[7] For χάριν, (benefit) א^C, B, L, P, have χαράν (joy.) Though Westcott and Hort put this in the text, and χάριν in the margin, most scholars are agreed that χάριν is the Apostle's word, and χαράν a slip or a correction.
[8] Mention may be made here of another interpretation of ver. 17, modifications of which recur from Chrysostom to Hofmann. In substance it is this: "The things that I purpose, do I purpose according to the flesh (_i.e._, with the stubborn consistency of a proud man, who disposes as well as proposes), that with _me_ (ἐμοί emphatic: _me_, as if _I_ were God, always to do what I would like to do) the Yes should be yes, and the No, no--_i.e._, every promise inviolably kept?" This is grammatically quite good, but contextually impossible.
[9] According to Schmiedel, in the words δι' ἡμῶν ... δι' ἐμοῦ καὶ Σιλουανοῦ καὶ Τιμοθέου we ought to discover an emphatic reference, by way of contrast, to Judaising opponents of Paul in Corinth. These are said to have brought _another_ Jesus (xi. 4), who was _notì_ God's ἴδιος υἱὸς in Paul's sense (Rom. viii. 32), and in whom there _was_ Yea and Nay--namely, the confirmation of the promises to the Jews or those who became Jews to receive them, and the refusal of the promises to the Gentiles as such. It needs a keen scent to discover this, and as the Corinthians read without a commentator it would probably be thrown away upon them.