The apostle continues the vindication of himself vs. 1-10. Asserts his strong love for the Corinthians, and exhorts them to keep themselves free from all contaminating alliances, vs. 11-18.

THE. APOSTLE’S FIDELITY AND LOVE. VS. 1-18.

As the occasion of writing this epistle was the false accusations of his opponents, a strain of self-vindication runs through the whole. In 5:12 he said he spoke of himself to enable his friends in Corinth to defend him against his enemies. He was governed by the love of Christ, and acted as his ambassador; as such he was a fellow-worker with God, and exhorted men not to fail of the grace of God, vs. 1, 2. In the exercise of this office he avoided all offense, v. 3, proving his sincerity and fidelity as a minister of God, by the patient endurance of all kinds of trials, vs. 4, 5; by the exercise of all the graces and gifts of the Spirit, vs. 6, 7; and under all circumstances, whether of honor or dishonor, prosperity or adversity, whether understood or misunderstood by his fellow men, vs. 8-10. He thus unbosomed himself to the Corinthians, because his heart was enlarged. It was wide enough to take them all in. Whatever there was of the want of love or of due appreciation between them and him, the fault was on their side, not on his, vs. 11, 12. He begs them to be as large-hearted towards him as he was towards them, v. 13, and not to allow themselves to be involved in any intimate alliances with the wicked, vs. 13-18. 1. We then, (as) workers together (with him), beseech (you) also that ye receive not the grace of God in vain.

This verse is intimately connected with the preceding chapter by the particles de< kai> , but also. He is still describing his manner of discharging his apostolic duties. He not only announced that God had made Christ sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in him, but also, as a co-worker with God, he exhorted men not to receive the grace of God in vain. In our version the apostle is made to say, “I beseech you also.” This is wrong; the also belongs to the verb — “I also beseech you.” That the word sunergou~ntev, co-operating, refers to the apostle’s co-operating with God, is plain from the connection, and from the nature of the work.

He had just before, 5:20, spoken of God’s beseeching them; and now he says, we as co-workers beseech you. So in 1 Corinthians 3:9, he says, “We are co-workers with God.” In the Vulgate the word is rendered adjuvantes, which favors the ideal that he was co-operating with them, assisting them (i.e. the Corinthians) by his exhortations. Luther’s version suggests the same meaning; Wir ermahen aber euch, als Mithelfer, as joint-laborers or helpers we exhort you. Compare 1:24, where the apostle says, “We are helpers (sunergoi> ) of your joy.” This view of the passage is given by many commentators. It does not, however, so well, as just remarked, agree with the context; and it would require, to prevent ambiguity, the insertion of uJmi~n, with you. As an apostle or minister of the gospel, Paul was a co-worker with God. That ye receive not the grace of God in vain. What is it to receive the grace of God in vain? Some say that the meaning is to accept of the atonement of Christ, or reconciliation with God spoken of in the preceding chapter, and yet to live in sin. The favor of God is then accepted to no purpose.

But this is an unscriptural idea. Justification and sanctification cannot be thus separated. A man cannot accept of reconciliation with God and live in sin; because the renunciation of sin is involved in the acceptance of reconciliation. Paul never assumes that men may accept one benefit of redemption, and reject another. They cannot take pardon and refuse sanctification. Others say that the apostle here exhorts his readers to guard against “falling from grace;” that having been graciously pardoned they should not, by a relapse into sin, forfeit the grace or favor which they had received. This is a very common interpretation. Olshausen says, “It is undeniable that the apostle assumes that grace when once received may be lost; the Scriptures know nothing of the dangerous error of the advocates of predestination, that grace cannot be lost; and experience stamps it as a lie.” But in the first place, it is no argument in favor of this interpretation that the apostle uses the infinitive aorist (de>xasqai ), have received, because the aorist infinitive is very commonly used for the present after verbs signifying to command or exhort. See Romans 12:1; 15:20; Corinthians 2:8; Ephesians 4:1. Winer’s Idioms of the New Testament, p. 386. In the second place, the “grace of God,” here spoken of, does not mean the actual forgiveness of sin, nor the renewing, sanctifying influence of the Spirit, but the favor of which the apostle spoke in the preceding chapter. It is the infinite grace or favor of having made his Son sin for us, so that we may become the righteousness of God in him. This is the grace of God of which the apostle speaks. He exhorted men not to let it be in vain, as it regarded them, that a satisfaction for sin sufficient for all, and appropriate to all, had been made and offered to all who hear the gospel. In precisely the same sense he says, Galatians 2:21, “I do not frustrate the grace of God.” That is, ‘I do not, by trusting to the works of the law, make it in vain that God has provided a gratuitous method of salvation.’ That great grace or favor he did not make a thing of naught. In Galatians 5:4, he says, “Whosoever of you are justified by the law, are fallen from grace.” That is, ‘ye have renounced the gratuitous method of salvation, and are debtors to do the whole law.’ So in Romans 6:14, it is said, “We are not under the law, but under grace.” In no one of these cases does “grace” mean either the actual pardon of sin, or inward divine influence. It means the favor of God, and in this connection the great favor of redemption. The Lord Jesus Christ having died for our sins and procured eternal redemption for us, the apostle was most earnest in exhorting men not to allow this great favor, as regards them, to be in vain. It is the more evident that such is the meaning of the passage because it is not so much a direct exhortation to the Corinthians, as a declaration of the method in which the apostle preached. He announced the fact that God had made Christ who knew no sin to be sin for us, and he exhorted all men not to receive the grace of God in vain, that is, not to reject this great salvation. And finally, this interpretation is required by the following verse. “Behold, now is the accepted time; now is the day of salvation.” This is appropriate as a motive to receive the offer of pardon and acceptance with God, but it is not appropriate as a reason why a renewed and pardoned sinner should not fall from grace. There is therefore no necessity to assume, contrary to the whole analogy of Scripture, that the apostle here teaches that those who have once made their peace with God and experienced his renewing grace can fall away into perdition. If reconciled by the death of his Son, much more shall they be saved by his life. Nothing can ever separate them from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus. Whom he calls, them he also glorifies. They are kept by the mighty power of God through faith unto salvation. 2. (For he saith, I have heard thee in a time accepted, and in the day of salvation have I succoured thee; behold, now (is) the accepted time; behold, now (is) the day of salvation .)

The Scriptures contain abundant evidence that inspiration did not interfere with the natural play of the powers of the sacred writers. Although they spoke as they were moved by the Holy Ghost, yet they were probably in most cases unconscious of his influence, and acted as spontaneously as the believer does under the power of the Spirit in all his holy exercises. Hence we find that the sacred writings are constructed according to the ordinary laws of mind, and that the writers pass from subject to subject by the usual process of suggestion and association. So here the use of the word de>xasqai brought up to the apostle’s mind the word dektw~| , as it occurs in the beautiful passage, Isaiah 49:8. Hence the quotation of that passage as it stands in the Greek version of the Old Testament. I have heard thee in an accepted time . In the Hebrew it is, a time of grace ; and to this answers the equivalent expression, the day of salvation . It is on these expressions that the appropriateness of the citation rests. The Old Testament speaks of “a time of grace,” and of “a day of salvation.” That is, of a time and a day in which grace and salvation may be obtained. The apostle adds, by way of comment and application, “Behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation.” The connection between this verse and what precedes is thus clear. ‘Receive not the grace of God in vain, for there is a time of grace and a day of salvation, and that day is now. Therefore, neglect not this great salvation.’ The 49th chapter of Isaiah, whence this passage is taken, is his servant to restore Israel and to be a light to the Gentiles. He it was whom man despised and the nation abhorred, to whom kings should rise and princes worship. It was he to whom Jehovah said, “I have heard thee in an accepted time, and in the day of salvation have I succoured thee.” This being the case, the use which the apostle makes of the passage may be explained either on the hypothesis adopted by Dr. J. A. Alexander, in his comment on this chapter, that the ideal person addressed is not the Messiah exclusively, but the Messiah and his people as represented in him. Therefore a promise of grace and salvation to the Messiah was at the same time a promise of grace and salvation to his people. This is the view which Bengel adopts. “He saith , the Father to Messiah, Isaiah 49:8, embracing in him all believers.” Or we may assume, in strict accordance with scriptural usage, that the apostle employs the language of the Old Testament to express his own ideas, without regard to its original application. God had in many ways, and on many occasions, promised to save sinners. To this promise the apostle appeals as a reason why men should accept the grace offered to them in Christ Jesus. He clothes this promise in scriptural language. He might have expressed it in any other equivalent form. But the language of the passage in Isaiah being brought to his mind by the principle of association, he adopts the form there given, without any intimation, expressed or implied, that the passage had not in the original a different application. Thus in Romans 10:18 he might have expressed the idea of the general proclamation of the gospel in his own words, but he chose to express it in the words of the nineteenth Psalm, “Their sound went into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world;” although that Psalm relates to an entirely different subject. We are accustomed, without hesitation and almost unconsciously, to make a similar use of scriptural language. 3. Giving no offense in any thing, that the ministry be not blamed.

The preceding verse is parenthetical, so that the connection is with v. 1. “We beseech giving, etc.” This and the following participles are all connected with the word (parakalou~men ) we beseech, or exhort, and are designed to show how the apostle discharged the duties of his office. This is his defense. In nothing he gave offense. He so acted that no one could fairly make his conduct a ground of rejecting the gospel. The word proskoph> is properly the act of striking or stumbling; then metonymically, that at which or against which any one stumbles. In the figurative use of the word, as here employed, it means an occasion of unbelief. Paul, in preaching the gospel to those to whom it was previously unknown, and whose principal means of judging of it was the conduct of its preachers, was specially careful to avoid every thing which could prove a stumblingblock to his hearers. Although this motive has peculiar weight where the gospel is new, as among the heathen, yet every one knows that the moral power of a preacher depends almost entirely on the conviction which the people have of his sincerity and of the purity of his motives.

This is a source of power for which neither learning nor talents can compensate. That the ministry be not blamed; or, as it is in many copies, our ministry, which gives the passage a most specific reference to himself, and is well suited to the whole connection.

Although in the following verses the apostle, as is his wont, gives his discourse free scope, allowing it, as it were, to flow on in its own impetuous and majestic course, without any attempt to reduce it to logical arrangement, yet in his mind order was so immanent that a certain method can always be detected even in his most impassioned utterances. So here, he first refers to the manifold trials, vs. 4, 5, then to the graces and gifts, vs. 6, 7, by which his sincerity had been tested and established; and then to the diverse circumstances of evil and of good report, under which he had maintained his integrity, vs. 8, 9, 10. Under these several heads there are the same number of specifications, nine in each. Under the two former, there is a ternary arrangement observable; three divisions, each with three specifications; and under the last, nine pairs of contrasts or antitheses, rising to that highest form of oratorical language, where truth is expressed in seeming contradictions. “Having nothing, yet possessing all things.” 4, 5. But in all (things) approving ourselves as the ministers of God, in much patience, in afflictions, in necessities, in distresses, in stripes, in imprisonments, in tumults, in labors, in watchings, in fastings.

So far from causing the ministry to be blamed, Paul in all things, (ejn panti> , ) in every relation, and on every occasion, approved himself, i.e. commended himself, not by self-laudation, but by so acting as to force the conviction of his sincerity on all men. As the ministers of God, i.e. as the ministers of God commend themselves. This interpretation is required, as Paul uses dia>konoi , not diako>nouv . It was as a minister he commended himself. In much patience, i.e. by patient endurance and constancy. Both ideas are expressed by the word uJpomonh> . Paul proved himself to be a true minister of Christ by the fortitude with which he endured sufferings, and by the constancy with which he adhered to his master under all these trials. In what follows in this and the next verse we have the trials enumerated to which he was subjected. These are arranged, as Bengel remarks, in three classes. The first, are general, afflictions, necessities, and distresses; the second are specific, stripes, imprisonments, and tumults; the third, voluntary, labors, watchings, and fastings. His constancy was exhibited in the cheerful endurance of all these kinds of trials. As to the first, the terms used are often interchanged and often combined. Qli>yeiv , pressures, from without or from within; including every thing which presses on the heart or tries the power of endurance or resistance; ana>gkai necessities , when a man is taxed to the utmost to know what to do or how to bear; stenocwri>ai , straits, when one has no room to stand or turn, and therefore escape seems hopeless. It is opposed to largeness of place. “He brought my feet into a large place,” as the Psalmist says. The preposition ejn is to be rendered by before uJpomonh> , and in before all the other nouns in these two verses. He commended himself by patience, in afflictions, in necessities, etc., etc. In stripes . Paul, as we learn from 11:24, 25, had already, at this period of his history, been eight times subjected to the ignominy and torture of the lash, five times by the Jews and thrice by the heathen. In imprisonments. How often the apostle was in prison we know not, as the Acts contain only a small part of his history. He was a prisoner at Philippi, at Jerusalem, at Cesarea, and at Rome; and when a prisoner’s feet were in the stocks, or he was chained.

The Holy Ghost testified that in every place “bonds and afflictions” awaited him. In tumults . The word is ajkatastasi>ai , which may mean “tossings to and fro,” and refer to Paul’s being constantly driven from one place to another, so that he had no quiet abode. This he mentions as one of his sore trials in 1 Corinthians 4:11. The word, however, in the New Testament always elsewhere means either disorder or tumultuous outbreaks. Luke 21:9. To these violent bursts of popular feeling the apostle was frequently exposed, as at Antioch in Pisidia, Acts 13:50; at Lystra, 14:19; at Philippi, 16:19; at Ephesus, Acts 19:29; at Jerusalem, 21:30. Before these manifestations of wrath and power the bravest men often quail. Such tumults can neither be resisted by force, nor be stilled by the voice. What can one man do before an infuriated mob? He could as well resist a tornado. Yet he can be calm and adhere to his purpose. “It is often required,” says Calvin, “of ministers of the gospel, that while they strive for peace, they should pass unbroken through tumults, and never deflect from the right course though heaven and earth should be mixed.” Besides these trials which came upon the apostle against his will, or without his agency, there were painful sacrifices which he made voluntarily, and which were among the strongest proofs of his sincerity.

These were his labors, watchings, and fastings . By labors are to be understood not only his working with his own hands to support himself while he made the gospel of no expense, but also the indefatigable exertions which he was constantly called to make, in traveling, and preaching, and in caring for the sick, the poor, and the interests of the church. Watchings , the sleepless nights which his constantly traveling, his anxieties and labors caused him to pass. Fastings ; this is often understood to refer to his suffering from hunger. But the word nhstei>a is never used for involuntary abstinence from food, and as it occurs here in connection with labors and watchings, both of which were voluntary acts of self-denial, it is probably to be taken in its ordinary sense. Perhaps, however, the reference is to those cases of abstinence which were in a measure forced upon him, or which he chose to submit to rather than to omit some duty or to fail to take advantage of some opportunity of usefulness. There is nothing in the connection to demand a reference to religious fasting, as when prayers and fasting are mentioned together. Here it is labors and fastings. 6, 7. By pureness, by knowledge, by long-suffering, by kindness, by the Holy Ghost, by love unfeigned, by the word of truth, by the power of God, by the armor of righteousness on the right hand and on the left.

As the apostle commended himself in the various trials enumerated in the two preceding verses, so by the graces and gifts here specified, it was made manifest to all that he was a true apostle and faithful minister of God. By pureness , both of heart and life. This includes not merely freedom from the pollution of immoral acts, but disinterestedness and singleness of motive. By knowledge ; what kind or form of knowledge is here indicated can only be gathered from the context. Some say it is the knowledge of the fitness and propriety of things, which exhibits itself as discretion. But as the apostle is speaking of those things which commended him as a minister of God and preacher of the gospel, and as several of the other specifications in these two verses, refer to gifts as distinguished from graces, it is more probable that the reference is to evangelical knowledge; that knowledge which he manifested in his teaching. Comp. Ephesians 3:4, where he speaks of his knowledge of the mystery of Christ, as patent to all his readers. And in Galatians 1:12, et seq., he appeals to his possession of this knowledge, without any human teaching, as an undeniable proof of his divine mission. By long-suffering, i.e. patiently submitting to injustice and undeserved injuries. By kindness, i.e. crhsto>thv (from crhsto>v , useful ) benevolence; a disposition to do good; as God is said to be kind to the unthankful and the evil, Luke 6:35. By the Holy Ghost; that is, by the manifestation of the Holy Ghost as dwelling in me. It is the doctrine of the Scriptures, and specially of Paul’s writings, that the Spirit of God dwells in all believers, and that besides those manifestations of his presence common to all, there is given to each one his special gift, whether ordinary or extraordinary; to one wisdom, to another knowledge, to another the gift of teaching, to another the working of miracles, etc. 1 Corinthians 12:7-11. In proof of his being a true minister of God, Paul appeals to the evidence of the presence of the Spirit in him, which evidence was to be found in those graces and gifts of the Holy Ghost with which he was replenished; and in the divine power which attended and rendered successful his preaching. He could appeal to his converts and say, “Ye are the seal of my apostleship in the Lord,” Corinthians 9:2. By love unfeigned. As in the preceding clause he referred to kindness or benevolence, here love must be taken in the restricted sense of Christian love — not that affection which is exercised towards the just and the unjust, but that which springs from the peculiar relations of the believer to God and to his brethren. It is brotherly love, or the love of the brethren as such. By the word of truth, that is, by the preaching of the truth, or preaching the contents of which is truth. The reference is not to veracity, but to the exhibition of the truth in his preaching. In a previous chapter, 4:2, he had said, “By the manifestation of the truth I commend myself to every man’s conscience in the sight of God.” By the power of God. The power of God was manifested in various ways in Paul’s ministry. “He that wrought in Peter,” he says, “to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me towards the Gentiles,” Galatians 2:8. By these various manifestations of divine power in his conversion, in his preparation for his work, and in the exercise of his apostleship, he was proved to be a true servant of God. By the armor of righteousness. The word “righteousness” is used in Scripture in two senses. It means either rectitude, uprightness, honesty, in the comprehensive sense of the terms; or it means justifying righteousness, the righteousness of faith, so often called the righteousness of God. Calvin and many others take it in the former sense here, and understand by the “armor of righteousness,” that armor which integrity affords, or those arms which are consistent with moral rectitude. Others prefer the latter sense of the word, and understand the armor of righteousness to be that which is secured by our justification before God. This interpretation is not only more in keeping with Paul’s usage of the word, but more consistent with the context. It was not Paul’s honesty which was his armor, or by which he established his claim to be a minister of God, but the supernatural gifts and graces of the Spirit. In Ephesians 6:14, he compares this righteousness to a breastplate; here to the whole panoply, on the right hand and on the left, offensive and defensive, because he who is justified, or clothed with the righteousness of Christ, has every thing at command. He has the shield of faith, and the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit. 8-10. By honor and dishonor, by evil report and good report, as deceivers, and (yet) true, as unknown, and (yet) well known; as dying, and behold, we live; as chastened, and not killed; as sorrowful, yet always rejoicing; as poor, yet making many rich; as having nothing, and (yet) possessing all things.

These verses are intimately connected, forming a distinct division of the apostle’s discourse. In vs. 4, 5, we had the preposition ejn in its local sense. Paul commended himself by patience in afflictions, in necessities, etc. In vs. 6, 7 the same preposition is used in its instrumental sense, by pureness, by knowledge, etc. Here the preposition dia> has a local sense, through, in the midst of. He maintained his consistency and integrity under all circumstances, through honor and dishonor, through evil report and good report. He was always the same — preached the same doctrine, urged the same duties, maintained the same principles, whether his preaching was approved or disapproved, whether it secured for him admiration or brought down upon him reproach. This is the common and most natural interpretation. Many, however, prefer the instrumental sense of the preposition. ‘By means of honor which we receive from the friends of God, and by means of the dishonor heaped upon us by our enemies.’

That the good honored him, and the wicked defamed him, was proof of his integrity. This requires too much to be supplied in order to bring out the sense. The former interpretation is more simple, and gives a meaning quite as pertinent. The figure which he uses is that of a road, along which he marches to victory, through all obstacles, disregarding what is said or thought by others. The last clause serves as the transition to a new mode of representation. He no longer speaks of what he did, but of the judgment of others concerning him. As deceivers, and yet true . These and the following adjectives and participles, as they are in Greek, though translated in some cases as substantives, are parallel with sunistw~ntev in v. 4. ‘We beseech you, commending ourselves, etc., and we beseech you, as deceivers , yet true , etc.’ That is, we go steadily on in the discharge of our duty whatever men may think or say. As deceivers , (pla>noi ,) not merely false pretenders, but seducers, men who lead others astray, and themselves wander from the truth. Matthew 27:63; 1 Timothy 4:1; 2 John 7. It is here the opposite of ajlhqei~~v , in the sense of truthful , loving and speaking the truth. Matthew 22:16; Mark 12:14. ‘Regarded as seducers, we are the advocates of the truth.’ As unknown, yet well known , (wJv ajgnoou>menoi , kai< ejpiginwsko>menoi ,) regarded with contempt as obscure and ignoble, yet recognized and famous. The antithesis is either that expressed in our version, between being unknown and being well known, or, between being misunderstood and being duly appreciated. The latter of the two words used by the apostle may well express that sense, as ejpiginw>skw often means to recognize, or acknowledge one to be what he is, or professes to be, 1:13, 14. Matthew 17:12, and although the former word does not elsewhere occur precisely in the sense of being misunderstood, yet to be unknown and to be unrecognized are ideas so nearly related, that it is not unnatural to take the word in that sense here, if the antithesis and context require it. Paul was unknown to the mass of the people; he was taken to be what he was not; and yet he was duly appreciated, and recognized in his true character by others. As dying , i.e. regarded by others as certain to perish, and behold we live . This is one interpretation. It is, however, more in harmony with what follows to understand the apostle to refer to actual facts. He was, as he says, 4:11 and 1 Corinthians 15:31, constantly exposed to death. He died daily, and yet he lived. God always interposed to rescue him from destruction when it seemed inevitable, and to sustain him under calamities which to all appearance no man could bear. As chastened, but not killed . To chasten (paideu>ein ) is properly to treat as a child, and as children are often made to suffer by their parents for their good, to chasten is to correct by suffering. The word, however, is often used to express simply the idea of infliction of pain without any reference to the end of the infliction. God never punishes his people. That is, their sufferings are never designed to satisfy justice; nor are they always even chastisements in the proper sense of the word. They are not in all cases sent to correct evils, to repress pride, or to wean from the world. God often afflicts his people and his church simply to enable them the better to glorify his name. It is an unchristian disposition, therefore, which leads us always to ask, when afflictions are sent upon ourselves or others, Why is this? What have we or they done to call forth this expression of parental displeasure or solicitude? What does God mean to rebuke? It may be that our sufferings are chastisements, that is, that they are designed to correct some evil of the heart or life, but this is not to be inferred from the simple fact that they are sufferings. The greater part of Paul’s sufferings were not chastisements. They were designed simply to show to all ages the power of the grace of God; to let men see what a man could cheerfully endure, and rejoice that he was called upon to endure, for the sake of the Lord Jesus. In this case chastened means simply afflicted. There is no reference to the design of God in sending the sufferings which the apostle was called to endure. There is another view of the meaning of this passage, which supposes the words to be uttered from the stand-point of Paul’s enemies. “Chastised, but not killed.”’Regarded as an object of divine displeasure, as smitten of God, (which may be true,) yet I am not killed.’ It is, however, more in keeping with what follows to understand the apostle as referring to his actual experience. He was greatly afflicted, but not killed; cast down, as he says in 4:9, but not destroyed. Compare <19B818> Psalm 118:18, “The Lord hath chastened me sore; but he hath not delivered me over unto death.” Let believers therefore regard their afflictions, when they can, not as indications of God’s disapprobation, but rejoice in them as opportunities graciously rejoicing them to glorify his name. As sorrowful, yet always rejoicing . This again may mean, ‘Looked upon as sorrowful, yet in fact always rejoicing;’ or, ‘Although overwhelmed with sorrow, yet full of joy.’ The latter interpretation is to be preferred. This is one of the paradoxes of Christian experience. The believer has more true joy in sorrow, than the world can ever afford. The sense of the love of God, assurance of his support, confidence in future blessedness, and the persuasion that his present light afflictions shall work out for him a far more exceeding and an eternal weight of glory, mingle with his sorrows, and give the suffering child of God a peace which passes all understanding.

He would not exchange his lot with that of the most prosperous of the children of this world. As poor, yet making many rich. Poor in this world’s goods, yet imparting to many the true riches; as having nothing, i.e. of earthly treasure, yet possessing all things, in the sense in which in Corinthians 3:21, he tells the Corinthians, “All things are yours.” The real property in any thing vests in him for whose benefit it is held and used.

And as all things, whether the world, or life or death, or things present or things to come, are held and disposed by God for the benefit of his people, for their present good and future glory, they are the real proprietors of all things. Being joint heirs with Christ, Romans 8:17, they possess all things. 11. O (ye) Corinthians, our mouth is open unto you, our heart enlarged.

This and the two following verses are an epilogue to the preceding vindication of himself, and an introduction to the following exhortations. O Corinthians. This direct address is unusual with the apostle, and is expressive of strong feeling. Galatians 3:1. Our mouth is open (ajne>w|ge , perfect, as present and intransitive, see John 1:52.) To open the mouth is a common scriptural expression, meaning to begin to speak, or, to speak, as in Matthew 5:2; Acts 8:32,35. Here, as the context shows, it is used emphatically, and means, to speak freely and openly. Compare Ephesians 6:19. Our heart is enlarged. See 1 Kings 4:29; <19B932> Psalm 119:32; Isaiah 60:5. Any joyful, generous feeling is said to enlarge the heart. A large-hearted man is one of generous and warm affections. The apostle had poured out his heart to the Corinthians. He has spoken with the utmost freedom and openness, and in doing so his heart was expanded towards them. He was ready to embrace them all, and to take them to his arms as his dear children. 12. Ye are not straitened in us, but ye are straitened in your own bowels.

The apostle abides by his figure. A large heart is one expanded by love; a straitened heart is one void of generous affections. To be straitened (snenocwre>w ) is to want room; stenocwri>a is want of room, straits, distress, anguish of mind. Hence to enlarge to give one a wide place, is to deliver, to bless. Psalm 4:1; <19B805> 118:5. Ye are not straitened in us, i.e. there is no lack of room for you in our heart; but ye are straitened in your own bowels, i.e. your heart is too narrow to admit me. Straitened in your own bowels, means, not that you are inwardly afflicted, or that the cause of your trouble is in yourselves, but, as the context requires, ‘Your bowels (hearts) are narrow or contracted.’ There is not room in them to receive me. Without a figure the meaning is, ‘The want of love is on your side, not on mine.’ 13. Now for a recompense in the same, (I speak as unto (my) children,) be ye also enlarged.

The exhortation or request is, ‘Be ye also enlarged, i.e. open your hearts to receive me, which is only a proper recompense for my love to you. I speak as to children, who are expected to requite the love of their parents with filial affection.’ The words than are explained as a concise expression for to< de< ajuto> o[ ejstin ajntimisqi>a , ‘as to the same thing, which is a recompense, be ye also enlarged.’ The accusative is the accusative absolute. 14. Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness ?

After the exhortation to requite his love by loving him, he exhorts them to keep aloof from all intimate association with the evil. The exhortation is general, and is not to be confined to partaking of heathen sacrifices, nor to intermarriage with the heathen, much less to association with the opponents of the apostle. It no doubt had a special reference or application to the peculiar circumstances of the Corinthians, and was intended to guard, them against those entangling and dangerous associations with the unconverted around them, to which they were specially exposed. And as we know that their special danger was from idolaters, (see 1 Corinthians ch. <460801> 8, and 10:14-33,) whose festivals they were constantly urged to attend, it is to be presumed that it was from all association with the heathen in their worship that the apostle intended to warn them. But this is only one application of the principle here laid down, viz., that intimate associations ought not to be formed by the people of God with those who are not his people. The same remark may be made in reference to the persons here intended by unbelievers . It is no doubt true that by unbelievers (oiJ ajpi>stoi ) Paul meant the heathen. (See 1 Corinthians 6:6.) But it does not follow from this that intimate association with the heathen is all that is here forbidden. The principle applies to all the enemies of God and children of darkness. It is intimate, voluntary association with the wicked that is forbidden. The worse a man is, the more openly he is opposed to Christ and his gospel, the greater the danger and evil of connection with him. It is not so much his profession as his real character and influence that is to be taken into account. If it be asked whether the marriage of professors of religion with non-professors, in the modern (or American) sense of those terms, is here expressly prohibited? The answer must be in the negative. There were no such classes of persons in the apostolic age, as professing and non-professing Christians. The distinction was then between Christians and heathens.

Persons born within the pale of the Christian Church, baptized in the name of Christ, and religiously educated, do not belong to the same category as the heathen. And the principle which applied to the latter therefore does not apply to the former. Still it is to be remembered that it is the union of incongruous elements, of the devout and undevout, of the spiritual and the worldly, of the good and the evil, of the children of God and the children of the evil one, that the apostle exhorts Christians to avoid. Be not unequally yoked. The word is eJterozuge>w , to be yoked heterogeneously , i.e. with an animal of another kind. The allusion is evidently to the Mosaic law which forbade the uniting animals of different kinds in the same yoke. Deuteronomy 22:10. In Leviticus 19:19, ejtero>zugov , in the Septuagint, means an animal of a different kind. It is the union of incongruous, uncongenial elements or persons that is forbidden. With unbelievers ; as the dative, ajpi>stoiv cannot depend on the preceding word, it is explained by resolving the concise phrase of the apostle into the full form, mh< gi>nesqe ejterozug . kai< ou[twv oJmizugou~ntev ajpi>stoiv . Winer, p. 252. By unbelievers, as above remarked, are to be understood the heathen, those who did not profess faith in the gospel. The exhortation is enforced by the following questions, which are designed to show the incongruity of such unions. For what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness ? This is stronger than asking, What fellowship have the righteous with the unrighteous? because there are many bonds of sympathy between good and bad men, arising from the participation of a common nature, and from the fact that in this life, the good are not wholly good, nor the bad wholly bad. The apostle, therefore, contrasts the characteristic and opposing principles by which the two classes are distinguished. By righteousness as opposed to unrighteousness, (dikaiosu>nh to ajnomi>a ,) is meant goodness, or moral excellence in general, conformity to the law of God as opposed to opposition to that law. It does not mean justifying righteousness, as though the contrast were, as some explain it, between the justified and the not justified. The opposition intended is that which exists between the righteous and the wicked. What fellowship, (metoch> ,) partnership. That is, what have they in common? What bond of union or sympathy is there between them? And what communion (koinwni>a ), see Acts 2:42; Corinthians 1:9, 10, 16. Parties are said to be in communion when they are so united that what belongs to the one belongs to the other, or when what is true of the one is true of the other. Believers are in communion, or have fellowship one with another, when they recognize each other as having a joint interest in the benefits of redemption, and are conscious that the inward experience of the one is that of the other. Incongruous elements cannot be thus united, and any attempt to combine them must destroy the character of one or the other. Hath light with darkness. Light is the common scriptural emblem of knowledge, holiness and blessedness. Hence Christians are said to be the children of light. Luke 16:8; Thessalonians 5:5. Paul was sent “to turn men from darkness to light,” Acts 26:18; Romans 13:12; Ephesians 5:8,9. Darkness, on the other hand, is the emblem of error, sin and misery. Satan’s kingdom is called the kingdom of darkness, and the wicked are the children of darkness; and the state of final perdition is “outer darkness.” Nothing can be more incongruous than light and darkness, whether in the literal or figurative meaning of the terms. The attempt, therefore, of Christians to remain Christians and retain their inward state as such, and yet to enter voluntarily into intimate fellowship with the world, is as impossible as to combine light and darkness, holiness and sin, happiness and misery. 15. And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?

What concord, (sumfw>nhsiv ,) “harmony of voice.” How discordant or opposite are Christ and Belial? How then can their followers agree? The proper orthography of the word according to the Hebrew is Beliar, (agreeably to a common change of the 1 for r by the Jews who spoke Greek,) others Beliam. The word is properly an abstract noun signifying worthlessness, then wickedness. Hence the wicked are called “sons of Belial,” i.e. worthless. It is used as a concrete noun in 2 Samuel 23:6; Job 34:18. “Wicked one,” and hence, by way of eminence, for Satan, who is oJ ponhro>v , the evil one. Compare 1 Corinthians 10:21, where the impossibility of uniting the service of Christ and the service of Satan is presented in much the same terms as it is here. Christ is God manifest in the flesh; Satan is the prince of darkness. How can they, or their followers agree? Or what part (meri>v in the sense of participation, fellowship. Colossians 1:12) hath he that believeth with an infidel. In modern usage an unbeliever often means one destitute of saving faith; and an infidel one destitute even of speculative faith, one who denies the gospel to be a revelation from God. This is a distinction unknown to the Bible. The word here rendered infidel is in v. 14 rendered unbeliever. In the apostolic age all who professed faith of any kind were called believers, and unbelievers were infidels. It was assumed that the faith possessed was genuine; and therefore it was assumed that all believers were truly the children of God.

A mere speculative believer and an infidel may agree well enough in their tastes, character and pursuits. There is no such incompatibility or antipathy between them, as the apostle assumes to exist between the (pisto>v and a]pistov ) believer and unbeliever. It is taken for granted that faith changes the whole character; that it makes a man move in an entirely different sphere, having different feelings, objects, and principles from those of unbelievers; so that intimate union, communion or sympathy between believers and unbelievers is as impossible as fellowship between light and darkness, Christ and Belial. And it must be so. They may indeed have many things in common; a common country, common kindred, common worldly avocations, common natural affections, but the interior life is entirely different; not only incongruous, but essentially opposed the one to the other. To the one, Christ is God, the object of supreme reverence and love; to the other, he is a mere man. To the one, the great object of life is to promote the glory of Christ and to secure his favor; to the other, these are objects of indifference. Elements so discordant can never be united into a harmonious whole. 16. And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in (them); and I will be their God, and they shall be my people .

In this and the following verses we have, 1. The assertion of the incongruity between the temple of God and idols. 2. The reason assigned for presenting this incongruity, ‘For ye are the temple of God.’ 3. The proof from Scripture that believers are God’s temple. 4. The duty which flows from this intimate relation to God; and 5. The gracious promise made to all those who live in accordance with the relation which they bear to God. What agreement (sugkata>qesiv , see Luke 23:51,) hath the temple of God with idols ?

A building consecrated to the true God is no place for idols. Men cannot combine the worship of God and the worship of devils. Idolatry is everywhere in Scripture represented as the greatest insult the creature can offer the Creator; and the grossest form of that insult is to erect idols in God’s own temple. Such was the indignity which those Corinthians offered to God, who, while professing to be Christians, joined in the religious services of the heathen. And such, in its measure, is the offense committed when the people of God become associated with the wicked in their inward and outward life. It is the introduction of idols into God’s temple. For ye are the temple of the living God. There would be no propriety in the preceding illustration if believers were not God’s temple.

This, therefore, the apostle first asserts and then proves. The text is here uncertain. The majority of MSS. read with the common text, uJmei~v , ye ; Lachmann, Meyer and some other editors, on the authority of a few MSS. and of the context, read hJmei~v , we . The sense is substantially the same.

The common text is to be preferred both on external and internal grounds.

The apostle is addressing the Corinthians, and properly therefore says, Ye are the temple of God . A temple is not a building simply consecrated to God, but one in which he dwells, as he dwelt by the visible manifestation of his glory in the temple of old. Hence heaven, as God’s dwelling place, is called his temple. Psalm 11:2; Habakkuk 2:20. Christ’s body is called a temple, because in him dwelt the fullness of the Godhead. John 2:19.

Believers collectively, or the church, is God’s temple, because inhabited by his Spirit, Ephesians 2:21, and for the same reason every individual believer, and every believer’s body is a temple of God. 1 Corinthians 3:16; 6:19. To prove that they were the temple of God, individually and collectively, he therefore cites the declaration of the Scriptures that God dwells in his people. “I will dwell in them and walk in them.” God is said to dwell wherever he specially and permanently manifests his presence.

And since he thus specially and permanently manifests his presence in his people collectively and individually, he is said to dwell in all and in each. To walk in them is simply a parallelism with the preceding clause, expressing the idea of the divine presence in another form. The nearest approach to the words here cited is Leviticus 26:11,12, where the same thought is expressed, though in somewhat different words. Instead of, “I will set my tabernacle among you,” the apostle expresses the same idea by saying, “I will dwell in them.” In them , is not simply among them, because the presence of God by his Spirit is always represented as internal, in the heart. “If Christ be in you,” says the apostle, “the body is dead, etc.” “If the Spirit of Him who raised Christ from the dead dwell in you, etc.” Romans 8:10,11. So of every believer our Lord says, “If a man love me, he will keep my words, and my Father will love him; and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him,” John 14:2,3. Every thing is full of God. An insect, a flower, is a constant manifestation of his presence and power. It is what it is because God is in it. So of the human soul, it is said to be full of God when its inward state, its affections and acts, are determined and controlled by him, so as to be a constant manifestation of the divine presence. Then the soul is pure, and glorious, and free, and blessed. This is what God promises to accomplish in us, when he says, “I will dwell in you and walk in you.” It is only a variation of forth when it is added, I will be their God, and they shall be my people. This is the great promise of the covenant with Abraham and with all the true Israel. It is one of the most comprehensive and frequently repeated promises of the Scriptures. Genesis 17:8; Deuteronomy 29:13; Jeremiah 31:33; Hebrews 8:10, etc., etc. There is unspeakably more in the promises of God than we are able to understand. The promise that the nations should be blessed in the seed of Abraham, as unfolded in the New Testament, is found to comprehend all the blessings of redemption. So the promise, I will be their God, and they shall be my people, contains more than it has ever entered into the heart of man to conceive. How low are our conceptions of God! Of necessity our conceptions of what it is to have a God, and that God, Jehovah, must be entirely inadequate. It is not only to have an infinite protector and benefactor, but an infinite portion; an infinite object of love and confidence; an infinite source of knowledge and holiness. It is for God to be to us what he designed to be when he created us after his image, and filled us with his fullness. His people, are those whom he recognizes as his peculiar property, the objects of his love, and the recipients of his favors. 17. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean (thing); and I will receive you.

This is a free citation from Isaiah 52:11,12, where the same exhortation to separate themselves from the wicked, and specially from the heathen, is addressed to the people of God. The words and I will receive you have nothing to answer to them in the passage in Isaiah, unless it be the words “God shall be your rere-ward;” literally, “he that gathereth you.” In Judges 19:18 the same word is rendered to receive, “There is no one receiveth me to house.” It is more probable, however, that they are borrowed from Ezekiel 20:34, as it is rendered in the ‘Septuagint. The exhortation is founded on the preceding passage. God is most intimately related to his people. They are his temple. He dwells in them. Therefore they are bound to keep themselves unspotted from the world. Their being God’s temple, his presence in them, and his regarding them as his people, depends upon their separation from the world. For if any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. 1 John 2:15. In this whole context the apostle clothes his own exhortation to the Corinthians in the language of God himself, that they might see that what he taught was indeed the word of God. 18. And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.

This is a continuation of the promise commenced in the preceding verse.