| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
 Bad Advertisement? News & Reviews: Are you a Christian? Online Store: |
CHAPTER 5PREVIOUS CHAPTER - NEXT CHAPTER - HELP
The confidence expressed in the preceding chapter is justified by showing that the apostle was assured of a habitation in heaven, even if his earthly tabernacle should be destroyed, vs. 1-10. His object in what he had said of himself was not self-commendation. He labored only for the good of the church, impelled by the love of Christ, whose ambassador he was, in exhorting men to be reconciled to God, vs. 11-21. THE STATE OF BELIEVERS AFTER DEATH. VS. 1-10. Paul did not faint in the midst of his sufferings, because he knew that even if his earthly house should be destroyed, he had a house in heaven — not like the present perishable tabernacle, but one not made with hands, and eternal, v. 1. He looked forward to the things unseen, because in his present tabernacle he groaned, desiring to enter his heavenly habitation. He longed to be unclothed that he might be clothed upon with his house which is from heaven, vs. 2-4. This confidence he owed to God, who had given him the Holy Spirit as a pledge of his salvation, v. 5. Having this indwelling of the Spirit he was always in good courage, knowing that as soon as he should be absent from the body, he would be present with the Lord, vs. 6-8. Therefore his great desire was to please him, before whose tribunal he and all other men were to appear to receive according to their works, vs. 9, 10. 1. For we know that if our earthly house of (this) tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens . The connection between this passage and the preceding chapter is plain. Our light afflictions, Paul had said, work out for us an eternal weight of glory, for we know that even if our earthly house perishes, we have an everlasting habitation in heaven. The general sense also of the whole of the following paragraph is clear. The apostle expresses the assurance that a blessed state of existence awaited him after death. There is, however, no little difficulty in determining the precise meaning of the figurative language here employed. Few passages in Paul’s writings have awakened a deeper or more general interest, because it treats of the state of the soul after death; a subject about which every man feels the liveliest concern, not only for himself, but in behalf of those dear to him. Where are those who sleep in Jesus before the resurrection? What is the condition of a redeemed soul when it leaves the body? These are questions about which no Christian can be indifferent. If Paul here answers those inquiries, the passage must have peculiar value to all the people of God. This, however, is the very point about which the greatest difficulty exists. There are three views taken of the passage; that is, three different answers are given to the question, What is that building into which the soul enters when the present body is dissolved? 1. The first answer is, that the house not made with hands is heaven itself. 2. That it is the resurrection body. If this be the correct view, then the passage throws no light on the state of the soul between death and the resurrection. It treats solely of what is to happen after Christ’s second coming. 3. The third opinion is, that the house into which the soul enters at death is, so to speak, an intermediate body; that is, a body prepared for it and adapted to its condition during the state intermediate between death and the resurrection. This, however, is not a scriptural doctrine. Many philosophers indeed teach that the soul can neither perceive nor act unless in connection with a body; nay, that an individual man is nothing but a revelation of the general principle of humanity in connection with a given corporeal organism, as a tree is the manifestation of the principle of vegetable life through a specific material organization. As therefore vegetable life is, or exists, only in connection with vegetable forms, so the soul exists only in connection with a body. Thus Olshausen in his Commentary, 1 Corinthians 15:42-44, says, Wie ohne Leib keine Seele, so ohne Leiblichkeit keine Seligkeit; Leiblichkeit und die dadurch bedingte Personlichkeit ist das Ende der Werke Gottes. “As without body there is no soul, so without a corporeal organization there can be no salvation; a corporeal organization, as the necessary condition of personality, is the end of God’s work.” Still more explicitly, when commenting on verses 19 and 20 of the same chapter, he says, Ein Fortleben als reiner Geist ohne korperliches Organ erkennt der Apostle gar nicht als Moglichkeit an; die Lehre von der Unsterblichkeit der Seele ist der ganzen Bibel, ebenso wie der Name, fremd — und zwar mit vollem Recht, indem ein persönliches Bewusstseyn im geschaffenen Wesen die Schranken des Leibes nothwendig voraussetzt. “The continued existence of the soul as a pure spirit without a body is to the apostle an impossibility. The Bible knows nothing of the doctrine of the immortality of the soul; the very expression is strange to it. And no wonder, for self-consciousness in a created being necessarily supposes the limitation of a bodily organization.” Of course all angels must have bodies, and of course also if the soul exists between death and the resurrection it must have a body. Strange to say, however, Olshausen, despite his maxim, “no body no soul,” admits the existence of the soul during the interval between death and the resurrection, and yet denies that it has a body. His utterly unsatisfactory attempt to reconcile this contradiction in his theory is, first, that self-consciousness in departed spirits is very obscure — a mere dreamy state of existence; and secondly, that it must be assumed that a relation continues between the soul and the elements of its decaying body in the grave. This is a perfect collapse of the theory. If it involves either of these consequences, that the soul is unconscious after death, or that its life is in connection with its disorganized body, and conditioned by that connection, then it comes in direct conflict with the Scripture, and is exploded as a mere product of the imagination. If the Bible teaches or assumes that a body is necessary to the self-consciousness of the soul, or even to its power to perceive and to express, to act and to be acted upon, then it would be not only natural but necessary to understand the apostle to teach in this passage that the moment the soul leaves its present body it enters into another. Then it would follow either that the only resurrection of which the Scriptures speak takes place at the moment of death, or that there is a body specifically fitted for the intermediate state, differing both from the one which we now have, and from that which we are to have at the resurrection. The former of these suppositions contradicts the plain doctrine of the Bible that the resurrection is a future event, to take place at the second advent of Christ; and the latter contradicts this very passage, for Paul says that the house on which we enter at death is eternal. Besides, the Bible knows nothing of any body except the sw~ma yuciko>n , the natural body , which we have now, and the sw~ma pneumatiko>n , the spiritual body , which we are to receive at the resurrection. We are therefore reduced to the choice between the first and second of the three interpretations mentioned above. The building of which the apostle here speaks must be either a house in heaven, or the resurrection body. If the latter, then Paul teaches, not what is to happen immediately after death, but what is to take place at the second coming of Christ. In opposition to this view, and in favor of the opinion that the house here mentioned is heaven itself, it may be argued, 1. Heaven is often in Scripture compared to a house in which there are many mansions, John 14:2; or to a city in which there are many houses, Hebrews 11:10; 14; 13:14; Revelation 21:10; or more generally to a habitation, Luke 16:9. 2. The figure in this case is peculiarly appropriate. The body is compared to a house in which the soul now dwells, heaven is the house into which it enters when this earthly house is dissolved. Our Lord told his sorrowing disciples that they should soon be with him, that in his Father’s house, whither he went, there were many mansions, and that he would receive them unto himself. 3. The description here given of the house of which the apostle speaks agrees with the descriptions elsewhere given of heaven. It is a building of God; compare Hebrews 11:10, where heaven is said to be a city whose builder and maker is God. It is not made with hands, i.e. not of human workmanship or belonging to the present order of things. In the same sense the true tabernacle in heaven is said to be “not made with hands,” Hebrews 9:11. It is eternal, because the state on which the soul enters at death is unchanging. And finally, this house is said to be “in heaven,” or, we are said to have it “in heaven.” This last clause is not consistent with the assumption that the house spoken of is the resurrection body. That body is not now in heaven awaiting our arrival there, nor is it to be brought down to us from heaven. But the mansion which Christ has gone to prepare for his people is in heaven; and therefore the apostle in raising his eyes heavenward could appropriately say, ‘If this tabernacle be dissolved I have a house in heaven.’ 4. The principal argument in favor of this interpretation is that the house spoken of is one on which the soul enters immediately after death. This is plain because Paul says, that if our earthly house be dissolved we have , i.e. we have at once, a house in heaven. The whole context requires this explanation to be given to e]comen , we have . The apostle is speaking of the grounds of consolation in the immediate prospect of death. He says in effect that the dissolution of the body does not destroy the soul or deprive it of a home. His consolation was that if unclothed he would not be found naked. While at home in the body he was absent from the Lord, but as soon as he was absent from the body he would be present with the Lord. It is so obvious that the apostle is here speaking of what takes place at death, that those who maintain that the building referred to is the resurrection body, propose various methods of getting over the difficulty. Some, as Usteri, assume that Paul, when he wrote the first epistle to the Corinthians, believed that the resurrection was not to take place until the second advent of Christ, but changed his view and here teaches that it takes place at death. That is, that the soul when it leaves the present body is furnished with that spiritual body which in the former epistle he taught was not to be received until Christ comes the second time. To those who proceed on the assumption of the inspiration of Scripture, this unatural explanation needs no refutation. In his epistle to the Philippians, written still later, he teaches the same doctrine that we find in First Corinthians. He must, therefore, have reverted to his former view. Paul was not thus driven about by every wind of doctrine. Even those who deny his inspiration must admit his consistency. Others say that as the apostle confidently expected to survive the second advent, he here speaks of what he anticipated in his own case. He believed he would not die, but be changed at once as described in 1 Corinthians 15:51,52. But even admitting that Paul at this time did expect to survive the coming of the Lord, that is not the expectation here expressed. On the, contrary, he is speaking of what would take place (eja>n ) even in case he should die. If, worn out by his sufferings, his earthly house should be dissolved before Christ came, still he knew he should have a house in heaven. Others again say that the interval between death and the resurrection is not taken into account, but that the apostle, after the manner of the prophets, speaks of events as chronologically coincident which in fact are separated by a long period of time. But this does not meet the difficulty. As the apostle is speaking of the ground of consolation in the prospect of death, he must be understood to refer, not to what might be expected at an indefinite period after that event, but to its immediately consequence. He did not glory in his afflictions because when his earthly house should be dissolved he would sink into a state of unconsciousness until the resurrection; but because he would have another and unspeakably better habitation. This is evident, because he speaks of his being absent from the body as the immediate antecedent of his being present with the Lord; which is only another form of saying he would be clothed upon with his house which is from heaven. 5. A fifth consideration in favor of the interpretation in question, is derived from the analogy of Scripture. The Bible in other places teaches that the souls of believers do at their death immediately pass into glory. Our Lord in refuting the Sadducees, who denied the existence of spirits, said “Have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying, I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living,” Matthew 22:32. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob therefore are living, and not in a dreamy state of semi-conscious existence. In the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, we are told that when Lazarus died he was carried by angels into Abraham’s bosom, i.e. to heaven. On the mount of transfiguration, Moses and Elias appeared talking with Christ. Our Lord said to the dying thief, “This day shalt thou be with me in paradise,” and paradise, as we learn from 2 Corinthians 12:2 and 4, is the third heaven. In Philippians 1:22-24, Paul says that although he has a desire to depart and be with Christ, yet his abiding in the flesh was more needful for them. This clearly implies that as soon as he departed from the flesh he expected to be present with the Lord. This flows from the perfection of Christ’s work. As his blood cleanses from all sin, there is no process of expiation or purification to be endured or experienced by believers after death. And as we know, as our Lord says, that they still live, they must enter on the blessedness secured by his merits. Accordingly the apostle says that the saints on earth and the saints in heaven form one communion. “We are come unto Mount Zion — and unto the spirits of just men made perfect,” Hebrews 12:23. The considerations above presented appear decisive in favor of understanding the apostle to mean by the house not made with hands, a mansion in heaven into which believers enter as soon as, their earthly tabernacle is dissolved. It is, however, objected to this view of the passage, that as the earthly house is the present body, the heavenly house must also be a body. This, however, does not follow. The comparison is not of one body with another; but of one house with another. We dwell now in an earthly tabernacle; after death, we shall dwell in a heavenly house. This is all that the figure demands. In the second place, it is urged that in v. 2 it is said our house is “from heaven,” and if from heaven it is not heaven itself. But our resurrection body is not from heaven in the local sense. It is from heaven only in the general sense of being heavenly, and in this sense our house is of heaven. It is not of the earth, does not belong to the present state of existence, but to that on which we enter in heaven. Besides, it is not heaven considered as a state, nor even as a place, (in the wide sense of the word heaven,) that is our house, but the mansion which the Lord has gone to prepare for his people in heaven. The simple idea is that the soul, when it leaves its earthly tabernacle, will not be lost in immensity, nor driven away houseless and homeless, but will find a house and home in heaven. This is the consoling doctrine here taught. The soul of the believer does not cease to exist at death. It does not sink into a state of unconsciousness. It does not go into purgatory; but, being made perfect in holiness, it does immediately pass into glory. As soon as it is absent from the body, it is present with the Lord. This is all that is revealed, and this is enough. What Paul learnt more than this when he was caught up into the third heaven, he was not permitted to make known. As Paul is speaking of himself in this whole connection, when he says we know , he does not refer to acknowledge common to all men, nor to other Christians, but he expresses his personal conviction — I know. That if , eja>n if as it may ; (not although ). The apostle is speaking of his afflictions, which were wearing away his strength; and says, ‘Even if my sufferings should prove fatal, and my earthly house be dissolved, I have another habitation.’ Our earthly house of this tabernacle, i.e. our earthly house which is a tabernacle, oJ skh~nov , a frail, temporary abode, as opposed to a stable, permanent building. See 2 Peter 1:13,14. Is dissolved, i.e. its component parts separated either by violence or decay, so that it falls in pieces. We have , i.e. I have, as he is speaking of himself. The present tense, e]comen , is used because the one event immediately follows the other; there is no perceptible interval between the dissolution of the earthly tabernacle and entering on the heavenly house. As soon as the soul leaves the body it is in heaven. A building of God , oijkodomh The words in the heavens may be connected with house , in the sense of heavenly, i.e. a celestial house. This construction is assumed in our version where the words “eternal in the heavens” are made to qualify or describe the house spoken of. The natural connection of the words, however, is with (e]comen ) we have . ‘If our earthly house be dissolved, we have in heaven a house of God, not made with hands, and eternal.’ 2. For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven .
This verse must, from the force of the connecting particle (ga>r ) for , be a confirmation of what precedes, but whether of what is said in v. 1, or at close of preceding chapter, is doubtful. The words kai< ga>r may mean either for also , or for even . If the former, this verse is cordinate with v. 1, and assigns an additional reason why the apostle looked at the things unseen and eternal. He thus looked for he knew he had in heaven a house not made with hands, and because he earnestly desired to enter that house.
If the latter explanation of the particles be preferred, the sense is, ‘I know I have a house in heaven, for even in this I groan, desiring to be clothed with my house which is from heaven.’ In this case the argument would be, ‘There is such a house, for I long for it.’ This, however, is hardly a scriptural argument. Paul’s confidence in a state of blessedness beyond the grave was not founded on the obscure aspirations of his nature, but on express revelation from God. Romans 8:22 is not parallel, for there the groaning of the creation is presented, not as a proof of future blessedness, but to show that the creature is subject to vanity, not willingly nor finally. In this , i.e. in this tabernacle, as the word skh~nov is used in v. 1, and also v. 4. We groan earnestly desiring , i.e. we groan because we desire. The groaning is the expression of this longing after his heavenly home; and not, as in v. 4, of suffering caused by afflictions. The ejpi> in ejpipoqou~ntev is either intensive, earnestly desiring, or it expresses the tendency of the desire. The word and its cognates are always used in the New Testament to express strong desire or longing. What the apostle thus longed for was, ejpendu>sasqai , to be clothed upon , i.e. to put on over, as an outer garment. With our house which is from heaven . As the body is familiarly compared sometimes to a house in which the soul dwells, and sometimes to a garment with which it is clothed, the two figures are here combined, and the apostle speaks of putting on a house as though it were a garment.
Both are a covering and a protection. Our house, oijkhth>rion , i.e. dwelling, more specific than the general term oijki>a , a building. Which is from heaven, ejx oujranou~ i.e. heavenly, as distinguished from a dwelling which is ejk gh~v , of the earth . 1 Corinthians 15:47. It is not “of this building,” tau>thv th~v kti>sewv , Hebrews 9:11. Those who understand this whole passage to treat of the change which is to take place in those believers who shall be alive when the Lord comes, and which is described in 1 Corinthians 15:51-54, lay special stress on this verse. They urge that this house being from heaven cannot be heaven; and that the verb ejpendu>w , meaning to put on over , evidently refers to the putting on of the new body, as it were, over the old one; and therefore can be understood only of those who, being in the body when Christ comes, are thus clothed upon without being unclothed. It has already been remarked that there is no force in the former of these arguments, because the new body is not from heaven. It is ejx oujranou~ only in the sense of being heavenly, and in that sense the expression suits the idea of a building as well as that of a body. As to the second argument, it may be admitted, that if the context demanded, or even naturally admitted of our understanding “the house not made with hands” to be the resurrection body, there would be a peculiar propriety in the use of the word ejpendu>sasqai , (to be clothed upon ,) instead of the simple verb ejndu>sasqai to be clothed . But the use of this word is not sufficient to determine the interpretation of the whole passage. 1. Because nothing is more common than the use of compound verbs in the same sense as the corresponding simple ones. 2. Because in 1 Corinthians 15:53,54, Paul uses the simple verb (ejndu>sasqai ) four times to express the very thing which it is here urged he must refer to because he uses the compound ejpendu>sasqai .
That is, he uses the two words in the same sense. He makes no difference between “putting on” and being “clothed upon.” We are not required, therefore, by the use of the latter expression, to infer that the apostle speaks of the change which those who are in the body should experience at the coming of Christ.
This view, as remarked above, is out of keeping with the whole context.
Paul was daily exposed to death, his outward man was perishing. His consolation was that if his earthly tabernacle were dissolved, he had a better house in heaven. He earnestly longed for that house; to be absent from the body and to be present with the Lord. All he says is said on the hypothesis of his dying, and therefore he cannot say he earnestly desired to escape death. What he longed for was, not that he might be alive when Christ came, and thus escape the pains of dissolution, but that he might quit his mud hovel and enter in that house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens. 3. It so be that being clothed we shall not be found naked .
Few verses in this epistle have been more variously explained than this. In the first place the reading is doubtful. The received text has ei]ge , which the great majority of the critical editions also adopt; Lachmann, on the authority of the manuscripts, B, D, E, F, G, reads ei]per , The latter (if so be, provided ) expresses doubt; the former (since ) expresses certainty. This distinction, however, is not strictly observed in Paul’s writings. See Corinthians 8:5; Galatians 3:4; Colossians 1:23; 2 Thessalonians 1:6. A more important diversity is that several ancient manuscripts and most of the Fathers read ejkdusa>menoi (un -clothed) instead of ejndusa>menoi (clothed ). The former renders the passage much plainer. ‘We earnestly desire to be clothed with our house from heaven, since (or, even if) being unclothed we shall not be found naked.’ That is, ‘Although despoiled of our earthly tabernacle we shall not be found houseless.’ Mill, Semler and Ruckert prefer this reading, but the weight of authority is in favor of the received text. There are three general modes of explaining this passage which have been adopted. 1. Calvin among the older commentators, and Usteri and Olshausen among the moderns, say that the words clothed and naked must be understood to refer to the moral or spiritual state of the soul; to its being clothed with righteousness or being destitute of that robe. Calvin says the apostle’s design is to limit the blessedness spoken of in the preceding verses to the righteous. The wicked are to be despoiled of their bodies and will appear naked before God; but believers, being clothed in the righteousness of Christ, will stand before him in the glorious vesture of immortality. There are two garments, therefore, he says, referred to; the one, the righteousness of Christ, received in this life; the other, immortal glory, received at death. The former is the cause and necessary condition of the latter. Calvin lays special stress on the kai> also , which is inserted for the sake of amplification, as though Paul had said, ‘A new garment shall be prepared for believers at death if also (or already) in this life they were clothed.’ This interpretation, however, is evidently out of keeping with the context.
It is very unnatural to make the same words have such different meanings in the same connection. In v. 2 we are said to be clothed with our house from heaven; in v. 3 we are so clothed as not to be found naked, and in v. 4 Paul speaks of being unclothed. If in vs. 2 and 4 the word refers to a body or house, in v. 3 it cannot refer to the robe of righteousness. Being unclothed is evidently the opposite of being clothed. As the former refers to laying aside the earthly tabernacle, the latter must refer to our being invested with the house from heaven.
Besides, any such distinction between the righteous and the wicked, or any caution that the unrighteous are not to be received into heaven, as this interpretation supposes, is foreign to the design of the passage.
Paul is not speaking of the general destiny of men after death, but of his own personal experience and conviction. ‘I know,’ he says, ‘that if I die I have a house in heaven, and being clothed with that house I shall not be found naked.’ There is no room here for a warning to the righteous. They are not at all brought into view. 2. The second general view of this passage is founded on the assumption that v. 2 speaks of the change to be effected in those who shall be alive when Christ comes. According to Grotius the meaning is, ‘We shall be clothed upon (i.e. invested with a new body over the present one), if so be that day shall find us clothed (i.e. in the body) and not naked (i.e. bodiless spirits).’ That is, we shall experience the change mentioned in v. 2, provided we are alive when Christ comes. To this, however, it is objected, first, that as the event of Paul’s being alive at that time was entirely uncertain, and is here so presented, the appropriate particle would be ei]per (if so be ) and not ei]ge (if , as is sure to be the case); and second, that this interpretation is inconsistent with the force of the aorist participle ejndusa>menoi . The sense given to the passage would require the perfect ejndedume>noi , being then clothed . According to Meyer the meaning is, ‘If, as is certain to be the case, we in fact (kai> ) shall be found clothed, and not naked.’ That is, ‘If clothed upon with our house from heaven (i.e. the new body) we shall not be found bodiless when Christ comes.’ This interpretation suits the words, but not the connection. As before remarked, the whole passage proceeds on the hypothesis of death. ‘If I die,’ says the apostle, ‘so and so will happen.’ This being the case, he cannot be understood to state what would happen if he did not die, but survived the coming of the Lord. Besides, the whole basis of this interpretation is unsound. Paul did not expect to survive the second advent, as is plain from 2 Thessalonians 2:1-6. See the comment on Corinthians 15:51. 3. The third interpretation assumes that the apostle refers not to the spiritual body but to a mansion in heaven. In the preceding verse he said that he earnestly desired to be clothed upon with his house from heaven, “since,” he adds, “being clothed, we shall not be found (i.e. shall not be) naked.” As the house from heaven is spoken of as a garment, being houseless is expressed by the word naked .
This interpretation gives the same translation of the words, as the preceding, but a different exposition of their meaning; and it has the advantage of agreeing logically with the context and with the elevated tone of the whole passage. ‘If I die,’ says Paul, ‘I know I have a home in heaven, and I earnestly desire to enter on that heavenly house, since when driven from this earthly tabernacle I shall not be houseless and homeless.’
According to this view the object of his desire was the glory and blessedness of heaven; according to the other, it was that he might live until Christ came, and thus, escape the pain of dying. This was an object comparatively insignificant, and utterly out of keeping with the heroic spirit which pervades the whole context. 4. For we that are in (this) tabernacle do groan, being burdened: not for that we would be unclothed, but clothed upon, that mortality might be swallowed up of life .
This verse gives the reason of the desire expressed in v. 2. ‘We desire our house which is from heaven, for in this we groan, etc.’ The words oiJ o]ntev mean we who are , not ‘whilst we are,’ which would require the simple o]ntev without the article. In this tabernacle , ejn tw|~ skh>nei , literally, in the tabernacle, i.e. the tabernacle mentioned in v. 1, and implied in v. 2. Do groan being burdened , i.e. because burdened. The burden meant may be the affliction by which Paul was overwhelmed; or the body itself; or the longing after a better world. As this passage is intimately connected with the preceding chapter, in which the apostle had spoken so freely of his sufferings, and as his experience in view of death was determined by those sufferings, it is perfectly natural to understand him to refer to the burden of sorrow. It was because he suffered so much that he groaned to be delivered, i.e. to be absent from the body and present with the Lord. Not that we would be unclothed. The words are ejfÆ w|= which in Romans 5:12 mean propterea quod , ‘because that;’ but here they more naturally mean quare , ‘wherefore.’ They introduce the reason of what follows, not of what precedes. ‘On which account,’ i.e. because we are thus burdened we desire, etc. If ejfÆ w|= be taken in the sense of because that the sense is just the opposite. Then this clause states the nature of the burden under which the apostle groaned. ‘We groan because that we do not wish to be unclothed.’ It was then the dread of death, or the desire to be glorified without the necessity of dying, that was the object of the apostle’s intense desire. This is altogether unworthy of the man and inconsistent with the context. Paul says, ‘We groan being burdened, wherefore , i.e. because thus burdened, we do not wish to die; death is not that for which we long, but that which comes after death. It is not mere exemption from the burden of life, from its duties, its labors or its sufferings, which is the object of desire, but to be in heaven.’ The passage is in its spirit and meaning altogether parallel with v. 8. “Willing rather to be absent from the body and present with the Lord.” To be unclothed means to lay aside our earthly tabernacle. To be clothed upon means to enter the house not made with hands. As the earthly house is compared to a garment, so is the heavenly house. That mortality (to< qnhto It was something very heroic and grand for a poor, persecuted man to stand thus erect in the presence of his enemies and in the immediate prospect of death, and avow such superiority to all suffering, and such confidence of a glorious immortality. The apostle, therefore, adds that neither the elevated feelings which he expressed, nor his preparation for the exalted state of existence which he so confidently expected, was due to himself. He who hath wrought us for the selfsame thing is God . The words eijv aujto< tou~to , to this very thing , naturally refers to what immediately precedes, the being clothed upon so that mortality should be swallowed up of life. For this elevated destiny God had prepared him; not created him, but (oJ katergasa>menov ) made him fit by giving the requisite qualifications. He was, as a believer, looking forward with joyful expectation to his home in heaven, the workmanship of God. Who also hath given unto us the earnest of the Spirit . God had not only prepared him for future glory, but had given him the assurance of a blessed immortality, of which the indwelling of the Holy Ghost was the earnest, i.e. a foretaste and pledge. 1:22; Ephesians 1:13,14; Romans 5:5; 8:16. According to the view given above of the context, the object of the apostle’s desire was not the resurrection, nor the change which the living believer is to experience at Christ’s coming, but the state of glory immediately subsequent to death. It is therefore of that the Holy Spirit is here declared to be the earnest. Elsewhere, as in Romans 8:11, the indwelling of the Spirit is represented as the pledge of the future life of the body, because he is the source of that life which the believer derives from Christ, and which pertains to the body as well as to the soul. Comp. 1 Corinthians 6:19.
All therefore in whom the Spirit dwells, i.e. manifests his permanent presence by producing within them the Christian graces, have the pledge of immediate admission into heaven when they die, and of a glorious resurrection when the Lord comes. 6. Therefore (we are) always confident, knowing that, whilst we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord.
The grammatical construction in this and the following verse, 8, is interrupted and irregular, which our translators have helped out by inserting the words we are , thus turning the participle qarrou~ntev into a verb. The unfinished sentence in v. 6 is resumed and completed in v. 8.
Omitting the words of resumption in v. 8, the whole sentence stands thus: “Being confident and knowing that whilst at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord, we are desirous (eujdokou~men ) rather to be absent from the body and present with the Lord.” This verse is introduced as a consequence of what precedes. ‘Having the earnest of the Spirit, therefore we are confident.’ This confidence is not a mere temporary feeling due to some transient excitement; but a permanent state of mind. Being always , pa>ntote on all occasions and under all circumstances, even in the midst of dangers and discouragements which, were it not for divine support, would produce despair. The ground of the boldness and confidence expressed by the word qarrou~ntev is not any thing in the believer; it is not his natural courage, not the strength of his convictions; but it is a state of mind produced by the indwelling of the Spirit, and the natural consequence of his presence. Being confident and knowing ; both these particles are grammatically constructed with the verb we are willing , eujdokou~men , in v. 8, and together express the ground of the apostle’s desire to be absent from the body. Knowing that, whilst we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord . The words ejndhme>w , to be at home (literally, among one’s people), and ejkdhme>w are opposed to each other. The figure is slightly changed from that used in the preceding verses. There it was a house, here a city, at least dh~mov , people, naturally suggests that idea.
Comp. Philippians 3:20; Hebrews 11:13; 13:14. 7. (For we walk by faith, not by sight.) This is a passing, parenthetical remark, intended as a confirmation of the preceding declaration. ‘We are absent from the Lord, for we now, in this life, walk by faith.’ The passage is parallel to Romans 8:24, “We are saved by hope (or in hope, i.e. in prospect).” Salvation is not a present, but a future good. So here, presence with the Lord is now a matter of faith, not of fruition. The condition of our present state of being is that of believing. The faith which is the evidence of things not seen and the substance (or assurance) of things hoped for, is the element in which we live, so long as we are not present with those things. Being the objects of faith they are of course absent. The preposition, dia> may have its ordinary force, “We walk by means of faith;” it is by faith we regulate our walk through life. Or it may be used here as in Romans 8:25. Hebrews 12:1, and elsewhere, to mark the attending circumstances, “we wait with patience,” “let us run with patience,” “we walk with faith.” And not by sight . The word ei+dov does not mean the sense of sight, but the thing seen, form, appearance, that which is the object of sight. In Luke 3:22, the Spirit is said to have descended swmatikw|~ ei]dei , in a bodily shape ; in 9:29 it is said of our Lord that the ei=dov tou~ prosw>pou aujtou~ , the fashion of his face was changed ; and in John 5:37 our Lord tells the Jews, speaking of the Father, “Ye have never heard his voice or seen his (ei=dov ) shape.” If this, the proper signification of the word, be retained, then ei=dov is the object of faith, the form and fashion of the things believed. Loco rei verbo acquiescimus , as Calvin expresses it. We are conversant with the report of heavenly things, not with the things themselves. We are absent, not present with them. In this case xvx means with . ‘We are not surrounded with the forms of things in heaven.’ It is no objection to this interpretation that the preposition dia> has a different force given to it in the first clause of the verse. ‘We walk by faith, and not with , or in presence of the objects of our faith.’ This change in the force of the same preposition in the same sentence is not unusual. See Hebrews 9:11,12; 10:20. The majority of commentators, however, depart from the proper signification of the word ei+dov and take it in the sense of o]yiv , because this agrees best with the antithesis to pi>stiv (faith ) and with the force of the preposition. “We walk by faith, not by sight;” we believe, but do not see things which govern our life. This, no doubt, is the idea which the apostle intended, although not precisely the form in which he has expressed it. 8. We are confident, (I say,) and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord .
The sentence begun and left incomplete in v. 6 is here resumed and carried out. Qarrou~men de> , we are of good courage . The particle de> may either serve to indicate the resumption of what he had begun to say in v. 6, or be taken adversatively in reference to v. 7. ‘We walk by faith, not by sight, nevertheless we are not discouraged.’ We are not only not desponding, but are so confident as to prefer to be absent from the body. Death is not an object of dread, but of desire. That the phrase “to be absent from the body” means to die is evident, not only from the import of the expression and from the parallel passage in Philippians 1:23, but also from the whole context, which treats of the apostle’s experience in view of death.
He was surrounded by dangers; he could scarcely bear up under the load of his sufferings; he was every day exposed to a violent death, which he had escaped hitherto only, as it were, by miracle; still he was not cast down.
He sustained his courage, and even desired to die. There can be no doubt that this verse is parallel with v. 4, where the apostle says he desired to be clothed upon, i.e. with his house which is from heaven. The object of desire is the same in both. It is also plain that in this verse it is absence from the body and presence with the Lord, not the being changed from corruptible to incorruptible without dying, that he earnestly longed for; and therefore this verse shows that the subject treated of in the context is the change which the believer experiences at death, and not that which those who are alive shall experience at Christ’s second coming. The words ejkdhme>w and ejndhme>w , here used as in v. 6, are best rendered ‘from home’ and ‘at home.’ ‘We would be from home as to the body, and at home with the Lord.’ The Lord is of course Christ, the supreme Lord, who in virtue of the fullness of the Godhead is the rightful sovereign and possessor of the universe, and in virtue of his dying for the redemption of his people, in a peculiar sense the sovereign and possessor of believers.
The Christian’s heaven is to be with Christ, for we shall be like him when we see him as he is. Into his presence the believer passes as soon as he is absent from the body and into his likeness the soul is at death immediately transformed; and when at the resurrection, the body is made like unto his glorious body, the work of redemption is consummated. Awaiting this consummation, it is an inestimable blessing to be assured that believers, as soon as they are absent from the body, are present with The Lord. 9. Wherefore we labor, that, whether present or absent, we may be accepted of him.
Wherefore , dio< kai> , wherefore also, i.e. because we desire to be with the Lord. Longing after communion with him produces the desire and secures the effort to be found acceptable to him. Those who have this hope purify themselves as he is pure. 1 John 3:3. It is impossible that those who regard the presence of Christ, or being with him, as heaven, should not desire and labor to be pleasing to him, by living in obedience to his commandments. We labor . The word filotimei~sqai means more than to labor. It signifies literally, to love honor, to be ambitious; and then to make any thing a point of honor, or to set one’s honor in doing or attaining something. So Paul says, he made it a point of honor not to build on another man’s foundation. Romans 15:20. And here he intends to say that as ambitious men desire and strive after fame, so Christians long and labor to be acceptable to Christ. Love to him, the desire to please him, and to be pleasing to him, animates their hearts and governs their lives, and makes them do and suffer what heroes do for glory. Whether present or absent . These words may be variously explained. 1. The sense may be, ‘Whether present in the body , or absent from the body ,’ i.e. whether living or dying. Comp. Romans 14:8, “Whether we live, we live unto the Lord; or whether we die, we die unto the Lord.” 1 Thessalonians 5:10, “Whether we wake or sleep, we live together with him.” The connection is then either with filotimou>meqa , ‘we strive whether in the body or out of the body; i.e. the desire in question is active as well in the living as the dead;’ or, as is better, with euja>restoi ei+nai ‘we strive to be acceptable whether in the body or absent from it.’ 2. The sense may be, ‘Whether present with the Lord , or absent from the Lord.’ This is only expressing the same idea in a different form.
Whether living or dead, as in Romans 14:8. 3. Meyer takes the words literally, ‘Whether at home or abroad.’ But this is utterly inconsistent with the context. The objection to the first interpretation, that the desire to be acceptable to the Lord when actually saved, must cease, inasmuch as the object is attained, is of no force.
The thing desired, to< zhtou>menon , as Chrysostom says, is that we may be pleasing to Christ whether here or there, whether in this world or the next. 10. For we must all appear before the judgment-seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things (done) in (his) body; according to that he hath done, whether (it be) good or bad .
In what precedes Paul had been speaking of himself. It was his own sufferings, hopes, and efforts which the occasion called upon him to exhibit. In all this, however, he spoke as a Christian, and therefore in the name of other Christians. In this verse he expressly comprehends others, and all others. ‘I strive to be acceptable to the Lord for we must all (I as well as all believers, and even all men) must, etc.’ As Christ is to decide upon our eternal destiny, it is of infinite moment that we should be acceptable, or well-pleasing, in his sight. We must all appear , fanerwqh~nai, This means either nothing more than a judicial appearance, as when any one is said to appear in court before a judge; or, as Bengel explains it, manifestos fieri cum occultis nostris , ‘we must all stand revealed in our true character before the judgment-seat of Christ.’ 1 Corinthians 4:5; Colossians 3:4. As there can be no disguise, no deception before an omniscient judge, Paul was assiduous in his efforts to be prepared to stand the scrutiny of an all-seeing eye. The judgment-seat of Christ ; bh~ma , literally, step , then a raised platform, or seat; most frequently used of the elevated seat on which the Roman magistrates sat to administer justice, an object of reverence and fear to all the people. As Christ is to be the judge, as all men are to appear before him, as the secrets of the heart are to be the grounds of judgment, it is obvious that the sacred writers believed Christ to be a divine person, for nothing less than omniscience could qualify any one for the office here ascribed to our Lord. That every one may receive , komi>zw , which in the active form means; to take up , in the middle, as here, to take for one’s self , properly to take or receive what is one’s due, or what on some ground one is entitled to. Matthew 25:27; Colossians 3:25; 2 Peter 2:13. The punishment which men are to receive will be what they have earned, and therefore what is in justice due to them. The reward of the righteous, although a matter of grace and not of justice, yet being, agreeably to the tenor of the covenant of grace, according to their works, it is of the nature of a reward.
The pay of a faithful soldier is a matter of debt, titles and estates are matters of favor. There is no inconsistency, therefore, in the Scriptures denying all merit to believers, and yet teaching that they shall be rewarded according to their works. We are said to receive the things done in the body , because the matter is conceived of, or is here represented as an investment.
Our acts are treasures laid up for the future, whether treasures of wrath, or treasures in heaven; and these (komizo>meqa ) we receive back. The word ta< dia< tou~ sw>matov may mean things (done) through or by the body .
Then bodily acts are taken for acts of all kinds. Compare Romans 8:13.
Or the dia> may be taken as in v. 7, (according to one interpretation of that verse,) as indicating the attending circumstance — with the body , i.e. while clothed with the body. This is the sense expressed in our version, which renders the clause “things (done) in the body,” although dia> of course does not mean in .
According to that he hath done, pro PAUL’S DEFENSE OF HIMSELF AGAINST THE CHARGE OF SELF-COMMENDATION. VS. 11-21.
He declares that he acted under a solemn sense of his responsibility to God, v. 11. This was not said with the view of commending himself; but rather to afford them the means of vindicating his character, v. 12. Whether his way of speaking of himself was extravagant or moderate, sane or insane, his motive in doing as he did was a sincere regard to the glory of God and the good of his church, v. 13. For the love of Christ constrained him to live, not for himself, but for him who died for him and rose again, vs. 14, 15. Acting under the control of this elevated principle, he was raised above the influence of external things. He did not judge of men by their external condition. He was a new creature in virtue of his union with Christ, vs. 16, 17. This great change which he had experienced was not self-wrought; it was of God, who is the author of the whole scheme of redemption. He is reconciled unto the world through Jesus Christ, and he has commissioned his ministers to proclaim this great truth to all men, vs. 18, 19. Therefore, the apostle, as an ambassador of God, exhorted men to accept of this offer of reconciliation, for which the most abundant provision had been made, in that God had made Christ to be sin for us, in order that we might be made the righteousness of God in him, vs. 20, 21. 11. Knowing therefore the terror of the Lord, we persuade men; but we are made manifest unto God; and I trust also are made manifest in your consciences.
This verse is an inference from what precedes, as is indicated by the particle (ou+n ) therefore . Paul had asserted his earnest desire to be acceptable to the Lord, and, therefore, knowing the terror of the Lord , etc.
In this version of the clause, to The evidence of the divinity of the Lord is thus seen to pervade the New Testament, and is not confined to a few isolated passages. Influenced, says the apostle, by the fear of the Lord, I persuade men . What this means is somewhat doubtful. The word pei>qein expresses the endeavor to convince, as in Acts 18:4, “He persuaded the Jews,” i.e. endeavored to convince them of the truth, and in Acts 28:23, “Persuading them concerning Jesus.” The apostle therefore may here mean that he endeavored to convince men of the truth of the gospel, i.e. to convert them, or bring them to the obedience of faith. Or, he may mean that he endeavored to convince them of his integrity, or that he was really governed by the fear of Christ, and was therefore sincere and honest, which in Corinth had been so unjustly called in question. This latter explanation is generally preferred, both because it suits the context, and because the following clause seems to require this idea. ‘We seek to convince men of our integrity, but God we need not convince, to him our inmost soul is manifest.’ The word (pei>qein ), however, also signifies to conciliate , to seek to please, as in Galatians 1:10, “Do we persuade (i.e. seek to please) men, or God.” Matthew 28:14; Acts 12:20; 1 John 3:19. Many prefer that sense here. Luther, in his idiomatic style, renders the clause, fahren wir schön mit den Leuten. The apostle is supposed to refer to the fact that he accommodated himself to all classes, and became all things to all men, that he might save some. 1 Corinthians 9:22.
Though he thus acted still he was manifest unto God; i.e. God knew the purity of his motives. This, however, is an idea foreign to the connection.
His accommodating himself to others was not the specific objection made against him by his enemies in Corinth, but, as appears from the previous chapters, his “lightness” or instability of purpose, and his consequent untrustworthiness as a man and as a teacher. Others again, take pei>qein in a bad sense. ‘We deceive men, (as our enemies say,) but are manifest to God.’ But this is utterly incongruous. How could Paul say in such a solemn connection, ‘I deceive men,’ and leave the saving clause, as my enemies say , to be supplied by the reader. The most |
