2 Corinthians 1

2 Corinthians 1:1

1. διὰθελ. θεοῦ] see 1 Corinthians 1:1, note.

Τιμόθεοςὁἀδ.] So of Sosthenes, 1 Corinthians 1:1; ‘one of οἱἀδελφοί;’—but perhaps in this case with peculiar emphasis: see 1 Corinthians 4:17; 1 Timothy 1:2; 1 Timothy 1:18; 2 Timothy 2:1. On his being with Paul at this time, see Prolegg. to this Epistle, § ii. 4.

σὺντ. ἁγ. πᾶσιν.…] This, and the Epistle to the Galatians, were circular letters to all the believers in the respective countries: the variation of expression in the two cases (ταῖςἐκκλησίαιςτ. Γαλατίας, Galatians 1:2) being accounted for by the circumstance that the matter of this Epistle concerned directly the church at Corinth, and indirectly all the saints in the province,—whereas that to the Galatians, being to correct deeprooted Judaizing error, directly concerned all the churches of Galatia. Achaia comprehended Hellas and Peloponnesus; the province was so named by the Romans because they became possessed of them by subduing the Achæan league, Pausan. vii. 16. 7. See Acts 18:12.

2 Corinthians 1:2

2. See 1 Corinthians 1:3.

2 Corinthians 1:3

3. εὐλ., Blessed (above all others) is.…

ὁθ. κ. πατ …] The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. Here, as in ref. Rom., De Wette would render, ‘God, and the Father’.…, which grammatically is allowable; but I prefer the other rendering, on account of its greater verisimilitude and simplicity.

ὁπ. τ. οἰκτιρ.] οἰκτ. can hardly be the gen. of the attribute, as De W. and Grot., seeing that οἰκτ. is plural and refers to acts of mercy; but as Chrys., p. 421, ὁοἰκτιρμοὺςτοσούτουςἐπιδειξάμενος: see ref. James. This meaning De W. himself recognizes in ὁθ. πάσηςπαρακλ.,—‘the God who works all (possible) comfort,’ and refers to ὁθεὸςτ. ἐλπίδος, Romans 15:13.

2 Corinthians 1:4

4. The Apostle in this Epistle uses mostly the first person plur., perhaps as including Timothy, perhaps, inasmuch as he writes apostolically (cf. ἡμᾶςτοὺςἀποστόλους, of himself and Apollos, 1 Corinthians 4:9), as speaking of the Apostles in common. This however will not explain all places where it occurs elsewhere: e.g. 1 Thessalonians 2:18, ἠθελήσαμενἐλθεῖνπρὸςὑμᾶς, ἐγὼμὲνΠαῦλος, καὶἅπαξκ. δίς,—where see note. So that after all perhaps it is best to regard it merely as an idiomatic way of speaking, when often only the singular is intended.

In order that we may be able: not, ‘so that we are able.’ διὰτοῦτογὰρπαρεκάλεσενἡμᾶς, φησίν, ἵναἡμεῖςἀλλήλουςπαοακαλῶμεν. Chrys. ib. “Non sibi vivebat Apostolus, sed Ecclesiæ: ita quicquid gratiarum in ipsum conferebat Deus, non sibi soli datum reputabat, sed quo plus ad alios juvandos haberet facultatis.” Calv.

ἧς, attr. for ᾗ, or perhaps (Winer, edn. 6, § 24. 1) for ἣν (παράκλησινπαρακαλεῖν).

2 Corinthians 1:5

5. ‘As He is, so are we in this world:’ 1 John 4:17. As the sufferings of Christ (endured by Christ, whether in his own person, or in his mystical body the Church, see Matthew 25:40; Matthew 25:45) abound towards us (i.e. in our case, see reff.);—even so through Christ our consolation also abounds. The form of expression is altered in the latter clause: instead of ἡπαράκλησιςτοῦχριστοῦπερις. we have ἡπαράκ. ἡμῶνπερισς. διὰτοῦχριστοῦ. And not without reason:—we suffer, because we are His members: we are consoled because He is our Head. There is no comparison (as Chrys., p. 422, οὐγὰρὅσαἔπαθε, φησίν, ἐπάθομενμόνον, ἀλλὰκαὶπερισσά) between the personal sufferings of Christ, and theirs.

2 Corinthians 1:6

6. And all this for your benefit. But whether we are afflicted, (it is) on behalf of your comfort (εἰςτὸδύνασθαικ.τ.λ. 2 Corinthians 1:4, only now applied to the Corinthians) and salvation (the great end of the παράκλησις), which (viz. παράκλησις and σωτηρία) is working (not, as Chrys., Theophyl., Estius, Beza, al., ‘being worked:’ the passive does not occur in St. Paul) in the endurance of the same sufferings which we also suffer;—and our hope is stedfast on your behalf (that you will endure hardness, and be consoled and saved);—or whether we are comforted, (it is) for your comfort and salvation. This place of the words καὶ—ὑμῶν agrees best with the sense, besides being in accordance with the best MSS. Their position has perhaps been altered to bring the two parts of the dilemma closer together, and because ἐλπὶςἡμῶν seemed to suit the part. εἰδότες, and the future supposed to be implied after οὕτωςκαί (as in E.

V.). The objection to this is (as De W.) that the ἐλπίς clearly must be referred to σωτηρία, which however is not hinted at in 2 Corinthians 1:7.

2 Corinthians 1:7

7. εἰδότες refers back to παρακαλούμεθα:—we are comforted with the assurance that, &c. After οὕτωςκαί understand not ἔσεσθε, but ἐστε: he is speaking generally, of the community of consolation subsisting mutually between himself and the Corinthians; and it was this thought which helped to console him.

2 Corinthians 1:8

8. see var. read.

It is generally supposed that the tribulation here spoken of was the danger into which Paul was brought by the tumult at Ephesus, related in Acts 19. This opinion has been recently defended by Neander, Wieseler, and Dr. Davidson, but impugned by De Wette, on the grounds, (1) that ἐντῇἈσίᾳ can hardly refer to Ephesus, which Paul generally names, 1 Corinthians 15:32; 1 Corinthians 16:8; (2) that he was not in danger of his life in this tumult. The first ground is hardly tenable: there would be an appropriateness in ἐντῇἈσίᾳ here, as he has in his mind an apologetic account of the reasons which hindered him from leaving those parts and coming to them. I own, however, that the strong expressions here used do not seem to me to find their justification in any thing which we know of that tumult or its consequences. I am unable to assign any other event as in the Apostle’s mind: but the expressions seem rather to regard a deadly sickness, than a persecution: see below, 2 Corinthians 1:9-10.

καθʼ ὑπερβ. signifies the greatness of the affliction itself, objectively considered: ὑπὲρδύν., the relation of it to our power of endurance, subjectively.

ὥστεἐξ.] So that we utterly despaired even of life. Such an expression surely would not be used of a tumult, where life would have been the first thing in danger, if Paul had been at all mixed up in it,—but to some wearing and tedious suffering, inducing despondency in minor matters, which even reached the hope of life itself.

2 Corinthians 1:9

9. ἀλλά, moreover,—carries on and intensifies the description of his hopeless state.

We had in ourselves the response of death, i.e. our answer within ourselves to the question, ‘Life or Death?’ was, ‘Death.’ So Vulg., Estius, Billroth, Rückert, Meyer, De Wette.

τ. ἀπόκρ. may perhaps mean, the ‘sentence,’ as Hesych[1]: ἀπόκριμα, κατάκριμα, ψῆφον,—and most Commentators. The perfect ἐσχήκαμεν is here (see also ch. 2 Corinthians 2:12-13) in a historical sense, instead of the aorist: which is unusual. Winer, edn. 6, § 40. 4 (see Moulton’s note 4, p. 340), illustrates the usage by ἦλθενκαὶεἴληφεν (τὸβιβλίον), Revelation 5:7; see also Revelation 8:5.

[1] Hesychius of Jerusalem, centy. vi.

ἵναμὴ …] very similarly ch. 2 Corinthians 4:7, ἔχομενδὲτὸνθησαυρὸντοῦτονἐνὀστρακίνοιςσκεύεσιν, ἵναἡὑπερβολὴτῆςδυνάμεωςᾖτοῦθεοῦ, καὶμὴἐξἡμῶν.

τῷἐγ. τ. νεκρούς] Our thoughts were weaned from all hope of surviving in this life, and fixed on that better deliverance which God shall work when He raises us from the dead.

To see in this expression merely a figure (De W.), and understand ‘Who raiseth the dead’ as = ‘Who delivers men from peril of their lives?’ because such peril is below and elsewhere (ch. 2 Corinthians 11:23) called θάνατος,—is surely very forced. Understanding it literally as above, I cannot see how it can be spoken with reference to the Ephesian tumult. If it alludes to any external danger, I should be disposed to refer it to the same obscure part of Paul’s history to which he alludes 1 Corinthians 15:32, where he also speaks of the hope of the resurrection as his great support. But there would be this objection, that these two passages can hardly refer to the same event; this evidently had taken place since the sending of the first Epistle.

2 Corinthians 1:10

10. Who rescued us from so great a death, and will rescue us,—on whom we hope that He will also continue to rescue us. The rec. ῥύεται, has been substituted for the fut. ῥύσεται, as more appropriate. But it regards the immediate future,—the καὶἔτιῥύσεται the continuance of God’s help in time distant and uncertain. The whole verse (as De W. confesses, who although he repudiates the Ephesian tumult, yet interprets the passage as alluding to external danger) seems to favour the idea of bodily sickness being in the Apostle’s mind.

2 Corinthians 1:11

11. συνυπουργούντων—with whom? From the similar passage Romans 15:30, συναγωνίσασθαίμοιἐνταῖςπροσευχαῖςὑπὲρἐμοῦ, it would seem as if μοι should be supplied;—but he himself could hardly be said ὑπουργεῖν, though he well might ἀγωνίσασθαι. We must therefore understand the preposition either with Chrys., Hom. ii. p. 432, τουτέστιν, εὐχομένωνπάντωνὑμῶνὑπὲρἡμῶν,—or as merely signifying coincidence with the purpose to be accomplished, as in μὴπροσεῶντοςἡμᾶςτοῦἀνέμου, Acts 27:7, where see note.

ἵναἐκπολλῶνπροσώπων.…] “Three constructions of this verse are possible: (1) to take ἐκπολλ. προσώπ. as well as διὰπολλῶν with, εὐχαριστηθῇ—‘in order that the mercy shewn to me may be given thanks for on my behalf by many persons with many words’ (Storr, Opusc. ii. 253): but the rendering ‘with many words,’ is objectionable, see Matthew 6:7:—(2) to take ἐκπολλ. προσώπ. with εὐχαρ., and διὰπολλῶν with τὸεἰςἡμ. χάρ.—‘in order that the mercy shewn to me by means of (the intercession of) many, may be given thanks for by many persons on my behalf’ (Theophyl., Billroth, Meyer, who explain ἐκπ. προσώπ. ‘ex multis oribus:’ Stanley, ‘from many upturned faces’): but the position of the words is against this,—and it is more natural that the mention of the effect of the intercession should precede that of the thanksgiving. (3) Consequently, the best method is to take ἐκπολλ. προσώπ. with τὸεἰςἡμ. χάρ., and διὰπολλῶν with εὐχαρ. (Beza, Calov., Estius, Fritz., Rückert, al.):—in order that the mercy shewn to us by the intercession of many persons, may by many be given thanks for on our behalf.” De Wette.

The emphasis of the whole being on the ἐκπολλῶνπροσώπων, he places it first, even before the art., after which it would naturally come.

προσώπων, ‘persons,’ a later meaning, which Phrynichus (see Wetst.) blames as used by οἱἀμφὶτὰςδίκαςῥήτορες.

2 Corinthians 1:12

12. γάρ, reason why they should help him with their united prayers.

καύχησις] viewed in its ground and substance. But we must not say that it is for καύχημα: the Apostle regards the μαρτύριον and the καύχησις as coincident:—it is not the testimony, &c., of which he boasts, but in which his boasting itself consists.

ἁγιότ.] ἁπλότητι seems to be a gloss from Ephesians 6:5:—in holiness and sincerity of God: i.e. either ‘belonging to God,’ as ἡδικαιος. αὐτοῦ, Matthew 6:33, or ‘which is the gift of God,’ as in ref. Rom.,—or better than either, as E. V., ‘godly,’ i.e. maintained as in the service of and with respect to God. Calvin interprets it, ‘coram Deo.’ See on ch. 2 Corinthians 2:17; and on the senses of ἁγιότ. and ἁπλότ., Stanley’s note.

οὐκἐνσοφ. σαρκ.] which fleshly wisdom is any thing but holy and pure, having many windings and insincerities in order to captivate men.

ἀλλʼ ἐνχάρ. θεοῦ] but in the grace of God, i.e. in that χάρις which he had received (ref. Rom.) εἰςὑπακοὴνπίστεωςἐνπᾶσιντοῖςἔθνεσιν—the grace of his apostleship. To this he often refers, see Romans 12:3; Romans 15:15; Ephesians 3:2, al.

περισσοτέρως] “Non quod apud alios minus sincere con-versatus fuisset; sed quia majora sinceræ suæ conversationis documenta apud Corinthios ostenderat: ut quibus gratis ac sine stipendio prædicasset evangelium, parcens eorum infirmitati.” Estius. But perhaps it may relate only to the longer time, and greater opportunities which he had had at Corinth for shewing his purity of purpose: so Calv., De W.

2 Corinthians 1:13-14

13, 14. Confirmation of the foregoing assertion. For we do not write to you any other things, except those which ye read, or [even] acknowledge (by experience of facts), and I hope, shall [continue to] acknowledge to the end:—i.e. ‘my character in my writings is one and the same, not fickle and changing, but such as past facts have substantiated it to be, and as I hope future facts to the end of my life will continue to do.’ ἀναγινώσκοντεςγὰρἐπιγινώσκετε, ὅτιἃσύνιστεἡμῖνἐντοῖςἔργοις, ταῦτακαὶἐντοῖςγράμμασιλέγομενκαὶοὐκἐναντιοῦταιὑμῶνἡμαρτυρίαταῖςἐπιστολαῖς, ἀλλὰσυνᾴδειτῇἀναγνώσειἡγνῶσις, ἣνπρολαβόντεςεἴχετε (al. ἔχετε) περὶἡμῶν. Chrys., Hom. iii. p. 443, who has the advantage of being able to express in his exposition the play of words in ἀνα- and ἐπι-γινώσκετε. As also ye did partly (that part of you, viz. which have fairly tried me: ἀπὸμέρους, because they were divided in their estimate of him, and those who were prejudiced against him had shut their minds to this knowledge. Chrys. refers it to what follows: μετριάζωνεἶπεν: Theophyl. to the not yet completed testimony of his ἐναρέτουβίου: Estius and Calvin, to their inadequate estimation of him, which he blames: but I much prefer the above.

So most Commentators) acknowledge us, that (not ‘because,’ putting a colon at μέρους, as Luth., Griesbach, and Scholz: nor is it to be joined with ἐπιγνώσεσθε, what follows being parenthesized, as Theophyl., al., Meyer, Olsh.) we are your boast, [even] as ye [also] are ours, in the day of the Lord Jesus. ἐσμεν, ‘present,’ as of that which is a settled recognized fact. But this is no ground for its being joined with ἐπιγνώσεσθε, as Olsh. The experimental mutual knowledge of one another as a καύχημα was not confined to what should take place ἐντῇἡμ. τ. κ. Ἰησοῦ, but regarded a present fact, which should receive its full completion at the day of the Lord.

2 Corinthians 1:15

15. ταύτῃτῇπεπ., i.e. of my character being known to you as that of an earnest and sincere man.

πρότερον belongs to ἐλθεῖν, not to ἐβουλόμην. πρότερον, viz. before he visited Macedonia, where he now was.

ἵναδευτέρανχάρινσχῆτε] that you might have a second benefit (effusion of the divine χάρις by my presence: not = χαράν as Chrys., see var. read.).

δευτέραν 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 δευτέρανχάριν 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 δευτέραν at all. For come when he would, the χάρις of the second visit would be the δευτέραχάρις, and the conferring a δευτέραχάρις 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 πρότερον … ἐλθεῖν,—the second by δευτέραχάρις, 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.

2 Corinthians 1:16

16. If this is the same journey which is announced in 1 Corinthians 16:5, the idea of visiting them in the way to Macedonia as well as after having passed through it, must have occurred to him subsequently to the sending of that Epistle; or may even then have been a wish, but not expressed, from uncertainty as to its possibility,—the main and longer visit being there principally dwelt on. But perhaps the following is the more likely account of the matter. He had announced to them in the lost Epistle (see 1 Corinthians 5:9) his intention, as here, of visiting them on his way to Macedonia: but the intelligence from “them of Chloe” had altered his intention, so that, in 1 Corinthians 16, he speaks of visiting them after he should have passed through Macedonia. For this he was accused of levity of purpose. Certainly, some intention of coming to them seems to have been mentioned in that lost Epistle: see 1 Corinthians 4:18. But the προπεμφθῆναιεἰςτὴνἸουδαίαν can hardly but be coincident with the alms-bearing scheme of 1 Corinthians 16:4; in which case the two plans certainly are modifications of one and the same.

2 Corinthians 1:17

17. μήτι … Did I at all use levity (of purpose)? τῇἐλαφ., as ἡἀρετή, ἡπίστις,—the art. being generic. Olsh., De Wette, Billroth, take it to mean ‘the levity of purpose which has been laid to my charge:’ Winer, ‘the levity of purpose inherent in human nature.’

Or those things which I plan, do I plan according to the flesh (i.e. according to the changeable, self-contradictory, and insincere purposes of the mere worldly and ungodly man), that there may be with me (not, so that there is with me: he is speaking not merely of the result, but of the design: ‘do I plan like the worldly, that I may shift and waver as suits me?’) the Yea, yea, and the Nay, nay (i.e. both affirmation and negation concerning the same thing)? Chrys, Theodoret, Theophyl., Œc[2], Calv., Bengel, Billroth, Winer, al., take it thus: ‘Or those things which I plan, do I plan after the flesh (as fleshly men do), so that my yea must (at all events) be yea, and my nay, nay?’ i.e. as worldly men who perform their promise at all hazards, and whatever the consequences, whereas I am under the guidance of the Spirit, and can only journey whither He permits. But this explanation is directly against the next verse, where ναὶκαὶοὔ is clearly parallel to ναὶναὶκαὶοὒοὔ here, the words being repeated, as in ref. Matt., without altering the sense: and inconsistent with 2 Corinthians 1:23 and ch. 2 Corinthians 2:1, where he says that his alteration of plan arose from a desire to spare them. See the whole discussed in Stanley’s note.

[2] Œcumenius of Tricca in Thrace, Centy. XI.?

2 Corinthians 1:18

18. Such fickleness, you know, was not my habit in preaching to you. Chrys. gives the connexion well: καλῶςἀντίθεσινἀνακύπτουσανκαταλύει. εἰγὰρὑποσχόμενος, φησί, παραγενέσθαιὑπερέθου, καὶοὐκἔστιπαράσοιναί, ναί (predicate in Chrys.’s interpretation; see above), καὶοὔ, οὔ, ἀλλὰνῦνἃλέγειςἀνατρέπειςμετὰταῦτα, ὥσπερἐπὶτῆςσῆςἐπιδημίαςἐποίησαςοὐαὶἡμῖν, μήποτεκαὶἐντῷκηρύγματιτοῦτογέγονεν. ἵνʼ οὖνμὴταῦταἐννοῶσι, μηδὲθορυβῶνται, φησίπιστὸςδὲὁθεὸςκ.τ.λ. p. 446.

πιστ. δὲὁθ., ὅτι] a form of asseveration: see reff.

The δέ follows on the denial of the preceding question.

ὁλόγ. Our doctrine (which we preached, cf. ὁλόγοςὁτοῦσταυροῦ, 1 Corinthians 1:18), to you is not (present, inasmuch as the character of the doctrine was present and abiding. The pres. has been altered in rec. to the easier ἐγένετο) yea and nay (i.e. inconsistent with itself).

2 Corinthians 1:19

19. Confirmation of the last verse, by affirming the same of the great Subject of that doctrine, as set before them by Paul and his colleagues.

χριστός, personal—not for ‘doctrina de Christo’—HE HIMSELF is the centre and substance of all Christian preaching: see 1 Corinthians 1:23, and note at 2 Corinthians 2:2.

ὁτοῦθεοῦυἱός is prefixed for solemnity, and to shew how unlikely fickleness or change is in Christ, being such as He is. Cf. 1 Samuel 15:29, ‘the Strength of Israel will not lie nor repent.’

Σιλουανοῦ] so 1 Peter 5:12; = Silas, see Acts 18:5 and al. He names his companions, as shewing that neither was he inconsistent with himself, nor were they inconsistent with one another. The Christ was the same, whether preached by different persons or by one person at different times.

ἀλλὰναὶἐναὐτ. γέγ.] ‘Christus prædicatus, i.e. prædicatio nostra de Christo, facta est næ in Ipso Christo.’ Bengel. This seems to me far better than with De Wette, al., to make ναί the subject, and γέγονεν predicatory. The absence of the art. before ναί, as well as the sense, stamps it as the predicate. ‘Christ preached as the Son of God by us, has become yea in Him,’ i.e. has been affirmed and substantiated as verity by the agency of the Lord Himself.

2 Corinthians 1:20

20. ὅσαιγὰρ … is an independent relative clause, as in ref.,—not the subject answering to ἐναὐτῷτὸναί as a predicate, as E. V.:—For how many soever be the promises of God, in Him is the yea (the affirmation and fulfilment of them all); wherefore also through Him is the Amen, for glory to God by our (the Apostles’) means. This reading, which has the stronger external authority, may have arisen from an idea that the clause had reference to the Amen uttered at the end of prayers. So Theodoret, οὗδὴχάρινκαὶδιʼ αὐτοῦτὸντῆςεὐχαριστίαςαὐτῷπροσφέρομενὕμνον, from which comment De Wette thinks the reading has sprung. The apparent objection to it is, that then ἡμῶν must mean ἡμῶνκαὶὑμῶν, which without notice it perhaps could hardly do. In the next verse, when such is about to be its meaning, we have first ἡμᾶςσὺνὑμῖν, and then in 2 Corinthians 1:22, ἡμᾶς … ἡμῶν in the general sense: but here, without any such preparatory notice, διʼ ἡμῶν must signify ‘by means of us Apostles,’ ‘by our work in the Lord.’ Thus ἀμήν will be merely a strengthening of ναί—the affirmation and completion of God’s promises.

2 Corinthians 1:21

21. ὁδὲβεβ.… ἡμᾶς is the (prefixed) predicate, and θεός the subject., βεβ. εἰςχριστόν = βεβ. τῇπίστειεἰςχριστόν, confirmeth us (in believing) on Christ.

χρίσαςἡμᾶς, after ἡμ. σὺνὑμῖν and the καί, cannot refer (as Meyer, al.) to any anointing of the Apostles only, but must be taken, as Chrys., al., of all, Apostles and Corinthians.—ὁμοῦπροφήταςκ. ἱερεῖςκ. βασιλεῖςἐργαζόμενοςταῦταγὰρτὸπαλαιὸνἐχρίετοτὰγένη. Chrys., p. 448. See 1 John 2:20. “Observe the connexion of χριστός and χρίσας.” Stanley.

2 Corinthians 1:22

22. σφραγ. again cannot refer to the Apostles alone, nor is ref. John any ground for such a reference,—but as in the other N. T. reff., to all,—sealed by the Holy Spirit to the day of redemption.

καὶδοὺς.…] ‘And assured us of the fact of that sealing:’ see Romans 8:16.

τ. ἀῤῥ. τ. πν.] the pledge or token of the Spirit: genitive of apposition: the Spirit is the token. ἀῤῥ., πρόδομα, Hesych[3]:—ἡἐπὶταῖςὠναῖςπαρὰτῶνὠνουμένωνδιδομένηπροκαταβολὴὑπὲρἀσφαλείας, Etymol. in Wetst., where see examples. “It is remarkable that the same word עֵרָבוֹן, is used in the same sense in Genesis 38:17-18, from עָרַב, to ‘mix’ or ‘exchange,’ and thence to ‘pledge,’ as Jeremiah 30:21; Nehemiah 5:3. It was therefore probably derived by the Greeks from the language of Phœnician traders, as ‘tariff,’ ‘cargo,’ are derived, in English and other modern languages, from Spanish traders.” Stanley.

[3] Hesychius of Jerusalem, centy. vi.

2 Corinthians 1:23

23. ἐπὶ.… ψυχ.] against my soul,—‘cum maximo meo malo, si fallo.’ Grot.

φειδόμενοςὑμ.] sparing you,—out of a feeling of compassion for you.

οὐκέτι ‘no more,’ viz. after the first time: see Prolegg. to 1 Cor. § 2 Corinthians 1:6. The following οὐχὅτικυρ. seems to be added to remove any false inference which might have been drawn from φειδόμενος as seeming to assert an unreasonable degree of power over them. But why ὑμῶντῆςπίστεως? He had power over them, but it was in matters of discipline, not of faith: over matters of faith not even an Apostle has power (‘fides enim prorsus ab hominum jugo soluta liberrimaque esse debet.’ Calv.), seeing it is in each man’s faith that he stands before God. And he puts this strongly, that in matters of faith he is only a fellow-helper of their joy (the χαρὰἐντῷπιστεύειν, Romans 15:13), in order to shew them the real department of his apostolic power, and that, however exercised, it would not attempt to rule their faith, but only to secure to them, by purifying them, joy in believing. He proceeds to say, that it was the probable disturbance of this joy, which induced bim to forego his visit.

τῇπίστει, dat. of the state or condition in which: cf. Romans 11:20. So Polyb. xxi. 9. ἔστητῇδιανοίᾳ.