2 Corinthians 9

CHAPTER IX

IV. The Purpose for Which the Brethren Are Sent

2 Corinthians 9:1

1 The admonition expressed in 8:24 to the effect that the Corinthians display their love and thereby justify the boasts that have been made regarding them does not make it necessary that at this late date they should still be told about the need obtaining in Jerusalem and what this collection means for the saints; that has long ago been attended to by Paul. What the Corinthians need is stimulation to speed up the collection itself. It has lagged due to the disturbance of the relation existing between the congregation and Paul. Since these difficulties have been practically removed, energy must be put forth lest, when Paul arrives and, what is most likely, some of the Macedonians with him, the Corinthians will still be found far behind and thus put all the good things which Paul has said to the Macedonian churches about them to shame. For this reason Paul sends not only Titus but as many as three able brethren to assist the Corinthians.

Titus will have some other things besides the collection to occupy his time. We must also remember, as the word “Achaia” intimates, that these three brethren are to look after the work also in other congregations in Greece even as this letter is to be communicated to the saints in Achaia (1:1). Some of the things said in this chapter have a wider scope.

Μέν is not the solitarium (regarding which see R. 1151); it includes v. 1, 2, and δέ follows in due order in v. 3. For (to explain further) concerning the ministration for the saints (the same expression that was used in 8:4) it is superfluous for me to write to you. You Corinthians know all about the need that is found among these saints at Jerusalem. Paul uses the singular “for me to write” because the idea of having all of his congregations help the poor in Jerusalem and thereby cement all his Gentile congregations into closest personal unity with the old Jewish mother church, originated in his heart.

2 Corinthians 9:2

2 Another “for” adds the fact that, when the need obtaining in Jerusalem was first presented to the Corinthians and the Achaians, it met a ready response: for I know your readiness, of which I am (still) boasting concerning you to Macedonians, that Achaia has been prepared a year ago. And your zeal incited the majority.

Paul is speaking about the readiness with which his first proposal of a grand collection for the relief of the poor in Jerusalem met, not only in Corinth, but in all the churches in Achaia. This readiness was such that he still boasts of it “to Macedonians” (no article: to such Macedonians as he meets). Paul even quotes what he tells these Macedonians: “Achaia has been prepared a year ago!” Ἀπὸπέρυσι is repeated from 8:10

Several points must be noted here. First, “Achaia” and not merely Corinth, the latter being, of course, included. “Has been prepared a year ago” speaks only about the beginning that was made, of course, as a beginning that proceeded forward (perfect tense); but in this case the tense really says nothing about the present outcome of the start. “A year ago” limits us to that past time. A year ago Achaia “has been prepared” is passive: Paul prepared Achaia, Paul presented the needs obtaining at Jerusalem, Paul awakened readiness and zeal in Achaia a year previously. We should not convert this perfect passive into a present active: “stands prepared” now (R., W. P.), because that would leave a false impression.

Because they fail to note voice, tense, and phrase, all of which refer to what Paul has done in Achaia at the beginning a year ago, namely inaugurated the preparation, which was all that could be done then, some tell us that all had practically been completed in Corinth as long as a year ago. Then Paul seems to contradict himself. His boast about Achaia becomes unwarranted. He is now worrying about that. Some of the Macedonians may go to Corinth with him and find out that he has deceived them when he said that everything had been completed in Achaia. Paul will be compelled to hang his head in shame.

The Corinthians, too, will look at him with surprise. Everybody will discover that Paul’s word cannot be trusted. First he stirs up the Macedonians by what he falsely tells them about Achaia and then uses the zeal thus stirred up among the Macedonians to set the Corinthians going at a rather late date in order to save his double dealing from exposure.

But there is a gap in this picture. Even if Paul succeeded in now whipping things up in Corinth, would not the Macedonians who would go to Corinth with Paul soon find out that in Corinth things had not been as Paul had represented them months ago, that only recently by sending three good men Paul had brought things in Corinth up to the point where he had said they were a year ago? What a fool Paul would be to suppose that he could escape discovery in this way! Trickery has a way of always coming to light at last. Paul quotes exactly what he is telling the Macedonians. It is that he has prepared Achaia a year ago.

That is exactly what he did a year ago. He was able to prepare the Macedonians much later. Last spring, only some months ago when he sent Timothy through Macedonia to Corinth (1 Cor. 16:10), Paul began preparing the Macedonians. The Achaians thus had an early start as far as preparation for the collection is concerned.

When Paul began preparations in Achaia he met with great readiness. There was no reason that he should not. He told and still tells the Macedonians about that. This was the readiness on the part of all the Achaians and not merely on the part of the Corinthians. Can anyone suppose that now, after Paul himself came to Macedonia greatly worried about Corinth, he hid his worries from all the Macedonians? Compare 2:12, 13.

He certainly did not. So the Macedonians knew that despite all the fine preparation made by Paul in Achaia a year ago, as far as Corinth was concerned, a serious slackening of effort had intervened. But this occurred only in Corinth. The Macedonians were vying not only with Corinth but with Achaia, throughout which Paul had made preparation as long as a year ago. The Macedonians, of course, knew also as a result of Timothy’s visit that Galatia and the Asian province were busy with the collection (Galatia, 1 Cor. 16:1; Gaius and Timothy, Galatian collection bearers, and Tychicus and Trophimus, Asian collection bearers, Acts 20:4). Although this is not mentioned by Paul—naturally not—it yet completes the picture.

The zeal of the Macedonians was stirred up by what Paul told them about the preparation that had been made by him a year ago in Achaia and about the response of readiness to go to work, which his efforts toward preparation had then met with. Besides all this, let it be understood that the character of Paul is beyond reproach.

2 Corinthians 9:3

3 Paul continues: yet I sent the brethren lest our boast concerning you be made empty in this (very) part that, as I was (just) saying, you have been (indeed) prepared, lest, perhaps, if Macedonians come with me and find you unprepared, we (that we say not you) be put to shame in this assurance.

Here Paul’s purpose in sending Titus and the two other brethren is stated: when Paul and some of his Macedonian friends come to Corinth in a few months and find that nothing worthwhile has been done during all this time, they would, of necessity, conclude that Paul had not rightly prepared the Corinthians in the first place, namely, as he said, already a year ago. Paul wants them to see from the results which they find when they get to Corinth that he had, indeed, made excellent preparation. There is still time enough left so that the results may catch up with the preparation which Paul certainly made; but, of course, that time must be diligently used to put speed into the attainment of the results. In an honest and yet most considerate way Paul indicates this to the Corinthians. His very considerateness will help to bring the fullest response.

Καύχημα is the substance of Paul’s boasting, namely his statement to the Macedonians “that Achaia (of which Corinth was the very capital and had the main congregation) has (already) been prepared (by me) a year ago” (v. 2). This boast Paul does not want to fee “made empty (κενός, made to appear as having nothing in it) in this very part” which Paul carefully restates. His boast contained various laudatory implications for the Achaians, but the essential part of it is the one that is now restated with subfinal ἵνα: “that, as I was just saying (in v. 2), you have been prepared,” prepared, indeed, by me a whole year ago.

This is not the final ἵνα, and this perfect passive periphrastic subjunctive is not present; Paul does not write “in order that you may (now) be prepared.” This is the same perfect passive as the one found in v. 2. “Ἵνα is epexegetical, in apposition to “this part”; it states that part of the boast which Paul has in mind. He even adds “as I was (just) saying,” saying in v. 2.

But this plain and most exact wording is not properly understood. Paul is speaking about the preparation which he made a year ago and not about a preparation which the Corinthians have made recently or are now making. The voice and the tense of the verb form will not permit the latter sense, which is also not in keeping with the context. The preparation made by Paul a year ago was thorough and effective. Verse 1 states that it would be superfluous to make it anew; v. 2 adds that, when Paul made this preparation, it produced “readiness.” The finest results should have followed during the past year. We know what interfered in Corinth, namely disturbances which called forth First Corinthians with its rebukes, and even more disturbances which Titus then helped to allay.

The fruits of Paul’s preparation were accordingly rather scant. The past year had largely been wasted. Even six months previously, in 1 Cor. 16:1–4, upon inquiry from Corinth, Paul had felt constrained to give directions and information. Something had been done, but not all that could and should have been done.

2 Corinthians 9:4

4 Unless things were now greatly speeded up in Corinth, even upon Paul’s coming to Corinth to spend the winter there (1 Cor. 16:6) any Macedonians (no article) coming with him would find the Corinthians “unprepared,” which discovery would certainly put Paul and his assistants to shame. The verbal adjective ἀπαρασκευάστους is derived from the two verbs that have already been used and is passive just as much as these two verbs are. On seeing such poor results after the passing of more than a year the Macedonians could conclude only that the Corinthians had never been properly prepared by Paul, that they still lacked this preparation in regard to which Paul had boasted that he had made it at the very beginning.

What could Paul say in face of the poor results? Even if he asserted anew what he had done, the Macedonians would have their doubts. Should Paul chide the Corinthians in the presence of these Macedonians and say that the fault for this lack of proper results was theirs? Would the Corinthians want Paul to do that? Then let them remember that whatever preparation Paul had made in Macedonia had yielded the very greatest results (8:1–5). That would certainly justify the conclusion that similar preparation made by Paul in Corinth should have produced somewhat similar results, the other alternative being that Paul had not made the preparation as he claimed he had.

Paul writes: “lest perhaps we be put to shame—not to say you.” This is paraleipsis (B.-D. 491, 1; R. 1199); Paul would place the blame on himself and his assistants although he intimates that he is doing this without being blameworthy, the real blameworthy people being the Corinthians. Certainly, Paul says, I and my assistants would be ashamed—what about you Corinthians yourselves? The phrase “in this assurance” modifies only “we” and not “you,” for the little parenthesis regarding “you” is attached only to “we.”

The word ὑπόστασις has many meanings so that its precise meaning is largely determined by the context. This naturally causes differences of opinion. C.-K. 541 propose Standhaftigkeit, Mut, (steadfastness, courage) which B.-P. 1359 support. Others take the word to have the same meaning as μέρος in v. 3, but without justifiable reason. “In this steadfastness or courage” is not nearly as. fitting as “in this confidence” (R. V.) and as our choice: “in this assurance,” which is probably the most common meaning of this word. All the “assurance” to which Paul and his assistants are clinging would be put to shame because it had not been rightly placed—ὑπόστασις, literally, “a placing under.”

2 Corinthians 9:5

5 Accordingly, I considered it necessary to urge the brethren to go to you in advance and to fix up in advance the blessing you promised in advance, this to be ready thus as a (true) blessing, not as (an exhibit of) covetousness.

There was still sufficient time though none to lose. The ἵνα clause states what Paul urged. He takes the responsibility: “I considered it necessary,” singular; in 8:18, 22 he writes: “we sent,” plural. The aorist is epistolary as it was in 8:17, 18, 22. Note the three compounds with πρό, “in advance.” The third is passive: your blessing “promised in advance” (by you). This is a gentle reminder. In their enthusiastic προθυμία (v. 2) the Corinthians had a year ago made these advance promises, but they still lack a good deal of being fulfilled. Note our word “artisan” in the verb καταρτίζω, which is here used in the rare compound with πρό, “to fix up in advance.”

Paul calls the contributions to be made in fulfillment of the advance promises the εὑλογία or “blessing” of the Corinthians and wants this to be ready ὡςεὑλογία, “as indeed, a blessing.” This word is to be understood in the active sense: the Corinthians blessed the saints with their contributions, made them like a benediction, filled them with that kind of a spirit. “Bounty” in our versions is not the proper word. Whatever one wants to make “a blessing” will, of course, be bountiful in quantity, but in this connection the word means more than quantity, namely generosity from a deep desire to help.

Thus the opposite is quite correctly πλεονεξία, which is again active, amor sceleratus habendi, from πλέον and ἔχειν (Stellhorn, Woerterbuch): the desire to have more and more for self. This is our “covetousness,” the German Geiz. We aid the English a little by translating “not as (an exhibition of) covetousness.” The worst feature of this vice is not the niggardly quantity given but the mean spirit which wants more for self and cares nothing for others, however needy the latter may be.

The infinitive is not an epexegetical complement of the ἵνα clause, nor does this ἵνα clause denote purpose. This accusative with the infinitive is in apposition with “your blessing”—“this (your blessing) to be ready,” etc. Already in 1 Cor. 16:2 Paul wrote “that there may be no gatherings when I come,” i.e., do not delay, have everything complete and ready. His urgency is now due to even higher considerations.

V. The Giver Whom God Loves

2 Corinthians 9:6

6 The infinitive clause occurring in v. 5 forms the transition to the new paragraph. We are shown at length how our giving can, indeed, be “a blessing,” a blessing all around, a blessing also to ourselves. Of course, there dare then be no “covetousness” about it. Here there is an exposition of giving that every preacher needs for himself as well as for his congregation.

Now this—he who keeps sowing sparingly, sparingly shall he also reap; and he who keeps sowing on the basis of blessings, on the basis of blessings shall he also reap.

Transitional δέ and a simple τοῦτο turn to the general subject of making Christian giving what it ought always to be in fullest measure, a great fountain of blessing. Review what Paul calls it in 8:1, “the grace of God,” i.e., grace and thus a great blessing to the giver himself. Here this is extended by the significant word “blessing”—others are blessed, by means of their thanks God is blessed, and thus we ourselves are blessed most of all. If every Christian giver knew what a shower of blessings he starts through his giving he would be like the Macedonians referred to in 8:4, begging to let him give.

We supply nothing with τοῦτο: we regard it as a nominative absolute or as an advance apposition to the double sentence. The thought is similar to that expressed in Prov. 11:24: “There is that scattereth and yet increaseth; and there is that withholdeth more than is meet, but it tendeth to poverty.” We have two beautiful chiasms which bring together “sparingly, sparingly” and “on the basis of blessings, on the basis of blessings” and thereby lift these words into prominence. Ὁσπείρων = he who keeps sowing, makes it his regular business of sowing either in the one or in the other way. We are shown two classes of sowers; and the question is to which of the two do we belong, do we want to belong.

“He who keeps sowing.” This is Paul’s picture of the Christian giver. How simple, how illuminating, how true! Ὁσπείρων is the exact designation which Jesus used in his wonderful parable in Matt. 13:3: “The sower,” the one whose business it is to sow, “went out to sow.” Here we have another parable about another “sower.” Indeed, all Christian giving is sowing, sowing, all sowing. We are all farmers, our great business is this sowing and the resultant reaping. It looks like throwing good grain away when the sower takes it by the handful and just scatters it, happy to have as big a field as possible, to be able to scatter as much as possible. It looks like throwing away when we give. But Christian giving is always a throwing away that is sowing.

The very word implies that a harvest is coming. So all our good works are a sowing; ever and ever a harvest is coming. It is foolish to say that this makes for a selfish motive. God designed grain to be sown and to yield its return; God arranged Christian life in good works and in giving in the same way. It is he who wants us to have the blessing of the harvest. This is his beautiful way of bestowing his blessing.

He has created the wonder of the grain as seed in order to fill our granaries with harvests. He gives us the grain in the first place, we could not make it. So he gives us the harvest from that grain which we do not make. He fills our hearts and our hands in the Christian life; all that we are and have is from him in Christ Jesus. All that he thus gives us is intended for great increase. It is like grain that is soon used up, soon disappears unless it is sown; but when it is scattered and sown, oh, how it multiplies!

As he enriched us in the first place, so he wants this riches to multiply for us. Actually, we cannot become too rich for God, yea, for him we cannot become rich enough. He multiplies our seed, assigns us ever wider, newer fields to be sown, to reap ever vaster harvests. Loaded with sheaves, we are to come at last, rejoicing with harvest songs. Ps. 126:6.

Why is it so hard for us to catch this vision? Every farm and every garden reveal it every spring, summer, and fall. God is a God of showers of harvest riches. He is the same God of showers of blessings in the Christian life. He does not intend that we shall be poor; all his arrangements are designed to fill us with riches. It is not because of his lack of generosity that so many of us remain poor.

Yet he correlates the two, sowing and harvesting. If he is to give us much, we must want much. How can God pour 1, 000 bushels into a receptacle that holds no more than one? If, in spite of all that God wants to give us, we insist on taking only a little, perhaps nothing at all, shall he upset the entire generous arrangement which he has made in letting sowings produce rich harvests in order to give us abundance in some other way? What other way that accords with God’s generosity could you suggest? The only other way which the world has ever found is to enrich oneself by robbing others, by grinding the face of the poor, by withholding the workman’s wages, etc.

So it remains ever true: what a man sows he shall reap. By the way in which you sow, God lets you yourself say in advance in what way, what kind of harvest, and how much you want to reap. Sow “sparingly” if you will, just a few grains—what a pity to throw more into the ground! “Sparingly you will also reap.” You certainly do not expect a few grains to produce barnfuls. You certainly know at sowing time for what size of harvest you are sowing.

Here is the proper way to sow: ἐπʼ εὑλογίας, which does not mean “bountifully” (our versions), scattering much grain over wide fields; nor “with blessing” (R. V. margin); nor does the phrase waver between occasion and time (R. 604). The plural is real, it pluralizes the singular ὡςεὑλογίαν used in v. 5. He who sows “on the basis of, on the principle of blessings,” he shall reap on this basis and this principle. Ἐπί is to be taken in its natural sense “upon” and makes the meaning rich. This sowing is ever done on one idea alone, on the idea of blessings—blessings, praises to God; blessings, benefactions to men; return blessings to ourselves. On no other basis or principle does this sower operate.

On this basis he reaps. He reaps all the blessings to God and all those to men, and he reaps the return blessings that God pours out on him.

It is all very wonderful, yet all most true. The Catholic exegesis finds work-righteousness here, namely the harvest as a reward of merit. But no man ever earned a harvest. God makes seed, soil, sunshine, growth, ripening,, and even the brain and the hand to place the seed into the soil and to bring the increase home.

2 Corinthians 9:7

7 Without a verb and with none to be supplied Paul adds: Each one just as he has chosen for himself in advance in his heart, not from grief or from compulsion. The verb is the perfect middle, its voice brings out the idea that the person chooses freely what he wants and would like to have for himself, whether he wants a sparing return or one that is running over with all kinds of blessings. Πρό, “in advance,” fits the idea of sowing which is always in advance of the harvest.

The two ἐκ phrases point to source. In the whole matter of Christian giving nothing is ever to be done “from grief”; no one is to be sorry about letting anything pass out of his hands, no one is ever to say: “I am sorry I gave or gave so much.” These negatives imply their corresponding positives. Thus the first implies: “I am glad I gave; I wish I could give more.” Nothing is ever to be given “from compulsion,” from a feeling that one is forced to give, that he is being robbed. No one is to think: “They took advantage of me; they shall not do it again.” The feeling is ever to be: “I am happy I gave; I really should have given more.”

Paul wants nothing but voluntary gifts for his great collection. He here sets forth voluntariness as being the only true motive and principle of Christian giving. It actuated the apostolic church (Acts 2:44, 45; 4:22); it has ever distinguished true Christian giving. A large amount of giving has been vitiated by not being free and voluntary. A large number have had no faith or too little faith in complete voluntariness. They fear that this will not bring the needed and the desired sums.

So they devise substitutes, all kinds of systems, schemes, and methods that seem to promise more than the giver’s own entirely free volition. Instead of depending wholly on such volition and stimulating it by means of pure gospel motivation as Paul does here, they use a little or a great deal of legalism which acts as pressure, or they stoop to worldly, often rankly worldly, methods. So Christian voluntariness declines more and more. The odor of legalism and of worldliness makes the “gifts” so obtained nauseating in the nostrils of God. The harvest of real blessings is lost. See The Active Church Member by the author, p. 148, etc., on the entire subject.

All legalism in giving or in securing gifts is Romanistic. No one has yet surpassed Rome in this direction. Many who think they hate Rome yet imitate Rome, and they should give Rome due credit although they fail to do this. Tithing is Jewish. Applying a little Christian varnish changes nothing. Paul was reared as a Jew.

If tithing could have been Christianized, the man who could and would have done it was Paul, and no better opportunity offered itself than this great collection which he planned for all his churches simultaneously. Paul shunned tithing. All the apostles shunned it. Not one word of Jesus favors it. His very mention of tithing is severely derogatory (Matt. 23:23; Luke 11:42; 18:12). The only other mention of it in the New Testament is purely historical (Heb. 7:5–9).

Is this not enough? More than enough! “Each one just as he has chosen for himself in his heart!”

For a cheerful giver God loves. The Greek reverses the subject and the predicate and thereby emphasizes both: God loves him—God loves him. See the noun “love” for the real meaning of the blessed verb; also John 3:16. From ἱλαρός we have “hilarious.” God loves the lighthearted, joyous, happy giver. He neither figures nor calculates. His faith is wreathed in smiles when another opportunity for giving greets him.

The German heiter is good. Such a giver is himself filled with the love of God. No stimulus for giving can possibly exceed God’s love in which grow all the fairest flowers of his blessings. Paul appropriates the thought and almost the words of Prov. 22:9 as found in the LXX: “God blesseth a man who is cheerful and a giver”; Hebrew: “He that hath a bountiful eye shall be blessed.” The Hebrew actually has a beatitude.

2 Corinthians 9:8

8 Δέ adds another point: Moreover, able is God to make every grace abound for you in order that, by having ever in everything every sufficiency, you may abound in every good work even as it has been written:

He scattered out, he gave to the poor laborers;

His righteousness remains for the eon.

The verb is placed emphatically forward: “Able is God.” Paul first presents his ability, what God can do, which implies his willingness; then in v. 10 what God will do. Paul’s reliance is not based on his own ability to move the Corinthians as they ought to be moved but on God’s ability alone. He tells the Corinthians that and thereby turns their hearts to God. Paul thus excludes the idea that he is belaboring the Corinthians with appeals of his own, for this is far from his mind. “God is able to make every grace abound for you” refers to χάρις in the broadest sense of the term. Note the complementary statement: “in order that you may abound in every good work.” He makes every grace abound for you so that you may abound for every good work. The one abounding purposes another abounding. Abounding grace is to bring abounding good works.

“Every grace,” like “every good work,” denotes multiplicity. Grace is a unit, but as an active attribute of God it bestows many different gifts of grace, and each exhibits that grace. John 1:16: “grace for grace.” “Every grace” is comprehensive in its multiplicity; it omits not a single gift of grace that we may need. Since it is “grace,” every gift is totally undeserved—pure, sweet grace through and through.

We fail to see how anyone can restrict “every grace” to earthly possessions and say that God gives these so that we can give to others. What we need most of all is “every grace” for our hearts in order to do any proper giving. Here “every good work” extends far beyond giving. Paul wants the Corinthians to see that giving is only one of these good works. When he speaks about this one, it is quite necessary to view it in connection with all the many others, all of which are alike products of abundant grace that is freely bestowed upon us. In order to give we must first receive, namely receive grace from God. So every good work implies the necessary previous reception of grace. He who lacks the work proclaims that he has refused the grace of which that work would be the flower and the fruit.

Note the heaping up of “every” in paronomasia: every grace—ever—in everything—every sufficiency—every good work. God, indeed, knows no limit. Note the individualizing in “every” (“ever”) which is combined in the multiplicity of completeness. Our versions mar the translation by interchanging “all” and “every.” One may translate in either way, for when the article is omitted with this numeral, “all” and “every” flow together. But as the one adverb we have no “all”; so we use “every” throughout in order to match the “ever” used as the adverb.

The main feature is, however, to see that God’s bestowal of “every grace” in abundance means our “having ever in everything every sufficiency in abundance for every good work.” “Every grace” is thus practically defined for us. Here there is a stream that is full to the banks. All these many good works we need in our hearts: faith, love, tenderness, pity, strength, courage, energy, zeal, enlightenment, wisdom, etc., etc. Then for our hands we need earthly means for giving, helping, etc., place and occasion to confess, and so in every situation whatever any good work may require. All this sufficiency God is able to supply.

The Cynics and the Stoics used αὑτάρκεια to designate their favorite virtue “self-sufficiency” under all circumstances, the feeling of being satisfied with what one has as being sufficient, depending on nothing beyond it. The papyri use the word in the meaning “competency,” a sufficient living. Some of the commentators draw on the pagan philosophers when they interpret this word. R., W. P., says outright that Paul borrowed the word from Greek philosophy and allows only this difference in Paul’s use, that he did not approve the Cynic’s avoidance of society. The philosophers themselves found the word and used it to denote a pagan virtue; Paul, too, did not invent the word but used it, as the common Koine papyri do, in the meaning “sufficiency,” complete supply, one, however, that is provided by God.

In 1 Tim. 6:6 Paul again uses the word. Although it is generally translated “contentment” in this passage and thus means a virtue, the meaning “sufficiency” is far more adequate.

God is able to provide us with such abundance that none of us ever needs to hesitate about dispensing it with full hands in all manner of good works. In fact, that we rely on his supplying us and thus engage to the limit in good works—this is his intention (ἵνα).

2 Corinthians 9:9

9 Most effective is the quotation from Ps. 112:9, which expresses the very same thought and uses even the figure of scattering seed. This psalm describes in detail the blessedness of the man who fears the Lord and delights in his commandments. One notable item in this blessedness is his great generosity toward the poor and needy. “It has been written” (perfect tense) = and is thus ever on record. The godly “scattered out” lavishly just like the sower who throws out his grain. The next proverb specifies: “he gave to the poor laborers,” a simple but significant statement. One might use it as an epitaph upon a generous Christian’s tomb. Four Greek words, yet how eloquent!

Plutarch distinguishes between πτωχός and πένης, the living of the former is living while having nothing, that of the latter living sparingly and depending on his labors. The one is a beggar who is wholly destitute, who lives on chance alms; the other is a poor, stinted workman. “To give” to the latter is not to hand him his pittance of pay but to make him a goodly present.

This godly man’s righteousness remains “for the eon,” the Greek idiom meaning “forever.” The eon lasts until the Parousia, until time ceases and eternity alone is left. “His righteousness” is his justitia acquisita, the quality of righteousness that is due to the divine verdict which pronounces him righteous in God’s court. This verdict of God’s is pronounced on the man in regard to his works, the proper fruit of faith and the public evidence of faith. This righteousness thus “remains.” The verdicts of men’s judgment disappear as being valueless. But when the eon merges into eternity, Christ himself will publish this man’s righteousness and the verdict from God before the entire universe: “Verily, I say unto you, inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me,” Matt. 25:40. This man enters heaven, and thus his “righteousness remains.” The divine verdict on his works will never be reversed, will only be published to the universe at the end of the eon.

Chrysostom likened this man’s beneficence to a fire which consumes the man’s sins and thus prepared the way for the Catholic error that works justify. But these are the works that follow faith, the justitia acquisita which evidences the justitia imputata. The acquired righteousness is ever imperfect and obtains God’s verdict only because its imperfections have been made good by Christ’s righteousness, which is imputed to us even before we do a single good work. If the righteousness of life did not follow, this would be evidence that Christ’s righteousness was never imputed to us, that justifying faith was never ours.

Paul’s quotation is so effective because it brings out the thought of “every grace,” first the grace that makes us God’s own, then the grace that enables us to do good works, finally the grace that now and at the last day renders its public verdict on our good works as believers. Many a non-Christian and many a Jew also do great works of charity, and the world’s verdict of approval rests upon them. But neither now nor in the final judgment can Christ render the verdict: “Ye did it unto me!” That verdict would be false. For whomsoever these do what they do, their intention is not to do them “for Christ.”

2 Corinthians 9:10

10 From what God is able to do the thought proceeds to what God will do. His ability, of course, already implies his willingness even as his willingness implies his ability. God’s purpose is “that you abound in every good work” (v. 8); this purpose God carries out, for Paul now says: “he will increase the fruits of your righteousness.” Thus the final object is attained, namely great and multiplied thanksgiving unto God.

And he who furnishes seed to the one sowing and bread for eating will furnish and will multiply your crop and will increase the fruits of your righteousness—you being enriched in everything for all single-mindedness, which keeps working out thanksgiving to God through us.

What God does in the domain of nature he will in a higher, richer way do in the domain of grace. We see it every time a man sows grain; God provides that “seed” (σπέρμα). When it is sown, through it he provides “bread for eating” (βρῶσις; is “eating,” the suffix -σις denoting action; βρῶμα is “food,” what is eaten or to be eaten). Ἐπιχορηγέω and the simplex have the same force: “to stand the expense of bringing out a chorus” at some public festival and thus in general “to furnish,” “to supply.” The connotation is that of great, free generosity. It is, indeed, with a lavish hand that God supplies seed and bread for mankind. God can even be named according to this generous action as Paul so names him here with the substantivized participle. In this way God attests his power and his beneficence to all mankind (Acts 14:17: “filling our hearts with food and gladness”). But we must note the connection between “seed for him who sows” and “bread for the eating.” He does not drop bread from heaven although we know that he once gave the manna in the desert. “The one who sows” mentioned in v. 6 is repeated, but the bread that thus results is now added.

God will do the same for us in the domain of grace and do it even in a similar way, namely so that we must do the sowing and obtain a crop. Christ and the apostles see these beautiful and instructive correspondences between nature and grace and use them most effectively. Men generally and even Christians so often fail to see them. Worldly men fail even to see the hand of God in the domain of nature and talk only about “the laws of nature” and thus fail to let the beneficence of God lead them to repentance (Rom. 2:4) and do not even thank him (Rom. 1:21, 22). A covert argument underlies Paul’s words, namely that he who is one to furnish so much for men’s bodies certainly will furnish no less for us Christians in our spiritual life under grace.

“He will furnish and will multiply your crop and will increase (make grow or augment) the fruits of your righteousness.” We now have no less than three verbs, first the same one that is used in connection with the seed and the bread and then two more that go far beyond this. God will not only “furnish” in the domain of grace, he will even “multiply,” he will even “augment.” To keep men alive with bread is a smaller matter for God than to load his Christians with the abundance of his grace. The bread which he furnishes to men is only “food that perishes”; he wants us to have “the food that endures to eternal life” (John 6:27). Paul calls the latter “the fruits of your righteousness,” of that righteousness which “remains forever.” John 15:8 adds that the Father is glorified when we bear much fruit of this kind and thereby show that we are Christ’s disciples.

But let us note the terms used; Paul does not again say σπέρμα as earthly grainseed but σπόρος, “crop,” a sowing that has been made and is in process of growing and producing. This is what God will multiply for us, not merely “seed” which we may never sow, but planted seed, a developing and a producing crop. When he multiplies the crop we have in the ground he thereby makes certain a multiplied harvest. So Paul adds: “he will make grow or augment your fruits of righteousness.” We prefer the reading γενήματα to γεννήματα. The former is derived from γίνεσθαι and always refers to the fruits of the fields, the latter is derived from γεννᾶν and always refers to living offspring that is born of parents. The texts confuse the two, but we no longer should do so.

The future tenses are volitive: God will do these things; not merely futuristic: God shall do them. On God’s part the will is always there to provide this increase of fruits of righteousness in the way indicated. If the increase is not forthcoming, this is due to our unwillingness. We do not let God multiply the crop we have or we do not even care to obtain the fruits. What a delight it is to any farmer to have many fields growing toward harvest! How pitiful it is if he has but a tiny patch!

So it is with regard to you and to me in our spiritual life. Now God’s will for us is literally to multiply our sowings, to increase the resultant fruits to the utmost. We regard “the fruits of righteousness” as an appositional genitive: the fruits constitute the righteousness. “Their works do follow them,” Rev. 14:13.

We do not approve the long parenthesis found in the A. V. The A. V. follows an inferior reading when it translates v. 10 as a wish and changes the sense with its “both—and” and with its improper construction “minister bread for your food.”

2 Corinthians 9:11

11 Paul continues with a plural nominative participle, regarding which our remarks on the similar participle found in 8:20 apply. Because the Greek participle has both case and number it is added with perfect clarity. Call it ad sensum if you wish but not an anacoluthon, irregular, independent as if it were an indicative, or reaching back across a parenthesis to v. 8 (A. V.). The present durative participle is just what Paul wants to express his thought, namely that in all that God will do for the Corinthians they are “being enriched in everything,” etc. Their enrichment does not wait until all the fruit has matured, it begins when God starts to furnish his supplies and continues as the seeded crop is multiplied.

A farmer counts himself rich when his abundant crops are growing and not only when the last load of the harvest is stored away. This present participle is exactly right.

Now this progressive enrichment is “in everything for all single-mindedness,” namely that single-mindedness “which keeps working out (producing) thanksgiving to God through us.” Here we have an exposition of what “the riches of their single-mindedness” in 8:2 means. Ἁπλότης is derived from the verb which means to spread out a cloth so that no fold in which anything may be hidden is left. See the fuller remarks in connection with 8:2. The riches consist in God’s providing everything for the Corinthians so that they could put their minds on one single thing without having other conflicting considerations. Their one and only thought is one “which works out or produces thanksgiving to God through us.” Their one aim is to get as much thanksgiving for God as possible, i.e., to have as many people as possible thank him. This is putting it in a beautiful and a true way. What a blessed thing to see how God is filling our lives with grace and help like growing crops so that our whole mind is bent only on multiplying thanks for him by what he is thus doing and will yet do for us! No worry about ourselves; no selfish greed to grasp earthly riches for us; only this one high and holy aim.

Your single-mindedness, Paul says, produces this thanksgiving to God “through us.” God is furnishing even these ministers of his, Paul and his assistants, to the Corinthians, who are to aid the Corinthians in securing this rich harvest of thanksgiving to God. These ministers are moving the Corinthians to do their full part in this matter of the collection. The Corinthians ought to know how much they need this aid, for during recent months they have been very lax, have even become disaffected toward Paul. Their single-mindedness was marred by secret contrary and evil thoughts. If such a disposition had continued, little thanksgiving to God would have been the harvest but rather much pleasure for the evil one.

Paul writes only “through us,” he is happy to be of some aid to the Corinthians in producing much thanksgiving to God. Rom. 1:21 combines glorifying God and thanking God, for we glorify him best when we thank his holy name. The highest aim for all of us should be this single purpose, to multiply thanksgivings to God. The minister’s highest work is to aid his church in attaining this aim. How few rise to this vision of our Christian life and work? We see so much duplicity, so much pleonexia. (v. 5), so much desire just for self.

2 Corinthians 9:12

12 With ὅτι Paul explains and elaborates his thought regarding this production of thanksgiving to God. Because the ministry of this public service is not merely an adding (something) to fill up the deficiencies of the saints but (is) also an overflowing by means of many thanksgivings to God—they, (induced) by the test of this (your) ministry, glorifying God for the submissiveness of your confession as regards the gospel of Christ and for the single-mindedness of your fellowship with them and with all—also they, with pleading (to God) on your behalf, longing for you because of the exceeding grace of God upon you.

Ὃτι is used as it was in 8:3. It is a mistake on the part of the Corinthians to think that, as far as their participation in it is concerned, this collection means no more than that they are only adding something to fill up the deficiences of the saints which were caused by their poverty. They are, of course, doing this, but they are doing vastly more by doing this, they are causing an overflow of many thanksgivings to God. The latter should especially delight their hearts and make them eager to participate.

Paul brings out the distinctive feature of Christian charity. Worldly charity is at best happy only in relieving human distress. Pharisaic and work-righteous charity thinks it is acquiring merit with God. By relieving distress Christian charity delights in the multiplied thanksgivings that will rise to God from the hearts and the lips of those whose distress is thus relieved. This is what Jesus means: “Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me,” Matt. 25:40. This divine motive makes Christian charity a sweet odor to God.

We now note the details which are so rich in meaning. This is diakonia, service that is rendered with the sole intent of helping others; it is always a beautiful term. Paul makes it even more beautiful by means of the qualifying genitive “of this public service.” Λειτουργία is public official service as when some official functions. Since priests function thus, some let the word mean “priestly service”; but the word itself never contains the priestly idea. Paul is not regarding the Corinthians as men who are engaged in priestly work. He sees them in a grand public work which is public because all these Gentile congregations of his are participating together. There is also an official feature about this collection, for it is the office of the church thus to help its needy members.

“Deficiency” is used in 8:14. The two present participles are especially interesting, for they are contrasts: προσαναπληροῦσα = by adding something (πρός) to fill (πληροῦν) up (ἀνά)—that is all that is done as far as the need is concerned; but περισσεύουσα = to make exceed, to make overflow, as when more is poured in than the vessel is able to hold—that is what is done by filling the hearts of the needy with many thanksgivings to God. The participles are to be construed with ἐστί as periphrastic present tenses. Paul says: “You are not merely helping to fill up the need of poverty, you are causing golden thanks to God to overflow.”

2 Corinthians 9:13

13 He continues, as he did in v. 11, with a nominative plural participle that is used ad sensum. In v. 14 he follows with a participle in the genitive absolute when he is speaking of the same persons. The addition of the latter casts light on the former. As the one is the genitive absolute, so the other is the nominative absolute. Paul does not speak about how the poor saints at Jerusalem will thank the Corinthians for the alms bestowed upon them, nor how these saints will thank God for these alms. Such thanks are self-evident to Paul.

As Paul conceives their reaction, the saints will glorify God in a much higher way. Induced “by the test of this your ministry” to them, they will glorify God for the spiritual results which God has produced in you. This “test” is not one which these saints have originated; it is one that God is applying to the Corinthians. The genitive is objective: God tests out “the ministry” of the Corinthians in this case in order to see how genuine it is as men test out the metal and the weight of coins. The phrase speaks about a completely successful test which proves “this ministry” of the Corinthians a genuine ministry indeed that is in no way to be discounted. When the saints in Jerusalem receive the alms they will see this ministry, not only from the amount given to them, but from the entire spirit which produced that amount.

Impelled by what they thus see, they glorify God.

Paul does, indeed, speak with great assurance in regard to the Corinthians. The test is yet to be made. How can he be so sure? What if the Corinthians fail in this test? Paul’s trust is not placed in the Corinthians but in God who will move them. He trusts that God will surely bless the efforts he is making in writing to the Corinthians as he does and in sending them three good men to help them (8:16–24). Because he uses God’s means, Paul is not the man to speak as though these means would fail. We fail when we resort to other means, when we do not trust the true ones which God furnishes us, and when we do not trust God enough to bless these means.

Paul sees the saints glorifying God for two things regarding the Corinthians. First of all, “for the submissiveness of your confession in (or in regard to) the gospel of Christ.” The genitive is possessive: this feature, namely true submissiveness, belongs to the confession which the Corinthians are making regarding their adherence to the gospel of Christ. We need not hesitate about construing ὁμολογίαεἰς (C.-K. 690 supplies other examples). It is also most natural to follow the word order as Paul wrote it. What is gained except involution by supposing that Paul means, “glorifying God for the submissiveness to the gospel as made by your confession”? Even the thought is better as the word order stands: “for the submissiveness of your confession in regard to the gospel.” It is the actual submissiveness that shows that we are confessing the gospel aright.

The gathering of the alms for the saints in the manner and the spirit set forth by Paul is a fine piece of the submissiveness that belongs to the confession of the Corinthians in regard to the gospel. This piece of the submissiveness is evidence that the rest of the submission is also present.

Secondly, the saints are seen as glorifying God “also for the single-mindedness of (your) fellowship with them and with all,” i.e., all other saints. The word ἁπλότης is used in the same sense as before (8:2; 9:11); it does not mean “liberality” or “liberal” (our versions) but, as already explained, “single-mindedness.” And κοινωνία means “fellowship” or “communion” as it did in 8:4 and not “contribution” (R. V.) or “distribution” (A. V.). Every thought of “contribution” is excluded by the phrases “with them and with all.” When we translate “liberality of the contribution for them (the saints) and for all,” the meaning is misleading, for the collection was taken up only for the saints in Jerusalem and not for all saints everywhere. Yet this idea is defended, it is said that this contribution to the saints at Jerusalem is as good as a contribution to all saints everywhere; by helping some really all are helped.

Paul is speaking about something that is far higher than “the liberality of the contribution.” The saints at Jerusalem are pictured as glorifying God “for the single-mindedness of (your) fellowship with them and with all,” i.e., for your spiritual fellowship and communion. It is this fellowship of the Corinthians which extends not only to those saints who are being helped at present but to all God’s saints, whether they are helped or not. This is “the communion of saints” confessed by us in the Third Article of the Apostles’ Creed.

Paul even combines the two objects of δοξάζοντες, the ἐπὶτῇ that is used with ὑποταγῇ should be supplied also with ἁπλότητι, and ὑμῶν should also be supplied with κοινωνίας. So we translate: “And for the single-minded-ness of your fellowship.” Let us consider the reason for uniting the two objects by means of one preposition, one article, and one genitive pronoun. The two objects always go together and form a whole. Submissive confession of the gospel means single-minded fellowship with all the saints, all of whom so confess and all of whom are in fellowship. The one is never separated from the other. The one is the basis, the other the result. Confession means fellowship, fellowship means confession.

For this reason Paul says “confession” and not merely faith. We know and recognize each other by our mutual and our identical confession. We cannot see each others’ faith, but we do hear each others’ confession. Confession is, however, the voice of faith even as fellowship is the evidence of this faith. The terms are perfectly chosen. For this reason, too, Paul employs two nouns for each of these related objects.

He might have used two adjectives: “submissive” and “single-minded.” The nouns are not only stronger than such adjectives would be, the nouns express the qualities which Paul wants to name: the quality of “submissiveness” and the quality of “single-mindedness.” The one is the great quality which our confession of the gospel must have, the other the great quality which our fellowship must have. Ὑποταγή is not “obedience” (R. V.), the term for which would be ὑπακοή; it is “submission” (A. V.) or rather “submissiveness.” This, too, makes plain that the two genitives “of your confession,” “of your fellowship,” are simple possessives: confession has the quality of submissiveness; fellowship has the quality of single-mindedness.

Still more. A confession that is not wholly and truly submissive is one that submits not only to the gospel but also to something else besides the gospel. It divides its allegiance. It tries to serve two masters. This is what we call unionism. On one occasion we confess with our brethren, then we turn around and confess with others who are not our brethren. At one time with those who accept all of the gospel as Christ gave it, then with those who alter that gospel at least in part. The sin of unionism is in the heart; it only manifests itself in the lack of proper confession in word and in deed. Christ ever requires complete submission to him alone, to his Word and gospel alone.

This is true with regard to the “single-mindedness in the fellowship” with the saints and true believers. “Single-mindedness” is exactly the proper word. It means a cloth that is spread out with no fold under which something may hide. Its opposite is “double-mindedness.” Read Paul’s own description of the latter in 6:14–18. Single-minded fellowship is found where the mind and the heart want only this one fellowship with the true confessors of the gospel of Christ. The other kind wants to fellowship the true confessors but at the same time also those who are not such confessors. Such fellowship is worthless.

It has been likened to a harlot who is not for a husband but for several, perhaps, many men. He who can brother beyond the true confessors thereby reveals that his brothership means too little. This is the other side of what is termed unionism. We again see that it is down in the heart, and that it only reveals itself in promiscuous fellowshiping. We have already stated that Christ requires “single-mindedness” in our fellowship.

2 Corinthians 9:14

14 Paul intends that v. 12–14 should be regarded as one great thought: the public diakonia of the Corinthians and its supreme effects. He thus uses two participles: a nominative absolute in v. 13, a genitive absolute in v. 14. Since these are participles they express the effects as being dependent on the diakonia as a cause. It is a fine way of expressing this very thought. Paul could have made the second participle another nominative absolute, but that would have paralleled the two effects. Paul wants the second effect only appended to the first. This is exactly what the genitive absolute does. We see that v. 13 could not be expressed by a genitive absolute with a nominative absolute following in v. 14.

The second and secondary effect of the Corinthian diakonia is of a personal nature, the feeling which the saints at Jerusalem will have toward the Corinthians: “also (besides what v. 13 states) they, with pleading (to God) for you, longing for you because of the exceeding grace of God upon you.” The dative is associative: the pleading for you accompanies the longing for you. This begging or pleading (δέησις) is intercession for the Corinthians. It accompanies the longing since the longing cannot be fulfilled, for the saints long to see their benefactors who are one with them in confession and in fellowship, long to embrace them and to thank them in person. But this is not possible; Corinth and Jerusalem are too far apart. So this intercession bridges the gap.

This longing is not the superficial one which beneficiaries have when they desire to meet their benefactors. The reason, behind it is spiritual: “because of the exceeding grace of God upon you.” R. 605 regards ἐφʼ ὑμῖν as a dative: “grace to you.” They who live in the grace of God long in brotherly fellowship to meet those who also live in this grace, the more so when personal gratitude for benefactions produced by this grace seeks for expression.

This very idea moved Paul to plan and to carry through his great collection. He had a higher object in view than the relief of personal suffering. He had that, too, in mind in fullest measure. But here was the opportunity to achieve far more, namely to cement the bond of confessional unity and fellowship and the bond of Christian love and attachment. The saints in Jerusalem were Jewish Christians, the majority of those in Paul’s churches were Gentile Christians. How easy it was for these two to drift apart in thought and in feeling. What a blessed thing to keep them in closest fellowship.

This is not church politics in any sense of the word. This is spiritual statesmanship of the highest and the purest kind. It has nothing to do with outward organization in which church politics and mere ecclesiastical statesmanship spread themselves today. Would that more church leaders would feed on this text and then turn it into action for the present church!

2 Corinthians 9:15

15 Paul closes this part of his epistle and the grand thought expressed in v. 12–14 in a beautiful manner: Thanks to God for his indescribable gift! Note how “God” is found throughout this paragraph (v. 6–15). Paul turns all the thoughts of the Corinthians upward to God and describes the thoughts and the feelings of the saints at Jerusalem as likewise being turned to God. This is due to the fact that all of Paul’s own thoughts are turned upward.

“His indescribable gift” fills Paul’s entire vision. This is the immensity of God’s gift of grace to all of the church and to all of its members. Such a “gift” God gave. But now let us not make the trivial application: “so we, too, ought to give,” and then embellish that idea. From 8:1 onward Paul speaks of our giving, of all our good works, of all our motives in such giving and such works, of all our aims and our purposes in them, and of all the results and the fruits produced by them as being nothing but a part of God’s grace to us, riches for us, blessing for us. All these are a part of this divine unmerited grace (see 1:2) which includes even vastly more.

And it is this which he calls “God’s indescribable GIFT.” It is a pure gift in toto. When we rise to that pure plane as Paul did, the spirit of what he has said will shine in its full glory.

“Unspeakable” is not correct; it is “indescribable,” for the simplex διηγέομαι = to recount, to describe, to set forth in detail. The fact that this word ἀνεκδιήγητος is not found in Greek literature before Paul’s time and only in church writers after his time, is scarcely proof that Paul coined the word. Not every word that was used in those days found its way into writings that were preserved for us. But it is surely the proper word here.

R. A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research, by A. T. Robertson, 4th ed.

B.-D. Friedrich Blass’ Grammatik des neutestamentlichen Griechisch, vierte, voellig neugearbeitete Auflage, besorgt von Albert Debrunner.

C.-K. Biblisch-theologisches Woerterbuch der Neutestamentlichen Graezitaet von D. D. Hermann Cremer, zehnte, etc., Auflage, herausgegeben von D. Dr. Julius Koegel.