world as the light and life of men. Dwell upon the significance and interest of the word “life,” and explain the new life in Christ Jesus, which the Christian enjoys.

II. THE MOURNFUL RESULT OF A PREACHED GOSPEL OFTEN IS DEATH. Our Lord used forcible but painful figures to express the death of the impenitent and unbelieving: “outer darkness;” “wailing and gnashing of teeth;” “worm that never dies;” “fire that none may quench.” We must feel the force of these things, for no man can worthily explain them. This “death” was the mournful issue of a preached gospel when the Son of man was himself the Preacher. Foolish Gadarenes besought him to depart out of their coasts, and leave them to their night and death. Hardened Capernaum, exalted even to heaven in privilege, must be thrust down to hell. St. Paul must turn from bigoted and prejudiced Jews, and go to the Gentiles, leaving the very children of the covenant in a darkness that might be felt. He who came to give life is practically found to be a Stone of stumbling and a Rock of offence. Five foolish virgins put their hands about their flickering lamps as they cry against the closed door; and this is the simple, awful ending of their story, “The darkness took them.” We do see men hardened under a preached gospel now. Illustrate by the dropping well at Knaresborough. Water ought to soften and melt, but these waters, falling upon things, encrust them with stone, and even turn them into stone. Such may have been the droppings of the “water of life” upon us. There are only these two issues. The gospel must either take us by the hand and lead us up into the sunlight or it must bid us away down into the dark. Only two issues, but what issues they are! Life! As we think of that word, all joy, light, and heaven come into our view. Death! As we speak that word, all darkness, woe, and hell come into our thoughts. “Who indeed is sufficient for these things?”even for the preaching of a gospel which must prove to be a “savour of life unto life or of death unto death.”R.T.

2Co 2:17

Conscious simplicity and integrity.

“The word for ‘corrupt,’ formed from a word which signifies ‘huckster,’ or ‘ tavern keeper,’ implies an adulteration like that which such people commonly practised. We, says St. Paul, play no such tricks of trade with what we preach; we do not meet the tastes of our hearers by prophesying deceits. The very fact that we know the tremendous issues of our work would hinder that.” God’s gospel word, the message of eternal life in Christ Jesus, may be adulterated or corrupted in three ways.

1. By mixing up with it foreign, inharmonious, merely human, teachings.

2. Or by making the gospel revelation into a stiffened, formal creed, over the precise terms of which we may wrangle and dispute.

3. Or by displacing the true motive in preaching it, and giving place to low aims, and purposes of merely selfish ambition, and longing for the praise of men. The appeal of the text has its special force when we remember of what things the Judaizing party accused the apostle. St. Paul’s enemies forced this appeal from him. Usually it is enough that the sincere and true man should keep on his faithful way, little heeding the opinions or accusations of others, trusting the care of his reputation to God. But occasions do arise when something like public vindication becomes necessary, and a man is called to assert his conscious integrity. Of this we have two very striking instances recorded in Scripture. Samuel, when set aside by the mistaken longing for a visible king, felt deeply hurt, though more for the insult thus offered to Jehovah, the ever-present but invisible King, than for his own sake. He pleaded thus with the people: “I have walked before you from my childhood unto this day. Behold, here I am: witness against me before the Lord, and before his anointed: whose ox have I taken? or whose ass have I taken? or whom have I defrauded? whom have I oppressed? or of whose hand have I received any bribe to blind mine eyes therewith? and I will restore it you” (1Sa 12:2, 1Sa 12:3). And David, misunderstood and slandered, turns to speak to God in the bearing of the people, and says, “Judge me according to my righteousness, and according to mine integrity that is in me” (Psa 7:8). Consider

I. THE GREAT GOSPEL TRUST.

1. On the one side, the trust of Divine revelation and message. Illustrate by the direct communications of the Divine will made to the ancient prophets. These they were expected to deliver with all simplicity and completeness, and without making any additions of their own to them.

2. On the other side, the trust of men’s souls. The world was given to the apostles as the sphere in which their gospel message was to be delivered. Such a trust demanded seriousness, sincerity, and holy zeal. It should ever call out the best that is in a man.

II. THE PERIL OF ITS INJURY THROUGH THE GUILE OF THE SELF SEEKER. Men will surely take their impressions of it from the character of the men who preach it. If we get a soiled idea of the gospel preacher, as an insincere, self-seeking man, it is only too likely that we shall have a soiled and stained image of the gospel that he preaches in our minds. Men can make golden glowings or deep shadows rest on the gospel that they declare, the message which they have in trust.

III. THE FORCE OF IT AS PRESERVED WHEN THE AGENT IS GUILELESS AND SINCERE. The stream gets no foulness as it flows through him. Illustrate how men of transparent character and beautiful piety put honour on religion. The commendation of Christ’s gospel to men is

(1) the pure and stainless Christ himself, and then

(2) the graciousness and charm of his servants who are like him.

The force behind gospel preaching is the life of the men who preach. The simple-minded, sincere, uncorrupted man may positively make additions to the practical power of the gospel upon men. Distinguish, however, between simplicity and moral weakness, and also between guilelessness and ignorance. The simplicity required is “unity” as opposed to “double mindedness;” it is being wholly for God. R.T.

Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary

2Co 2:1. ForI would not come again, &c. “I purposed in myself, it is true, to come to you again; but I resolved too that it should be without bringing sorrow with me.” That this is the meaning of this verse, and not that he would not come to them in sorrow a second time, is past doubt, since he had never been with them in sorrow a first time. See ch. 2Co 1:15.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

2Co 2:1 . ] is the usual , which leads on from the assurance given by Paul in 2Co 1:23 , to the thought that he in his own interest ( , dativus commodi ; for see 2Co 2:2 ) was not willing to come again to them .

The interpretation apud me (Vulgate, Luther, Beza, and many others) would require or . (1Co 7:37 ; 1Co 11:13 ). Paul, by means of , gives to the matter an ingenious, affectionate turn, regarding the truth of which, however, there is no doub.

] I determined , as 1Co 2:2 ; 1Co 7:27 . As to the emphatically preparatory with following infinitive accompanied by the article, comp. on Rom 14:13 , and Krger, Lev 7:4 .

] belongs to . , taken together , so that Paul had once already (namely, on his second arrival) come to the Corinthians . The connection with merely (Pelagius, Primasius, Theodoret, and the most; also Flatt, Baur, Reiche), a consequence of the error that Paul before our Epistles had been only once in Corinth, [137] is improbable even with the Recepta (the more suitable order of the words would be: ), but is impossible both with our reading and with that of Tischendorf (see the critical remarks), unless we quite arbitrarily suppose, with Grotius (comp. also Reiche), a trajectio , or, with Baur, I. p. 342, an inaccuracy of epistolary styl.

] provided with affliction (Bernhardy, p. 109; comp. Rom 15:29 ), bringing affliction with me , i.e. afflicting you . This explanation (Theodoret, Calvin, Grotius, and others, including Ewald) is, indeed, held by Hofmann to be impossible in itself, but is required by the following . Hence Billroth and Hofmann, following Chrysostom and many others, are wrong in thinking that the apostle’s own sadness is meant; and so also Bengel, Olshausen, Rckert, de Wette, Reiche, Neander, following Ambrosiaster, and others, who think that it is also included. That it is not meant at all , is shown by , 2Co 1:23 , and by the coupling of what follows with . Comp. , 1Co 4:21 . The apparent difficulty, that Paul in our first Epistle makes no mention whatever of the fact and manner of his former visit to Corinth when he caused affliction, is obviated by the consideration that only after our first Epistle was the change of plan used to the apostle’s disadvantage, and that only now was he thereby compelled to mention the earlier arrival which had been made . Hence this passage is not a proof for the assumption of a journey to Corinth between our two Epistles (see the Introd.).

[137] This error has compelled many to get out of the difficulty by conceiving our first Epistle as the first coming So Chrysostom, Calvin, Beza, Bengel, and others. Lange, Apostol. Zeitalt . I. p. 204, believes that he has found another way: that Paul had the veryfirst time come to Corinth in affliction (1Co 2:1 ff.), which affliction he had brought mill him from Athens . As if in 1Co 2:1 ff. he is speaking of a ! and as if a brought with him from Athens , though nowhere proved, would have had anything to do with the Corinthians!

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

2Co 2:1-4 . Continuation of what was begun in 2Co 1:23 .

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

IV.MORE PARTICULAR EXPLANATIONS OF HIS REASONS FOR NOT VISITING THEM; THAT HE MIGHT SPARE THEM AND HIMSELF NEEDLESS PAIN. DIRECTIONS WITH RESPECT TO THOSE WHO HAD ESPECIALLY CAUSED TROUBLE

2Co 2:1-11

1But I determined this with [for] myself, that I would not come again to you in heaviness [in sorrow come again to you].1 2For if I make you sorry, who is he then2 that maketh me glad, but the same which is made sorry by me? 3And I wrote this same [om. unto you3], lest when I came I should have sorrow from them of whom I ought to rejoice; having confidence in you all, that my joy is the joy of you all. 4For out of much affliction and anguish of heart I wrote unto you with many tears; not that ye should be grieved [have sorrow], but that ye might know the love which I have more abundantly unto you. 5But if any have caused grief [sorrow], he hath not grieved [caused sorrow to] me, but in part, (that I may not overcharge [him]) you all. 6Sufficient to such a man is this punishment, which was inflicted of many. 7So that contrariwise ye ought rather [om. rather4] to forgive him and comfort him, 8lest perhaps such a one should be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow. Wherefore I beseech you that ye would confirm your love toward him. 9For to this end also did I 10write, that I might know the proof of you, whether5 ye be obedient in all things. To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also6: for if I forgave any thing, to whom [whatever] I forgave it [om. it], for your sakes forgave I it, in the person [presence] of Christ; 11lest Satan should get an advantage of us: for we are not ignorant of his devices.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

2Co 2:1-4. Having given the reason which had prevented his visit to the Corinthians (viz.: that he might spare them, , 2Co 1:23), the Apostle now proceeds to inform them that one reason for thus sparing them was for his own sake.But I determined this for my own sake.The indicates simply an advance in the course of the argument. is here used as it is in 1Co 2:2; 1Co 7:37 [in the sense of: to determine, to form a decision]. The meaning of is not here [as in the Luth. and all the Eng. versions]: with myself, for then the words should have been ; but it is rather the dat. commodi: for my own sake; a thoughtful, affectionate turn of expression Meyer. is emphatic and anticipates that which immediately follows, and which is epexegetical or explanatory of it (comp. Rom 14:13 et. al.That I would not again come to you in sorrow).The belongs to the whole phrase: in sorrow come to you, and not merely to the verb to come independently of the words in sorrow. Critics have been led to this violent removal of the word from its natural connection by their unwillingness to concede that the Apostle had made a second journey to Corinth before writing this Epistle (comp. 2Co 1:15). Neander: Paul intended to say that he would not a second time in sorrow come to them. But when had he been with them the first time in sorrow? Such a phrase could hardly be applicable to his first residence at Corinth. We must therefore believe that Paul had been a second time in that city, and that many sad things had then taken place there. We shall be obliged to accept of Bleeks explanation, that Paul had made one journey to Corinth not only before the Epistle to the Corinthians, which stands first in our canon, but another before writing our Epistle, which must have been actually first written, but which has been lost. [Comp. what is said of this second visit in the Introd., 6]. We must also conclude from what follows, in the second verse, for if I make you sorrowfulthat the sorrow here referred to must have been a sorrow of the Corinthians and not of the Apostle himself nor one shared by both parties. To come in sorrow, then, was to bring with him that which should cause sorrow (comp. Rom 15:29, and , 1Co 4:21).7Who is he then that maketh me glad but the same who is made sorry by me?The in the beginning of the apodosis or the concluding clause of 2Co 2:2, is remarkable; and the connection of this sentence with the protasis which precedes it is not easy to be determined. Many have therefore concluded that we have here an aposiopesis, and that the Apostle, led off by his strong emotion, suddenly breaks off from his previous sentence and commences here a new interrogative sentence. The sense then would be: he could not think of giving them pain, for that would be ungrateful and unkind, since he would thus give pain to those who were giving him joy. In such a case, however, the expression ought to have been: , : who is he then that is made sorrowful by me, but the one who makes me glad? We not unfrequently meet with before the concluding clause (apodosis) of a conditional proposition in the works of the epic poets, in order to indicate that both transactions mentioned take place at precisely the same time (comp. Passow, sub voce , p. 1539 a. [Jelf, 759, 2]). It might be translated [as in our Eng. vers.], then, and the sense would be: there would be then no one to make me glad, etc. He intends to say that both things could not be at the same time, that he could not be making them sad while they were making him glad. The absurdity of expecting that they would then make him joyful is made still more evident by the phrase, : he must be the very one who is made sad by me. If I, your spiritual father, make you sorrowful, I thus deprive myself of the joy which you, my children, afford me; and I must be destitute of it entirely, for I cannot expect joy from one who has been saddened by me, The singular is rendered necessary not only by the , but by the abstract form in which the matter is put. The reference is not to the case of the incestuous person (1Co 5:1). is contrasted with , but it is not otherwise emphatic, and contains no allusion to some other persons who might be occasioning them sorrow. The in indicates the person who was to be the source of sorrow, and the phrase is equivalent to .I put in writing this same thing, etc.In this verse refers to the first Epistle, and not to the one he was writing (comp. 2Co 2:4-9). It stands at the commencement of the sentence that it might be emphatic, and it is contrasted with . But is equivalent to , as in 2Pe 1:5, and frequently in the classical authors; or is it the objective accusative to ? The first would be the easier interpretation, but such a construction occurs nowhere else in Pauls writings (in 2Co 2:9 it is ). The refers to that which forms the theme and object of this section, (2Co 2:7), and respecting which he had already written in 1Co 4:21. (Osiander). The reference to what had been said in 1Co 4:21 does not seem very properly indicated, even if we suppose that the following censures have reference to the incestuous person. On the other hand it seems very natural for him to make this reference to the censures contained in his first Epistle (especially those in chap. 5), as matters in which they had a painful interest and which might grieve them, and to assure them that he now wished to avoid a repetition of this unpleasant experience when he should be present with them, and that his course in that matter had sprung from the confidence he had in them all. He therefore goes on to remind them of the frame of mind in which, and the object with which, he had then written (2Co 2:4). Meyer thus explains it: This matter (so well known to you that I need not particularize it) I have written and not deferred to speak of until I should be present with you, in order that I might not, etc.That when I came I should not receive (suffer) sorrow from those who ought to give me joy. is not exactly as if he had written or , butfrom those who ought to be the source of my joy. has reference to the relation of a spiritual father which he sustained toward them.For I had confidence in you all, that my joy was the joy of you all.In most other places is followed by an with a dative, but here, as in Mat 27:43, and 2Th 3:4, it is followed by an with an accusative, indicating that the confidence extended to them and beyond them. The Apostle would thus make them see that he had written the sharp reproofs contained in his first Epistle not from a disposition distrustfully to draw back from them, but with an assured confidence that they were really and in heart so attached to him that his joy would be the joy of them all. He felt assured that they would, after his written admonition, arrange every difficulty which had troubled him, so that there would be no necessity for any oral reproofs which would be as painful to him as to them. His hove rose entirely above those parties which had apparently become so prominent in the Church, and especially above that portion which had turned away from him; and in the spirit which believeth all things (1Co 12:7), he had fastened upon the then latent power of filial affection, which he was satisfied would soon be strong enough to overcome every hinderance in their hearts (comp. Meyer and the admirable remarks of Osiander). Hence the phrases and [the first expressing his confidence in them, and the latter their confidence in him]. In 2Co 2:4 he mentions first of all the spirit which had actuated him when he wrote to them:For I wrote unto you under great tribulation and oppression of heart, with many tears. is dependent upon both the preceding nouns. is stronger than , and signifies restriction, oppression, anguish, as in Luk 21:25; and in Luk 12:50. The greatness of the inward suffering is made still more evident in , from which it appears to have broken forth with many tears. Neander:The designates the accompanying circumstances (comp. Act 20:19; Act 20:31). Stanley: and , out of the heart, through tears. The connection with 2Co 2:3, indicated by the , is explained by Meyer and Osiander to be, that the Apostle might present the evidence of the confidence he had reposed in them: for if, in writing that Epistle, I had not had this confidence, the Epistle itself would not have been to me the occasion of so much anxiety and so many tears. It was precisely because he had had this confidence, and yet was under the necessity of writing, that the whole thing was so exceedingly painful; and yet it would probably be simpler to refer the remark primarily to the main sentence in 2Co 2:3. His object in writing to them was, (), etc. His great anxiety when he wrote was to be spared this affliction when he should visit them. Among the things which had influenced him when writing thus with so much solicitude, he now proceeds more expressly to mention the love which had already been hinted at in , etc.Not that ye might be made sorrowful, but that ye might know, etc.His object had then been not to make them sorrowful, but rather by writing to them to let them see how deep was his affection for them. There is nothing in this inconsistent with what is said in 2Co 7:8 ff., for even there the is not presented as the final aim of the Apostle, but simply as a means indispensable to their recovery.The love which I have more abundantly toward you. is put at the commencement of the clause that it may be emphatic. is certainly comparative, and yet his love was not compared with his sorrow, as if in consequence of this, or in connection with this, it became proportionably intense, or with his zeal, as if that zeal became more glowing as his love was greater; but his love to the Corinthians was compared with his love to other churches. It was analogous to the special love which parents bear to those children who are objects of peculiar hope and therefore of peculiar care, or who for any reason stand in need of special attention. What he here says of the spirit which had induced him to write to them, does not seem quite applicable to our present Epistle, in which great calmness and perspicuity are predominant. Some have therefore contended that another Epistle must have been meant. Rckert, however, supposes that the Apostle had deliberately and prudently put such restraints upon his spirit at that time that his style of writing was no true exhibition of his feelings. We see no necessity for such an expedient, which seems so inconsistent with the Apostles general character, for it is the very spirit of holy love to put restraint upon its own action that the object of its affection may receive no detriment. (Comp. Meyer and Osiander).

2Co 2:5-11. Digression with respect to the incestuous person. The expressions he had used respecting the , the and , naturally led him to speak of the difficulty which had been the occasion of most of his sorrow, and of the severe censures he had been obliged to inflict, i.e., of the incestuous scandal. Neander, on the other hand, asks: Why was Paul under any necessity of vindicating himself for his anxiety respecting the incestuous person? The matter wears a very different aspect, if we suppose that in the meantime another case had come up, and that some one had made his appearance, who insolently defied Pauls Apostolical authority, and was likely in this way to produce a division in the Church. Every thing may be naturally explained if we assume that another Epistle had been sent by Titus, in which such a state of affairs had been the topic of discussion. Ewald concludes from 2Co 2:5-11; 2Co 7:2; 2Co 7:12; 2Co 3:1; 2Co 1:13; 2Co 1:23, that after a brief and unexpected visit of the Apostle at Corinth, some distinguished individual had made use of every circumstance which could be turned to his disadvantage, and that this calumniator had charged him especially with duplicity in his public discourses and with an attempt to acquire notoriety, power and pecuniary profit among the people. [Comp. Introd. 6]. The spirit of his address is gentle, in consistency with all the previous proceedings in the case, and the conciliatory strain in which he was writing. As a revocation of the extreme penalty was not excluded by what he had said in 1Co 5:5; 1Co 5:13, provided the offender should be brought to repentance, the Apostolical authority would not be endangered by his restoration. The fifth verse is connected, not with the third (Olshausen), but with the fourth verse, where he had said that it was not his design to grieve them.But if any (among you) have caused grief, he hath not grieved me (2Co 2:5).Not only is the offence not specifically named, but the terms used to describe it are of the mildest signification, and the is purposely made indefinite, though without necessarily implying that the persons were unknown. There is no contradiction with 2Co 2:4 when he says: he hath not caused sorrow in me, for by those words he means to say, that it had not been merely a personal () grief. He wishes it to be regarded as a calamity to the whole congregation. (- therefore is not equivalent to ). Hence stands in contrast with . The idea of is softened still more by the addition of : partially, to some extent; an allusion to what he afterwards expresses in 2Co 2:6 by , viz.: that although some of them had taken part in the public condemnation of the criminals with too little seriousness, they could not, after all, be unaffected by its unhappy results. The clause: that I may not overcharge, has reference only to the having caused grief; and the relative (him) must be understood as its object [i.e., but in part (that I may not overcharge him) you all].This is a fine turn, for he thus says: in so saying I would impose no intolerable burden upon him, as if he were one who had injured you more than , in full measure. The word has the sense of: to load, to overburden, as in 1Th 2:9; 2Th 3:8; Bengel: ne addam onus gravato; not exactly in the sense of: to say too much, or to express himself harshly. Not only because it violently separates the words you all, but on account of the tone of irony or even of keen reproach implied in it, we regard as altogether unsuitable the interpretation which makes the Apostle say: but partially, that I may not throw the burden on all [i.e., may not accuse or grieve you]. Finally, the interpretation which makes the Apostle say: he hath not grieved me (properly speaking, or alone), only in part (for he has grieved you also), that I may not lay upon you all the burden or reproach, as if you were all equally indifferent to the offence; has against it the fact that the which is there so emphatic has no suitable contrast, and it would have been necessary to say: . This last objection would also lie against making the words mean: but by way of general participation, ut membrum ecclesi, etc. Neander completes the object of this final sentence thus: that I may not make the matter too important.8 In accordance with the mild expression in 2Co 2:5, the Apostle explains his views still further in 2Co 2:6 regarding the proceedings against the offending person.Sufficient unto such a one [one who has such a spirit as this offender now shows] is this very punishment which has been inflicted by the many (2Co 2:6).The stands at the head of the sentence for the sake of emphasis, and is designed to say that nothing farther was needed by way of punishment. It is used substantively like in Mat 6:34, and means that which is satisfactory. The Catholic interpretation makes it refer to the sufficiently long continuance of the excommunication. Both the context (2Co 2:5, , and 2Co 2:7 ff.), and the lead us to suppose that unlike the same words in 1Co 5:5, is designed to intimate that the offender had begun to exhibit some signs of penitence. signifies, not threatening, but punishment, and in this place at least it implies that this consisted in very decided censures (Sir 2:10, where it means punishment generally). has reference to something well known to the Corinthians. The by whom the punishment had been inflicted could not have been the eldership, but the majority of the Church at Corinth. Probably the action had been the more severe, possibly amounting to a withdrawal of fellowship with the offender, in consideration of the fact that an antipauline minority refused to take part in his punishment. The shows that the excommunication could not have been complete (1Co 5:3 ff.), and so that could not have referred merely to the time in which that had continued. But it would be utterly inconsistent with the honesty of Pauls character to suppose with Rckert and Baur that he was here arresting the proceedings, after they had been commenced, from mere policy, to avoid a rupture with his opponents; and that he was now therefore affecting to be satisfied with the measures which the majority had adopted. The only motive he had for the milder proceeding which he now advises, was simply that which he himself afterwards avowed, viz., that the thorough repentance of the offender had rendered severer measures unnecessary. It would have been altogether unapostolic, not to say unchristian, to drive such a one to despair. The whole object of disciplinethat which had been aimed at in the punishment inflicted by the majorityhad been attained. (comp. on 1 Corinthians 5 and Osiander and Meyer on our passage). As the result of these proceedings, on the one hand, the large majority had shown their cordial disapproval of the offence, the honor of the Church had been vindicated, and their non-participation in the sin and so their purity had been made evident; and on the other, a penitent spirit had been called forth in the bosom of the sinner himself (comp. 2Co 2:7). These things constitute a sufficient reason for an entire change of proceeding, viz., for his forgiveness.So that on the contrary ye ought rather to be kind to him and to comfort him (2Co 2:7).The here implies that what he was about to say, was the essential and necessary result of the , and it includes the idea of an obligation on their part. Still there is no necessity of supplying a , as if the Apostle would say: it is sufficient to show on the contrary your favor (to him); or: so that ye may show, on the contrary, kindness. [Winers Gr. N. T., 45, 2d note]. refers to , but does not imply exactly to give up or to remit the punishment, for it means properly to show favor or kindness. In the present case, however, this must, by its own nature, have involved a forgiveness of the injury done to the congregation, as the word is often used by Paul sometimes with (, 2Co 12:13; Col 2:13), and sometimes without (Eph 4:32 and Col 3:13) the mention of the object. denotes here the friendly intercourse and consolation which would correspond with . This is still further enforced by the Apostle when he points out what would be the consequence if this kind treatment were neglected: lest, perhaps, such a one should be swallowed up with an excess of sorrow.The expresses the greatly increased sorrow which would be the effect of a continuance or an aggravation of the punishment. Of course it is here presumed that a high degree of punishment had already been inflicted, for otherwise all increase of it would not drive the sufferer to despair. It is to this, the renunciation of all hope of salvation and of all efforts to attain eternal life, and so the utter ruin of the man himself, that the swallowing up has reference, and not directly to his apostacy from the faith (being devoured by the Prince of this world), nor to death by his own hands, and still less to his sickness or death. The sorrow is compared to a wild beast (comp. 1Pe 5:8). By the words: such a one, ( ), he designates the man as an object of sympathy. As the result of the , and the apprehension he had given as a reason for it, the Apostle now urges his exhortation.Wherefore I exhort you to make good [substantiate by action] your love toward him (2Co 2:8). (as in Gal 3:15) signifies to establish in a valid manner and by a formal decision, so that the man might be solemnly restored to the communion of the Church. To suppose that the Apostle was here merely going through the form of approving of a decision which the Church had already made, and which would have been valid without his authority (Rckert); is not necessarily implied in the language, and would imply a worldly policy, of which we have no reason to think him capable. In 2Co 2:9 he probably meets a possible or actual objection against the directions contained in his former Epistle, for he there informs his readers what had been his object in writing so severely.For to this end I also wrote, that I might know the proof of you.He means to say that his present request or admonition (2Co 2:8) was not only reasonable, but entirely consistent with what he had before written. In his earlier Epistle his purpose had been to ascertain their , i.e., whether ye are obedient in all things.It was not, therefore, a main point with him in what he then had

aid, to carry his apostolical authority to its utmost limits. Or more simply: inasmuch as the punishment which the majority had imposed was not very severe, I propose that ye should now bring your love to bear upon him, for the whole object of my former Epistle, which was to find out whether you would be true and obedient, has been attained by the punishment which the majority have inflicted. [In these words it is not meant that the direct object of his writing had been simply to put the matter to the test whether they would obey him, any more than when God sends afflictions on men that the entire object is to prove them and to know all that is in their hearts, but simply that his great and final aim was thus virtually accomplished (Billroth)]. The belongs not to (as if he had written ); its object is not to indicate that his aim in his former Epistle was the same with that of his present request, but to suggest a contrast between his writing (), and what he had arranged (orally) by deputies. The effect of the is thus to give prominence to . The whole context also shows that must have reference to the former and not to the present Epistle. His object was to say that he was anxious to prove whether they would cheerfully comply with his directions in all things, the present mild, as well as the former severer requirements. : in relation to all things, even those rigorous measures which might be somewhat difficult of execution. here as in Rom 5:4, and Php 2:22, means the goodness, or approved quality; i.e. whether they would turn out to be upright Christians, his genuine children in Christ, and obedient to their father in all things (comp. 1Co 11:2; and Col 3:20). [Trench, Synn., 2d Ser. 24, Ellicott on Php 1:10; Php 2:22].Having made this reference to his earlier Epistle, the object of which had now been attained in the course of the recent disciplinary proceedings, the Apostle proceeds ( of progress) to a further recommendation of the course implied in , by assuring them that he was willing to be united with them in their public act of forgiveness (2Co 2:10). This idea he expresses at first thus briefly.Now to whom ye forgive anything, I forgive it also. (sc. ). He afterwards, however, strengthens the thought in the causal sentencefor if I have forgiven anything, whatever I forgave for your sakes I forgive it in the presence of Christ, lest, etc.According to the common interpretation, he confirms the () by saying that whatever he had forgiven, he had forgiven it entirely on their account. is, on any interpretation, to be supplied in connection with . It is not, however, precisely implied that he was induced to do this at their request, for nothing is said of their actual intercession. He wishes in this way to show them that his love was directed to the highest good of the whole congregation. For after every thing necessary to maintain holy order, and the injured honor of the Church had been accomplished, and all necessity for further severity had been removed by the cordial repentance of the offender, his affection for them prompted him to heal the breach which had troubled them by forgiving the sinner, and to recover a member who had been temporarily sundered from them. Thus the confidence of the Church would be raised, and their former love would be revived etc. By the phrase: If I have forgiven anything: he intimates, that in the present instance he leaves it rather doubtful to what extent he had received any injury (2Co 2:5). He does not say, if I have anything to forgive, but simply, if anything ought to be said in general of my having forgiven any one. There was no need of repeating the here, for it has been already made sufficiently prominent in the . The addition of suggests a still deeper reason why he had delayed his journey. He had been induced to do so in the presence of Christ; from regard to Him who was the Author of all reconciliation to God, to whom he owed his own forgiveness as a sinner, and who had intrusted to him the duty of preaching reconciliation to men (the opp. , comp. 2Co 5:18 ff; 2Co 3:9; Eph 4:32; 1Ti 1:15). This is not a solemn affirmation or oath (for Paul nowhere else swore by Christ), but simply a strong assertion of his uprightness. It merely showed how he had either had Christ and Christs cause before his mind in this affair, had acted tanquam inspectore Christo or had virtually done all in the name or in the commission of Christ; though if this had been strictly intended he would probably have used the phrase . In the Sept. the phrase here used is employed as a rendering for , Pro 8:30. If we take the words in the sense first given, we have conveyed to some extent, the idea which Meyer and Rckert find in . They take the words in a passive sense: that which has been forgiven to me (a construction analagous to ). We meet with the word in this sense in the classical writers, but in the New Testament, at least in Pauls writings (Gal 3:18) and in the Acts (Act 27:24) it is always used in the active sense. would then signify that the pardon which had been bestowed upon him had been for the advantage of the Gentile, and especially the Corinthian Christians, inasmuch as his forgiveness had been the occasion of bringing them to salvation. In this case, when Paul introduced the words , he wished to remind them not only that Christ was a witness of his forbearance, but that he was himself nothing but a pardoned sinner before God. would then be an expression of his humble recollection of the great guilt which continually oppressed him and made him a perpetual suitor for pardon (Meyer). In favor of this general interpretation may be urged the , which certainly creates a difficulty in the way of the ordinary explanation, inasmuch as it seems to lay a special emphasis upon the perf: , rather than upon the , which otherwise seems so prominent. Osiander endeavors to remove this difficulty by suggesting that Paul aims to represent his own act of forgiveness () as something quite distinct from and independent of that which they were to exercise, and that he here passes from their forgiveness, as one which was then in process and incomplete, to his own, which was complete and already certain ( ). But is not this rather a concealment than a removal of the difficulty? Having previously taken it for granted that they were disposed to forgive, and having conceded to them the initiative in the affair, in the full confidence that they continued of the same mind, and in order that their act might be complete having given to them his own authorization and consent (), what call was there for the following sentence as a reason and confirmation of the same thing ( )? Then if we take the clause passively, how can we explain the doubt implied in , when everywhere else we find Paul expressing himself so confidently as to his own forgiveness? But if Meyers interpretation must therefore be regarded as unsatisfactory, we are still less prepared to regard Paul as here referring to some opponents who had denied his forgiveness through Christ. Even if we allow of his explanation of , and urge nothing further in opposition to on the ground that it is a mode of expression altogether unusual with Paul on such a subject (everywhere else the phrase is , or ), we must certainly regard the way in which Meyer endeavors to connect it with (2Co 2:11) as altogether too artificial. The idea would then be that it had been Gods will that Paul should be pardoned in the presence of Christ [God is said to forgive for Christs sake, and Christ is said to forgive, but Christ is never represented as the mere witness or spectator of our forgivenessHodge], simply for the sake of the Corinthians, that they might be aroused to resist the wiles of Satan, i.e., that they might not be tempted to act inconsistently with the design of God and of Christ by refusing to pardon the offender, and so overwhelming him with an excess of sorrow (2Co 2:7). The way in which Rckert connects this clause ( .) with the first half of 2Co 2:10, i.e., by passing over the whole last part of 2Co 2:10, is even yet more violent. Osiander has probably hit upon the correct explanation, although the train of thought needs to be more particularly developed, when a slight modification of his view will become indispensable. The Corinthians had no reason to doubt that he would unite with them in their act of forgiveness, for he had already forgiven the man for their sake (the remainder as above).9 But that he might present in a clearer light the importance of their granting, or of the mans possessing, this forgiveness, the Apostle adds (2Co 2:11), lest Satan should get an advantage of us (of you and me)i.e. lest the great adversary of Gods Church should get an advantage at our expense. Should any person be driven to despair by our long continued severity, not only would they themselves be lost to us and be gained by Satan, but in the Church itself we should be exposed to increased bitterness and alienation on the part of the members, and many would become estranged from an Apostle who seemed inclined to such extreme measures. Neander:If the utmost severity should be exercised, it would be used for an occasion for all kinds of evil in the congregation.Inasmuch as Paul here speaks throughout not of Divine forgiveness, but only of his own and the Churchs forgiveness; and inasmuch as neither Paul nor the Church could have pardoned an offence like that of incest, Neander has here found an argument for his opinion that some member of the Church had risen up against the Apostle personally (and of course against the whole Church). On this interpretation also the objections which Rckert and Baur have derived from 2Co 2:5-10 against the character of Paul and against a belief in miracles sink into insignificance. The necessity of being on their guard against such overreaching arts is pointed out in the brief causal or final sentencefor we are not ignorant of his devices (thoughts, schemes).The of Satan are those thoughts or plots which he directs to the injury of Christs cause, to the recovery of those who had been wrested by grace from his grasp (1Pe 5:8), to the creation of dissensions, etc. [The personality and agency of the adversary can hardly be recognized in plainer terms than in both these passages.Alford.]

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

It is a mark of admirable wisdom in one who exercises authority in the Church to be able to distinguish clearly between Gods purposes and Satans devices, that he may so proceed as to promote the one and give no advantage to the other. Gods thoughts are thoughts of peace, and their aim is to deliver and to cure the souls of men. But the means by which he seeks to accomplish His benevolent designs seem not unfrequently severe, for His medicines are sometimes very bitter. It is often necessary to be harsh, and to decline all ordinary considerations of delicacy. And yet the severity should not be allowed to exceed the proper limits which love prescribes. If the demands of justice are satisfied, if the honor of God and of His Church have been vindicated, if a sense of sin and true repentance have been awakened, if guilt has been openly confessed, and a desire for forgiveness and restoration has been decidedly expressed, it is time to exercise gentleness and to restore the offender, and to open to him a heart of love and to extend toward him the hand of support. In this way the government and discipline of a congregation is directed to the same end with Christs own purposes, and are the means of fulfilling His designs. Satans arts, on the other hand, are all with a view to thwart Gods plans of mercy, to unsettle the peace of a Church, to destroy faith, hope and love in the hearts of its members, to turn away as many as possible from the Lord and from His grace, and, in a word, to produce general corruption. Every one gives his aid to these arts, who for any reason, from defective zeal, from selfish convenience, the fear of men, or party spirit, takes so little notice of sins and offences, or resists them with so little earnestness, that full opportunity is given to the diffusion of the corrupting leaven. But quite as great advantage is given to Satans schemes, when the proper limit of severity is exceeded, when discipline is carried to an extreme, when no forgiveness is exercised, and in order to maintain apparent firmness and consistency, every offence is rigidly dealt with, without regard to consequences. It is always bad policy to allow any occasion for suspecting that we are selfishly maintaining our own authority by recklessly pressing forward to an extreme. By such means the hearts of many will be embittered or driven to despair, and increased division and irritation will be sure to ensue. Satan, too, will thus accomplish what he most wishes. That which had the semblance of prudence and holy earnestness, turns out to be foolishness and a severity very unlike that of heaven. The result is that Gods plans of mercy are dishonored, and the character and influence of those who pursued such a mistaken policy is seriously impaired.

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

Luther, 2Co 2:7 :It is much harder to comfort a troubled conscience than to raise the dead.While, therefore, ministers ought doubtless to reprove and punish with some severity those who have fallen into sin, they ought by all means to comfort and restore those whom they discover to be penitent and anxious to reform; especially when we remember that God spared not His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all, and that His mercy had been made to exceed all our sins, that those who have fallen may not be swallowed up by too much sorrow.

Starke, 2Co 2:1 :A pastor who has the salvation of his people supremely at heart will be careful to show great indulgence to the weak, to avoid every needless occasion for punishment, and to do nothing likely to produce ill-will or injury to any one, without the prospect of a greater ultimate benefit. Eccles. 20:1; 22:6.

2Co 2:3. A true minister of Christ rejoices over nothing so much as the spiritual prosperity of his people, and nothing will trouble him more than their spiritual declension. In like manner, an honest and upright hearer may be known, by the joy which his minister feels and the praises which his minister renders to God, on his account, and by the readiness with which he removes by a speedy amendment all occasion of disquietude which he may have given to the heart of his pastor (Heb 13:17; Rom 16:19). The real motive for carnal zeal in the infliction of punishment is hatred, and we need not be surprised to find those who possess it, restless in disposition and followed by continual opposition. True spiritual zeal, on the other hand, may be equally earnest, but it will be moved and pervaded by love, it will be always calm, and it will remain loving and beloved unto the end.Hedinger:How much sorrow and how many tears Paul gave to the case of one offender! how many hast thou bestowed upon the many wandering and lost ones of thy flock? The Lord have mercy on the poor sheep of such a shepherd!

2Co 2:7. Unseasonable comfort is like a new piece of cloth upon an old garment (Mat 9:16), but excessive severity will probably throw the sinner into despair and drive him farther away. Much wisdom is needed to apply both law and Gospel in an appropriate manner.God alone can forgive sin (Psa 130:4); the Church can only point out the conditions on which God forgives, administer consolation to the penitent, and absolve those who confess their faults in the presence of such as have been scandalized by their offences.

2Co 2:8. Hedinger:The penitent should be received to full public favor, and never afterward upbraided for his offence. Our Lord Himself never broke a bruised reed nor quenched the smoking flax (Isa 42:3).

2Co 2:11. Satan is exceedingly crafty, and watches every opportunity to do an injury (Eph 6:11). We should therefore be always forecasting how we may deprive him of every such opportunity (Act 20:28).

Berlenb. Bible, 2Co 2:1 :Our absence on certain occasions may be as important as our presence on others.

2Co 2:4. It ought to touch our hearts to be told: I wrote this unto you with many tears; and we should instantly inquire: Have I really given occasion for this?We should never hesitate to lay hold of and deliver those who have fallen into error before it is too late, and yet we must not expect that they will readily regard our reproofs as kind and loving acts.

2Co 2:7. Our love to our neighbor should be like our Lords, whose long suffering is our salvation. He can hold the balance so accurately that the sinner is allowed to sink neither into despair nor into false security,

2Co 2:8. How seldom do we meet with that loving spirit which shrinks not from the fallen, but goes to them, and seeks to save even the lost. Such a one, however, knows how to lay the iron so gently on the wound that the patient bears even a deep incision.

Rieger, 2Co 2:1-2. Suspicion can sometimes enter the heart so deeply, that it can give off a web of dark thoughts for many years. It is better to crush the heads of such serpents as soon as possible.Many are too tenacious of their own freedom. They follow simply their own convenience and advantage without reference to the consciences or the suspicions of their brethren; while others freely exercise their right of judgment upon everything they see, and when they find nothing to censure in the outward conduct, they fasten upon some trifling thing to be impeached in the inward spirit. Thus the hearts of men are thrown continually further and further apart, and there can be no such thing in life or death as mutual confidence or assistance. Those who are grieved for the affliction of Joseph (Amo 6:6), will feel disposed to save as much as possible the reputation of a servant of Christ whose character is suffering.Nothing can more cheer us under the trials of our work, than to find that those afflictions which spring from a mans own or others faults, have become the seed of a saving repentance.

2Co 2:3-4. It is never well when those who watch for souls are compelled to labor in the midst of perpetual sighs and discouragements. On the other hand, when they are cheerful, their joy will be the joy of all, and every plant of grace will be revived.In the kingdom of Christ truth should never be spoken with a simpering and trifling manner, but an imperious and a lordly style of address is quite as inappropriate. Those discourses, whose object is to reprove others and to bring offenders to repentance, should be the offspring of the preachers own sorrow, and be brought forth with much anguish of soul. He must himself know what it is to confess his sins before the Lord with many tears.Love makes us zealous, and zeal will admonish and reprove our best friends and brethren

2Co 2:5 ff. Precious fruit of the righteousness revealed in the Gospel! While we justify the condemnation of the sin, we sympathize with, and long to save the sinner! When the conscience of a child of God has been awakened, and his heart has been softened by discipline, he should have not only a gradual restoration of individual love, but an assurance of the common fellowship he once enjoyed.What a difference there is between dealing with a sin which is concealed, justified or praised, and one which is recognized, confessed, and already put away with godly sorrow.

2Co 2:11. Satan has always further trials and temptations for those who have no meekness or tenderness of heart. Ministers must continually take precautions against these.Lord, how many things are done on our account by our enemies, and by Thee as our Advocate, of which we have no conception! Thy faithfulness alone can save us!

Heubner, 2Co 2:1-4 :Painful as it may be, we are often bound to grieve others, that we may do them good. We must not always be giving sweet meats.The highest enjoyments of a minister are those which he feels with reference to his people. Between him and them there should be the most intimate communion.A faithful pastor should have a very tender heart, and he must know what it is to weep in solitude over his people. Such tears have their source in the spirit of God. None but faithful shepherds know what such distress is; for those corruptions which allow him no peace, make the hireling indifferent and cold.

2Co 2:5. Public scandals are a disgrace which the whole congregation should deeply feel. And yet how little of this public spirit is there in most of our communities.

2Co 2:6. There is great power when many are united to remove offences. The discipline which needs no outward force is the most effective.

2Co 2:7. The moment we perceive that an offender has submitted to his punishment, and become penitent, we should change our conduct toward him.The discipline of the Church should always be directed to the reformation, and not to the mere punishment of the offender. Whatever makes him worse, is opposed to its true object.

2Co 2:8. The same spirit which once caused sorrow, now comforts.

2Co 2:9. A genuine Christian spirit may always be known from its readiness to comply with Apostolic direction.

2Co 2:10. Ministers should never disregard the united voice of their people. Its utterances are a great consolation when they speak forgiveness to those who have fallen.

2Co 2:11. It is the business of the Wicked One to injure, and, if possible, break up the spiritual association of Gods people (the Church). He therefore tempts them, sometimes, to be slack, but sometimes to be excessively severe in discipline, and thus to drive souls into despair. Force, intolerance and persecution, have been his favorite arts by which to rend and destroy the Church; and unfortunately ecclesiastical history is principally occupied with accounts of them.The Christian should never forget that this evil spirit knows of no rest, and he should ever be on his guard against Satanic wiles. Those who have been enlightened from above, are not ignorant of these devices, and know well how to thwart such schemes. Only those who are short-sighted and simple will look upon warnings against them as vain fancies, and hence be taken by surprise.

W. F. Besser, 2Co 2:4. A mothers love will be seen in the most delicate attentions to her invalid child, and no better test of a shepherds love can be given than when he hastens with especial earnestness after the sheep which has gone astray.

2Co 2:10. The rock on which all true comfort is founded, when we are absolved from our offences, is the great truth, that whoever the public minister may be, the absolution is not mans but Gods.

[Here is an example of the difficult duty and right of blame, or of correcting our fellowmen. I. Every one has something of this kind to do. A more than common share of it falls upon ministers and those in public stations, but there are occasions when every one is called to it. Society should not be turned into an arena of distrust, where each one is zealously watching over others conduct, nor yet should it be one of cold indifference towards each others sufferings and welfare. Where anothers faults are forced upon our attention, it may be our duty to attempt their correction, 1. for the offenders own sake (2Co 2:6-8); 2. for societys sake (2Co 2:4); and 3. even for our own sake (2Co 2:1), since we may be misunderstood if we show no interest in the case. II. But much depends upon the way in which it is performed; as, 1. by the right person; 2. at the right time (Paul declined even to be present at one time); 3. by the right means (by a visit or by Epistle); 4. in the right spirit (not from love of censuring, love of dominion, personal pique or jealousy, but from love to the offender and to Christs cause.We have here (2Co 2:6-11): I. The Christian idea of punishment; When it should be inflicted? 1, when the good of the offender demands it, for even if he has forfeited all rights, he has claims upon our benevolence; 2, when society is threatened with injury, and 3, when a righteous indignation at crime calls for an expression. When it should be dispensed with or remitted? When the ends of punishment are secured, 1, by the private sufferings or repentance of the offender, 2, by his partial punishment, which corrects the offender and vindicates public sentiment. II. The Christian idea of absolution: Mans declaration of Gods forgivenessman speaking in Gods stead; 1, its use to save from remorse and despair; 2, its representative character (2Co 2:10). After Robertson and Lisco].

Footnotes:

[1]2Co 2:1.The arrangement of the words, should be, according to the best MSS.: . The Rec. on less [Meyer: almost no] authority has . The best authorities also put before . Tisch. still adheres to: , and he is sustained by D. E. F. G. the Ital. Vulg. Syr. and Goth. vss., Chrys. and Theophyl. and most of the Lat. fathers. Nearly every recent critic has adopted the order: . [There appears to be no sufficient reason why and should not be rendered into English uniformly by the same generic words, as is contended for by Stanley (p. XXI.) and the editors of the Bible Union. In the eight times in which those words occur in our section, our A. V. has the different English words in heaviness, sorrow, grief, etc.]

[2]2Co 2:2.The best authorities have no after . It was added by a later hand. [Only Bloomfield, among later critics defends it both on documentary and internal evidence. He contends that the idiom and the interrogative use of demands a verb or its equivalent.]

[3]2Co 2:3.The best authorities have also cancelled after [but Bloomfield defends it as less likely to have been interpolated where it is found, than to have fallen out where it is wanting.]

[4]2Co 2:7.In the best MSS. is wanting, and in others it stands after . It is a gloss upon . [And yet it is found in C. K. L. and Sinait. the Vulg. the Peschito Syr. Chrys. Theodt. Damasc. Theophyl. Oecum. and other MSS.; and it is inserted by Tisch., Stanley, and Meyer. The latter thinks it was omitted on account of its apparent superfluity.]

[5]2Co 2:9.Lachmann following A. B. has instead of . The might easily have fallen out before (both are wanting in one MS. [of the 11th cent.]) and was then supplied in various ways. (One MS. [also of the 11th cent.] has .)

[6]2Co 2:10.The best authorities have , . Rec. has , . Meyer thinks that . was left out on account of the occurrence of . twice (in several MSS. it is found wanting), and then that it was reinserted in different positions.

[7][Although our authors construction of actively (:causing grief) is sanctioned by a number of ancient (especially Chrysostom) and modern critics, it is certainly not the natural meaning of the word, and is utterly inappropriate in the remainder of this section, and in other parts of Pauls writings. We much prefer that of the majority of interpreters, which makes the sense of 2Co 2:2-3 to be: I determined not to come to you again in sorrow; and therefore I refrained from visiting you at a time in which I should have been obliged to inflict on you a chastisement which would have been painful to me. I therefore then wrote an admonition to you. that ye might correct the evil, and that when I should actually come to you I might have joy in you. In this way, though my letter caused some sorrow, it was like the process of healing which finally gives joy to both patient and physician, and did not subject me to a personal intercourse of sorrow. For ye are the only sources of my joy when I come in person to Corinth, and if ye are thrown into permanent sorrow, who will there be to give me any satisfaction ? See our interpretation further defended in Hodges Com.].

[8][To understand the authors criticisms we need to have the several ways in which this passage has been punctuated and rendered distinctly before us. All that are important may be reduced to three: 1. That of Chrysostom, and advocated generally, especially by de Wette, Meyer, Osiander, Bloomfield, Neander, Alford, Stanley and Hodge, viz.: ., ., ( ) , i.e., If any have caused grief, he hath grieved not me, but more or less (that I be not too heavy on him) all of you. Theophylact says: the Apostle skilfully brings them all in as partakers of the injury, that he may have them partakers in the absolution. 2. That of Theodoret, the Vulgate, Luthers translation, and the A. V., and advocated by Bengel and Wordsworth, viz.: , ( ), i.e., He hath not grieved me, (i. e., not so much me personally), but in part, (i.e., only as a part of the whole Church, and hence on account of the share I have in your griefs), that I may not lay the load of guilt on all of you. 3. That of Mosheim, Olshausen, Billroth and Conybeare, viz.: ( ) , i.e., he hath not grieved me, but in part (that I may not accuse all) you. Billroth: Whether he has caused grief to me is not a matter for present consideration: it is not I that must suffer for him, but you, at least a part of you, for I will not be unjust and charge you all with having been indifferent concerning his offence.]

[9][Paul, in this case, assumes that man had been sinned against by this offender, and so man might forgive for this offence. He denies that he alone would either feel aggrieved ( ) or grant pardon. He refuses to absolve the man until the Church nad acted. He was ready, however, to forgive any one () or any thing ( the better reading), when the Church had forgiven. If they had forgiven (and he speaks of this as if it were past, , open perf.), he had done so (and for their sakes), if they had not forgiven, he had not (he makes his action hypothetical on theirs, , Hodge), and yet he seems to regard his action as equally indispensable to the completeness of theirs. If be translated in the name, or by the authority of Christ, the Apostle acted as Christs representative; but if, as is more likely, it means in Christs presence, as if Christ were looking on (Stanley). Paul assumes that he was acting for the Church and himself, so far as each had been sinned against. From this we get the Apostles true idea of absolution. First, there was repentance and Divine forgiveness, then confession in some way so as to satisfy the congregation, and finally, the forgiveness and formal announcement (absolution) on the part of the Church or its representatives. Nothing is said of ecclesiastical satisfactions in the Roman sense. Comp. W. F. Besser, Bibelstunden; and F. W. Robertson, Ser. V., 3d series, Lect. 37th, 4th series.]

Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange

CONTENTS

The Apostle prosecutes the Subject of his Epistle in this Chapter. Very blessedly he speaks the inmost Feelings of his Soul, and finds cause to bless God, for causing him always to triumph in Christ.

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

(1) But I determined this with myself, that I would not come again to you in heaviness. (2) For if I make you sorry, who is he then that maketh me glad, but the same which is made sorry by me? (3) And I wrote this same unto you, lest, when I came, I should have sorrow from them of whom I ought to rejoice; having confidence in you all, that my joy is the joy of you all. (4) For out of much affliction and anguish of heart I wrote unto you with many tears; not that ye should be grieved, but that ye might know the love which I have more abundantly unto you. (5) But if any have caused grief, he hath not grieved me, but in part: that I may not overcharge you all. (6) Sufficient to such a man is this punishment, which was inflicted of many. (7) So that contrariwise ye ought rather to forgive him, and comfort him, lest perhaps such a one should be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow. (8) Wherefore I beseech you that ye would confirm your love toward him. (9) For to this end also did I write, that I might know the proof of you, whether ye be obedient in all things. (10) To whom ye forgive anything, I forgive also: for if I forgave anything, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ; (11) Lest Satan should get an advantage of us: for we are not ignorant of his devices. (12) Furthermore, when I came to Troas to preach Christ’s gospel, and a door was opened unto me of the Lord, (13) I had no rest in my spirit, because I found not Titus my brother: but taking my leave of them, I went from thence into Macedonia.

The greater part of the subject, connected with those verses, is of a personal nature, and hath reference to some events, which took place in the Church of Corinth, which the Apostle had thought it necessary to reprove. But with that tenderness which distinguished Paul’s character, fearing he might have used more sharpness, than the persons conceived necessary, he here aims to soften all the former asperity, and to sooth their minds with love. Our great improvement from the passage will be to observe, how much grace, and wisdom it requires, in cases of Church government, to know how to temper suited firmness in reprehension, with tenderness and compassion; lest, as the Apostle saith, Satan should take advantage of the corruption of the mind, and stir up schism in the Church of God.

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

Forewarned, Forearmed

2Co 2:11

‘Knowledge is power,’ said Lord Bacon; and to know some of the subtleties of that malevolent power that fights against us, is so far to be forearmed. Paul does not tell us what the devices were. But probably the devices of today are very much the same as in Paul’s time. We are not ignorant of his devices what, then, are some of these?

I. Firstly, he labels evil things with pleasant names. There is a tendency in all language to do that. No man has ever loved to call the seamier side of things by its right name, or to look the darker facts of life straight in the face. It is this tendency of human speech that is caught up and wrested by the devil into an engine and instrument of ill.

II. He makes his onset on our strongest side. Our characters are complex products, and in every one of us strong elements and weak are strangely blended. The strongest Achilles has his defenceless heel. Thou hast a worst side, and generally men take thee on thy worst side. But thou hast a best side, and God takes thee on that. And Satan, transforming himself into an angel of light, assails on that side too. The Bible has many instances of that.

III. He uses tools. It is one mark of practical genius to choose the right instruments to do its work. Could you conceive a finer choice of instruments than Satan makes, when he is seeking to overthrow a human soul? Out of a hundred gates into your hearts and mine, he passes by those that are barred and chooses one that will open at a touch. His is the plan and his the whole device. But he gets other hands and other hearts to the work; and the whole history of the tempted world, and the whole history of your tempted heart, tells the consummate genius of the choice.

IV. He shams defeat. To sham defeat is a well-known trick in warfare. Our unseen foe is a consummate strategist. Many a soul has been lost because it won won in the first encounter, then said all’s well, and laid its arms aside till the old sin crept up again and sprang, and the last state was worse than the first.

V. He lays the emphasis upon tomorrow. We are always prone to put the accent there. In every life, for every start and every noble deed, God says, Today. In every life, for every start and every noble deed, the devil says, To-morrow.

G. H. Morrison, Flood-Tide, p. 230.

References. II. 12. Expositor (5th Series), vol. i. p. 387; ibid. vol. ii. p. 275; ibid. (6th Series), vol. iii. p. 239; ibid. vol. ix. p. 21; ibid. vol. x. p. 344.

Victories, Not Victors

2Co 2:14

The text has been read thus: ‘But thanks be unto God, which always leadeth us in triumph in Christ, and maketh manifest through us the savour of His knowledge in every place’.

This is a beautiful picture. The subject ought to be treated pictorially. We should see a great king with a great procession of chariots behind him, and those chariots full of saved men, and the Captain of their salvation at the head pointing to these men as proofs of the reality and energy and beneficence of His redeeming and saving grace. Let the heart keep the picture vividly before its eyes: Christ at the head, miles of chariots, all golden, all filled with living hymns, all wounded men, but wounded to their own salvation; and as they come along they say, We have been taken by Christ at the spear-point; if you want to know what Christ can do, read the record of our experience.

I. This reading of the text does two things: first, it puts Christ in His right position, and, secondly, it puts Christians in their right position, and not Christians only, but Christian apostles and martyrs, the leaders and heads of the visible Church upon earth, appointed by Christ, clothed by Him with some mantle which is the truest honour of the soul. Christ is put in His right position by being put at the head of the great procession. Who is this that cometh up from Edom with dyed garments from Bozrah, this that is red in His apparel, travelling in the greatness of His strength? And who are these that follow Him, and sing as they follow? It is the army of the saved, it is the caravan of the blessed, it is the host on every member of which is sprinkled the saving blood, and by these grand trophies of His grace Christ spreads the news of His kingdom over all the waiting earth.

II. We are, then, to be specimens of Christ’s victorious grace. What an honour, what a responsibility, yet what a danger! lest we should be self-deceived and be but half-subdued. The argument of Christ is, Believe Me for the work’s sake; here is the man, the man is the best argument; personal character is the best defence; remember what the man was, what the man is, to what energy he ascribes the change. He tells you it was the miracle of the grace of God; believe the man. Why should you be keeping outside God’s gracious kingdom, chaffering with some fellow-disputant, neither of you being able to discuss the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven with any adequacy of intellectual force or spiritual fitness? why should you be asking hard questions in words? There is the man, the soul, the publican, the thief, the prodigal there! You have not to answer an argument in words, you have to destroy a logic in life, a grand syllogism in fact, in experience, in ascertainable consequence. Look at the instances you yourselves have known of the energy of the grace of Christ; know that Jesus Christ calls you to consider what victories He has already won. Whatever your case or mine may be, there is an analogy, a parallel, an almost identical instance in the record of Christ’s victories. Read it, and say, If Christ could conquer that man, He can conquer me.

Joseph Parker, City Temple Pulpit, vol. II. p. 89.

References. II. 14. Bishop Doane, Christian World Pulpit, vol. lvii. p. 385. Expositor (4th Series), vol. iii. p. 93; ibid. vol. x. p. 274. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture Corinthians, p. 296. II. 14-16. C. Moinet, The Great Alternative and other Sermons, p. 279. W. Pulsford, Trinity Church Sermons, p. 198. II. 15. J. G. Rogers, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xlvii. p. 52. II. 15, 16. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. i. No. 26. II. 16. F. W. Farrar, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xliv. p. 233. H. M. Butler, Harrow School Sermons (2nd Series), p. 80. Morley Wright, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xlviii. p. 301. J. M. Neale, Sermons on the Blessed Sacrament, p. 1. A. Goodrich, Christian World Pulpit, vol. lvi. p. 248. J. G. Greenhough, The Mind of Christ in St. Paul, p. 293. II. 17 . Expositor (4th Series), vol. ii. p. 300; ibid. vol. iii. p. 94; ibid. (6th Series), vol. vii. p. 456; ibid. vol. viii. p. 75. II. 18. G. Austen, The Pulpit, vol. i. p. 41. III. Expositor (5th Series), vol. x. p. 260. III. 2, 3. A. Rowland, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xliv. p. 299. H. Woodcock, Sermon Outlines (1st Series), p. 190.

Fuente: Expositor’s Dictionary of Text by Robertson

XXVII

THE TWO COVENANTS

2Co 1:21-3:18 .

In the last of 2Co 1 there is one passage that we need to discuss: “Now he that established us with you in Christ, and anointed us, is God; who also sealed us, and gave us the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts.” Some words used here a Christian ought to understand. For instance, “anointed,” “sealed,” “earnest.” In the Old Testament, prophets, priests, and kings were anointed with the “holy anointing oil” whose recipe Moses gave in Exo 30:22-33 . As a ceremony it signified their consecration, or setting apart, to office. As a symbol it signified the influence of the Holy Spirit which qualified them to perform their official duties. In the New Testament it means that the Holy Spirit, received by faith, qualifies every Christian to be a priest of God, to offer spiritual sacrifices. The word “anointed,” I say, refers to the influence that comes upon the Christian in the sense of setting him apart for the work of Christ and qualifying him to do it. As the Old Testament priest, prophet, and king were anointed for an office, so is every Christian. We are all kings and priests unto God. Without the Holy Spirit we cannot acceptably serve God.

The word “seal” has a different signification.

It is quite common in Pedo-baptist literature to refer to baptism as a seal, but in the Word of God baptism is nowhere called a seal. On the contrary, we are expressly said to be sealed by the Holy Spirit.

The object of a seal is to accredit or designate ownership. For instance, a man writes a letter and puts the mark of his seal on it; that authenticates the letter. If a seminary confers a degree or sells a piece of property, neither degree nor deed is valid unless it bears the corporate seal of the seminary. We are said to be sealed by the Holy Spirit. That simply means this that the gift of the Holy Spirit to a Christian authenticates that Christian as God’s property. Suppose I address a communication and put my seal on it; that seal is designed to keep the communication intact until it gets to its address. So we are sealed unto the day of redemption.

That is a very strong argument in favor of the final preservation of the saints. The imprint of the Holy Spirit on us is a mark that we belong to God and will be delivered to God on the day of redemption. If the seal of God does hold (and there is no power that can break it) that is demonstrative that the Christian will reach his destination.

There is still another word “given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts.” An “earnest” is something of this kind: The holy land was promised to the Israelites. Spies were sent to look out the country and sample it. They brought back a bunch of grapes, and the people were enabled to eat those grapes before they got to the country where the grapes grew. They were the same in kind, but not the same in quantity. God intends that our promised land shall be heaven; but before we get to heaven he gives us foretastes in kind of what we are to get when we reach heaven; the joy, peace, and glory that often comes to the Christian heart here on earth is an earnest of what heaven will be. It is a little piece of heaven, sent down to us beforehand. How often in a great revival we hear brethren say, “This is heaven on earth! We are getting foretastes of the glory of God.” The sense of forgiveness, the sweet peace that comes in the heart on reconciliation with God, the joy of the converted soul anything of that kind is an earnest of heaven.

The first part of 2Co 2 is devoted to a case of discipline. In the first letter he had written very sharply in a way to bring grief to their hearts because they had allowed an awful sin, committed by one of their members, to go unrebuked. He is now explaining to them why he made them sorry: “If I make you sorry, who then is he that maketh me glad but he that is made sorry by me? And I wrote this very thing, lest, when I came, I should have sorrow from them of whom I ought to rejoice; having confidence in you all, that my joy is the joy of you all. For 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.” That sharp letter he wrote was prompted by love. He saw that they were getting themselves into trouble. He adds, “But if any hath caused sorrow, he hath caused sorrow, not to me, but in part (that I press not too heavily) to you all. Sufficient to such a one is this punishment which was inflicted by the many.” When they came to expel that man they could not get a unanimous vote, for some stood for him.

That conveys this lesson to us, that in expelling a man it is not necessary that the vote should be unanimous; a majority vote is sufficient for expulsion or any discipline whatever.

It is different in the reception of a member. Pastors and churches sometimes have to show why it is that a majority vote is sufficient to expel a man, and here is the text. The word “many” means majority. This case also contains another important lesson on discipline: “Sufficient to such a one is the punishment inflicted by the majority; so that contrariwise ye should rather forgive him and comfort him, lest by any means such a one should be swallowed up with his overmuch sorrow. Wherefore I beseech you to confirm your love toward him. For to this end also did I write, that I might know the proof of you, whether ye are obedient in all things. But to whom ye forgive anything, I forgive also; for what I also have forgiven, if I have forgiven anything, for your sakes have I forgiven it.”

That raises the question: What is the object of discipline? To gain the offending brother. Even when we exclude him, if he be a Christian, and his exclusion is conducted properly, it will likely have that effect on him. It had that effect in this case. When this man saw that this church by a majority vote decided that he was living in a, sin of such heinousness that it disqualified him for membership in a church of Jesus Christ, it broke his heart and he repented of his sin. Paul says, “Let that punishment of expulsion be sufficient, and on his repentance forgive him and take him back again.” That is the point in discipline.

All the rest of the letter until we come to 2Co 8 is on Paul’s ministry: “Now when I came to Troas for the gospel of Christ, and when a door was opened unto me in the Lord, I had no relief for my spirit, because I found not Titus, my brother; but taking my leave of them, I went forth into Macedonia.” The thought is that a man who loves to preach the gospel and is holding a meeting where the door of success is open, may yet have such a burden on his heart about other matters that he cannot fulfil his duty as a preacher. Paul is distressed to death about that case at Corinth for fear that the church should go astray and be lost from the churches of Jesus Christ, as he says elsewhere that the case of all the churches was resting on his apostolic heart. Many a time when the preacher preaches he carries a burden that nobody else knows anything about. Sometimes he has a burden on him right in the midst of a meeting that does not touch the meeting, coming from circumstances elsewhere that divert his mind and press on his heart.

Then he says, “But thanks be unto God, who always leadeth us in triumph in Christ, and maketh manifest through us the savor of his knowledge in every place.”

Notice that always and in every place the true preacher triumphs.

Paul explains how that is: “For we are a sweet savor of Christ unto God, in them that are saved, and in them that perish; to the one a savor from death unto death; to the other a savor from life unto life.” Some preachers think if they preach, and people are not saved, they have failed. If the preacher preaches God’s gospel where he wants him to preach, he wins a victory over the lost if not over the saved.

In other words, God intends that the terms of mercy contained in his gospel should be submitted to people whether they receive it or reject it, and that there is no responsibility attaching to the preacher in the issue.

If they reject it, the gospel is to them a savor of death unto death, and of life unto life, if they accept it. I do not know any other part of the Scriptures so little understood as that statement.

One night, when I was a young pastor, a brother pastor came to see me, very much distressed. He said, “My ministry is a failure.” I said, “I am disposed to question that.” He said, “I cannot disguise it from myself; it is a dead failure. I have preached for a solid year in tears and in earnestness and nobody in my community has been convicted of sin.” I said, “That does not prove that you have failed. If you had preached without praying or studying or asking God to give you the right message, I would agree with you that your ministry is a failure. But if you have preached in faith, in tears, in prayer, faithfully holding up the gospel, you have won the victory,” and I read this passage. He was so impressed that he got right down on the floor at my house, and such a thanksgiving I never heard. He said, “Do you know that you have saved my life? I felt like quitting the ministry because I was in such despair.” Generally, we should look for success in the salvation of men, and that should be our principal desire in preaching, and generally that will be the result, but sometimes it will not. “But always in every place God causeth us to triumph.”

2Co 3 commences with a reference to letters of recommendation: “Are we beginning again to commend ourselves, or need we, as do some, epistles of commendation to you or from you? Ye are our epistle, written in our hearts, known and read of all men; being made manifest that ye are an epistle of Christ, ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in tables that are hearts of flesh.” He uses two figures about the letters: First, in his heart it is written; second, Christ, using him as a penman, wrote a letter on their hearts, and that letter that Christ wrote could be known and read of all men not written with ink and pen, but with the Spirit. It was not written like the commandments of Moses, on tables of stone, but on the fleshly tables of the heart. He says, “I don’t need a letter of recommendation, as some other people do. The Jewish brethren came bringing letters from the Jerusalem church, and they had stirred up all this trouble. They needed letters of recommendation. You heard the gospel through me. I built on no other man’s foundation, but led you to Christ. If you want to know where my letter of recommendation is, look on yourselves. Christ dictated; I wrote the letter, and it is a long ways better than a letter written in ink.” An ink letter oftentimes means very little.

Once a man came into my office and asked me for a letter of recommendation. I said, “I do not even know you.” He said, “That is all right; you can tell them about me.” I said, “Why do you not tell them about yourself? Your word would mean as much as my letter. You have come to the wrong place; I never write a letter of recommendation unless I know what I am writing about.” Again, a certain man wanted me to commend a book. I said, “I have never read that book.” “Well, I will show you its prospectus,” said he. “But the prospectus is not the book. Do you think I would commend a book that I have not read, and do you think I would trade my name for a single book?” “Well,” he said, “other people do that way.” “Yes,” I said, “and that is the reason that their letters of recommendation are not worth anything.”

It is a suspicious thing for a man to carry his valise full of recommendations. I once knew a preacher who carried around a scrapbook in which he had preserved every foolish thing that had ever been said in his favor by the newspapers. My father used to say, “Whenever you see a chimney with a big log up against it, you may know that it is a weak chimney, and needs to be propped.” The object of a letter of recommendation is simply to give a person an introduction, and then let him stand for himself.

The poorest preacher and the poorest pastor I ever saw had twenty-three letters of recommendation and several degrees from colleges.

The most important thought in connection with these letters of recommendation is that, after all, everything must be judged by its fruits, and every man must be known by his works. What is Christianity? Christ wrote a letter. Where is that letter? That Corinthian church. Is there anything different between what they are now and what they were before their conversion? Yes, a great deal of difference, and all that difference is in favor of the Christian religion that worked the change. We may tell a man about the effects of Christianity, and he will take all we say with a grain of salt, but if we show him actual cases of changed people, they become letters of recommendation for the Christian religion. If the one who joins the church remains as he was before, it proves nothing; but if Christianity makes better husbands, wives, brothers, sisters, and citizens, the whole wide world can read that letter.

An infidel once said to me that there was one woman in my church who had really been converted, or changed, and that the change was for the better, and that was one argument for Christianity that he could not answer. The next thought is in 2Co 3:5-6 : “But our sufficiency is from God; who also made us sufficient as ministers of a new covenant; not of the letter, but of the Spirit: for the letter killeth.” The lesson from that word “sufficient” should sink down into every preacher’s heart. It is not because a man is six feet tall; Paul was a low man. It is not because a man is pretty; Paul was ugly. It is not because a man is clear-eyed; Paul was dim-eyed. It is not because a man is sound in health; Paul was in ill health. It is not because a man is a rhetorician; Paul did not use his rhetoric. “Our sufficiency is of God.” We cannot put too much emphasis on that thought.

I was stopping once in Louisville. The brethren, hearing I was there, sent for me to make a talk to the Seminary boys, and I combined two passages which say, “Good and able ministers of Jesus Christ.” I took that as my theme. What is a good preacher? This refers to character. What is an able preacher? This refers to efficiency. I do not think I ever made a better talk to preachers than I made that night.

Now comes in the ministry of Paul, commencing at 2Co 3:7 , showing a distinction between the two covenants. We have already had one distinction, that the old covenant was written on tables of stone and the new covenant on tables of the heart. Here we have another: “But if the ministration of death, written, and engraven on stones, came with glory.” The old covenant was the ministration of death. The law gendered to bondage. The soul that sinneth shall die. The new covenant is the ministration of life. We cannot save men by the law. We can kill them, but we save men by the gospel. That distinction should be kept sharp in mind. It was a very solemn thing when God came down on Mount Sinai, crested with fire, and shaken with thunder, illumined with lightning, and the beat of the angel pinions filled the air it was a glorious thing. But what is that to the ministration of life through the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ? The law came by Moses, but grace and truth by Jesus Christ our Saviour, who abolished death, and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel. The law the ministration of death is written on cold rock, outside of man. The gospel the ministration of life is written on the warm heart, inside of man. Paul, in Heb 8:7-12 , says in speaking of the two covenants, “For if that first covenant had been faultless, then would no place have been sought for a second. For finding fault with them, ha saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, That I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah; Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers In the day that I took them by the hand to lead them forth out of the land of Egypt; For they continued not in my covenant, And I regarded them not, saith the Lord. For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel After those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, And on their heart also will I write them: And I will be to them a God, And they shall be to me a people: And they shall not teach every man his fellow-citizen, And every man his brother, saying, know the Lord: For all shall know me, From the least to the greatest of them. For I will be merciful to their iniquities, And their sins will I remember no more.”

Then Paul adds, “In that he saith, a new covenant, he hath made the first old. But that which is becoming old and waxeth aged is nigh unto vanishing away.” The new covenant is internal, and nothing has been done until the writing touches on the inside.

The glory of the old covenant was reflected in the face of Moses. When he came down from the mount his face was shining so that it dazzled the eyes of the people. But that was nothing like the shining of the transfiguration of Christ. The shining of Moses’ face was transitory. Moses put a veil over his face. He knew that the shining would pass away and his face would be as it was before. He veiled his face lest the Jews should see the end of the shining, and would not follow him. But the Jews believed that he veiled his face because it was too bright to look at, and that if the veil were lifted off, the face of Moses would outshine any face in the world. Mightily does Tom Moore bring out the thought in The Veiled Prophet of Khorasan , in Lalla Rookh. An impostor, wearing a veil, played upon the superstition of the people, saying that no mortal could endure the brightness of the splendor of his face, and in mercy to them he kept his face veiled. But he promised some day to uncover his face that they might see his glory. His object was to pre-commit them, and so bring them to absolute despair and ruin at the unveiling. One of the most pathetic things in poetry is where the prophet lifted his veil that the ruined Zelica might see his face; that she might see the horrible face of the demon who had deceived her. What must be the unveiling of the Law covenant to the lost dupes who have trusted it?

The next point is, that the Old Testament is a ministration of condemnation: “For if the ministration of condemnation hath glory, much rather doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory.” The word “righteousness” here should be rendered “justification.” The thought is that the old covenant condemns men; the new covenant justifies men. The preacher ought to be able to distinguish between those two points, condemnation and justification.

The next point is that the old covenant was written in types, veiling the truth signified. He says, “Having therefore such a hope, we use great boldness of speech, and are not as Moses, who put a veil upon his face.” Moses set forth things in allegories and types. Boldness, or plainness of speech here, refers to absence of figures of speech. That is the difference between telling a thing in straight-out language, and in using parables. The gospel makes the way of life very plain, so that a fool cannot misunderstand. In much of the Old Testament we have to study so as to find the signification of the type or of the prophetic visions. They were but shadows.

Notice again the old covenant dazzled the eye 2Co 3:18 : “But we all, with unveiled face beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are transformed into the same image from glory to glory, even as from the Lord the Spirit.” The verse preceding says, “The Lord is the spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.” Mirrors in those days were made of hammered and polished metal) and made a dim reflection. The sun may be out of sight, but the moon is a mirror catching the light of the sun and reflecting it to the eye of the beholder.

I am going to give you what I call a very impressive illustration. In Prescott’s Conquest of Peru, there is a description of the Temple of the Incas as Cuzco. This temple consists of three walls, north, south, west. The eastern side of the structure was open. The walls were smoothly cemented, and on the cement was put thinly hammered gold. The way they worshiped was this: They would come to the temple just before dawn and stand in that opening to the east, and facing the western wall a golden wall; on the left a golden wall; and on the right a golden wall. The sun would rise behind them, and long before they could see it directly they could see its reflection in the western wall, and be covered with the golden light. Their faces were illumined in the reflection. Now we all look into the mirror upon the glory of the Lord, and that mirror reflects it on us, and we catch the reflected image and are changed in it from glory to glory; as the sun behind those people rising higher, blazing brighter, bathed them more and more in its reflected light, so the Lord of righteousness, as he rises, brings healing in his wings. We look at Christ as in a mirror. He is not here, but we see him mirrored in the face of his saints. It is a law that we become like that which we steadfastly contemplate. If we steadily study about good, pure, and holy things, we become like them. If we study about evil things, vile and loathsome and slimy, we become like them. We steadfastly behold the glorious things of the gospel as in a mirror and become transformed ourselves, more and more like Jesus, and at last become altogether like him in image.

QUESTIONS

1. What three important words in 2Co 1:21-22 which need to be understood?

2. What the meaning and application of the word “anointed”?

3. Discuss the word “seal,” showing its application by illustrations.

4. What the meaning of “earnest,” what the illustration given, and what the spiritual significance of it?

5. To what is the first part of 2Co 2 devoted, and what connection has this with the first letter?

6. What the history of this case, and what important lesson for us in it?

7. What lesson here as to the object of discipline, and how is it clearly shown in this case?

8. To what is the next section, 2Co 2:12-7:16 , devoted, and what the lessons of 2Co 2:12-13 ?

9. What the ground of Paul’s thanksgiving here, and how could Paul say, “God always leadeth us in triumph”? Illustrate.

10. What lesson for us here on the question of letters of recommendation, and what the explanation of Paul’s two figures of speech relative to this matter? Illustrate.

11. What the most important thought in connection with these letters of recommendation, and how does the author illustrate it?

12. What lesson here as to our sufficiency, and how does this idea relate to “Good and able ministers of Jesus Christ”?

13. What 2 distinctions here noted between the new covenant and the old?

14. What prophet does Paul quote to show the difference between the old covenant and the new, where do we find this quotation, and how does this prophet show the difference?

15. Give an account of the shining face of Moses, and illustrate with the incident of The Veiled Prophet of Khorasan.

16. How is the Old Testament a ministration of condemnation, in what does the ministration of righteousness exceed the ministration of the Old Testament, and what the meaning of word “righteousness” here?

17. What difference between the Old Testament and the New Testament expressed in 2Co 3:12 , and how is this illustrated in the case of Moses veiling his face?

18. What Paul’s mirror-illustration, and how is this illustrated by author?

Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible

1 But I determined this with myself, that I would not come again to you in heaviness.

Ver. 1. That I would not come again ] Ille dolet quoties cogitur esse ferox. It goes as much against the heart of a good minister as against the hair with his people, if he say or do anything to their grief. It is no pleasure to him to fling daggers, to speak millstones, to preach damnation, &c. But there is a cruel leniency, as was that of Eli to his sons; and evil men must be sharply rebuked, that they may be sound in the faith, Tit 1:13 .

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

1 4 .] FURTHER EXPLANATION ON THE REASON OF THE POSTPONEMENT OF HIS VISIT.

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

1. ] is merely transitional, and does not imply any contrast with what has preceded.

, not = (as most Commentators and E. V.), but ‘dat. commodi,’ for my own sake , as is evident by the consideration in the next verse.

refers to what follows: see reff.

] not again to come to you in grief . This is the only fair rendering of the words; implying, that some former visit had been in grief . Clearly the first visit Act 18:1 ff., could not be thus described: we must therefore infer, that an intermediate unrecorded visit had been paid by him. On this subject, compare ch. 2Co 12:14 ; 2Co 13:1 and notes: and see Prolegg. to 1 Cor. v.

] is explained in 2Co 2:2-3 to mean (so Estius, Bengel, Rckert, Olsh., De Wette, al.) in mutual grief : ‘I grieving you ( 2Co 2:2 ), and you grieving me’ ( 2Co 2:3 ): not, as Chrys., al., Paul’s grief alone, nor, as Meyer, al., grief inflicted on them by Paul.

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

2Co 2:1 . . . .: but I decided this for my own sake, that I would not come again to you with sorrow; i.e. , I determined that my next visit should not be painful, as my last was. The juxtaposition of with (see crit. note) requires that interpretation. Hence the former visit in St. Paul’s mind could not have been his first visit to Corinth (Act 18:1 ff.), for that was not . And thus we are forced to conclude that another visit was paid from Ephesus, of which no details have been preserved ( cf. 2Co 12:14 , 2Co 13:1 ). The conditions 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 Act 19:10 . 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 1Co 5:9 , in which he charged the Corinthians “to keep no company with fornicators”. Subsequently to this he again received distressing intelligence (1Co 1:11 ; 1Co 5:1 , etc.), whereupon he wrote the first canonical Epistle (see Introd. , p. 7).

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

2 Corinthians Chapter 2

The apostle now explains more fully his motive for not going before to Corinth. They ought, from 1Co 4 , to have gathered plainly enough why it was. But the flesh never appreciates motives of the Spirit; and the enemy takes pleasure in embroiling the saints, if he fail with those that serve them for Jesus’ sake. Now, however, that grace had begun to work in the Corinthians, the language is modified accordingly. The apostle had then asked if he was to come with a rod, or in love and a spirit of meekness. Here, as he had already stated that it was to spare them he had not as yet come to Corinth, he follows up with words that show how far from him it was to lord it over their faith, as some might have drawn from his threat of a rod.

“But I judged this for myself not to come again [or back] unto you in grief.* For if I grieve you, who then [is] he that gladdeneth me, if not he that is grieved by me? And I wrote this very thing, that I might not on coming have grief from those from whom I ought to have joy, having trust in you all that my joy is [that] of you all. For out of much tribulation and distress of heart I wrote to you with many tears, not that ye should be grieved, but that ye may know the love that I have very [lit. more] abundantly unto you.” (Vers. 1-4.)

* The true order is with the

best and most MSS.

There is no p.m. A, B, Cp.m. O, P, etc.

It is a mistake that these words imply a former visit in grief, and therefore a second intermediate and unrecorded one, distinct from the first. The work began, as described in Act 18 . The next visit of which scripture speaks was in Act 20:2 , Act 20:3 , after both epistles were written – the first from Ephesus (1Co 16:8 ), the second from Macedonia – but whether from Philippi (as is the traditional idea), or from some other place, as Thessalonica, does not appear. Tradition is certainly wrong in asserting that the first also issued from Philippi, as it may be about the second. 2Co 12:14 , 2Co 12:21 ; 2Co 13:1 , in no way indicate the fact, but the intention of a second visit, put off because of their state, and in the hope that the delay might give occasion to the intervention of grace, and thus the need of judicial severity be spared, on the apostle’s part, toward many in the assembly. Indeed 2Co 13:2 seems plainly to indicate that he had not really been a second time: “I have declared beforehand, and say beforehand, as present the second time, and now absent,” etc.

There is no evidence, in my judgment, that he had gone once to correct abuses, and to exercise discipline. He was anxious to avoid any such necessity, and therefore, instead of going as intended, he went to meet Titus, spite of work most attractive to him, that he might know how his first letter had fared at Corinth.

Actually he had not been; this was the third time he had the purpose of going; and it was the putting off the visit when intended which gave rise to the charge of light-mindedness. The change was due to their failure, and in no sense to his. On the contrary, he preferred in love to them to be grossly misconstrued, and so, instead of explaining to others, he decided this for or with himself, not to come back to them in grief.

At that time his visit would have been sorrow all round – to him certainly – at the sight of the saints, divided by party zeal, entangled by fleshly lusts, dabbling with the world, tampering with idolatry, unworthily communicating, disorderly in the assembly, and denying – implicitly at least – fundamental doctrine, and not less surely to them, if he convicted their consciences, and dealt with their state as it deserved. Graciously, therefore, had he deferred his visit till the issue of his first letter appeared, wherein he had brought the light of God to bear on all these evils and more, of which report mainly, not a fresh visit, had apprised him. The good news he had received of the effect produced by his letters opened his heart, and let out the deep affection he had for them, spite of their grievous faults. For he is convinced that their grief was his, as also that his joy was theirs. What a wondrous power there is in Christ to produce communion in grief over evil, in the joy of grace, above self and its divisive character and consequences! His desire was the happiness of the saints. No wonder, then, he shrank from going where and when his visit must be one of grief. For if I grieve you, who then is it that is to gladden me, if not he that is grieved by me?” That is, none but they could satisfy his heart. What love, and delicacy too! He individualises the saints in this phrase: And I wrote this very thing, that I might not on coming have grief from those from whom I ought to have joy: having trust in you all that my joy is [that] of you all.”

It is clear thence that it is not only inflicting, but receiving, grief of which the apostle speaks, as indeed it is always according to God in His church, whatever it be in the world. His motive in writing was the removal of what ought to pain them as it did him, that he and they might at his coming rejoice together, Christ being the spring, who can tolerate nothing offensive to God in His temple, which the saints are. And the circumstances, as well as inward feelings of the apostle, were eminently adapted to bring about the result. “For out of much tribulation and distress of heart I wrote to you with many tears, not that ye should be grieved, but that ye may know the love which I have very abundantly unto you.” It was very abundant love, but hardly more than to others, as some conceive.

There is, perhaps, no place where the delicacy, as well as faithfulness, of the apostle appears more than in dealing with the case which had so deeply pained his heart, in view of the dishonour done to the Lord at Corinth. For if it betrayed how low the unjudged flesh of a Christian might carry him, it had also discovered the low state of the assembly, and made it a special trial to him who loved them, and a special danger for those who were otherwise alienated. Nevertheless, the grace and truth which came in Christ wrought so mightily by the Holy Spirit in this blessed servant, that even the light-minded Corinthians were roused to repentance quite as decidedly as to activity in discipline; and so far communion was restored between them and the apostle. It ought to be doubted that, as he commanded them to put away the wicked person from among themselves, they could not but bow, purging out the old leaven, that they might be a new lump, as they were unleavened. The paschal sacrifice of Christ is inseparable from the feast of unleavened bread we have to celebrate here below. We cannot shirk the responsibility, if we enjoy the privilege. Siincerity and truth must characterise the believer.

But if the saints in Corinth were only of late awakened to feel and act with honour and holy resentment at such an outrage in God’s temple, there was danger now of a strong reaction. Severity is as little according to Christ as laxity or indifference; and those who needed such a powerful appeal to arouse them to vindicate the injured name of the Lord, were now disposed to an extreme of judicial sternness, as far from the grace of the apostle, as before from his care for holiness. Thus fellowship of heart was imperilled from the opposite side.

The apostle, however, seizes on what was good, through the action of the Spirit in them, to labour for still more and better. Recovery from a low state is rarely immediate. Correction is needed there, as well as here; and the very fact that the call to righteousness is again heard, may, for the time, so pre-occupy the soul, that love cannot yet act freely. So it was at Corinth, till he who so blessedly represented the Master laid his hands again upon their eyes, which as yet saw men like trees walking, that, restored fully, they might look on all clearly. He had written out of much tribulation and distress of heart to them, with many tears, which refuted the charge of either levity or self-exaltation; not that they might be grieved, but that they might know his very abundant love toward them. Now he turns to the one in question, who had grieved him from the first tidings of the sin, since the first epistle had been used to put his and their sin in the light of God before their consciences.

“But if any one hath grieved, he hath grieved not me, but in part (that I may not press heavily) all of you. Sufficient to such an one [is] this rebuke, which [is] by the many; so that, on the contrary, ye should rather forgive and comfort, lest somehow such an one be swallowed up with excessive grief. Wherefore I exhort you to ratify love toward him. For I wrote also for this, and that I might know the proof of you, whether as to all things ye are obedient. But to whom ye forgive anything, I also; for I too, what I have forgiven, if I have forgiven anything, [do so] for your sake, in Christ’s person, that we might not be overreached by Satan, for we are not ignorant of his devices.” (Vers. 5-11.)

The sorrow which had filled the apostle’s heart had, more or less, overspread the assembly; and such is the feeling which becomes it. If the godly Israelite so took up and confessed the sins of the people, how much more those in a far nearer relation to the Lord? Yet we see it deeply in Moses and Joshua, in Hezekiah and Josiah, in Daniel and Ezra. So now grace had communicated to the saints, in measure, the apostle’s grief at the Corinthian scandal: not that they, if any, felt so deeply as he, but that he could speak of them all as affected similarly with himself. Thus the hearts of all would be conciliated, and even he that had caused the grief would feel that there was in the apostle anything but the wish to overwhelm him. He adds that the rebuke or punishment already inflicted of the many was enough. This would not have been so if the sentence of excision had not been carried out. Not a word intimates that a. mere reproof short of it had arrested the evil, and brought the evil-doer to repentance. The notion, therefore, of the French Reformers (Calvin, Beza, etc.), or others, to this effect is not only unfounded but unworthy also; for as the first epistle had peremptorily insisted on putting away the offender, the second is equally plain that mutual confidence was in measure restored by their decision and self-judgment in this very case. Verse 9, in particular, is inconsistent with anything less, not to speak of verses 7, 8, and indeed others elsewhere. Nor does verse 6 fairly bear the meaning that he is distinguishing another sort of censure which the Corinthians had administered from the excommunication he had himself enjoined; but that what was already done in accordance with inspired injunctions had effected its purpose, and should not last longer. This is entirely confirmed by the call that follows, rather to forgive and comfort, lest perhaps if he continued under so terrible a sentence, broken down as he was, he should be swallowed up with excessive grief. Wherefore he beseeches the saints to ratify love, as they had already testified abhorrence of the sin, by a formal act of the assembly. Thus too would the saints prove their obedience in all respects, in gracious restoration of the penitent, as before in solemn judgment of his heinous sin; and the apostle also had all this in view when he wrote both epistles.

But it is of deep moment to mark and learn that, though he has to awaken the assembly both to judge and to restore, for they had failed in both respects, he will have them to feel and act aright, joining them in their acts, and in no way acting for them. Hence he does not at all speak as a spiritual dictator, however real and great the authority given him of the Lord, as he takes pains to allege in both doctrine and discipline. “But to whom ye forgive anything, I also [forgive]; for also I, what I have forgiven, if I have forgiven anything, [do so] for your sake in Christ’s person, that we should not be overreached by Satan, for we are not ignorant of his thoughts.” It would have been no adequate healing of the assembly to have forgiven the Corinthian offender because the apostle had done so, and commanded it. When the flagrant evil was not judged, he did command excommunication; but when grace had wrought all round in estimating as well as dealing with what was so humbling, he will have them to forgive, and go with them in it. It is not, therefore, “whom I forgive, ye also,” but “to whom ye forgive anything, I also.” He is most careful to press their own place of ratifying love, even when apostolically laying down their duty, that he might have fellowship with them throughout. In the prerogative of mercy he would follow, and what he had forgiven, if he had forgiven aught, do it on their account in Christ’s person. How blessed the seal of authority, and how gracious the sanction! May we cherish such a scene of divine affections in presence of good and of evil. Our weakness is immense, the difficulty as various as humanly insuperable, the danger from Satan’s wiles constant; but greater is He that is in the saints than he that is in the world; and we know that the enemy’s thoughts and designs are levelled pre-eminently at God’s assembly, the only divine society on earth.

The apostle resumes for a moment the account of his course, but the aim is to testify his affectionate concern for the Corinthian saints who misjudged him, and, failing in love themselves, saw not his love which spared them, as much as it sought their blessing to the Lord’s glory.

“Now when I came unto the Troad for the gospel of Christ, a door being opened to me in [the] Lord, I had no rest in my spirit at not finding Titus, my brother; but having taken leave of them, I went forth unto Macedonia. But thanks [be] to God that always leadeth us in triumph in Christ, and maketh manifest the odour of his knowledge through us in every place. Because we are a sweet odour of Christ to God in those to be saved, and in those that perish: to the one an odour from* death unto death, but to the others an odour from* life unto life; and who [is] sufficient for these things? For we are not as the many, retailing the word of God; but as of sincerity, but as of God, before God, we speak in Christ.” (Vers. 12-17.)

* twice ( A B C, etc.), with the genitive.

We see two things here: the apostle’s deep value for the gospel; his still deeper value for the saints as in danger of compromising Christ. Hence, whatever his purpose in coming into a new region, and in the face of a distinct opening for the work of reaching souls outside, he could not rest without hearing of those souls, so dear to him for the Lord’s sake, and so exposed to Satan’s wiles. He had hoped to have heard news of Corinth through Titus; but Titus he did not find; and so, turning his back on those on the eastern side where he then was, he repairs to Macedonia. His heart was on the saints. Anxiety for the assembly decided him to abandon for the time even so promising a field for the gospel. The church has the nearest claim, and the apostle acts on it. It was not only that the letter he had written bore witness of his love for them, and grief over the grave circumstances of the Corinthian assembly, but also his relinquishment of the gospel work he so valued, and this spite of the opening of a door in the Lord. His heart was tried greatly, as he thought of the saints and of his own letter. Would they accept it as of God, and judge themselves by the light? Would they resent his plain and searching, however affectionate, appeals? The situation was most critical. Taking leave, then, of the saints in Troas, he goes forth where he hoped to hear the most speedy and authentic tidings of their state, and the effect of his own letter.

But, instead of stopping to describe the intelligence conveyed by Titus, the apostle breaks forth into a burst of praise and thanksgiving. It was, no doubt, characteristic of his deep feeling and immediate appreciation that he should thus turn from the human instrument to His grace who had wrought such a happy result, where things were so painful and perilous; but no means can be conceived more admirably adapted to express at once what grace had effected in the Corinthian saints, nor any more becoming a servant of Christ. There is thus the complete absence of self-vindication, and there is no credit taken for superior wisdom.

The gracious power of God is celebrated immediately as His victory. Not merely is every means attributed to Him, and the blessing, from Him, which piety would always feel and utter gladly, but he speaks in the most forcible way of God always leading us in triumph in the Christ. The best proof of its peculiarity is that so many commentators, Protestant and Catholic alike, pare down and alter the meaning. Among the rest, our own Authorised translation was so affected by this impression, that they rendered , “to cause to triumph,” instead of lead in triumph, as they should. The other has been attempted to be sustained by the Hellenistic causative usage of , , , and , even in classical Greek. But the usage of the apostle in Col 2:5 is adverse, nor am I aware of a single instance in which it can be proved to be ever thus employed. Besides, it really weakens, if it does not destroy, the beauty of the apostle’s image, and makes it to be his triumph rather than God’s. The one would be a rather unseasonable, and perhaps galling, reminder to the Corinthians that he was as right as they were wrong; the other, a singularly beautiful, though bold, prediction of a divine victory, in which he has part as a willing captive, or part of the train.

There is no over-colouring of the figure, no representation of himself as humbled and conquered, still less any reference to their fighting against God or His servant. But he turns his joy over their being brought to repentance, and a recognition of his apostolic authority, as well as of his loving services, into a thanksgiving to God, who, instead of letting him feel his abandonment of evangelistic work, always loads us in triumph in the Christ, and makes manifest the odour of His knowledge through us in every place. The allusion is to a Roman triumph, where aromatics were burnt profusely; and on this, too, he seizes to illustrate the going forth everywhere around of his testimony to Christ in the gospel. But the sweet perfumes in a triumphal procession were accompanied by life to some of the captives, and by death to others; and this is as naturally as powerfully turned to point the twofold issues of the gospel.

The unbelieving Jew or Gentile saw no more in Jesus crucified than a dead man; how could the message founded on Him be of power to such? They might not deny the gracious words of it, any more than of Christ in the synagogue of Nazareth, where He announced His mission in the wondrous citation from Isa 61 ; yet they saw not, heard not, God in either. But as God delighted in His Son, a Saviour, so He pronounced beautiful the feet of those that announced glad tidings of peace, of those that announce glad tidings of good things; and so, too, He smells a savour of rest sweeter than that of Noah’s offering, or any other. “Because,” says the apostle, “we are a sweet odour of Christ to God in those to be saved, and in those that perish;” and this he explains carefully: “to the one an odour from death unto death,” which we have seen; “but to the other an odour from life unto life.” Such is the message where it is mixed with faith; for faith sees and hears Him as the Son of God, yet Son of man, who died for man, for sins, but rose in the power of an endless life, that we might live also, and live of His life, where sin can never enter, nor death have dominion more.

No wonder, as the apostle weighs the responsibility of a service so blessed on the one side, so tremendous on the other, that he exclaims, “And who [is] sufficient for these things?” For if the gospel is a word of delivering grace, it causes the truth to shine out so as to intensify the servant’s estimate of responsibility. This is just what should be – full liberty imparted, instead of bondage; but solemn responsibility, realised as it never was before, and could not be in any other way. But here the mass of the Corinthians sadly fell short, not the apostle, whom they had slighted in their self-sufficient folly. “For we are not, as the many, retailing (or, adulterating) the word of God; but as of sincerity, but as of God, before God, we speak in Christ.” He did not, like the many, traffic in the word of God; but as of transparency, nor this only, but as of God, and this too with a present sense of having to do with Him, as all must later, “before God,” “we speak in Christ,” which is far more intimate and forcible than merely of Him. Yet even such solemn words did not hinder men, and even saints, too soon and down to our day, to make the ministry of the gospel a stepping-stone to earthly gain and worldly honour, in manifest discord with the cross of Christ, and to the utter eclipse of His heavenly glory, not to speak of the grievous loss of all concerned.

Fuente: William Kelly Major Works (New Testament)

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: 2Co 2:1-4

1But I determined this for my own sake, that I would not come to you in sorrow again. 2For if I cause you sorrow, who then makes me glad but the one whom I made sorrowful? 3This is the very thing I wrote you, so that when I came, I would not have sorrow from those who ought to make me rejoice; having confidence in you all that my joy would be the joy of you all. 4For out of much affliction and anguish of heart I wrote to you with many tears; not so that you would be made sorrowful, but that you might know the love which I have especially for you.

2Co 2:1

NASB, NKJV”But”

NRSV, TEV,

NIV, REB”So”

NJB”then”

RSV”For”

There is a Greek manuscript variant between “for” (i.e., gar, cf. P46 and B) and “but” (i.e., de, cf. , A, C, D, F, G). The UBS4 gives “”for” a “C” rating, meaning they can not decide. Often conjunctions are crucial in interpretation, but in this case the sense of the sentence defines the issue.

NASB”I determined this for my own sake”

NKJV”I determined this within myself”

NRSV, TEV,

NJB”I made up my mind”

This seems to imply that Paul did not have special insight from the Spirit about this matter. He mentions several times how the Spirit had led his travel plans (cf. Act 16:9-10; Act 18:21; Rom 1:10; Rom 15:32; 1Co 4:19), but this time he has no specific guidance and decides not to come.

“that I would not come to you in sorrow again” Paul mentions a third visit to Corinth in 2Co 12:14; 2Co 13:1. The book of Acts does not record this second painful visit. His initial stay in Corinth is recorded in Act 18:1-11. See chart in Introduction, Date, E. “visit” C. It probably occurred between the writing of I and 2 Corinthians.

2Co 2:2 “if” This is a first class conditional sentence, which is assumed to be true from the author’s perspective or for his literary purposes. Paul’s second visit had made the church sad. I like the NJB translation of this verse, “for if I cause you distress I am causing distress to my only possible source of joy.” Paul did not enjoy the confrontational aspect of his apostolic responsibility.

2Co 2:3 “This is the very thing I wrote you” There are several theories that try to explain these verses.

1. some call this an epistolary aorist, which means it would refer to 2 Corinthians (cf. NJB)

2. some believe this refers to 1 Corinthians

3. others believe that this refers to the previous lost letter mentioned in 1Co 5:9

4. others think this refers to a severe lost letter, possibly partially preserved in 2 Corinthians 10-13

2Co 2:4 This verse so clearly reveals Paul’s heart and the emotional pain he felt about what happened during his painful visit. Yet, he spoke the truth, as painful as it was. Like a good medical doctor, Paul knew sometimes pain is necessary for long term healing.

Paul uses two subjunctive verbs in this sentence because sometimes people do not respond well to correction. God had created all humans with free will, which is both a precious and a dangerous thing. It holds the potential of joy and restoration or embitterment and continuing rebellion.

NASB”especially”

NKJV, NRSV”abundantly”

NJB”how very much”

This verse also includes one of Paul’s characteristic terms which he uses so often in his Corinthian letters (i.e., perissoters). See full note at 2Co 1:5 or the Special Topic at 2Co 2:7.

Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley

determined = judged, or decided. Greek. krino. App-122.

that I would not cot to.

not. Greek. me. App-105.

to = unto. Greek. pros. App-104.

in. Greek. en. App-104.

heaviness = sorrow or grief. Greek. lupe, translated “sorrow” in verses: 2Co 2:3, 2Co 2:7.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

1-4.] FURTHER EXPLANATION ON THE REASON OF THE POSTPONEMENT OF HIS VISIT.

Fuente: The Greek Testament

Chapter 2

But I determined this with myself, that I would not come again to you in heaviness ( 2Co 2:1 ).

“I wrote a heavy letter to you, but I was determined that I wasn’t going to come again in heaviness.”

For if I make you sorry [by having to rebuke you and deal with those issues], who is he then that maketh me glad, but the same which is made sorry by me [the ones that I made sorry]? ( 2Co 2:2 )

“You rejoice me, you cause my heart to rejoice when I see your faithfulness and all, but here I am rejoicing in the very same persons, they’re causing me to rejoice, the very same persons that I had to make sorry.”

And I wrote this same unto you, lest, when I came, I should have sorrow from them of whom I ought to rejoice; having confidence in you all, that my joy is the joy of you all ( 2Co 2:3 ).

So, “I didn’t want to have sorrow when I came, I wanted it to be a joyful experience when I come. I want us both to be able to rejoice.”

For out of much affliction and anguish of heart I wrote unto you ( 2Co 2:4 )

“That first epistle was a hard thing to write. I want to you know that it was hard for me; it was with a lot of anguish and with a lot of tears. The anguish of my heart, I wrote to you with tears. It wasn’t, you know, the heavy rebuke of a hard-fisted tyrant. But the first epistle was coming out of a broken heart.”

I think that we so often misunderstand God. Because we so often think of God coming down on our heads as a heavy tyrant, you know. When we read in the Bible the stories of the Bible, it’s too bad that we can’t somehow have it in record that we could hear the tone of voice. Because many times, the tone of voice really determines what is actually said. And your relationship with God, or your understanding of God, oftentimes, I believe, puts the wrong tone of voice on the word of God.

For instance, when Adam sinned in the garden and God came down to talk with Adam, and Adam hid himself from God. And God said, “Adam, where art thou?” What tone of voice do you hear? Heavy judgment, an arresting officer? Hand up, you’re under arrest? I don’t hear that tone of voice at all. I hear the sob of a heartbroken father. “Adam, where are you? What have you done?” And the disappointment of a heartbroken father over the failure of man, even as Jesus wept over Jerusalem when He saw what their actions was going to bring upon them. And God, knowing what Adam’s action was going to bring upon mankind, sobbing over the failure of man. And when God deals with you, it’s with tears, a heart filled with anguish. For He loves you and He wants only the best for you. Don’t misunderstand God.

Paul didn’t want them to misunderstand him, God’s servant. “That heavy letter that I had to write to you, it was hard. I did it with anguish. It was with tears.”

not that ye should be grieved, but that ye might know the love which I have more abundantly unto you. But if any have caused grief, he hath not grieved me, but in part: that I may not overcharge you all ( 2Co 2:4-5 ).

Now, you remember when he wrote the first epistle, he wrote to them concerning that man that was living in an adulteress relationship with his father’s mother, or with his father’s wife. And Paul had told the church that they should put him out of the fellowship, that they weren’t to keep company with a brother who was an adulterer, that they should turn him over to Satan for the destruction of his flesh. It was not good that they just accepted and received this man into the fellowship of the believers, because he was leaven, and a little leaven will leaven the whole lump.

Now, they did follow Paul’s injunction. They put the fellow out because of the adulteress life that he was living, but the desired effect came. The man did repent, and he wanted now to come back into fellowship, having cleaned up his act. But there were those that were still going to keep him from fellowship. And Paul is saying:

Sufficient to such a man is this punishment, which was inflicted of many. So that contrariwise ye ought rather to forgive him, and comfort him, lest perhaps such a one should be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow. Wherefore I beseech you that ye would confirm your love toward him ( 2Co 2:6-8 ).

Time now to receive him back.

For to this end also did I write, that I might know the proof of you, whether ye be obedient in all things. To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also: for if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ; Lest Satan should get an advantage of us: for we are not ignorant of his devices ( 2Co 2:9-11 ).

So, Paul encourages them to take the fellow back in, lest Satan really get hold of the guy and he lose out. That if they forgive him, he forgives him, in the stead of Christ, he offers that forgiveness. Jesus said to him, “Every sins you remit, they shall be remitted. Whoever’s sins you retain, they shall be retained” ( Joh 20:23 ). Paul here is, in the name of Christ, forgiving the man because of the man’s repentance.

Now, God doesn’t require us to forgive, except there be repentance. If he repents, forgive him. Now, that bothers a lot of people. But I like to suggest that you think that through. God does not forgive apart from repentance. Jesus said, “Unless you repent, you’re going to perish” ( Luk 13:3 ). God will not forgive apart from repentance. But where there is repentance, then there ought to be, and should be, immediate forgiveness. If your brother offends you and repents, forgive him. But there is not a requirement of forgiveness apart from repentance that I know of in the scriptures.

We are not ignorant of Satan’s devices. Now, our problem is that we are ignorant many times of Satan’s devices. I think that a lot of times we have real difficulty, because we don’t recognize the real source of conflict, being ignorant of Satan’s devices. I believe that Satan is able to attack us in the realm of the spirit, also in the realm of our emotions. I feel that some days when we just feel out of sorts and nasty, that really it is a spiritual attack of the enemy against us. I feel that a lot of times when there is this unrest within the home, the children are really on each other, that it is a spiritual battle that is going on. And if we are ignorant of Satan’s devices, many times we can be drawn into these conflicts and we can lose our joy and the blessing of the Lord upon our lives as we get drawn into this physical kind of a contact. Satan is constantly trying to draw you into the physical realm to battle with you, because if he can get you into the physical arena, he can knock your block off. He can beat you to pieces. That’s why I never like to meet him in the physical arena, in the area of the flesh. I don’t want to meet him. I only want to meet him in the spiritual arena, because there I have the great advantage — the name of Jesus Christ.

And so, a lot of times we have problems when we are ignorant of Satan’s devices, and we need to recognize the source of this problem that we are facing. And recognizing the source, it is Satan that is coming against us. It is Satan that is allowing this or doing this to us. Then I can deal with it, and I resist him in the name of Jesus, and then I rejoice for the glorious victory that I have in Christ.

So those are the three R’s of the spiritual walk. The recognition of the source of the problem. The resisting of his work, for the Bible says, “Resist the devil and he will flee from you” ( Jas 4:7 ). And then the rejoicing in the victory that we have through Jesus Christ over every work of the enemy. So remember the three R’s. Don’t be ignorant of his devices, or you can find yourself really being defeated more often than you’d like to be.

Furthermore, when I came to Troas to preach Christ’s gospel ( 2Co 2:12 ),

He had gone to Troas from Ephesus in Acts, Chapter 20.

and a door was opened unto me of the Lord, I had no rest in my spirit, because I found not Titus my brother; but taking my leave of them [so I left them], I went from thence into Macedonia ( 2Co 2:12-13 ).

So, Paul went to Troas. Opportunity was given to him to preach, but his spirit was so heavy, because Titus wasn’t there, who was to meet him and bring him news of the church in Corinth. “We went on over to Macedonia.” He just was restless, concerned, so concerned for the condition of the church in Corinth, for the believers there.

Now thanks be unto God, which always causeth us to triumph in Christ, and maketh manifest the savor of his knowledge by us in every place ( 2Co 2:14 ).

So, Paul gives thanks to God who causes us to always triumph. I love that. In Christ.

For we are unto God a sweet savor of Christ, in them that are saved, and in them that perish: To the one we are the savor of death unto death; and to the other the savor of life unto life. And who is sufficient for these things? ( 2Co 2:15-16 )

God has made me responsible to be his representative, to bring a message to people, which to some is a message of eternal life, a sweet savour unto God, life to life. But to others who reject and who refuse, it’s a message of death, of judgment. I bear God’s word. To believe and to receive means life; to reject means death. To bear that kind of message, a message of life and death, is a heavy responsibility. The message that I bring, the teaching of God’s word that I bring, a person’s eternal life hangs in their believing that message. That is why it is so important that I teach the message clearly, that I teach it plainly, and that my life backs up what I say. Because it’s a person’s eternal life that’s at stake. And if I get too much of my personality into it and they find my personality obnoxious and they go away from the message because of the way I have presented it, it was offensive or obnoxious to them, then it was a savor of death unto death. Tragic.

So, it is a heavy responsibility that I have in bearing this message, because it is life or death. And that is why Paul said, “Who is sufficient for these things? I mean, hey, I can’t handle that, that I am responsible of bearing a message that can mean life or death. That’s eternal life or death. Who is sufficient for these things?”

In the next chapter . . . and it’s too bad we don’t get there tonight, because Paul gives the answer to this question, “Who is sufficient for these things?” He says, “For our sufficiency is not of ourselves, but of Christ” ( 2Co 3:5 ). If that weren’t the case, I wouldn’t be here. You know, if God put it all on me, I’d say, “Noooo way.” But our sufficiency is of Christ.

For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God ( 2Co 2:17 ):

There are people today who are guilty of corrupting the word of God, twisting the scriptures to their own ends, in order that they might gather a following after themselves. People who are always looking for some secret meaning within the scripture, making it mean something other than what it says. “Now, that’s not really what God meant. What God meant was…” And then they go off on their own little tangents. “I’ll tell you what God really meant to say. I know He said that, but that’s not what He meant. Let me tell you what God really meant.” And I become God’s interpreter. Dangerous place to be, a place I don’t want to be.

For I personally feel that God meant what He said. And if God didn’t mean what He said, I don’t know why He didn’t say what He meant. But I do believe God meant what He said, and thus, I believe that always the plain and obvious meaning of the scripture is the correct interpretation. Unless your understanding of that scripture makes it seem foolish, then your understanding is wrong; your interpretation is wrong. Because God didn’t say anything foolish. But I believe that the plain and obvious meaning. I believe that God meant what He said, and I believe that any of you can go home and take your Bible, and read it, and understand it, and know what God said, and know what God meant to say.

I don’t have any science and health and keys to the scriptures to tell you what God meant to say. I don’t have any Awake Magazines to tell you what God meant to say. I don’t have any revelations from the angel Moroni to tell you what God meant to say. You see, people always say, “Well, there are so many religions and there are so many churches, and they say different things, so I’m confused. I don’t know who to believe, so I don’t go to any church.” Agreed. A lot of churches are saying a lot of different things. And they are all saying they are right. Then how do I know? Just read the Book.

You see, we don’t have any other books to pedal. We tell you, “Just read the Book.” I’m not afraid of anything that you will come to believe by just reading this Book. I have such confidence in this Book and in the Holy Spirit to guide you in your understanding of this Book, that I don’t have any worries or fears about what you’re going to come to believe by reading this Book.

I don’t have to say to you, “Oh now, don’t read that book. If you read that you’ll get confused. You can read this for two years and you’ll be in darkness. But you read our books which explain this book to you. And you don’t have to read this book anymore, all you read is our explanations.”

Why do they have to do that? Because if you just read this Book, you’ll never come to their explanations. I mean, they are so weird and far out, that unless it was explained to you that way, you would have never have guessed it. You could never have come to believe it that way, except it was taught to you that this is what God really meant.

Hey, I don’t have any qualms or fears about your reading the Book. In fact, I encourage you, read the Book and get it first hand. Let God speak to you right out of His word. You’re not going to come up with any weird doctrines or be lead astray. The Spirit of God, who is the Spirit of truth, will lead you into all truth if you’ll read the Book.

Now, that’s what makes us different. Others are afraid for you to read the Book, unless you also read theirs. Definitely read theirs. Because you can’t understand this Book, you see. No, no, that’s not so. You can understand this Book, for the Spirit of God will teach you the truth. Read the Book.

For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ ( 2Co 2:17 ).

We speak as God’s servants before God, His truth.

Father, we thank You for Your word which gives light, for the entrance of thy word gives light. The light unto our path to guide us into truth. May we walk in the light and in the truth of thy word. Bless, Lord, thy word to our hearts tonight. Help us to assimilate it, to meditate upon it, and to feed from it, that our spiritual man might grow and become strong. In Jesus’ name, Father. Amen.

May the Lord keep His hand upon your life in a wonderful way this week. May it be a week of spiritual growth, as you come to a richer, fuller understanding of the grace and the love of God towards you that He has demonstrated in Jesus Christ. And may the promises of God be to you “yes” in Christ, and may you begin to experience the richness and the blessings of those promises of God as His peace and His joy and His love fill your life. And may He use you as His instrument in sharing that joy and peace with others. In Jesus’ name. “

Fuente: Through the Bible Commentary

2Co 2:1. , But I determined for myself) so far as I myself am concerned, for my own advantage. The antithesis is, to you in this ver.: comp. 2Co 1:23.-, but) This is an antithesis to not as yet, 2Co 1:23.-, again) This is construed with come; not with, come in heaviness (sorrow): he had formerly written in heaviness, he had not come.- , in heaviness (sorrow) twofold; for there follows, for if I make you sorry, and, if any one have caused grief [sorrow, 2Co 2:5.] This repetition (anaphora[11]) forms two antithetic parts, the discussion of which elegantly corresponds to each respectively, I wrote that you might know [2Co 2:4]; I wrote that I might know, 2Co 2:9; [the joy] of you all; [overcharge] you all, 2Co 2:3; 2Co 2:5.

[11] See Append. The frequent repetition of the same word to mark the beginnings of sections.

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

2Co 2:1

2Co 2:1

But I determined this for myself, that I would not come again to you with sorrow.-Paul determined not to go to Corinth until he had a good report from them. Until they had improved so that he could come with words of approval rather than of condemnation.

Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary

What a remarkable light is thrown on his first letter by his declaration that he wrote it “out of much affliction and anguish of heart,” and “with many tears.” Referring thus to his first letter, Paul singled out from it the flagrant case of the incestuous person, speaking of him with extreme delicacy. It is evident that, for the most part, the Church at Corinth was in accord with the apostle, for they had carried out his injunction, and had disciplined the wrongdoer. Also, the result had been salutary in his case, for the apostle writes of the guilty man being in danger of being “swallowed up with his overmuch sorrow.” He now urged the congregation to manifest their love by restoring the. man to fellowship. As the apostle had urged them to exercise discipline to defeat the foe, he now counseled them to manifestation of love for the man, also to defeat the foe.

Perhaps nowhere in the New Testament is the subject of the ministry so clearly set in relation to its sublimities. The apostle described the triumphant nature of the true work of the ministry. The figure is of a Roman triumph. In such a triumph the conspicuous personages were the victor and the vanquished. The apostle spoke of himself and those engaged in the ministry as victors. Their work is likened to a long triumphant march. That is Paul’s estimate of the true nature of the ministry. So great a conception is it that he exclaims, “Who is sufficient for these things?” The words that follow are really connected with what precedes the question; they declare that the reason for the victory lies in the fact that there has been no corrupting, or making merchandise, of the Word of God.

Fuente: An Exposition on the Whole Bible

2:1. Quisquis fuerit capitum divisor, fecit hic ineptam sectionem, says Calvin with justice. The connexion with what goes before is very close. The Apostle is continuing his answer to the charge of levity. He had changed his plans in order to spare them. Having stated what he did not mean when he spoke of sparing them (1:24), he now explains what that expression does mean.

. It is not easy to decide whether or is the right reading. External evidence seems to be somewhat in favour of , but is more likely to have been changed to than vice versa, and makes a good connexion; It was to spare you that I gave up the idea of another visit to Corinth, for I determined this for myself. But another immediately after is unpleasing and somewhat unlikely, and makes quite a natural connexion, whether one renders it by and or but. It was to spare you, and as regards myself, etc. For , see on 1Co 2:2 and but 7:37; in the latter passage we have, as here, pointing forward to what is coming. The verb at once excludes the idea of levity or caprice; he thought the matter over and came to a definite conclusion; cf. v. 14; also Rom 14:13, where we have exactly the same construction as here, with an anticipatory , followed by with the infinite; , . In 1 Jn. commonly refers to what follows (3:1, 8, 4:3); so also in 1 Cor. (1:12, 7:29, 15:50). is dat. commodi rather than dat. ethicus, which would have been rather than . It was chiefly for their sakes that he postponed his visit; but he came to the conclusion that for his own sake he had better not have the pain. AV, following the Vulg., statui autem hoc ipsum apud me, has But I determined this with myself, which would require or , a reading found in no text. And ipsum is in the wrong place; we should have statui autem (or enim) mihi ipsi hoc.*

. There is little doubt that this is the right order of the words; see below. The translation of them is disputed. Those who hold that 12:14 and 13:1 compel us to believe that St Paul had already paid two visits to Corinth, translate, Not again in sorrow to come to you. Again in sorrow is to be taken together and is emphatic by position. He has had to come once in sorrow; and if he visited them on his way to Macedonia, he would have again to come in sorrow. This he decided not to do. The distressing visit cannot refer to the long stay during which he converted them; therefore there must have been a second visit, which was probably short. See Introduction; also G. H. Rendall, p. 57. Among recent writers, Is it not plain, says K. Lake, that this passage (2:1-11) implies a recent visit which had ended so unpleasantly that St Paul had determined not to come back if he was likely to undergo similar experiences? (Earlier Epp. p. 150).

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

The AV has heaviness for here, with sorrow in v. 3, 2:7, 7:10; Php 2:27, etc.; and sorrow is used to translate other Greek words. Even the R. V. uses sorrow for both (often) and , which in Rom 9:2 it renders pain.

B 17, 37, Syr-Hark. Copt. support : D*, Aeth. support : almost all others support . T.R. with a few cursives reads . Nearly all authorities have , but D E G, Syr. Pesh. have . . . Copt. omits and has .

2. … For if I (with emphasis) make you sorrowful, who then is he that maketh me glad, but he that is made sorrowful by me. Sorry and sorrowful (6:10) are not synonymous, and the latter is what is meant here: see on v. 5. The makes the emphatic and thus adds force to the question, Why, who is there to make me glad? Ja wo ist denn dann noch einer, der mich erfreute So Bachmann. The answer to this question is No one, for the only people who can cheer me have been made sad by me. The accepts the previous statement, and the question shows what a paradox it involves; cf. v. 16; Mar 10:26; Joh 9:36. See Winer, p. 545; Blass, 77. 6. The singular , , does not allude to any individual. The rhetorical is necessarily singular, and thus the community is spoken of as an individual. The point is delicately put. You Corinthians are my fount of joy; how could I be the one to wish to trouble with sorrow the source whence I draw my own gladness? But does not refer to the penitent rebel who has been pained by the process of conversion; and ad hoc vos contristo ut gaudeam de vobis (Pseudo-Primasius) is certainly not the meaning of the verse. Ambrosiaster is far better; ideo noluit ire, ne forte corripiens paucos multos contristaret, ipse etiam contristatus; compatiuntur enim omnia membra unius moerori.

without ( A B C, Copt.); other authorities insert. It is probably not original.

3. . This may be accepted as the right reading (see below), but its meaning is not certain, for both and may be understood in more ways than one.

Is a simple aorist referring to a previous letter? Or is it an epistolary aorist referring to the present letter? In other words, ought it to be translated I wrote or I am writing? It is not quite certain that there is anywhere in N.T. an instance of as an epistolary aorist meaning I am writing, although there are several cases which may be such. It is not such in 7:12, or 1Co 5:9, or 3Jn 1:9: in all three cases refers to a previous letter. It may be an epistolary aorist in 1Co 9:15 (see note there), but more probably it refers to an earlier part of the letter (see on 1Jn 2:21, 1Jn 2:26); and this is clearly the meaning of in Eph 3:3. See Lightfoot on Gal 6:11, where may mark the place where St Paul ceased to dictate and began to write himself; also on Phm 1:19, where seems to show that he wrote the whole letter with his own hand. near the opening of the Martyrdom of Polycarp is a clear instance, and there are instances in papyri. There is no doubt that is used in the sense of I am sending in 8:18, 9:3; Php 2:28; Phm 1:12; and there is an interesting example in the papyrus letter quoted above (introd. to 1:3) from Apion to his father; , I am sending you by Euctemon the little portrait of me.* Other examples might be quoted.

What is stated here and what is stated in 7:8-12 show that does not mean I am writing, in reference to this part of 2 Cor.; it means I wrote, in reference to some earlier letter. Like in v. 1, refers to what took place in the past; and it is possible that both aorists refer to the same period in the past. In that case the meaning would be that, when he decided not to come to Corinth. he sent a letter instead of coming. That is thoroughly intelligible and natural, and we may regard as certain that does not refers to 2 Cor. 1-9. It is equally certain that it does not refer to 1 Cor. The language of vv. 3, 4 and of 7:8-12 has to be explained in an unnatural manner, or indeed has to be explained away (see below), in order to make it fit 1 Cor.

The meaning of may be for this very reason. That rendering is linguistically possible; see on 2Pe 1:5; Winer, p. 178; Blass, 49. But elsewhere (v. 5; Rom 9:17, Rom 9:13:6.; Col 4:8) St Paul writes to express this; and in v. 9; 1Th 3:3; 1Ti 4:10 we have with a similar meaning. Nowhere else does St Paul use or , without , in the sense of for this reason, and the probability is that it is not used in that sense here. This very thing is the simpler and more probable rendering; and what precedes shows what this very thing was,-viz. that to spare them he had given up the idea of coming, because he did not wish to pay a (second) painful visit, and was dealing with them by letter instead of coming. It is quite possible that in these verses he is quoting his earlier letter, just as in 1 Cor. he sometimes quotes the Corinthians letter; but we cannot detect the quotations with any certainty. We may, however, feel sure that there was not only a letter from St Paul to Corinth before 1 Cor. (see on 1Co 5:9), but also a letter between 1 Cor. and 2 Cor.

That 2 Cor. 10-13 is part of the latter letter is a theory which here finds further confirmation (see on 1:23). In 13:10 he says, For this cause when absent I write these things, that when present I may not deal sharply. Here, with apparent reference to those very words, he says, I wrote this very thing that I might not by coming have sorrow. It is natural that what he called dealing sharply when they were in revolt, he should call having sorrow now that they have submitted.

. In order that I might not by coming have sorrow. He does not say . , that when I came I might not have sorrow. AV and RV. rather imply the latter reading.

. From the hands of those from whom I ought to have been rejoicing, if he had come. They were his spiritual children who ought to be making him happy by following his wishes and example (see on 1Co 4:16).

. Because I had reposed trust on you all. Even when they were rebels he was confident that there was real sympathy with him, and that they would wish to please him. Confidens vos omnes intelligere, quia tunc verum gaudium habitis, si ego gaudeo (Pseudo-Primasius). In the fulness of his heart he expresses what he hopes rather than what he knows; (Chrys.). For the construction cf. (Psa 125:1); also 2Th 3:4. Contrast 1:9, 10:7; Phm 1:21, where we have the more classical dative.

without ( A B C O P 17, Am. Copt., Ambst.): other authorities insert. C O, Chrys. have : A, Copt. Arm. omit : other authorities have , which D E F G, Latt. Goth., Aeth. place before D F, Latt. insert after . (* A B O P, Chrys.) rather than (3 C D E F G K L); cf. 1:15; Rom 1:13; Php 2:27.

4. . These strong words, expressive of deep emotion and intense distress, are quite in place, if they refer to a letter of which 10-13. formed a chief part. That passionate outburst of feeling might well have been written in deep affliction and anguish of heart amid a flood of tears. But, as a description of the state of his mind when he wrote 1 Cor., the language is extravagant.* It might apply to the short section about the incestuous person, but that is only a fragment of the Epistle; and nowhere in the range of his extant letters can we find any considerable portion to which this statement would so fitly apply as to 10-13.

It is interesting and instructive to compare the Apostles description of his own condition during the writing of this vindication of his own authority with J. H. Newmans statements respecting himself, while he was writing the marvellous Apologia pro Vita sua in the spring of 1864. He wrote to Sir F. Rogers on April 22; During the writing and reading of my Part 3 I could not get from beginning to end for crying. He wrote to Mr. Hope-Scott on May 2; I have been writing without interruption of Sundays five weeks. I have been constantly in tears, and constantly crying out with distress.

The Apostles statement explains () how it came about that one whose function it was to be a helper of their joy (1:24) should write a letter which was sure to cause great sorrow. That incongruity was only too keenly felt by the writer, and it caused him intense distress. Yet the object of the letter was not to spare himself and inflict pain on them, but to prove the reality of his affection. He had had more than enough of .

The change from to has significance. It was out of a condition of affliction that the letter was written, and it passed through a flood of tears. We should more naturally say amid many tears. There is a similar change from to in Rom 2:27: for of attendant circumstances, cf. Rom 4:2, Rom 8:25, Rom 16:20. Both and may be taken with both substantives; out of much affliction of heart and much anguish of heart. In class. Grk. is nearly always literal, of actual contraction, junction or check. It occurs Luk 21:25 and nowhere else in N.T. In LXX it occurs Jdg 2:3; Job 30:3; Jer 52:5; Mic 5:1 (4:14), with a variety of meanings. Jeromes carelessness in revision is seen again in his rendering of the word. In Luk 23:25 he has pressura for both and , although Lat. Vet. distinguishes with compressio and necessitas, and here he has angustia for .

In his speech to the Ephesian elders at Miletus, St Paul twice mentions his frequent tears (Act 20:19, Act 20:31). One may call it softness, as Calvin remarks, but it is more worthy of a hero than illa ferrea durities Stoicorum would have been. The Apostle was no Stoic, and for him the suppression of all emotion was no road to perfection. The sympathy which he felt he showed, with utter disregard for Stoical and , and Epicurean : is a doctrine to which he could never subscribe.

. Placing . in front of throws great emphasis on the word; cf. (Gal 2:10). He could have spared himself the pain of writing such a letter; he could have come at once and used severity, without giving them time to return to their obedience: but his love for them would not allow him to do either. As Chrys. points out, the run of the sentence requires not that you should be made sorrowful, but that you should be induced to repent. Instead of this he substitutes that you should know the exceptional love which I have for you. It was affection, not cold or cruel severity which made him write. He bears Corinth written on his heart; 1:12, 3:2; 12:15; 1Co 4:15, 1Co 9:2: (Theophyl.). That is not a word of Biblical origin has been shown by Deissmann (Bible Studies, p. 199). It has been found in Egypt in papyri of the Ptolemaic period.

2:5-17. The Treatment of the Great Offender and the Result of the Severe Letter

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

5As regards him who has been the cause of the sorrow, it is not so much to me that he has caused it (I do not wish to be considered at all) as to all of you; and perhaps not to all of you, for there may be exceptions, and I do not wish to be hard upon any one. 6I think, therefore, that the punishment which was inflicted by the majority is sufficient in the circumstances, and those who thought it inadequate need not insist upon anything more; 7on the contrary, you may now turn round and forgive and encourage him. 8If you fail to do this, a person in his circumstances may sink down in despair in the excess of his grief. I therefore implore you to leave him no longer in suspense, but at once, by some formal act, put into execution, not any sentence of further punishment, but the renewal of your love for him. 9This request that you should forgive him is not at all inconsistent with the letter which I sent instead of coming, for I wrote that letter, not so much in order to be severe on him, as to have a sure test whether in all respects you are prepared to obey me. 10You have proved your loyalty by punishing where punishment was due; but now, if you decide to forgive, you may rest assured that I agree with that decision; for-and this is one more point-if there has been anything for me to forgive, it is for your sakes that I have forgiven it, not thoughtlessly, but as in the presence of Christ. 11Satan is always on the watch to get an advantage over us. He did get an advantage when he caused this member of our body to sin so grievously. Are we to let him have another advantage-over a sinner that has repented?

12My disturbing anxiety about you is now removed; but it was so intense that, although, when I came to Troas to preach the Gospel, God gave me openings there which were very favourable, 18yet I could not settle to any fruitful work, because Titus, who was to bring me news of you, was not to be found there. In my eagerness to learn what success he had had among you I said good-bye to Troas and went on to Macedonia to meet him the sooner. 14But, God be thanked, all has turned out for the best. God, as always, led us along in His triumphal train with Christ, using us as His instruments to diffuse the sweet odour of His Gospel in every place. 15For it is of the fragrance of Christ that we ourselves are a sweet savour to God among both those who are in the way to deliverance and those who are in the way to destruction, 16to the one being a savour exhaled from death and breathing death, to the other a savour exhaled from life and breathing life. It is an awful charge, and what ministers are competent to undertake it? 17Some are not, but by Gods grace we are. For, unlike most teachers, we are not men who for their own ends corrupt Gods message. No; with sincerity in our hearts, nay with God in our hearts, and with His eye upon us, as befits those who are members of Christ, we deliver our message.

5-11. This paragraph about the great offender is not really a digression (Meyer), and the fact that we should have a good sequence of thought if it were omitted does not prove it to be a digression. It is part, and not on unimportant part, of St Pauls vindication of himself. The Corinthians chief grievance was his sending them a severe letter instead of coming to them for the long and happy visit indicated in 1Co 16:5-7. But there was also the treatment of the ringleader against Apostolic authority. The majority censured him in a way which some thought inadequate. The Apostle assures them that the action of the Church in condemning the offender satisfies the requirements, all the more so as the person condemned is very penitent. He assures them that he is more than ready to join in their formal restoration of the man to favour; and there is now no bar to his coming.

We are ignorant as to the exact nature of the penalty which was inflicted by the majority, but apparently it was not that which St Paul was believed to require. Possibly it was that suggested in 1Co 5:11, , as also in 2Th 3:14, , , where we have the important addition, , . In accordance with this addition, the Apostle now pleads earnestly for a generous forgiveness. Punishment had been inflicted in order to rescue him from perdition by inducing him to repent; and he had repented. If punishment were continued, it might drive him to perdition by making him desperate.

We are ignorant also as to who this offender was and as to what was the exact nature of his offence. But it should no longer require to be proved that this offender is not the incestuous person of 1Co 5:1, but some one who had wronged Paul himself (Moffatt, Int. to the Literature of the N.T., p. 122). This theory is still advocated by Zahn (1909), McFadyen (1911), and others, and therefore it is necessary to point out once more how untenable it is. Tertullians vigorous argument almost suffices without any others (De Pudic. 13). After quoting this passage (5-11) he asks whether the Apostle could possibly have written in this effusively indulgent way about a man who had been guilty of fornication aggravated by incest, and this without one word of severity about the past or warning about the future.* We must remember that, if the offender here is the incestuous person of 1Co 5:1, then the incest was of a specially monstrous character, for the sinful union was contracted in the lifetime of the mans father. This passage and 7:12 refer to the same case, and there, if is the incestuous son, must be the womans injured husband, who was still alive when St Paul wrote. This adds immense force to Tertullians question. Moreover, it is unlikely that St Paul would view such a sin simply as an injury inflicted by one man on another. When he treats of incest in 1 Cor., it is the infection of the whole Church upon which he enlarges (v. 6, 7, 11, 13). Lastly, it is incredible that St Paul would say (v. 9) that he had insisted upon the punishment of so grievous a sin, merely to test the Corinthians, whether they were ready to obey him in all things.

If is the Apostle himself, the language used here and in 7:12 is quite natural. This man had grossly wronged St Paul, but the particulars are unknown to us.* Of such an offender St Paul might reasonably say that he had demanded his punishment to test the loyalty of his converts. This man had insulted and defied him. The personal affront St Paul could treat as nothing, but he could not allow his authority to be defied. The man must be punished, and punished by the community; that would test their loyalty. If this was done, the amount of punishment was of comparatively small importance; and when the man had expressed contrition, prolongation of his punishment would do more harm than good. On this interpretation, everything falls into its place. From a feeling of delicacy, St Paul uses indefinite language; it sufficed to tell the Corinthians what he meant, but it does not suffice to tell us.

5. . The indefiniteness begins at once. But if any one has caused sorrow, it is not to me that he has caused it. The personal element is brushed on one side at once; the injury to the Church, whose members are members of Christ, is what matters. The argument that we have here a and a (v. 6) and (v. 11), and that in 1Co_5. we have also a (v. 1) and a (v. 5) and (v. 5), and that therefore this passage refers to the same case as that, is very shallow. In every sinful (7:11) there is a and a , with Satan at work also. The use of in the two places is different. In the other case St Paul refuses to stain his letter with the name of such a transgressor, and perhaps intimates that any one who transgresses in a like manner will receive the like punishment. In this case, he refrains from naming him out of consideration for the offenders feelings, whose case he states hypothetically; if there is such a person: in v. 10, 7:14, 10:7 we have a similar use of . So also there is difference in the way in which Satan is introduced in each case. There he was made the instrument of chastisement; here he is to be guarded against as a crafty enemy.

( ) . This is the best arrangement of a sentence which has suffered by being dictated; He hath caused sorrow, not to me, but in part (that I press not too heavily) to you all. So RV and others. He does not wish to be severe, but it is really the whole Corinthian Church that has been troubled by this mans . A qualifying is inserted, because there were a few who were not distressed by the scandalous treatment of the Apostle.

It is possible, with Mosheim, Olshausen, and others, to include in the parenthesis and make it the acc. after , that I press not too heavily upon all. But this gives a weak position to , and leaves awkwardly alone after the parenthesis. If is taken with we have a pointed and almost necessary antithesis to , not me but all of you.

The AV rendering, He hath not grieved me but in part: that I may not overcharge you all, follows Tertullian, Vulgate, Luther and others, but it cannot stand, for does not mean except (Mar 10:40), and St Paul is not urging that he has been distressed even in part; he is dismissing the personal affront altogether. It is not quite certain whether means that not quite all the Corinthians had been distressed, or that all of them had been distressed to some extent; but the former is much more probable as being more true, and this is an additional objection to the rendering in AV. B. Weiss understands as limiting the action of the : the offender was only partly the cause of the Corinthians; grief; the other part was caused by the Apostles severe letter. Hofmann gives the highly improbable meaning of for a time, and with perverted ingenuity makes the first part of the verse interrogative; If any one has caused sorrow, is it not to me that he has caused it? The answer to this question is, Yes; nevertheless, for a time (that I may not press too heavily on you all) sufficient to such a one, etc. This is a very clumsy construction, and-what is far more serious-it destroys the tact and delicacy of the Apostles appeal by laying the whole emphasis on the personal injury to himself-the thing about which he desires to say as little as possible. *

In Biblical Greek, is peculiar to Paul, who always uses it in a metaphorical sense (1Th 2:9; 2Th 3:8) and with the acc. Appian has it several times, always with the dat. (examples in Wetstein); and it is found in inscriptions. Cf. , 12:16. On the whole verse see Stanley and Alford.

6. . A sufficient thing for such a person is this punishment. We may understand , but is more probable. This substantival use of the neuter adjective accompanied by a feminine substantive is found elsewhere; (Mat 6:34); (the reading of D and other authorities, Act 12:3); (Luk 12:23). Blass, 31. 2, quotes also (Luk 22:38), but the meaning there is, Enough of this subject, not, two swords are a sufficient thing. There is perhaps a slight difference of meaning between and . The latter would mean that the existing need not be prolonged. The former means that no additional penalty need be imposed. But this cannot be insisted on. The meaning here is that the punishment is a sufficient thing. It is not said that it is adequate to the offence, but that it satisfies the requirements of the case. Apostolic authority has been defied, and the Church, acting through the majority, has censured the offender. Nothing further is necessary.

In Wisd. 3:10 we have , but nowhere else in Bibl. Grk. does occur. In Attic Grk. it means possession of political rights, citizenship. The transition to punishment is curious, the intermediate step being getting ones due: the citizen gets his due, and the criminal gets his. Cf. the Biblical use of = rebuke, censure severely, and the classical use of = legal penalty. The Latin renderings of vary; increpatio (Tert.), correptio (Aug.), objurgatio (Vulg.); in Wisd. 3:10, Vulg. has correptio. It is possible that both and are forensic terms. In 2Th 1:9 St Paul has = punishment, a word of somewhat similar history, passing from customary rights, through legal action to penalty. Punish and punishment are freq. in O.T., but not so in N.T.

. Which was inflicted by the many (RV) or by the majority, rather than by many (AV). A similar correction should be made 4:15, 9:2; 1Co 10:5; Php 1:14; cf. 1Co 15:6. It may be lawful to translate many or even several (Blass, 44. 4), but in this and other places in N.T. the many or the majority is probably right. They are contrasted with a minority who did not concur in what was done by , and it is often assumed that this minority opposed the infliction of the as being excessive, or as being altogether undeserved. Those who hold this view remind us that there was an anti-Pauline party at Corinth which would be sure to refuse to punish a man whose only offence was that of having defied St Paul. But there is no hint that this minority had been patronizing a rebel. St Paul tells them that contrariwise they should rather forgive the rebel, which implies that hitherto they had refused to forgive him. It is more likely that the minority were the Paul party (1Co 1:12, 1Co 1:13), who thought that one who defied the Apostle ought to be much more severely punished; and it is this minority whom he is specially addressing. Kennedy, Second and Third Corinthians, pp. 100 f.; Lake, Earlier Epistles, p. 171.

7. … So that on the contrary you may rather forgive him fully and comfort him. The gives the natural consequence of the view that the penalty which has been imposed satisfies the requirements. So far from imposing anything more, they may put an end to what has been imposed. He is not telling them what they must do; there is no . He tactfully points out the logical consequence of admitting the , and leaves them to act upon it. The is probably genuine (see below), and it indicates that there were still some who felt that the punishment was insufficient. For , which implies making the man a present of the remainder of the penalty, * and forgiving him absolutely, cf. 12:13; Luk 7:42, Luk 7:43; Col 2:13, Col 2:3:13; Eph 4:32.

. Lest by any means such a one should be swallowed up by his overmuch sorrow. Neither here nor 9:4 nor 12:20 does the AV give the right force to : it does so 1Co 9:27; Gal 2:2. Various conjectures are made as to what the Apostle feared might be the result; apostasy, reckless indulgence in sin, suicide. It is more important to notice that this implies that the man had already repented; he was no longer rebellious; and vera poenitentia est jam cessare a peccato (Herveius). Evidently, his grief was already great, and there was danger of his despairing of being restored to favour in Christian society. For in the metaphorical sense cf. v. 4; 1Co 15:54; 1Pe 5:8. It is freq. in LXX. The swallowing, as Chrys. says, may be , , . In the Ep. of the Churches of Lugdunum and Vienna those who had apostatized are said to have been swallowed by the Beast, , , (Eus. H.E. v. ii. 6). The rather superfluous repetition of at the end of the sentence gives a touch of compassion, enforcing the plea. Locus diligenter observandus, says Calvin; docet enint qua aequitate et clementia temperanda sit disciplina Ecclesiae, ne rigor mtodum excedat. Severitate opus est ne impunitate (quae peccandi illecebra merito vocatur) mali reddantur audaciores. Sed rursus, quia periculum est, ne is qui castigatur animum despondeat, hic adhibenda est moderatio; nempe ut Ecclesia simulatque resipiscentiam illius certo cognoverit, ad dandam veniam sit parata. He goes on to contrast the cruel sentences of the penitential system. The comment is remarkable as coming from so rigorous a disciplinarian.

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

A B, Syr-Pesh., Aug. omit , which is found before in C K L O P, Syr-Hark. Vulg. Copt. Arm., Chrys. Ambrst. and after in D E F G17, Goth., Thdrt. Tert.

8. . He does not invoke his Apostolic authority and command the forgiveness; as an equal he entreats them to grant it. The community had selected and enforced the penalty, whatever it may have been, and he leaves to them the removal of it. He respects the democratic feeling of the Corinthian Church, and he respects the spirit of the Lords commission to the whole Church. It is a fact of the highest importance and clearly established by the documents, that the commission given on the evening of the first Easter Day-the Great Commission-was given to the Church and not to any class in the Church-to the whole Church and not to any part of it, primarily. Receive ye the Holy Ghost; whosoever sins ye forgive, they are forgiven unto them; whosoever sins ye retain, they are retained (Joh 20:22 f.). The words are the Charter of the Christian Church, and not simply the Charter of the Christian Ministry (Westcott, Ephesians, pp. 169 f.). On that first Easter evening, not all the Apostles were present, and others were present who were not Apostles. The commission, in the first instance, was to the community as a whole. The Apostle here makes his appeal to the whole community, and not to any class of officials, and he leaves the community free to act. The change of meaning from , to comfort (v. 7), to , I beseech (v. 8), should be noted: see on 1:4.

. Oro vos, constituatis in eum dilectionem (Tert.). Obsecro vos, ut confirmetis in illum caritatem (Vulg.). The differences are characteristic, and constituo is perhaps better than confirmo, in the sense of make effective; we have constituere libertatem, victoriam, pacem, concordiam fidem, etc. We need not suppose that implies that a formal resolution, rescinding the previous sentence, is to be passed, any more than ratify would imply that in English. What the Apostle cares about is the change from censure to affection; the way in which the affection is to be made effective he leaves to them. What it is that they are to ratify is kept with effect to the last. Comp. Luk 14:18, where comes as a surprise at the end; one would have expected just the opposite. At Corinth there were some who wished for a more severe punishment on the offender than censure and separation. The Apostle says, , , (Thdrt.). With comp. (Gen 23:20). In papyri (Oxyrh. 513, 4) . Thuc. VIII. lxix. 1, .

9. . For it was just for this that I also wrote; the just marks the emphasis on , which looks forward to . As in v. 3, refers to the letter between 1 Cor. and 2 Cor., of which 2 Cor. 10-13 is probably a part. The marks the agreement of this letter with that, not of this letter with what he had said, or of this passage with the earlier part of this letter. And we must not translate as if we had .

. The proof of you, i.e. he wished to have them tested; ut cognoscam probationem vestram (Tert.), which is better than ut cognoscam experimentum vestrum (Vulg.). In 2:9, 8:2, 13:3, Vulg. has experimentum for , as also in Php 2:22; but in 9:13 and Rom 5:4 it has probatio. AV has experience, experiment, trial, and proof, but without following Vulg. in its changes.

. Whether in all respects ye are obedient, whether to every call of duty you lend your ear. They were not to be obedient just so far as the claims made on them pleased them. The . implies that the proof was satisfactory; they are obedient in all points; cf. (1Co 5:7). Here, as in 7:12, St Paul seems to be interpreting his original intention in writing the letter by the light of the actual results of the letter.

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

Once more we have considerable confirmation of the theory that 10-13. is part of the severe letter to which allusion is made by here and in v. 3. In 10:6 he says, Being in readiness to avenge all disobedience when your obedience shall be fulfilled; here he says, For it was just for this that I also wrote, that I might know the proof of you, whether you are obedient in all things. As in v. 3 and 1:23, he here writes in the past tense of the same thing as that of which in 10-13. he writes in the present tense. It is quite natural that in the previous letter written in severity, he should speak of avenging disobedience, and that in this letter of reconciliation he should omit all allusion to such a possibility. That within the compass of a dozen verses we should have three close parallels between 1.-9. and 10.-13., and all of the same character, make a case of considerable strength. And we shall find other facts pointing in the same direction.

A B 17 have , other authorities Cf. Heb 6:14, where has been corrupted to .

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

. Here we have (contrast v. 9), introducing an additional reason, and is emphatic; For also what I have forgiven, I on my side as distinct from you. AV is faulty in turning the perfects into aorists.

. A gracious parenthesis; if I have forgiven anything, i.e. if I have had anything to forgive. He is not suggesting a doubt as to whether he has granted forgiveness, but he puts the fact of there being something for him to forgive as a mere hypothesis. The hypothetical statement is exactly parallel to : if there is such person, he has received forgiveness so far as I am concerned. Some would translate, what I have been forgiven, if I have been forgiven anything, which is grammatically possible, but it spoils the appeal, and is out of harmony with . St Paul is not thinking of the Corinthians change of attitude towards himself, but of his own towards the offender and them. It is for their sakes that he has so entirely blotted out the thought of the mans offence. Their relation towards the offender has been a painful one, but it need not continue; let it be changed for a happy one.

. In the presence of Christ; in facie Christi, or in conspectu Christi (Calv.); (Thdrt.). Cf. (Pro 8:30). This is more probable than in the person of Christ (AV, RV); in persona Christi (Vulg.), an Christi Statt (Luth.), or unto the glory of Christ (Chrys.). See on 1:11. But, however we may translate the expression, the purpose of it is to correct a possible misunderstanding of . Although it was for their sakes that he acted as he did, yet he remembered whose eye was upon him to approve or condemn his action.

(* A B C2 D E O P) rather then (3 C* F G K L), as in most places where such crasis is possible. . ( A B C F G O) rather than . (D2 K L 17). Baljon suggests that is a gloss. It would be a very clever gloss,-subtly Pauline. As in the case of 1:6, 7, there is difference of opinion about the division of the verses. Some editors assign to v. 10.

11. . . To prevent our being overreached by Satan. The man is penitent and is freeing himself from Satan; what a grievous error to aid Satan in getting control over him again! Chrys. remarks that the Apostle is quite right in speaking of the of Satan, of his getting more than his due. That Satan should take man by sin is proper to him, but that he should do so through mans repentance is too much, for repentance is our weapon, not his. Vulg. has at non circumveniamur a Satana, * which is not so good as ne fraudemur (Tert.), but better than ne possideamur (Aug. Ambrst.). The verse explains the . It was to the Corinthians advantage and the Apostles as well (his including himself in this gain is a delicate touch) that Satan should not be allowed to gain through a Christians penitence: debemus cavere ne remedium nostrum fiat ejus triumphus (Ambrose). Nowhere else in Bibl. Grk. is the passive of found. In LXX the verb is rare; in N.T. both and are peculiar to Paul. The us or we means the Church as a whole, not the Apostle.

. This is probably an intentional play upon words, but it can hardly be imitated in English; for we are not unwitting of his wiles: non ignoramus astutias ejus. This is the rendering of Pseudo-Cypr. (De sing. cler. 19) and of Ambrst. Sedulius has versutias; Tert, injectiones. Vulg. is very capricious in its translation of , a word which in N.T. is almost peculiar to 2 Cor., in which it always has a bad sense. Here it has cogitationes, in 3:14 (with Cypr. Test. 1. 4) and in 11:3 it has sensus, in 4:4 mentes, in 10:5 intellectum (sing.), and in Php 4:7 intelligentias. Chrys. gives a variety of expressions to represent , all of them pointing to the wiliness of the evil one; , , , : and this thought is freq. in Paul (4:4, 11:14; 1Co 7:5; 2Th 2:9). See on 3:14.

Of the Scriptural designations of the evil one, four are found in this Epistle; Satan (here, 11:14, 12:7), the serpent (11:3), Beliar (6:15), the god of this age (4:4). Elsewhere St Paul calls Satan the tempter (1Th 3:5), the devil (Eph 4:6, etc.), the evil one (Eph 6:16), the prince of the power of the air (Eph 2:2). It is not necessary to dwell on the obvious fact that here and elsewhere he regards the evil power which opposes God and the well-being of man as a personal agent. Excepting 12:7, always has the article in the Pauline Epp. So also most frequently in the rest of the N.T. But, whether with or without the article, in N.T. is always a proper name which designates the great Adversary of God and man.

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

12. . Now (not furthermore, AV) when I came to Troas. The words might mean to the Troad, the region between the Hellespont and Mount Ida, but a town must be meant. * St Paul would not tell Titus to meet him in a large district, and the city of Troas was a convenient landing-place from Macedonia. Its full name was Alexandria Troas, , being an adjective to distinguish it from other places called ; and while in N.T. and Pliny it is called simply Troas, in Strabo it is called simply Alexandria. Its modern name is Eski Stambui or Eski Stamboul, Old Constantinople. It was one of the few Roman colonies in Asia Minor, and Suetonius says that there was a widely spread rumour that Julius Caesar meant to transfer the capital of the Empire to this colony. A coast-road ran northwards from Ephesus through Adramyttium to Troas, and when St Paul left Ephesus (Act 20:1) for Troas he probably followed it; but he may have gone by sea. Troas is a few miles south of Novum Ilium, which was on the site of the Homeric Troy. See Enc. Bib. iv. 5215.

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

. Although a door stood open to me in the Lord See on 1Co 16:9 and Lightfoot on Col 4:3 and 1Th 1:9, where is used of an excellent opening for missionary work. It was hardly necessary to add after , but he wishes to make it quite clear that he had come for the work of a Christian missionary, and that it was precisely in that sphere that he found a promising opportunity. This intensifies the significance of what follows. In spite of all this he found it impossible to remain and work.

with almost all authorities, except F G, Latt., which have , propter evengelium. D E here do not agree with d e, but have : see critical note on v. 17. For , F G, Latt. have , ostium mihi apertumesset. Some editors assign to v. 12, not without reason. There is similar difference between vv. 10 and 11; see above.

13. . I had no relief for my spirit. He uses the same expression in 8:5, , where the change from to has no special significance: it is the seat of human emotion and sensation that is meant in each case. We talk of weariness of the spirit and weariness of the flesh, without much change of meaning. We may explain the perf. as vividly recalling the moment when the Apostle had this experience and could say I have not got relief; but more probably this is another instance of the aoristic use of the perf. See on 1:9.

Like , is specially freq. in this letter (7:5, 8:13) and occurs elsewhere in N.T. only in 2Th 1:7; Act 24:23. Vulg. usually renders it requies, but relaxation in the sense of loosening some kind of tension or restriction is its meaning rather than rest. Being set free from is the main idea in this letter, as in 2 Thess. In Ecclus. 15:20, 26:10, it means freeing from wholesome restraint, licence. So also in the Epistle of Barnabas 4:2; . With the dat. for my spirit, comp. (Gen 8:9).

. Because I found not Titus my brother. For some reason, he fully expected to find Titus there, and his failing to do so seems to have robbed him of the power of work; his anxiety about Corinth was so great. Chrys. thinks that St Paul may have wished to remain at Troas, but that God required him to go on. St Paul tells us that he could not endure remaining at Troas; he was so miserable there. There is no hint of any other reason. Thdrt. thinks that the Apostle felt that he must have a colleague; that a missionary working alone was wasted. What is intimated here is quite an intelligible reason. The Apostle was very human; he was so anxious about the effect of his severe letter, that he decided to shorten the time of torturing suspense by going where he could meet Titus the sooner. Moreover, he may have reasonably thought that the rescue of the Corinthian converts from disaster was more important than making new converts at Troas. We know little of Titus, except what can be gathered from 2 Cor. and Gal. St Paul evidently had the highest opinion of him. Here he calls him my brother, and in 8:23, my comrade and fellow-worker in your interest; in 12:18 he mentions him as one who was utterly incapable of being mean or grasping. , Titus is the first missionary of purely Greek and pagan origin that is known to us (Gal 2:3). But in N.T. means no more than Gentile, and we cannot be sure of the nationality of Titus. Nevertheless, his acceptability among the Corinthians, and his success in the delicate mission which St Paul entrusted to him, are evidence of his being by race a Greek. K. Lake, Earlier Epp. pp. 146 f., 275 f. Titus is mentioned nine times in 2 Cor. and is highly praised. In 1 Cor. he is not mentioned at all. The reason may be that he was the bearer of 1 Cor. Ramsay, Paul the Traveller, p. 284.

There is no parallel in N.T. to the causal dat. , by reason of my not finding; in 1Th 3:3 the true reading is , not . But examples are found elsewhere; (Jos. Ant. xiv. x. 1). Moulton quotes from papyri, . See Winer, p. 413 for other references.

. The same words occur Mar 6:46, the only place in N.T. in which the verb occurs outside the writings of Paul and Luke, and where is as indefinite as here. In N.T. the mid. only is found, and its meaning is to bid farewell to friends, in Mk. probably to the disciples, here obviously to the converts at Troas; cf. Luk 9:61, Luk 9:14:33; Act 18:18, Act 18:21. The word suggests that he left them with reluctance. In Josephus it is used of Esthers fasting, (Ant. xi. vi. 8). Hence it comes to mean to renounce, as in the baptismal formula, , , . Suicer gives many references. Vulg. has vale facere here and in Acts, but in Lk. renunciare. See Index IV.

. In Act 16:10, Act 20:1 we have ., and in each case it is needless to ask whether refers to leaving the town or leaving the province. Both Asia and Macedonia were Roman provinces. See Index IV.

In these two graphic verses (12, 13), St Paul once more shows the Corinthians how erroneous it was to suppose that his not visiting them at the time proposed was due to levity or any want of care for them. For their sakes he abandoned a very promising field of missionary enterprise. He is so overwhelmed with thankfulness at the thought of the ultimate result, that, without going on with his narrative, he bursts out into a hymn of praise. We can imagine the surprise of his amanuensis, as the Apostle suddenly changed his line of thought and began to dictate the next four verses. See 7:5 f. for the narrative.

It is difficult to believe that the man who had just been freed from an agony of anxiety as to the effect of a severe letter to the Corinthians should forthwith write the severe reproaches and sarcasms contained in 10-13:10, and should send them to the Corinthians in the same letter in which he tells them of this agony of anxiety.

For (3 A B C * G K) L P have and * C2 have , both of which may safely be disregarded, while D E 17 have , which Blass is inclined to adopt. Schmiedel rightly rejects the conjectures that vv. 12, 13 originally came after 1:22, or were written by Paul as a marginal note to 1:16. The conjectures are quite unnecessary.

14. . St Paul generally writes (8:16, 9:15; Rom 6:17, Rom 7:25), but here, as in the similarly sudden transition to thanksgiving in 1Co 15:7, he puts first with great emphasis. The two thanksgivings should be compared. In each case we have a noble digression of irrepressible gratitude. And the gratitude here is evoked by the thought of the intense revulsion of feeling from anxiety to joy when he met Titus and heard that all was well in Corinth. To seek for any other explanation is unintelligent waste of time. The remembrance of the victory of Gods cause at Corinth leads him on to think of the triumph of the Gospel generally, and of the very subordinate but glorious share which Apostolic missionaries have in that triumph. He thinks of its progress as a magnificent procession moving onwards through the world. The victorious commander is God, and the Apostles are-not His subordinate generals, but His captives, whom He takes with Him and displays to all the world. St Paul thanks God, not for always causing him to triumph (AV), but for at all times leading him in triumph. The Apostles were among the first to be captured and made instruments of Gods glory. When a Roman imperator triumphed, clouds of incense arose all along the route; and in the triumph-train of the Gospel the incense of increased knowledge of God is ever ascending. The Apostles cause this increase of knowledge, and therefore they themselves are a fragrance to the glory of God, a fragrance that is life-giving to those that are on the road to salvation, but will prove deadly to those who are on the other road. The atmosphere of the Gospel is one which only those who are prepared to welcome it can breathe with safety and delight; to others it is a peril and a pain.

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

. Who at all times leadeth us in triumph is almost certainly right. It is true that some verbs in – acquire a causative sense: may mean I make a disciple of (Mat 28:19; Act 14:21) as well as I am a disciple (Mat 27:57), and may be I make to be king (Isa 7:6) as well as I am a king (Luk 19:14, Luk 19:27). But we do not know that ever means I cause to triumph, although that meaning would make good sense here and is adopted by various interpreters; qui facit ut semper triumphemus (Beza), qui triumphare nos facit (Calvin). But in Col 2:15 has its usual meaning of I lead in triumph, and that is likely to be its meaning here. Earlier writers have nos in triumpho circumduco. This is Thdrt.s explanation; . And Chrys. is similar; . Oecumenius also; .* See on 1Co 4:9, where we have a similar metaphor, and the leading idea in both places is that of exhibiting, displaying to the world. As to the usual signification of one example may suffice; Cleopatra, captured by Caesar, says to the Manes of Mark Antony, whom she had recently buried, (Plut. Ant. 84). Wetstein gives other examples. See also Field, Notes on Translation of the N.T. p. 181, who, however, questions the allusion to a Roman triumph. The derivation of , like that of (1:12), is a problem, but its meanings are well established. Originally a hymn sung in processions in honour of Bacchus, it was used as equivalent to the Roman triumphus, probably through similarity of sound and of association. Thus Polybius says that the Senate can add glory even to the successes of generals by bringing their achievements in tangible form before the eyes of the citizens in what are called triumphs (6., 15:8). Wetstein well sums up the meaning of the passage; God leads us round as it were in triumph, so that we do not stay in one place or move on to another according to our own will, but as seems good to our all-wise Director. The man whom He vanquished at Damascus He leads in triumph, not at Rome, and just once, but through the whole world, as long as he lives. See also McFadyen, ad loc., and also on the Pauline phrase in Christ in Truth in Religion, pp. 242-259, from which much of the next note is taken.

. Cf. in v. 12. The expressions, , , , , , , occur upwards of fifty times in N.T., and nearly all of them are found in the Pauline Epp. The exceptions are 1 Pet. v. 10, 14, of which 5:10 is doubtful, and both may be due to Pauline influence. Of the six forms of expression (which cover all four groups of the Pauline Epp.), the first three are very common, while the last three are rare, occurring only once or twice each. The differences in the forms of expression may not mean much, but the total amount may show channels of thought in which the Apostles mind habitually ran. In Christ or in Christ Jesus was a sphere in which his inner life ever moved. To us the phrase has a conventional sound; it is like a coin much defaced by frequent use, and it needs to be taken back to the mint in which it was fashioned, the mint of experience. St Paul had been persecuting the followers of Jesus as being the worshippers of a false and dead Messiah. Experience had confronted him with the same Jesus and had compelled him to recognize Him as the true Messiah, victorious over death, and able to make Himself known to living men. Further experience had proved that Jesus the Messiah was one in whom was revealed all that men could know about God, and that the way to learn the truth about God was to be united with His Christ. Henceforth St Paul thought of himself as in Christ, and these words tell us of a man with a changed consciousness of life.* The chief element of change was a sense of freedom, freedom from the bondage of the Law and from the bondage of sin: but it was not the only element. In Christ we have indeed a sphere of liberty, but we have also a sphere of work; for freedom is freedom to do something, and to be in Christ is to be working in His service, as fellow-workers not only of Apostles (8:23), but of God Himself (1Co 3:9). To be working in this atmosphere of liberty is an experience which makes men new creatures in Christ Jesus (v. 17), with new estimates of things, new aims and hopes, and new powers wherewith to attain and fulfil them.

Whether intended to do so or not, at the end of this clause balances at the beginning of it. It is for being perpetually led in triumph in Christ that the Apostle gives rapturous thanks to God. And the central word is , which is repeated in another form in . Neither in time nor in space is there any point at which this being led in triumph ceases.

. Sweet odours often reveal the presence of what cannot be seen; odor ideo, quia sentitur potius quam videtur (Pseudo-Primasius). God makes manifest through the labours of His ministers the fragrance which a knowledge of the Christ who reveals Him always brings. The genitive is probably one of apposition; the knowledge is the fragrance; cf. (1:22). This metaphor of fragrance suggests the penetrating strength of the revelation and the delight which it brings to those who receive it. We have here one of many passages in N.T.-more common in St John than in St Paul-in which we are in doubt whether a pronoun refers to God or to Christ. Here may mean either; but the preceding and the which follows make the reference to Christ more probable. In any case it is in Christ that the knowledge of God is acquired; 4:6.

. The choice of the verb is determined by rather than by .* As in 1:19 and 1Co 3:5, the Apostles are not independent agents, but instruments. Cf. the frequent . It is a mistake to refer to St Paul alone. He is not claiming an exclusive revelation. show that there is no special reference to the crisis at Corinth. It is fanciful to find in any allusion to the anointing of priests, or in any suggestion of the opening of a box of unguents. The verb is very freq. in the Johannine and Pauline writings, and occurs nine times in this Epistle.

15. . By way of explanation () the metaphor of the sweet savour is used in a different way to express the work of those who preach the Gospel. In spreading the fragrance of it they are themselves a fragrance to God. Here is emphatic, as is in v. 14, For it is of Christ that we are a sweet odour to God. Of Christ means that the fragrance comes from Him, for it is He whom the missionaries preach, and such preaching is pleasing to God. It is possible that is added because of the frequency of or in LXX. Codex Mosquensis (K) omits , and J. Weiss regards it as an editorial insertion; but it has point. The preaching is always to God, but not always to men, to some of whom it breathes death.* It is worth noting that the sacrificial phrase , so frequent in LXX, is not used here, and this makes any allusion to sacrifice doubtful. Contrast Eph 5:2, where see J. A. Robinson. In Php 4:18, , is used of the gifts of the Philippians to the Apostle. Cf. Eze 20:41; Mal 3:4. In N.T. is found only in Paul. See Index IV.

. The repetition of the shows how different the two classes are; among those that are being saved (pres. part.; Luk 13:23; Act 2:47; see on 1Co 1:18) and among those who are perishing (4:3; 1Co 1:18; 2Th 2:10). The perfective verb (Luk 15:17; Mat 8:25) gives the idea of something which is regarded as certain at the moment of utterance. The are not merely on the road to : is regarded as their end, unless some complete change takes place. J. H. Moulton, Gr. p. 114. The two expressions are far more pregnant and significant than believers and unbelievers. Cf. 1Co 10:9, 1Co 10:15:18; Rom 2:12; Php 1:28, Php 3:18.

16. . The classes just mentioned are taken in reverse order: chiasmus is freq. in these Epistles (4:3, 6:8, 9:6, 10:11, 13:3; 1Co 3:17, 1Co 4:10, 1Co 8:13, 1Co 13:2). A savour from death to death a savour from life to life. It may be doubted whether the double ought to be pressed and rigidly interpreted. Perhaps nothing more is meant than continuous succession, as when we say from day to day, from strength to strength. In such cases it would be misleading to insist upon out of and into as the meaning of from and to, and then ask, out of what? and into what? It is easy to see that to some persons the Gospel message may be . What should have been to their wealth becomes, through their own fault, an occasion of falling lower and lower. But it is not easy to see how the Gospel can be , in the sense that it proceeds out of death. Progress from one evil condition to another is what is meant, movement from bad to worse. They were in a condition that was virtually fatal when the Gospel came to them, and its effect was to confirm that fatal tendency. The idea of pestilential air coming from a corpse is not required. Nor need we, with Bousset, bring in the oriental idea that the perfumes of heaven, or other strong smells (Tobit 8:2, 3), will drive demons back to hell. Chrys. does not help us with the remark that ointment is said to suffocate swine, nor Thdrt, with the popular belief that sweet odours drive away vultures. Evidence of this curious belief is given by Wetstein. It is better to abide by the comment of Gregor. Nyss.; . So also Jerome (Ep. cxx. 11); Nominis Christi in omni loco bonus odor sumus Deo et praedicationis nostrae longe lateque spirat fragrantia. Sed odor noster qui per se bonus est, virtute eorum qui suscipiunt sive non suscipiunt in vitam transit aut mortem, ut qui crediderint salvi fiant, qui vero non crediderint pereant. Schoettgen and Wetstein quote Jewish sayings to the effect that the words of the Law are medicine to the wise and poison to fools. As regards the Saul of Tarsus and Paulus the Proconsul illustrate the one side, Simon Magus and Elymas Magus the other side.

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

We do not know enough about the situation to see why St Paul prepares the way for his elaborate vindication of the Apostolic office and of the Gospel (3:1-6:10) by flashing out this question in a way which, even without the tam, is almost offensive, and is certainly very abrupt. Augustine and Herveius interpret the question as meaning, Who is competent to understand these things? which does not fit the context. Who is equal to such responsibilities? is the meaning. The answer is not stated, but is clearly implied in the next verse; We are, for, etc.

is omitted in both places by D E F G K L, Latt. Arm.; probably because of the difficulty of seeing how could be , Goth. has the second , which is easy, and omits the first, which is difficult. We must read in both places with A B C Copt. Aeth., Clem-Alex. Orig.

17. . The indicates the reply to the question just asked. We are sufficient for these things, for we are not as the many teachers. Here we have for the first time in the Epistle a passage that is manifestly polemical. The Apostles opponents may have been in his thoughts in earlier places, but here it is quite certain that he is censuring other teachers for doing what the Apostle and his colleagues never do; they garble the word of God, in order to make the preaching of it more profitable to themselves. There are similar polemical hits in 3:1, 4:2, 5:12, while 10-13 teems with them, e.g. 10:12, 18, 11:12, 13, 20, 12:14. With comp. (3:1). Here, as in Rom 5:15, Rom 5:19, AV ignores the article before and translates many instead of the many. But we need not give the article its strongest force and make mean the majority, although it is likely that at Corinth the majority of the teachers were misleading the converts; and that the Judaizers on the one hand, and the advocates of Gentile licence on the other, far outnumbered the Apostle, Silvanus, and Timothy with whatever helpers they may have had. The meaning here seems to be the mob of teachers, without comparing them in number with the Apostle and his colleagues. On the opposition to St Paul see K. Lake, Earlier Epp. pp. 219 f. In what sense he claims for himself and his fellow-workers he tells us at once in 3:5, 6; none are sufficient, excepting those whom God has made so, and it is evident whom He has made sufficient, viz., those who preach His word as He would have it preached.

. Adulterating the word of God. The participle belongs to not to ; We are not people who adulterate the word. Vulg. has adulterantes for here and for 4:2. Adulterate suggests more clearly than corrupt (AV, RV) that the corruption is done for the sake of some miserable personal gain. The word occurs, nowhere else in Biblical Greek, but , a retail dealer, occurs twice in LXX. In Isa 1:22 we have , Thy hucksters mix their wine with water, in order to cheat the buyers; and Ecclus. 26:29, , An huckster shall not be judged free from sin. St Paul may have had Isa 1:22 in his mind in using . The Talmud counts the huckster as one whose business involves robbery, and Deu 30:13 is interpreted to mean that the Law cannot be found among hucksters or merchants. Plato says, Knowledge is the food of the soul; and we must take care that the sophist does not deceive us when he praises what he sells, like those who sell the food of the body, the merchant and the hawker (); for they praise all their wares, without knowing what is good or bad for the body. In like manner those who carry about items of knowledge, to sell and hawk () them to any one who is in want of them, praise them, all alike, though neither they nor their customers know their effect upon the soul (Protag. 313 D). Lucian says that philosophers dispose of their wares just as hucksters () do, most of them giving bad measure after adulterating and falsifying what they sell (Hermotimus, 59): is frequently used of a retailer of wine. Other illustrations in Wetstein.

The expression, the word of God, , is very freq. in N.T., nearly forty times in all, without counting the expression, which is also freq., the word of the Lord, . It is specially common in Acts (twelve times) and in the Pauline Epp. (4:2; 1Co 15:36; Rom 9:6; Col 1:25; 1Th 2:13; 2Ti 2:9; Tit 2:5). Its usual meaning, as here, is the Gospel as preached, the contents of the new religion, as set forth in the O.T. and in the life and teaching of Christ. Often , without , is used in much the same sense, and in interpreting it in the Pauline Epp. we must bear in mind 1Co 2:2, I determined not to know anything among you, save Jesus Christ, and Him crucified, so that the preaching of the word means the preaching of Jesus Christ, crucified and raised again. It was this that was being adulterated at Corinth. See J. H. Bernard, Past Epp. pp. 74 f.; Harnack, Constitution and Law of the Church, pp. 332 f.

As to the manner of the adulteration, omnis doctor qui auctoritatem Scripturarum, per quam potest audientes corripere, vertit ad gratiam et ita loquitur ut non corrigat sed delectet audientes, vinum Scripurarum violat et corrumpit sensu suo (Jerome on Isa 1:22). As Chrys. puts it, such teachers .

, . But as from sincerity, nay, as from God. Sincerity (see on 1:12) is the internal source, and God is the external source, of what the missionaries preach. Their message rings true, for it comes from an honest and good heart (Luk 8:15), and is inspired by the faithful God (1:18) who cannot lie (Tit 1:2). Cf. , (Mat 10:20). The means as any one acts who acts , . The repetition of gives emphasis in an ascending scale; 7:11; 1Co 6:11; as in Mt. 7:49; Joh 1:14.

. Cf. 12:19; Rom 4:17, etc. Neither nor is classical; both are found several times in N.T. and LXX. There is no before . , and there should be no comma either before or after these words; but as from God in the sight of God speak we in Christ. God is the source of what they preach and the witness of it; what greater guarantee of truthfulness could there be?

. See on v. 14. Neither Christi nomine (Grot.), nor secundum Christum (Calv.), nor de Christo (Beza), but, quite literally, in Christo (Vulg.); it is in Christ, as members of His Body, that ministers of the Gospel do their work, in the power that flows from union with Him. The branches bear fruit by being in the vine, and in no other way (Joh 15:4).

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

( A B C K, d e f Vulg. Copt. Aeth.) rather than (D E F G L, g Syrr. Arm.). F G, d e f Vulg. Copt. Goth. omit the second F G, d e f g Vulg. Copt. Goth. omit the second . In all three cases, as in that of in v. 12, D E do not agree with d e. (* A B C P 17) rather than (3 D E F G K L;). The second without (* A B C D * 17) rather than with (3 D2 and 3 E F G K L P). On the difference between and see Westcott, additional note on 1Jn 4:2.

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

B B (Fourth century). Codex Vaticanus.

17 17. (Evan. 33, Act_13. Ninth century). Now at paris. The queen of the cursives and the best for the Pauline Epistles; more than any other it preserves Pre-Syrian readings and agrees with B D L.

37 37. (Evan. 69, Acts 69, Rev_14. Fifteenth century). The well-known Leicester codex; belongs to the Ferrar group.

* information respecting the commentator is to be found in the volume on the First Epistle, pp. lxvi f.

D D (Sixth century). Codex Claromontanus; now at Paris. A Graeco-Latin MS. The Latin (d) is akin to the Old Latin. Many subsequent hands (sixth to ninth centuries) have corrected the MS.

E E (Ninth century). At Petrograd. A copy of D, and unimportant

G G (Late ninth century). Codex Boernerianus; at Dresden. Interlined with the Latin (in minluscules). The Greek text is almost the same as that of F, but the Latin (g) shows Old Latin elements.

(Fourth century). Codex Sinaiticus; now at Petrograd, the only uncial MS. containing the whole N.T.

A (Fifth century). Codex Alexandrinus, now in the British Museum. All of 2 Corinthians from 4:13 to 12:6 is wanting.

C C (Fifth century). Codex Ephraemi, a Palimpsest; now at Paris, very defective. Of 2 Corinthians all from 10:8 onwards is wanting.

* In the frayed original only is legible; and = is a better restoration than , which was an earlier conjecture.

Wieseler thinks that these verses may refer to the letter of 1Co 5:9, but they evidently refer to something more recent, and to the last letter which he had sent them. As this cannot be 1 Cor., it must be a letter written later than 1 Cor.

O O (Ninth century). Two leaves at Petrograd contain 2Co 1:20-12.

P P (Ninth century). Codex Porfirianus Chiovensis, formerly possessed by Bishop Porfiri of Kiev, and now at Petrograd.

F F (Late ninth century). Codex Augiensis (from Reichenau); now at Trinity College, Cambridge.

K K (Ninth century). Codex Mosquensis; now at Moscow.

L L (Ninth century). Codex Angelicus; now in the Angelica Library at Rome.

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

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

McFadyen is inconsistent. On 1Co 5:1 he says that it is uncertain whether the father was dead when to son took his fathers wife; on 2Co 7:12 he assumes that the father was alive when the son formed this reveling union.

* Es muss sich hier um eine schwere persnlichs Krankung dest Paulus und um einen personlichen Beleidiger handeln (Bousset, p. 175). See also Hastings, DB i. p. 493; Enc. Bibl. 1:902; G. H. Rendall, p. 61; Schmiedel, p. 221. Bleek, Hilgenfeld, Ewald, Godet, Bachmann, Lietzmann und outhers take a similar view; the offence was a personal attack on St Paul.

Krenkels suggestion that the offender had wronged a fellow-Christian in a matter of property has found little support. It is more probable than the supposed reference to 1Co 5:1; but the only reasonable hypothesis is that the was against St Paul himself. Against Timothy is not impoossible, but it is improbable

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

Bachmann quotes what Zeus says about the parasites (Lucian, Timon, 10), , viz. that of seeing Timon rolling in money, which tells against the supposed distinction.

Sufficiens non quantum ad Dei judicium, sed quantum expediebattmpori.

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

* Until the Reformation it was not seriously disputed that indulgenes were comparatively modern. But the Council of Trent (Sess. xxv.) delared them to have been used antiquissimis temporibus, and this view is authoritatively upheld.

* The corruption of to occurs elsewhere; to (1Co 7:32).

* Vulg. always has circumvenire for ? (7:2, 12:17, 18; 1Th 4:6): so also had Cyprian (Test. iii. 88).

* Cf. Act 20:5, Act 20:6, where the art, is omitted and inserted of the same place in consecutive verses.

Valida fama percrebuit migraturum Alexandriam vel Ilium, trenslatis simul opibus imperii (Julius, 79).

d d The Latin companion of D

e d The Latin companion of E

* Suidas gives as the equivalent of .

St Paul uses a number of words to xpress his relation to God as a minister of the Gospel. It is and (9:12), (5:20), (10:4), and (1Co 4:1); but this metaphor of being led in triumph by Him is the most striking of all.

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

* In LXX, the most common verbs with are and

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

Other terms used by St Paul in reference to the fate ofd unbelievers are (Rom 6:23, Rom 8:6), (Gal 6:8), (Rom 2:5, Rom 2:8, Rom 2:5:9; 1Th 1:10, 1Th 5:9). But he is much more concerned to remind his readers that believers can be sure of salvation in Christ than to discuss the future of those who refuse to believe on Him

f d The Latin companion of F

g d The Latin companion of G

Fuente: International Critical Commentary New Testament

Tender-hearted and Forgiving

2Co 1:23-24; 2Co 2:1-11

In these opening words Paul evidently refers to the sin mentioned in 1Co 5:1-13. His judgment had been strong and stringent, the Corinthian church had acted upon it, and the offender had suffered severely in consequence. But the result had been more than satisfactory. He had repented with great brokenness of spirit. Indeed, it seemed as if he would be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow, 2Co 2:7.

The Apostle desires the Corinthians to understand that he also had shed many tears over the case, 2Co 2:4. His was a very affectionate and tender disposition, which shrank from inflicting pain, and yet was resolute at all costs to maintain truth. We get a sidelight here as to the heart of God. May we not believe that whenever He chastens us, it is with profound pity? Whom He loves He chastens; and whom He receives, He scourges. But when there is full and frank repentance, there should be forgiveness. The penitent offender was to be restored to church fellowship and received with brotherly welcome. The Savior Himself speaks through forgiveness. It is His love that moves, His voice that declares; while an unforgiving spirit sets an open door to the entrance of Satan.

Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary

2Co 1:23-24; 2Co 2:1-17

Moreover I call God for a record upon my soul, that to spare you I came not as yet unto Corinth. Not for that we have dominion over your faith, but are helpers of your joy: for by faith ye stand. But I determined this with myself, that I would not come again to you in heaviness. For if I make you sorry, who is he then that maketh me glad, but the same which is made sorry by me? And I wrote this same unto you, lest, when I came, I should have sorrow from them of whom I ought to rejoice; having confidence in you all, that my joy is the joy of you all. For out of much affliction and anguish of heart I wrote unto you with many tears; not that ye should be grieved, but that ye might know the love which I have more abundantly unto you. But if any have caused grief, he hath not grieved me, but in part: that I may not overcharge you all. Sufficient to such a man is this punishment, which was inflicted of many. So that contrariwise ye ought rather to forgive him, and comfort him, lest perhaps such a one should be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow. Wherefore I beseech you that ye would confirm your love toward him. For to this end also did I write, that I might know the proof of you, whether ye be obedient in all things. To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also: for if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ; lest Satan should get an advantage of us: for we are not ignorant of his devices. Furthermore, when I came to Troas to preach Christs gospel, and a door was opened unto me of the Lord, I had no rest in my spirit, because I found not Titus my brother: but taking my leave of them, I went from thence into Macedonia. Now thanks be unto God, which always causeth us to triumph in Christ, and maketh manifest the savour of his knowledge by us in every place. For we are unto God a sweet savour of Christ, in them that are saved, and in them that perish: to the one we are the savour of death unto death; and to the other the savour of life unto life. And who is sufficient for these things? For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ. (1:23-2:17)

There are a number of verses in this portion of the Word, any one of which might furnish the theme for a lengthy address, but in giving these expositions I cannot pause on every important verse in the way I should like to do, but must occupy you rather with the general trend of the apostles words, the main thoughts that are emphasized. I want to confine myself largely to verses 14-16, where the saints are seen as led in Christs triumph. But to lead up to that and to connect with that which we have had previously, I will go over the intervening verses.

Some of the Corinthians had charged Paul with lightness, with insincerity, with carelessness, because he had intimated that he was going to visit them and then had refrained from doing so. They said, Yes, he promises one thing and does another. Now he explains more fully just why he did not visit them at an earlier date in accordance with his first intention. I call God for a record upon my soul, that to spare you I came not as yet unto Corinth. Not for that we have dominion over your faith, but are helpers of your joy: for by faith ye stand. After having made up his mind to visit them he had heard of their very disorderly conduct; they were going to law one with another, petty jealousies had come up among them, there was a sectarian spirit manifested, some were saying, I am of Paul, others, I am of Apollos, and still others, I am of Christ, as though Christ were the Head of a party instead of the Head of the whole church. And then there were very grievous things of a moral character among them. One had fallen into very marked sin, so much so that the name of God was blasphemed by the world outside because of the wickedness of this professing Christian, and Paul says, as it were, If I came to you after learning these things I would have to come among you with a rod, simply to scold you, to speak sternly to you, and I could not do that. I loved you so tenderly that I preferred to stay away and write to you and pray for you, and to call upon God to enable you to judge these evil things. Now I am glad to find that you have judged them.

He told them in the previous letter that they were to put away that wicked man who had fallen into licentiousness, who was guilty of the sin of fornication, for otherwise he would corrupt the whole fellowship. A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump (Gal 5:9). If any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat (1Co 5:11). They were to refuse Christian fellowship to such an one, they were to put away from among them that wicked person. They had acted upon that, and because they had, he now feels differently toward them. He did not want to come until they obeyed his instructions-But I determined this with myself, that I would not come again to you in heaviness. For if I make you sorry, who is he then that maketh me glad, but the same which is made sorry by me? That is, if when I came to you my time had to be devoted to bringing before you these corrupt things that have been permitted in your assembly, it would break my heart. You would be made sad and I would be sadder, so I stayed away and prayed and wrote to you. I wrote this same unto you, lest, when I came, I should have sorrow from them of whom I ought to rejoice; having confidence in you all, that my joy is the joy of you all. In other words, he said, I had this confidence that if once these evil things were really brought to your attention, your Christian conscience would make you see the importance of dealing with them, you would not go on tolerating the wickedness. And that indeed had been true. For out of much affliction and anguish of heart I wrote unto you with many tears; not that ye should be grieved, but that ye might know the love which I have more abundantly unto you. It was no easy thing for Paul to bring these things to their attention, nor could he do it in a hard, legal way. They were his children in the faith, he loved them tenderly, and it grieved his spirit to find that they had turned aside to evil ways and were bringing dishonor on the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. That should ever be the attitude of a true pastor in the church of God.

Now he comes to speak particularly of that wicked man who had fallen into the gross sin of immorality and had been put away from Christian fellowship. If every person guilty of immorality in the professed church could be dealt with and put away today, how much more power there would be in the assemblies of the saints. Of course there is always hidden sin that we cannot deal with, but when it comes to light Gods Word demands that it be dealt with and the wicked person put away. We might say, Well, but if we excommunicate that man, we will drive him from Christian influence and he will get worse and worse. God said, Deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus (1Co 5:5). Put him outside of the assembly of God, put him back in the world to which he belongs, because he is living according to the worlds standards, and leave him there until God brings him to repentance. Then restore him to fellowship.

If any have caused grief, he hath not grieved me, but in part: that I may not overcharge you all. Sufficient to such a man is this punishment [this discipline], which was inflicted of many. It was not Pauls discipline. Paul had told them what to do, and they did it. The responsibility rests, not on the apostle, but on the church of God in a given place. And so the church had inflicted discipline on this man. Now the man is repentant, he proves by his repentance that though he had failed he was really a child of God after all. What will they do with him now? So that contrariwise ye ought rather to forgive him, and comfort him, lest perhaps such a one should be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow. Wherefore I beseech you that ye would confirm your love toward him. If the Devil cannot get the church of God to overlook an outbreak of iniquity and to go on as though nothing had happened, he will seek to have them go to the other extreme. If discipline is inflicted upon a person and there is sincere repentance, then the Devil will try to harden the hearts of Gods people against him. They will say, We cannot trust that man; he was in our fellowship once, and proved so bad we had to put him out, and we cannot trust him in the future. No, no, the apostle says; you are not to act like that. That is just as wrong as it is to tolerate sin. It is wrong to keep him out when he repents, for what is the church of God after all but a company of repentant sinners? And what is heaven? It is a home for repentant sinners. No one will ever get into heaven but repentant sinners. I am speaking of adults for, of course, all the little ones are taken home to heaven. There their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven (Mat 18:10). The church of God is simply a gathering, not of people who have never failed, but of repentant sinners, and if a man repents, bring him back into fellowship. Perhaps he feels so defiled, so bad, that he will never ask for restoration. He will say, I have disgraced the Lord, I am not fit for fellowship. Do not wait for him to ask, go to him and confirm your love toward him. For to this end also did I write, that I might know the proof of you, whether ye be obedient in all things. Ye were obedient when I said, Put him away; now let me see whether you are just as obedient when I say, Bring him back as a repentant person.

Then he says, To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also: for if I forgave anything, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ. He had already forgiven this offender in his own heart. He says, I have taken that attitude toward this repentant offender. Once I demanded that he be put away, now I forgive him as simply one with you in this act. Lest Satan should get an advantage of us: for we are not ignorant of his devices. His devices are, first, tolerate sin, and then if you wont do that but you deal with sin in discipline, then never forgive. How often that spirit is manifested among Christians! There is not a great deal of discipline in the church of God today. A minister said to me one day, One of our leading members is well known to be supporting a mistress in a hotel downtown, and breaking the heart of his wife and children, yet he is a leader in our church, a very wealthy man. If we were to bring him up for discipline it would split the church, and I do not know what we would do without his money. I said, Better split the church and go on with the godly part. Gods Word is clear, Put away from among yourselves that wicked person (1Co 5:13). Let him take his tainted money and go. God does not want the money of a fornicator, of an adulterer, of a drunkard, of an extortioner, of a covetous man. He does not need such money. God has plenty of money to support His work. Satan says, Be easy on him; we must not judge one another. But Gods Word says that we ought to judge those that are within. When there is blatant sin we are to deal with it. The one side is, put him away. But when he repents and says, Brethren, I have sinned, but by the grace of God I have turned from my sin; will you restore me to your love and confidence? what are we to do then? You ought now to forgive. Perhaps he will get so thoroughly under the power of remorse that he will just break completely and say, I will never be able to retrieve myself. The people of God will never have confidence in me again. V/hat difference does it make what I do? Show him now that you can forgive as well as discipline. Lest Satan should get an advantage of us.

Furthermore, when I came to Troas to preach Christs gospel, and a door was opened unto me of the Lord. He had been very near to them; he was at Troas, which is just across the water, and he would have liked to go ahead with the wonderful opportunity for service which came to him, but he was so restless thinking about their difficulties that he could not remain. I had no rest in my spirit, because I found not Titus my brother: but taking my leave of them, I went from thence into Macedonia. But no matter what circumstances he is called upon to pass through he says, Thanks be unto God, which always causeth us to triumph in Christ, and maketh manifest the savor of his knowledge by us in every place. Or, it may be rendered, Thanks be unto God, which always leadeth us in Christs triumph. This is a very lovely picture. As Christs servants we are continually being led in His triumph. What does he mean by that? It is not merely that Christ always makes us victors, but whatever circumstances the people of God may be called upon to pass through we are always led in Christs triumph. It is a striking figure of speech, a wonderful picture that he puts before us.

When a Roman general had been out into some distant land to put down an uprising, or to win new lands for the Roman empire, to defeat great armies, the senate frequently voted him a triumph. When he and his army returned to Rome a public holiday was declared, and all the people thronged to the main thoroughfare to see this general enter in triumph. Here is a long line of captives, representatives of the people he has subjugated. They are in chains, and are holding censers in their hands, and sweet, fragrant incense arises. Then comes the general, and behind him another long line of captives bearing censers. These in front are to be set at liberty, and the fragrant incense is the odor of life to them. Those behind are condemned to die, and are going on to the arena; they are to be thrown to the wild beasts or put to death in some other way, and the fragrant incense that arises from their censers is a savor of death. The general marches on in triumph. There are some with a savor of life, there are others with a savor of death. The apostle says, as it were, Christ, our great Redeemer, has won a mighty victory over all the powers of hell. He has led captivity captive and given gifts unto men. He has annulled him that had the power of death, and God has voted Him a triumph; and now Christ is marching triumphantly through the universe, and He is leading us in His triumph, and we who are His captives by grace are a sweet savor unto life, but even men who refuse His grace must glorify God in their judgment, and they are a sweet savor, but unto death. So he says, Thanks be unto God, which always causeth us to triumph in Christ, and maketh manifest the savor of his knowledge by us in every place. For we are unto God a sweet savour of Christ, in them that are saved, and in them that perish: to the one we are the savour of death unto death; and to the other the savor of life unto life. And who is sufficient for these things? As we march on with Christ proclaiming His gospel, that gospel is to God a sweet savor, whether men believe it or refuse to believe it. But to all who believe it, it is a sweet savor of life; to all who refuse to believe it, it is a savor of death, but its fragrance is just as precious to God whether believed or refused.

Who is sufficient for these things? Let me put it this way: I stand up and try to preach, I attempt to give the gospel of the grace of God knowing my message is to have a double effect, some people are going to believe it, and it will add to their joy for all eternity. Some people are going to refuse it, and it will make it worse for them than if they had never heard it at all. I may say, My God, I would rather not preach than make it worse for men in eternity. But God says, Go on and preach My Word; it is your business to give it out whether they receive it or reject it. The responsibility is theirs. Who is sufficient for these things? Our sufficiency is of God (3:5).

For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ. That word corrupt is a Greek word used for small trading, and suggests the thought of what we call, grafting. We are not of those who huckster the Word of God; in other words, we are not of those who are giving out the Word of God for the money we can get out of it, we are not selling the Word of God; we are seeking to minister Gods truth for the blessing of His people and the salvation of souls. What a wonderful thing to be led in Christs triumph! He went down into death, He came up in triumph, having spoiled principalities and powers. He has made a show of them, triumphing over them, and we are linked with Him who says, I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore (Rev 1:18).

Fuente: Commentaries on the New Testament and Prophets

2Co 2:11

I. Satan endeavours to keep men from Christ, knowing well that the spiritual life will not thrive on anything but Christ; he endeavours to substitute anything else, no matter what, instead of Him, as an object for the soul to fix upon. And when this is done, the spiritual life becomes soon extinct, or wanes back into a miserable, spiritless formality. How many are checked and stunted in growth by this device of the enemy!

II. He blinds the judgment and spiritual understanding, and so produces a low and inadequate view of the Christian life, so that many of its most imperative requirements are kept in the background, while perhaps, at the same time, others are rigidly insisted on. It is a most important requisite for the Christian to be complete in his self-devotion to God.

III. He weakens our faith. The greatest blessing which any Christian can possess is a simple, unwavering faith in God. And no doubt this would be the direct consequence of the reception of the truth in the love of it, if not hindered and thwarted by the agency of Satan upon our sinful and doubting hearts.

IV. He suggests to the mind evil and hateful thoughts. Frequently such thoughts are thrust in against our wills, evidently not arising from any connection of ideas in our own minds; and this, to those who are given to low and desponding frames of feeling, is a sore trial, believing as they do that such thoughts arise from themselves, and that they betoken a depraved and criminal intention within them. If Christians would believe and recognise more than they do the agency of the tempter within them, they would derive encouragement under such inward struggles from knowing that it is not they themselves, but he against whom they are called on to maintain the good fight, from whom such thoughts arise. The conclusion from what has been said is twofold. (1) Of exhortation-“Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour.” (2) Of encouragement-It is surely a consolation to be able to see and know with whom we have to contend, to be able to feel that-evil as are our hearts by nature, and depraved as are our wills-all our inward temptations and suggestions to evil are not our own, and will not, if in God’s strength resisted, be laid to our own charge.

H. Alford, Sermons, p. 301.

References: 2Co 2:12-17.-Ibid., p. 287. 2Co 2:14.-Preacher’s Monthly, vol. ii., p. 259.

2Co 2:14-16

The Absolute Character and Critical Effects of the Ministry of the Gospel.

I. The absolute or real character is seen in what it is to God. The gospel not only displays and embodies, but taxes to the utmost, the resources of the Divine love and wisdom combined. And just as the scattered flowers, fragrant shrubs, and sweet incense breathed forth a perfume of sweet savour before the advancing ranks of the triumphal procession, irrespective of its effects on victor and vanquished; so, irrespective of its consequences in respect to those who hear the gospel, the ministry of its glad tidings is unto God the diffusion of a sweet savour.

II. The critical influence of the gospel is seen in its opposite effects on those to whom it is preached. Paul felt acutely that he could not be the minister of the word of life to men without increasing their responsibility and aggravating the condemnation of those who rejected it. For in proportion to its quickening power of life in those who receive it, does it work death in those who refuse to accept it. The nature of fallen man being susceptible of the application of the divinest means for his recovery, he is, in case of their employment a failure, thereby doomed to a corresponding depth of wretchedness and woe. Let us learn that the character of the purpose of God’s grace and the means for its fulfilment are such as to give Him joy wherever they are proclaimed. What they are to us is determined by our own moral state and character.

W. Pulsford, Trinity Church Sermons, p. 198.

Reference: 2Co 2:14-17.-A. J. Parry, Phases of Christian Truth, p. 194.

2Co 2:15-16

God Glorified in the Preaching of the Gospel.

I. The gospel is a revelation of all which is most illustrious in Godhead and of all that as sinful creatures we are most concerned in ascertaining. We read that when God rested from the work of creation He saw everything that He had made, and He beheld that it was very good. And why should He not hold the same in regard to the gospel? It may well be supposed that God would regard the ambassadors of His Son, those who with their lives in their hands hastened to publish the glad tidings of redemption, as more truly and more emphatically the revealers of Himself, than all those worlds so gorgeously apparelled with which His creative edict had peopled infinite space. Who then can be surprised at the lofty tone assumed by St. Paul when speaking of his own ministrations of the gospel of Christ. He felt that his preaching was a manifestation of the invisible Deity.

II. It was another view of the office of the preacher that extorted from the Apostle the words “Who is sufficient for these things?” Preachers are watchmen, and with all their vigilance may sometimes fail in warning those committed to their care. They are stewards of the mysteries of God; and compassed with infirmities even when they are unwearied in labour, they may occasionally err as interpreters of the word, and place before the people falsehood as well as truth. But it is when they come to view themselves as actually employed in the making men inexcusable, then it is that their office assumes its most fearful aspect. Then it is that, if they have but human hearts and sympathies, they must feel their office a burden too great to be borne, and half long to be allowed to keep back their message, lest it should prove nothing but a savour of death unto death. “Who is sufficient for these things?” It is for the hearers to spare their minister this, and to make the gospel a sweet savour of life unto life, and not a savour of death unto death.

H. Melvill, Penny Pulpit, No. 2181.

References: 2Co 2:15, 2Co 2:16.-Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. i., No. 26; Homilist, 2nd series, vol. ii., p. 468.

2Co 2:16

The Missionary.

I. Among the qualifications of the true missionary, I do not scruple to put first a love of souls; or, if the expression be thought to have too technical a meaning, let us say rather an earnest longing that other men and women should become true Christians at heart. Here we have the true foundation on which all missionary success must be reared. There is no substitute for it. Heart to heart, soul to soul, man must come with his brother-man, if he is to implant in him any seeds of a spiritual life.

II. A successful missionary must be in the main a hopeful, sanguine man. One of the sorest temptations to missionaries is the temptation to despond. This is a temptation hardly known to any but noble natures. Those who have no high aims, no grand enterprises with which they have intertwined their hearts, cannot tell the miseries of misgiving. But the records of missionaries are essentially records of high aims and gallant enterprises; and so you find a large space filled by their hours of darkness. These are the weak moments of strong natures. They are enough to show one of the characteristic trials of the missionary, and of the need there is that he should be a man naturally cheerful and hopeful.

III. Again, a missionary should be a man of delicate sympathy. The most holy natures are sometimes deficient in at least the finer shades of sympathy. Such persons, if they adopt the missionary calling, will probably find again and again that their success is marred.

IV. A successful missionary must have a very sure and definite hold of the main promises and doctrines of the gospel. His own faith must be strong and simple; if not, he will not be able to speak or act with decision. His tongue will be tied, his arm will be palsied by the fatal consciousness that he has not thoroughly grasped and appropriated the truths which he is professing to impress upon others.

H. M. Butler, Harrow Sermons, 2nd series, p. 80.

I. The difficulties which faced St. Paul were open and tangible. He knew that on one side there was Jewish bigotry, and on the other side Greek speculation; here the charge of apostasy from ancestral sanctities-there of insubordination to existing authorities; here some definite risk of scourging or stoning, of dungeon or sword-there some insidious corruption of gospel simplicity by Judaizing admixture or Alexandrian refinement. From these things he had no rest; his life was a daily sacrifice, wanting but its completion in the drink-offering of his blood. But St. Paul was spared some experiences, belonging to an age not his. That reckless, restless impatience of the old, even when the old is God’s truth; that insolent disdain of Christ’s ordinance of preaching; that choosing and rejecting amongst the plain sayings of Scripture,-these habits of thought and mind have taken the place, in our time, of that scoffing of the scorner which at least warned off the believing: they have passed inside the unguarded door of the Church, and they utter themselves in the very temple of God, as if they were part and parcel of the recognised sentiment of the faithful.

II. There is yet another peculiarity of our time which troubles a thoughtful man as much as any-it is the timidity of the believing, in the face of free thought and scientific discovery. I count it a great evil when true believers betray an uneasiness in the presence of true seekers. Truth and the Truth can never really be at variance. Let not faith think that by hiding its head in the sand it can elude pursuit, or that by a clamorous outcry, “The gospel is in danger,” it can breathe either confidence into its troops or panic into its foes. Let us be brave with a courage at once of man and of God. Let us count no affront to the cause of Christ equal to that of His so-called followers who would turn His Church into a clique and His hope into a fear.

C. J. Vaughan, Temple Sermons, p. 1.

References: 2Co 2:16.-Homilist, 2nd series, vol. iv., p. 385; J. Clifford, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxxvi., p. 305.

Fuente: The Sermon Bible

3. His Deep Exercise Concerning Them. Yet Overcoming.

CHAPTER 2

1. The Burden of his Soul. (2Co 2:1-4.)

2. Concerning the Brother who had been Disciplined. (2Co 2:5-11.)

3. Overcoming. (2Co 2:12-17.)

In the previous chapter we read the reason why he had not gone to Corinth. To spare you I came not to Corinth (2Co 1:23). He feared, that on account of their deplorable condition; exercising his God-given apostolic authority, he might appear as dominating over them. He had determined that he would not come again to them with sorrow. He might have hastened to Corinth with a rod (1Co 4:21), but he exercised patience and had waited, no doubt with much prayer to God, for the gracious effect of the first Epistle he had sent unto them. In all these statements so humble, so loving and so patient, we have the love exemplified which is described in the previous epistle (Chapter 13). He was not easily provoked; he hoped all things and endured all things. He also tells them in what state of mind he was in when he wrote his first Epistle. What deep soul exercise the fourth verse reveals! He was so much concerned that he wrote out of much affliction and agony of heart, while his tears flowed freely. But it was not done to grieve them; love for them was the only motive, that ye might know the love which I have more abundantly towards you.

The case of the transgressor whose wicked deed had been exposed and rebuked in the first Epistle (1Co 5:1-13), whose discipline had been demanded by the Apostle, is taken up first. What had grieved him had grieved them also. This they had shown by the way in which they had treated this brother. Titus had brought him the information that they had acted and the transgressor had been put away from fellowship. He also must have told Paul of his deep and true repentance. He therefore exhorts them to receive him again and comfort him, who was in grave danger of being swallowed up with much sorrow on account of the discipline from the side of the mass of Christians. He tells them to assure this weak brother, who had been restored, of their own love, and while they had forgiven him, he also forgave. In assuring the disciplined brother of their love they would thereby prove their obedience in all things. They had previously shown their obedience by judging the evil doer for his sin. Lest Satan should get an advantage of us, for we are not ignorant of his devices. The brother in question who had been delivered to Satan was in danger of being driven to despair, and in this way Satan might get an advantage over them. This might have resulted in bringing about a division between the Apostle and the Corinthians. The course pursued by the apostle in forgiving love, prevented this.

When the Apostle came to Troas to preach the Gospel of Christ, there was a door opened unto him by the Lord. His great business was to preach the Gospel, and the Lord had manifested His approval by opening a door. Yet Paul was restless. He had expected to meet Titus to receive the anxiously awaited news from Corinth. So he did not enter the door which the Lord opened to preach the Gospel, but he hastened to Macedonia. His own anxiety and restless haste were weaknesses. The door opened for service should have made him tarry at Troas to preach that Gospel, which he loved so well. Then, in due time, the Lord would have led Titus to him. From all this the Corinthians could learn his great love for them and his deep anxiety and concern. And yet his conscience must have been troubled in having lost so great an opportunity to preach the Gospel. Surely he was in a very trying position as a servant of Christ. On the one hand he valued the Gospel and loved to preach it, and on the other hand was his burdened heart for the Saints of God. And therefore he comforts and encourages himself by an outburst of thanksgiving. He knows that God is in it all; not he himself leads, but God always leadeth him in triumph in Christ, (causes us to triumph is a faulty translation), and maketh manifest the odor of His knowledge through us in every place. It is an allusion to a Roman triumphal procession after the victory. Captives were led in these processions, but the victors were the prominent figures. So Paul declares, God always leadeth us in triumph in Christ. He gives us the victory. All his anxiety for the Corinthians ended in triumph. This was always so. In connection with a Roman triumph incense was burned upon every altar. These aromatics pervaded the whole procession. Through the apostle the sweet smell of His knowledge was spread about. But he also applies this to the Gospel. The two classes are mentioned by him, those who are being saved and those who are perishing. Let us also notice the beautiful thought that the preaching of the Gospel is a sweet incense of Christ unto God. Independent of the results of the preaching of the Gospel, whenever that precious name is preached, which is as ointment poured forth (Son 1:3), it delights the heart of God and is a sweet savor unto Him. But as to men, to some it is a savor (or odor) of death unto death and to others a savor of life unto life. (In the Roman triumphal procession were captives to whom the burning incense was a token of death; to others it was a token of life.)

And who is sufficient for these things? What great issues the Gospel ministry involves and how great the responsibility! The question is answered in the next chapter. Our sufficiency is of God (2Co 3:5). Upon Him the true minister of the Gospel is solely cast. And because Paul had his sufficiency of God as well as those who were associated with him, he could say, for we are not as the many, corrupting the Word of God; but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God, speak we in Christ. The word corrupt has the meaning of adulterating, trading. It has been strikingly translated driving a traffic in the Word of God and with this making merchandise of the Truth of God, the adulterating is closely connected. It began with apostolic days. How much worse is it in our times! Many who lay claim to the name of ministers of the Gospel are men-pleasers, covetous, aiming at their own popularity, seeking their own and not the things of Christ; and therefore they trade in these truths and handle the Word of God deceitfully as well as diluting it. A solemn description of a true servant of Christ is the concluding sentence of this chapter. He is of God, with a God-given message, and he speaks of God in the sight of God.

Fuente: Gaebelein’s Annotated Bible (Commentary)

I determined: 2Co 1:15-17, Act 11:29, Act 15:2, Act 15:37, 1Co 2:2, 1Co 5:3, Tit 3:12

that: 2Co 2:4, 2Co 1:23, 2Co 7:5-8, 2Co 12:20, 2Co 12:21, 2Co 13:10, 1Co 4:21

Reciprocal: 1Ch 4:10 – that it may Rom 1:12 – that I may 1Co 4:19 – I 2Co 1:24 – are

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

THE APOSTLE HAD made up his mind that he would postpone his visit until it could be made under happier circumstances: and now, as he wrote this second letter, the heaviness was passing and brighter things coming into view. His first letter had made them sorry, as he intended it should, and their sorrow now made him glad, as verse 2Co 2:2 of chapter 2 shows. It had been sent ahead on its mission so that when he did come amongst them it might be with confidence established, and with joy.

In verse 2Co 2:4 we get a very touching and valuable glimpse of the manner and spirit of Pauls writing. Reading his earlier epistle we can discern its powerful and trenchant style: we can notice how calculated it was to humble them with its touches of holy irony. We should hardly have known however that he wrote it out of much affliction and anguish of heart… with many tears, had he not told us this. But so it was. Foolish and carnal though they were, yet he loved them with a tender affection. Consequently the inspired Word of God flowed to them through the human channel of a loving and afflicted heart, and was mightily effective. Would to God that we were followers of Paul in this, and learned the holy art through him! How much more effective we should be.

What a deluge of controversial writings has flowed through the churchs history! What polemics have been indulged in! And how little, comparatively speaking, has been accomplished by them. We venture to believe that if only one tenth had been written, but that tenth had been produced by men of God, writing with much affliction and anguish of heart and with many tears, because of that which made the writing needful, ten times as much would have been accomplished for the glory of God.

After all, love lies as the rock-bottom foundation of everything. Not cleverness, not ability, not sarcasm, not anger, but LOVE is Gods way of blessing.

Out in the darkness, shadowed by sin

Souls are in bondage, souls we would win.

How can we win them? How show the way?

Love never faileth, Love is the way.

Love never faileth, Love is pure gold;

Love is what Jesus came to unfold,

Make us more loving, Master, we pray,

Help us remember, Love is Thy way.

It might have seemed harsh of Paul to call the evil-doer at Corinth, that wicked person, and to instruct that he be put away from their midst. But his loving heart caused his eyes to shed tears as he penned the words. Pauls words and tears were effective and the punishment was inflicted, as verse 2Co 2:6 states; and inflicted not by Paul merely, or by one or two of the more spiritual at Corinth, but by the whole mass of the saints. Thus the man was made to feel that they all abhorred and disowned his sin. His conscience was reached. He was brought to repentance.

This, of course, is the end that discipline is designed to reach. Erring believers are not disciplined merely for the sake of punishment, but that they may be brought to repentance and so restored, both in their souls, and to their place of fellowship amongst Gods people. This happy end was reached in the case of the offender at Corinth.

How infrequently is it reached today! All too often the putting away is done in a hard judicial spirit. The anguish of heart, the tears are absent, and the offender becomes more occupied with the harsh manner of his brethren than with his own delinquencies. Hence his repentance is a long way off-to his loss and theirs.

The action taken at Corinth was so effective that the man was brought himself into much affliction and anguish of heart. Indeed the danger now was that the Corinthian assembly would in their zeal against his sin, overlook his sorrow, and not forgive him administratively by restoring him to his place in their midst. Now, therefore, Paul has to write to them urging them to do this, and thus confirm their love towards him. It was possible otherwise that he might be overwhelmed with overmuch sorrow. Sorrow for sin is good; yet there is a point where it may become excessive and harmful-a point where sorrow should cease and the joy of forgiveness be known. The joy of the Lord, and not sorrow for sin, is our strength.

Verse 2Co 2:10 shows that if the assembly at Corinth forgave the man, their forgiveness carried with it Pauls. And again, that if Paul forgave any, by reason of his apostolic authority, he did so for their sakes, and as acting on behalf of Christ. The forgiveness spoken of in this verse may be termed administrative forgiveness. It is the forgiveness of which the Lord spoke in such scriptures as Mat 16:19, where it is apostolic; Mat 18:18, where it is vested in the assembly; Joh 20:23, where it is confirmed to the apostolic company by the Lord in His risen condition. In 1Co 5:1-13 we have a case in which the powers of binding or retaining were exercised. In our chapter we have an example of loosing or remitting.

Paul wrote thus, not merely for the sake of the sorrowing brother, but for the sake of all, lest Satan should get an advantage over all of them. Note it well! The very devil himself in some cases likes to see believers righteous overmuch, at the expense of the meekness and gentleness of Christ. The Apostle could add, for we are not ignorant of his devices. Alas, that so often we cannot truthfully say that! We are ignorant of his devices, and though our intentions are good we fall into traps that he sets.

What wisdom we need to hold the balance evenly, in practical matters, between the claims of righteousness and love. How necessary to remember that all discipline is inflicted in righteousness, whether by God Himself or by men, in order that repentance may be produced: and that when it is produced love claims the right to hold sway. Let us not continue to smite in discipline a repentant soul, lest we come under Divinely inflicted discipline ourselves.

One remarkable feature about this epistle is the way in which historical details as to Pauls movements and experiences form a kind of framework, in the midst of which is set the unfolding of much important truth, which is introduced rather in the form of digressions-often lengthy ones. The epistle opened with his sufferings and trouble in Asia, and the consequent change in his plans, and this led to the important digression of 2Co 1:19-22. Then he picks up the thread as to his subsequent movements, only to digress further in chapter 2, as to the forgiveness of the repentant offender.

At verse 2Co 2:12 he again reverts to his movements. This brief visit to Troas must be distinguished from that recorded in Act 20:6. It apparently came between the departure from Ephesus and the arrival in Macedonia, as recorded in Act 20:1. Though an open door was set before him by the Lord he was unable to avail himself of it, owing to his great anxiety for news of the Corinthians. In this case his pastoral solicitude prevailed against his evangelistic fervour. If the servant is not at rest in his spirit he cannot effectively serve the Lord.

The apostle was evidently conscious that this was failure on his part. Yet looking back he was equally conscious that God had overruled it to the glory of Christ; and this led him to an outburst of thanksgiving to God. It also led him once more to digress from his account of his experiences, and we do not come back to them until 2Co 7:5, is reached. The long digression which starts with verse 2Co 2:14 of our chapter, contains the main teaching of the epistle.

As regards his service, one thing he knew: he really and truly set forth Christ. Many there were who dared to manipulate the Word of God to serve their own ends. He, on the other hand, spoke with all sincerity as of God, and as in the sight of God, and as representing Christ. Moreover Christ was his great theme. Hence God led him in triumph in Christ.

The language the Apostle uses seems to be based upon the custom of according a triumph to victorious generals, when sweet odours were burned, and some of the captives, who helped to augment the triumph, were appointed to die, and some to live. The triumph was Christs; but Paul had a share in it as spreading abroad the sweet odour of Christ wherever he went-an odour so infinitely fragrant to God. This was so whether he were in Troas or whether in Macedonia.

He preached Christ as the One who died and rose again, whether men believed and were saved, or whether they believed not and perished. If they believed not and were perishing, then the tidings of the death of Christ simply meant death for them. If He died for sins, and they refused Him, they certainly must die in their sins. If some believed, then tidings of His life in resurrection brought the odour of life for them. Because He lived they should live also.

How solemn then is the effect of a true preaching of Christ! What eternal issues hang upon it! This is so, whether the lips that utter it be Pauls in the first century or ours in the twentieth. No wonder the question is raised, Who is sufficient for these things? It is raised, but, not answered immediately. It is answered however in verse 2Co 2:5 of the next chapter. The whole thing being of God there is no sufficiency but of God. Would that every servant of God always bore this in mind! What deep-toned earnestness it would produce in us: what dependence upon the power of God. How careful we should be not to adulterate the message, and not to carry out the work just as we like, or as we think best; but to serve according to the Word of God.

Fuente: F. B. Hole’s Old and New Testaments Commentary

2Co 2:1. This chapter continues the thought introduced in verse 23 of the preceding one. Heaviness is from LUPE, which Thayer defines, “sorrow, pain, grief,” and he explains it at this passage to mean, “of one who on coming both saddens and is made sad.” Paul was always conscientious and would not keep back any unpleasant chastisement that was due his brethren. (See chapter 7:8.) However, by waiting a while longer before appearing in person, the brethren were given space to profit by the letter which he had sent to them, which caused some grief as we shall see later.

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

2Co 2:1. But I determined this for myself, that I would not come again to you with sorrow. This is so plainly a continuance of his explanation of the delay of his expected visit to Corinth, that it is a pity a new chapter should in the recognised division have begun here.

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

The occasion of St. Paul’s writing again to the Corinthians, and deferring for the present to come unto them, is here intimated. There was an incestuous person in the church of Corinth, who had married his father’s wife; if she were his own natural mother, the sin was most prodigious and unnatural, that the child of her womb should be the husband of her bed; if she were his mother-in-law, it was against the law of reverence, and an heinous sin for the son to uncover the father’s nakedness. And it was an aggravation of the sin, that the person committing it was a Christian, a member, and, as some think, a minister of the church of Corinth. St. Paul, in his former epistle, 1Co 5:1 command them to excommunicate this incestuous person, which accordingly they did; and this spiritual physic, applied to the offender, had a good effect upon him; for being punished by the church, he punisheth himself; and being cast out of the church, he casts away his sin.

Happy is it, when the church’s censures are so executed as to bring offenders to a sight and sense of their sins, in order to a deep humiliation and thorough reformation.

Now, says the apostle, I determined not to come to you in heaviness; that is, one great reason why I put off my coming amongst you might neither occasion sorrow, nor create heaviness, either to you or myself; for I delight not in censuring and chiding, when I can otherwise avoid it: For if I make you sorry, and myself with you, who is it that can make me glad, but he that is made sorry by me? that is, nothing can make me glad but the reformation of the fallen person.

Where note, That nothing adds so much to the joy and comfort of the ministers of Christ, as their recovery of revolted souls from under the empire and dominion of sin and Satan. We joy with them, and rejoice in God for them; we live as we see any of you stand fast in the Lord, we die as we see others stick fast in their sins.

Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament

God’s Verification of Paul’s Sincerity

God had established Paul’s sincerity by backing him with signs and miracles. Since God was a promise keeper, He would not support one who was dishonest. God had anointed Paul as an apostle and placed His seal on him to show His ownership. The Holy Spirit working through Paul was God’s way of putting up enough money to guarantee payment of His part of the bargain. The Spirit was evidence that Paul was working in God’s behalf ( 2Co 1:21-22 ).

Paul called God as a witness since God knows all things and is able to search man’s heart. He wanted them to know that he did not come to Corinth when promised, to spare them added hardships. The apostle could not rule over their faith. Instead, he revealed the will of God to them in the hope that they would grow in faith. He wanted his trip to be with them to be a happy occasion, which it would be if they stood firm in God’s truth. Paul refused to come to them while they needed discipline for their weakness in the faith. He had made them sorry by the discipline of the earlier letter and was hoping to be made happy by their changed lives. His love for the church and desire to see them grow in faith made it well worth the wait before coming. Only those he had caused to be sorry could make him happy. Their standing firm in the faith would bring rejoicing ( 2Co 1:23-24 ; 2Co 2:1-2 ).

Fuente: Gary Hampton Commentary on Selected Books

2Co 2:1-3. But I, &c. The apostle proceeds with his apology, begun in the preceding chapter, for delaying his visit to the Corinthians, and signifies that he had deferred it because he had determined with himself not to come among them with sorrow, by punishing the guilty, if he could by any means avoid it; and therefore, instead of coming to punish them, he had written to them, that he might have joy from their repentance: and in excuse for the severity of his first letter, he told them that he wrote it in the deepest affliction; not to make them sorry, but to show the greatness of his love to them. I determined this with myself As if he had said, I will now plainly and faithfully tell you the true reason of that delay of my journey, which has so much surprised many of you, and at which some appear to have taken offence; it was not that I forgot you, or failed in my friendly regards to you; but I resolved, on hearing how things were among you, that if it could by any means be prevented, I would not come again to you with heaviness , in grief, either on account of the sin of the particular offender, or of the disorders in the church in general, or in circumstances which must have grieved both myself and you; but that I would wait for those fruits which I hoped would be the effect of my endeavours, in my former epistle, to regulate what had been amiss. For if I make you sorry If I should be obliged to grieve you still more by my reproofs and censures, and particularly by punishing the disobedient among you; who is he then that maketh me glad That could give me joy; but the same who is made sorry by me? That is, I cannot be comforted myself till his grief is removed. The apostle, knowing that the sincere part of the church would be made sorry by his punishing their disobedient brethren, wished, if possible, to avoid doing it. And, added to this, the recovery of offenders would give him more sensible joy than any thing else; considerations which, taken together, abundantly justify the language he here uses. And I wrote this same, , this very thing, to you About reforming what is amiss, particularly to excommunicate the incestuous person, and to shun all contentions, sinful practices, and confusion in your meetings; lest when I came again to Corinth, as I proposed, I should have sorrow from them Lest I should have occasion to censure and punish any, (to do which would be grievous to me,) of whom In whose repentance; I ought to rejoice, having confidence in you all that my joy is the joy of you all That in general you bear the same affection toward me, as I feel in my heart toward you, and are desirous of giving me cause of joy, rather than of sorrow. It seems either the apostle is speaking here of the sincere part of the Christian Church, or the word all must be taken in a qualified sense.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

But I determined this for myself, that I would not come again to you with sorrow.

Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)

2 Corinthians Chapter 2

But had there been any lightness in his decisions, since, as he now informed them, he had intended to visit them on his way to Macedonia (where he was at the moment of writing this letter), and then a second time on his return from that country? In no wise; they were not intentions lightly formed, according to the flesh, and then abandoned. It was his affection, it was to spare them. He could not bear the idea of going with a rod to those whom he loved. Observe in what manner, although shewing his affection and tenderness, he maintains his authority; and they needed the exercise of this authority. And while reminding them of his authority, he displays all his tenderness. They were not Cretans, perhaps, whom it was necessary to rebuke sharply; but there was a laxity of. morals which required delicacy and care lest they should become restive, but also authority and a bridle, lest, in giving them liberty, they should fall into all sorts of bad ways. But he turns immediately to the certainty which was in Christ, the basis of all his own. He would not press too much upon the chord he had touched at the beginning. He lets his authority be known as that which might have been exercised, and he does not employ it. The groundwork of Christianity was needed, in order to put their souls into a condition to judge themselves healthily. They were quite disposed, through the intrigues of false teachers and their habit of schools of philosophy, to separate from the apostle, and, in spirit, from Christ. He brings them back to the foundation, to the sure doctrine that was common to all those that had laboured among them at the beginning. He would give Satan no occasion to detach them from him (see 2 Corinthians2:11).

He establishes therefore the great principles of Christian joy and assurance. I do not speak of the blood, the only source of peace of conscience before God as a judge, but of the manner in which we are placed by the power of God in His presence, in the position and state into which that power introduces us according to the counsels of His grace. Simple certainty was in Christ, according to that which had been said. It was not first Yea, and then Nay: the yea remained always yea-a principle of immense importance, but for the establishment of which there was needed the power and the firmness and even perfection, and the wisdom, of God; for to assure and make stedfast that which was not wise and perfect would certainly not have been worthy of Him.

It will be seen that the question was, whether Paul had lightly changed his purpose. He says that he had not; but he leaves the thought of that which concerned him personally to speak of that which pre-occupied his thoughts-of Christ; and to him, in fact, to live was Christ. But there was a difficulty to solve, when the immutability of Gods promises was the question. It is that we are not in a state to profit by that which was immutable on account of our weakness and inconstancy. He solves this difficulty by setting forth the mighty operations of God in grace.

There are two points therefore:-the establishment of all the promises in Christ, and the enjoyment, by us, of the effect of these promises. The thing is, as we have seen, not merely to say, to promise, something; but not to change ones intentions, not to depart from what was said, but to keep ones word. Now there had been promises. God had made promises, whether to Abraham unconditionally, or to Israel at Sinai under the condition of obedience. But in Christ there was, not promises, but the Amen to Gods promises, the verity and realisation of them. Whatever promises there had been on Gods part, the Yea was in Him, and the Amen in Him. God has established-deposited, so to speak-the fulfilment of all His promises in the Person of Christ. Life, glory, righteousness, pardon, the gift of the Spirit, all is in Him; it is in Him that all is we-Yea and Amen. We cannot have the effect of any promise whatsoever out of Him. But this is not all: we, believers, are the objects of these counsels of God. They are to the glory of God by us.

But, in the first place, the glory of God is that of Him whoever glorifies Himself in His ways of sovereign grace towards us; for it is in these ways that He unfolds and displays what He is. The Yea and Amen therefore of the promises of God, the accomplishment and the realisation of the promises of God, for His glory by us, are in Christ.

But how can we participate in it, if all is Christ and in Christ? It is here that the Holy Ghost presents the second part of the ways of grace. We are in Christ, and we are in Him not according to the instability of the will of man, and the weakness that characterises him in his transitory and changeable works. He who was firmly established us in Christ is God Himself. The accomplishment of all the promises is in Him. Under the law, and under conditions the fulfilment of which depended on the stability of man, the effect of the promise was never attained; the thing promised eluded the pursuit of man, because man needed to be in a state capable of attaining it by righteousness, and he was not in that state; the accomplishment of the promise therefore was always suspended; it would have its effect if-but the if was not accomplished, and the Yea and Amen did not come. But all that God has promised is in Christ. The second part is the by us, and how far we enjoy it. We are firmly established by God in Christ, in whom all the promises subsist, so that we securely possess in Him all that is promised us. But we do not enjoy it as that which subsists in our own hands.

But, further, God Himself has anointed us. We have by Jesus received the Holy Ghost. God has taken care that we should understand by the Spirit that which is freely given us in Christ. But the Spirit is given to us, according to the counsels of God, for other things than understanding merely His gifts in Christ. He who has received Him is sealed. God has marked him with His seal, even as He marked Christ with His seal when He anointed Him after His baptism by John. Moreover the Spirit becomes the earnest, in our own hearts, of that which we shall fully possess hereafter in Christ. We understand the things that are given us in the glory; we are marked by the seal of God to enjoy them; we have the earnest of them in our hearts-our affections are engaged by them. Established in Christ, we have the Holy Ghost, who seals us when we believe, to bring us into the enjoyment, even while here below, of that which is in Christ.

Having again spoken of the care which manifested his affection for them, he expresses his conviction that that which had pained him had pained them also; and this was demonstrated by the way in which they had treated the transgressor. He exhorts them to receive again and comfort the poor guilty one, who was in danger of being entirely overwhelmed by the discipline that had been exercised towards him by the mass of the Christians; adding, that if the Christians forgave him his fault, he forgave it likewise. He would not that Satan should get any advantage through this case to bring in dissension between himself and the Corinthians; for Paul well knew what the enemy aimed at, the object with which he made use of this affair.

This gives him occasion to shew how much he had them always in his heart. Coming to Troas for the gospel, and a wide door being opened to him, nevertheless he could not remain there, because he had not found Titus; and he left Troas and continued his journey into Macedonia. It will be remembered that, instead of passing by the western shores of the Archipelago, in order to visit Macedonia, taking Corinth on his way, and then returning by the same route, the apostle had sent Titus with his first letter, and had gone by way of Asia Minor, or the eastern coast of the sea, which led him to Troas, where Titus was to meet him. But not finding him at Troas, and being uneasy with regard to the Corinthians, he could not be satisfied with there being a work to be done at Troas, but journeyed on to meet Titus and repaired to Macedonia. There he found him, as we shall see presently. But this thought of having left Troas affected him, for in fact it is a serious thing, and painful to the heart, to miss an opportunity of preaching Christ, and the more so when people are disposed to receive Him, or at least to hear of Him. To have left Troas was indeed a proof of his affection for the Corinthians; and the apostle recalls the circumstance as a strong demonstration of that affection. He comforts himself for having missed this work of evangelisation by the thought that after all God led him as in triumph (not caused him to triumph). The gospel which he carried with him, the testimony of Christ, was like the perfume caused by burning aromatic drugs in triumphal processions-a token of death to some of the captives, of life to others. And this perfume of the gospel was pure in his hands. The apostle was not like some who adulterated the wine they furnished; he laboured in Christian integrity before God.

Fuente: John Darby’s Synopsis of the New Testament

HE RESOLVES NOT TO COME TO THEM IN SORROW

2Co 2:1-13.

Paul most sagaciously and successfully maneuvers this whole matter. It would have been a terrible ordeal to him, who had spent eighteen months with them and seen them all born from above, and rejoiced exultantly with his spiritual children, to come among them with the castigatory rod, holding church trials and turning out a big lot of them. So he determines from the start, and arriving at Ephesus from his great Eastern tour, and there bearing all about these irregularities, heresies and disorders, he decides that he will wheel them into line by firing on them at long range.

4. For out of much grief and anguish of heart I wrote unto you through many tears, not that you may be grieved, but that you may know the Divine love I have toward you exceedingly. While he had met every issue fairly and squarely, withholding not an iota or flickering, he had baptized his letters with his tears. Timothy and Titus, his noble preachers, had been signally blessed of God in their work among them, corroborating the Pauline epistles by their preaching and bringing about a genuine repentance and radical reform.

5. But if anyone has grieved you all in part, he did not grieve me but in part, that I may not burthen you.

6. This punishment from the many is sufficient for such an one.

7. So, on the contrary, you should rather bless and exhort him, lest he may be swallowed up with excessive grief.

8. Therefore, I exhort you to stir up your Divine love toward him. This is that notorious incestuous man who had his fathers wife (the old man still living, ch. 2Co 7:12), though Paul had assured them that this man should be turned over to Satan, i. e., expelled from the church, in case that he did not take heed. But, to the infinite gratitude of Paul, he had not only reformed and made everything right as far as possible, but he was about to grieve himself to death, and the whole church was down in mourning with him and praying for him, not a single one vindicating him, but condemning him, and crying to God to have mercy on him and them. When Titus arrives and tells Paul about the genuine, radical and excessive repentance, and the man even about to grieve himself to death, Paul tells them here that it is enough, and exhorts them to turn the tide and labor to comfort him, all stirring up their Divine love in his behalf, exhorting and blessing him, lest he die of grief.

9. For unto this indeed I wrote, in order that I may know your approval, if you are obedient in all things. He had the blessed consolation of realizing that they were obedient in all things. Instead of dividing up into factions, as is customary in case of church discipline, they unanimously accepted the situation and came down in sackcloth and ashes, those who had sinned crying for mercy, and the balance crying along with them that the sin had occurred among them.

10-11. But in whatsoever you rejoice as to anything, I do also, for indeed I have rejoiced in this, if I have rejoiced in anything, for your sakes in the face of Christ, in order that we may not be gobbled up by Satan, for we are not ignorant of his devices. If they had broken into divisions over the Pauline discipline, Satan would have made great capital out of it. But as it was, he was utterly defeated and the victory was complete.

12-13. Having come into Troas unto the gospel of Christ, indeed a door being opened to me in the Lord, I had no rest in my spirit because I did not find Titus my brother, but bidding them adieu I departed into Macedonia. Troas is over in Asia, the capital of Mysia, the successor of old Troy of Homeric notoriety. Titus was to meet Paul there, and give him the news from Corinth, whither Paul had sent him to preach and to do his utmost to obey his epistles and make everything right. On arrival, he does not find him. Such is his anxiety to hear from Corinth that he does not delay, but hastens away over the sea to Macedonia, where he meets Titus bringing the glorious news of his great revival at Corinth, so ravishing to the longing heart of their spiritual father.

Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament

2Co 2:1. But I determined that I would not come again to you in heaviness; but rather wait till the late scandal should subside. The offender, a man no doubt much known in the city, had laid his horn in the dust, and brought a dark cloud of shame and grief on the church; he had caused both jews and gentiles to triumph over the christian name. If a man under any strong temptation to sin, would open his mind to a friend, his fall might possibly be prevented. The words of Christ would be thundered in his ears, Cut off thy right hand; pluck out thy right eye.

2Co 2:4. Out of much affliction and anguish of heart I wrote to you with many tears. The heart always makes the best apology. When we see the honest man, and nature itself unfolded, we ask no more. The issue of those sentiments were pardon for the offender, healing for the church, and the restoration of love to the brethren. But oh, what calamities had resulted from a single case of irregular desire ending in shame!

2Co 2:11. Lest Satan should get an advantage of us. Lest he should expose to the world all your weaknesses, your conflicts, and your passions, with a thousand augmentations. Therefore heal the wound at once, and return to mutual love. When any member of a church falls into gross and scandalous sins, the weakness of the church becomes exposed. The prudence of the elders must therefore be exercised to save religion from contempt by expelling the offender, and equally so by seasonable endeavours to restore him again to the peace of his brethren, as soon as the fruits of repentance shall fairly appear. In cases where a succession of relapses do not follow, we should show the same compassion to others which God has shown to us.

2Co 2:13. I had no rest in my spirit, because I found not Titus my brother. Fellow-labourers for twenty years, delighting in the work, willing to suffer, and ready to die for Christ, must be united in spirit beyond all that fleshly affinities can boast. He wanted the more to find Titus, that he might drink fresh streams of joy in hearing of the recent success of the gospel in all the provinces of ancient Greece.

2Co 2:14. Thanks be to God, which always causeth us to triumph in Christ. Of the triumph of Sesostris, we have spoken on the nineteenth of Isaiah. His triumph was imitated by Roman conquerors. Sometimes on entering the city of Rome, the chariot of the hero was drawn by white horses; sometimes by lions, by tigers, or by deer. All the trophies of war followed, and all the splendour that art could devise. But their triumphs were after Bellona had blown the trumpet of carnage. Pauls was after the joyful sound, the gospel of peace. They had left the countries behind bleeding, weeping, burning. Paul left the sunbeams of righteousness and joy on all the churches. They had left their enemies slumbering in the dust. Paul left the idols broken, like Dagon before the ark. Their victories were partial, and at the expense of much Roman blood. Pauls triumphs were in every city, and the dead in trespasses and sins were quickened to a life of faith and love. Thanks be to God, who made bare his holy arm of salvation.

REFLECTIONS.

This chapter is extremely interesting in regard to christian discipline. It displays an admirable style of reasoning, discovers the tenderness of the apostles heart, and confirms the restoration of the incestuous Corinthian to the peace of the church. This man had been publicly expelled, and denied communion for about a year. 1 Corinthians 5. But he had borne it as the sentence of God, and submitted with tears and meekness to the rod. Now, despair in men who have fallen into fornication and adultery can never work repentance; but a judicious exercise of mercy may prevent their health from being ruined by too much sorrow. Hence the religion of Christ, distinguished by charity, can sustain no new wound by the redmission in one year of a man who had evident marks of repentance and piety. And in this opinion, I am happy to add, the great body of christian critics concur.

The sanction which St. Paul conferred on the church to forgive this gross offender, fully shows in what light the power of remitting sins, conferred on the apostles, and in them on all ministers, is to be understood: it is to apply the promises of pardon, and officially to receive a sinner into the church. On this subject, Tirinus quarrels with Calvin, but without a doubt the latter has truth on his side. However, let us warn men, that if they fall again and again into gross sin, they ought not to expect the mercy of the church: nor ought they to wish to be stumblingblocks to persons of delicate sentiments. We say to profligate characters, sin no more, lest both the church and heaven be for ever shut against you. The thanks which the apostle renders to God for making the ministry triumphant in every place, is an admirable consideration of encouragement and comfort. He had been twenty four years in the ministry; he had travelled through Asia and Greece; and in the face of this great city he could say, that truth had in all places prevailed against error; love had vanquished prejudice, and patience had surmounted persecution. Whenever he gained the ear of a people, grace was sure to gain many of their hearts, and to win them over to the faith of Christ. The fragrance of paradise was once more felt by sinful man, in the glory of their doctrine, in the sweetness of their temper, and in the excellence of their piety.

The gospel was not without most instructive effects on the minds of the wicked. When men saw this light, and still wandered in darkness; and when they even hated and persecuted the preachers, the gospel was to them a pestilential odour. Their proud hearts, revolting at its fragrance, gave new energy to sin, which wrought death in them, while the gospel left them without excuse. Menochius laments in his day [1602] that among the Roman catholics so few ministers were found who were by their life and doctrine a sweet odour to God. And we may all say, who is sufficient for these things? Do thou, oh Lord, make us men who abhor and scorn to corrupt and adulterate thy word.

Fuente: Sutcliffe’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

2Co 1:23 to 2Co 2:4. Paul now states the real and sufficient reason for his apparent vacillation. He had already paid a visit to Corinth (cf. 2Co 13:2) which had been full of pain to himself as well as to others. It had become only too probable that another visit would lead to even sadder experiences. In fact, it was to spare them that he had not fulfilled his promise. Not that it was true, as some said, that he wished to dictate to them in matters of faith. Far from that, the object of himself and his fellow-workers was simply to cooperate with the church in cultivating their joy. In respect of their faith they were fully established.

Was it likely that the apostle would come a second time to cause pain, when the very people he would pain would be the people on whom he depended for joy? Instead of coming he had sent a letter (the lost epistle), in which he probably explained why he was not coming, as well as dealt faithfully with their want of loyalty to himself. By that letter he had hoped to bring them into such a frame of mind that he might exchange sorrow for joy, and once more that joy would not be for himself alone, but shared by them and him. That letter had been written in what was little less than an agony of pain and anxietya description which cannot be applied to our First Epistleand yet its purpose was not to give pain but to prove the reality of Pauls affection.

Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible

These first few verses are a continuation of chapter 1. Paul had purposed that he would not come to the Corinthians “in heaviness,” and for this reason delayed his visit. For his First Epistle was such that it would tend to deeply plough them up, and make them sorry. He did not want to continue the same reproving ministry when he came to them. If they were made sorry in such a way as to correct the wrongs among them, then of course they would make him glad. So he had written with the earnest desire of such a result. In coming to them, he did not want to have sorrow, but to have from them the normal joy of seeing the truth prosper in souls who were after all his own brethren. For in reality Paul’s joy is the proper joy of all believers, for it is joy in the Lord, and in the pure truth of His Word. He could have confidence then that this too was their joy, though it had needed the First Epistle to clear away the rubbish that obscured their true joy.

But he assures them that it was far from a joy to write that letter: his anguish and many tears were however, both because of the seriousness of the evil that had attacked them, and because he did not desire to grieve them. Yet true love for them required his writing.

In verse 5 he refers to the man he had required them to put out of their fellowship (1Co 5:1-13). He had caused grief, not merely to Paul (in case anyone thought this was the important factor), but in part to them all. Compare the New Translation of J. N. Darby here. He says “in part” because he does not want to overcharge them, or to make them so opposed to the man that they would have no genuine desire for his recovery and restoration.

For it is evident that they had obeyed Paul’s instructions to put away the man. Now it is just as serious that the man be restored. The discipline had achieved its proper end in leading the man to self-judgment and ceasing from his sin. It is to be noted that the “punishment” or “rebuke” had been inflicted by “the many.” Perhaps not every individual in the assembly had fully concurred in this (as is sometimes the case), but it was nevertheless a true assembly judgment, in obedience to God. Now he is to be forgiven publicly, and comforted, or encouraged: otherwise discipline might be carried to such an extreme as to swallow up the offender in sorrow. Paul entreats them to assure the man of their love. Once the guilt is properly judged and stopped, this should always be the case.

For Paul’s writing them first (and certainly this second time also) involves the question as to whether the Corinthians had concern to be obedient to the truth of God, whether as to judging the evil, or in regard now to the forgiving of the offender.

Verse 10 shows the excellent spirit of unity on Paul’s part. If he had required unity in reference to judgment, it is to be true as to forgiveness too: he would concur with their forgiving and restoring this brother. His forgiveness in such a case too, is for their sakes, and as in the Person of Christ; for certainly a true restoration of the man would be for their own blessing, and consistent with the character of the Person of Christ, He who is the Center of unity.

But there was also a danger of Satan getting an advantage of the saints. If at first he would threaten the assembly by introducing moral evil, in this case his threat is rather that of producing, in saints, a mere self-righteous attitude that does not forgive even when repentance is evident. Satan’s devices are numerous, and cunning: the apostles were not ignorant of these, and neither ought we to be.

Verse 12 shows that, though Paul had left Ephesus to go into Macedonia (Act 20:1), he had stopped at Troas, where the Lord had opened a door for the preaching of the gospel. Yet he did not stay, because he had no rest in his spirit. Evidently he had thought that Titus may have come there from Corinth, but it was not so. And Paul’s concern as to Corinth would not allow him to stay at Troas in spite of the open door. He deeply desired to learn from Titus how the Corinthians had received his first letter, so he went on to Macedonia. Notice, the New Translation, “I came into Macedonia,” not “went.” Compare chapter 7:5,6. He did not find Titus when he arrived there, but Titus did come afterward, which was a great comfort to Paul. No doubt it was because of the good news Titus brought that Paul speaks as he does in verse 14.

His heart expands in thanksgiving to God, who “always leads us in triumph in Christ.” Not that it is their triumph, but His, while they are His willing captives, led as it were in His victory procession. He has triumphed, not only over them, but over all their circumstances, making all these things subserve His perfect will. And through them the savour of His knowledge was made manifest. Their willing subjection to His leading was a precious witness to the greatness of His triumph and glory. This was as true in regard to those who perish as to those who are saved. The servants’ subjection and

devotion to Christ was a sweet savour to God, for it was a true representation of Him. If one rejected this, yet he had been given the honest witness that such rejection was choosing death; and God is glorified in the righteous carrying out of the sentence of death. On the other hand, the life promised in Christ is as absolutely real; and God is glorified in the reception of life by the believing heart.

What an honor to be in the place of representing God in Christ! No wonder the apostle asks, “And who is sufficient for these things?” The answer is found in chapter 3:5. The solemnity of such a trust certainly requires the sincerity and truth that trembles at the Word of God. There were “many” who made a trade of the Word of God, manipulating it by cunning deceit to serve their own selfish interests; and today their number is multiplied. Paul was in constant exercise of soul to guard thoroughly against such a thing. The Word means precisely what God intends it to mean, and I am not at liberty to interpret it simply as I see fit; but to seek in it God’s own mind. No doubt it has various applications, but I must be seriously careful before God to apply it consistently with the rest of Scripture. The servant is to faithfully represent God, in single-eyed sincerity, with a sense always of acting and speaking as “in the sight of God.” Compare chapter 4:3.

Fuente: Grant’s Commentary on the Bible

Verse 1

In heaviness; in sadness.

Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament

SECTION 2. PAULS REASON FOR NOT COMING TO CORINTH CH. 1:12-2:4.

For this our exultation is the witness of our conscience that in holiness and sincerity of God, not in fleshly wisdom but in the grace of God, we have behaved ourselves in the world and especially towards you. For no other things are we writing to you except what you read, or indeed acknowledge, and I hope that to the end you will acknowledge, according as also you have acknowledged us in part; because a ground of exultation to you we are, as also you to us, in the day of our Lord Jesus.

And with this confidence I wished to come first to you, that you might have a second grace; and through you to pass on into Macedonia, and again from Macedonia to come to you, and by you to be sent forward to Judaea. While wishing this then, do you infer that I acted at all with levity? Or, the things which I purpose, is it according to flesh that I purpose them, that there may be with me the Yes yes and the No no? But faithful is God that our word to you is not Yes and No. For, Gods Son, Christ Jesus, who among you through us was proclaimed, through me and Silvanus and Timothy, did not become Yes and No, but in Him there has come to be Yes. For, so many promises as there are, in Him is the Yes, for which cause also through Him is the Amen, for glory to God through us. And He who confirms us with you for Christ, and has anointed us, is God, who also sealed us, and gave the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts.

And for my part I call upon God as witness upon my soul that it was to spare you that I did not come again to Corinth. Not that we are lords of your faith: but we are joint-workers of your joy. For by faith you stand. But I determined this with myself not again with sorrow to come to you. For, if it is I that make you sorrowful, who then is it that makes me glad, except he that is made sorrowful through me? And I wrote this very thing, lest having come I should receive sorrow from those from whom I must needs rejoice; being confident about all of you that my joy is that of you all. For out of much affliction and constraint of heart I wrote to you amid many tears, not that you may be made sorrowful, but that you may know the love which I have the more abundantly towards you.

From (2 we learn that at first Paul intended to go direct by sea from Ephesus to Corinth, then to Macedonia and back to Corinth, and then to Judaea. This purpose he had already abandoned when he wrote 1Co 16:5 ff. And the earnestness of his self-defence in 2Co 1:23 suggests that its abandonment had been quoted against him by enemies at Corinth as a mark of levity or guile. For his defence against this charge, he prepares the way by appealing in 2Co 1:12-14 to his conduct at Corinth: he then meets it expressly by appealing in 2Co 1:15-22 to the Gospel he preached; and by explaining in 2Co 1:23 to 2Co 2:4 his real motive.

2Co 1:12. Ground of Pauls confidence that he shall have the effective prayers of his readers, viz. his conduct towards them.

This our exultation: the joyful expectation just expressed.

Is the witness etc.: the strongest possible way of saying that Pauls joyful confidence is an immediate outflow of his consciousness (see 1Co 8:7 and Rom 2:15) of having lived a holy and pure life at Corinth. 2Co 1:11, in which this confidence found utterance, is a voice of his conscience bearing witness.

In holiness: with a constant aim to work out the purposes of God. See note, Rom 1:7.

Sincerity: as in 1Co 5:8.

Of God: wrought and given by God. Cp. peace of God, Php 4:7.

Fleshly wisdom: a faculty of choosing the ends and means best fitted to satisfy the desires, and supply the needs, of the body. Cp. Jas 3:15. See note, 1Co 3:4. Such wisdom takes into account only those ends and means which the eye can see and the hand can grasp.

In the grace of God; expounds of God above. Pauls heart tells him that he has acted with pure loyalty to God, not on principles which are wise from the limited point of view of the present bodily life: but he remembers that his holiness and sincerity are gifts to him of the undeserved favor of God. Cp. 1Co 15:10. And he has acted thus even in the present wicked world.

Especially to you: giving them during his long intercourse (Act 18:11) abundant proof of the principles which guide him.

2Co 1:13-14. No other things: in writing 2Co 1:12 he means nothing more than they read in the plain meaning of his words, or than they already acknowledge to be true. His words have no hidden meaning.

To the end: as in 1Co 1:8.

As also etc.: courteous acknowledgment that all the recognition Paul hopes for in the future he already has.

In part: either a partial recognition by the whole church, or a recognition by a part of the church. Probably the latter, in accordance with the severe censure of DIV. III.

Because a-ground-of-exultation to you etc.: a fact justifying the foregoing words. Just as the Corinthian Christians, who are a result of Pauls toil and a proof of the power of the Gospel, call forth in him joyful confidence in God, so Paul, as a great monument of the grace of God, calls forth in their hearts a similar confidence.

In the day etc.: 1Co 1:8 : suggested probably by you to us, (Php 2:16; 1Th 2:19,) but embracing also we are to you. They who save a soul from death lay up for themselves joy in that Day when the light of eternity will reveal the true value of a soul. And the same light will reveal the true grandeur of the heroes of the church, and thus increase the joy of those who have been associated with them on earth. Paul declares that, just as he already possessed in his readers that which would be a joy to him in the day of Christ, so they regarded him.

This justified him in saying that they had already recognized the truth of his words about himself in 2Co 1:11. Thus 2Co 1:12-13 support 2Co 1:11.

Notice how wisely and lovingly Paul approaches his defence of himself in 2Co 1:15-22. He appeals to his readers sympathy, by speaking of his great peril and its effect upon him. He wins their confidence by saying that he expects to be saved from future peril because they are praying for him. This reliance upon their prayers he justifies by saying that it is the voice of his conscience, of that faculty in man which knows the secrets of mans heart, declaring that he has acted towards the Corinthians as a man of God. For such a one, and one intimately associated with themselves, they cannot but pray. This testimony about himself Paul supports by saying that he means only what he says, and that his readers exultation about him, an exultation which looks forward to eternity, is a proof that they recognize the truth of his words.

2Co 1:15-16. The change from we, us, to I (to be noted carefully throughout the Epistle) marks a transition to matters pertaining only to Paul after matters pertaining to his helpers, especially Timothy who joins in this letter and who shared his labors at Corinth and his perils in Asia.

First to you: before going to Macedonia. 2Co 1:17 suggests that the apostles change of purpose had brought against him a charge of carelessness or vacillation, against which in 2Co 1:15 he begins to defend himself.

Grace, or favour, i.e. from God: cp. gift-of-grace, Rom 1:11; also Rom 15:29. Through Pauls visit Gods favor will reach and bless his readers.

A second grace: a second visit, i.e. one visit on the way to Macedonia and one on the return journey.

And through you etc.: continuation of Pauls wish.

To be sent forward etc.: the same wish is expressed in 1Co 16:6. This purpose to go to Judaea agrees with Act 21:15. To this plan of travel Paul was prompted by his confidence that he is to his readers a ground of exultation and that to the end they will recognize the godliness and purity of his conduct. He wished to see them as often as possible, and to have their assistance for his journey to Judaea.

2Co 1:17. Paul comes now to the charge against himself based on the foregoing purpose. Consequently, this purpose, afterwards abandoned must have been in some way, possibly in the lost letter, (1Co 5:9,) made known to the Corinthians.

With levity: hastily forming a purpose, and caring little whether it was accomplished.

Or etc.: another possible supposition. Paul answers his first question touching one special case in the past, I acted, by asking a second question about an abiding principle of his life, I purpose.

The Yes, yes and the No, no: emphatic assertion and emphatic denial of the same thing, of which one or other must necessarily be deliberate falsehood.

According to flesh: see Rom 1:4. If Paul makes directly contrary statements about his own purposes, his purposes must, since the Spirit of God is the Spirit of the Truth, be prompted by considerations drawn from the present bodily life. But, of such considerations, his whole career of hardship and peril was an evident and utter trampling under foot. It was therefore impossible for him to say one thing and mean another; and equally impossible to form a careless purpose.

May be with me: graphic picture of the inconsistency of Yes and No dwelling together in a man like Paul. This inconsistency is represented as an aim which Paul is supposed deliberately to set before himself, and for which he sinks down to worldly motives. For without such motives he could not be guilty of the insincerity with which he was charged.

2Co 1:18-20. Solemn answer to the foregoing questions, followed by proof.

Our word: of Paul and his colleagues, for all whom holds good Pauls reply to a charge made against himself alone. Our word, not words; puts together in one category all they say and write, including the Gospel. This all-embracing word is not contradiction, but harmony. Of this, the trustworthiness of God is a pledge. Cp. 1Co 1:9. For we cannot conceive that God who claims implicit belief would send, and attest by miraculous powers, untruthful ambassadors. Of 2Co 1:18; 2Co 1:19 is proof. See under 2Co 1:22.

God: placed before Son for emphasis, and taking up faithful is God. The full title of Christ is emphatic.

Among you through us: by the agency of Paul and his colleagues the incarnate Son of God was first proclaimed at Corinth.

Through me etc.: exact specification of us. Notice the agreement with Act 18:5.

Silvanus: in Acts, Silas: a prophet, and leading man in the church at Jerusalem, sent by that church to Antioch as bearer, in company with Paul and Barnabas, of the decree. After preaching for a time at Antioch and then returning to Jerusalem, he went with Paul on his second missionary journey. He and Timothy remained behind when Paul left Berea suddenly, but rejoined him at Corinth. See Act 15:22; Act 15:32; Act 15:40; Act 18:5. With this last verse agrees 1Th 1:1; 2Th 1:1.

Whether 1Pe 5:12 refers to the same man, we do not know: or why he disappears so suddenly and at the same time both from the Book of Acts and from the Epistles of Paul.

Did not become; i.e. prove itself to be.

The Son of God, whose advent as Jesus, the anointed King, Paul proclaimed at Corinth, and who is Himself the Word of God, did not prove Himself to be a self-contradictory word.

In Him there has come to be, in a sense unknown before, assertion; viz. the unwavering promise of God. This is explained and proved in 2Co 1:20.

In Him is the Yes. Christ incarnate was a solemn and costly declaration by God that He will fulfill every one of the ancient promises, a declaration not admitting denial of doubt.

The Amen: Rom 1:25 : the expression of mans faith that the promise will be fulfilled. Since in Christ God reasserts the old promises, also through Christ men believe them, and shout Amen.

Through us: by whose preaching the Amen has risen from the lips of many who never spoke it before. And this has been in order that glory may come to God, i.e. that His grandeur may shine forth and thus elicit admiration for men. Cp. Rom 15:7; Rom 15:9.

Through us; keeps up the connection between the Gospel and Paul, and it thus parallel to the same words in 2Co 1:19.

2Co 1:21-22. The source in God of that stability of Pauls character which excludes the possibility of levity or deception. We are thus led back to the faithfulness of God (2Co 1:18) with which the argument began.

Confirms us: gives to us an immovable Christian character. So 1Co 1:8; Col 2:7; Heb 13:9. Of such character trustworthiness is an essential element.

With you: courteous recognition that the readers have or may have the same stability.

For Christ; who is the aim of all Christian excellence. In all our relations to Christ God makes us stable.

And has anointed us: formal installation into a sacred office. So Luk 4:18; Exo 28:41; 1Sa 10:1; 1Sa 16:13; 1Ki 19:16. It recalls the divine authority of these heralds of Christ. With you is not repeated: for the readers did not hold the same sacred office.

Sealed us. See Rom 4:11; 1Co 9:2; Rev 7:3; Joh 6:27. God had not only formally installed them in the office of herald but had also put a visible mark upon or in them as specially His own. What the seal was, he need not say. The following words sufficiently suggest it. Cp. Eph 1:13; Eph 4:30. The Holy Spirit given to Paul and his colleagues was a divine mark, visible to himself and in some measure to those who knew him, that they belonged to God. Nay more. The Spirit in their hearts was an earnest of the good things for which they were sealed.

Earnest: English rendering of a Hebrew word (used in Gen 38:17) which through Phoenician sailors passed into Greek and Latin, denoting a sum of money paid at the time of purchase as a pledge of the whole price. The Spirit in the hearts of believers is the beginning and pledge of future blessedness. Cp. first-fruit of the Spirit, Rom 8:23. Day by day God confirms them, ever increasing their firmness: once for all He anointed and sealed them, and gave to them the Spirit.

Review of 2Co 1:18-22. The questions of 2Co 1:17 were their own answers. For, evidently, Pauls purposes were not prompted by the present bodily life. But he thinks it fit to record an emphatic denial followed by proof. And his denial covers everything said to his readers from time to time by himself and his colleagues. In proof that their word was not contradictory Paul reminds his readers that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who had become known to them through the agency of himself and his helpers, was Himself the solemn and unwavering voice of God to man, and had proved Himself to be such to the Corinthians. In Him every one of the old promises was reaffirmed, in a manner which called forth the response of faith. And at Corinth this response had been elicited by Pauls agency, for the glory of God. To the office of herald he and his companions had been anointed by God and in their hearts they bore the proof and pledge that they belong to Him and are heirs of infinite blessing. And Paul acknowledged that the unwavering stability which gave them a right to claim the confidence of their converts was Gods work in them day by day. Now, could it be supposed that heralds, to whom had been committed the proclamation of this unfailing word of God, could themselves be guilty of vacillation and deception? The dignity of the office in which God has placed them forbids the thought.

This argument warns us not readily to charge with frivolous or selfish motives those who bear, in the success of their Christian work a visible mark of Gods approval and support. And it is a warning to all engaged in such work, to speak and act, by exact truthfulness and by fulfilling all their promises as far as they can, worthily of Him whose sure word they proclaim as the ground of all our hope and the source of our life.

2Co 1:23. After showing in 2Co 1:18-22 how inconsistent with the Gospel he preached amid Gods evident approval and help would be a worldly change of purpose, Paul will explain in 2Co 1:23 to 2Co 2:4 his real motive for the change.

I for my part: about Paul alone, in contrast to the foregoing general statements. See 2Co 1:15. The solemn earnestness of the appeal implies that on the ground of his delay in coming to Corinth a serious charge had been brought against the Apostle. Cp. 2Co 1:17; 1Co 4:18.

Upon my soul: as in Rom 2:9. Laying open the seat of life to be smitten if he speak falsely, Paul appeals to God. In delaying his visit he was sparing them the punishment which, had he come, he would have been compelled to inflict. Cp. 1Co 4:21. Instead of punishing, he wrote (2Co 2:3) the First Epistle.

Come again; implies, taken with 2Co 2:1, that between the departure recorded in Act 18:18 and the writing of the First Epistle Paul had visited Corinth; and places the unrecorded visit in some relation to that which Paul now proposes. See under 2Co 2:1.

2Co 1:24. A corrective to 2Co 1:23. By using the word spare, which implies authority to punish, Paul does not mean that he can control their faith, and thus cut them off from Christ. In spite of all he can do, his readers may still take hold of Christ by faith and thus obtain eternal life. This ought never to be forgotten by those who pronounce an ecclesiastical sentence.

But joint-workers etc.: Pauls true relation to his readers and a reason for sparing them. He was working with them and was thus working out joy for them. For all growth in the Christian life in both individuals and communities, is an increase of joy. Only as a means of greater joy ought Christs servants to inflict pain; and therefore as little pain as possible to attain this end. This being Pauls mission, he delayed his visit to Corinth. For, had he come sooner, he would have been a messenger of sorrow. And he preferred to give pain by a letter rather than by a personal visit.

By faith you stand; justifies not lords etc. Open as they were to censure, they yet maintained, though imperfectly, their Christian position; and this by their belief of the words of Christ. And the dignity of their position he cannot forget, even while using words of authority.

2Co 2:1-2. Paul will now show how his delay was designed to spare his readers.

I determined: as in 1Co 2:2.

For myself: i.e. saving himself sorrow by sparing them.

With sorrow: which he will inflict, as proved by 2Co 2:2.

Again with sorrow; can only mean a second painful visit. For this only will account for the prominent and emphatic position of again. Otherwise this word is quite needless. For, since Paul has already been at Corinth, to go there now is necessarily to go again. Whereas again with sorrow has almost tragic force. Paul remembers a former sad visit, and fears that his next will be the same. This former visit cannot have been his first, recorded in Act 18:1 : for then there was no church at Corinth to whom or from whom he could give or receive sorrow. It must therefore have been a visit not mentioned in the Book of Acts. See further under 2Co 13:2. For the foregoing decision 2Co 2:2 is a reason, betraying Pauls earnest love for his readers. To give them sorrow, is to inflict sadness upon the only persons who are a joy to himself. In other words, he has no human joy except the fellowship and love of his converts; and therefore cannot lightly make them sad.

2Co 2:3-4. To Pauls resolve (2Co 2:1) 2Co 2:3 a adds what he actually did to accomplish it.

This very thing: his First Epistle, which in thought now lies before him.

Lest having come: he wrote instead of coming.

I should have sorrow: in contrast to makes you glad in 2Co 2:2.

I must needs etc.] To rejoice in his converts was to Paul an absolute necessity. Cp. 1Th 3:8, we live if you stand in the Lord.

Being confident etc.: a confidence which moved him to write instead of incurring the risk of a painful visit. To avoid what his confidence in his readers tells him would be sorrow to them as well as to himself, he wrote instead of coming.

All of you: even the erring ones, who in their heart of hearts loved Paul.

Out of much affliction etc.: state of mind which moved him to write, given in support of the just mentioned aim of his letter. His sorrow and tears prove the purity of his motive.

Constraint: cognate with holds fast in 2Co 2:14. A great burden resting upon his heart, and holding him as if in bonds, forced him to write. There is nothing to suggest a reference here to anything except the First Epistle. For its tone is condemnatory almost throughout. Would that all Christian reproof had a similar motive!

Amid many tears: interesting mark of the intensity of the apostles feelings, and a close coincidence with Act 20:19; Act 20:31.

That you may be made sorrowful: an evitable and foreseen result of the letter, but not its aim. Love to the Corinthians moved him to write and guided his pen. And he wrote that his love might reveal itself to them.

Specially towards you: as in 2Co 1:12. As he writes to, and thinks of, them, he feels how specially dear to him are his converts at Corinth.

With 2Co 2:1-4 agrees 1Co 16:5, which shows that while writing the letter Paul had already given up his purpose of coming direct to Corinth.

From 2Co 1:23 to 2Co 2:4, and from this whole epistle more than any other, we gain an insight into the inner life of Paul. Little did we think as we read his former letter and felt the severity of its indignant reproofs that it was prompted by deep sorrow and moistened with tears.

While purposing to come direct to Corinth Paul received bad news about the state of the church. Perceiving that to come now would be a visit of sorrow, not to himself only but to them, he resolved to delay his visit. And, while thinking of punishment, he remembers that, apart from anything he can do, his converts at Corinth can and do take hold of Christ by faith, and thus maintain, in spite of many imperfections, their place in the family of God. His work is simply to increase their joy. Already he has come once to Corinth as a bearer of sorrow; and he does not wish to do so again. And for this he has a personal motive. To grieve them is to cast a shadow on the only earthly source of joy to himself. To avoid this he wrote to them, moved by an assurance that in writing he was seeking the joy both of himself and them. The burden of heart which moved him to write and the tears which fell as he wrote testify that he had no other motive, and that his letter was an outflow of his special love to his converts at Corinth.

Fuente: Beet’s Commentary on Selected Books of the New Testament

CHAPTER 2

SYNOPSIS OF THE CHAPTER

i. He declares that he had not come to them through fear of causing sadness to himself and to them.

ii. He exhorts them (ver. 6) to re-admit the fornicator, on his repentance, who had been excommunicated by him (1 Cor. v.), and (ver. 10) he absolves him from the sentence of excommunication and from his penance.

iii. He tells them (ver. 14) that he sheds everywhere a good odour of Christ, which is life to the good and faithful, and death to the evil and unbelieving.

Ver. 1.-But I determined this with myself. I determined not to come to you from a desire to spare you. Cf. chap. 1. 23.

Ver. 2.–For if I make you sorry. Although I made you sorry by rebuking you in my First Epistle, yet I am now made glad with you in seeing the repentance and sorrow, both of yourselves and the fornicator. The “for if” is not causal but explanatory.

Who is he then that maketh me glad, but the same which is made sorry by me? He who is grieved and made penitent by my reproof is the one who most makes me glad, i.e., the incestuous person whom I excommunicated (1Co 1:5).

Ver. 3.-Lest when I came I should have sorrow. I wished by sending you a letter first to rebuke and correct your evil ways, lest I should be forced to do so in person, which would be very painful to me.

Having confidence in you all. I had complete confidence that you would at once take away whatever might displease me, because you regard my joy as yours, and my grief therefore as yours also. I knew, therefore, that what displeased me would displease you. S. Paul says ail this to prepare the Corinthians for his arrival, and to induce them to amend themselves, lest he should be deeply grieved at seeing them not yet amended.

Ver. 5.-He hath not grieved me. The fornicator did not grieve me only.

But in part. He grieved, says Anselm, many other good men as well as me; those, viz., who banished from their society with ignominy the man that I had already excommunicated.

That I may not overcharge you all. Overcharge you by putting on you the suspicion that there are not many who are grieved on account of the incestuous person. In the First Epistle (v. 2) he seems to have charged them all with consenting to, or with treating lightly, the sin of incest.

Ver. 6.-Sufficient to such a man is this punishment. The public separation and shame of excommunication. Hence it follows that the man repented after his excommunication, and is here absolved by the Apostle.

Ver. 7.-So that contrariwise ye ought rather to forgive him. Forgive him the rest of his term of penance by admitting him to your fellowship again. Cf. ver. 10.

Ver.8.-That ye would confirm your love toward him. By declaring in public assembly of the Church that you once more embrace him as a brother. There is an allusion in the Greek verb to the fixed days of assembly for legal trials or elections, and the Apostle therefore alludes to the fixed days of assembly in the Church, and bids the Corinthians confirm their love then toward the incestuous person by re-admitting him.

Ver. 9.-For to this end also did I write. Viz., this Epistle, to the end that I might induce you to confirm your love toward him.

That I might know the proof of you. A proof of your obedience.

Ver. 10.-To whom ye forgive anything, I forgive also. You have asked through Titus that he may be forgiven, and I make the same request of you. So Theodoret explains these words. Cf. also chap. vii. 7. It is clear from ver. 7 that this forgiveness had not yet taken place, and the meaning therefore is: As, when you were gathered together and my spirit I excommunicated him (1 Cor. 5), so now do I join with you in forgiving him, as you will forgive him at my exhortation.

Observe against Luther that this Epistle was written to the rulers of the Church, or rather to the Church itself, that it might exercise this power of absolving, not corporately, but by the prelates. Yet out of courtesy he wishes even the laity to co-operate in the absolution, and by their consent, prayers, desire, and compassion to forgive this scandal which had been given to them and the Church, and to remit the due canonical penance or punishment. Cf. 1Co 5:4. Hence he goes on to say, “For your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ.” S. Paul here asserts that he forgave in the exercise of his power and jurisdiction as the vicar of Christ; and he orders his sentence to be publicly proclaimed in the Corinthian Church, by the bishop or some other officer, and implies that the Corinthians forgave merely through their prayers, consent, and execution of the sentence of absolution. S. Chrysostom lays this down clearly when he says: “As when he ordered the man to be cut off he did not allow that with them was any authority to forgive, since he said, ‘I have judged to deliver such an one to Satan,’ so again did he admit them into partnership with him when he said, ‘When ye are gathered together to deliver him.’ He was aiming at two ends, one that the sentence might be passed, and the other that it should not be carried out without them, lest he should seem to do them an injury by so acting. Neither does he pass sentence alone, lest the Apostle should seem to be isolated and to despise them.”

If I forgave anything, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ. I forgave it, i.e., I determined to forgive it (ver. 7), and now by this letter and by the bearer, whether Titus or some other, I forgive it. This is a Hebraism, by which the past is put for the present.

It may be asked, What was it that the Apostle forgave? I reply 1. that this forgiveness consisted in giving absolution from excommunication, and at the same time, or rather still more, in giving full indulgence for the incest, i.e., remission of all the penalty due because of it. It is evident from 1 Cor. v. that the punishment inflicted was excommunication, and with it the penalty of ignominious exclusion from the Church, and the handing over of his body to be afflicted by Satan. Here, however, he absolves him from every chain by which he had been bound.

2. To forgive, properly speaking, refers to guilt or punishment. Of excommunication alone is it strictly said, “I absolve.”

3. He re-admits him to grace, both on account of the zeal of the Corinthians and the contrition of the incestuous person, and relaxes his punishment and shame and rebuke, lest from too much sorrow he should despair. This indulgence is referred to by the word anything. Whatever part of the punishment you have asked may be forgiven him, I forgive him.

4. He remits the punishment not merely, as Calvin thinks, before the Church, but in God’s judgment: this is expressed by the phrase in the person of Christ, otherwise there would not have been any indulgence or mercy shown here to the fornicator. It is better to be visited on earth with infamy and corporal punishment than before he tribunal of God to be handed over to the fire, either of purgatory of hell.

Hence S. Thomas and others rightly lay down that the Apostle and the Church give indulgences. So, in olden times, martyrs, when in prison, sent to the Bishops men who had lapsed, praying them to relax their punishment, as appears from Tertullian (ad Martyr. c. 1), Cyprian (Epp. 11, 21, 22); and the Council of Nice (c. xi. and xii.) grants to those that have lapsed that, according to the willingness with which they bore the punishment inflicted on them, might the Bishop give indulgence. Cf. Baronius, vol. i. p. 592. Observe that the reason for giving indulgence was the fear that the penitent might despair. Hence, formerly, indulgence was not given unless a good part of the penalty had been paid, and that lest the vigour of discipline and of satisfaction, which is the third part of repentance, should be relaxed. Cf. S. Cyprian (ad Martyr. lib. iii. Epp. 6). The Council Trent (sess. xxv.), in its decree on indulgences, orders that moderation should be shown in giving indulgences, according to the ancient practice of the Church, lest ecclesiastical discipline should, by excessive leniency, be rendered lax.

If I forgave anything. He speaks modestly of his generosity. Hence he adds that he did it in the Person of Christ.

In the person of Christ. This may be understood (1.) in the presence of Christ. So Theodoret and Vatablus. This rendering is eagerly adopted by Calvin and Beza, and read as if it meant, I forgive him ex animo, really and not feignedly. (2.) Properly it means, “I forgive him by the authority of Christ entrusted to me, who said, ‘Whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.'” So Theophylact renders it: “I forgive him just as if Christ had forgiven him: just as a regent acts with the authority of a king, and orders, passes laws, and pardons in his stead.” As S. Paul, in 1 Cor. v., had excommunicated the fornicator in the name of Christ, so here, by the same authority, he sets him free, just as any one who might have been condemned by the regent could not be pardoned but by the regent himself.

Ver. 11.-Lest Satan should get an advantage over us. Lest we be deceived, and lest that fornicator be, by excessive severity, driven by Satan to despair. The Greek verb means, lest we be seized unjustly, and taken possession of by Satan, just as misers, usurers, and tyrants defraud, and rob, and oppress. Hence Ambrose renders it, “Lest we be possessed by Satan.” For, as Theophylact says, when Satan catches and deceives souls, he does not seize what is his own but what is ours and Christ’s. Hence Tertullian (de Pudicit. c. xiii.) reads for the following clause: “We are not ignorant of his devices,” “We are not ignorant of his robberies.”

For we are not ignorant of his devices. Plutarch relates an excellent saying of Chabrias, that “he is the best commander who knows intimately the plans of the enemy.” In like manner he is the best Christian soldier and captain who knows thoroughly the devices and machinations of Satan. He transforms himself into an angel of light, that that which is a suggestion of our enemy the devil may seem to be the counsel of a friendly angel. We often experience suggestions of evil surmisings, bitterness of soul, anger, moroseness, cowardice, and we think that we are moved by some good cause and by reason, and that these things come forth from our own minds, when all the time they proceed from the devil, who suggests them to our ruin. The Christian, therefore, should, in such cases, reflect whether these suggestions are in accordance with charity, humility, patience, grace, and the law of Christ, and if he finds them to be opposed, let him be sure that they are of the devil: if he is in doubt, let him take counsel with his confessor, his superior, or some prudent man. S. Anthony, by long experience, learnt this and taught it: he was in the habit of constantly laying bare and explaining to his disciples, the arts and devices of the devil, and of pointing out the way to defeat them, as we read in the life of him by Athanasius. S. Francis, too, frequently did the same thing, and so freed many of his followers from the devil’s temptations, as S. Bonaventura relates (Visa, lib. i. c. 11).

In this way, then, Satan was instigating the leaders of the Corinthian Church to show anger and indignation against this fornicator for having so foully stained the first purity of his Church, to the end that, being deprived of all comfort and hope, he might lose all heart and become desperate. Paul saw through this intent of Satan, and here exposes it, and bids them receive the fornicator once more into grace, and give him, on his penitence, pardon and remission.

Vers. 12, 13.-Furthermore, when I came to Troas . . . I had no rest in my spirit, because I found not Titus my brother. S. Jerome (ad Hedibiam) says that Titus was S. Paul’s interpreter, and explained the sublime truths taught by him in Greek worthy of the subject. There was, too, another reason why Paul went to Troas to meet Titus, viz., that he was anxious to hear from Titus, whom he had sent to Corinth, the state of the Church there, before he himself fulfilled his promise of returning thither. Hence, in chap. vii. 6, he says that he had been comforted in Macedonia by the arrival of Titus, who brought him word of the sorrow of the Corinthians and of their desire to see him. Titus, however, seems to have reported to Paul that the time was not yet ripe for his return to Corinth. Paul, therefore, postponed his visit to Corinth, and sent on this letter to pave the way for him, to and correct the failings of the Corinthians.

Ver. 14.-Now thanks be unto God which always causeth us to triumph in Christ. The Syriac and Theophylact render this “triumphs in us,” i.e., makes us conspicuous to all. A triumph is the procession of a victorious commander through the midst of the city with his trophies and other signs of victory. But those things which seem to us to be suffering and shame are our glory and triumph, says Theophylact. Secondly, Anselm understands it of God triumphing over the devil in us or through us. Cf. Col 2:15.

The Apostle seems to have had to bear sharp persecution in Macedonia, and, indeed, in vii. 5 he says that he had suffered there every kind of tribulation: without were fightings, within were fears; but God’s grace gloriously and triumphantly overcame them all. S. Jerome (Ep. 150 ad Hedibiam, qu. xi.) says beautifully that the Apostle here gives thanks to God for counting him worthy to be the subject of the triumph of His Son over so many persecutions and evils, which he underwent in his task of converting the Gentiles to Christ. “For the triumph of God,” says S. Jerome, “is the suffering of the martyrs for the name of Christ, the shedding of their blood, and their joy in the midst of torture. For when anyone saw the martyrs stand firm, and so perseveringly endure tortures, and glory in their sufferings, the odour of the Knowledge of Christ was shed abroad among the Gentiles, and the half unconscious thought would arise that if the Gospel were not true it would never be proof against death.” The preaching of the Gospel therefore triumphs in the Apostles, inasmuch as in it faith overcomes unbelief, truth falsehood, the love of Christ the hatred of the scornful, patience every kind of suffering and persecution, and even death itself.

Ver.15.-We are unto God a sweet savour of Christ. Or, according to the Latin, a sweet odour. We scatter by word and example a good report of Christ to the honour of God. A good odour is exhaled from special kinds of herbs and such things as sweet spices. Such was the fame of the Apostles and of their preaching, such was the glory and honour that sprang from their virtues and was due to their merits. Hence the bride, i.e., the Church, in Song vii. 1, compares herself to a garden of sweet spices in which there is to be seen the beauty, pleasantness, and fair order of the growing herbs and sweetly scented flowers which exhale their delicious fragrance. This is what Christ orders in S. Matt. v. i6, where by another metaphor glory and good name are called the splendour that flows forth from the light of good works.

S. Bernard (Serm. xii. in Cantic.) says excellently: “Paul was a chosen vessel, truly a sweet-smelling vessel, filled with pleasant odours and with every fair colour for the painter, for he was a good odour of Christ in every place. Truly, far and wide was the fragrance of his abundant sweetness scattered from that breast which so anxiously and for all the Churches. For see what spices and aromas he had stored up within: ‘I die daily,’ he says, ‘for your glory,’ and, ‘Who is weak and am I not weak?'”

Observe again that, as the more spices are crushed the greater is the fragrance they exhale, so is it with Christ, His Apostles and Martyrs, and all the Saints: the greater the persecutions and tribulations that pressed them and, as it were, crushed them, the sweeter was the odour that their virtue gave forth.

Cf. Ambrose and Anselm, and S. Bernard (Serm. 71 in Cantic.), who discourses of the spiritual colour and odour of virtues from the text, “I am the Rose of Sharon and the Lily of the valley.” He says: “The character has its colours and its odours; odour in the good report it bears, colour in the conscience within. The good intention of your heart gives its colour to your work; the example of your modesty and virtue gives it its odour. The righteous is in himself a fair lily, to his neighbour he is full of sweet odours. To our neighbour we owe it that we maintain a good reputation, to ourselves that we are careful to have a conscience void of offence.” S. Jerome also, alluding to the same passage, says: “The life and conversation of a Bishop, pastor, or teacher ought to be such that all his goings out and comings in, and all his works should be redolent of heavenly grace.”

Heathen writers also employ this image of odour in rebuking evil livers. Martial, e.g., says that “he smells not sweet who always smells sweet,” implying that that man’s chastity was to be suspected who was always endeavouring to overwhelm the foulness of his own shameful disease by some artificial scent. Certainly we read of the virgin Catherine of Sienna, that she was wont to close her nostrils when she met any one that was impure, as though the smell of his wickedness was grievous to her, God giving this most chaste virgin perception of such things. S. Basil (Ep. 175) relates that some bird-catchers were wont to dip the wings of tame doves in some sweet liquid which was pleasant to other doves, so as to allure them and catch them. So must the Christian do: by the sweet odour of his virtues he must allure the lost and bring them to Christ. So did the virgin Cecilia win to Christ her spouse Valerianus, by causing him, on the first night of their marriage life, to smell the most fragrant odour of her chastity, as though it were the scent of spring roses.

Ver. 16.-To the one we are the savour of death unto death, and to the other the savour of life unto life.” “We are,” says Theophylact, “a royal censer, and wherever we go we carry with us the odour of the spiritual ointment, i.e., in every place we scatter the good fumes of the knowledge of God.” Again says cumenius: “As the fragrance of ointment nourishes the dove and destroys the beetle, and as the light of the sun gladdens the eyes that are healthy and hurts those that are weak, as fire purifies gold and destroys straw, so is Christ ruin to the evil, resurrection to the good.” Observe the Hebraism, an odour of death unto death, i.e., a deadly odour bringing death. The fragrance of the fame of the life, preaching, and conversion of the Apostles breathed life into the good, death into the evil; for the wicked, unable to bear the splendour of such holiness, hardened themselves the more in their wickedness, envy, or hatred. But Clement of Alexandria (Pd. lib. ii.) reads, “odour from death” and “odour from life,” which means: The preaching of the Cross and death of Christ is an odour to the unbelievers arising from the death of Christ, and tends to the ruin of those who regard that death merely as a death, and find it accordingly foolishness or a stumbling-block: but to them that believe it is an odour from life, inasmuch as they embrace the life offered to them in this death. For the death of Christ was the cause of his resurrection to a glorious life, and in us it is the cause of our resurrection to the life of grace in this world, and the life of glory in the world to come.

And who is sufficient for these things? The ministers, says Ambrose, who are in every place a good odour of Christ are as few as they are insufficient.

Ver. 17.-For we are not as many which corrupt the word of God. The particle for denotes that Paul, with the few other Apostles, was by God’s grace a fitting minister of Christ, and scattered wherever he went the good odour of the Gospel, while many others were unfitting preachers of the Gospel, of evil odour and of bad report

The Latin for corrupt is “adulterate,” which, Salmeron says, denotes the act of one who has connection with a woman that is not his wife; so does he who mingles truth and falsehood adulterate the word of God. S. Gregory (Morals, lib. xxii. c. 12) says: ‘To adulterate the word of God is either to think of it otherwise than it is, or to seek from it, not spiritual fruit but the corrupt offspring of human praise. To speak in sincerity is to say nothing but what one ought, i.e., to seek always the glory of the Creator.” Again (Morals, lib. xvi. c. 2 5) he says: “An adulterer seeks not offspring but carnal delight; and whoever perversely serves vain-glory is rightly said to adulterate the word of God, because it is not his aim to beget children to God by sacred eloquence but to display his own knowledge. Whosoever therefore is drawn to speak by the desire of vain-glory spends his labour rather on pleasure than generation.”

But the Greek word used here is not the word for committing adultery, but one that denotes to traffic as an inn-keeper, and S. Paul contrasts with this sincere dealing. They make the word of God a matter of traffic, who, like inn-keepers, preach the Gospel for gain, and look at it entirely from the point of view of their own profit. Still the Latin accurately translates the passage, because, as inn-keepers often adulterate the wine that they sell to increase their profits, so do greedy and false preachers of the Gospel mingle with it their own gain, and so adulterate that Gospel which should be pure, and be purely referred to God’s glory. “War is not a matter of traffic,” said King Pyrrhus, “but of fighting.” Cowardly captains, from dread of battle, stave it off by payment of money; others sell the loyalty they owe to their leader, and, like inn-keepers, arrange with the enemy the price of the cities and fortresses entrusted to their charge.

Again, these same false preachers, in order to add to their gain and to win the applause of men, often teach and preach what they see is pleasing to great men or to the people, and tickle their ears, and so corrupt the Gospel with false and empty doctrines. The Apostle seems to be here censuring incidentally his enemies the false Apostles, who were adulterating Christianity with Judaism, and who are severely reproved by him in chaps. x. and xi. Hence, in chap. iv. 2, he explains “corrupt” to mean “handle the word of God deceitfully,” and he contrasts himself and other sincere teachers of the Gospel with these deceitful dealers in chap. iii.

But as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ. I am not an inn-keeper, as are the false apostles, but a sincere preacher of the word of God, preaching nothing but what I have learned from God and have received at His mouth as His ambassador. I know too, and constantly keep in mind and reflect that I stand and preach in the presence of God, and that all that I do or say is noted by Him and will have to be accounted for by me in the hour of death.

In Christ, says S. Jerome (ad Hedibiam), is the same as for Christ; or it may mean “of Christ and His religion.” The sense then is: I preach the doctrine of Christ alone, I spread the honour and glory of Christ alone. Or in Christ may again be taken to mean that he speaks and preaches in the truth, faithfulness, and sincerity of Christ. S. Chrysostom once more takes it to mean through Christ and His grace.

Fuente: Cornelius Lapide Commentary

2:1 But I determined this with myself, that I would not come again to you in {a} heaviness.

(a) Causing grief among you, which he would have done if he had come to them before they had repented.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

The chapter division is artificial. Paul now clarified what he did mean in 2Co 1:23. When had Paul come to them in sorrow? There is no valid basis for describing his first visit to Corinth, during which he established the church, as a sorrowful one. He had experienced some hard times during the 18 months (Act 18:11) he was there, but generally this visit was pleasant. Paul later referred to his next visit to Corinth as his third (2Co 12:14; 2Co 13:1). Consequently we have reference here to a second visit not recorded in the Book of Acts. The commentators disagree over whether it took place before or after the writing of 1 Corinthians. I believe the evidence indicates it took place after that writing. [Note: Cf. F. F. Bruce, ed., 1 and 2 Corinthians, pp. 183-84.]

Note that Paul "determined" not to come again in sorrow. This is not the language of a vacillator.

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

24

Chapter 5

A PASTORS HEART.

2Co 1:23-24; 2Co 2:1-4 (R.V)

WHEN Paul came to the end of the paragraph in which he defends himself from the charge of levity and untrustworthiness by appealing to the nature of the Gospel which he preached, he seems to have felt that it was hardly sufficient for his purpose. It might be perfectly true that the Gospel was one mighty affirmation, with no dubiety or inconsistency about it; it might be as true that it was a supreme testimony to the faithfulness of God; but bad men, or suspicious men, would not admit that its character covered his. Their own insincerities would keep them from understanding its power to change its loyal ministers into its own likeness, and to stamp them with its own simplicity and truth. The mere invention of the argument in vv. 18-20 {2Co 1:18-20} is of itself the highest possible testimony to the ideal height at which the Apostle lived; no man conscious of duplicity could ever have had it occur to him. But it had the defect of being too good for his purpose; the foolish and the false could see a triumphant reply to it; and he leaves it for a solemn asseveration of the reason which actually kept him from carrying out his first intention. “I call God to witness against my soul, that sparing you I forbore to come to Corinth.” The soul is the seat of life; he stakes his life, as it were, in Gods sight, upon the truth of his words. It was not consideration for himself, in any selfish spirit, but consideration for them, which explained his change of purpose. If he had carried out his intention, and gone to Corinth, he would have had to do so, as he says in 1Co 4:21, with a rod, and this would not have been pleasant either for him or for them.

This is very plain-plain even to the dullest; the Apostle has no sooner set it down than he feels it is too plain. “To spare us,” he hears the Corinthians say to themselves as they read: “who is he that he should take this tone in speaking to us?” And so he hastens to anticipate and deprecate their touchy criticism: “Not that we lord it over your faith, but we are helpers of your joy; as far as faith is concerned, your position, of course, is secure.”

This is a very interesting aside; the digressions in St. Paul, as in Plato, are sometimes more attractive than the arguments. It shows us, for one thing, the freedom of the Christian faith. Those who have received the Gospel have all the responsibilities of mature men; they have come to their majority as spiritual beings; they are not, in their character and standing as Christians, subject to arbitrary and irresponsible interference on the part of others. Paul himself was the great preacher of this spiritual emancipation: he gloried in the liberty with which Christ made men free. For him the days of bondage were over; there was no subjection for the Christian to any custom or tradition of men, no enslavement of his conscience to the judgment or the will of others, no coercion of the spirit except by itself. He had great confidence in this Gospel and in its power to produce generous and beautiful characters. That it was capable of perversion also he knew very well. It was open to the infusion of self-will; in the intoxication of freedom from arbitrary and unspiritual restraint, men might forget that the believer was bound to be a law to himself, that he was free, not in lawless self-will, but only in the Lord. Nevertheless, the principle of freedom was too sacred to be tampered with; it was necessary both for the education of the conscience and for the enrichment of spiritual life with the most various and independent types of goodness; and the Apostle took all the risks, and all the inconveniences even, rather than limit it in the least.

This passage shows us one of the inconveniences. The newly enfranchised are mightily sensible of their freedom, and it is extremely difficult to tell them of their faults. At the very mention of authority all that is bad in them, as well as all that is good, is on the alert; and spiritual independence and the liberty of the Christian people have been represented and defended again and again, not only by an awful sense of responsibility to Christ, which lifts the lowliest lives into supreme greatness, but by pride, bigotry, moral insolence, and every bad passion. What is to be done in such cases as these, where liberty has forgotten the law of Christ? It is certainly not to be denied in principle: Paul, even with the peculiar position of an apostle, and of the spiritual father of those to whom he writes, {1Co 4:15} does not claim such an authority over their faith-that is, over the people themselves in their character of believers as a master has over his slaves. Their position as Christians is secure; it is taken for granted by him as by them; and this being so, no arbitrary ipse dixit can settle anything in dispute between them; he can issue no orders to the Church such as the Roman Emperor could issue to his soldiers. He may appeal to them on spiritual grounds; he may enlighten their consciences by interpreting to them the law of Christ; he may try to reach them by praise or blame; but simple compulsion is not one of his resources. If St. Paul says this, occupying as he does a position which contains in itself a natural authority which most ministers can never have, ought not all official persons and classes in the Church to beware of the claims they make for themselves? A clerical hierarchy, such as has been developed and perfected in the Church of Rome, does lord it over faith; it legislates for the laity, both in faith and practice, without their co-operation, or even their consent; it keeps the cactus fidelium, the mass of believing men, which is the Church, in a perpetual minority. All this, in a so-called apostolic succession, is not only anti-apostolic, but anti-Christian. It is the confiscation of Christian freedom; the keeping of believers in leading-strings all their days, lest in their liberty they should go astray. In the Protestant Churches, on the other hand, the danger on the whole is of the opposite kind. We are too jealous of authority. We are too proud of our own competence. We are too unwilling, individually, to be taught and corrected. We resent, I will not say criticism, but the most serious and loving voice which speaks to us to disapprove. Now liberty, when it does not deepen the sense of responsibility to God and to the brotherhood-and it does not always do so-is an anarchic and disintegrating force. In all the Churches it exists, to some extent, in this degraded form; and it is this which makes Christian education difficult, and Church discipline often impossible. These are serious evils, and we can only overcome them if we cultivate the sense of responsibility at the same time that we maintain the principle of liberty, remembering that it is those only of whom he says, “Ye were bought with a price” (and are therefore Christs slaves), to whom St. Paul also gives the charge: “Be not ye slaves of men.”

This passage not only illustrates the freedom of Christian faith, it presents us with an ideal of the Christian ministry. “We are not lords over your faith,” says St. Paul, “but we are helpers of your joy.” It is implied in this that joy is the very end and element of the Christian life, and that it is the ministers duty to be at war with all that restrains it, and to co-operate in all that leads to it. Here, one would say, is something in which all can agree: all human souls long for joy, however much they may differ about the spheres of law and liberty. But have not most Christian people, and most Christian congregations, something here to accuse themselves of? Do not many of us bear false witness against the Gospel on this very point? Who that came into most churches, and looked at the uninterested faces, and hearkened to the listless singing, would feel that the soul of the religion, so languidly honored, was mere joy-joy unspeakable, if we trust the Apostles, and full of glory? It is ingratitude which makes us forget this. We begin to grow blind to the great things which lie at the basis of our faith; the love of God in Jesus Christ-that love in which He died for us upon the tree-begins to lose its newness and its wonder; we speak of it without apprehension and without feeling; it does not make our hearts burn within us any more; we have no joy in it. Yet we may be sure of this-that we can have no joy without it. And he is our best friend, the truest minister of God to us, who helps us to the place where the love of God is poured out in our hearts in its omnipotence, and we renew our joy in it. In doing so, it may be necessary for the minister to cause pain by the way. There is no joy, nor any possibility of it, where evil is tolerated. There is no joy where sin has been taken under the patronage of those who call themselves by Christs name. There is no joy where pride is in arms in the soul, and is reinforced by suspicion, by obstinacy, even by jealousy and hate, all waiting to dispute the authority of the preacher of repentance. When these evil spirits are overcome, and cast out, which may only be after a painful conflict, joy will have its opportunity again, -joy, whose right it is to reign in the Christian soul and the Christian community. Of all evangelistic forces, this joy is the most potent; and for that, above all other reasons, it should be cherished wherever Christian people wish to work the work of their Lord.

After this little digression on the freedom of the faith, and on joy as the element of the Christian life, Paul returns to his defense. “To spare you I forbore to come; for I made up my own mind on this, not to come to you a second time in sorrow.” Why was he so determined about this? He explains in the second verse. It is because all his joy is bound up in the Corinthians, so that if he grieves them he has no one left to gladden him except those whom he has grieved-in other words, he has no joy at all. And he not only made up his mind definitely on this; he wrote also in exactly this sense: he did not wish, when he came, to have sorrow from those from whom he ought to have joy. In that desire to spare himself, as well as them, he counted on their sympathy; he was sure that his own joy was the joy of every one of them, and that they would appreciate his motives in not fulfilling a promise, the fulfillment of which in the circumstances would only have brought grief both to them and him. The delay has given them time to put right what was amiss in their Church, and has ensured a joyful time to them all when his visit is actually accomplished.

There are some grammatical and historical difficulties here which claim attention. The most discussed is that of the first verse: what is the precise meaning of ? There is no doubt that this is the correct order of the words, and just as little, I think, that the natural meaning is that Paul had once visited Corinth in grief, and was resolved not to repeat such a visit. So the words are taken by Meyer, Hofmann, Schmiedel, and others. The visit in question cannot have been that on occasion of which the Church was founded; and as the connection between this passage and the last chapter of the First Epistle is as close as can be conceived (see the Introduction), it cannot have fallen between the two: the only other supposition is, that it took place before the First Epistle was written. This is the opinion of Lightfoot, Meyer, and Weiss; and it is not fatal to it that no such visit is mentioned elsewhere-e.g., in the book of Acts. Still, the interpretation is not essential; and if we can get over 2Co 13:2, it is quite possible to agree with Heinrici that Paul had only been in Corinth once, and that what he means in ver. 1 here is: “I determined not to carry out my purpose of revisiting you, in sorrow.”

There is a difficulty of another sort in ver. 2 {2Co 2:2}. Ones first thought is to read …, as a real singular, with a reference, intelligible though indefinite, to the notorious but penitent sinner of Corinth. “I vex you, I grant it; but where does my joy come from-the joy without which I am resolved not to visit you-except from one who is vexed by me?” The bad mans repentance had made Paul glad, and there is a worthy considerateness in this indefinite way of designating him. This interpretation has commended itself to so sound a judge as Bengel, and though more recent scholars reject it with practical unanimity, it is difficult to be sure that it is wrong. The alternative is to generalize the , and make the question mean: “If I vex you, where can I find joy? All my joy is in you, and to see you grieved leaves me absolutely joyless.”

A third difficulty is the reference of in ver. 3 {2Co 2:3}. Language very similar is found in ver. 9 ( ) {2Co 2:9}, and again in ( ) 2Co 7:8-12. It is very natural to think here of our First Epistle. It served the purpose contemplated by the letter here described; it told of Pauls change of purpose; it warned the Corinthians to rectify what was amiss, and so to-order their affairs that he might come, not with a rod, but in love and in the spirit of meekness; or, as he says here, not to have sorrow, but, what he was entitled to, joy from his visit. All that is alleged against this is that our First Epistle does not suit the description given of the writing in ver. 4 {2Co 2:4}: “out of much affliction and anguish of heart I wrote unto you with many tears.” But when those parts of the First Epistle are read, in which St. Paul is not answering questions submitted to him by the Church, but writing out of his heart upon its spiritual condition, this will appear a dubious assertion. What a pain must have been at his heart, when such passionate words broke from him as these: “Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you?-What is Apollos, and what is Paul?-With me it is a very little thing to be judged by you.-Though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I begot you through the Gospel.-I will know, not the speech of them that are puffed up, but the power.” Not to speak of the fifth and sixth chapters, words like these justify us in supposing that the First Epistle may be, and in all probability is; meant.

Putting these details aside, as of mainly historical interest, let us look rather at the spirit of this passage. It reveals, more clearly perhaps than any passage in the New Testament, the essential qualification of the Christian minister-a heart pledged to his brethren in the love of Christ. That is the only possible basis of an authority which can plead its own and its Masters cause against the aberrations of spiritual liberty, and there is always both room and need for it in the Church. Certainly it is the hardest of all authorities to win, and the costliest to maintain, and therefore substitutes for it are innumerable. The poorest are those that are merely official, where a minister appeals to his standing as a member of a separate order, and expects men to reverence that. If this was once possible in Christendom, if it is still possible where men secretly wish to shunt their spiritual responsibilities upon others, it is not possible where emancipation has been grasped either in an anarchic or in a Christian spirit. Let the great idea of liberty, and of all that is cognate with liberty, once dawn upon their souls, and men will never sink again to the recognition of anything as an authority that does not attest itself in a purely spiritual way. “Orders” will mean nothing to them but an arrogant unreality, which in the name of all that is free and Christian they are bound to contemn. It will be the same, too, with any authority which has merely an intellectual basis. A professional education, even in theology, gives no man authority to meddle with another in his character as a Christian. The University and the Divinity Schools can confer no competence here. Nothing that distinguishes a man from his fellows, nothing in virtue of which he takes a place of superiority apart: on the contrary, that love only which makes him entirely one with them in Jesus Christ, can ever entitle him to interpose. If their joy is his joy; if to grieve them, even for their good, is his grief; if the cloud and sunshine of their lives cast their darkness and their light immediately upon him; if he shrinks from the faintest approach to self-assertion, yet would sacrifice anything to perfect their joy in the Lord, -then he is in the true apostolical succession; and whatever authority may rightly be exercised, where the freedom of the spirit is the law, may rightly be exercised by him. What is required of Christian workers in every degree-of ministers and teachers, of parents and friends, of all Christian people with the cause of Christ at heart-is a greater expenditure of soul on their work. Here is a whole paragraph of St. Paul, made up almost entirely of “grief” and “joy”; what depth of feeling lies behind it! If this is alien to us in our work for Christ, we need not wonder that our work does not tell.

And if this is true generally, it is especially true when the work we have to do is that of rebuking sin. There are few things which try men, and show what spirit they are of, more searchingly than this. We like to be on Gods side, and to show our zeal for Him, and we are far too ready to put all our bad passions at His service. But these are a gift which He declines. Our wrath does not work His righteousness-a lesson that even good men, of a kind, are very slow to learn. To denounce sin, and to declaim about it, is the easiest and cheapest thing in the world: one could not do less where sin is concerned, unless he did nothing at all. Yet how common denunciation is. It seems almost to be taken for granted as the natural and praiseworthy mode of dealing with evil. People assail the faults of the community, or even of their brethren in the Church, with violence, with temper, with the One, often, of injured innocence. They think that when they do-so they are doing God service; but surely we should have learned by this time that nothing could be so unlike God, so unfaithful and preposterous as a testimony for Him. God Himself overcomes evil with good; Christ vanquishes the sin of the world by taking the burden of it on Himself; and if we wish to have part in the same work, there is only the same method open to us. Depend upon it, we shall not make others weep for that for which we have not wept; we shall not make that touch the hearts of others which has not first touched our own. That is the law which God has established in the world; He submitted to it Himself in the person of His Son, and He requires us to submit to it. Paul was certainly a very fiery man; he could explode, or flame up, with far more effect than most people; yet it was not there that his great strength lay. It was in the passionate tenderness that checked that vehement temper, and made the once haughty, spirit say what he says here: “Out of much affliction and anguish of heart, I wrote unto you with many tears, not that you might be grieved, but that you might know the love which I have more abundantly toward you.” In words like these the very spirit speaks which is Gods power to subdue and save the sinful.

It is worth dwelling upon this, because it is so fundamental, and yet so slowly learned. Even Christian ministers, who ought to know the mind of Christ, almost universally, at least in the beginning of their work, when they preach about evil, lapse into the scolding tone. It is of no use whatever in the pulpit, and of just as little in the Sunday-school class, in the home, or in any relation in which we seek to exercise moral authority. The one basis for that authority is love; and the characteristic of love in the presence of evil is not that it becomes angry, or insolent, or disdainful, but that it takes the burden and the shame of the evil to itself. The hard, proud heart is impotent; the mere official is impotent, whether he call himself priest or pastor; all hope and help lie in those who have learned of the Lamb of God who bore the sin of the world. It is soul-travail like His, attesting love like His, that wins all the victories in which He can rejoice.

Fuente: Expositors Bible Commentary