honesty, in the comprehensive sense of the terms ; or it means justifying righteousness, the righteousness of faith, so often called the righteousness of God. Calvin and many others take it in the former sense here, and understand by the " ar- mour of righteousness," that armour which integrity affords, or those arms which are consistent with moral rectitude. Others prefer the latter sense of the word, and understand the armour of righteousness to be that which is secured by our justifica- tion before God. This interpretation is not only more in keeping with Paul's usage of the word, but more consistent with the context. It was not Paul's honesty which was his armour, or by which he established his claim to be a minister of God, but the supernatural gifts and graces of the Spirit. In Eph. 6, 14, he compares this righteousness to a breast- plate ; here to the whole panoply, on the right hand and on the left^ offensive and defensive, because he who is justified, or clothed with the righteousness of Christ, has every thing at command. He has the shield of faith, and the helniet of sal- vation, and the sword of the Spirit.
8-10. By honour and dishonour, by evil report and good report ; as deceivers, and (yet) true ; as un- known, and (yet) well known ; as dying, and behold, we live ; as chastened, and not killed ; as sorrowful, yet always rejoicing ; as poor, yet making many rich ; as having nothing, and (jxt) possessing all things.
These verses are intimately connected, forming a distinct division of the apostle's discourse. In vs. 4. 5, we had the preposition Iv in its local sense. Paul commended himself by patience hi afflictions, in necessities, &c. In vs. 6. 7 the same preposition is used in its instrumental sense, hy pureness, by knowledge, &c. Here the preposition Sta has a local sense, through^ in the midst of. He maintained his consistency and integrity under all circumstances, through honour and dishon- our, through evil report and good report. He was always the same — preached the same doctrine, urged the same duties, maintained the same principles, whether his preaching was approved or disapproved, whether it secured for him admira- tion or brought down upon him reproach. This is the com- mon and most natural interpretation. Many, however, prefer