Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - 2 Corinthians 8:12 - 8:12
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
2Co_8:12. Confirmation of the ἐκ τοῦ ἔχειν by a general proposition. There is nothing to be supplied except the simple ἐστί after εὐπρόσδεκτος , so that ἡ προθυμία remains the subject (Vulg., Erasmus, and others, including Rückert, Osiander, Ewald). It is quite superfluous mentally to supply the non-genuine τις after ἔχῃ , and to refer εὐπρόσδ . to it (Billroth), all the more that Paul is fond of personifying abstractions ( ἡ προθυμία ). The correct translation is: For, if the inclination exists (presents itself as existing), it is well-pleasing in proportion to that which it has, not in proportion to that which it has not, i.e. God measures His good pleasure according to that which the πρόθυμος (who is ready to contribute) possesses, not according to that which he does not possess.[277] If, for example, the poor man who is ready to give little, because he has not much, were less pleasing to God than the rich man, who is willing to give much, God would then determine His good pleasure according to what the ΠΡΌΘΥΜΟς does not possess. Such an unjust standard God does not apply to good will! οὐ γὰρ τὴν ποσότητα , ἀλλὰ τῆς γνώμης ὁρᾶ τὴν ποιότητα , Theodoret. On ΠΡΌΚΕΙΤΑΙ in the sense specified, see Kypke, II. p. 259, and from Philo, Loesner, p. 312. Comp. ΠΑΡΆΚΕΙΤΑΙ , Rom_7:18. The interpretation prius adest, namely, tanquam boni operis fundamentum (Erasmus, Beza, Estius, and others), is not supported by linguistic usage, and there is no hint in the context of a reference to time. Flatt imports “unpleasing” into the negative half of the sentence; and Hofmann goes still further, since he finds in πρόκειται the realization of the good will, and attaches to this (not to εὐπρόσδ .) the ΚΑΘῸ ἘᾺΝ ἜΧῌ , while he thereupon adds the supplementary words Οὐ ΚΑΘῸ ΟὐΚ ἜΧΕΙ so as to form the sentence: “that is not the condition of the acceptableness of the good will, that it is present as realized according to the measure of what it has not.” In this way we should have mentally to add εἰ πρόκειται after Οὐ ; and Paul would not only have made use of a fragmentary mode of expression as unintelligibly as possible, but would withal have posited an inconceivable case, namely, that the good will is realized according to the measure of non-possession, which is tantamount to saying that the good will gives what it has not. And the assumption that πρόκειται denotes already the realization of the προθυμία by the act, is the more erroneous, that the one before whom the προθυμία is laid is here God, as is shown by εὐπρόσδεκτος . God, however, looks on the heart, and the frame of mind itself lies open before Him.
Note further the difference between the conditioned καθὸ ἐὰν ἔχῃ , in proportion to what he, under the respective circumstances of each case ( ἐάν = ἄν ), may have, and the unconditioned καθὸ οὐκ ἔχει . Comp. Hartung, Partikell. II. p. 293 f.; Klotz, ad Devar. p. 143.
[277] An evangelical commentary on this sentence is the story of the widow’s mite, Mar_12:42 ff.; Luk_21:2 ff.