2 Corinthians 1:16 – End Bible Teaching

Welcome
Prayer
Song
Silence

2nd Corinthians 1.16-end
September 2nd 2018
Meat

Alright, we left off at verse 20 last week and spent out time talking about everything being YEA in Christ Jesus, and with Paul saying

“All of it unto the Glory of God by us.”

So Paul continues to wrap up the chapter, saying in the next four verses:

21 Now he which stablisheth us with you in Christ, and hath anointed us, is God;
22 Who (speaking of God) hath also sealed us, and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts.
23 Moreover I call God for a record upon my soul, that to spare you I came not as yet unto Corinth.
24 Not for that we have dominion over your faith, but are helpers of your joy: for by faith ye stand.

Okay, lets wrap up chapter one and start with verse 21 where Paul says

21 Now he which stablisheth us with you in Christ, and hath anointed us, is God;

Young’s literal puts verse 21 this way, saying:

2Co 1:21 (YLT) and He who is confirming you with us into Christ, and did anoint us, God,

It appears (to me, at least) that Paul’s intention is to help trace everything to God who through Christ did all things.

And here he tells us that the one who confirms the believers at Corinth WITH them, the apostles, INTO CHRIST, is God.

In the previous chapter Paul dwelt at length on his own fidelity and veracity as a trusted apostle. He has taken pains to prove that he was not inconstant and fickle-minded as a yea, yea/nay, nay sort of person.

But here he steps back a bit and makes sure to give all glory and honor to God who he says was the one who confirms that the believers in Corinth were one with them in Jesus.

We notice that Paul say, “And hath anointed us.”

I think the first “us” in this verse is Paul speaking about the Apostles, and the second us speaks to all of them as believers.

And hath anointed us (who are Christians).

It was customary to anoint kings, prophets, and priests, on their entering on their office, as a part of the ceremony of inauguration.

The word anoint is applied to a priest in Exodus 28:41 and 40:15 – to a prophet, in 1st Kings 19:16 and Isaiah 61:1; to a king in 1st Samuel 10:1; 15:1; 2nd Samuel 2:4; and 1st Kings 1:34.

We also know that anointing is also applied to the Messiah as being, set apart or consecrated to his office as prophet, priest, and king (the highest office ever held in the world).

Well here it is applied also to Christians as being consecrated or set apart to the service of God by the Holy Spirit.

In 1st John 2:20, we read, “But we have an unction from the Holy One, and know all things.”

In 1st John 2:27 we also read, “But the anointing which ye have received abideth in you . . .”

The anointing which was used in the consecration of prophets, priests, and kings, seems to have been designed to be emblematic of the influences of the Holy Spirit, who is often represented as poured upon those who are under his influence, (Proverbs 1:23; Isaiah 44:3; Joel 2:28,29; Zechariah 12:10; and Acts 10:45,) in the same way as water or oil is poured out.

And as Christians are everywhere represented as being under the influence of the Holy Spirit and as being those on whom the Holy Spirit is poured, they are represented as “anointed” just as the former prophets, priests, and Kings were anointed.

Similarly, true Christian are simultaneously, by and through this anointing of the Holy Spirit upon and over them, set apart from the world around them and to the work that they will do, and are therefore consecrated to the service of God.

And Paul makes it clear here that God does all of this.

And then we read another addition to this very important concept as Paul says:

22 Who (speaking of God) hath also sealed us, and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts.

So, Paul presents us with two illustrations.

In the first he says that believers are anointed – which is a direct allusion to the Holy Spirit pouring over a person who is called, set apart and prepared for a specific work.

And the second part is that he says that God has sealed believers, and given them what he calls the “earnest of the Spirit in our hearts.”

The questions then become, are all Christians anointed by the Holy Spirit and are all sealed and given the “earnest of the Spirit in their hearts?’

What do these things look like? How can we tell if we have had them? Are their outward evidences we ought to be looking for or exhibiting?

And then what does “the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts mean? And again, are there outward indicators that this earnestness has been given? Are there signs accompanying those who have been anointed and sealed, and does a person have to be anointed and sealed in order to experience life with God here and in the hereafter?

Because of the presence of these passages and statements by Paul there is a whole sub-sector of believers who are all about showing the signs and proof that being anointed and sealed has occurred. Some suggest that it all happens at “real” conversion, some at “water baptism,” some evidencing it all through the speaking of tongues. And so on and so on.

Wherein lies the truth?

STOP

The word used here (from sfragizw) means, to seal up; to close and make fast with a seal, or signet–as, e.g., books, letters, etc., that they may not be read. It is also used in the sense of setting a mark on anything, or a seal, to denote that it is genuine, authentic, confirmed, or approved–as when a deed, compact, or agreement is sealed. ‘

It is thus made sure; and is confirmed, or established.

Hence it is applied to persons, as denoting that they are approved, as in Re 7:3: “Hurt not the earth, neither the sea, nor the trees, till we have sealed the servants of our God in their foreheads.”

Comp. Eze 9:4. See Barnes for Joh 6:27, where it is said of the Saviour, “for him hath God the Father sealed.” Comp. Joh 3:33.

In a similar manner Christians are said to be sealed; to be sealed by the Holy Spirit, Eph 1:13; 4:30; that is, the Holy Spirit is given to them to confirm them as belonging to God. He grants them his Spirit. He renews and sanctifies them. He produces in their hearts those feelings, hopes, and desires which are an evidence that they are approved by God; that they are regarded as his adopted children; that their hope is genuine; and that their redemption and salvation are SURE–in the same way as a seal makes a will or an agreement sure. God grants to them his Holy Spirit as the certain pledge that they are his, and shall be approved and saved in the last day. In this there is nothing miraculous, or in the nature of direct revelation. It consists of the ordinary operations of the Spirit on the heart, producing repentance, faith, hope, joy, conformity to God, the love of prayer and praise, and the Christian virtues generally; and these things are the evidences that the Holy Spirit has renewed the heart, and that the Christian is sealed for the day of redemption.

And given the earnest of the Spirit. The word here used (arrabwna) from the Heb. HEBREW means, properly, “a pledge given to ratify a contract; a part of the price, or purchase-money; a first payment; that which confirms the bargain, and which is regarded as a pledge that all the price will be paid. The word occurs in the Septuagint and Hebrew, in Ge 38:17,18,20. In the New Testament it occurs only in this place, and in 2Co 5:5; Eph 1:14–in each place in the same connecton as applied to the Holy Spirit, and his influences on the heart. It refers to those influences as a pledge of the future glories which await Christians in heaven. In regard to the “earnest,” or the part of a price which was paid in a contract, it may be remarked,

(1.) that it was of the same nature as the full price, being regarded as a part of it;

(2.) it was regarded as a pledge or assurance that the full price would be paid. So the “earnest of the Spirit” denotes that God gives to his people the influences of his Spirit; his operation on the heart as a part or pledge that all the blessings of the covenant of redemption shall be given to them. And it implies,

(1.) that the comforts of the Christian here are of the same nature as they will be in heaven. Heaven will consist of like comforts; of love, and peace, and joy, and purity begun here, and simply expanded there to complete and eternal perthetlon. The joys of heaven differ only in degree, not in kind, from those of the Christian on earth. That which is begun here is perfected there; and the feelings and views which the Christian has here, if expanded and carried out, would constitute heaven.

(2.) These comforts, these influences of the Spirit, are a pledge of heaven. They are the security which God gives us that we shall be saved. If we are brought under the renewing influences of the Spirit here; if we are made meek, and humble, and prayerful by his agency; if we are made to partake of the joys which result from pardoned sin; if we are filled with the hope of heaven, it is all produced by the Holy Spirit; and is a pledge or earnest, of our future inheritance–as the first sheaves of a harvest are a pledge of a harvest, or the first payment under a contract a pledge that all will be paid. God thus gives to his people the assurance that they shall be saved; and by this “pledge” makes their title to eternal life sure.

23 Moreover I call God for a record upon my soul, that to spare you I came not as yet unto Corinth.

Moreover, I call God for a record upon my soul. It is well remarked by Rosenmuller, that the second chapter should have commenced here, since there is here a transition in the subject more distinct than where the second chapter is actually made to begin. Here Tindal commences the second chapter. This verse, with the subsequent statements, is designed to show them the true reason why he had changed his purpose, and had not visited them according to his first proposal. And that reason was not that he was fickle and inconstant; but it was that he apprehended that if he should go to them in their irregular and disorderly state, he would be under a necessity of resorting to harsh measures, and to a severity of discipline that would be alike painful to them and to him. Dr. Paley has shown with great plausibility, if not with moral certainty, that Paul’s change of purpose about visiting them was made before he wrote his first epistle; that he had at first resolved to visit them, but that, on subsequent reflection, he thought it would be better to try the effect of a faithful letter to them, admonishing them of their errors, and entreating them to exercise proper discipline themselves on the principal offender; that with this feeling he wrote his first epistle, in which he does not state to them as yet his change of purpose, or the reason of it; but that now, after he had written that letter, and after it had had all the effect which he desired, he states the true reason why he had not visited them. It was now proper to do it. And that reason was, that he desired to spare them the severity of discipline, and had resorted to the more mild and affectionate measure of sending them a letter, and thus not making it necessary personally to administer discipline. See Paley’s Horae Paulinae, on 2Co 4:1-18, 2Co 5:1-21. The phrase, “I call God for a record upon my soul,” is, in the Greek, “I call God for a witness against my soul.” It is a solemn oath, or appeal to God; and implies, that if he did not in that case declare the truth, he desired that God would be a witness against him, and would punish him accordingly. The reason why he made this solemn appeal to God, was the importance of his vindicating his own character before the church, from the charges which had been brought against him.

That to spare you. To avoid the necessity of inflicting punishment on you; of exercising severe and painful discipline. If he went among them in the state of irregularity and disorder which prevailed there, he would feel it to be necessary to exert his authority as an apostle, and remove at once the offending members from the church, he expected to avoid the necessity of these painful acts of discipline, by sending to them a faithful and affectionate epistle, and thus inducing them to re- form, and to avoid the necessity of a resort to that which would have been so trying to him and to them. It was not, then, a disregard for them, or a want of attachment to them, which had led him to change his purpose, but it was the result of tender affection. This cause of the change of his purpose, of course, he would not make known to them in his first epistle, but now that that letter had accomplished all he had desired, it was proper that they should be apprized of the reason why he had resorted to this instead of visiting them personally.

24 Not for that we have dominion over your faith, but are helpers of your joy: for by faith ye stand.

Not for that we have dominion, etc. The sense of this passage I take to be this: “The course which we have pursued has been chosen, not because we wish to lord it over your faith, to control your belief, but because we desired to promote your happiness. had the former been our object, had we wished to set up a lordship or dominion over you, we should have come to you with our apostolical authority, and in the severity of apostolic discipline. We had power to command obedience, and to control your faith. But we chose not to do it. Our object was to promote your highest happiness. We, therefore, chose the mildest and gentlest manner possible; we did not exercise authority in discipline, we sent an affectionate and tender letter.” While the apostles had the right to prescribe the articles of belief, and to propound the doctrines of God, yet they would not do even that in such a manner as to seem to “lord it over God’s heritage,” (ou kurieuomen;) they did not set up absolute authority, or prescribe the things to be believed in a lordly and imperative manner; nor would they make use of the severity of power to enforce what they taught. They appealed to reason; they employed persuasion; they made use of light and love to accomplish their desires.

Are helpers of your joy. This is our main object, to promote your joy. This object we have pursued in our plans; and in order to secure this, we forbore to come to you, when, if we did come at that time, we should have given occasion perhaps to the charge that we sought to lord it over your faith.

For by faith ye stand. See Barnes for 1Co 15:1. This seems to be a kind of proverbial expression, stating a general truth, that it was by faith that Christians were to be established or confirmed. The connection here requires us to understand this as a reason why he would not attempt to lord it over their faith; or to exercise dominion over them. That reason was, that thus far they had stood firm, in the main, in the faith, (1Co 15:1;) they had adhered to the truths of the gospel, and in a special manner now, in yielding obedience to the commands and entreaties of Paul in the first epistle, they had showed that they were in the faith, and firm in the faith. “It was not necessary or proper, therefore, for him to attempt to exercise lordship over their belief; but all that was needful was to help forward their joy, for they were firm in the faith. We may observe,

(1.) that it is a part of the duty of ministers to help forward the joy of Christians.

(2.) This should be the object even in administering discipline and reproof.

(3.) If even Paul would not attempt to lord it over the faith of Christians, to establish a domination over their belief, how absurd and wicked is it for uninspired ministers now– for individual ministers, for conferences, conventions, presbyteries, synods, councils, or for the pope–to attempt to establish a spiritual dominion in controlling the faith of men. The great evils in the church have arisen from their attempting to do what Paul would not do; from attempting to establish a dominion which Paul never sought, and which Paul would have abhorred. Faith must be free, and religion must be free, or they cannot exist at all.

Now, as Paul continues on here in chapter two his writing style becomes a bit cloudy and less clear, making the general points available but the way he says them not easy to interpret.

It is the reading of chapter 2 that always caused me heart-burn and made me wonder if Paul was even the author.

So, it will be obvious that Paul is continuing on with what he said at the end of what we call chapter one, but lets read on from verse 1-11.

2nd Corinthians 2:1 But I determined this with myself, that I would not come again to you in heaviness.
2 For if I make you sorry, who is he then that maketh me glad, but the same which is made sorry by me?
3 And I wrote this same unto you, lest, when I came, I should have sorrow from them of whom I ought to rejoice; having confidence in you all, that my joy is the joy of you all.
4 For out of much affliction and anguish of heart I wrote unto you with many tears; not that ye should be grieved, but that ye might know the love which I have more abundantly unto you.

5 But if any have caused grief, he hath not grieved me, but in part: that I may not overcharge you all.
6 Sufficient to such a man is this punishment, which was inflicted of many.
7 So that contrariwise ye ought rather to forgive him, and comfort him, lest perhaps such a one should be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow.
8 Wherefore I beseech you that ye would confirm your love toward him.
9 For to this end also did I write, that I might know the proof of you, whether ye be obedient in all things.
10 To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also: for if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ;
11 Lest Satan should get an advantage of us: for we are not ignorant of his devices.

2:1 But I determined this with myself, that I would not come again to you in heaviness.

IN this chapter Paul continues the discussion of the subject which had been introduced in the previous chapter. At the close of that chapter, he had stated the reasons why he had not visited the church at Corinth. See Barnes for 2Co 1:23, See Barnes for 2Co 1:24. The main reason was that instead of coming to them in that disordered and irregular state, he had preferred to send them an affectionate letter. Had he come to them personally, he would have felt himself called on to exercise the severity of discipline. He chose, therefore, to try what the effect would be of a faithful and kind epistle. In this chapter, he prosecutes the same subject. He states, therefore, more at length the reason why he had not come to them, 2Co 2:1-5. The reason was, that he resolved not to come to them, if he could avoid it, with severity; that his heart was pained even with the necessity of sending such a letter; that he wrote it with much anguish of spirit; yet that he cherished towards them the most tender love. In his former epistle (1Co 5:1-13) he had directed them to exercise discipline on the offending person in the church. This had been done according to his direction; and the offender had been suitably punished for his offence. He had been excommunicated; and it would seem that the effect on him had been to induce him to forsake his sin, and probably to put away his father’s wife, and he had become a sincere penitent. Paul, therefore, in the next place, (2Co 2:6-11,) exhorts them to receive him again into fellowship with the church. The punishment he says had been sufficient, (2Co 2:6;) they ought now to be kind and forgiving to him, lest he should be overwhelmed with his sorrow, (2Co 2:7) he says that he had forgiven him, so far as he was concerned, and he entreated them to do the same, (2Co 2:10;) and says that they ought, by all means, to pursue such a course that Satan could’ get no advantage of them, 2Co 2:11. Paul then states the disappointment which he had had at Troas in not seeing Titus, from whom he had expected to learn what was the state of the church at Corinth, and what was the reception of his letter there; but that not seeing him there, he had gone on to Macedonia, 2Co 2:12,13. There, it would seem, he met Titus, and learned that his letter had had all the success which he could have desired. It had been kindly received; and all that he had wished in regard to discipline had been performed, 2Co 2:14. The hearing of this success gives him occasion to thank God for it, as one among many instances in which his efforts to advance his cause had crowned with success. God had made him everywhere successful; and had made him triumph in Christ in every place. This fact gives him occasion 2Co 2:15,16 to state the general effect of his preaching and his labours. His efforts, he says, were always acceptable to God–though he could not be ignorant that in some cases the gospel which he preached was the occasion of the aggravated condemnation of those who heard and rejected it. Yet he had the consolation of reflecting that it was by no fault of his, 2Co 2:17. It was not because he had corrupted the word of God; it was not because he was unfaithful; it was not because he was not sincere. He had a good conscience– a conscience which assured him that he spoke in sincerity, and as in the sight of God–though the unhappy effect might be that many would perish from under his ministry.

2nd Corinthians 2:1 But I determined this with myself, that I would not come again to you in heaviness.

Verse 1. But I determined this with myself. I made up my mind on this point; I formed this resolution in regard to my course.

That I would not come again to you in heaviness. In grief, (en luph) would not come, if I could avoid it, in circumstances which must have grieved both me and you. I would not come while there existed among you such irregularities as must have pained my heart, and as must have compelled me to resort to such acts of discipline as would be painful to you. I resolved, therefore, to endeavour to remove these evils before I came, that when I did come, my visit might be mutually agreeable to us both. For that reason I changed my purpose about visiting you, when I heard of those disorders, and resolved to send an epistle. If that should be successful, then the way would be open for an agreeable visit to you.” This verse, therefore, contains the statement of the principal reason why he had not come to them as he had at first proposed. It was really from no fickleness, but it was from love to them, and a desire that his visit should be mutually agreeable. Comp. See Barnes for 2Co 1:23.

2 For if I make you sorry, who is he then that maketh me glad, but the same which is made sorry by me?

“If when I should come among you I should be called on to inflict sorrow by punishing your offending brethren by an act of severe discipline as soon as I came, who would there be to give me comfort but those very persons whom I had affected with grief? How little prepared would they be to make me happy, and to comfort me, amidst the deep sorrow which I should have caused by an act of severe discipline. After such an act–an act that would spread sorrow through the whole church, how could I expect that comfort which I should desire to find among you? The whole church would be affected with grief; and though I might be sustained by the sound part of the church, yet my visit would be attended with painful circumstances. I resolved, therefore, to remove all cause of difficulty, if possible, before I came, that my visit might be pleasant to us all.” The idea is, that there was such a sympathy between him and them–that he was so attached to them– that he could not expect to be happy unless they were happy; that though he might be conscious he was only discharging a duty, and that God would sustain him in it, yet that it would mar the pleasure of his visit, and destroy all his anticipated happiness by the general grief.

3 And I wrote this same unto you, lest, when I came, I should have sorrow from them of whom I ought to rejoice; having confidence in you all, that my joy is the joy of you all.

The words “this same” (touto auto) refer to what he had written to them in the former epistle, particularly to what he had written in regard to the incestuous person, requiring them to excommunicate him. Probably the expression also includes the commands in his former epistle to reform their conduct in general, and to put away the abuses and evil practices which prevailed in the church there.

Lest, when I came, etc. Lest I should be obliged, if I came personally, to exercise the severity of discipline, and thus to diffuse sorrow throughout the entire church.

I should have sorrow from them of whom I ought to rejoice. Lest I should have grief in the church. Lest the conduct of the church, and the abuses which prevail in it, should give me sorrow. I should be grieved with the existence of these evils; and I should be obliged to resort to measures which would be painful to me, and to the whole church. Paul sought to avoid this by persuading them before he came to exercise the discipline themselves, and to put away the evil practices which prevailed among them.

Having confidence in you all. Having confidence that this is your general character, that whatever adds to my joy, or promotes my happiness, would give joy to you all. Paul had enemies in Corinth; he knew that there were some there whose minds were alienated from him, and who were endear outing to do him injury. Yet he did not doubt that it was the general character of the church that they wished him well, and would desire to make him happy; that what would tend to promote his happiness would also promote theirs; and, therefore, that they would be willing to do anything that would make his visit agreeable to him when he came among them. He was therefore persuaded, that if he wrote them an affectionate letter, they would listen to his injunctions, that thus all that was painful might be avoided when he came among them.

4 For out of much affliction and anguish of heart I wrote unto you with many tears; not that ye should be grieved, but that ye might know the love which I have more abundantly unto you.

Possibly Paul’s enemies had charged him with being harsh and overbearing. They may have said that there was much needless severity in his letter. He here meets that, and says, that it was with much pain and many tears that he was constrained to write as he did. He was pained at their conduct, and at the necessity which existed for such an epistle. This is an eminently beautiful instance of Paul’s kindness of heart, and his susceptibility to tender impressions. The evil conduct of others gives pain to a good man; and the necessity of administering reproof and discipline is often as painful to him who does it, as it is to those who are the subjects of it.

And anguish of heart. The word rendered “anguish” (sunochv) means, properly, a holding together or shutting up; and then pressure, distress, anguish–an affliction of the heart by which one feels tightened or constrained; such a pressure as great grief causes at the heart.

I wrote unto you with many tears. With much weeping and grief that I was constrained to write such a letter. This was an instance of Paul’s great tenderness of heart–a trait of character which he uniformly evinced. With all his strength of mind, and all his courage and readiness to face danger. Paul was not ashamed to weep; and especially if he had any occasion of censuring his Christian brethren, or administering discipline, Comp. Php 3:18; Ac 20:31. This is also a specimen of the manner in which Paul met the faults of his Christian brethren. It was not with bitter denunciation. It was not with sarcasm and ridicule. It was not by blazoning those faults abroad to others. It was not with the spirit of rejoicing that they had committed errors, and had been guilty of sin. It was not as if he was glad of the opportunity of administering rebuke, and took pleasure in denunciation and in the language of reproof. All this is often done by others; but Paul pursued a different course. He sent an affectionate letter to the offenders themselves; and he did it with many tears. IT WAS DONE WEEPING. Admonition would always be done right if it was done with tears. Discipline would always be right, and would be effectual, if it were administered with tears. Any man will receive an admonition kindly, if he who administers it does it weeping; and the heart of an offender will be melted, if he who attempts to reprove him comes to him with tears. How happy would it be if all who attempt to reprove should do it with Paul’s spirit. How happy, if all discipline should be administered in the church in his manner. But, we may add, how seldom is this done ! How few are there who feel themselves called on to reprove an offending brother, or to charge a brother with heresy or crime, that do it with tears!

Not that ye should be grieved. It was not my object to give you pain.

But that ye might know the love, etc. This was one of the best evidences of his great love to them which he could possibly give. It is proof of genuine friendship for another, when we faithfully and affectionately admonish him of the error of his course; it is the highest proof of affection when we do it with tears. It is cruelty to suffer a brother to remain in sin unadmonished; it is cruel to admonish him of it in a harsh, severe, and authoritative tone; but it is proof of tender attachment when we go to him with tears, and entreat him to repent and reform. No man gives higher proof of attachment to another than he who affectionately admonishes him of his sin and danger.

5 But if any have caused grief, he hath not grieved me, but in part: that I may not overcharge you all.

If any have caused grief. There is doubtless here an allusion to the incestuous person. But it is very delicately done. He does not mention him by name. There is not anywhere an allusion to his name; nor is it possible now to know it. Is this not a proof that the names of the offending brethren in a church should not be put on the records of sessions, and churches, and presbyteries, to be handed down to posterity? Paul does not here either expressly refer to such a person. He makes his remark general, that it might be as tender and kind to the offending brother as possible. They would know whom he meant, but they had already punished him, as Paul supposed, enough; and now all that he said in regard to him was as tender as possible, and fitted, as much as possible, to conciliate his feelings and allay his grief. He did not harshly charge him with sin; he did not use any abusive or severe epithets; but he gently insinuates that he “had caused grief;” he had pained the hearts of his brethren.

He hath not grieved me, but in part. He has not particularly offended or grieved me. He has grieved me only in common with others, and as apart of the church of Christ. All have common cause of grief; and I have no interest in it which is not common to you all. I am but one of a great number who have felt the deepest concern on account of his conduct.

That I may not overcharge you all. That I may not bear hard (epibarw) on you all; that I may not accuse you all of having caused me grief. The sense is, “Grief has been produced. I, in common with the church, have been pained, and daily pained, with the conduct of the individual referred to; and with that of his abettors and friends. But I would not charge the whole church with it; or seem to bear hard on them, or overcharge them with want of zeal for their purity, or unwillingness to remove the evil.” They had shown their willingness to correct the evil by promptly removing the offender when he had directed it. The sense of this verse should be connected with the verse that follows; and the idea is, that they had promptly administered sufficient discipline, and that they were not now to be charged severely with having neglected it. Even while Paul said he had been pained and grieved, he had seen occasions not to bear hard on the whole church, but to be ready to commend them for their promptness in removing the cause of the offence.

6 Sufficient to such a man is this punishment, which was inflicted of many.

Sufficient to such a man. The incestuous person that had been by Paul’s direction removed from the church. The object of Paul here is to have him again restored. For that purpose he says that the punishment which they had indicted on him was “sufficient.” It was

(1.) a sufficient expression of the evil of the offence, and of the readiness of the church to preserve itself pure; and

(2.) it was a sufficient punishment to the offender. It had accomplished all that he had desired. It had humbled him, and brought him to repentance; and doubtless led him to put away his. wife. Compare See Barnes for 1Co 5:1. As that had been done, it was proper now that he should be again restored to the privileges of the church. No evil would result from such a restoration, and their duty to their penitent brother demanded it. Mr. Locke has remarked, that Paul conducts this subject here with very great tenderness and delicacy. The entire passage, from 2Co 2:5-10, relates solely to this offending brother; yet he never once mentions his name, nor does he mention his crime. He speaks of him only in the soft terms of “such a one” and “any one.” Nor does he use an epithet which would be calculated to wound his feelings, or to transmit his name to posterity, or to communicate it to other churches. So that though this epistle should be read, as Paul doubtless intended, by other churches, and be transmitted to future times, yet no one would ever be acquainted with the name of the individual. How different this from the temper of those who would blazon abroad the names of offenders, or make a permanent record to carry them down with dishonor to posterity.

Which was inflicted of many. By the church, in its collective capacity. See Barnes for 1Co 5:4. Paul had required the church to administer this act of discipline, and they had promptly done it. It is evident that the whole church was concerned in the administration of the act of discipline; as the words “of many” (upo twn pleionwn) are not applicable either to a single “bishop,” or a single minister, or a presbytery, or a bench of elders: nor can they be so regarded, except by a forced and unnatural construction. Paul had directed it to be done by the assembled church, 1Co 5:4, and this phrase shows that they had followed his instructions. Locke supposes that the phrase means, “by the majority;” Macknight renders it, “by the greater number;” Bloomfield supposes that it means that the punishment was carned rate effect by all. Doddridge paraphrases it, “by the whole body of your society.” The expression proves beyond a doubt that the whole body of the society was concerned in the act of the excommunication, and that that is a proper way of administering discipline. Whether it proves, however, that that is the mode which is to be observed in all instances, may admit of a doubt, as the example of the early churches, ha a particular case, does not prove that that mode has the force of a binding rule on all.

7 So that contrariwise ye ought rather to forgive him, and comfort him, lest perhaps such a one should be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow.

On the other hand; on the contrary. That is, instead of continuing the punishment. Since the punishment was sufficient, and has answered all the purpose of bearing your testimony against the offence, and of bringing him to repentance, you ought again to admit him to your communion.

Ye ought rather to forgive him. Rather than continue the pain and disgrace of excommunication. It follows from this,

(1.) that the proper time for restoring an offender is only when the punishment has answered the purpose for which it was designed; that is, has shown the just abhorrence of the church against the sin, and has reformed the offender; and

(2.) that when that is done, the church ought to forgive the offending brother, and admit him again to their fellowship. When it can be ascertained that the punishment has been effectual in reforming him, may depend somewhat on the nature of the offence. In this case, it was sufficiently shown by his putting away his wife, and by the manifestations of sorrow. So, in other cases, it may be shown by a man’s abandoning a course of sin, and reforming his life. If he has been unjust, by his repairing the evil; if he has been pursuing an unlawful business, by abandoning it; if he has pursued a course of vice, by his forsaking it, and by giving satisfactory evidences of sorrow and of reformation, for a period sufficiently long to show his sincerity. The time which will be required in each case must depend, of course, somewhat on the nature of the offence, the previous character of the individual, the temptations to which he may be exposed, and the disgrace which he may have brought on his Christian calling. It is to be observed, also, that then his restoration is to be regarded as an act of forgiveness, a layout, (carisasyai, that is, cariv, favour, grace,) on the part of the church. It is not a matter of justice, or of claim on his part; for having once dishonored his calling, he has forfeited his right to a good standing among Christians; but it is a matter of favor, and he should be willing to humble himself before the church, and make suitable acknowledgment for his offences.

And comfort him. There is every reason to think that this man became a sincere penitent. If so, he must have been deeply pained at the remembrance of his sin, and the dishonor which he had brought on his profession, as well as at the consequences in which he had been involved. In this deep distress, Paul tells them that they ought to comfort him. They should receive him kindly, as God receives to his favor a penitent sinner. They should not cast out his name as evil; they should not reproach him for his sins; they should not harrow up his recollection, of the offence by often referring to it; they should be willing to bury it in lasting forgetfulness, and treat him now as a brother. It is a duty of a church to treat with kindness a true penitent, and receive him to their affectionate embrace. The offence should be forgiven and forgotten. The consolations of the gospel, adapted to the condition of penitents, should be freely administered; and all should be done that can be, to make the offender, when penitent, happy and useful in the community.

Lest perhaps such a one. Still forbearing to mention his name; still showing towards him the utmost tenderness and delicacy.

Should be swallowed up, etc. Should be overcome with grief; and should be rendered incapable of usefulness by his excessive sorrow. This is a strong expression, denoting intensity of grief. We speak of a man’s being drowned in sorrow; or overwhelmed with grief; of grief preying upon him. The figure here is probably taken from deep waters, or from a whirlpool which seems to swallow up anything that comes within reach. Excessive grief or calamity, in the Scriptures, is often compared to such waters. See Ps 124:2-5, “If it had not been the LORD who was on our side when men rose up against us, then they had swallowed us up quick, when their wrath was kindled against us; then the waters had overwhelmed us, the stream had gone over our soul; then the proud waters had gone over our soul.” See Ps 69:1, “Save me, O God, for the waters are come into my soul.” Paul apprehended that, by excessive grief, the offending brother would be destroyed. His life would waste away under the effect of his excommunication and disgrace, and the remembrance of his offence would prey upon him, and sink him to the grave.

8 Wherefore I beseech you that ye would confirm your love toward him.

Wherefore I beseech you that ye would confirm your love toward him. The word here rendered confirm, (kurwsai) occurs in the New Testament only here and in Ga 3:15. It means, to give authority, to establish as valid, to confirm; and here means that they should give strong expressions and assurances of their love to him; that they should pursue such a course as would leave no room for doubt in regard to it. Tindal has well rendered it, “Wherefore I exhort you that love may have strength over him.” Paul referred doubtless, here, to some public act of the church by which the sentence of excommunication might be removed, and by which the offender might have a public assurance of their favor.

9 For to this end also did I write, that I might know the proof of you, whether ye be obedient in all things.

The apostle did not say that this was the only purpose of his writing, to induce them to excommunicate the offender, he does not say that he wished, in an arbitrary manner, to test their willingness to obey him, or to induce them to do a thing in itself wrong, in order to try their obedience. But the meaning is this: This was the main reason why he wrote to them, rather than to come personally among them. The thing ought to have been done; the offender ought to be punished; and Paul says that he adopted the method of writing to them, rather than of coming among them in person, in order to give them an opportunity to show whether they were disposed to be obedient. And the sense is, “You may now forgive him. He has hot only been sufficiently punished, and he has not only evinced suitable penitence, but also another object which I had in view has been accomplished. I desired to see whether you were, as a church, disposed to be obedient. That object, also, has been accomplished. And now, since everything aimed at in the case of discipline has been secured, you may forgive him, and should, without hesitation, again receive him to the bosom of the church.”

10 To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also: for if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ;

To whom ye forgive any thing. The sense here is, “I have confidence in you as a Christian society; and such confidence, that if you forgive an offence in one-of your members, I shall approve the act, and shall also be ready to forgive.” He refers, doubtless, to this particular case; but he makes his remark general. It is implied here, I think, that the Corinthians were disposed to forgive the offending brother; and Paul here assures them that they had his hearty assent to this, and that if they did forgive him, he was ready to join them in the act, and to forgive him also.

For if I forgave any thing. If I forgive anything; if I remit any of the punishments which have been inflicted by my authority.

For your sakes. It is not on account of the offender alone; it is in order to promote the happiness and purity of the church.

In the person of Christ. Locke paraphrases this, “By the authority, and in the name of Christ.” Doddridge, “As in the person of Christ, and by the high authority with which he has been pleased to invest me.” Tindal, “In the room of Christ.” The word rendered person (marg., sight proswpw, from prov and wq) means, properly, the part towards, at, and around the eye.–Robinson. Then it means the face, visage, countenance; then the presence, person, etc. Here it probably means, in the presence of Christ; with his eye upon me, and conscious that I am acting before him, and must give account to him. It implies, undoubtedly, that Paul acted by his authority, and felt that he was doing that which Christ would approve.

11 Lest Satan should get an advantage of us: for we are not ignorant of his devices.

The name Satan denotes an adversary, an accuser, an enemy. It is the usual proper name which is given to the devil, the great adversary of God and man.

Should get an advantage of us. The literal translation of the Greek would be, “That we may not be defrauded by Satan,” ina mh pleonekthywmen upo tou satana. The verb here used denotes, to have more than another; then to gain, to take advantage of one, to defraud. And the idea is, that they should at once re-admit the penitent offender to their communion, lest, if they did not do it, Satan would take advantage of it to do injury to him and them. It is a reason given by Paul why they should lose no time in restoring him to the church. What the advantage was which Satan might gain, Paul does not specify. It might be this: That under pretence of duty, and seeking the purity of the church, Satan would tempt them to harsh measures; to needless severity of discipline; to an unkind and unforgiving spirit; and thus, at the same time, injure the cause of religion, and ruin him who had been the subject of discipline.

For we are not ignorant of his devices. We know his plans, his thoughts, his cunning, his skill. We are not ignorant of the great number of stratagems which he is constantly using to injure us, and to destroy the souls of men. He is full of wiles; and Paul had had abundant occasion to be acquainted with the means which he had used to defeat his plans, and to destroy the church. The church, at all times, has been subjected to the influence of those wiles, as well as individual Christians And the church, therefore, as well as individual Christians, should be constantly on its guard against those snares. Even the best and purest efforts of the church are often perverted, as in the case of administering discipline, to the worst results; and by the imprudence and want of wisdom–by the rashness or overheated zeal–by the pretensions to great purity and love of truth –and by a harsh, severe, censorious spirit, Satan often takes advantage of the Church, and advances his own dark and mischievous designs.