Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 2 Corinthians 1:15
And in this confidence I was minded to come unto you before, that ye might have a second benefit;
15 24. St Paul’s reason for putting off his coming
15. And in this confidence ] It was the conviction of this community of interest which made St Paul desire to visit Corinth. It was (see 2Co 1:23) the consciousness that all his converts did not realize it which made him anxious to try the effect of a letter first. See ch. 2Co 2:3, 2Co 7:8-12.
I was minded to come unto you before ] i.e. before going to Macedonia.
that you might have a second benefit ] Lit. grace. These words would be more intelligible had they been placed at the end of the next verse. By the ‘second benefit’ is meant the effects of the visit which the Apostle hoped to have paid to the Corinthians after his return from Macedonia. It has been explained, (1) of the favour of the Apostle’s presence, (2) of the outpouring of God’s grace or favour which St Paul, as an Apostle of Christ, had the privilege of imparting. See Rom 1:11. Tyndale, who is followed by Cranmer and the Geneva Version, renders one pleasure more. Wiclif, the (Rhemish a) secunde grace.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
And in his confidence – In this confidence of my integrity, and that you had this favorable opinion of me, and appreciated the principles of my conduct. I did not doubt that you would receive me kindly, and would give me again the tokens of your affection and regard. In this Paul shows that however some of them might regard him, yet that he had no doubt that the majority of the church there would receive him kindly.
I was minded – I willed ( eboulomen); it was my intention.
To come unto you before – Tyndale renders this: the other time. Paul refers doubtless to the time when he wrote his former Epistle, and when it was his serious purpose, as it was his earnest wish, to visit them again; see 1Co 16:5. In this purpose he had been disappointed, and he now proceeds to state the reasons why he had not visited them as he had purposed, and to show that it did not arise from any fickleness of mind. His purpose had been at first to pass through Corinth on his way to Macedonia, and to remain some time with them; see 2CO 1:16. Compare 1Co 16:5-6. This purpose he had now changed; and instead of passing through Corinth on his way to Macedonia, he had gone to Macedonia by the way of Troas 2Co 2:12; and the Corinthians having, as it would seem, become acquainted with this fact, had charged him with insincerity in the promise, or fickleness in regard to his plans. Probably it had been said by some of his enemies that he had never intended to visit them.
That ye might have a second benefit – Margin, grace. The word used here charis is that which is commonly rendered grace, and means probably favor, kindness, good-will, beneficence; and especially favor to the undeserving. Here it is evidently used in the sense of gratification, or pleasure. And the idea is, that they had been formerly gratified and benefitted by his residence among them; he had been the means of conferring important favors on them, and he was desirous of being again with them, in order to gratify them by his presence, and that he might be the means of imparting to them other favors. Paul presumed that his presence with them would be to them a source of pleasure, and that his coming would do them good. It is the language of a man who felt assured that he enjoyed, after all, the confidence of the mass of the church there, and that they would regard his being with them as a favor. He had been with them formerly almost two years. His residence there had been pleasant to them and to him; and had been the occasion of important benefits to them. He did not doubt that it would be so again. Tyndale renders this: that ye might have had a double pleasure. It may be remarked here that several mss. instead of charin, grace, read charan, joy.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 15. And in this confidence] Under the conviction or persuasion that this is the case; that ye exult in us, as we do in you;
I was minded] I had purposed to come to you before, as he had intimated, 1Co 16:5; for he had intended to call on them in his way from Macedonia, but this purpose he did not fulfil; and he gives the reason, 2Co 1:23.
A second benefit] He had been with them once, and they had received an especial blessing in having the seed of life sown among them by the preaching of the Gospel; and he had purposed to visit them again that they might have a second blessing, in having that seed watered. Instead of , grace or benefit, several MSS. read joy, pleasure; but the word grace or benefit, seems to express the apostle’s meaning best.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Being confident that my presence with you would be matter of rejoicing both to you and also to me, I purposed: to come unto you before I went into Macedonia, visiting you shortly in my journey thither, that so you might have, a second longer visit in kindness to you. We find, Act 16:9, that Paul received his first call into Macedonia in a vision; we read again of his passing through Macedonia to go to Jerusalem: the apostle seemeth to speak here of the latter.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
15. in this confidenceof mycharacter for sincerity being “acknowledged” by you (2Co1:12-14).
was mindedI wasintending.
before“to comeunto you before” visiting Macedonia (where he now was). CompareNote, see on 1Co 16:5; alsosee on 1Co 4:18, which, combinedwith the words here, implies that the insinuation of some at Corinth,that he would not come at all, rested on the fact of his having thusdisappointed them. His change of intention, and ultimateresolution of going through Macedonia first, took place before hissending Timothy from Ephesus into Macedonia, and therefore (1Co4:17) before his writing the first Epistle. Compare Act 19:21;Act 19:22 (the order there is”Macedonia and Achaia,” not Achaia, Macedonia);Act 20:1; Act 20:2.
that ye might have a secondbenefitone in going to, the other in returning from,Macedonia. The “benefit” of his visits consisted in thegrace and spiritual gifts which he was the means of imparting(Rom 1:11; Rom 1:12).
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And in this confidence I was minded,…. Being fully persuaded of your affection for me, as having been instrumental in the conversion of many of you, and of your esteem of me as a faithful and upright minister of the word, and of your being my rejoicing in the day of Christ, I was desirous, and had determined, and so promised,
to come to you before; when I sent my first epistle to you, or before now, or before I went into Macedonia; and what I now say was the sincere intention of my mind; I thought really to have done what I had such an inclination to: and my view in it was,
that you might have a second benefit; the meaning of which according to some is, first by his letter to them, and then by his presence with them; or as others, one benefit when he should pass by them to Macedonia, and a second, when he should return to them from thence, according to the following verse; or rather, as the first benefit which they received from him, and under his ministry, was their conversion, so this second benefit may design their edification, and establishment in the faith, their growth in grace, and improvement in spiritual knowledge.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
| Paul’s Sincerity and Affliction. | A. D. 57. |
15 And in this confidence I was minded to come unto you before, that ye might have a second benefit; 16 And to pass by you into Macedonia, and to come again out of Macedonia unto you, and of you to be brought on my way toward Juda. 17 When I therefore was thus minded, did I use lightness? or the things that I purpose, do I purpose according to the flesh, that with me there should be yea yea, and nay nay? 18 But as God is true, our word toward you was not yea and nay. 19 For the Son of God, Jesus Christ, who was preached among you by us, even by me and Silvanus and Timotheus, was not yea and nay, but in him was yea. 20 For all the promises of God in him are yea, and in him Amen, unto the glory of God by us. 21 Now he which stablisheth us with you in Christ, and hath anointed us, is God; 22 Who hath also sealed us, and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts. 23 Moreover I call God for a record upon my soul, that to spare you I came not as yet unto Corinth. 24 Not for that we have dominion over your faith, but are helpers of your joy: for by faith ye stand.
The apostle here vindicates himself from the imputation of levity and inconstancy, in that he did not hold his purpose of coming to them at Corinth. His adversaries there sought all occasions to blemish his character, and reflect upon his conduct; and, it seemed, they took hold of this handle to reproach his person and discredit his ministry. Now, for his justification,
I. He avers the sincerity of his intention (v. 15-17), and he does this in confidence of their good opinion of him, and that they would believe him, when he assured them he was minded, or did really intend, to come to them, and that with the design, not that he might receive, but that they might receive a second benefit, that is, a further advantage by his ministry. He tells them that he had not herein used lightness (v. 17), that, as he aimed not at any secular advantage to himself (for his purpose was not according to the flesh, that is, with carnal views and aims), so it was not a rash and inconsiderate resolution that he had taken up, for he had laid his measures thus of passing by them to Macedonia, and coming again to them from Macedonia in his way to Judea (v. 16), and therefore they might conclude that it was for some weighty reasons that he had altered his purpose; and that with him there was not yea yea, and nay nay, v. 17. He was not to be accused of levity and inconstancy, nor a contradiction between his words and intentions. Note, Good men should be careful to preserve the reputation of sincerity and constancy; they should not resolve but upon mature deliberation, and they will not change their resolves but for weighty reasons.
II. He would not have the Corinthians to infer that his gospel was false or uncertain, nor that it was contradictory in itself, nor unto truth, 2Co 1:18; 2Co 1:19. For if it had been so, that he had been fickle in his purposes, or even false in the promises he made of coming to them (which he was not justly to be accused of, and so some understand his expression, v. 18, Our word towards you was not yea and nay), yet it would not follow that the gospel preached not only by him, but also by others in full agreement with him, was either false or doubtful. For God is true, and the Son of God, Jesus Christ, is true. The true God, and eternal life. Jesus Christ, whom the apostle preached, is not yea and nay, but in him was yea (v. 19), nothing but infallible truth. And the promises of God in Christ are not yea and nay, but yea and amen, v. 20. There is an inviolable constancy and unquestionable sincerity and certainty in all the parts of the gospel of Christ. If in the promises that the ministers of the gospel make as common men, and about their own affairs, they see cause sometimes to vary from them, yet the promises of the gospel covenant, which they preach, stand firm and inviolable. Bad men are false; good men are fickle; but God is true, neither fickle nor false. The apostle, having mentioned the stability of the divine promises, makes a digression to illustrate this great and sweet truth, that all the promises of God are yea and amen. For, 1. They are the promises of the God of truth (v. 20), of him that cannot lie, whose truth as well as mercy endureth for ever. 2. They are made in Christ Jesus (v. 20), the Amen, the true and faithful witness; he hath purchased and ratified the covenant of promises, and is the surety of the covenant, Heb. vii. 22. 3. They are confirmed by the Holy Spirit. He does establish Christians in the faith of the gospel; he has anointed them with his sanctifying grace, which in scripture is often compared to oil; he has sealed them, for their security and confirmation; and he is given as an earnest in their hearts,2Co 1:21; 2Co 1:22. An earnest secures the promise, and is part of the payment. The illumination of the Spirit is an earnest of everlasting life; and the comforts of the Spirit are an earnest of everlasting joy. Note, The veracity of God, the mediation of Christ, and the operation of the Spirit, are all engaged that the promises shall be sure to all the seed, and the accomplishment of them shall be to the glory of God (v. 20) for the glory of his rich and sovereign grace, and never-failing truth and faithfulness.
III. The apostle gives a good reason why he did not come to Corinth, as was expected, v. 23. It was that he might spare them. They ought therefore to own his kindness and tenderness. He knew there were things amiss among them, and such as deserved censure, but was desirous to show tenderness. He assures them that this is the true reason, after this very solemn manner: I call God for a record upon my soul–a way of speaking not justifiable where used in trivial matters; but this was very justifiable in the apostle, for his necessary vindication, and for the credit and usefulness of his ministry, which was struck at by his opposers. He adds, to prevent mistakes, that he did not pretend to have any dominion over their faith, v. 24. Christ only is the Lord of our faith; he is the author and finisher of our faith, Heb. xii. 2. He reveals to us what we must believe. Paul, and Apollos, and the rest of the apostles, were but ministers by whom they believed (1 Cor. iii. 5), and so the helpers of their joy, even the joy of faith. For by faith we stand firmly, and live safely and comfortably. Our strength and ability are owing to faith, and our comfort and joy must flow from faith.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
Confidence (). This late word (LXX Philo, Josephus) is condemned by the Atticists, but Paul uses it a half dozen times (3:4 also).
I was minded to come ( ). Imperfect, I was wishing to come, picturing his former state of mind.
Before unto you ( ). This was his former plan () while in Ephesus to go to Achaia directly from Ephesus. This he confesses in verse 16 “and by you to pass into Macedonia.”
That ye might have a second benefit ( ). Or second “joy” if we accept with Westcott and Hort. This would be a real second blessing (or joy) if they should have two visits from Paul.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
1) “And in this confidence,” (kai taute te pepoithesei) and (it was) in this persuasion,” confidence that they would acknowledge his sincerity before he went into Macedonia.
2) “I was minded to come unto you before,” (eboulomen proteron pros humas elthein) “I formerly intended to come to you,” of his own accord, or because he wanted to do it. He considered crossing the Aegean sea from Ephesus to Corinth, then visiting them again on his return from a tour of Macedonia later, Act 19:1-41.
3) “That ye might have a second benefit,” (hina deuteran chasin schete) “In order that you all might have a second benefit, or good blessing,” by two visits from him on this tour instead of one. He appears to have communicated this to them in a former letter, 1Co 5:9. But he received a bad letter revealing quarrels, wranglings, contentions, and moral and doctrinal error among them. That report led him to write 1Corinthians in reply, 1Co 1:11, in which letter he indicated his change of former plans to visit them only on his return from Macedonia, 1Co 16:5.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
15. In this confidence. After having given them reason to expect that he would come, he had subsequently changed his intention. This was made an occasion of calumny against him, as appears from the excuse that he brings forward. When he says that it was from relying on this confidence that he formed the purpose of coming to them, he indirectly throws the blame upon the Corinthians, inasmuch as they had, by their ingratitude, hindered, to some extent, his coming to them, by depriving him of that confidence.
That ye might have a second benefit The first benefit had been this — that he had devoted himself for the entire period of a year and six months (Act 18:11) to the work of gaining them to the Lord; the second was their being confirmed, by means of his coming to them, in the faith which they had once received, and being stirred up by his sacred admonitions to make farther progress. Of this latter benefit the Corinthians had deprived themselves, inasmuch as they had not allowed the apostle to come to them. They were paying, therefore, the penalty of their own fault, and they had no ground for imputing any blame to Paul. If any one, however, prefers, with Chrysostom, to take χάριν (benefit) as used instead of καράν , (joy,) I do not much object to it. (275) The former interpretation, however, is more simple.
(275) “Most modern Commentators explain the χάριν gift or benefit; but the ancient Commentators, and some modern ones, as Wolf and Schleus, gratification for χαράν. It should seem to mean benefit generally, every spiritual advantage, or gratification from his society, imparted by his presence.” — Bloomfield One MS. reads χαράν Kypke, who renders χάριν, joy adduces instances in support of this meaning of χάρι ”, though acknowledged to be unusual, from Plutarch, Polybius, and Euripides. The phrase is rendered in Tyndale’s version, (1534,) and also in Cranmer’s, (1539,) and Geneva, (1557,) versions — one pleasure moare. — Ed.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
Appleburys Comments
Explanation of His Deferred Visit
Scripture
2Co. 1:15-24. And in this confidence I was minded to come first unto you, that ye might have a second benefit; 16 and by you to pass into Macedonia, and again from Macedonia to come unto you, and of you to be set forward on my journey unto Judaea. 17 When I therefore was thus minded, did I show fickleness? or the things that I purpose, do I purpose according to the flesh, that with me there should be the yea yea and the nay nay? 18 But as God is faithful, our word toward you is not yea and nay. 19 For the Son of God, Jesus Christ, who was preached among you by us even by me and Silvanus and Timothy, was not yea and nay, but in him is yea. 20 For how many soever be the promises of God, in him is the yea: wherefore also through him is the Amen, unto the glory of God through us. 21 Now he that established us with you in Christ, and anointed us, is God; 22 who also sealed us, and gave us the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts.
23 But I call God for a witness upon my soul, that to spare you I forbare to come unto Corinth. 24 Not that we have lordship over your faith, but are helpers of your joy: for in faith ye stand fast.
Comments
And in this confidence.Paul was confident that the Corinthians understood that he was their spiritual father and that they were his spiritual children. See 1Co. 4:14-16. With this in mind, he had planned at first to come to Corinth and after passing through their area to go on to Macedonia and then to come back from Macedonia to Corinth in order that he might visit them twice. In this way he would demonstrate his good toward them. This differed from the original only in that it would give the Corinthians a second benefit, that is, they would have the privilege of having the apostle with them on two occasions. It suggests a deeper concern for them than for the Macedonians. It was not to be understood as cancelling his original plan. See 1Co. 16:5-7. He wanted them to continue to understand that what he had written in the first letter about his intention to visit them would be fulfilled.
set forward on my journey.This does not seem to suggest any financial aid, since Paul had made a rule in dealing with Corinth to accept no support from them, lest his motives be misunderstood or he should give occasion to the false teachers to justify their desire to be paid.
Luke tells of an occasion when Paul met with the brethren from Ephesus on his way to Jerusalem. He told how Paul spoke to them and then knelt down and prayed with them. All wept and fell on his neck and kissed him, sorrowing most of all for his word that they would not be able to see him again. See Act. 20:17-28. Paul probably had a meeting of this sort in mind when he suggested coming back to Corinth and have them send him on his way to Judea.
When I was thus minded.The defense which Paul makes at this point is against anticipated objections. This is common in his writings because he knew the minds of those to whom he wrote. An example of it is given in Rom. 6:1-23; Rom. 7:1-25 where he answered possible objections on the part of his readers.
There is no indication that the Corinthians had known anything about this plan to visit them twice until they read it in this letter. Timothy, of course, had been sent to Corinth and was with Paul as he was writing II Corinthians. See 1Co. 4:16-17; 1Co. 16:10. There is no indication, however, that he knew anything about the plan mentioned in the above verses while he was at Corinth.
Titus also had been sent to Corinth. This fact is mentioned in 2Co. 2:13; 2Co. 7:6-14; 2Co. 8:6; 2Co. 8:16; 2Co. 8:23, and 2Co. 12:18. There is no indication that Titus could have known that Paul was planning to make a trip first to Corinth and then to Macedonia. Paul had not been able to make contact with him until he found him in Macedonia, from which point he was writing this second Corinthian letter.
It seems best then to assume that Paul was anticipating possible criticism of the plan which he had not been able to put into effect. The Corinthians were being informed about it for the first time as they read this letter. He wanted them to know about it because he wanted them to understand his love for them as their father in the gospel. He also knew that there were some among them who assumed that he would not come at all. See 1Co. 4:18.
did I show fickleness?The word translated fickleness means lightness. Some assume that Paul was vacillating as if he had been saying one thing but was now saying something entirely different. Paul explained this word by using two other expressions: (1) purpose according to flesh; and (2) the yea, yea, and the nay, nay.
According to flesh seems to suggest the manner in which men make plans without considering their relation to God, a thing that Paul never did. See 2Co. 1:12 on fleshly wisdom. James mentions those who say today or tomorrow we will go into the city and spend a year there and trade and get gain. (Jas. 4:13). He adds that because a man doesnt know what the morrow will bring, he ought to say, If the Lord will, we shall both live and do this or that (2Co. 4:15). When Paul wrote to the Corinthians about his proposed trip he said I will come to you shortly if the Lord will (1Co. 4:19). Later, he spoke of his desire to spend some time with them and added, If the Lord permit (1Co. 16:7).
James also throws light on the meaning of the yes, yes. See Jas. 5:12. It is in a different context, for James is reminding the brethren that they are not to swear by heaven or earth or anything else. That is to say, they could not bind heaven and earth to make up any deficiency in the truthfulness of their statement. Therefore their yes was to be yes. This was to be a positive affirmation that what they are saying was true or that their no meant just no. But Paul is talking about his plan that had to do with future events. He could not, as men might do, say Yes affirming by this yes that he did not need to consider the Lords will. The defense that Paul is making in these somewhat difficult phrases (that is, difficult for us to understand, not for the Corinthians) seems to be against the possible charge that he made his plan lightly, not considering the will of God. That this is so, seems to be clear from the fact that he stated these questions in forms that required No for an answer. He wasnt treating the matter lightly, was he? The only answer that could be given was No. He didnt make the plan according to men who disregard God, did he? The answer was No. His Yes wasnt Yes without considering Gods will, was it? Again, the only answer was No.
But as God is faithful.The questions which Paul had just asked required a negative answer. To make sure that the Corinthians understood it, he added, Our word to you is not Yes and No. This does not suggest vacillation, for it is based on the principle of the trustworthiness of God. The visit he planned to make to Corinth and had deferred was based on the principle of trustworthiness of God whom he served as an apostle of Jesus Christ through the will of God.
For the Son of God, Jesus Christ.Having stated that his plan to visit Corinth had not been made lightly, he now proves his trustworthiness by a three-fold argument: (1) that based on his preaching; (2) that based on Gods promises; and (3) that based on the evidence of Gods approval on his ministry.
Paul and his companions, Silvanus and Timothy, had preached the Son of God, Jesus Christ, in the midst of the Corinthians. This was not a matter on their part of Yes and No, for in Himthat is, in Christis the Yes. The certaintyvalidity, trustworthinessof the message of the apostle and his companions was not a matter of mens speech but of Christ Himself.
For how many soever be the promises of God.God is trustworthy; the message concerning His Son, Jesus Christ, is trustworthy; the promises of God which are fulfilled in His Son are likewise trustworthy.
Paul and those associated with him could wholeheartedly say Amen to this.
Now he that establisheth us with you in Christ.God is the One who established both Paul and the Corinthians in their relationship to Christ, and in the day of our Lord Jesus (2Co. 6:14).
The Corinthians had gotten their sins washed away by the blood of the Lamb, when they were baptized into Christ; they were separated from their sins; they were pardoned in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God. See 1Co. 6:11. They could depend on that relationship because they were instructed by the inspired apostle of Christ. Paul had obeyed the gospel which Ananias had preached to him when he said, Now why do you delay? Arise and get yourself baptized and wash away your sins, because you called on the name of the Lord (Act. 22:16). They could be sure about their relationship to Christ because of their obedience to the word that had come from Him.
anointed us.Anointing had to do with ones installation in office. In the Old Testament times, both prophets, priests, and kings were anointed as they were installed in office. Christ Himself was anointed with the Holy Spirit as He began His ministry as Prophet, Priest, and King. See Luk. 4:18; Act. 10:38. The apostles were baptized in the Holy Spirit so that they might speak as the Spirit gave them utterance and reveal the message from God. See 1Co. 2:6-16.
When Paul insists that God anointed us, in all probability he was referring to the whole apostolic group. When John wrote to the church mentioning the anointing which they had from the Holy One, he referred to this power that came to the apostles who were baptized in the Holy Spirit and those upon whom they laid their hands in order that they might bring the inspired teaching to all who would hear. John affirms that the message thus spoken was true. See 1Jn. 2:19-27. In the same way, the Corinthians could trust what Paul said because he was an apostle of Christ through the will of God.
who also sealed us.Paul tells the Ephesians that they had been sealed by the promised Holy Spirit. See Eph. 1:13. The Holy Spirit through the apostles by the word which they preached had produced in them the identifying marks of a Christian, that is, Christian character and conduct. See Gal. 5:22-24; Rev. 7:3.
Paul was speaking of those things that marked him as a genuine apostle of Jesus Christ. His word was trustworthy. See 2Co. 12:12 where he reminded them that the signs of an apostle were wrought among them. They were the signs and wonders and mighty works which he had done in the midst of them.
Since Gods approval rested on him, they could trust his word and be assured of the sincerity of his plan to come to them.
and gave us the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts.Paul also refers to earnest in 2Co. 5:5 and Eph. 1:14. It ought not to be confused with firstfruits (1Co. 15:20) which suggest that Christs resurrection indicates that all the dead will be raised.
Earnest is usually defined as money paid down to guarantee the full payment of a debt. An instance in which the word meant a pledge, token or guarantee that ones word would be made good is mentioned in Gen. 38:17-18; Gen. 38:25. This meaning fits well each of its uses in the New Testament in which it is used. It is something that guarantees that Gods promise will be fulfilled.
The earnest or the guarantee is the Spirit, that is, the Holy Spirit is the One who gives the guarantee. In this instance, the guarantee had to do with Pauls apostleship and trustworthiness of his word. See 1Co. 2:6-16 where Paul argues for his inspiration as well as that of the other apostles. He declared that the Spirit had revealed the mind of God to them, and that they spoke that revelation in words that were Spirit-taught. He affirmed that wethe apostleshave the mind of Christ. He knew that Christ, by the Spirit, had guided him into all the truth (Joh. 16:13-14). He was aware of the fact that the Corinthians could trust his word because it was guaranteed by the Holy Spirit, for it came from God through the Holy Spirit.
in our hearts.that is, in the hearts of the inspired apostles. The inspired message was in their minds, for they had the mind of Christ. This is not intangible subjectivism, but an awareness on the part of the apostles that they were actually being used by the Holy Spirit to reveal the truth of God. The accompanying miracles gave objective testimony to this truth. See Heb. 2:3-4.
But I call God for a witness.In this most solemn manner Paul assured the Corinthians that they could understand that he was telling the truth. The trip that he was planning had to be deferred because he had not learned of their reaction to the instruction given in First Corinthians. He had asked, Shall I come to you with a rod of chastisement, or shall I come in love and a spirit of gentleness? It was to spare them the embarrassment and sorrow of having to be reproved again, that he deferred the trip until he could hear from Titus and know about the situation at Corinth. See 2Co. 2:12 and 2Co. 7:6.
Not that we have lordship over your faith.In First Corinthians, Paul had reminded them that he and Apollos were ministersdeaconsthrough whom they had believed. See 1Co. 3:5. They were responsible to the Lord, not Paul, for their belief. He challenges them in the closing words of this second letter to test out their ownselves to see if they were in the faithfaith, that is, in the Lord Jesus Christ. All that Paul could do was to work for their joy, by encouraging them to remain faithful to the Lord and instructing them in their privileges and responsibilities as Christians. He couldnt believe for them.
for in faith you stand.They had taken that stand when Paul preached the word of Christ to them. They had demonstrated that faith is obedience to Christ. There was no other foundation on which to build.
This in no way suggests that Paul was unaware of the fact that some were ready to listen to the appeal of the false teachers who were disturbing them, as the closing chapters of the letter clearly indicate. It does show his concern that they remember that their relation to Christ, the Lord, depended on faith expressed in obedience to Him.
Summary
Paul began his second epistle in a manner that was intended to insure a favorable reception on the part of his readers. In his usual, gracious manner he addressed them as the church of God. The brethren at Corinth were made aware of the fact that what he said to them was intended for all the saints in the whole of Achaia.
While this letter was to be critical of many things that were going on in Corinth, Paul began by telling them how God had comforted him in his sufferings for Christ. The merciful Father had done this so that he might be able to help others in their trials. He had a sure hope for them because he knew that as they were sharers of the sufferings so also they would be of the comfort.
He mentioned the thing he had suffered in Asia. It had been beyond his ability to endure; he utterly despaired of life. This was like a death sentence to him. He dared not trust in himself, but in God who raises the dead. God delivered him from such a death. He was confident that God would do so again if he should face the same trial again. The Corinthians had prayed for his deliverance which made this gift from God a matter of thanksgiving on the part of many people.
Paul had been conscientious in his conduct everywhere, and especially at Corinth. He wanted them to know that he intended to keep his promise to visit them again just as he had written in his first epistle. A delay had become necessary, but he would come again to Corinth.
They, for the most part, had understood that this promise had been made by their spiritual father. They were his beloved children. They could be proud that he was their father in the gospel, and he could be proud of his relation to them in the Day of our Lord Jesus.
Confident that they understood this relationship, Paul had planned to visit them first, then go to Macedonia and again return to them. They would have the privilege of helping him on his journey to Judea. Such a visit would prove his kindly feeling for them. They would have no reason to be jealous over his attention to other churches.
Was such a plan mere words spoken lightly with no intention of carrying out the plan? Nothing in his preaching could lead them to suppose he had been so fickle. The promises of God which they had heard from him were trustworthy. Moreover, God had established him in his relationship to them as the apostle through whom they had learned about Christ. He had equipped him to speak the wisdom from God. God had given him the identifying marks of an apostle. As an inspired apostle, he had in his mind and heart the message which the Holy Spirit had revealed to him on which he based his confidence in God and His promises. No word of his was spoken lightly.
Why then had he delayed his coming? He called upon God to testify for him that it was to spare them from sorrow. The delay would give them time to examine their position and make sure about their faith in the Lord.
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
(15) And in this confidence.What has been said hitherto paves the way for the explanation of his apparent change of purpose which he is anxious to give, though he will not formally plead at the bar of the tribunal of those who accused or suspected him. It was because he trusted that they would judge him rightly that he had done that which had led some to judge him wrongly. His plan had been at first to go straight by sea from Ephesus to Corinth, then to pass on to Macedonia, thence to return to Corinth, and thence set sail for Jerusalem. When he wrote 1Co. 16:5-6, he had already modified his plan by deciding to go to Macedonia first. His original scheme had shown his wish to see as much of the Corinthians as possible. They were to have two visits (a second favour), and not one only. Had he shown less regard, he asks, in the change with which he had been taunted?
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
PART FIRST.
PAUL’S MAINTENANCE OF HIS APOSTLESHIP, 2Co 1:15 to 2Co 11:17.
I. DEFENCE OF HIS IMPUGNED CHANGE OF PLAN OF TRAVEL, 2Co 1:15 to 2Co 2:17.
1. His change of plan was not of fickle will, but of divine motive, 2Co 1:15-22.
15. This confidence Of our mutual boast of each other. Before, qualifies minded, and should be placed before it. This purpose was before his first epistle, and was a subordinate part of his plan, as stated Act 19:21.
A second benefit A double benefit, by a double visit, as described next verse.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
He Explains That The Change of Plans He Made Was Not Due To Fickleness
‘And in this confidence I was minded to come first to you, that you might have a second benefit, and by you to pass into Macedonia, and again from Macedonia to come to you, and of you to be set forward on my journey to Judea.’
It was because of his confidence in his message, and in their readiness to receive it, that originally he had intended to come to them before going to Macedonia, so that they might have the benefit (charis – something resulting from God’s grace) of a second visit. And then after going to Macedonia to return to them for a third visit, prior to going to Judea (among other things with the collection money for the poor in Judea – 1Co 16:1). Why then did he not do so?
In 2Co 1:23 he will tell them that it was in fact to spare them in the light of what he would have to say as a result of the way they had treated him. But first he feels that he must establish the question of fickleness theologically. He is shocked to think that they might see him, the bearer of the true Gospel, as fickle. Fickleness, he wants them to know, is in fact a stranger to him (as it should be to us) because of Whom he serves. For central to being a servant of God is to be reliable. Although he will then point out that, for those who serve God, their plans must always be thoughtfully carried through and be subject to His will.
‘Of you to be set forward.’ The verb indicates that they were to arrange his journey to Judea, sending companions with him to carry ‘the collection’ for the poor in Jerusalem (1Co 16:1), and making all provision for those who went with him. Act 20:2-4 may suggest that this never happened, but Luke is not necessarily being exhaustive there about who accompanied Paul.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
No fickleness can be charged to the apostle:
v. 15. And in this confidence I was minded to come unto you before, that ye might have a second benefit;
v. 16. and to pass by you into Macedonia, and to come again out of Macedonia unto you, and of you to be brought on my way toward Judea.
v. 17. When I, therefore, was thus minded, did I use lightness? or the things that I purpose, do I purpose according to the flesh, that with me there should be yea, yea, and nay, nay?
v. 18. But as God is true, our word toward you was not yea and nay.
v. 19. But the Son of God, Jesus Christ, who was preached among you by us, even by me and Silvanus and Timotheus, was not yea and nay, but in Him was yea.
v. 20. For all the promises of God in Him are yea, and in Him Amen, unto the glory of God by us. Because Paul had changed his original plan as to his visit to Corinth, some of his personal enemies in that city were trying to represent him as an unreliable person. But he has his defense ready: And in this confidence it was my will first to come to you. In the assurance of their ready acknowledgment of his unblamable conduct, and that the Corinthians, in proper gratitude, considered him a cause of their glorying, Paul’s plan had been to journey to Macedonia over Corinth, to stop off there first, in order that they might again, for the second time, have the benefit and the blessing of his presence and instruction. This plan had been abandoned even when he wrote the first letter, 1Co 16:5. On his return from Macedonia he had planned to come to Corinth once more, and to make the journey to Judea from there, accompanied by a delegation from their congregation. He confesses to a change of his plans, but that fact does not argue for fickleness of purpose.
This charge St. Paul rejects with solemn emphasis: When now I had this intention, did I make use of levity? Or did I make my proposition, my plan, according to the flesh, as the unregenerate people make plans and promises, that with me yes and no amount to about the same thing? Are my plans made like those of a man of the world to be changed at my own caprice, affirmative today, negative tomorrow? The insinuation of his enemies was that Paul either did not reflect sufficiently upon his plan and the way in which he might carry it out, or he had changed it without valid reasons and therefore had little regard to the binding quality of promises. But Paul contends that his adversaries are in the wrong when they impute such a fickle behavior to him. Inconstancy is indeed the characteristic of the carnal, selfish person, and he cannot be relied upon. But in his own case this deduction is false, as Paul solemnly states: But as God is faithful, our word toward you is not yes and no. As surely as God is faithful and true, all the words and instructions which he made use of in the case of the Corinthians were reliable. This wider protestation is purposely used by the apostle; for if he actually were unreliable in such small matters as promises, his personal affairs, then he might be untrustworthy in the greater matters of his word to them, in every form of teaching. On the other hand, as he solemnly asseverates, his every word to them was sincere, even to the matter of his promise to come to them before journeying to Macedonia.
The danger being that the Corinthians might be influenced to believe him unreliable in his promises and then extend this supposition to his doctrine, causes Paul to emphasize the truth and the reliability of the Gospel-doctrine as taught by him: For God’s Son, Christ Jesus, who was preached among you through us, through me and Silvanus and Timotheus, was not yes and no, but yes is in Him. Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the content of all apostolic and evangelical preaching, is not an uncertain foundation, an unreliable base. Right and wrong, truth and falsehood, certainty and unreliability, are not found in Him at the same time; He is not a reed shaken by the wind, but a rock that remains unmoved, though assailed by the fiercest attacks of the portals of hell. This Gospel-message had been brought to the Corinthians by Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy, to mention only three of their teachers, and they all, in spite of the difference in talents, had preached the same Jesus, in the same way, without contradiction. In Him we have the positive benefits of divine wisdom, of righteousness, of sanctification, of salvation and glorification. In Jesus the divine and eternal yes has come into being as a true human being; Christianity is the only positive, certain religion. For, as Paul continues his comforting assurance: However numerous may be the promises of God, in Him is the yes, wherefore also through Him the Amen to God for glory through us. Jesus Christ in His own person is the embodiment and fulfillment of all the promises of God to mankind; He either fulfilled them personally or secured their fulfillment through His servants. And because Christ is thus the consummation of all the divine promises, therefore He is also the Amen, therefore all our prayers in His name are fitly closed with this confession of our trust in the willingness of God to give us all the spiritual blessings which we need throughout our lives. To the positive fulfillment of all the promises of God for the redemption of fallen mankind the believers give their joyful assent by their confession at the end of all creeds and prayers. And thus the Gospel-promises redound to the glory and praise of God out of the mouth of the believers, until the whole world rings with hymns in His honor.
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
2Co 1:15. And in this confidence I was minded Or, I purposed: So 2Co 1:17. The next thing which St. Paul justifies, is his not coming to them. He had promised to call on the Corinthians in his way to Macedonia, but failed: this his opposers would have to proceed from levity in him, or a mind regulating itself wholly by carnal interest (ver.
17.). To which he answers,that God himself having confirmed him among them by the unction and earnest of his Spirit, in the ministry of the gospel of his Son,whom St. Paul had preached to them steadily the same, without any the least variation, or unsaying of any thing that he had at any time delivered,they could have no ground to suspect him to be an unstable, uncertain man, who could not be depended on in what he said to them, 2Co 1:15-22. In the next place, with a very solemn asseveration, he professes that it was to spare them that he came not to them, 2Co 1:23.ch. 2Co 2:3. He gives another reason, 2Co 1:12-13 why he went on to Macedonia, without coming to Corinth, as he had proposed; namely, the uncertainty he was in, by the not coming of Titus, concerning their disposition at Corinth. Having mentioned his journey to Macedonia, he takes notice of the success which God gave to him there and every where, declaring of what consequence his preaching was, both to the salvation and condemnation of those who received or rejected it; professing again his sincerity and disinterestedness, not without a severe reflection on their false apostle, 2Co 1:14
By the word , in the verse before us, which our Bibles translate benefit, it is plain the Apostle means his being present among them a second time, without giving them any grief or displeasure. He had been with them before almost two years together, with satisfaction andkindness; he intended them another visit, but it was, he says, that they might have the like gratification; that is, the like satisfaction in his company a second time: which is to the same purport with what he says, ch. ii
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
2Co 1:15-16 . .] and by means of this confidence , viz. . . . . in 2Co 1:13-14 . (2Co 3:4 , 2Co 8:22 , 2Co 10:2 ; Eph 3:12 ; Phi 3:4 ; Joseph. Bell. i. 3. 1) is later Greek. See Eustathius, ad Od. iii. p. 114, 41; Thom. Mag. p. 717; Lobeck, ad Phryn. p. 294 f.
] Paul entertained the plan for his journey, set down in 2Co 1:16 , before the composition of our first Epistle, and he had communicated it to the Corinthians (whether in the first now lost letter, or otherwise, we know not). But before or during the composition of our first Epistle he altered this plan (as we know from 1Co 16:5 ) to this extent, that he was not now to go first to Corinth, then to Macedonia, and from thence back to Corinth again (2Co 1:16 ), but through Macedonia to Corinth. The plan of travel, 1Co 16:5 , was accordingly not the first (Baur; comp. Lange, apost. Zeitalt. I. p. 200 f.), but the one already altered, which alteration was ascribed to the apostle as indecision. This is intelligible enough from the antagonistic irritation of their minds, and does not require us to presuppose an expression in the alleged intermediate Epistle (Klpper, p. 21 f.). Chrysostom, Theodoret, and Oecumenius make the apostle say: I had, when I wrote to you 1Co 16:5 , the unexpressed intention to arrive still earlier than I promised, and to reach you even sooner (immediately on the journey towards Macedonia). Quite a mistaken view, since such a mere thought would not have been known to his opponents, and no excuse for his fickleness could therefore have been engrafted on i.
] belongs to : [130] I intended to come to you first of all , not, as I afterwards altered my plan, to the Macedonians first, and then from them to you. Beza, Grotius, Bengel, and others, including Rosenmller and Rckert, connect . and ., which, however, on the one hand is opposed to the sense (for Paul cannot say, “I intended formerly to come to you,” since his intention is still the same), and on the other would not accord with . . .; for not the , but the , was to bring in its train a .
] corresponds ingeniously to the : in order that you might have a second benefit of grace . By is meant a divine bestowal of grace , with which Paul knew his coming to be connected for the church; for to whatever place he came in his official capacity, he came as the imparter of divine , Rom 1:11 ; comp. Rom 15:29 . Chrysostom, Oecumenius, and others, including Kypke, Emmerling, Flatt, and Bleek (in the Stud. u. Krit. 1830, p. 622), hold that is equivalent to (and hence this is actually the reading of B L, some min., and Theodoret). Certainly also means pleasure, joy , and is, as in Tob 7:16 , the opposite of (Eur. Hel. 661, and more frequently in Pindar; see Duncan, Lex. , ed. Rost, p. 1191; also in Plato, Ast, Lex. III. p. 538), but never in the N. T. This sense, besides, would be unsuitable to the apostle’s delicate and modest style of expression elsewhere. Nor, again, is a benefit on the part of the apostle meant (Grotius, Rosenmller, Schrader, Billroth, comp. also Hofmann), because the expression is only in keeping with his affection and humility (comp. 1Co 15:10 ) if a divine display of grace is meant. The comparison with 1Co 16:3 is therefore not to the point, because there a is named, of which the readers were givers. But what does he mean by ? Many answer with Estius: “ut ex secundo meo adventu secundam acciperetis gratiam, qui dudum accepistis primam, quando primum istuc veniens ad fidem vos converti.” Comp. Pelagius, Calvin, Wolf, Mosheim, Bengel, Emmerling. But against this it may be urged: (1) historically, that Paul certainly had been already twice in Corinth before our two Epistles (see Introd. 2); and (2) from the connection, that the in this sense can by no means appear as an aim conditioned by the ; for even a later coming would have had a in this sense as its result. This second reason is decisive, even if, with Schott, Errterung , etc., p. 58 ff., and Anger, rat. temp. p. 72 f., we were to set aside the former by the supposition: “apostolum intra annum illum cum dimidio, quem, quum primum Corinthi esset, ibi transegit, per breve aliquod temporis spatium in regiones vicinas discessisse; sic enim si res se habuit, Paulus, etsi bis ad Corinthios venerat, ita ut in secunda, quam iis misit, epistola adventum tertium polliceri posset: tamen, quoniam per totum illud intervallum Corinthi potissimum docuerat, simile beneficium, quod in itinere seriore in eos collocaturus erat, jure secundum appellavit,” Anger, l.c. p. 73. The right solution results from 2Co 1:16 , which is appended by the epexegetical , viz., that the appears as setting in through the . . Paul had intended on his projected journey to visit Corinth twice , and had therefore proposed to himself to come to the Corinthians first of all (not first to the Macedonians), in order that they in this event might have a second on his return from Macedonia (the first they were to have on his journey thither). From this it is at once obvious: (1) how superfluous is the linguistically incorrect supposition that is here equivalent to , as Bleek and Neander, following Chrysostom and Theodoret, [131] take it; (2) how erroneous is the opinion of Rckert, that . is put in a wrong place, and should properly only come behind , 2Co 1:16 . No; according to the epexegetical , 2Co 1:16 , . serves to give exact and clear information as parallel to the , and then . as parallel to the . . Comp. Baur, I. p. 338, Exo 2 .
[130] The position of , immediately after . (Lachmann, Tischendorf, Rckert), which has preponderating evidence, and is therefore to be preferred, makes no difference in this respect.
[131] In other respects Theodoret, Bleek, and Neander, as also Billroth, Olshausen, and Rckert, agree in thinking that refers to the repeated visit to Corinth which had been intended after returning from Macedonia. But Chrys., quite against the context, explains the double joy as . So also Erasmus, Vatablus, and others.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
(15) And in this confidence I was minded to come unto you before, that ye might have a second benefit; (16) And to pass by you into Macedonia, and to come again out of Macedonia unto you, and of you to be brought on my way toward Judea. (17) When I therefore was thus minded, did I use lightness? or the things that I purpose, do I purpose according to the flesh, that with me there should be yea yea, and nay nay? (18) But as God is true, our word toward you was not yea and nay. (19) For the Son of God, Jesus Christ, who was preached among you by us, even by me and Silvanus and Timothy, was not yea and nay, but in him was yea. (20) For all the promises of God in him are yea, and in him Amen, unto the glory of God by us.
There are several things contained in these verses, which have a special and particular reference to the Church at Corinth, which will not require to he noticed. I mean such as the Apostle’s intention of visiting them, and granting to them a second benefit. But I pass over these considerations, which are of a private nature, to attend to such, as are of a public concern to the whole Church of God, in all ages; and which are of too much importance to be hastily passed over. I pray the Lord to be the Teacher, both of him that writes, and him that reads, on this momentous doctrine.
And, first. I beg the Reader to observe what Paul saith, that his doctrine was not yea, and nay. He almost seems to swear to it. As God is true, saith he. These are solemn words. When Jehovah affirms anything, of more than ordinary solemnity, his words are: As I live, saith the Lord. It is in the form of an oath. It is the Lord’s peculiar prerogative of speaking; and therefore highly unsuitable to be used in common conversation. Paul, therefore, is very solemn in what he saith. See Num 14:21 ; Isa 49:18 ; Jer 22:24 ; Eze 5:11 etc.
Secondly. What Paul preached, was not a Yea and Nay Gospel: that is, not an uncertain, peradventure creed. He did not halt between two opinions. Paul made it not a yea, and nay, whether Jehovah in his threefold character of Persons had, or had not chosen the Church in Christ, before the foundation of the world. He did not preach that Christ so died for the salvation of sinners that it was yea, and nay, how many would be saved, and how many not. He did not compliment man, at the excellence of God’s truth; and left it at a peradventure, whether after God the Father’s choice of the Church, and Christ’s redemption of the Church, any of his little ones should perish! Oh! what a yea and nay doctrine is that, which makes the matter doubtful. As if God the Father had chosen, Christ’s death had purchased the salvation of his people, God the Spirit had regenerated his people; and yet it was yea, and nay, whether such should be saved. Well might the Apostle speak with such a vehemency, and appeal to God as true, that his doctrine, his preaching, his word, was of no such doubtful issue.
Thirdly. What Paul preached was, Jesus Christ the Son of God. And this was no yea and nay doctrine. Jesus Christ is the sum and substance of the whole Bible. Jehovah’s, that is, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost’s one grand and only Ordinance of Heaven for salvation. In Jesus Christ is included all. No moral essays. No covenant of works. No law and Gospel mingled together. Not partly man, and partly God. Not for man to do his best, (for that best would deserve condemnation,) and Christ to do the rest. But Christ all, and in all. This was what Paul preached. And in Christ all was yea, without nay.
Fourthly. All the promises in the Bible are to this amount. There is not a promise out of Christ. There is not a promise but in Christ. Until I have Christ, I have no claim to a single promise. Christ himself is the first Promise, which came in with the fall of man. The seed of the woman shall bruise the serpent’s head, Gen 3:15 . And all the after promises arise out of this. Hence, all the promises of God in him, are yea, and in him, Amen: that is, certain and sure.
This then, was the sum and substance of all Paul’s preaching. And the glory of God became manifested by it, in every instance where the Lord confirmed it. Reader! pause over the subject; for it is highly interesting. Ask your own heart, whether the Lord hath given you such precious views, concerning the Yea, and Amen; the fulness, and suitableness, and all-sufficiency, which is in Christ Jesus?
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
15 And in this confidence I was minded to come unto you before, that ye might have a second benefit;
Ver. 15. A second benefit ] Gr. “grace,” not converting only, but confirming also. All is but enough.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
15 24 .] His defence of himself against the charge of fickleness of purpose for not having come to them .
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
15. ] ., i.e. of my character being known to you as that of an earnest and sincere man.
belongs to , not to . , viz. before he visited Macedonia, where he now was.
] that you might have a second benefit (effusion of the divine by my presence: not = as Chrys., see var. read.).
second , because there would thus have been opportunity for two visits, one in going towards Macedonia, the other in returning. This is the interpretation of De Wette, Bleek, and Wieseler, and I believe the only one which the words will bear. The other, according to which would mean ‘a second benefit,’ by my visiting you for the second time , is in my view unnatural, and would hardly have justified the use of at all. For come when he would , the of the second visit would be the , and the conferring a would have been of no signification in the present connexion, which is to state a purpose of paying them two visits in one and the same journey . The first of these he characterizes by , the second by , implying also the first. So that I do not believe this passage to be relevant to the question respecting the number of visits which Paul had made to Corinth previously to writing these Epistles. See on that question, Prolegg. to 1 Cor. v.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
2Co 1:15-22 . HIS CHANGE OF PLAN WAS NOT DUE TO FICKLENESS. . . .: and in this confidence ( sc. , that they would acknowledge his sincerity) I was minded to come before ( sc. , before he went to Macedonia) unto you, that ye might have a second benefit . The circumstances seem to have been as follows. While St. Paul was at Ephesus (Act 19 ) his intention had been to cross the gean to Corinth, thence to visit Macedonia, and then to come back to Corinth on his way to Juda with the contributions which he had gathered ( cf. 1Co 16:3-4 ). The Corinthians would thus have enjoyed a “second benefit” ( cf. Rom 1:11 ; Rom 15:29 ), inasmuch as he would have visited them both on his way to Macedonia, and on his return journey. This project he had communicated to them, probably in the letter which is lost (1Co 5:9 ). But he received bad news from Corinth (1Co 1:11 ), and he wrote 1 Cor. in reply. In this letter (1Co 16:5 ) he incidentally mentioned that he had changed his plans, and that he now proposed to travel from Ephesus to Corinth vi Macedonia, the route which he adopted in the sequel (Act 20:1 ff., chap. 2Co 2:12 , 2Co 7:5 ). When the Corinthians heard of this, they began to reproach him with fickleness of purpose (chap. 2Co 1:17 ), and the charge came to his ears. We have his defence in the verses (15 22) before us.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: 2Co 1:15-22
15In this confidence I intended at first to come to you, so that you might twice receive a blessing; 16that is, to pass your way into Macedonia, and again from Macedonia to come to you, and by you to be helped on my journey to Judea. 17Therefore, I was not vacillating when I intended to do this, was I? Or what I purpose, do I purpose according to the flesh, so that with me there will be yes, yes and no, no at the same time? 18But as God is faithful, our word to you is not yes and no. 19For the Son of God, Christ Jesus, who was preached among you by us-by me and Silvanus and Timothy-was not yes and no, but is yes in Him. 20For as many as are the promises of God, in Him they are yes; therefore also through Him is our Amen to the glory of God through us. 21Now He who establishes us with you in Christ and anointed us is God, 22who also sealed us and gave us the Spirit in our hearts as a pledge.
2Co 1:15 “In this confidence” See full note at 2Co 3:4.
“I intended at first to come to you” “I intended” is an imperfect tense which denotes repeated actions, here thoughts, in past time. In 1Co 16:2-8 Paul told them of his proposed travel plans. Because of their actions, he later changed his mind because he did not want to come in judgment, but joy! The vocal minority accused him of fickleness, not only in his travel plans, but in his gospel (cf. 2Co 1:18-20).
NASB”so that you might twice receive a blessing”
NKJV”that you might have a second benefit”
NRSV”so that you might have a double favor”
TEV”in order that you might be blessed twice”
NJB”so that you would benefit doubly”
There is a Greek manuscript variant here. Some manuscripts have charin, which comes from charis, which means benefit or favor (i.e., *, A, C, D, F, G, and the Syriac and Armenian translations).
Other manuscripts have charan, which comes from chara, which means joy, gladness, or rejoicing (i.e., cf8 i2, B, L, P). The UBS4 Greek text gives charin a “B” (almost certain) rating. In context (i.e., 2Co 1:16) it refers to Paul coming twice to Corinth with them having the opportunity of supplying his needs as he travels on (cf. Gordon D. Fee, To What End Exegesis?, pp. 99-104).
2Co 1:16 “and by you to be helped on my journey to Judea” Paul would not take any money from the Corinthian church while he was ministering to them. He was afraid he would be attacked over this issue. As it turns out he was attacked for not taking money from them.
This phrase implies that he was going to let this church provide his missionary travel needs (cf. 1Co 16:6; Rom 15:24). This may have been a way to test their loyalty to him and the gospel and to silence his critics.
2Co 1:17 “do I purpose according to the flesh” This phrase may reflect Paul’s critics (cf. 2Co 10:2-3; 2Co 11:18) or Paul seeking after the will of God in all that he does, including travel (cf. 1Co 4:19; 1Co 16:7; Act 18:21; Rom 1:10; Rom 15:32).
That the second option fits this context best can be seen from 2Co 1:18 a. God’s faithfulness is a recurrent theme in Paul’s writings (cf. 1Co 1:9; 1Co 10:13; 1Th 5:24; 2Th 3:3).
For “flesh” see Special Topic at 1Co 1:26.
2Co 1:18 “God is faithful” Faithful is placed first for emphasis. In Paul’s writings this becomes a descriptive title for God (cf. 1Co 1:9; 1Co 10:13; 1Th 5:24; 2Th 3:3). In the OT faith is usually understood as faithfulness. This is the crucial characteristic of God (cf. Deu 7:9; Isa 49:7). His gracious, faithful character is unchanging (cf. Mal 3:6). Mankind’s hope is not in human performance or devotion, but in the character and promises of God (cf. 2Co 1:12; 2Co 1:15; 2Co 1:20)!
2Co 1:19 “the Son of God, Christ Jesus” Paul does not use the phrase “Son of God” often (cf. Rom 1:4; here, and Gal 2:20). However, the concept and related phrasing is very common. See Special Topic at 1Co 1:9.
“Silvanus” Silas, or Silvanus, was the man Paul chose to go with him on the second missionary journey after Barnabas and John Mark went back to Cyprus.
1. He is first mentioned in the Bible in Act 15:22 where he is called a chief man among the brethren of the Jerusalem Church.
2. He was also a prophet (cf. Act 15:32).
3. He was a Roman citizen like Paul (cf. Act 16:37).
4. He and Judas Barsabbas were sent to Antioch by the Jerusalem Church to inspect the situation (cf. Act 15:22; Act 15:30-35).
5. Paul mentions him in 2Co 1:19 as a fellow gospel preacher.
6. Later he is identified with Peter in writing 1 Peter. (cf. 1Pe 5:12).
7. Both Paul and Peter call him Silvanus while Luke calls him Silas (the Aramaic form of Saul). It is possible that Silas was his Jewish name and Silvanus his Latin name (cf. F. F. Bruce, Paul: Apostle of the Heart Set Free, p. 213).
2Co 1:19-20 “but is yes in Him” 2Co 1:19-20 are theologically packed! Paul is asserting that the mission team (himself, Silvanus, and Timothy) preached Jesus as God’s fulfilling promise as God’s Son and as mankind’s only hope to them as the apex of OT revelation! Their preaching was not wishy-washy, but definite (cf. 2Co 1:18). Jesus is the Father’s “yes” for every promise, every need, every hope (i.e., perfect active indicative of ginomai). By affirming Jesus, they give glory to the Father’s provision.
All of the church at Corinth’s knowledge (1) of God, (2) of His Son, (3) of His promises (cf. Rom 9:4) and (4) of His grace provisions come through Paul’s mission team. If they start doubting the motives and message of Paul, they lose confidence in the gospel!
2Co 1:20 “Amen” See fuller note at 1Co 14:16 c.
“glory” See SPECIAL TOPIC: GLORY (DOXA) at 1Co 2:7.
2Co 1:21-22 There is a definite structure to these two verses that describes what God (i.e., “The One who”) has done to equip and affirm the missionary team.
1. God establishes us, 2Co 1:21 (cf. 1Co 1:8). This is a present active participle which points toward a continuing action. It means to confirm, establish, make constant, unwavering (cf. 2Co 1:7; Rom 4:16). This term is used in the papyri to denote a legal guarantee (cf. Moulton and Milligan, p. 107).
2. God anointed us, 2Co 1:21 (cf. 1Jn 2:20; 1Jn 2:27). This is an aorist active participle. The tense points to a completed, one-time act. The term itself reflects an OT concept of God’s choosing and equipping for ministry of certain leaders of Israel
a. prophets, cf. 1Ki 19:16 and possibly parallelism of 1Ch 16:22; Psa 105:15
b. priests, cf. Exo 40:15; Lev 4:3; Psa 105:15
c. kings, cf. 1Sa 9:16; Psa 2:2; Psa 18:50; Psa 20:6; Hab 3:13)
It is the term that in Greek is translated “Christ” when referring to the Messiah (i.e., the Anointed One). Believers are also chosen and equipped by God to serve His kingdom purposes.
3. God sealed us, 2Co 1:22 (cf. Joh 3:33; Joh 6:27; Rom 4:11; Rom 15:28; 1Co 9:2; Eph 1:13; Eph 4:30; 2Ti 2:19; Rev 7:3-8). This is an aorist middle participle which means to mark something or someone as ones property, or genuine, or as safely delivered. Believers belong to God!
4. God gave us the Spirit in our hearts as a pledge, 2Co 1:22 (cf. 2Co 5:5; Rom 8:9-16; Rom 8:23; Rom 8:26-27; Eph 1:13-14).
The term “given” is another aorist active participle, implying a completed action. God has fully provided for His children.
1. establishes (present tense)
2. anointed (aorist tense)
3. sealed (aorist tense)
4. given the Spirit (aorist tense)
All of these provisions relate to Paul’s confidence in 2Co 1:15; 2Co 1:19-20. Paul’s confidence was in the Father’s and the Son’s and the Spirit’s actions and provisions.
“Christ. . .God. . .Spirit” Notice that the Trinity is active in our assurance (see Special Topic following). Although the term “Trinity” does not appear in the Bible, the concept is recurrent (cf. 1Co 12:4-6; 2Co 13:14). Christianity is a monotheistic faith (cf. Deu 6:4). However, if Jesus is divine and the Holy Spirit is a person we have three persons of one divine essence. A Triune Unity! See Special Topic at 1Co 2:10.
SPECIAL TOPIC: ASSURANCE
2Co 1:22 “sealed us” See SPECIAL TOPIC: SEAL at 1Co 9:2.
“hearts” See Special Topic at 1Co 14:25.
“as a pledge” It speaks both of promise of full payment in the future and partial payment now. God’s down payment was the life of His Son and the full presence of His Spirit (cf. Eph 1:3-14). See full note at 2Co 5:5.
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
in. No Prep Out, case. confidence. Greek. pepoithesis. App-160.
was minded = wished. Greek. boulomai, App-102.
unto. Greek. pros. App-104.
before, i.e. before visiting Macedonia.
benefit. Greek charis, App-181.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
15-24.] His defence of himself against the charge of fickleness of purpose for not having come to them.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
2Co 1:15. , in this) of which 2Co 1:12 treats at the beginning.-, before) We have frequent mention of this intention in the former epistle; it is construed with I was minded.- , a second benefit) They had had their first benefit [exhibited by Divine help; 2Co 1:12] at the first visit of Paul: comp. thy first love, Rev 2:4. He had designed a second benefit for them at his second visit. Grace is in itself one; but in being had [in the having of it], there is a first, second grace, etc.: comp. Joh 1:16. [Of His fulness have all we received, and grace for grace.]
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
2Co 1:15
2Co 1:15
And in this confidence-In reliance on the mutual respect and affection which existed between them, he was confident that they would recognize his sincerity, and receive him with joy, and be benefited by his coming.
I was minded to come first unto you,-[His original intention was to go direct from Ephesus to Corinth before going into Macedonia; instead of this, he had gone first to Macedonia (1Co 16:5), and would thus see Corinth only once, on his way south, whereas had he gone first to Corinth, he would have paid them a double visit at this time-on his way to as well as from Macedonia.]
that ye might have a second benefit;-A second benefit from his teaching and presence. He probably thought of bestowing other and greater gifts on them to further aid them in their Christian life. [The importance of the church of Corinth, its central position, made it very important that he should give them as much as possible of his personal supervision.]
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
in: 1Co 4:19, 1Co 11:34
that: Rom 1:11, Rom 15:29, Phi 1:25, Phi 1:26
benefit: or, grace, 2Co 6:1
Reciprocal: Job 17:11 – purposes Act 19:21 – purposed Act 20:3 – he purposed Rom 1:13 – that oftentimes 1Co 16:5 – when 2Co 2:1 – I determined 2Co 2:3 – having 2Co 12:14 – the third Gal 5:10 – confidence Phi 1:6 – confident 1Th 3:10 – might perfect 1Ti 3:14 – hoping
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
2Co 1:15. This confidence refers to the state of cooperation mentioned in the preceding two verses. Second benefit is said with regard for the spiritual gifts that an apostle can bestow on Christians.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
2Co 1:15. And in this confidenceof the cordial footing on which we stood to each other,I was minded to come unto you beforebefore going to Macedonia, sailing direct from Ephesus to Corinth (almost in a straight course from east to west),that ye might have a second benefitthe benefit of a return visit from Macedonia, as expressed in the next clause but one.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Observe here, 1. The apostle’s steady purpose, and fixed resolution, to come and spend some time amongst the Corinthians: I was minded to come unto you. Where a faithful minister has good hopes and confidence of doing good amongst a people, there is great encouragement for coming to them, and abiding with them. When the ministers of Christ find that God has farther converting work, or edifying work, for them to do in a particular place amongst his people, they will not, they must not, yea, they dare not, forsake them for outward advantages.
Observe, 2. the end of St. Paul’s purpose and resolution to come unto them: That they might have a second benefit. The first benefit was their conversion, the second benefit was their confirmation; confirmation in the faith, and reformation both in life and manners.
It is not sufficient that by our ministry we plant a church, and gather a people out of the world, by external and visible profession; but there is farther need of daily industry, and continual care to water what we have planted, to cultivate and dress that corner of our Lord’s vineyard which is under our particular inspection and care.
O that our people had hearts to cry out, and say, Lord! not the first time only, but the second, yea, all my life, make me partaker of this benefit.
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
A Change in Plans
Paul asked the Corinthians if he acted like an unscrupulous person of this world who would promise one thing and do another with light regard for his honor. The apostle went on to tell them that he was just like the God he had preached to them. God was good to his word and so his servant Paul was true to his word. He, unlike a crooked politician, would not affirm and deny the same statement ( 2Co 1:17-18 ).
Silas, Timothy and Paul had all preached and worked together during the apostle’s first visit in Corinth ( Act 18:5 ). They had, on that first visit, preached a Christ who kept his promises. No matter how many promises God makes, he will keep them all. God also sent Jesus to be the “Amen”. He came to say “So be it” to all of God’s promises ( 2Co 1:19-20 ).
Fuente: Gary Hampton Commentary on Selected Books
2Co 1:15-16. And in this confidence That is, being confident of this, namely, of our mutual affection to, and esteem for, each other; I was minded , I purposed; to come unto you before Or first, as seems here to signify. As soon as the apostle was informed, by some of the family of Chloe, that dissensions had arisen among the Corinthian brethren, he determined to go to Corinth first; that is, before he went into Macedonia. His intention was to go straightway to Corinth by sea, because he wished to be there soon, in the expectation that his presence among the Corinthians would put an end to their divisions, either in the way of persuasion or of punishment. Wherefore, to prepare the Corinthians for his coming, he notified his resolution to them by Timothy and Erastus; but after their departure, having great success in preaching, and the messengers from Corinth arriving with a letter from the sincere part of the church, the apostle judged it prudent to delay his visit to Corinth, to give them who had sinned time to repent. And therefore, instead of going straightway to Corinth, by sea, he resolved to go by the way of Macedonia. This alteration of his purpose he signified to the Corinthians in his first epistle, 1Co 16:5-7. That you might have a second benefit So our translators have rendered ; that is, a further confirmation and edification in gifts and graces, wherewith ye were enriched by my first coming to you. And to pass by you into Macedonia To make you a short visit in my way thither; and then, having despatched my business in the churches there, to come again to you from Macedonia, and make a longer stay; and of you to be brought (sent) forward toward Judea When I shall go thither to deliver the money raised by the contribution of the Gentile Christians, for the relief of their distressed Jewish brethren.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
And in this confidence [i. e., that you gloried in me and I in you, and that we mutually loved each other] I was minded to come first unto you, that ye might have a second benefit [this word implies the spiritual gifts which he bestowed on his visits–comp. Rom 1:11; Rom 15:29];
Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)
2Co 1:15-22. But had he not laid himself open to a charge of fickleness? Had he not led them to expect that he would ere this have paid them another visit, returning through Corinth from Macedonia, and taking from Corinth his final departure to Juda when he went to convey the money collected for the poor Christians at Jerusalem. It was not true that in abandoning that plan he had showed himself one whose word was not to be trusted. It was true that while the confidence he has just referred to was unshaken, he had made and announced this plan. And he had not laid his plans, as men too often do, so that their Yea is lightly turned to Nay. God is to be relied on, and the message delivered by His messengers has always been direct and unambiguous. For there was no ambiguity about Christ, who had been the subject of the apostles preaching. On the contrary, all the promises of God had received confirmation in Him. Whenever the Corinthians say Amen (So it is) to any or all of these promises, they set their seal to the genuineness of the message, and so to the sincerity of the messenger. And they must remember that both parties, the apostle and the church, are absolutely made over to Christ, and that by God Himself. For it is God who has anointed them for service, and sealed them in baptism and given them in the Spirit the pledge of final and complete salvation. Between parties which were connected in a relationship like that there could be no question of bad faith.
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible
Verse 15
In this confidence; namely, his confidence in their regard and attachment to him.–I was minded to come; I had intended to come.–A second benefit. He had already once visited Corinth, when he first planted the gospel there.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
1:15 And in this confidence I was minded to come unto you before, that ye might have a {o} second benefit;
(o) Another benefit.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
The consistency of Paul’s conduct 1:15-22
Having claimed singleness of purpose in his dealings with the Corinthians, Paul proceeded to help them appreciate the fact that his behavior had been consistent with his Spirit-led purposes.
"Long-range plans may need to be modified as time goes by. In Paul’s case, his original plans were made in good faith with the best information he had at the time. Circumstances had altered, however, and it was necessary to revise those plans." [Note: Kent, p. 37.]
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
In 1Co 16:5 Paul had told the Corinthians he planned to visit them after he had passed through Macedonia. Evidently he was not able to make that trip. There is no evidence in the New Testament that he ever followed this itinerary.
Here we have another plan that Paul evidently sent the Corinthians after he wrote 1 Corinthians. He says he intended to visit Corinth on his way to Macedonia, probably from Ephesus, his headquarters during this period of his ministry. He then planned to come back through Corinth as he traveled from Macedonia to Judea. This would enable him to see the Corinthians twice, a double visit and a double blessing. Paul referred to this plan as his original intention, not counting what he had written in 1 Corinthians. In 1Co 16:2-8 his projected itinerary had been Ephesus, Macedonia, Corinth, and then possibly Jerusalem. However, Paul was at this time in Macedonia having traveled there from Ephesus by way of Troas, not Corinth (2Co 2:13; 2Co 7:5; 2Co 8:1; 2Co 9:2; 2Co 9:4).
We can see why some in Corinth had concluded that since Paul had not followed through with his plans they could not count on his word and doubted his love for them.
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
Chapter 3
THE CHURCHS ONE FOUNDATION.
2Co 1:15-20 (R.V)
THE emphatic words in the first sentence are “in this confidence.” All the Apostles plans for visiting Corinth, both in general and in their details, depended upon the maintenance of a good understanding between himself and the Church; and the very prominence here given to this condition is a tacit accusation of those whose conduct had destroyed his confidence. When he intimated his intention of visiting them, according to the program of vv. 15 and 16 {2Co 1:15-16}, he had felt sure of a friendly welcome, and of the cordial recognition of his apostolic authority; it was only when that assurance was taken away from him by news of what was being said and done at Corinth, that he had changed his plan. He had originally intended to go from Ephesus to Corinth, then from Corinth north into Macedonia, then back to Corinth again, and thence, with the assistance of the Corinthians, or their convoy for part of the way, to Jerusalem. Had this purpose been carried out, he would of course have been twice in Corinth, and it is to this that most scholars refer the words “a second benefit,” or rather “grace.” This reference, indeed, is not quite certain; and it cannot be proved, though it is made more probable, by using and to interpret each other. It remains possible that when Paul said, “I was minded to come before unto you, that ye might have a second benefit,” he was thinking of his original visit as the first, and of this purposed one as the second, “grace.” This reading of his words has commended itself to scholars like Calvin, Bengel, and Heinrici. Whichever of these interpretations be correct, the Apostle had abandoned his purpose of going from Ephesus to Macedonia via Corinth, and had intimated in the First Epistle {1Co 16:1-24} his intention of reaching Corinth via Macedonia. This change of purpose is not sufficient to explain what follows. Unless there had been at Corinth a great deal of bad feeling, it would have passed without remark, as a thing which had no doubt good reasons, though the Corinthians were ignorant of them; at the very most, it would have called forth expressions of disappointment and regret. They would have been sorry that the benefit (), the token of Divine favor which was always bestowed when the Apostle came “in the fullness of the blessing of Christ,” and “longing to impart some spiritual gift,” had been delayed; but they would have acquiesced as in any other natural disappointment. But this was not what took place. They used the Apostles change of purpose to assail his character. They charged him with “lightness,” with worthless levity. They called him a weathercock, a Yes and No man, who said now one thing and now the opposite, who said both at once and with equal emphasis, who had his own interests in view in his fickleness, and whose word, to speak plainly, could never be depended upon.
The responsibility for the change of plan has already, in the emphatic , been indirectly transferred to his accusers; but the Apostle stoops to answer them quite straightforwardly. His answer is indeed a challenge: “When I cherished that first wish to visit you, was I-dare you say I was-guilty of the levity with which you charge me? Or-to enlarge the question, and, seeing that my whole character is attacked, to bring my character as a whole into the discussion-the things that I purpose, do I purpose according to the flesh, that with me there should be the yea yea and the nay nay?” Am I, he seems to say, in my character and conduct, like a shifty, unprincipled politician-a man who has no convictions, or no conscience about his convictions-a man who is guided, not by any higher spirit dwelling in him, but solely by considerations of selfish interest? Do I say things out of mere compliment, not meaning them? When I make promises, or announce intentions, is it always with the tacit reservation that they may be cancelled if they turn out inconvenient? Do you suppose that I purposely represent myself ( ) as a man who affirms and denies, makes promises and breaks them, has Yes yes and No no dwelling side by side in his soul? You know me far better than to suppose any such thing. All my communications with you have been inconsistent with such a view of my character. As God is faithful, our word to you is not Yes and No. It is not incoherent, or equivocal, or self-contradictory. It is entirely truthful and self-consistent.
In this eighteenth verse the Apostles mind is reaching out already to what he is going to make his real defence, and (“our word”) therefore carries a double weight. It covers at once whatever he had said to them about the proposed journey, and whatever he had said in his evangelistic ministry at Corinth. It is this latter sense of it that is continued in ver. 19 {2Co 1:19}: “For the Son of God, Christ Jesus, who was preached among you by us, by me and Silvanus and Timotheus, was not Yes and No, but in him Yes has found place. For how many soever are the promises of God, in Him is the Yes.” Let us notice first the argumentative force of this. Paul is engaged in vindicating his character, and especially in maintaining his truthfulness and sincerity. How does he do so here? His unspoken assumption is that character is determined by the main interest of life; that the work to which a man gives his soul will react upon the soul, changing it into its own likeness. As the dyers hand is subdued to the element it works in, so was the whole being of Paul-such is the argument-subdued to the element in which he wrought, conformed to it, impregnated by it. And what was that element? It was the Gospel concerning Gods Son, Jesus Christ. Was there any dubiety about what that was? any equivocal mixture of Yes and No there? Far from it. Paul was so certain of what it was that he repeatedly and solemnly anathematized man or angel who should venture to qualify, let alone deny it. There is no mixture of Yes and No in Christ. As the Apostle says elsewhere, {Rom 15:8} Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision “in the interest of the truth of God, with a view to the confirmation of the promises.” However many the promises might be, in Him a mighty affirmation, a mighty fulfillment, was given of every one. The ministry of the Gospel has this, then, as its very subject, its constant preoccupation, its highest glory-the absolute faithfulness of God. Who would venture to assert that Paul, or that anybody, could catch the trick of equivocation in such a service? Who does not see that such service must needs create true men?
To this argument there is, for the natural man, a ready answer. It by no means follows, he will say, that because the Gospel is devoid of ambiguity or inconsistency, equivocation and insincerity must be unknown to its preachers. A man may proclaim the true Gospel and in his other dealings be far from a true man. Experience justifies this reply; and yet it does not invalidate Pauls argument. That argument is good for the case in which it is applied. It might be repeated by a hypocrite, but no hypocrite could ever have invented it. It bears, indeed, a striking because an unintentional testimony to the height at which Paul habitually lived, and to his unqualified identification of himself with his apostolic calling. If a man has ten interests in life, more or less divergent, he may have as many inconsistencies in his behavior; but if he has said with St. Paul, “This one thing I do,” and if the one thing which absorbs his very soul is an unceasing testimony to the truth and faithfulness of God, then it is utterly incredible that he should be a false and faithless man. The work which claims him for its own with this absolute authority will seal him with its own greatness, its own simplicity and truth. He will not use levity. The things which he purposes, he will not purpose according to the flesh. He will not be guided by considerations perpetually varying, except in the point of being all alike selfish. He will not be a Yes and No man, whom nobody can trust.
The argumentative force of the passage being admitted, its doctrinal import deserves attention. The Gospel-which is identified with Gods Son, Jesus Christ-is here described as a mighty affirmation. It is not Yes and No, a message full of inconsistencies, or ambiguities, a proclamation the sense of which no one can ever be sure he has grasped. In it ( means “in Christ”) the everlasting Yea has found place. The perfect tense () means that this grand affirmation has come to us, and is with us, for good and all. What it was and continued to be in Pauls time, it is to this day. It is in this positive, definite, unmistakable character that the strength of the Gospel lies. What a man cannot know, cannot seize, cannot tell, he cannot preach. The refutation of popular errors, even in theology, is not gospel; the criticism of traditional theories, even about Scripture, is not gospel; the intellectual “economy,” with which a clever man in a dubious position uses language about the Bible or its doctrines which to the simple means Yes, and to the subtle qualifies the Yes enormously, is not gospel. There is no strength in any of these things. Dealing in them does not make character simple, sincere, massive, Christian. When they stamp themselves on the soul, the result is not one to which we could make the appeal which Paul makes here. If we have any gospel at all, it is because there are things which stand for us above all doubts, truths so sure that we cannot question them, so absolute that we cannot qualify them, so much our life that to tamper with them is to touch our very heart. Nobody has any right to preach who has not mighty affirmations to make concerning Gods Son, Jesus Christ-affirmations in which there is no ambiguity, and which no questioning can reach.
In the Apostles mind a particular turn is given to this thought by its connection with the Old Testament. In Christ, he says, the Yes has been realized; for how many soever are the promises of God, in Him is the Yes. The mode of expression is rather peculiar, but the meaning is quite plain. Is there a single word of good, Paul asks, that God has ever spoken concerning man? Then that word is reaffirmed, it is confirmed, it is fulfilled in Jesus Christ. It is no longer a word, but an actual gift to men, which they may take hold of and possess. Of course when Paul says “how many soever are the promises,” he is thinking, of the Old Testament. It was there the promises stood in Gods name; and hence he tells us in this passage that Christ is the fulfillment of the Old Testament; in Him God has kept His word given to the fathers. All that the holy men of old were bidden to hope for, as the Spirit spoke through them in many parts and in many ways, is given to the world at last: he who has Gods Son, Jesus Christ, has all God has promised, and all He can give.
There are two opposite ways of looking at the Old Testament with which this apostolic teaching is inconsistent, and which, by anticipation, it condemns.
There is the opinion of those who say that Gods promises to His people in the Old Testament have not been fulfilled, and never will be. That is the opinion held by many among the modern Jews, who have renounced all that was most characteristic in the religion of their fathers, and attenuated it into the merest deistical film of a creed. It is the opinion also of many who study the Bible as a piece of literary antiquity, but get to no perception of the life which is in it, or of the organic connection between the Old Testament and the New. What the Apostle says of his countrymen in his own time is true of both these classes-when they read the Scriptures there is a veil upon their hearts. The Old Testament promises have been fulfilled, every one of them. Let a man be taught what they mean, not as dead letters in an ancient scroll, but as present words of the living God; and then let him look to Jesus Christ, the Son of God, and see whether there is not in Him the mighty, the perpetual confirmation of them all. We smile sometimes at what seems the whimsical way in which the early Christians, who had not yet a New Testament, found Christ everywhere in the Old; but though it may be possible to err in detail in this pursuit, it is not possible to err on the whole. The Old Testament is gathered up, every living word of it, in Him; we are misunderstanding it if we take it otherwise.
The opinion just described is a species of rationalism. There is another opinion, which, while agreeing with the rationalistic one that many of Gods promises in the Old Testament have not yet been fulfilled, believes that their fulfillment is still to be awaited. If one might do so without offence, I should call this a species of fanaticism. It is the error of those who take the Jewish nation as such to be the subject of prophecy, and hope for its restoration to Palestine, for a revived Jerusalem, a new Davidic monarchy, even a reign of Christ over such an earthly kingdom. All this, if we may take the Apostles word for it, is beside the mark. Equally with rationalism it loses the spirit of Gods word in the letter. The promises have been fulfilled already, and we are not to look for another fulfillment. Those who have seen Christ have seen all that God is going to do-and it is quite adequate-to make His word good. He who has welcomed Christ knows that not one good word of all that God has spoken has failed. God has never, by the promises of the Old Testament, or by the instincts of human nature, put a hope or a prayer into mans heart that is not answered and satisfied abundantly in His Son.
But leaving the reference to the Old Testament on one side, it is well worth while for us to consider the practical meaning of the truth, that all Gods promises are Yea in Christ. Gods promises are His declarations of what He is willing to do for men; and in the very nature of the case they are at once the inspiration and the limit of our prayers. We are encouraged to ask all that God promises, and we must stop there. Christ Himself then is the measure of prayer to man; we can ask all that is in Him; we dare not ask anything that lies outside of Him. How the consideration of this should expand our prayers in some directions, and contract them in others! We can ask God to give us Christs purity, Christs simplicity, Christs meekness and gentleness, Christs faithfulness and obedience, Christs victory over the world. Have we ever measured these things? Have we ever put them into our prayers with any glimmering consciousness of their dimensions, any sense of the vastness of our request? Nay, we can ask Christs glory, His Resurrection Life of splendor and incorruption-the image of the heavenly. God has promised us all these things, and far more: but has He always promised what we ask? Can we fix our eyes on His Son, as He lived our life in this world, and remembering that this, so far as this world is concerned, is the measure of promise, ask without any qualification that our course here may be free from every trouble? Had Christ no sorrow? Did He never meet with ingratitude? Was he never misunderstood? Was He never hungry, thirsty, weary? If all Gods promises are summed up in Him-if He is everything that God has to give-can we go boldly to the throne of grace, and pray to be exempted from what He had to bear, or to be richly provided with indulgences which He never knew? What if all unanswered prayers might be defined as prayers for things not included in the promises-prayers that we might get what Christ did not get, or be spared what He was not spared? The spirit of this passage, however, does not urge so much the definiteness as the compass and the certainty of the promises of God. They are so many that Paul could never enumerate them, and all of them are sure in Christ. And when our eyes are once opened on Him, does not He Himself become as it were inevitably the substance of our prayers? Is not our whole hearts desire, Oh that I might win Him! Oh that He might live in me, and make me what He is! Oh that that Man might arise in me, that the man I am may cease to be! Do we not feel that if God would give us His Son, all would be ours that we could take or He could give?
It is in this mood-with the consciousness, I mean, that in Jesus Christ the sure promises of God are inconceivably rich and good-that the Apostle adds: “wherefore also through Him is the Amen.” It is not easy to put a prayer into words, whether of petition or thanksgiving, for men are not much in the habit of speaking to God: but it is easy to say Amen. That is the part of the Church when Gods Son, Jesus Christ, is proclaimed, clothed in His Gospel. Apart from the Gospel, we do not know God, or what He will do, or will not do, for sinful men; but as we listen to the proclamation of His mercy and His faithfulness, as our eyes are opened to see in His Son all He has promised to do for us, nay, in a sense, all He has already done, our grateful hearts break forth in one grand responsive Amen! So let it be! we cry. Unless God had first prompted us by sending His Son, we could never have found it in our hearts to present such requests to Him; but through Christ we are enabled to present them, though it should be at first with only a look at Him, and an appropriating Amen. It is the very nature of prayer, indeed, to be the answer to promise. Amen is all, at bottom, that God leaves for us to say.
The solemn acceptance of a mercy so great-an acceptance as joyful as it is solemn, since the Amen is one rising out of thankful hearts-rebounds to the glory of God. This is the final cause of redemption, and however it may be lost sight of in theologies which make man their center, it is always magnified in the New Testament. The Apostle rejoiced that his ministry and that of his friends ( ) contributes to this glory; and the whole connection of thought in the passage throws a light on a great Bible word. Gods glory is identified here with the recognition and appropriation by men of His goodness and faithfulness in Jesus Christ. He is glorified when it dawns on human souls that He has spoken good concerning them beyond their utmost imaginings, and when that good is seen to be indubitably safe and sure in His Son. The Amen in which such souls welcome His mercy is the equivalent of the Old Testament word, “Salvation is of the Lord.” It is expanded in an apostolic doxology: “Of Him, and through Him, and to Him are all things: to Him be glory forever.”