11 Cor. xvi. ὑστέρημα, 14. ἵνα καὶ τὸ ἐκείνων περίσσευμα γένηται εἰς τὸ ὑμῶν
17; chaps. ix. 12, xi, ; Phil. li. 30. m Exod. xvi. 18, n Here only.
ὑστέρημα: ὅπως γένηται ἰσότης, 15. καθὼς γέγραπται, ™“‘O τὸ πολὺ, οὐκ ἐπλεόνασε καὶ ὁ τὸ ὀλίγον οὐκ " ἠλαττόνησε”. 16. "Χάρις δὲ “τῷ “ Θεῷ τῷ διδόντι ᾿ τὴν αὐτὴν ἢ σπουδὴν ὑπὲρ
ο Refi.ii.14. ὑμῶν ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ Τίτου: 17. ὅτι τὴν μὲν παράκλησιν ἐδέξατο,
p Reff. vii. 11.
α σπουδαιότερος δὲ ὑπάρχων, " αὐθαίρετος ἐξῆλθε πρὸς ὑμᾶς.
18.
αμα "Συνεπέμψαμεν δὲ pet? αὐτοῦ τὸν ἀδελφὸν, οὗ ὁ ὃ "ἔπαινος ἐν τῷ
il. 28;
Tim.i.17. £Ver.3only. δβ Ver. 22 only.
t Rom. ii. 29, xiii. 3; 1 Cor. iv. 5; Phil. iv. 8.
1 $*BCKP, g read διδοντι; δοντι is read by ΜΕΡΕΙ, ἃ, e, f, vg. and the Syriac; C and the Bohairic add μιν (through misunderstanding the sense).
2 Tisch. reads τον αδελφον per’ αντον with N{*P and the Bohairic; but the τες, order is supported by all the other principal MSS. and vss.
8 Ἐπ om. ο.
equality, your abundance at the present season being a supply for their want, that their abundance also may prove to be a supply for your want, sc., at some future time, that there may be equality, i.e., reciprocity. There is no thought here of Jerusalem giving spiritual benefits in return for the material benefits given by Corinth (cf. chap, ix. 14 and Rom. xv, 27); what is meant is that if it ever came to the turn of Corinth to be poor, then it would be for Jerusalem to con- tribute for Aer support. Such an idea as that of the transference of the merits of the saints is, of course, quite foreign to the context.
Ver. 15. καθὼς γέγραπται κ.τ.λ.: as it is written, sc., in the words of Scripture, “ He that gathered (we must understand σύλλεξας from Exod. xvi. 17) much had nothing over; and he that gathered little had no lack,” sc., because each gathered enough manna for his own needs and no more, That each Christian Church may have enough for its necessities, not its luxuries, is what St. Paul contemplates as desirable and possible by mutual generosity in giving. The true text (ABF) of the LXX in Exod. xvi. 18 has τὸ ἔλαττον for τὸ ὀλίγον, which however is found as an early correction in A, and also in Philo.
Vv. 16-24. HE COMMENDS TO THEM TiTrus AND TWO UNNAMED COMPANIONS, WHO, BEARING THIS LETTER WITH THEM, ARE SENT TO GATHER THE COLLECTION at CortntTH.—Ver. 16. χάρις δὲ τῷ Θεῷ x.t.A.: but thanks be to God, who gives (note the pres. tense) to (lit., ‘in’; see on i. 22 for constr.) the heart of Titus the same earnest care for you, sc., the same that I myself feel.
Ver. 17. ὅτι τὴν μὲν παράκλ. κ.τ.λ.: for not only did he accept (the epistolary aorist) our exhortation, sc., of ver. 6, but ΙΕ this is the proof of his σπουδή)
eing himself very earnest (we are not to press the comparative σπονδαιότερος; cf. Acts xvii. 22), it was of his own accord that he went forth (epist. aor.) unto you, sc., from Macedonia, bearing this letter. ὑπάρχων is used (as at Rom. iv. 19, 1 Cor. xi. 7, chap. xii. 16, Gal. i, 14, Phil. ii. 6) instead of ὥν, as expressing not merely the fact that Titus was σπου τερος, but that this was his habitual condition; “being, as he is,” would convey the sense.
Ver. 18. συνεπέμψαμεν δὲ κ.τ.λ.;: and we have sent (the epistolary aorist; cf. Acts xxiii. 30, chap. ix. 3, Phil. ii. 28, Philm. 12) together with him the brother, sc., the brother whom you know (cf. chap. xii. 18), whose praise in the Gospel, i.e., whose good repute as a labourer in the cause of the Gospel (cf. chap. x. 14, Phil. iv. 3, Rom. i. 9), is throughout all the Churches, i.e., is spread abroad in all the Churches through which I have passed (cf. 1 Cor. vii. 17, xiv. 33; see xi. 28). The Patristic reference (Origen, Jerome, etc.) of these words to St. Luke is stereotyped in the Collect for St. Luke’s Day, but there is hardly room for doubt that this is due to a mistaken interpreta- tion of εὐαγγέλιον as signifying a written Gospel, rather than the “" good news” of God delivered orally by the first Christian preachers. We have no positive data by which to determine which of St. Paul’s contemporaries is here alluded to. It has been argued that as this unnamed “brother” is seemingly subordinate to Titus, he must not be identified with