Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - 2 Corinthians 8:3 - 8:5
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
2Co_8:3-5. Ὅτι is not dependent on γνωρίζομεν (Hofmann), but gives the proof of what was just said: εἰς τὸν πλοῦτον τῆς ἁπλ . αὐτ .
The construction is plain; for there is no need to supply an ἦσαν , as many wish, after αὐθαίρετοι or after δεόμενοι , but, as Bengel aptly remarks: “ ἔδωκαν … totam periochae structuram sustinet.” Comp. Fritzsche, Dissert. II. p. 49; Billroth, Ewald, Osiander, Hofmann. There are, namely (and in accordance therewith the punctuation is to be fixed), four modal definitions attached to this ἔδωκαν : They gave (1) according to and beyond their means; (2) of their ovm impulse; (3) urgently entreating us for the χάρις and κοινωνία κ . τ . λ .; and (4) not as we hoped, but themselves, etc. This last modal definition is naturally and quite logically attached by καί (hence καὶ οὐ καθὼς ἠλπίσ .); and Rückert (comp. de Wette and Neander) is arbitrary in holding this καί to prove that Paul allowed the sentence he had begun to drop, and appended a new one, so that after ἠλπίσαμεν we should have to supply an ἐγένετο or ἐποίησαν .
μαρτυρῶ ] I testify it, a parenthetic assurance. Comp. the Greek use of οἶμαι and the like (Bornem. ad Xen. Conv. p. 71, 179; Stallb. ad Plat. Gorg. p. 460 A).
παρὰ δύναμιν ] i.e. more amply than was accordant with their resources. See Homer, Il. xiii. 787; Thucyd. i. 70. 2; Lucian. Nigr. 28, de Dom. 10. The same, in substantial meaning, is ὑπὲρ δύναμιν , 2Co_1:8; Dem. 292. 25. It forms, with κατὰ δύναμ ., a climactic definition of ἔδωκαν , not of αὐθαίρ ., to which it is not suitabl.
αὐθαίρετοι ] excludes human persuasion or compulsion, not the divine influence (see 2Co_8:5, διὰ θελήματος θεοῦ ); we must not, with Rückert, hold it, on account of the remark 2Co_9:2, to be an exaggeration, since the latter notice does not deny the self-determination of the Macedonians, but, when compared with our passage, exhibits as the real state of the case this, that Paul had boasted of the readiness of the Achaeans before the Macedonians, but without exhortation to the latter, and that these thereupon, of their own accord, without urging, had resolved on making a contribution, and had given very amply. Comp. Chrysostom on 2Co_9:2. αὐθαίρετος , free-willed, self-determined, only here and at 2Co_8:17 in the N. T., often in the classic writers; seldom of persons (Xen. Anab. v. 7. 29; Lucian. Catapl. 4). Comp. the adverb in 2Ma_6:19; 3Ma_6:6.
μετὰ πολλῆς … εἰς τ . ἁγίους ] to be taken together: with much exhortation entreating us for the kindness and the participation of the service being rendered for the saints, i.e. urgently entreating us that the kindness might be shown them of permitting them to take active part in the … work of collections. Οὐχ ἡμεῖς αὐτῶν ἐδεήθημεν , ἀλλʼ αὐτοὶ ἡμῶν , Chrysostom; and in the κοινωνία sought they saw a kindness to be shown to themselves: they knew how to value the work of love thus highly. The χάρις , namely, here is not grace from God (Hofmann and the older commentators), since it was requested from the apostle, but τὴν χάριν κ . τ . κοινων . is a true ἓν διὰ δυοῖν (the favour, and indeed the partaking, i.e. the favour of partaking). See Fritzsche, ad Matth. p. 854, and generally, Nägelsbach on Il. iii. 100, p. 461, ed. 3. Bengel, who likewise rejects the δέξασθαι ἡμᾶς of the Recepta, connects τὴν χάριν κ . τὴν κοινωνίαν κ . τ . λ . with ἔδωκαν ; but what a prolix designation of the withal quite self-evident object of ἔδωκαν would that be, while δεόμενοι ἡμῶν would remain quite open and void of definition! On δεῖσθαι , with accusative of the thing and genitive of the person, comp. Plato, Apol. p. 18 A, p. 41 E; Xen. Cyrop. i. 4. 12; Anab. vii. 3. 5; 3 Esd. 8:53. Yet in the classics the accusative of the object is the neuter of a pronoun, like τοῦτο ὑμῶν δέομαι ; ὅπερ ὑμῶν δέομαι , and the like, or of an adjective (Krüger on Thuc. i. 32. 1).
τῆς εἰς τοὺς ἁγίους ] In this addition (comp. 1Co_16:1), which would in itself be superfluous, there lies a motive of the δεόμενοι .
καὶ οὐ καθὼς ἠλπίσαμεν ] for but a little could be expected from the oppressed and poor Macedonians! Οὐ περὶ τῆς γνώμης λέγει , ἀ̓ λλὰ περὶ τοῦ πλήθους τῶν χρημάτων , Theodoret. According to Hofmann, the words are meant only to affirm that the Macedonians had joined in the contribution quite of their own resolution, which had not been expected by the apostle. But in this case the remark, which on this interpretation would be no independent element, but only the negative expression of what was already said in αὐθαίρετοι , would have had its logical position immediately behind αὐθαίρετοι ; and it must have run not as it is written by Paul, but: καθὲς οὐκ ἠλπίσαμεν . No, the apostle says: and their giving did not remain within the limits of the hope which we had formed regarding them, but far surpassed these ( ἀλλʼ ἑαυτοὺς κ . τ . λ .).
ἀλλʼ ἑαυτοὺς κ . τ . λ .] but themselves they gave, etc. An expression of the highest Christian readiness of sacrifice and liberality, which, by giving up all individual interests, is not only a contribution of money, but a self-surrender, in the first instance, to the Lord, since in fact Christ is thereby served, and also to him who conducts the work of collection, since he is to the giver the organ of Christ. Flatt and Billroth, following Mosheim and Heumann, are wrong in making πρῶτον before in the sense: before I asked them. This reference is not in the least implied in the immediate context ( οὐ καθὼς ἠλπίσ .); and if it were, πρῶτον must have had the first place:[269] ἀλλὰ πρῶτον ἑαυτοὺς ἔδωκαν κ . τ . λ . As the words stand, ἑαυτούς has the emphasis of the contrast with οὐ καθὼς ἠλπίσ . Bengel also (comp. Schrader) is wrong in thinking that in πρῶτον there is implied prae munere: the Macedonians, before they made collection, had first given themselves to the Lord, and then left it to the apostle to determine how large their contribution should be. In that case there must have been inserted καὶ τὰ χρήματα ἡμῖν , or something similar, as a correlative to ἑαυτοὺς πρῶτον τῷ κυρίῳ . It is wrong to find in ἑαυτούς the idea merely of voluntarily.[270] without any summons, because it is object of the having given. It must have run: αὐτοὶ ἑαυτοὺς κ . τ . λ . (comp. 2Co_1:9), or without stress on the self-object, ἈΦʼ ἙΑΥΤῶΝ .
ΚΑῚ ἩΜῖΝ ] Paul does not say ἜΠΕΙΤΑ ἩΜῖΝ (in opposition to the usual opinion that καί stands for ἜΠΕΙΤΑ ; so also Rückert), because the surrender to the Lord is not a prius in time, but in degree: to the Lord before all, and to us. So Rom_1:16; Rom_2:9-10.
διὰ θελήμ . θεοῦ ] not exactly an expression of modesty (Billroth),—for it is only arbitrary to limit it merely to καὶ ἡμῖν (so also Bengel, Ewald),—but added quite according to the requirement of religious feeling: for God has, according to His will, so wrought on their dispositions, that they, etc. Comp. 2Co_8:1; 2Co_8:16.
[269] This also in opposition to Hofmann, who, in consistency with his inappropriate interpretation of κ . οὐ καθ . ἠλπίσ ., takes πρῶτον : without such a thought (such a hope) having occurred to me. Besides, πρῶτον would not mean “without,” but “before that,” etc.
[270] So Hofmann; whence there would result even a threefold expression of the voluntary act, namely: (1) in αὐθαίρετοι ; (2) in κ . οὐ καθ . ἠλπίσ ., and (3) in ἑαυτούς .