The apostle apologizes for the self-commendation which was forced upon him, vs. 1–15. He contrasts himself and his labours with the assumptions of the false teachers, vs. 15–33.
Reasons for his self-commendation, vs. 1–15
HE had just condemned all self-commendation, yet he was forced to do what had the appearance of self-laudation. The Corinthians were in danger of being turned away from Christ by having their confidence in Paul undermined by the misrepresentations of his enemies. It was therefore necessary for him to present the grounds which he had for claiming authority over them, and for asserting his superiority over his opponents. Yet so repugnant was this task to his feelings, that he not only humbly apologizes for thus speaking of himself, but he finds it difficult to do what he felt must be done. He over and over begins what he calls his boasting, and immediately turns aside to something else. He begs them to bear with him while he proceeds to praise himself, v. 1, for his doing so sprang from the purest motive, love for them and anxiety for their welfare, vs. 2–3. An anxiety justified by the readiness with which they bore with those who preached another gospel, v. 4. He thus spoke because he was on a par with the chief apostles, and not behind those who among them claimed to be his superiors, v. 5. They might have higher pretensions as orators, but in knowledge and in every thing that really pertained to the apostolic office he was abundantly manifest among them, v. 6. His refusal to avail himself of his right to be supported by those to whom he preached was no offence to them, and no renunciation of his apostleship, vs. 7–9. He was determined to refuse any pecuniary aid from the Christians in Achaia, not because he did not love them, but because he wished to cut off all occasion to question his sincerity from those who sought such occasion, and because he desired to put the false teachers to the same test of disinterestedness, vs. 10–12. These teachers claimed to be apostles, though they had no more right to the office, than Satan had to be regarded as an angel of light, vs. 13–15.
- Would to God ye could bear with me a little in (my) folly: and indeed bear with me.
The self-commendation of the false teachers was the fruit of conceit and vanity; with the apostle it was self-vindication. Although so different in character and design, they had one element in common. Both included self-laudation. Both, therefore, are designated by the same word, boasting; and both, therefore, he calls ἀφροσύνη, a want of sense. Would to God, in the Greek simply, ὄφελον, oh that, I would. In fact, however, every such exclamation is, in the pious mind, a prayer; and, therefore, the rendering, ‘I would to God,’ is neither irreverent nor inaccurate. Oh that ye could bear with me, (ἀνείχεσθε, Hellenistic form, instead of ἠνείχεσθε.) The pronoun μοῦ properly belongs to the verb, and not to the following μικρόν τι, as if the sense were, a little of my folly. The meaning is, ‘Bear with me (μικρόν τι ἀφροσύνης), as to a little of folly.’ This reading is, on the authority of the majority of MSS., adopted by the later editors. Knapp and others read, μικρὸν τῇ ἀφροσύνῃ, a little as to folly; which amounts to the same thing. And indeed bear with me. So Calvin, Beza, and many others, who take ἀνέχεσθε as the imperative. This clause is then a repetition of the first, only more vehemently expressed. The former is a wish, the latter a supplication or demand. But the context does not require this vehemence. A more appropriate sense is afforded by taking the word in the indicative, ‘But indeed ye do bear with me;’ i.e. the request is not necessary, I know you are disposed to suffer me to speak as I see fit.
- For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present (you as) a chaste virgin to Christ.
This is the reason either why they should bear with him, or why he was assured that they would do so. That is, the connection is either with the first and principal clause of v. 1, or with the latter clause. It makes but little difference. The sense is better if the connection is with the first clause. ‘Bear with my folly—for I am jealous over you.’ Ζηλῶ γὰρ ὑμᾶς. The word ζηλόω may mean, I ardently love, or more specifically, I am jealous. The latter, as the figure of marriage is used, is probably the sense in which the apostle uses the word. With godly jealousy; ζῆλος θεοῦ may mean a zeal of which God is the object, as in Rom. 10:2; comp. John 2:17. In that case Paul intends to say that the feeling which he had for the Corinthians was a pious feeling. It was no selfish or mercenary interest, but such as arose from his desire to promote the honour of God. Or, the meaning is, a zeal of which God is the author; or, a zeal which God approves; or, the zeal which God has. As the people of God are so often represented in the Bible as standing to God in a relation analogous to that of a wife to a husband, so God is represented as being jealous, i.e. moved to deep displeasure when they transfer their love to another object. Is. 54:5, 62:5; Ez. 16; Hos. 2. In this view, the apostle means to say, that he shares in the feeling which God is represented as entertaining towards his church. The translation given in the English version includes all the meanings above mentioned; for a godly jealousy (or zeal) is a pious zeal, it is a zeal of which God is both the object and the author, and it is such a zeal as he has. For I have espoused you to one husband. It was natural for the apostle to feel this jealousy over them, for he stood in a most intimate relation to them. Their union with Christ was his work. 1 Cor. 4:15, 9:1. He may compare himself in this verse to a father who gives his daughter to the bridegroom. To this it is objected that Paul became the father of the Corinthians by their conversion; whereas the relation here referred to subsisted before their conversion or espousal to Christ. It is commonly assumed that the allusion is to the office of “the friend of the bridegroom,” John 3:29, (παρανύμφιος,) whose business it was to select the bride, to be responsible for her conduct, and to present her to the bridegroom. In this sense Moses was called παρανύμφιος by the Rabbis, as it was through him the people entered into covenant with God. In either way the sense is the same. Paul’s relation was so intimate with the Corinthians as the author of their espousals to Christ, that he could not fail to feel the deepest interest in their fidelity. I have espoused you. The verb ἁρμόζω in the active voice is used of the father who betroths his daughter; in the passive of the bride who is betrothed; in the middle voice it is generally used of the man who pledges himself to a woman. The middle form, however, is sometimes used, as in this verse, (ἡρμοσάμην,) in the active sense. To one husband. The marriage relation from its nature is exclusive. It can be sustained only to one man. So the relation of the church, or of the believer, to Christ is in like manner exclusive. We can have but one God and Saviour. Love to him of necessity excludes all love of the same kind to every other being. Hence the apostle says he had espoused (betrothed) them to one man. This was done in order, in due time, to present them as a chaste virgin unto Christ. As in Eph. 5:27, this presentation of the church to Christ as his bride, is said to take place at his second coming, this passage is commonly understood to refer to that event. Paul’s desire was that the Corinthians should remain faithful to their vows, so as to be presented to Christ a glorious church, without spot or wrinkle, on that great day. He dreaded lest they should, in that day, be rejected and contemned as a woman unfaithful to her vows.