Comentários bíblicos

CHAPTER 8

2 Corinthians 8:3. ὑπὲρ δύναμιν] Lachm. Rück. and Tisch. read παρὰ δύναμ., on decisive evidence; ὑπέρ is a gloss.—2 Corinthians 8:4. After ἁγίους Elz. has δέξασθαι ὑμᾶς, which, on decisive evidence, is rightly struck out by Griesb. and the later editors as a supplementary insertion, though defended by Rinck.—2 Corinthians 8:5. ἠλπίσαμεν] Only B and 80 have ἠλπίκαμεν, just as in 2 Corinthians 8:6 only B has ἐνήρξατο.—2 Corinthians 8:7. ἐξ ἡμῶν ἐν ὑμῖν is attested only by min. and Syr. Arm. Slav. ms. Comp. Orig.: nostra in vos. Error of transcription, or correction through misunderstanding.—2 Corinthians 8:12. After ἔχῃ Elz. and Scholz have τις. An addition in opposition to decisive evidence.—2 Corinthians 8:13. δέ] is wanting in B C א min. and Aeth. Clar. Germ.; deleted by Lachm., and rightly, since it betrays itself as inserted to mark the contrast.—2 Corinthians 8:16. διδόντι] D E F G L א and many min. Chrys. Theophyl. have δόντι. Approved by Griesb., adopted by Scholz, Rück. But the aorist has crept in obviously on account of the aorists that follow.—2 Corinthians 8:19. σύν] B C and many min., also several vss. and Fathers, have ἐν. Recommended by Griesb., adopted by Lachm. Rück. and Tisch. Rightly; σύν, though defended by Reiche, is an erroneous glos.

αὐτοῦ] is wanting in B C D* F G L and many min., also in several vss. and Latin Fathers. Suspected by Griesb., deleted by Lachm. Rück. Considering the great preponderance of the adverse evidence, it is more probable that it has crept in by writing τοῦ twice, than that it has been left out on account of its being unnecessary and seemingly unsuitable (Reiche).

Instead of the last ἡμῶν Elz. has ὑμῶν, against decisive testimony. Alteration, because ἡμῶν was held to be unsuitable.—2 Corinthians 8:21. προνοοῦμεν γάρ] Elz.: προνοούμενοι, only supported by later codd. and some Fathers. The participle appears to be a mere copyist’s error occasioned by στελλόμενοι, so that at first even the γάρ remained beside it, as is the case still in C, min., and some vss. and Fathers, whom Tisch. follows. But afterwards this γάρ had to be dropped on account of the retention of the participle.—2 Corinthians 8:24. ἐνδείξασθε] Lachm. and Tisch. read ἐνδεικνύμενοι, following B D* E* F G 17, It. Goth. The imperative is a gloss.

Elz., against decisive testimony, has καί before εἰς πρόσωπον. Added for the sake of connection.

Chap. 8 and 9 The second chief division of the Epistle: regarding the collection for the poor in Jerusalem (1 Corinthians 16), coming very fitly after the praise contained in chap. 7, and having the way appropriately paved for it in particular by the closing words, 2 Corinthians 7:16.

2 Corinthians 8:1. The δέ is the mere μεταβατικόν, leading over to a new topic in the Epistle. Comp. 1 Corinthians 7:1; 1 Corinthians 8:1; 1 Corinthians 12:1; 1 Corinthians 15:1.

τὴν χάριν τ. θεοῦ τὴν δεδομ. κ.τ.λ.] the grace of God, which is given in the churches of Macedonia, i.e. how graciously God has wrought in the churches of Macedonia, inasmuch as He (see 2 Corinthians 8:2) called forth in them so great liberality. Comp. 2 Corinthians 9:14. The expression rests on the idea, that such excellent dispositions and resolves are produced and nourished, not by independent spontaneity, but by the grace of God working on us (operationes gratiae). Comp. Php 2:13. Paul, therefore, does not think of the grace of God as shown to himself (Origen, Erasmus, who paraphrases it: “quemadmodum adfuerit mihi Deus in ecclesiis Maced.;” comp. Zachariae, Emmerling, Billroth, Wieseler, Chronol. p. 357 ff.; also Rückert, yet with hesitation),—in which case he could not but have added ἐμοί or ἡμῖν, in order to make himself understood,—but, on the contrary, as granted to the liberal churches, working in them the communicative zeal of love, so that the construction with ἐν is quite as in 2 Corinthians 8:16; 2 Corinthians 1:22.

2 Corinthians 8:1-6. The beneficence of the Macedonians has been shown beyond all expectation; hence we have exhorted Titus to complete among you the work already begun.

2 Corinthians 8:2. A more precise explanation of τὴν χάριν κ.τ.λ., so that ὅτι (that, namely) is dependent on γνωρίζομεν. This exposition consists, as was seen by Chrysostom, Theodoret, Erasmus, Luther, Grotius, and many others, of two statements, so that after τῆς χαρᾶς αὐτῶν we must mentally supply the simple ἐστί.[265] This scheme of the passage, which Osiander and Hofmann also follow, is indicated by ἡ περισσεία in the one half, and ἐπερίσσευσεν in the other, whereby two parallel predicative relations are expressed, as well as by the fact that, if the whole be taken as one sentence, and consequently ἡ περισσ. τ. χαρᾶς αὐτῶν be taken along with the following καὶ ἡ κατὰ βάθους πτωχεία αὐτῶν as the subject of ἐπερίσσευσεν (so by most expositors since Beza), this subject would embrace two very diverse elements, and, besides, there would result the combination not elsewhere occurring: ἡ περισσεία ἐπερίσσευσεν. Hence it is to be explained: that, namely, in much attestation of affliction the abundance of their joyfulness is, i.e. that, while they are much put to the test by sufferings, their joy is plentifully present, and (that) their deep poverty became abundant unto the riches of their single-heartedness, i.e. that they, in their deep poverty, plentifully showed how rich their single-heartedness wa.

ἐν πολλῇ δοκιμῇ θλίψεως] Instead of writing simply ἐν πολλῇ θλίψει, Paul designates this situation according to the wholesome moral aspect, in which it showed itself amongst the Macedonians to their praise. Δοκιμή, namely, is here also not: trial, but, as Paul always uses it, verification (Romans 5:4; 2 Corinthians 2:9; 2 Corinthians 9:13; 2 Corinthians 13:3; Php 2:22). Chrysostom aptly says: οὐδὲ γὰρ ἁπλῶς ἐθλίβησαν, ἀλλʼ οὕτως ὡς καὶ δόκιμοι γενέσθαι διὰ τῆς ὑπομονῆς. The verification of their Christian character, which the θλίψις effected in them, was just the moral element, in which the joyfulness πολλὴ καὶ ἄφατος ἐβλάστησεν ἐν αὐτοῖς (Chrysostom), and existed among them in spite of the θλίψις itself, which, moreover, would have been calculated to produce the opposite of χαρά. Regarding the θλίψις of the Macedonians, see 1 Thessalonians 1:6; 1 Thessalonians 2:14 ff.; Acts 16:20 ff; Acts 17:5. The χαρά, the virtue of Christian gladness of soul, rising above all afflictions (Galatians 5:22; 2 Corinthians 6:10; Romans 14:17; comp. on John 15:11), is not yet defined here more precisely as regards its special expression, but is already brought into prominence with a view to the second part of the verse, consequently to the liberality which gladly distributes (2 Corinthians 9:7; Acts 20:35).

ἡ κατὰ βάθους πτωχεία] the deep poverty,[266] literally, that which has gone down to the depth (Winer, p. 357 [E. T. 477]); comp. βάθος κακῶν, Aesch. Pers. 718, Hel. 303; ἐς κίνδυνον βαθύν, Pind. Pyth. iv. 368, and the like; Blomfield, ad Aesch. Pers. Gloss. 471. The opposite is βαθύπλουτος, Ellendt, Lex. Soph. I. p. 286.

ἐπερίσσευσεν] became abundant, i.e. developed an exceedingly great activity, and this εἰς τὸν πλοῦτον κ.τ.λ.,[267] unto the riches of their singleness of heart. This is the result (Romans 3:7; 2 Corinthians 9:8) of the ἐπερίσσ.; so that their simple, upright spirit showed itself as rich, in spite of their poverty, through the abundance of kind gifts which they distributed. Note the skill and point of the antithetic correlation purposely marking the expressions in the two parts of the verse.

The ἉΠΛΌΤΗς[268] is the upright simplicity of heart (Ephesians 6:5; Colossians 3:22); honestly and straightforwardly it contributes what it can to the work of love without any selfish design or arrière pensée (as e.g. the widow with her mite). Comp. on 2 Corinthians 12:8. And so it is rich, even with deep poverty on the part of the givers. The genitive is, as in περισσεία τῆς χαρ., the genitivus subjecti, not objecti (rich in simplicity), as Hofmann, following older commentators, holds. The αὐτῶν is against this latter view, for either it would have been wanting, or it would have been added to ΠΛΟῦΤΟΝ, because it would belong to that word.

[265] Not ἦν; for the present corresponds to the perfect δεδομ., and that, which took place in the happy state of things thus subsisting, is then subjoined by the aorist ἐπερίσσευσεν.

[266] As a grammatical supplement the simple οὖσα is sufficient; hence it is not to be taken, with Hofmann, as the poverty sinking deeper and ever deeper, but as the deep-sunk poverty. On κατά with genitive, comp. the Homeric κατὰ χθενός, Il. iii. 217; κατὰ γαίης, Il. xiii. 504; κατὰ σπείους, Od. ix. 330 (down into the cave), xii. 93. See in general, Spitzner, De vi et usu praepos. ἀνά et κατά ap. Homer. 1831, p 20 ff.

[267] The neuter form, τὸ πλοῦτος (Lachm. Tiseh. Rück.), is attested here by B C א 17, 31, but more decidedly in Ephesians 1:7; Ephesians 2:7; Ephesians 3:8; Ephesians 3:16; Php 4:19; Colossians 1:27; Colossians 2:2.

[268] Hofmann conjectures that the prominence given to the ἁπλότης was called forth by the want of it among the Achaean Christians. In this case there would be in it a side-allusion, which is not justified in what follows. But the ἁπλότης, which had shown itself among the Macedonians in a specially high degree, was to serve them as an example, by way of stimulating emulation, not exactly of putting them to shame.

2 Corinthians 8:3-5. Ὅτι is not dependent on γνωρίζομεν (Hofmann), but gives the proof of what was just said: εἰς τὸν πλοῦτον τῆς ἁπλ. αὐτ.

The construction is plain; for there is no need to supply an ἦσαν, as many wish, after αὐθαίρετοι or after δεόμενοι, but, as Bengel aptly remarks: “ἔδωκαν … totam periochae structuram sustinet.” Comp. Fritzsche, Dissert. II. p. 49; Billroth, Ewald, Osiander, Hofmann. There are, namely (and in accordance therewith the punctuation is to be fixed), four modal definitions attached to this ἔδωκαν: They gave (1) according to and beyond their means; (2) of their ovm impulse; (3) urgently entreating us for the χάρις and κοινωνία κ.τ.λ.; and (4) not as we hoped, but themselves, etc. This last modal definition is naturally and quite logically attached by καί (hence καὶ οὐ καθὼς ἠλπίσ.); and Rückert (comp. de Wette and Neander) is arbitrary in holding this καί to prove that Paul allowed the sentence he had begun to drop, and appended a new one, so that after ἠλπίσαμεν we should have to supply an ἐγένετο or ἐποίησαν.

μαρτυρῶ] I testify it, a parenthetic assurance. Comp. the Greek use of οἶμαι and the like (Bornem. ad Xen. Conv. p. 71, 179; Stallb. ad Plat. Gorg. p. 460 A).

παρὰ δύναμιν] i.e. more amply than was accordant with their resources. See Homer, Il. xiii. 787; Thucyd. i. 70. 2; Lucian. Nigr. 28, de Dom. 10. The same, in substantial meaning, is ὑπὲρ δύναμιν, 2 Corinthians 1:8; Dem. 292. 25. It forms, with κατὰ δύναμ., a climactic definition of ἔδωκαν, not of αὐθαίρ., to which it is not suitabl.

αὐθαίρετοι] excludes human persuasion or compulsion, not the divine influence (see 2 Corinthians 8:5, διὰ θελήματος θεοῦ); we must not, with Rückert, hold it, on account of the remark 2 Corinthians 9:2, to be an exaggeration, since the latter notice does not deny the self-determination of the Macedonians, but, when compared with our passage, exhibits as the real state of the case this, that Paul had boasted of the readiness of the Achaeans before the Macedonians, but without exhortation to the latter, and that these thereupon, of their own accord, without urging, had resolved on making a contribution, and had given very amply. Comp. Chrysostom on 2 Corinthians 9:2. αὐθαίρετος, free-willed, self-determined, only here and at 2 Corinthians 8:17 in the N. T., often in the classic writers; seldom of persons (Xen. Anab. v. 7. 29; Lucian. Catapl. 4). Comp. the adverb in 2Ma 6:19; 3Ma 6:6.

μετὰ πολλῆς … εἰς τ. ἁγίους] to be taken together: with much exhortation entreating us for the kindness and the participation of the service being rendered for the saints, i.e. urgently entreating us that the kindness might be shown them of permitting them to take active part in the … work of collections. Οὐχ ἡμεῖς αὐτῶν ἐδεήθημεν, ἀλλʼ αὐτοὶ ἡμῶν, Chrysostom; and in the κοινωνία sought they saw a kindness to be shown to themselves: they knew how to value the work of love thus highly. The χάρις, namely, here is not grace from God (Hofmann and the older commentators), since it was requested from the apostle, but τὴν χάριν κ. τ. κοινων. is a true ἓν διὰ δυοῖν (the favour, and indeed the partaking, i.e. the favour of partaking). See Fritzsche, ad Matth. p. 854, and generally, Nägelsbach on Il. iii. 100, p. 461, ed. 3. Bengel, who likewise rejects the δέξασθαι ἡμᾶς of the Recepta, connects τὴν χάριν κ. τὴν κοινωνίαν κ.τ.λ. with ἔδωκαν; but what a prolix designation of the withal quite self-evident object of ἔδωκαν would that be, while δεόμενοι ἡμῶν would remain quite open and void of definition! On δεῖσθαι, with accusative of the thing and genitive of the person, comp. Plato, Apol. p. 18 A, p. 41 E; Xen. Cyrop. i. 4. 12; Anab. vii. 3. 5; 3 Esd. 8:53. Yet in the classics the accusative of the object is the neuter of a pronoun, like τοῦτο ὑμῶν δέομαι; ὅπερ ὑμῶν δέομαι, and the like, or of an adjective (Krüger on Thuc. i. 32. 1).

τῆς εἰς τοὺς ἁγίους] In this addition (comp. 1 Corinthians 16:1), which would in itself be superfluous, there lies a motive of the δεόμενοι.

καὶ οὐ καθὼς ἠλπίσαμεν] for but a little could be expected from the oppressed and poor Macedonians! Οὐ περὶ τῆς γνώμης λέγει, ἀ̓λλὰ περὶ τοῦ πλήθους τῶν χρημάτων, Theodoret. According to Hofmann, the words are meant only to affirm that the Macedonians had joined in the contribution quite of their own resolution, which had not been expected by the apostle. But in this case the remark, which on this interpretation would be no independent element, but only the negative expression of what was already said in αὐθαίρετοι, would have had its logical position immediately behind αὐθαίρετοι; and it must have run not as it is written by Paul, but: καθὲς οὐκ ἠλπίσαμεν. No, the apostle says: and their giving did not remain within the limits of the hope which we had formed regarding them, but far surpassed these (ἀλλʼ ἑαυτοὺς κ.τ.λ.).

ἀλλʼ ἑαυτοὺς κ.τ.λ.] but themselves they gave, etc. An expression of the highest Christian readiness of sacrifice and liberality, which, by giving up all individual interests, is not only a contribution of money, but a self-surrender, in the first instance, to the Lord, since in fact Christ is thereby served, and also to him who conducts the work of collection, since he is to the giver the organ of Christ. Flatt and Billroth, following Mosheim and Heumann, are wrong in making πρῶτον before in the sense: before I asked them. This reference is not in the least implied in the immediate context (οὐ καθὼς ἠλπίσ.); and if it were, πρῶτον must have had the first place:[269] ἀλλὰ πρῶτον ἑαυτοὺς ἔδωκαν κ.τ.λ. As the words stand, ἑαυτούς has the emphasis of the contrast with οὐ καθὼς ἠλπίσ. Bengel also (comp. Schrader) is wrong in thinking that in πρῶτον there is implied prae munere: the Macedonians, before they made collection, had first given themselves to the Lord, and then left it to the apostle to determine how large their contribution should be. In that case there must have been inserted καὶ τὰ χρήματα ἡμῖν, or something similar, as a correlative to ἑαυτοὺς πρῶτον τῷ κυρίῳ. It is wrong to find in ἑαυτούς the idea merely of voluntarily.[270] without any summons, because it is object of the having given. It must have run: αὐτοὶ ἑαυτοὺς κ.τ.λ. (comp. 2 Corinthians 1:9), or without stress on the self-object, ἈΦʼ ἙΑΥΤῶΝ.

ΚΑῚ ἩΜῖΝ] Paul does not say ἜΠΕΙΤΑ ἩΜῖΝ (in opposition to the usual opinion that καί stands for ἜΠΕΙΤΑ; so also Rückert), because the surrender to the Lord is not a prius in time, but in degree: to the Lord before all, and to us. So Romans 1:16; Romans 2:9-10.

διὰ θελήμ. θεοῦ] not exactly an expression of modesty (Billroth),—for it is only arbitrary to limit it merely to καὶ ἡμῖν (so also Bengel, Ewald),—but added quite according to the requirement of religious feeling: for God has, according to His will, so wrought on their dispositions, that they, etc. Comp. 2 Corinthians 8:1; 2 Corinthians 8:16.

[269] This also in opposition to Hofmann, who, in consistency with his inappropriate interpretation of κ. οὐ καθ. ἠλπίσ., takes πρῶτον: without such a thought (such a hope) having occurred to me. Besides, πρῶτον would not mean “without,” but “before that,” etc.

[270] So Hofmann; whence there would result even a threefold expression of the voluntary act, namely: (1) in αὐθαίρετοι; (2) in κ. οὐ καθ. ἠλπίσ., and (3) in ἑαυτούς.

2 Corinthians 8:6. In order that we should exhort Titus, etc. Comp. 2 Corinthians 8:17. εἰς τό with the infinitive is here, as in all passages (see on Romans 1:20), to be taken, not as so that (so usually, and by Winer), but as telic: in order that. Comp. Kühner, ad Xen. Anab. vii. 8. 20. Certainly the παρακαλέσαι ἡμᾶς τίτον κ.τ.λ. was a consequence of the beyond expectation successful course of the matter in Macedonia, in accordance with which Paul might promise himself no less a success among the Corinthians; but delicately and piously he presents the state of the case, as if this further prosecution of the work of collection, amidst the self-sacrificing liberality of the Macedonians effected by the divine will, had lain in God’s purpose, and was therefore a consequence that had been aimed at by God. This flows from the διὰ θελήμ. θεοῦ immediately preceding. Comp. Hofmann also. Paul sees in the fact, that the divinely-willed success of the collecting work in Macedonia has encouraged him to the continuance of it expressed in 2 Corinthians 8:6, the fulfilment of the divine counsel and will, which he is thereby servin.

ἵνα] Design in the παρακαλέσαι, and consequently its content.

καθὼς προενήρξατο] as he formerly has begun, without doubt during his sojourn in Corinth after our first Epistle, see Introd. § 1. The word is indeed without example elsewhere, but it is formed from ἐνάρχομαι, after the analogy of προάρχω and other.

οὕτω καὶ ἐπιτελέσῃ εἰς ὑμᾶς] so also might complete it among you. The emphasis lies, as before on προενήρξατο, so here on ἐπιτελέσῃ. With the verb of rest εἰς associates the thought of the previous arrival, so that ἐλθέν may for clearness be supplied. See Kühner, § 622 b; Jacobs, ad Anthol. XIII. p. 71; Ellendt, Lex. Soph. I. p. 537. The correlation of ἐνάρχεσθαι and ἐπιτελεῖν is simply as in Php 1:6, Galatians 3:3; we should anticipate (2 Corinthians 9:12) by importing the idea of sacrifice (Osiander).

καὶ τὴν χάριν ταύτην] not hanc quoque gratiam (Beza, Calvin, comp. Castalio), but: etiam gratiam istam (Vulgate). For also belongs to τὴν χάριν, not to ταύτην. He shall complete among you—in addition to whatever else he has already begun and has still to complete—also this benefit. This better suits the context, namely, the connection of the οὕτω καὶ ἐπιτελ. with καθὼς προενήρξατο, than the interpretation of Estius: “dicit etiam, ut innuat Titum alia quaedam apud ipsos jam perfecisse.” So also Flatt. It is quite superfluous to invoke, with Hofmann, an involution of two sentences in order to explain the double καί. And since καί refers to the activity of Titus, Billroth is wrong in explaining it: “they are to distinguish themselves in this good deed, as in all things.”

The work of collection is designated as χάρις, for on the side of the givers it was a showing of kindness, a work of love, an opus charitativum. Observe that here and in 2 Corinthians 8:4; 2 Corinthians 8:19, θεοῦ is not added, as in 2 Corinthians 8:1; 2 Corinthians 9:14, according to which Hofmann and older commentators explain it here also of the divine grace, of which they are made worthy through the service rendered.

2 Corinthians 8:7. Ἀλλʼ] is not equivalent to οὖν (Beza and others, also Flatt), nor to agedum (Emmerling), but is the Latin at, breaking off the preceding statement, like the German doch. Hermann, ad Viger. p. 812, aptly says: “Saepe indicat, satis argumentorum allatum esse.” Comp. Baeumlein, Partik. p. 15. Olshausen has a more far-fetched idea, that it is corrective: yea rather. And Billroth imports quite arbitrarily: “When I entreated Titus, I knew beforehand that this time also you would not deceive me, but that, as you are distinguished in all that is good, so also you would zealously further this collection;” and Rückert also (similarly Calvin): “I have entreated Titus, etc.; yet let it not happen that he should need first to encourage you (?), yea rather, etc.” According to Hofmann, ἀλλά forms the transition to the οὐ κατʼ ἐπιταγὴν λέγω which follows in 2 Corinthians 8:8; but this supposes a very involved construction (comp. afterwards on ἵνα κ.τ.λ.).

ὥσπερ ἐν παντὶ κ.τ.λ.] as you in every relation are abundant (excellitis) through faith (strength, fervour, and efficacy of faith), and discourse (aptitude in speaking), and knowledge (see regarding both on 1 Corinthians 1:5), and every diligence (“studium ad agendas res bonas,” Grotius), and your love to us, so should you abound in showing this kindness. If πίστει κ.τ.λ. be taken as a specification of ἐν παντί (Luther, Grotius, and most), the meaning is more uncertain, since ἐν is not repeated. Comp. 2 Corinthians 6:4; 1 Corinthians 1:5; it comes in again only before ταύτῃ τ. χάρ. Grotius aptly remarks: “non ignoravit P. artem rhetorum, movere laudando.” Amidst the general praise, however, he wisely here also leaves the distingue personas to the feeling of the reader.

τῇ ἐξ ὑμῶν ἐν ὑμῖν ἀγάπῃ] Paul here conceives the active love as something issuing from the disposition of the person loving, and adhering to the person loved. Thus he felt the love of the Corinthians to him in his heart; comp. 2 Corinthians 7:3. This view alone suits the context, inasmuch as the other points mentioned are points purely subjective, belonging to the readers, and serving to recommend them; hence we are not to understand it as the love dwelling in the apostle, but owing its origin to the readers (Hofmann). Calvin aptly remarks: “Caritatem erga se commemorat, ut personae quoque suae respectu illis addat animos.” On the form of the expression, comp. Winer, p. 181 f. [E. T. 241].

ἵνα καὶ ἐν ταύτῃ τῇ χάριτι περισσ.] A periphrasis for the imperative, to be explained by supplying a verb of summoning, on which ἵνα depends in the conception of the speakers. See Buttmann, p. 208 [E. T. 241]; Fritzsche, ad Matth. p. 840, ad Marc. p. 179. In the old Greek ὅπως is used in the very same way (ἵνα late and seldom, as in Epictetus, Dissert, iv. 1. 142). See Matthiae, p. 1187; Viger. ed. Herm. pp. 435, 791 f.; Hartung, Partikell. II. p. 148. According to Grotius and Bengel, whom Hofmann follows, the connecting of ἵνα κ.τ.λ. with the following οὐ κατʼ ἐπιταγὴν λέγω would yield no unsuitable sense (in opposition to Rückert); but the construction of the passage in 2 Corinthians 8:7-8, so as to form one period, would be a construction assumed without sufficient ground, ill-arranged and ambiguous, and would not accord with the apostle’s way of beginning a new sentence by οὐ … λέγω in order to guard against an incorrect judgment of the previous one (2 Corinthians 7:3; 1 Corinthians 4:14. Comp. 2 Corinthians 5:12).

In καὶ ἐν ταύτῃ τῇ χάριτι, ταύτῃ has the emphasis (it was otherwise in 2 Corinthians 8:6); also in this showing of kindness, as in other works of beneficence,—which was embraced in ἐν παντί.

2 Corinthians 8:7-15. Encouragement to associate with their other Christian excellences distinction also in this work of love, which he says not in the form of a command, but to test their love—for they knew indeed the pattern of love in Christ—and by way of advice (w. 7–9). For this is serviceable for them, inasmuch as they had already made the beginning. Now, however, they were not to fail of completing their work, namely, according to their means; for it was not intended that others should be at ease while they were in want, but that a relation of equality should be established (2 Corinthians 8:10-15).

2 Corinthians 8:8. Prudent and yet deeply stirring caveat in reference to what was said in 2 Corinthians 8:7. Not by way of command do I say it, but as, through the diligence of others, testing also the genuine nature of your love.

διά] “aliorum studio vobis commemorate,” Benge.

ἑτέρων] of members of extraneous churche.

τὸ γνήσιον] the genuineness. See Kühner, II. p. 122; Dissen, ad Pind. Nem. p. 452.

δοκιμάζειν] is here, too (comp. on 1 Corinthians 11:28), not probatum reddere (Chrysostom, Theodoret, Estius), but explorare; for by the result, which the setting forth of the Macedonian example would have on the Corinthians, it had to be shown whether, and how far, their brotherly love was genuine or not. The participle does not depend on 2 Corinthians 8:10 (Bengel), but on λέγω, which is to be supplied again after ἀλλά. λέγω with the participle: I say it, inasmuch as I thereby, etc. Comp. on 1 Corinthians 4:14.

2 Corinthians 8:9. Parenthesis which states what holy reason he has for speaking to them, not κατʼ ἐπιταγήν, but in the way just mentioned, that of testing their love. For you know, indeed (γινώσκετε not imperative, as Chrysostom and others think), what a high pattern of gracious kindness you have experienced in yourselves from Jesus Christ. So the testing, which I have in view among you, will only be imitation of Christ. Olshausen rejects here the conception of pattern, and finds the proof of possibility: “Since Christ by His becoming poor has made you rich, you also may communicate of your riches; He has placed you in a position to do so.” The outward giving, namely, presupposes the disposition to give as an internal motive, without which it would not take place. But in this view πλουτήσητε would of necessity apply to riches in loving dispositions, which, however, is not suggested at all in the context, since in point of fact the consciousness of every believing reader led him to think of the whole fulness of the Messianic blessings as the aim of Christ’s humiliation, and to place in that the riches meant by πλουτήσητε.

ὅτι διʼ ὑμᾶς κ.τ.λ.] that He for your sakes, etc., epexegetical of τὴν χάριν τ. κυρ. ἡμ. Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ. The emphatic διʼ ὑμᾶς brings home to the believing consciousness of the readers individually the aim, which in itself was universa.

ἐπτώχευσε] inasmuch as He by His humiliation to become incarnate emptied Himself of the participation, which He had in His pre-existent state, of God’s glory, dominion, and blessedness (πλούσιος ὤν), Php 2:6. On the meaning of the word, comp. LXX. Jdg 6:6; Jdg 14:15; Psalm 34:10; Psalm 79:8; Proverbs 23:21; Tob 4:21; Antiphanes in Becker’s Anecd. 112. 24. The aorist denotes the once-occurring entrance into the condition of being poor, and therefore certainly the having become poor (although πτωχεύειν, as also the classical πενέσθαι, does not mean to become poor, but to be[271] poor), and not the whole life led by Christ in poverty and lowliness, during which He was nevertheless rich in grace, rich in inward blessings; so Baur[272] and Köstlin, Lehrbegr. d. Joh. p. 310, also Beyschlag, Christol. p. 237. On the other hand, see Raebiger, Christol. Paul. p. 38 f.; Neander, ed. 4, p. 801 f.; Lechler, Apost. Zeit. p. 50 f.; Weiss, Bibl. Theol. pp. 312, 318.

ὤν] is the imperfect participle: when He was rich, and does not denote the abiding possession (Estius, Rückert); for, according to the context, the apostle is not speaking of what Christ is, but of what He was,[273] before He became man, and ceased to be on His self-exinanition in becoming man (Galatians 4:4; this also in opposition to Philippi, Glaubensl. IV. p. 447). So also ὑπάρχων, Php 2:6.

ἽΝΑ ὙΜΕῖς … ΠΛΟΥΤΉΣΗΤΕ] in order that you through His poverty might become rich. These riches are the reconciliation, justification, illumination, sanctification, peace, joy, certainty of eternal life, and thereafter this life itself, in short, the whole sum of spiritual and heavenly blessings (comp. Chrysostom) which Christ has obtained for believers by His humiliation even to the death of the cross. Πλουτεῖν means with the Greek writers, and in the N. T. (Romans 10:12; Luke 12:21), to be rich; but the aorist (1 Corinthians 4:8) is to be taken as with ἐπτώχευσε. Ἐκείνου, instead of the simple ΑὐΤΟῦ (Krüger, ad Xen. Anab. iv. 3. 30; Dissen, ad Dem. de cor. p. 276, 148), has great emphasis: “magnitudinem Domini innuit,” Bengel.

In opposition to the interpretation of our passage, by which ἐπτώχ. falls into the historical life, so that πλούσιος ὤν is taken potentialiter as denoting the power to take to Himself riches and dominion, which, however, Jesus has renounced and has subjected Himself to poverty and self-denial (so Grotius and de Wette), see on Php 2:6.

[271] As e.g. βασιλεύειν, to be king, but ἐβασίλευσα: I have become king. Comp. 1 Corinthians 4:8; and see in general, Kühner, ad Xen. Mem. i. 1. 18; also Ernesti, Urspr. d. Sünde, I. p. 245.

[272] Comp. his neut. Theol. p. 193: “though in Himself as respects His right rich, He lived poor.”

[273] Comp. Rich. Schmidt, Paul. Christol. p. 144.