Bible Commentaries

CHAPTER 16

1 Corinthians 16:2. σαββάτου] recommended by Griesb., adopted also by Lachm. Rück. Tisch., following A B C D E F G J א** 17, Syr. Vulg. Chrys., al. Elz. and Scholz, however, have σαββάτων, an alteration in accordance with passages such as Matthew 28:1; Mark 16:2; Luke 24:1.—1 Corinthians 16:7. Instead of the second γάρ, Elzevir has δέ, against decisive evidence. An alteration to express the antithesi.

ἐπιτρέπῃ] Lachm. Rück. Tisch. read, as approved previously by Griesb.: ἐπιτρέψῃ, following A B C J א, min. Chrys. Theoph. ms. Rightly; comp. Hebrews 6:3.—1 Corinthians 16:17. ὑμῶν] ὑμέτερον should be adopted, according to preponderant evidence; and comp. Philippians 2:30.

Instead of οὗτοι, A D E F G, 64, Vulg. Chrys. Oec. Ambrosiast. have αὐτοί, which is recommended by Griesb. and adopted by Lachm. Rück. Tisch. Rightly; the external evidence is considerable enough, and οὗτοι might easily be written on the margin by way of gloss.—1 Corinthians 16:19. In place of πρίσκιλλα we should write πρίσκα, with Tisch., following B א, 17, and several vss. Pel. The former name was taken from the Acts.—1 Corinthians 16:22. ἰησοῦν χριστόν in Elz. after κύριον (against A B C* א* and several min. Aeth. Copt.) is an old, readily-occurring addition.

1 Corinthians 16:1. The construction may be: ὥσπερ περὶ τῆς λογ. διέτ. ταῖς ἐκκλ. τῆς γαλ., οὕτω κ. τ. λ. Comp. 2 Corinthians 9:1; also 1 Corinthians 12:1. Still περὶ … ἁγίους may also be taken by itself (de Wette and others), comp. 1 Corinthians 16:12; 1 Corinthians 7:1; 1 Corinthians 8:1. We cannot, indeed, decide, but the latter is more in harmony with the inartificial movement of the epistolary styl.

λογία· συλλογῇ, Suidas, comp. Hesychius. Without example elsewhere save in the Father.

εἰς τοὺς ἁγίους] i.e. εἰς τοὺς πτωχοὺς τῶν ἁγίων τῶν ἐν ἱερουσαλήμ, Romans 15:26. This detail, however, was obvious of itself to the readers; the assumption that οἱ ἅγιοι by itself denoted the mother church (Hofmann)¹⁰¹ is neither necessary nor capable of proof; they are the ἅγιοι who are known; the readers were acquainted with the fact, for whom the apostle made the collection.

The poverty of the church at Jerusalem explains itself in part from the community of goods which had formerly¹⁰² subsisted there (see on Acts 2:44 f.). This poverty itself, along with the high interest excited by what was in truth the mother church of the whole of Christendom, as well as Galatians 2:10, and generally Paul’s love for his people (Romans 9:3), which made sacrifices with joy, form a sufficient explanation of his great zeal in their support, and of his delivering over the sums raised in person, notwithstanding of the dangers which he saw before him. Rückert’s view (comp. also Olshausen), that Paul desired to appease the minds of the Jewish Christians there which were embittered against him, before he journeyed into the west, has no trace whatever of its existence either in the Acts or the Epistles. See, on the contrary, Acts 21:17-24. Rückert even asserts that such a reason alone could justify him in undertaking so perilous a journey. But see Acts 20:22-24.

τῆς γαλατ.] whether from Ephesus by messengers, or in person on the journey mentioned in Acts 18:23 (Osiander, Neander, Wieseler), or by letter (so Ewald), must be left undecided. In the Epistle to the Galatians preserved to us there is no mention of this collection; for Galatians 2:10 is of general import, although it is the basis of the apostolic διατάσσειν, as well as the special warrant for it. For the rest, Bengel aptly says: “Galatarum exemplum Corinthiis, Corinthiorum exemplum Macedonibus, et Macedonum Romanis proponit, 2 Corinthians 9:2; Romans 15:26. Magna exemplorum vis.” But a proof, too, how Paul sought to foster the community of life and effort in his churches (comp. Lechler, p. 364 f.), and how the appointed mode of doing so had already approved itself.

1 Corinthians 16:1-9. Regarding the collection for Jerusalem; doubtless (comp. 1 Corinthians 7:1, 1 Corinthians 8:1, 1 Corinthians 12:1) occasioned by a question in the Corinthian letter.

1 Corinthians 16:2. κατὰ μίαν σαββάτου] on each first day of the week. A Hebraism very common in the New Testament, in accordance with the Jewish custom of designating the days of the week by אחר בשבת, שּׁני בשבת, etc. Lightfoot, Hor. ad Matthew 28:1. The singular of σαββ. also means week, as in Mark 16:9; Luke 18:12.

It does not, indeed, follow from this passage in itself that the Sunday was already observed at that time by assemblies for the worship of God, although this is to be assumed from other indications (see regarding this on Acts 20:7); for παρʼ ἑαυτῷ τιθέτω cannot refer to the laying down of money in the assembly (Estius, Bengel, Mosheim, al.); but no doubt it does show that to the Christian consciousness it was a holy day in whose consecration the appropriateness of such works of love was felt, τὰ γὰρ ἀπόῤῥητα ἀγαθὰ καὶ ἡ ῥίζα καὶ ἡ ἀρχὴ τῆς ζωῆς ἡμετέρας ἐν ταύτη γέγονεν, Chrysosto.

παρʼ ἑαυτῷ τιθέτω κ. τ. λ.] let him lay up in store at home whatever (quodcunque) he succeeds in, i.e. if he has success in anything, let him lay it up (i.e. what has been gained thereby), comp. expressions such as in John 12:5; Matthew 19:21, etc. Comp. Herod. vi. 73: κλεομένεϊ εὐωδώθη τὸ πρῆγμα. Sirach 11:16; Sirach 38:14; Sirach 41:1; Tobit 4:19; 3 John 1:2. To supply θησαυρίζειν after εὐοδ. (Hofmann) is superfluous. Explanations such as quod ei placuerit (Vulgate,¹⁰³ Erasmus, Paraphr., Luther, al.), and that of Billroth and Rückert, following older interpreters: what is possible for him without burdening himself, are not in accordance with the literal sense of εὐοδόω (see on Romans 1:10). παρʼ ἑαυτῷ: at home, chez lui, see on Luke 24:12. Loesner, Obss. p. 297. θησαυρίζων: “paulatim cumulum aliquem faciens,” Grotiu.

ἵνα ΄ὴ κ. τ. λ.] in order that gatherings be not made, when I shall have come. The collection was to be then so far already made, that every one would only have to produce what he had already gathered together week by week out of his profits in trade. By this whole injunction Paul doubtless had in view both the enlargement and the acceleration in due season of the collection.

1 Corinthians 16:3. οὓς ἐὰν δοκιμ.] whomsoever you shall consider fit. Paul thus makes the appointment of the persons who were to bring the money dependent upon the choice of his readers; hence Grotius observes: “Vide, quomodo vir tantus nullam suspicioni rimam aperire voluerit.” It is possible, however, that he had never thought of that; for it was quite natural for him, with his fine practical tact, not to anticipate the givers as respects the transmission of their gift.

διʼ ἐπιστολῶν] by means of letters, by my giving them letters along with them to express their mission. Comp. Winer, p. 356 [E. T. 476]. The plural might denote the category (by way of letter), and thus only one letter be meant (Heumann); but there is nothing to compel us to depart from the plural sense, for Paul very reasonably might design to write different letters to several persons at Jerusalem.¹⁰⁴ διʼ ἐπιστ. is to be connected with what follows (Chrysostom, Theophylact, and the majority of modern expositors), and it is put first, because Paul has already in his mind the other possible alternative, that he himself may make the journey. The majority of the older editors (except Er. Schmid), also Beza, Calvin, Estius, al., connect it with δοκιμ.: “quos Hierosolymitanis per epistolas commendaveritis,” Wetstein. But in that case the πέ΄ψω would surely be somewhat meaningless! No; the bearers of the collection are to be chosen by the givers; but it is Paul, as the originator and apostolically commissioned steward (Galatians 2:10) of the collection, who sends the mone.

τὴν χάριν ὑμ.] your love gift, beneficium. Comp. 2 Corinthians 8:4; 2 Corinthians 8:6-7; 2 Corinthians 8:19. “Gratiosa appellatio,” Bengel; comp. Oecumenius; Xen. Ag. iv. 4 f., Hier. viii. 4; Sirach 3:29; Sirach 30:6; Sirach 29:15; 4 Maccabees 5:8.

1 Corinthians 16:4. In case, however, of it (what is being spoken of, i.e. the result of the collection) being worthy that I too should journey (to Jerusalem),¹⁰⁵ then they shall journey with me. The genitive τοῦ πορεύεσθαι depends upon ἄξιον. Comp. Fritzsche, ad Matth. p. 845; Winer, p. 304 [E. T. 408].

Paul makes his own journeying thither dependent upon the issue of the collection, not, of course, for the sake of safety in its conveyance, nor yet because, in the event of a considerable sum being realized, he desired to be independent in connection with the application of it, but—which alone results from ἄξιον without arbitrariness—because a scanty sum would have been disproportionate to an extraordinary mission. Consideration for the decorum attaching to the apostolic rank underlies his procedure, not the prudential motive: “in order, on this opportunity, to fulfil his purpose of going to Jerusalem (Acts 19:21), and to prepare for himself there a good reception” (de Wette), or in order by this journey to heal the breach between the Jewish and Gentile Christians (Baur). Bengel says well: “Justa aestimatio sui non est superbia.” At the same time, he will not undertake this charge alone; see 2 Corinthians 8:20.

1 Corinthians 16:5 f. His arrival, which had not hitherto been specifically determined, is now defined by him as respects its tim.

ὅταν ΄ακεδ. διέλθω] According to 2 Corinthians 1:15, it had previously been his plan to proceed from Ephesus by Corinth to Macedonia, from Macedonia again back to Corinth, and then onward to Jerusalem. This plan, however, he has altered (see 2 Corinthians 1:15; 2 Corinthians 1:23 ff.), and he now intends to journey first through Macedonia, and then to Corinth, where he thinks perhaps ( τυχόν) to spend some time, or even to winter. In the second Epistle, too, we see him actually engaged on this journey in Macedonia (2 Corinthians 2:13; 2 Corinthians 8:1; 2 Corinthians 9:2; 2 Corinthians 9:4), and upon the way to Corinth (1 Corinthians 2:1, 1 Corinthians 12:14, 1 Corinthians 13:1, al.). Acts 20:1-2, agrees with thi.

΄ακεδ. γὰρ διέρχ.] is not a parenthesis, but the ΄ακεδ. put first corresponds to the πρὸς ὑμᾶς δέ which follows, and the διέρχομαι to the παραμενῶ: for Macedonia I journey through (without halting), but with you will I perhaps remain. The present διέρχ. designates the future as present in conception, i.e. conceived as quite certain. From the erroneous rendering: I am on my journey through Macedonia, arose the erroneous statement in the subscription, that the letter was written from Philipp.

παραμενῶ] he remained three months, Acts 20:2.

ἵνα ὑμεῖς κ. τ. λ.] ὑμεῖς has the emphasis. Were Paul to remain in another church, others would give him the escort; there is something kindly both in ἵνα and in ὑμεῖς, the unprompted thoughtfulness of lov.

τυχόν] forsan, only here in the New Testament, very common in Greek writer.

οὗ] As Luke 10:1. Bornemann, Schol. in loc.; Kühner, II. p. 318. Whither his thoughts, however, were generally turned at that time, see Acts 19:21.

1 Corinthians 16:7. For it is not my will to see you now in passing. Since he does not say πάλιν ἐν παρ., but ἄρτι ἐν παρ., no inference can be drawn from this passage to decide the question (see Introduction to 2 Cor. § 2) whether Paul had been already twice in Corinth before writing our Epistle to the Corinthians (in opposition to Schrader, Neander, Wieseler, Otto); but he says simply: it is not his will now to visit the Corinthians only as a passing traveller, which leaves it quite undecided whether he has already previously visited them once ἐν παρόδῳ (so, too, Hofmann) or not. In order rightly to understand the passage, observe that the ὑμᾶς, which is put first on that account, has the emphasis, in contrast to the Macedonians. The Corinthians, in the journey which he is now about to make, are to have the advantage over the Macedonians, whom he will only see in journeying through, 1 Corinthians 16:5.¹⁰⁶ According to Billroth and others, the thought is meant to be, that he will not now see them, as he had formerly intended, on his journey through (to Macedonia). But in that case he would have written: ἄρτι γὰρ οὐ θέλω κ. τ. λ. Regarding ἐν παρόδῳ, comp. Thuc. i. 126. 7, v. 4. 5, vii. 2. 3; Polyb. v. 68. 8; Lucian, D. Deor. xxiv. 2.

ἐλπίζω γὰρ κ. τ. λ.] ground of the οὐ θέλω κ. τ. λ.; for he hopes that the Lord will enable him to make a longer visit to the church than merely ἐν παρόδῳ, and upon the ground of this hope it is not his will, et.

ὁ κύριος] Christ, in whose service the apostle journeys and works (Acts 16:7; Acts 16:10).

ἐπιτρέψῃ] shall have allowed, i.e. shall have given signs of His approval. “Pia conditio,” Bengel. Comp. 1 Corinthians 4:19.

1 Corinthians 16:8-9. Paul now mentions the duration of his present stay in Ephesus, and the reason of i.

τῆς πεντηκ.] is the immediately impending festival of Pentecost. See Introduction, § 3. Nothing can be inferred from our text, which contains simply a statement of time, in support of a Christian celebration of this festival as already by this time subsistin.

θύρα γάρ μοι κ. τ. λ.] The figurative expression (comp. Wetstein) denotes the opportunity opened before him for working (otherwise Acts 14:27). Comp. 2 Corinthians 2:12, and see on Colossians 4:3. ΄εγάλη applies to the extent, ἐνεργ. to the influence of the sphere of action offered; the latter epithet, however, powerful, corresponds not to the figure but to the matter, and even to that only in so far as it is conceived of as immediately connected with the opened θύρα,—a want of congruity in the animated and versatile mode of representation (comp. Plato, Phaedr. p. 245 A: ΄ουσῶν ἐπὶ ποιητικὰς θύρας ἀφίκηται) which occasioned the reading ἐναργής, evidens (Vulgate, Itala, Pelagius, Ambrosiaster, Beda), which occurs in Philemon 1:6, and is approved by Beza, Grotius, Bos, and Clericus. As regards the later Greek of ἀνέῳγεν (instead of ἀνέῳκται, as 46, Theophylact and Oecumenius actually read), see Lobeck, ad Phryn. p. 157 f.

κ. ἀντικείμ. πολλοί] “quibus resistam. Saepe bonum et contra ea malum simul valde vigent,” Bengel.

1 Corinthians 16:10-11. Recommendation of Timothy (1 Corinthians 4:17) to be well received and escorted back. He is not the bearer of our Epistle (Bleek), but journeyed through Macedonia (Acts 19:22), and must arrive in Corinth later than the Epistl.

ἐὰν δὲ ἔλθῃ] if, indeed, he shall have come. Rückert holds that ὅταν would have been more correct. Either one or other was correct, just according to the conception of the writer. He conceives of the arrival of Timothy as conditioned by the circumstances, and therefore places it under the hypothetical, not under the temporal ( ὅταν), point of vie.

ἵνα κ. τ. λ.] design of the βλέπετε: be careful, in order that he, etc. Paul might also have written negatively: βλέπετε, μὴ ἐν φόβῳ (1 Corinthians 2:3), or ἵνα μὴ ἐ. φ. (2 John 1:8), etc. The positive expression, however, demands more; his going out and in among the readers is to be free from fear. Comp. on γίνεσθαι with the adverb of the mode of the going out and in, Herod. i. 8, ix. 109; Plut. Alex. 69, Demetr. 11, Mor. p. 127 A also Plato, Prot. 325 B Tobit 7:9; Tobit 7:11; 1 Maccabees 8:29. They are so to conduct themselves towards him that he shall not be intimidated among them. This peculiar ἀφόβως, as well as the reason assigned which follows τὸ γὰρ ἔργον κ. τ. λ., and the conclusion again drawn from it: μή τις οὖν αὐτ. ἐξουθενήσῃ, make it probable that Paul has in view not the ill-will of his own opponents, which his friend might encounter. (Osiander, Neander), with which the τὸ γὰρ … ὡς καὶ ἐγώ does not well agree, but the youth of Timothy (1 Timothy 4:12), on account of which, in a church to some extent of a high-minded tendency, he might easily be not held in full respect, slighted and intimidated. So already Chrysostom and the majority of interpreters. The conjecture that Timothy was of a timid nature (de Wette) is without a trace of historical support, and is superfluous. Regarding τὸ ἔργ. τοῦ κυρ., see on 1 Corinthians 15:58.

ἐν εἰρήνῃ] is not to be explained from the formula: πορεύεσθαι ἐν εἰρήνῃ (so Calvin: “salvum ab omni noxa,” comp. Beza, Flatt, Maier), since, on the contrary, the context would lead us to think, in accordance with ἀφόβως and μή τις ἐξουθ., of a peaceful escort, a προπέμπειν in peace and concord, χωρὶς μάχης κ. φιλονεικίας (Chrysostom, Theophylact). Flatt and Hofmann refer ἐν εἰρ. to what follows (that he may come to me safely and without danger). But the subsequent reason assigned contains nothing referable to ἐν εἰρήνῃ, which must have been the case, had it been so emphatically put first. Besides, the escort to be given was not for protection, but in testimony of love and reverenc.

ἵνα ἔλθῃ πρός με] There is implied, namely, in προπέμψατε κ. τ. λ., with its aim as here defined: “in order that he may come (back) to me,” the admonition not to detain him too long in Corinth—for Paul is expecting hi.

μετὰ τῶν ἀδελφῶν] Several others, therefore, besides Erastus (Acts 19:22), had journeyed with Timothy.¹⁰⁷

1 Corinthians 16:12. δέ] marks the transition from Timothy to Apollo.

περὶ δὲ ἀπ. τοῦ ἀδ.] stands independently: quod attinet ad Apoll., as 1 Corinthians 16:1; 1 Corinthians 7:1.

ἵνα ἔλθῃ κ. τ. λ.] design of the πολλὰ παρεκάλεσα αὐτόν: I have advised him much, in order that he should come, etc. Paul makes this remark: “ne Corinthii suspicentur, ab eo fuisse impeditum,” Calvin. Perhaps they had expressly besought that Apollos might be sent to the.

πολλά is intensive, as in 1 Corinthians 16:19, and often in Greek writer.

μετὰ τῶν ἀδελφῶν] These are the Corinthian Christians, who journeyed back from Ephesus to Corinth with this Epistle. See 1 Corinthians 16:17. Here also the words are not to be joined with παρεκάλεσα (Hofmann), but with ἵνα ἔλθῃ κ. τ. λ., beside which they stan.

καὶ πάντως κ. τ. λ.] And the will was wholly (out and out) lacking (“sermo quasi impersonalis,” Bengel) in order to come now, comp. Matthew 18:14. The context compels us to understand θέλημα of the will of Apollos, not of God’s will (Theodoret, Oecumenius, Theophylact, Bengel, Rückert). καί does not stand for ἀλλά (Beza and others), comp. Romans 1:13.

ὅταν εὐκαιρ.] So soon as he shall have found a convenient time for it. Regarding the lateness of the word in Greek, see Lobeck, ad Phryn. p. 125.

REMARK.

It follows from this passage that Apollos, who by this time must have been again (Acts 18:24 ff.) in Ephesus,¹⁰⁸ was neither a faction-maker nor at variance with Paul, for Paul himself plainly regarded his going to Corinth as a thing advantageous and to be desired. Hence, too, the refusal of Apollos is not to be explained from fear of adding new fuel to the party heats, but simply from the contents of the ὅταν εὐκαιρήσῃ. He must have found hindrances for the present in the relations of his work, by which he saw himself detained from the desired journey until a more convenient time, so that he did not yield even to the advice of the apostle. The text tells us nothing further; but the Corinthians themselves might learn more details from the bearers of the Epistle. Van Hengel (Gave d. talen. p. 111 f.) brings the refusal into a too arbitrarily assumed connection with the Corinthian misuse of the glossolalia.

1 Corinthians 16:13 f. In conclusion of the whole Epistle, and without connection or reference to what has immediately preceded, there is now added a concise exhortation which compresses closely together, in five imperatives following each other asyndetically, the whole sum of the Christian calling, upon which are then to follow some personal commendations and greetings, as well as, lastly, the proper closing greeting and the benediction.

The γρηγορεῖτε summons to Christian foresight and soberness, without which stedfastness in the faith ( στήκ. ἐν τ. πίστ.) is not possible; ἀνδρίζεσθε and κραταιοῦσθε, again, to the manly (“muliebris enim omnis inconstantia,” Pelagius) and vigorous resistance against all dangers, without which that stedfastness cannot continu.

ἀνδρίζεσθαι] to bear oneself manfully, to be manly in bearing and action; only here in the New Testament, but often in classic writers, see Wetstein, and in the LXX. Comp. the Homeric ἀνέρες ἐστε, Il. v. 529; and see, also, Valckenaer, ad Herod. vii. 210; Heind. ad Plat. Phaedr. p. 239 B. Comp. ἀνδρικῶς ὑπομεῖναι μάχεσθαι κ. τ. λ., Ast, Lex. Plat. I. p. 165.

κραταιοῦσθε] be strong. Comp. Ephesians 3:16 : δυνάμει κραταιωθῆναι διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος αὐτοῦ εἰς τὸν ἔσω ἄνθρωπον. The verbal form occurs in the LXX. and Apocrypha; not in Greek writers, who say κρατύνεσθαι.

ἐν ἀγάπῃ] as in the life-sphere of the whole Christian dispositions and action, chap. 13, and, in particular, of mutual edification, 1 Corinthians 8:1.

1 Corinthians 16:15-18. Commendation of the three Corinthian delegates who had brought to the apostle the letter of the church; first of all (1 Corinthians 16:15 f.) and chiefly, of Stephanas (1 Corinthians 1:16) and his house. The special expression which Paul gives (1 Corinthians 16:16) to the commendation of Stephanas must have been grounded in some antagonism unknown to us, which the man had to lament in his work for the churc.

παρακαλῶ] The question is, Whether the exhortation itself begins at once with οἴδατε (so that the latter would be imperative), or only with ἵνα, so that οἴδατε would be indicative, and the passage ending with ἑαυτούς would put forward the motive in the first place? The latter is the ordinary view and the only correct one, for οἴδατε as an imperative form (instead of ἴστε) cannot be pointed out (in opposition to Erasmus, Wolf, Heydenreich); on the supposition of its being imperative, εἰδέναι would require to be taken as in 1 Thessalonians 5:12 (“ut jubeat agnosci bene meritos,” Erasmus); on the view of its being indicative, it is the simple know. The construction is the ordinary attraction οἶδά σε τίς εἶ, and οἴδατε … ἑαυτούς is an auxiliary thought which interrupts the construction (comp. Dissen, ad Dem. de Cor. p. 34 b).

ἀπαρχὴ τῆς ἀχ.] i.e. the first family which had accepted Christianity in Achaia; the holy first-fruits of the land, in so far as it was destined to become, and was in process of becoming, Christian. Comp. Romans 15:6.

ἔταξαν] The plural, on account of the collective οἰκία. They have set themselves (voluntarily devoted themselves and placed themselves at the post) for the service of the saints. Instances of τάσσειν ἑαυτόν in this sense may be seen in Wetstein and Kypke, II. p. 234. Comp. Plato, Rep. p. 371 C: ἑαυτοὺς ἐπὶ τὴν διακονίαν τάττουσι ταύτην, Xen. Ages. ii. 25, Mem. ii. 1. 11. Beza denies the emphasis of ἑαυτούς, unwarrantably, but in the interest of the “vocatio legitima.”¹⁰⁹ We have no more precise knowledge of the historical circumstances here pointed to. Perhaps Stephanas devoted himself also especially to journeys, embassies, execution of special commissions, and the like; his wife, to the care of the poor and sic.

τοῖς ἁγίοις is an appropriating dative to διακ. See, already, Raphel, Xenoph. in loc.; Bernhardy, p. 88. By οἱ ἅγιοι are meant the Christians, as in 1 Corinthians 16:1; not, however, the mother church at Jerusalem (Hofmann). A reference to prosecuting the collection (in connection with which people had, it is supposed, been refractory towards Stephanas) lies wholly remote from the word.

καὶ ὑμεῖς] You too. The καί finds its reference, according to the context, in what goes before: εἰς διακ. τ. ἁγ. ἔταξ. ἑαυτ. Wetstein is right, therefore, in saying: “illi vobis ministrant; aequum est, ut vos illis vicissim honorem exhibeatis” (rather: obsequamini).

ὑποτάσσ.] namely, to their proposals, exhortations, etc. Ewald and Ritschl regard Stephanas as one of the overseers of the church; a relation which, however, would have required a more precise and definite designation than the general and qualitative τοῖς τοιούτοις. See, besides, on 1 Corinthians 1:17.

τοῖς τοιούτοις] to those who are so affected, indicates, in a generalizing way, the category to which Stephanas and his house belong. This generalization, by which the injunction of obedience towards the concrete persons comes out in a less strict and immediate form, but in which it is still implied, is a delicacy of expressio.

τῷ συνεργ.] The reference of the συν is given by the context from τοῖς τοιούτοις; hence: who works with them, i.e. in fellowship with them, which presupposes harmony in the spirit and purport of the work. Comp. Chrysostom. While Rückert leaves us our choice between three supplements contrary to the context: τῷ θεῷ (1 Corinthians 4:9), ἐ΄οί (so Erasmus), and ὑ΄ῖν (2 Corinthians 1:24), Hofmann adds a fourth arbitrary supplement: helpful to increase the kingdom of God. This design is of course taken for granted of itself, but does not explain the συν.

καὶ κοπιῶντι] and takes pains (therein), gives himself trouble about it. Comp. 1 Corinthians 15:10, 1 Corinthians 4:12; Galatians 4:11; Romans 16:6.

1 Corinthians 16:17-18. Regarding Fortunatus (probably not different from the person named in Clem. 1 Cor. 59) and Achaicus no particulars are known. They are not to be included (as de Wette would have it) in the family of Stephanas, which has been spoken of already. Grotius holds them to be Chloe’s people; but see on 1 Corinthians 1:11.

ὅτι τὸ ὑμέτερον ὑστέρημα αὐτοὶ ἀνεπλ.] because they for their part have supplied your lack (your absence). Comp. on Philippians 2:30. ὑμέτ. is thus taken objectively (comp. 1 Corinthians 15:31): the lack of your presence; and ὑμέτ. and αὐτοί (see the critical remarks) have the emphasis. Observe how courteously the expression: the want of you (of your presence), is chosen. Hofmann, on the contrary, misses this delicate touch by taking it as: what was lacking in you, in this respect, namely, that you could not appear with me in person. With still less delicacy Grotius, who adduces in his support 2 Corinthians 9:12 : “quod vos omnes facere oportuit, id illi fecerunt; certiorem me fecere de vestris morbis.” He is followed by Rückert, who founds wrongly upon Philippians 2:30 : “what should have been done by you, that have they done,” inasmuch, namely, as they had given him joy, which had not been done by the Corinthians. But we must not decide here by passages from other Epistles, since linguistically both renderings alike may be correct, but simply by the connection, according to which the men as ambassadors from the Corinthians were the compensation to the apostle for the lack of the presence of the latter. Comp. Chrysosto.

ἀνέπαυσαν γὰρ κ. τ. λ.] reason assigned for the preceding τὸ ὑστέρημα αὐτ. ἀνεπλ.¹¹⁰ Regarding the phrase, comp. 2 Corinthians 7:13; Philemon 1:7; Philemon 1:20.

καὶ τὸ ὑ΄ῶν] for they have refreshed (by their arrival here, and the communications and assurances connected therewith, comp. 2 Corinthians 7:13) my spirit and yours. The latter, inasmuch as they had come not in their own name, but as representatives of the whole church; their meeting therefore with Paul could not but be refreshing to the consciousness of the whole church. As they by their presence provided for Paul the joy of ἀνάπαυσις, so they provided it also for the church, which through them had entered into this fellowship with the apostle, and thus owed to them the refreshment which it could not but experience in the consciousness of this living intercourse of love with Paul brought about through these men. Comp. Chrysostom: οὐ παύλῳ μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐκείνοις αὐτοὺς χαρισαμένους δείκνυσι τῷ τὴν πόλιν ἅπασαν ἐν αὐτοῖς περιφέρειν. Paul thus expresses not simply reciprocity in general,—that which is presupposed where there is good-will (de Wette),—but the relation implied in the representation of the church by their delegates,—a relation, therefore, which for the latter, in virtue of their acceptance of the embassage, was one of merit. There lies here, also, in the addition of this second pronoun, a tender delicacy (comp. on 1 Corinthians 1:2), which the readers acquainted with the manner of the apostle could well appreciate. Grotius makes the reference to be to the assurances of Paul’s love which those men had brought with them to the Corinthians. But τὸ ὑμῶν also, like τὸ ἐ΄ὸν πνεῦ΄α, must refer to the time of the presence of the delegates with Pau.

ἐπιγινώσκετε] Attention to the compound verb: recognise them rightly (comp. on 1 Corinthians 13:12), should of itself have sufficed to prevent alterations of the sense of the word (such as: prize them highly, so Theophylact, Grotius, Flatt, Neander, and others). The high esteem is the consequence of the ἐπιγιν.

τοὺς τοιούτους] as in 1 Corinthians 16:16.

1 Corinthians 16:19 f. τῆς ἀσίας] in the narrower sense, comprehending the western coastlands of Asia Minor (see on Acts 2:9), where Ephesus also lay. From the latter, at least, Paul was charged with a greeting, but in the assurance of a like loving fellowship on the part also of the other Asiatic churches, with which he was in intercourse from Ephesus, he widens i.

ἐν κυρίῳ] marks the Christian character of the greeting, inasmuch as it was given with the feeling of living and moving in Christ. Comp. on Romans 16:22. The ἐν κυρ., which is here added, is taken for granted by the reader in the case of the other greetings also. But here precisely it is expressed, because this greeting is a specially fervent one; hence also πολλά (much, comp. 1 Corinthians 16:12).

σὺν τῇ κατʼ οἶκον αὐτ. ἐκκλ.] Aquila and Prisca (Priscilla), who had gone from Corinth (see on Acts 18:2) to Ephesus (Acts 18:18; Acts 18:26), had therefore given their dwelling here too, as afterwards at Rome (Romans 16:3 f.), for the assembly of a portion of the Christians in the place. Comp. on Rom. l.c. Probably Paul also lodged with them, so that the old addition: παρʼ οἷς καὶ ξενίζομαι (D E F G, Vulg., etc.), contains a true statemen.

οἱ ἀδελφοὶ πάντες] the whole of the members of the Ephesian church—these, still, separately and personally, although already included collectively in the first greetin.

ἐν φιλ. ἁγ.] by means of a holy kiss. See on Romans 16:16; 2 Corinthians 13:12; 1 Thessalonians 5:26. It is the kiss which was the token of Christian, brotherly love (1 Peter 5:14), and thus had the specific character of Christian consecration. Comp. Constit. apost. ii. 57. 12, viii. 5. 5 : τὸ ἐν κυρίῳ φίλημα. More special considerations, such as that of the absence of hypocrisy (Chrysostom, Theodoret, Theophylact), are imported. They are to greet each other, mutually (not from Paul), with the holy kiss after the reading of the Epistle in the assembly, and thereby manifest their brotherly love to each other respectively.¹¹¹ Comp. on Romans 16:16.

1 Corinthians 16:21-24. Conclusion added with his own hand in token, according to 2 Thessalonians 3:17, comp. 1 Corinthians 2:2, that the Epistle, though not written with his own hand, was his Epistle. Comp. Colossians 4:18.

ὁ ἀσπασμός] is the greeting κατʼ ἐξοχήν, the final salutation to the church. Nothing is to be supplied; on the contrary, Paul writes these words, and there is the greetin.

παύλου] in apposition to ἐμῇ. See Kühner, II. p. 145.

In 1 Corinthians 16:22, looking back once more, as it were involuntarily, upon the many degenerate forms of Christian life, and the discords at Corinth, he adds an apostolic utterance of judgment, full of terrible solemnity, against all those who could not but feel that it struck at the.

οὐ φιλεῖ τ. κύρ.] is without love to Christ. So he designates those Christians, who, like so many at Corinth, by factiousness, self-seeking, strife, a carnal life, etc., practically denied their love to Christ (John 14:23). That the curse applied to them, as long as they were impenitent, is self-evident. Comp. 2 Corinthians 7:10.

Observe that the more sensuous word φιλεῖν is nowhere used by Paul in those Epistles which are undoubtedly his (comp., however, Titus 3:15), except in this passage so full of emotion; elsewhere he uses ἀγαπᾶν (Ephesians 6:24).

ἤτω ἀνάθ.] i.e. then let him be one devoted to destruction (to the eternal ἀπώλεια). See on Romans 9:3; Galatians 1:8.

μαραναθά] energetic reference to the Parousia, at which that ἤτω ἀνάθ. shall be realized. The word is the Aramaic מָרָנָא אֲתָא , i.e. our Lord is come, by which, however, not the coming in the flesh is meant, as Chrysostom, Theodoret, Theophylact, Jerome, Erasmus, Castalio, al., assume,¹¹² but, in accordance with the context (see previously ἤτω ἀνάθ.), the eschatological coming to judgment. Paul sees the near and certain Parousia as if already begun (see on this use of the Hebrew praeterite, Ewald, Lehrb. 135. 3), and exclaims, like a prophet beholding it in vision: Our Lord is here! But it is not a form of putting under ban (see Lightfoot, Hor. p. 260), as indeed it does not occur in the Rabbinical writings; Luther (comp. Calvin) has without any warrant made it into Maharam Motha (which would be מחרם מותא , maledictus ad mortem). According to Hofmann, μαραναθά is meant to be equivalent to מַר אַנְתָה , Thou art the Lord, whereby the thought is expressed: “He will prove Himself in them to be Lord.” But how needless is this wholly novel and far less characteristic interpretation! The traditional interpretation, αναθα, but μαραν αθα. So already B**. And the versions, too (those which do not with the Vulgate retain it untranslated), translate according to this division; so already the Peshito: Dominus noster venit. Cod. It. g.: in adventu Domini.',)" onmouseout="UnTip()">¹¹³ on the other hand, places the punishment of the judgment directly before our eyes. Why, we may ask further, did Paul use the Aramaean expression? We do not know. Perhaps there was implied in it some reminiscence from the time of the apostle’s presence among them, unknown to us, but carrying weight for his readers; perhaps it was only the prompting of momentary indignation, that, after the sentence of judgment already pronounced ( ἤτω ἀνάθεμα), “rei gravitate commotus, quasi sibi non satisfecisset” (Calvin), he desired to clothe in truly solemn language the threatening reference to the Parousia yet to be added by μαραναθά, instead of saying ὁ κύριος ἡμῶν ἥκει. That there was a reference, however, in the Aramaean expression to the Petrine party who understood Hebrew, is not to be assumed (in opposition to Hofmann), as the general εἴ τις οὐ φιλεῖ τ. κύριον shows of itself. The two Aramaean words were doubtless enough intelligible generally in the mixed church, which contained so much of the Jewish element. Had the Maranatha, however, been as it were the mysterious watchword in the world of that time (Ewald), there would be in all probability more traces of it to be found in the New Testament. This also in opposition to Bengel. The view of Chrysostom and Theophylact is singularly absurd: Paul wished by the Aramaean to cross the conceit of the Corinthians in the Hellenic language and wisdom. Billroth, followed by Rückert, holds that he had added something in Aramaic also, in order to accredit yet more strongly the authenticity of the Epistle, but that this had afterwards been written by the transcribers in Greek letters. But the assumption that he had not written μαραναθά in Greek letters, although it has passed over so into all Greek MSS. of the text, is equally arbitrary with the presupposition that he had thought such an extraordinary and peculiar mode of attestation to be needful precisely in the case of this Epistle, which was already sufficiently accredited without it by the bearers.—1 Corinthians 16:23. The grace of the Lord, etc., sc. εἴη, the apostle’s most common closing wish in an epistle, Romans 16:20; Romans 16:24; Galatians 6:18; Philippians 4:23; 1 Thessalonians 5:28; 2 Thessalonians 3:18; Philemon 1:25.—1 Corinthians 16:24. My love, etc., sc. ἐστι: his heart impels him still to add this assurance at the very end, all the more because the divisions, immoralities, and disorders in the church had forced from him such severe rebukes and, even now, such corrective appeals. He loves them, and loves them all. If taken as optative (Luther, Estius, Ewald), it would be less suitably an indirect admonition, namely, that they might so conduct themselves that, et.

ἐν χριστῷ ἰησοῦ] Christ is his whole life-sphere; in it he loves also. His love has thus the distinctively Christian character, in contrast to all κοσμικὴ ἀγάπη (Theophy)