Lange Commentary - 2 Corinthians 12:19 - 13:14

Online Resource Library

Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | Download

Lange Commentary - 2 Corinthians 12:19 - 13:14


(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)

This Chapter Verse Commentaries:

XVI—REPROOF OF SOME MORAL IMPERFECTIONS NOT YET REMOVED, AND ADMONITION TO SPARE HIM THE NECESSITY OF APOSTOLIC DISCIPLINE. CONCLUDING ENCOURAGEMENTS AND BENEDICTION

2Co_12:19-21. 2Co_13:1-14

19Again, think ye that we excuse ourselves unto you? [For a long time ye are thinking that it is to you that we are excusing ourselves ðÜëáé äï÷åῖôå ; ὅôé ὑìῖí ἀðïëïãüõìåèá ]; we speak before God in Christ: but we do all things, dearly beloved, [but all, beloved,] for your edifying. 20For I fear, lest, [haply ìÞðùò ] when I come, I shall not find you such as I would, and that I shall be found unto you such as ye would not: lest [haply] there be. debates [discord], envyings [emulation, æῆðùò ], wraths, 21 strifes, backbitings, whisperings, swellings, tumults: And lest, when I come again, my God will humble me among [with respect to, ðñὸò ] you, and that I shall bewail many which have sinned already, [before, ðñïçìáñôç÷üôùí ], and have not repented of the uncleanness and fornication and lasciviousness which they have committed.

2Co_13:1. This is the third time am coming to you. In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established. 2I told you before, and foretell you, as if I were present, the second time; and being absent now I write [I have said before, and now say beforehand as I did when I was present the second time, so now also in my absence, om. I write] to them which heretofore have sinned, and to all others, that, if I come again, I will not spare: 3Since ye seek a proof of Christ speaking in4 me, which [who] to you-ward is not weak, but is mighty in you. For though he [For He also, êáé ãὰñ ] was crucified through weakness, yet he liveth by the power of God. For we also [om. also] are weak in him, but we shall live with him11 by the power of God toward you. 5Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves, Know [or, know] ye not your own selves, how that Jesus6 Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates? [to some extend unapproved, ôὶ ὰäὁêéìïß ?] But I trust that ye shall know that we are not reprobates [unapproved]. 7Now I pray to [yet we pray, åὐ÷üìåèá äὲ ] God that ye do no evil; not that we should appear approved, but that ye should do that which is honest, [excellent], though we be as reprobates [as if unapproved]. 8For we can do nothing against the truth, but [we can do something] for the truth. 9For we are glad, [rejoice, ÷áßñïìåí ], when we are weak, and ye are strong: and also we wish, [pray for, åὐ÷üìἐèá ], even your perfection10 [prefect restoration, êáôÜñôéóí ]. Therefore I write these things being absent, lest being present I should use sharpness, according to the power which the Lord hath given me to [for, åἰò ] edification, and not to [for] destruction. 11Finally, brethren, farewell, [rejoice, ÷áßñåôå ] Be perfect [be restored to order, êáôáñôßæåóèå ], be of good comfort, 12 be of one mind, live in peace; and the God of love and peace shall be with you, greet one another with a holy kiss. 13All the saints salute you. The grace of our Lord 14Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Amen. [om. Amen].

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

2Co_12:19-21. For a long time ye are thinking that we are excusing ourselves unto you (ver.1).—Paul here guards against the erroneous impression which he anticipated some might receive from his self-defence, that he was standing in judgment before them; he assures them that his only object was to do them good. Nothing was then of more importance to him than their amendment, unless he was willing to have their whole conduct come before him in his judicial capacity. The interrogative form of the sentence would become necessary if we adopt the word ðÜëéí of the Receptus (a reading perhaps occasioned by 2Co_3:1); but it would be quite unsuitable if ðÜëáé be adopted. With this latter reading Paul must be understood to refer to what would take place, when his Epistle should be read or heard at Corinth, especially that part which was of an apologetical character. Ὑìῖí stands at the commencement of the sentence for the sake of emphasis. It is the dative of direction or tendency (with, or before you) as in Act_19:33. He was about to set before them the positive bearing of his self-defence upon them, i.e., to show them that its true object was to promote their spiritual life ( ïἰêïäïìÞ ). This required that all obstructions to his Apostolical influence, and all prejudices and wrong thoughts against him and his conduct among them, should be removed, and that all dependence upon their false teachers should be broken off. But before he presented this it was of consequence to assure them that he was standing with his apology at the bar of God, to whom alone he was responsible.—we speak before God in Christ, but all things, beloved, for your edification (2Co_12:19 b).—In these words (comp. 2Co_2:7) his object was not to affirm the sincerity of his purpose, but to let them know that it was to God that he was accountable, and from God that he expected an acquittal. The words in Christ ( ἐí ×ñéóôῷ ) point out the sphere in which he was speaking, one far above every human tribunal, as a Christian and an Apostle, conscious of his fellowship with Christ. In connection with the last clause ( ôὰ äὲ ðÜíôá ) we must supply ëáëïῦìåí (we speak) from the preceding sentence. Some would join the sentence with the preceding [and unite ôὰ and äὲ together] so as to read: ëáëïῦìåí ôáäå ðÜíôá , etc; but ôÜäå usually refers to that which follows it, and never is made use of by Paul in any other passage. [It refers here to something definite, and not to all things in general, for it is confined to those matters of which he had been speaking, and especially his apology for himself]. In this last clause also, he makes, by way of conciliation, a direct appeal to them as his beloved ones ( ἀãáðçôïß ), before entering upon a more severe remonstrance. The reason for this is apparent in 2Co_12:20-21.—For I fear that haply when I come, I shall not find you such as I would, and that I shall be found unto you such as ye would not (2Co_12:20 a).—He here notices the unhappy condition he had reason to fear they were in, and which called for these efforts on his part for their benefit. His first reference to this condition is very tender. He merely mentions the impression which such a state of things would necessarily make upon him when he should come among them, and he alludes to the proceedings which such a state would necessarily call forth from him. Even when he says, I fear lest, etc., he expresses the solicitude of a father, and his earnest desire that his intercourse with them might be free from annoyance; but in ìÞðùò we have something likewise of a conciliatory nature. [The word is used in two successive clauses (anaphora), but in the third (2Co_12:21) it is exchanged for ìὴ , inasmuch as the hesitation to express his thought in decisive terms wears away as he proceeds. The expressions: “such as ye would not,” and “such as I would,” are euphemistic, to avoid a more disagreeable phrase. The use of the verb èÝëù for âïýëïìáé was not uncommon, and yet we may recognize something of the specific meaning of èÝëù here, inasmuch as the Apostle meant perhaps to express some determination of the will in the case]. In êᾆãþ — ïἶïí ïὐ èÝëåôå he shows that he was painfully conscious of an Apostolic power of discipline which he would be obliged to exert; and he now reappears in that triumphant attitude of authority which he had formerly assumed (comp. Meyer). ̓ Õìῖí has not the sense of: by you, but to you, or for you, as in Rom_7:10. The position of the second ïὐ before the èÝëåôå is especially emphatic. What he meant by such as he would not, he shows in greater detail in the second part of 2Co_12:20 and in 2Co_12:21.—lest I shall find, perchance, among you debate, emulation, passions, contentions, slanderings, whisperings, insolences, tumults (2Co_12:20).—The unpleasant things which he found are arranged under two different relations, according to the two different kinds of moral defect he knew to be in the Church. [Bengel: “That which was not such as he would, is treated of to the end of the chapter, then what was such as they would not, is treated of from 2Co_8:1 and onwards.” Such vices indicate how great were the difficulties to be met with in churches just emerged from heathenism, but we are not to suppose them prevalent among that portion which Paul had described in chap. 7 as penitent and obedient]. Not, however, until the commencement of the next chapter does he come to speak of the exercise of his Apostolic power to punish offenders (for in the next verse he brings before us another kind of offences). To ìÞðùò ἔñéò , etc., must be supplied åὑñåèῶóéí (or ὦóéí ) ἐí ὑìῖí . We have ἔñéò and æῆëïò in 1Co_3:3, and ἔñéò in 1Co_1:11; on ἔñéäåò comp. Winer, § 9 [p. 59, Philad. ed.]. Èõìïß occurs also in Gal_5:20, and signifies vehement passion, boiling emotion. Èõìüò signifies the heart as the seat of passionate emotion, and then this emotion itself—passion, wrath, rage; the plural is found also in the classic writers. ̓ Åñßèåéá signifies hired work, mercenariness, love of intrigue, a disposition to foment parties. See Rom_2:8; Gal_5:20; Php_1:17; Php_2:3; Jam_3:14; Jam_3:16 (not of ἔñéò ) Com. Meyer and Fritzsche on Rom_2:8. Êáôáëáëéáß signifies, evil reports in general; øéèõñßóìïß , secret slanderings. The original verb of öõóéþóåéò is used with reference to the insolence of faction, an arrogant conceit of knowledge, and arrogance with respect to gifts in general, in 1Co_4:6; 1Co_8:1; 1Co_13:4. ̓ Áêáôáóôáóßáé occurs in 2Co_6:5; 1Co_14:33. In addition to these moral defects, which had their origin in the factious spirit prevailing at Corinth, and hence called for decisive measures, the Apostle now proceeds (2Co_12:21) to mention some manifestations of that sensuality for which their city was noted.—Lest again when I come, my God shall humble me with respect to you (2Co_12:21 a).—There is no need of commencing a new period here, and so of giving this whole verse an interrogative form. The reading ôáðåéíþóåé does not require this, for this word, like the ìÞ (previously ìÞðùò ), indicates simply an increased anxiety that such a sad calamity should not come upon him. We may also notice that a question calling for a negative answer (comp. 2Co_12:17-18) would not be appropriate in this connection (2Co_12:20). The ðÜëéí qualifies the whole phrase: ἐëèüíôïò ìïõ ôáðåéíþóåé ìå (comp. 2Co_2:1), and not merely either ἐëèüíôïò ìïõ or ôáðåéíþóåé . He does not intend to say that he had experienced a similar mortification during some former visit [and yet comp. 2Co_2:1. We see not how ðÜëéí can have its force without supposing some reference to a former visit, even if it should be made to qualify ἐëèüíôïò alone. And yet this could not have been his first visit when he had great success and general joy in spite of his persecutions, but certainly no such humiliations. We are obliged to think of a second unrecorded visit between his first and second Epistle. See on 2Co_12:1 of the next chapter]. The genitive absolute here is remarkable, and hence the reading in the Receptus. The ôáðåéíïῦí has reference not to the exercise of discipline among them, as if this would produce a feeling of humiliation on account of his love to the Church and to the Lord, and would be traceable to God because it would take place according to the Divine will, but rather to the mortification the Apostle would experience if he were compelled to see the fruit of his labors among them utterly destroyed, and thus to find all his boasting either much abated or completely wrested from him. Should such a humiliation come upon him, he would trace it to the hand of God, and receive it as a wholesome discipline. He would therefore humbly submit himself to it, and find consolation in the reflection that the God who did it was his God (Rom_1:8; 1Co_1:4), the God whom he served, and with whom he was in such intimate fellowship that the interests of one were the interests of both. If we give the word the sense of: to trouble, or to grieve, it will have precisely the same signification with ðåíèÞóù . Ðñὸò ὐìᾶò has here the sense, not of: with or among you, for with such a meaning it would be superfluous, but of: in respect to you.—And I shall bewail many of those who have sinned before and have not repented of the uncleanness and fornication and lasciviousness which they have committed (2Co_12:21 b). The word ðåíèåῖí signifies, to mourn, to lament, lugere, especially for the dead, etc. It expresses the genuine feeling of a spiritual pastor (comp. Calvin), and perhaps it alludes to the idea of a spiritual death. It expresses either the sorrow he would feel on account of their impenitence (Meyer), or the grief he would feel in denouncing punishment or in excommunicating them (De Wette, et al.). [In ancient times sentence of condemnation in the Church was pronounced with outward signs of sorrow and mourning; see 1Co_5:2; 2Co_7:7; 2Co_7:9 (Old Paraphrase). Perhaps the customs attending excommunication were derived from an extreme interpretation of such passages]. The objects of this sorrow are mentioned when he says: ðïëëïὺò ôῶí ðñïçìáñôçêüôùí êáὶ ìὴ ìåôáíïçóÜíôùí , etc. This is not an inexact form for designating a general class, instead of saying ôïὺò ìὴ ìåôáíïὴóáíôáò ; many, i.e., who have not repented. But the Apostle had not in mind all unconverted sinners, in every congregation, among whom he gave especial prominence to those in Corinth by using the word ðïëëὸõò (Lücke), for nothing in the context warrants us in giving such an extension to- the idea. He unquestionably had his eye upon sinners in Corinth alone, when he used the phrase ðñïçìáñôçêüôåò , etc. But our further explanation must depend upon the answer to the question, whether ἐðὶ ôῇ ἀêáèáñóßᾳ etc., should be connected with ìåôáíïçóÜíôùí or with ðåíèÞóù . The first method would be without analogy, so far as the New Testament is concerned, for in every instance there, ìåôáí . is construed with ἀðü or ἐê (with ἐðß only in the Old Testament, in Joe_2:13, and Amo_7:3, where the ìåôáíïåῖí in both cases is the act of God). And yet it is probably admissible, even if the idea of a mere change of mind without that of sorrow for sin, be connected with the word. It would then signify, a change of mind in respect to, or on account of, etc. [Osiander draws attention to the contrast of ðñï : and ìåôá :] The connection of the words with ðåíèÞóù seems rather unusual and strange, inasmuch as in other places we meet with ðåíèåῖí ἐðß ôéíé in the sense of: to lament over something, but not with ðåíèåῖí ôéíá ἐðß ôéíé . It is, however, not altogether unallowable on this account. If we adopt the first mode of connecting the words, we must understand by ðïëëïýò the worst among the class of persons mentioned (De Wette, Osiander), i.e., those whom he would be obliged to punish by excluding them from the Church ( ðåíèåῖí would then be: to mourn for them as dead persons; and it is used with respect to such an act in 1Co_5:2). If we adopt the other mode, ðñïçìáñôçêüôåò etc., would signify those who had in any manner sinned, etc., and we should make the Apostle say that he feared he should have to mourn over many of these on account of the sins of the flesh, of which they were guilty; and he designs to mention here the other class of sins which were most prevalent at Corinth i.e., besides those mentioned in 2Co_12:20). We prefer the second of the methods, because the reference to the excommunication of the worst contains something unnatural, and 1Co_5:2 by no means justifies us in referring ðåíèÞóù to such a transaction. Against this second method no objection should be urged on account of the position of ðåíèÞóù , nor of the thought itself, to mourn for one on account of such things. ÐåíèÞóù stands at the commencement of the clause for the sake of emphasis, and ἐðß stands not at a very extraordinary distance from it. The Apostle might very reasonably be understood to mourn over such impenitent persons on account of their sins, even though he does not in this place, as in other places (comp. 1Co_6:9-10), bring prominently before us the consequences of those sins. The ðñï , however, refers not to the period before their conversion, but to the time preceding his second visit, when misunderstandings had begun to prevail, and when he had admonished them to repent (comp. 2Co_13:2), though with so little success that he found the peculiar faults mentioned in 2Co_12:20-21 were still prevalent among them. ̓ Áêáèáñáßá signifies sins of a sensual nature generally, such as defiled both soul and body, Rom_1:24; Gal_5:19; Eph_4:19. Ðïñíåßá (1Co_5:1), and ἀóÝëãåéá (wantonness, shamelessness, voluptuousness, Rom_13:13; Gal_5:19, et al.), are particular exhibitions of ἀêáèáñóßá . ÐñÜóóåéí signifies, to bring about, achieve (comp. Passow). We do not (with Meyer and Osiander) make ìὴ ìåôáíïçóÜíôùí refer to those who should be impenitent at the anticipated coming of the Apostle at Corinth: “and shall not have repented,” but to the fruitlessness of his admonitions when he was among them the second time. [The perfect in ðñïçì . has here a special force and significance, implying that the sins were continued, and were not overcome by a true repentance. The aorist of ìὴ ìåôáí . is in contrast with this, and we see no reason why it may not be taken in the sense of a futur. exact, i.e., those who will not have repented when I shall be with you].

2Co_13:1-4. This is the third time I am coming to you (2Co_13:1 a).—Now follows the Apostle’s announcement of his determination to proceed with an unsparing judicial severity, in accordance with what he had said in 2Co_12:20 : êᾳ ̇ ãὼ åὑñçèῶ ὑìῖí , ïἰïí ïὐ èÝëåôå . Ôñßôïí ôïῦôï signifies here: this is the third time, as in Joh_21:14, et al. Ἔñ÷ïìáé speaks of his actual coming, and presupposes that he had been at Corinth twice before this (it cannot refer to a mere purpose or plan of such a journey, nor to a coming by letters).

[General note on Paul’s visits to Corinth. It seems to us impossible to interpret 2Co_13:1, on any other view than that Paul had previously been twice at Corinth. It cannot be made to mean simply, this is the second time É have been ready , and if it could it would have been a most unfortunate reference, in which he would rather remind his readers of his failure actually to come. The usual appeal to 2Co_12:14, is unsatisfactory, not only because our passage should not be a repetition of that, but because the proper idea of that is, I am ready to come the third time. The word äéÝñ÷ïìáé in 1Co_16:5, is not quite to the point (Wordsworth), since it would only show how the will was taken for the fact, but would not account for his expected coming, being the third of a series of the same kind. Certainly no one, reading 2Co_13:1, without a previous bias, would ever think of anything but a third actual visit. In 2Co_2:1, Paul also implies that he had once visited them “in heaviness,” evidently on account of the misconduct of Christians there; in 2Co_12:21 he intimates that God had then humbled him; and in 2Co_13:2 (rightly rendered) he implies that he had then given them warning that if he came again he would not spare them. Now when could that visit have been paid? The whole idea is unsuitable to the first visit when the church was formed. Nor could it have been after that which we now call the First Epistle, when he announced his intention to remain at Corinth until Pentecost (1Co_16:8), and after “the Epistle” in which he had written to them “not to keep company with fornicators” (1Co_5:9), and answered the inquiries the Corinthians had made of him (1Co_7:1). See Introd. § 6. But we know that Paul resided at Ephesus during the whole time between his first visit to Corinth and his journey through Macedonia, during which he wrote our present Second Epistle. There must, however, have been time enough after his departure from Corinth for the springing up of the disorders which were censured in that unrecorded visit, and the subsequent lost Epistle, and for the sending of a letter and perhaps a deputation from the Corinthian Church to Paul (1Co_7:1; 1Co_1:11; 1Co_16:17). On the supposition that Paul came to Ephesus late in the year 54, Alford ventures to place the unrecorded journey in the Spring of 55, and the lost Epistle in the Spring of 57, or at least early in the same year in which he left Ephesus for Macedonia (1Co_16:8). As Ephesus and Corinth were the usual points of transit between Asia and Europe, Paul might easily have made a brief visit of the kind supposed, but as it was attended with no special results, it was not mentioned in the Acts. The shipwrecks and disasters at sea mentioned in 2Co_11:23-28, indicate that Paul must have made several voyages during his missionary life, which are not recorded. Comp. Alford, Introd. to Cor. § 5., and Essay on How to use the Epistles in Sun. Mag. for 1867. J. L. Davies, Art. Paul in Smith’s Dict. of the Bible].

In the mouth of two witnesses and of three shall every word be established (ver. l b).—By a citation from the very letter of the Law in Deu_19:15, the Apostle lets them see how rigid and precise were to be his disciplinary proceedings when he should come to them this third time. He would so arrange the proceedings that the witnesses should be heard in the presence of the congregation (comp. 1Co_5:12-13; 1Co_5:3, etc.), for in the trial of notorious offences, it would be necessary to adhere strictly to all legal forms, that he might avoid any appearance of partiality. Ῥῇìá [the word, after the Hebrew manner] stands here for the matter, cause, conduct or charge in dispute. ÓôáèÞóåôáé , signifies: shall be established, determined or brought to a decision. ̓ Åðὶ óôüìáôïò , i.e., on account of what is spoken. The êáß instead of ἤ before ôñéῶí was designed to imply, and by three, as if there are so many; or, also by three, if he had said, from two to three. The free application which some have made of this citation from the law, (either to his repeated warnings and their certainty and validity; or to those repeated announcements of his coming with the accompanying warnings and threatenings which were equally sure to prove true; or to the various occasions on which he had been or was about to be present among them, as if these were distinct personal witnesses to establish the truth of the matter) seems to us by no means ingenious or plausible, even if we accept the more delicate and profound explanation which Osiander proposes, viz., that his apostolic visits among them were, in consequence of their repetition, not merely means by which he directly saw them, but distinct practical attestations of his faithful testimony among them, deposing against those who should continue impenitent (comp. Mat_8:4; Mat_10:18).—Whether any relation was intended between ôñßôïí and ôñéῶí is very uncertain. Inasmuch as he was about to announce in 2Co_13:2, that he was now determined to proceed in an unsparing manner against them, it is difficult to perceive in what way he can imply that he was especially patient in delaying and in repeatedly warning them.—What is said in 1Ti_5:19 shows that the law in such matters was not looked upon as abrogated. [Its validity, however, depended upon its general reasonableness and upon Christ’s recognition and re-institution (Mat_18:15) and not upon the perpetual obligation of the Mosaic precept].—I have said already and now say beforehand, as when I was present the second time so now also in my absence, to them which heretofore have sinned and to all the rest (2Co_13:2 a).—The verb ðñïåßñçêá (I have said before) has reference to previous announcements which still remained in force (perfect tense), and ðñïëÝãù (I foretell) to what he was then writing [in which he probably used precisely the same words, viz.: “If I come again,” etc.] With respect to the former, he says: that he had said when present the second time, i.e., as I did when I was present the second time; and with respect to the latter he says, I say beforehand, now when I am absent ( êáὶ ἀðὼí íῦí , comp. 2Co_13:10). There is a correspondence between the two clauses ðñïåßñçêá and ðñïëÝãù on the one hand, and ôὸ äåὺôåñïí and íῦí on the other, and hence the ôὸ äåýôåñïí should not be separated from ðáñþí and connected with ðñïëÝãù . It is evident from 2Co_13:1 ( ôñßôïí ôïῦôï ἒñ÷ïìáé ) and other passages, that the Apostle had already been twice at Corinth, and hence there is no need of the interpretation here: “as if I were present the second time, although I am now absent.” The ðñïçìáñôçêüôåò were those in general who had previously sinned (and even then [open perfect] continued to do so), whether before his second visit ( ὡò ðáñὼí ôὸ äåýôåñïí ), or until his present writing ( ἀðὼí íῦí ). The ëïéðïß were not those who had become impure after those just mentioned, as if ðñïçìáñô . were related to ðñïåßñçêá and ïἱ ëïéðïß to ðñïëÝãù , for such an expression would be not only forced but indistinct. It means rather the remaining members of the congregation, either such as witnessed his threatenings, or (better) such as should be brought by his warnings and their own reflection to a reformation, and hence such as would not fall under discipline. The substance of what he had thus told them, and now foretold them, was:—that if I come again I will not spare (2Co_13:2 b).—In the words åἰò ôὸ ðÜëéí the ðÜëéí which had been used as a noun, is converted by the åἰò back again into an adverb. Why it was that he had been so lenient on his second visit is not told us; it may have been because he had hoped that they would themselves come to a better mind by reflection, or because he had feared that he would only make matters worse, etc. With ïὐ öåßóïìáé is intimately connected what is said in 2Co_13:3.—Since ye seek a proof of Christ speaking in me, who toward you is not weak, but is strong among you (2Co_13:3).—The reason he would not spare them, is introduced by ἐðåß : “I will not spare, since now ye seek, and indeed challenge by your conduct a proof,” etc. Others make ἐðåὶ æçôåῖôå the protasis or conditional proposition to 2Co_13:5, and regard the words, “Who is not weak toward you—by the power of God toward you,” or at least the whole of 2Co_13:4, as a parenthesis. Such a construction, however, seems unnecessary and awkward. ÄïêéìÞí , which stands for emphasis at the commencement of the sentence, signifies: proof, trial, verification by experiment [see on 2Co_2:9]. The genitive, however, may be either of the object: the proof of the fact, etc., i.e., the proof that Christ is speaking in me; or of the subject: that Christ may give proof that He is in me. That which follows, who is not weak toward you, etc., is rather in favor of the latter interpretation. In the words, Christ speaking in me, he had reference not merely to Christ’s speaking through him ( ἐí = äéÜ ), but to Christ’s being and acting in him. By their impenitent conduct they were putting Him to the proof whether he could carry out what He had threatened against them, and so they challenged Him to make a demonstration of His power to punish them. What is said in the relative sentence, was intended to make them consider how dangerous such a challenge was: “who is not weak with respect to you [ åἰò ], but is mighty among [ ἐí ] you.” In this he refers not to earlier manifestations of this power among them by means of spiritual gifts and miracles, etc., but to such an exercise of it among them as would become indispensable to punish them if they continued impenitent. The word äõíáôåῖ occurs nowhere else except here and in Rom_14:4, though it is analogous to ἀäõíáôåῖ , and was perhaps occasioned by the use of ἀóèåíåῖ . The reason for the assertion that Christ was not weak but mighty, he now proceeds to give in 2Co_13:4 :—For he also was crucified on account of weakness, but he lives on account of the power of God (2Co_13:4 a). The Apostle here reminds them that Christ was once reduced to an extremity of weakness, but that he now lived by the power of God. That extremity was when He endured crucifixion in consequence of the human infirmity which He had experienced in the season of His (voluntary) humiliation and privation (Php_2:7-11). Ἑê here designates the cause or origin. The æῇí refers to the life of absolute power (energy) which began with Christ’s resurrection, was derived from God, and was afterwards proved by influences among men (comp. Rom_6:4; Act_2:33; Eph_1:20-23; Php_2:9). If we accept the reading: êáὶ ãὰñ åἰ (which Osiander with Tischendorf adopts as the lect. diffic.), åἰ must be taken as concessive, and by itself it seems not inconsistent with the ἀëëÜ which follows. But êáὶ ãὰñ does not correspond with ἀëëÜ very well, inasmuch as it signifies not merely: for, but: for even. Êáὶ ãὰñ åἰ would then signify: for even (although) if. But êáὶ åἰ indicates that the condition must be looked upon as an extreme one, and not to be expected. On the other hand åἰ êáß would have implied that this condition was probable or certain, but that for the argument in hand it was a matter of indifference. We are obliged in this case to suppose that there has been an exchanging of êáὶ åἰ for åἰ êáß , which must be ascribed to some transcriber having interpolated the åἰ , rather than to Paul. A concessive protasis appears appropriate on account of the ἀëëÜ . The solution of the difficulty which Osiander proposes, viz., that the êáß implies that the case of Christ was similar to that of his ministers, does not seem clear to us, and indeed appears unintelligible. The best way would seem to be, to leave out the åἰ , as it may easily have been inserted. It is evident that the Apostle looked upon this as the actual condition in which Christ was, for he now proceeds to show that he himself was in the same condition of weakness and life through the power of God:—for we also are weak in him, but we shall live together with him through the power of God toward you (2Co_13:4 b).—It is evident, therefore, that he leaves us to infer what must be the condition of Christ from that of one who stood in fellowship with Christ ( ἐí — óὺíáὐôῷ ); inasmuch as the condition of the former was reflected or was repeated in that of his followers, or was the consequence of it. ̓ Áóèåíïῦìåí refers not to the Apostle’s sufferings, but to his appearing to lack power when he spared the Corinthians It must be regarded, therefore, as something which was like Christ’s own weakness, voluntarily assumed. He describes it also by the words ἐí áὐôῷ as something which was the consequence of his fellowship with Christ [Winer’s Idioms, § 52, p. 311 note], and therefore like Christ’s own weakness transient and temporary, inasmuch as the Divine power which made Christ alive would necessarily and in that very act make alive all who were connected with him ( óὺí ἀõôῷ ). And indeed, åἰò ὑìᾶò indicates that his being alive would be manifested in the energy by which they would be directed. There is no reference in the word æῃí , as here used, to the future resurrection, but it means simply to be vigorous, to be full of life. Neander: “In the discharge of our Apostolic authority among you will be manifested the Divine power of a risen and glorified Christ.” [The Apostle, in this passage, surely claims that Christ spoke and acted in him, and we reasonably infer that his Apostolic words, Epistles and acts were those of an infallible Christ within him. It has been said that he never advanced such a claim. Not only in the ἀëëὰ , which occurs in both clauses of 2Co_13:4, but in the use of the present ( æῇἀóèåíïῦìåí ) and the future ( æÞóïìåí ) in opposition to ( ἐóôáíñþèç ), we have a strong contrast with the resurrection and all its endless and perpetual influences through Christ and His people].

2Co_13:5-10.—Examine your own selves whether ye are in the faith, prove your own selves (2Co_13:5 a).—In opposition to the thought represented in 2Co_13:3, according to which they desired a proof of Christ in him, the Apostle presents the demand that they should direct their examination to their own selves. For the sake of emphasis ἐáõôïýò is put first. ÐåéñÜæåéí signifies, to make proof or trial of one, to tempt (1Co_10:9, ἐêðåéñÜæåéí ×ñéóôüí which is here the same as äïêéìὴí æçôåῖí , etc.). [On the ordinary distinction to be observed between these expressions, see Trench, Synn. 2d Part, p. 119ff]. He then more particularly defines the point to which that self-examination should be directed, i.e., whether they were in the faith; thus probably intimating that their äïêéìὴõ æçôåῖí betrayed a serious defect in that respect, inasmuch as they would hardly have needed any proof of Christ in him if they had been in the faith. To be in the faith, or, to esteem themselves standing in the faith, were phrases which designated a living Christianity, the original principle of which is a faith laying hold of Christ, surrendering the whole heart to Him, and in this way bringing us into fellowship with Him (not: fides qaæ creditur, in contrast with erroneous doctrines; and also not the faith of miracles). The äïêéìÜæåéí also is not in this passage equivalent to äüêéìïí ðïéåῖí but as in 1Co_11:28, it signifies, to try, to inquire into the worthiness of a thing, with the view of accurately distinguishing between what is and what is not genuine. The word here properly refers back to their seeking a proof of Christ ( äïêéìὴí æçåῖôå ). The essential nature of the faith is further pointed out in the succeeding clause.—Or know ye not your own selves, that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye are to some extent unapproved (ver.5b) ?—(Comp. Eph_3:17; Gal_2:20). The use of the entire name Ἰçóïῦò ×ñéóôüò indicates more than usual solemnity, and implies that the presence of Christ’s spirit, by faith, in the Church and in the hearts of its members, produces a practical fellowship with the whole person of Christ (comp. 2Co_6:16; 1Co_3:16; Eph_2:21-22). In ἐáõôïýò , ὅôé — ἐí ὑìῖí we have an attraction of a peculiar kind (where the attracted word is not the subject of the succeeding sentence). [Winer’s Idioms, § 63, 3. a. p. 396]. Yourselves ( ἐáõôüõò ) in this connection is emphatic, since it is contrasted with Christ speaking in you, in 2Co_13:3. [Our English version entirely overlooks the ἢ at the head of the clause.] There are two ways by which ἢ ïὐê ἔðéãéí . etc., may be connected in sense with that which precedes it; according to the first, the spiritual relation which Christ sustained toward them, and of which indeed they must be conscious if they were Christians, imposed on them the obligation to examine more carefully into their relation to Him and their conduct toward Him, and of course into their faith, in order to ascertain whether it was not wavering (Osiander). According to the second, he appeals to their sense of honor, and implies that for this reason they should not shrink from self-examination; i.e., they surely ought not to be so entirely destitute of a Christian spirit as not to know their own selves (Meyer, deWette). In either case there was a motive for self-examination; but the ἢ ïí ̓ ê argues in favor of the latter method. In åἰ ìÞôé ἀäüêéìïéἐóôå , he intended to say, that they would find this to be the case with themselves, unless they should prove to be unworthy, spurious Christians (Osiander: He throws out a doubt of that gracious state to which they laid claim, in the same proportion in which they were ignorant of their relation to Christ and did not examine themselves). Ἐé ìÞôé is used in 1Co_7:5; and the ôé has the effect rather to soften the force of the expression [unless ye are “somewhat reprobates,” or “to some extent abide not the proof”]. Áäüêéìïé has reference to äïêéìÜæåôå and äïêéìÞí which he had previously used.—But I trust ye shall know that we are not unapproved (2Co_13:6).—This verse is intimately connected with the latter part of 2Co_13:5. Áäüêéìïé , in this verse, has reference to Paul’s power as an Apostle to punish offenders, and he expresses the hope that (in case he should be compelled to exercise it) they would find him [if they ventured to put him to the proof] (in this respect) not unapproved, i.e., as one who throws out empty threatenings, but is too feeble to execute the but rather one who would make those who perseveringly resisted him feel his power (comp. 2Co_13:7; 2Co_13:9). This was the äïêéìÞ which they sought (2Co_13:3). His hope, however, was not fixed exclusively upon the punishment in itself, but upon the proper authentication of his office, the maintenance of his Apostolic authority by such means. The interpretation which maintains that ãíþóåóèå (ye shall know) is to be understood, not of an experimental knowledge, but of a knowledge gained by their reformation in consequence of his warning, or by an observation of his life and works as an Apostle [i.e., if you put our Apostolical power to the test by appealing to our clemency], is not quite consistent with the general scope of the passage. The same may be said of the view which aims to mediate between the different explanations, and maintains that the knowledge was to be obtained partly by an examination of themselves and partly by their experience of ecclesiastical discipline.—But in 2Co_13:7 he shows that he would gladly be spared such an authentication of his power:—But we pray God that ye do no evil (2Co_13:7 a);—His desire is expressed in the form of a prayer. The explanation which makes ὑìᾶò the object and the Apostle himself the subject of ðïéῆóáé [that I may do you no evil], is unsatisfactory: 1, because he could not apply such a designation to the punishment he inflicted; 2, because êáêὸí ðïéåῖí ìçäÝí has an evident reference to ôὸ êáëὸí ðïéåῖí [the one being what is morally bad or worse, and the other what is morally honorable, beautiful and right].—not that we should appear approved, but that ye should do what is good, though we be as unapproved (2Co_13:7 b).—He here expresses what was more particularly the purport of his prayer. (We should observe the change which here takes place in the construction: the infinitive and ἵíá , comp. ðñïóåý÷åóèáé ἵíá Col_1:9; 2Th_1:11). The prayer was not (I pray or I desire), that he might appear approved (in consequence of the infliction of punishment, or the accomplishment of his threatenings) but that the Corinthians might do well (that which is right), though he should be unapproved (inasmuch as his threatenings would remain unfulfilled, or seem needless and uncalled for). [In this case he would use the word ἀäüêéìïò in two different senses: in the one sense he would not be unapproved, since the reformation of the Corinthians would be the best proof of his Apostolic power, but in another sense he would be unapproved, because he would fail in the fulfilment of his threatenings, on account of their reformation. He meant to say that he cared not for being unapproved in the latter sense, since they would be saved and edified. Comp. Stanley]. Another explanation is given by Meyer, who takes ἵíá in the sense of, that, in order that, and understands äüêéìïé of the approbation which would be awarded to him as their spiritual father, if they should conduct themselves well; but he makes ἀäüêéìïé . refer to his failure in exercising and applying his power as an Apostle to inflict punishment. It must be conceded that the idea advanced in this first explanation lies not within the range of thought pursued by the context, and yet it would not be inconsistent with Paul’s manner, to say that the good conduct of his readers might make him seem in one aspect äüêéìïò and in another ἀäü&