insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6232','1','47','8','15','15','<p>8:15 <i>As it is written: He that gathered much did not have too much, and he that gathered little had no lack</i>- The preceding verse has argued that Jewish Christian spiritual abundance should elicit material support from Gentile Christians. But that was not true to reality- for the Jerusalem Jewish Christians soon returned to Judaism, and were against Gentile Christians, being largely responsible for Paul\'s arrest when he arrived in Jerusalem with what had been collected, and probably behind much of the Judaist trouble making in the Christian churches he founded. And now he uses an argument which is not completely apposite to the case he is trying to make. In the wilderness, some families could collect more manna than others due to weak health or lack of opportunity. But they shared the manna collected in a collective way, according to Jewish tradition, so that nobody had too much or too less. Those who could collect more gave their abundance to those who could not gather enough. This posits a material giving of our superfluous material wealth to those in the community who have a deficit in material wealth, and in this way &quot;an equality&quot; is achieved. But :14 has argued differently- that Jerusalem\'s <i>spiritual </i>wealth should be matched by Gentile <i>material</i> giving. The argument from the Jewish manna tradition about the stronger sharing with the weaker (which is not Biblically attested) is therefore not completely relevant. The Biblical account is that each family should gather their own manna for their family; so that Jewish tradition may not even have been correct or historically actual in any case. I noted on :9 that Paul makes a similar poor argument and confusion of category concerning the wealth of the Lord Jesus. He confuses material and spiritual, in a way out of character for Paul the intellectual rabbi, whose arguments are usually logically tight, compelling and watertight. All this arose, I suggest, from a desperate desire to make things work out regarding the Poor Fund and his vision of Jewish-Gentile unity within the wider church. Many well intentioned Christian leaders have made similar mistakes when seeking to enforce a unity in practice upon believers who are simply not mature enough nor ready for it.</p><p>Paul pleads with Corinth to see the similarities between them and the ecclesia in the wilderness; he wants them to personalize it all. He sees their gathering and redistribution of wealth as exactly analogous to Israel&rsquo;s gathering of manna (2 Cor. 8:15)- and he so wishes his Corinthians to think themselves into Israel&rsquo;s shoes. For then they would realize that as Israel had to have a willing heart to give back to God the wealth of Egypt which He had given them, so they were to have a willing heart in being generous to their poorer brethren (Ex. 35:5 = 2 Cor. 8:12). And they would have realized that as &ldquo;last year&rdquo; they had made this offer (2 Cor. 8:10 Gk.), so the year before, Israel had received Egypt&rsquo;s wealth with a similar undertaking to use it for the Lord&rsquo;s cause. As Moses had to remind them a second time of their obligations in Ex. 35, so Paul had to bring it again before Corinth. And if they had seen these similarities, they would have got the sense of Paul&rsquo;s lament that there was not one wise hearted man amongst them- for the &ldquo;wise hearted&rdquo; were to convert Israel&rsquo;s gold and silver into tools for Yahweh&rsquo;s service (Ex. 35:10 = 1 Cor. 6:5; 2 Cor. 10:12). &nbsp;</p><p>They were fed with manna one day at a time- this is so stressed (Ex. 16:4,19,20). There was to be no hoarding of manna- anything extra was to be shared with others (Ex. 16:8; 2 Cor. 8:15). But we live in a world where the financial challenges of retirement, housing, small family size if any family at all... mean that there appears no other option but to \'hoard manna\' for the future. To some extent this may be a reflection of the way that life in these very last days is indeed quite different to anything previously known in history; but all the same, we face a very real challenge. Are we going to hoard manna, for our retirement, for our unknown futures? Or will we rise up to the challenge to trust in God\'s day by day provision, and share what\'s left over? &quot;Give us this day our bread-for-today&quot; really needs to be prayed by us daily. Let\'s give full weight to the Lord\'s command to pray for only &quot;our daily bread&quot;, the daily rations granted to a soldier on active duty. It\'s almost impossible to translate this term adequately in English. In the former USSR and Communist East Germany (DDR), there was the idea that nobody in a Socialist state should go hungry. And so if you were hungry in a restaurant after eating, you had the right to ask for some food, beyond what you paid for. In the former East Germany, the term <i>S&auml;ttigungsbeilage </i>was used for this in restaurants- the portion of necessity. It\'s this food we should ask God for- the food to keep us alive, the food which a Socialist restaurant would give you for free. We shouldn\'t be thinking in terms of anything more than this. It\'s an eloquent essay in what our attitude to wealth, materialism and long term self-provision ought to be.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6233','1','47','8','16','16','<p>8:16 <i>But thanks be to God, who put the same earnest care for you into the heart of Titus- </i>We note that God can act directly upon the human heart. Although it may be that again Paul is exaggerating- for he had surely briefed Titus of his own expectations and intended outcomes, and I have argued on chapter 7 that Paul chose to over interpret the report of Titus when he returned to Paul from Corinth. &quot;The same earnest care&quot; refers to how the Macedonians had an &quot;earnestness&quot; (:8 s.w.) for the project. Titus and the Macedonians had the same urgency for the project, and Paul wants Corinth to likewise respond &quot;urgently&quot;- for the Greek for &quot;earnest care&quot; carries the basic idea of haste. The urgency was because Corinth had not in fact been collecting for the Fund as they had intimated they were doing, and something at least had to be contributed from them for Paul\'s boasting about them to be validated, and for the project to work out.</p><p>There is an urgency in the mediation of mercy towards others. When Paul thanks God that Titus has a heart of &ldquo;earnest care&rdquo; for the Corinthians, he uses a Greek word <i>spoude</i> which literally means &ldquo;speed&rdquo;, and is elsewhere translated &ldquo;haste&rdquo; &ndash; as well as &ldquo;haste&rdquo; and &ldquo;business&rdquo; (2 Cor. 8:16). The heart that really cares will be characterized by a speedy and quick response, not a careful weighing up of a situation, nor a resignation of responsibilities to ponderous committees. See on Lk. 14:5.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6234','1','47','8','17','17','<p>8:17 <i>For he indeed accepted our appeal; but being very earnest, he went to you of his own accord</i>- As noted on :16, it was Paul who appealed to Titus to go to Corinth and get them to donate to the Fund. But he says that Titus also went of his own will, in response to God confirming his \'earnestness\' with more \'earnest care\' placed in his heart (:16). We see here a cameo of how Christian action works out in practice. There are various stimuli- a request from another brother, a passion placed in our heart, and our own freewill passion of our own accord. God will not force anyone to work for Him against their will; but He will place callings in their heart, and confirm their response to it.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6235','1','47','8','18','18','<p>8:18 <i>And we have sent together with him the brother whose praise in the gospel is spread through all the churches</i>- The obvious questions are as to who this brother was, and why the anonymity? Another brother is apparently mentioned anonymously in :22- although that may be another description of the same brother. If the anonymity was to preserve from persecution, why would a specific brother be targeted for persecution for being involved in a welfare project? If persecution is indeed a reason, then one suspects it was Paul\'s Jewish enemies who were trying to stymy the project. Which is why when Paul arrives at Jerusalem with what had been collected, the Jews get him arrested. And with the Judaist influence at Corinth being such a problem for Paul, we can imagine it was that same Jewish influence which was seeking to hamper Paul\'s pet project. The brother with a good reputation amongst the churches was Timothy (Acts 16:2,3). 2 Cor. 1:1 states that this letter was written by Paul and Timothy; it could be that although the letter was written by both of them, Paul is writing here, and referring to his co-author in this indirect way because that was appropriate literary protocol at the time. Paul wants to remind the audience of Timothy\'s strong qualifications, but he is aware that this a letter ostensibly co-authored by himself and Timothy. So he has to refer to Timothy in this indirect manner.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6236','1','47','8','19','19','<p>8:19 <i>And not only this but he is the one who was appointed by the churches to travel with us in this act of grace, which is administered by us to the glory of the Lord and to show our own willingness to help</i>- Paul carefully doesn\'t define which churches had appointed this brother Timothy? to carry the collection. We can assume they were churches founded by Paul and loyal to him. What would have added to the credibility and success of the project was if those &quot;churches&quot; included the Jerusalem church and other Jewish churches in Palestine. The group of brethren who took the gathering to Jerusalem in Acts 20:3 were certainly pro-Paul loyalists and include no &quot;circumcision&quot; Christians. So whilst Paul was right to seek to glorify the Lord and to administer the project with integrity, placing himself beyond reproach as to financial mismanagement, the whole approach was forcing something on to others which they were clearly not supportive or nor willing to support. This is the problem with obsessive enforcement of projects upon others. Paul was clearly the administrator of the project, as he says himself here. And he simply lacked credibility with the hard core circumcision party who dominated the Jerusalem church; this was not his fault, indeed there was likely nobody who had the confidence of all the various factions to be able to pull off a project of this scope and scale. &quot;To show our own willingness to help&quot; is an attempt to translate two Greek words which literally mean &quot;your ready mind&quot; (as AV). The text could be stating that the &quot;act of grace&quot;, the giving to the Fund in response to God\'s grace, would glorify both the Lord Jesus and also their willingness to assist in His work. But offering glorification of self as a reason to donate is really getting desperate.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6237','1','47','8','20','20','<p>8:20 <i>This was to avoid being blamed by anyone in this matter of charity which is ministered by us</i>- The &quot;matter of charity&quot;, AV &quot;this abundance&quot;, uses a term which concerns a large sum: &quot;lavish gift&quot; (NAB), &quot;large sum&quot; (NJB), &quot;large fund&quot; (JB). But the Corinthians hadn\'t yet donated anything, and as noted above, time was passing, Paul didn\'t want them to be burdened, and he was looking for just a symbolic donation from them. But he uses this term because of the huge significance which he saw in their donations. It really seems Paul was exaggerating things in his mind. Paul wisely got others involved in transporting the funds so that his integrity could not be questioned.&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6238','1','47','8','21','21','<p>8:21 <i>For we take care to do things honourably, not only in the sight of the Lord but also in the sight of men</i>- This is a quotation from Prov. 3:4 LXX. It is not enough to reason that we are correct before God; if we have a sense of His glory and our responsibility as His witnesses in this world, then we must be careful to appear correct before men too. Not because we wish their approbation, but because we seek to glorify God in the eyes of this world.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6239','1','47','8','22','22','<p>8:22 <i>And we have sent with them our brother, whom we have many times proved earnest in many things; but now, much more earnest, by reason of the great confidence which he has in you</i>- This could be a parallel description of the brother in :18. Or it could be another anonymous brother. The word &quot;earnest&quot; is used elsewhere only of Onesiphorus (2 Tim. 1:17), whose name means literally \'the bearer / carrier of profit\', which would be relevant to bearing / carrying the Poor Fund to Jerusalem. I noted on 7:16 that Paul\'s &quot;great confidence&quot; in the Corinthians was because he wished to see them in a positive light, he over interpreted the report from Titus as meaning that they were indeed who he wished they were. And here too, this anonymous brother is described as having the same &quot;great confidence&quot; in the Corinthians. But as noted throughout chapter 7, I suggest that this is Paul projecting onto another brother his own mistaken feelings towards the Corinthians. He has decided that this anonymous brother will have the same view of them as he does. This is not to say that the record here is not inspired, nor that the Spirit was not with Paul. But as we read of David\'s bitter ranting against his enemies, his feelings on the cusp of emotion are recorded in God\'s words, so the record of Paul\'s feelings for the Corinthians are recorded- contradictory as they are, just as human emotion is often self-contradictory when love and personal investment are involved.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6240','1','47','8','23','23','<p>8:23 <i>Whether any inquire about Titus, he is my partner and my fellow-worker toward you; or our brothers, they are the messengers of the churches, they are the glory of Christ</i>- The Corinthians knew Titus, for he had already visited them. So this \'enquiry\' would not be in the sense that they didn\'t know who he was. It was Titus who had visited them and \'begun\' the project with them, and he had just returned to Paul from a visit to Corinth (7:13). And Paul was now sending him to them again in the hope they would give him the promised donations. So the \'enquiry\' was rather of another kind, reflecting a hostility towards Titus and the brothers with him. This reveals that Paul\'s claim about the mutual love between Titus and the Corinthians was again an emotional exaggeration, and he had to as it were come down to earth and in reality defend Titus against the scepticism the Corinthians had about him.&nbsp;</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6241','1','47','8','24','24','<p>8:24 <i>Therefore show them in the presence of the churches the proof of your love and of our boasting on your behalf</i>- Paul dealt with a very difficult situation in Corinth by being totally open hearted, when his natural sense must have been to be very cagey with them (2 Cor. 6:11). Indeed, some of his most revealing autobiographical passages are found in 2 Corinthians, as he opens his heart to them. And he encouraged them to likewise <i>openly show before the ecclesias</i> their love for others (2 Cor. 8:24 s.w.). He surely had in mind the Lord&rsquo;s teaching that our light should shine before others, because all things will ultimately be brought into the open (Lk. 8:16,17). This doesn&rsquo;t just refer to preaching; it refers to an open shining out of whatever spirituality we have, to everyone.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6242','1','47','9','1','1','<p>9:1 <i>For concerning the service to the saints, it is superfluous for me to write to you</i>- I have noted throughout commentary on chapters 7 and 8 that Paul\'s arguments are very emotional and desperate in many ways. He is seeking some actual real donation from the Corinthians as they had earlier promised. And he is using every possible argument, including some desperate ones, to get them to agree to give Titus and his team some cash or material donations when they come. So within the two chapters of high pressure reasoning which we have in chapters 8 and 9, it is hardly true that half way through he here says that it was really unnecessary for him to be writing to them about their donations, because he is so sure they are going to donate. He says he has &quot;no need&quot; (GNB) to be writing this because he knows their willing hearts (:2). So... why then write two chapters of desperate urging if it was unnecessary? Again (see on 8:9,15), Paul\'s logic and persuasion is uncharacteristically weak and uncompelling.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6243','1','47','9','2','2','<p>9:2- see on Jn. 19:39; Rom. 11:14; 2 Cor. 8:11.</p><p><i>For I know your readiness, of which I boast on your behalf to those in Macedonia, that Achaia has been prepared for the past year</i>- Paul could have taken the view that they were all talk, as people often are when it comes to money matters. Instead he boasts of their talk about wanting to support his project. In all human relationships, we can take a cup half full or cup half empty approach. Paul was so \'in love\' with the weak Corinthians that he acted as if he really believed them, when clearly all the evidence was that he should have been wary of their promises. After all, these are the same Corinthians to whom he wrote 1 Corinthians. It was surely an exaggeration to say that Achaia Corinth and the churches around it had been &quot;prepared&quot; for a year. Prepared to give? Or does he imply they had collected each week as he advised in 1 Corinthians 16, and were now ready for the donations to be picked up by Titus and his team, in order to be taken to Jerusalem? According to the usage of &quot;prepared&quot; in :3, that seems more the idea. As suggested on chapter 7, this is the boasting of a man deeply in love with a woman who just isn\'t going to come through on his expectations and hopes for her. Hope had morphed into reality in Paul\'s mind.</p><p><i>And your zeal has stirred up very many of them</i>- Paul could bid men follow him, that they might follow Christ. And the inspired word does bid us go down the road of comparing our behaviour with that of others. Paul boasted of the Corinthians&rsquo; enthusiasm in planning to make donations in order to provoke the ecclesias in Macedonia to a like generosity. Their zeal &ldquo;provoked very many&rdquo; (AV). We should provoke one another to love and good works, by example (Heb. 10:24). This is why Christian fellowship is built into our spiritual journey- for we take strength from others as well as from the Lord directly. He mediates His encouragement through others.&nbsp;</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6244','1','47','9','3','3','<p>9:3 <i>But I have sent the brothers, that our boasting on your behalf may not be made void in this respect. That, even as I said: You may be prepared</i>- Paul had already sent Titus and the two anonymous brothers mentioned in chapter 8, and it would seem they were carrying 2 Corinthians in their hands to give to the Corinthians. He asks them now to &quot;be prepared&quot;, i.e. to hand over some actual donations; whereas he had boasted to others that Corinth was already &quot;prepared&quot; (:2). He wants them to live up to his exaggerated hopes and expectations of them. And this is exactly what causes so much friction in human relationships, especially in the spiritual sphere.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6245','1','47','9','4','4','<p>9:4 <i>Lest by any means, if there come with me- </i>This sounds as if Paul was actually going to accompany Titus, but according to how he has earlier written of his travel plans, we can assume that Paul intended himself to come to Corinth after Titus had actually secured the donations from them. Hence in :5 he writes of Titus and his team going on ahead of him to Corinth. But in 13:2 Paul speaks as if his coming to Corinth was under question, and if he did visit them again, it would be in serious judgment upon them. We can conclude that this letter is a \'flow of consciousness\' letter, Paul is writing down his thoughts and feelings as they come to him, in line with his policy of being completely open hearted to the Corinthians (see on 6:11). He writes here as if all is going to work out, Titus will prepare them for the donations and they will make them, and then Paul and some Macedonians will come and be present when the donations are collected and taken on towards Jerusalem. But in 13:2 he concludes the letter by writing that his visit is in question and it will be for judgment of the Corinthians. This kind of flow of consciousness writing is to be found often in the Psalms, Lamentations and at times in prophets like Jeremiah. It is all inspired, but gives us an insight into the internal thought processes of believers, with all their anger and irrationality and the contradictions of thought which we all experience as we cope with situations.&nbsp;</p><p><i>Some Macedonians and find you unprepared, we (not to mention you) would be embarrassed for my being so confident of your generosity- </i>These Macedonians were presumably Sopater, Aristarchus and Secundus, mentioned in Acts 20:4 as those travelling to Jerusalem with the collection. Paul mentions his own embarrassment first, and theirs only secondarily, in passing. He had too much personally invested in the project. Loss of face was far more significant in the first century world than we can imagine. To reason \'You had better donate or else I shall be embarrassed\' is not a particularly strong argument, and reflects the urgent desperation Paul felt to by all means make this project work. But don\'t be too hard on Paul- he was sincerely motivated, but like many believers of his personality type, his pet project in the Lord\'s service had become obsessive for him.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6246','1','47','9','5','5','<p>9:5- see on 2 Cor. 8:9.</p><p><i>So I thought it necessary to urge the brothers to go on ahead to you- </i>The \'urging\' suggests Titus and his team were not altogether confident of the whole plan, and Paul had to urge them. This gives the lie to Paul\'s rejoicing in chapter 7 that Titus had been welcomed by the Corinthians and was relieved and confident in their giving. That, I suggested, was written on the cusp of the joy which comes from the love which believes all things, on the slenderest and most unrealistic of evidence.</p><p><i>And arrange in advance for the gift you have promised, so that it may be ready as a willing gift, not, as it were, as an extortion</i>- Again there appears a tension within Paul\'s argument. He says that the gift must be &quot;willing&quot; and not extorted or pressured out of them. But he has just asked them to make the gift lest they be ashamed (:4). We are left with the impression of high pressure tactics being palmed off as \'things which don\'t really need to be said but I\'ll just mention them\' (:1). &quot;Extortion&quot; is the word for coveting. We can give money generously, apparently, but do so from a motive of <i>covetousness</i>- the very opposite of true generosity and acceptable sacrifice. We can covet respect, admiration from our brethren... and not give as a pure and private reflection of the endless grace we have received.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6247','1','47','9','6','6','<p>9:6 <i>But this I say: He that sows sparingly shall reap also sparingly; and he that sows bountifully shall reap also bountifully- </i>Paul now gives a more spiritual reason for their generosity. Our generosity to others now will lead to a reaping at the time of harvest, which is at the Lord\'s return. And yet from 1 Cor. 15 we know that some of the Corinthians didn\'t believe in the Lord\'s resurrection and were sceptical of a claim of future harvest at the resurrection. So the whole appeal was at a level inappropriate to the spiritual level of the Corinthians; and we can learn from that in our dealings with weaker believers. &quot;Bountifully&quot; is the same word used in :5 for &quot;gift&quot;; the AV in :5 brings out the connection by calling their &quot;gift&quot; a &quot;bounty&quot;. They would receive again the &quot;bounty&quot; or gift they sowed- but at the harvest, which 1 Cor. 15 has explained is at the Lord\'s return and will be in the form of the nature of our resurrection body. Our generosity now has eternal consequence. And as 1 Cor. 15 points out, there is an out of proportion increase between the seed sown and the body that later arises. We don\'t just get what we sow, but so much more. In the end, this is a question of levels. It\'s not that the &quot;sparing&quot; shall not be saved; but rather that they shall not eternally reap the blessings of their generosity in this brief mortal life.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6248','1','47','9','7','7','<p>9:7 <i>Let each man do according to what he intends in his heart- </i>The Greek suggests that they were to do this in the future (AV &quot;so let him give&quot;). Which rather gives the lie to Paul\'s over enthusiastic claim that they had already started donating in actuality (8:10). He is asking them to now give something, even on a symbolic level. But for all the desperation of his position and pressuring of the Corinthians to donate, Paul does to his credit recognize that all giving must be from the heart. It was there in the heart that the Holy Spirit resided, at least potentially; and Paul is again hinting that their giving would be actualized by allowing the path of the Spirit in their thinking and actions. Giving according to the heart is an allusion to Israel donating towards the work of the tabernacle (Ex. 25:2; 35:21). The new tabernacle is the poorest of the Christian believers.</p><p><i>Not grudgingly, or of necessity- </i>Yet some of the reasons Paul urges for their giving were indeed from a motive &quot;of necessity&quot;, e.g. to save face (:4). As discussed previously, this is another example of apparent contradiction within Paul\'s reasoning, so desperate is he to see this project work, at least on some level.</p><p><i>For God loves a cheerful giver- </i>The quotation is from Prov. 22:8 LXX &quot;God blesses a cheerful and giving man&quot;. The blessing may be alluded to in :8-10 where the idea is that God blesses the generous with even more to give. Paul has written of how the abounding joy of the poor brethren in Macedonia abounded unto a generosity which was actually beyond their means (2 Cor. 8:2). And here when he goes on to speak of how God loves a &ldquo;<i>cheerful</i> giver&rdquo; (2 Cor. 9:7), he uses a word which James Strong defines as meaning &lsquo;hilarious&rsquo;, from the Greek <i>hilaros</i>. And yet our giving tends to so often be a matter of phlegmatic planning, to salve an otherwise uneasy conscience. But the picture Paul paints is of a man or woman <i>hilarious</i> in their giving to the poor. This isn&rsquo;t the giving which watches for the response, and is offended if it isn&rsquo;t what we expect. This is a picture of giving from the joy of giving, reflecting the Father&rsquo;s generosity to us. And this, Paul says, <i>God loves</i>. Quite simply. We touch the heart of Almighty God by such giving. And yet this hilarious giving isn&rsquo;t merely the emotion of a moment, the sort of thing played upon in many a Pentecostal gathering. It is to be a giving as a person &lsquo;purposes in their heart&rsquo; (2 Cor. 9:7); and again, Strong challenges us with his definition of the Greek word translated &lsquo;purposes&rsquo;: &ldquo;to <i>choose</i> for oneself <i>before</i> another thing (<i>prefer</i>), that is, (by implication) to <i>propose</i> (<i>intend</i>)&rdquo;. But having made this conscious decision, to put, say, Sister Svetlana&rsquo;s need before your preference for a new piece of furniture, we are to perform the actual giving with the hilarity of the cheerful giver. And as we know, Paul makes the point that such acts of generosity are acts of sowing, bringing forth fruits of righteousness; and the Lord will grant us yet more seed to sow in the same way. Forsaking all we have may not mean we are left with nothing.&nbsp;</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6249','1','47','9','8','8','<p>9:8 <i>And God is able to make all grace abound to you, so that you, having always all sufficiency in everything, may abound to every good work</i>- Paul often uses <i>charis</i>, &quot;gift&quot; or &quot;grace&quot;, in connection with the gift of the Holy Spirit. This gift, he feels, should elicit giving and grace within us, which is why in this section he puts &quot;grace&quot; for their giving to the Jerusalem Poor Fund. They had been asked to abound in this grace (see on 8:7), which in practice meant giving to the poor; and God was able in turn to make all grace abound to them. In this sense we receive grace for grace (Jn. 1:16). The gift of grace is not just a one off gift at baptism; in response to how we use it, so it will be given yet more to us. The simple principle is that God will empower us to do good works; we cannot blame a lack of good works on God not having empowered us.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6250','1','47','9','9','9','<p>9:9 <i>As it is written: He has scattered abroad, He has given to the poor. His righteousness abides for ever</i>- The generosity of God is to be a direct pattern for our own. And His giving is liberal and abundant, and is part of a righteousness which is eternal. Giving now has eternal consequence.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6251','1','47','9','10','10','<p>9:10 <i>And He that supplies seed to the sower and bread for food shall supply and multiply your seed for sowing- </i>Seed is multiplied in order to be sowed, and not to be hoarded. Paul is not simply saying that if wealth comes our way, it is in order to give it away. For he was writing (according to 1 Cor. 1) to those who were not &quot;mighty&quot; in this world or secular reckoning. He is writing to low wage earners, and encouraging <i>them</i> to be generous with what they had, and to believe that they will be given &quot;seed&quot; in order to sow it by being generous to others. If we want to be sowers, which is part of our Christian calling, then God will give us the seed to sow. God will empower us to meet the needs and fulfil the callings received. 2 Thess. 1:11 is explicit about this too: &quot;To which end we also pray always for you, that our God may count you worthy of your calling and fulfil every desire of goodness and work of faith, with power&quot;. The desire to do good shall be fulfilled by God\'s empowerment. This takes quite some faith to believe, and it seems the Corinthians also stumbled at it. But the principles here stand true as a challenge for all time.</p><p>Paul likens generosity to sowing seed. If we do this for our poor brethren, then God will multiply our seed for sowing (RV); He will give us yet more with which to be generous with. We are &ldquo;enriched unto all liberality&rdquo; (2 Cor. 9:11 RV)- this is <i>why</i> we receive anything, to be liberal with it. And thus he writes in conclusion of &ldquo;the proving of you by this ministration&rdquo; (2 Cor. 9:13 RV). This brief but vital teaching of Paul here is a proof of our spirituality. Our response to ministering to others is a proving of us. It&rsquo;s as simple and as clear as that. And remember that Paul was writing these words to a <i>poor</i> ecclesia, amongst whom there were not many wealthy folk (1 Cor. 1:26-28). Paul speaks of joy as a motive for generosity.</p><p><i>And increase the fruits of your righteousness- </i>The Old Testament allusions are to the LXX of Is. 55:10 and Hos. 10:12. These passages imply an eternal quality to the righteousness, just as God\'s righteousness abides for ever (:9). The fruit of our generosity in this temporal life is eternal.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6252','1','47','9','11','11','<p>9:11- see on 2 Cor. 6:10.<br /><i>You will be enriched in every way for all your generosity, which through us will produce thanksgiving to God</i>- &quot;Enriched... for&quot; could be translated as AV &quot;enriched... to&quot;. Either way, the idea is in harmony with the teaching of the preceding verses, that we are enriched so that we may be generous- in whatever terms that enrichment comes. As stated earlier, we are given seed in order to sow it, rather than hoard it. Any enrichment for generosity is not as it were a reward for having been generous, but merely a provision to continue doing it. The fruit which sprung up from the seed sown, or the enrichment caused by generosity, is envisaged as being in spiritual terms. Thanksgiving to God would be produced as a result of their generosity. But again, the argument is true as it stands, but appears somewhat forced- please give your money as I direct you, so that I and my team can then give thanksgiving to God. I have noted through chapters 7-9 that Paul seems to use every argument possible to persuade the Corinthians to part with their cash, and at times his desperation is apparent. The idea of enrichment however is how Paul opened the Corinthian correspondence, reminding them that they had been &quot;enriched in every way (1 Cor. 1:5) in having been given the Spirit in so many different ways- even though they were &quot;not spiritual&quot; (1 Cor. 3:1) because they had not let the Spirit function. The similarity of wording is significant. The giving or grace of the Corinthians was to be enabled and rooted in the Spirit <i>charis</i> or gift / enrichment they had been given. It was in this sense that Paul could say he had &quot;made many rich&quot; by his preaching ministry (2 Cor. 6:10).</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6253','1','47','9','12','12','<p>9:12<i> For the administration of this charity not only provides for the wants of the saints, but abounds also through many thanksgivings to God</i>- Paul was clearly the administrator of the charity project, although he sees himself as a \'deacon\' or servant of it (NEV &quot;administration&quot;). And yet it is hard to avoid the conclusion that the project and its success had become obsessive to him. He sees it is a way in which poverty could be relieved, but much praise and glory elicited for God and His grace, if orthodox Jewish Christians in Jerusalem could fall to their knees in praise and thanks for their Gentile brethren\'s generosity to them in Corinth. Visions of Christian unity are likewise not unknown today to become obsessive, and those involved in them become too personally caught up in their success or failure. I pointed out on chapters 7 and 8 that there is no evidence that the famine continued in Palestine as severely nor as long as Paul\'s passion for the Poor Fund required; to the point that he had to ask others to pray that when he finally arrived in Jerusalem with the food and cash, it would be accepted by the brethren (Rom. 15:31).</p><p>Thanksgiving to God and His glorification can be elicited in multiple ways, and even if the Poor Fund project failed, glory to God could surely be achieved another way. But it seems too much had been personally invested in it. The fascinating story is recorded for our learning, and the lessons are powerful. The truth is that when Paul arrived in Jerusalem with the Poor Fund, the Jerusalem Jewish Christians provoked a riot, were certainly not happy to see him, forced him to demonstrate loyalty to the Jewish law, and I have argued in commentary on Acts- got him arrested and imprisoned. It is fantasy to imagine Paul arriving with those carrying the money and goods, and the saints in Jerusalem falling to their knees in praise to God for Paul\'s initiative and administration of the Corinthian\'s generosity. That\'s just not what happened. Paul\'s project was intended indeed to elicit many thanksgivings to God, but that was not the outcome. He writes here of what he hoped and dearly wanted to happen as if it had happened. There is in Hebrew and he clearly thought in Hebrew whilst writing in Greek a prophetic perfect tense, whereby God often expresses His hopes for the future in the past tense, as if they have happened. And Paul does the same here, writing of how his project has resulted i.e. surely <i>will</i> result in thanksgiving as a result of Corinthian generosity. The idea that this refers to some previous support of the Poor Fund doesn\'t really fit with the flow of the argument in this chapter. Paul had been asked by the Jerusalem elders to &quot;remember the Jewish Christian, perhaps specifically Jerusalem poor&quot; in return for not demanding the circumcision of Gentile converts (Gal. 2:10). Paul dearly wished to be acceptable to the Jerusalem elders; for him culturally, Jerusalem was still the centre of the world. Perhaps his obsession with the Poor Fund arose partly from his desperation to be acceptable and pleasing to the Jerusalem elders. It would have been so very hard for Paul to experience a hostile reception by his Jerusalem brethren and perhaps a refusal of what support he had managed to gather for them. He was then forced by them to prove his orthodoxy, and it seems the Jerusalem Jewish Christians were the ones who orchestrated his arrest and imprisonment. The Lord surely worked to correct Paul\'s desire to please men.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6254','1','47','9','13','13','<p>9:13 <i>By their approval of this service-</i> &quot;Their approval&quot; is an attempt to grapple with what seems an awkward phrase, rendered correctly by AV &quot;By the experiment of this&quot; service. Paul rather likes the idea of things being an experiment; for he has written earlier using the same word about his command for them to separate from the immoral brother (2:9). This was a test or experiment of their loyalty, rather than being necessary for the sake of that brother or those whom he had wronged (7:12). There must be divisions within the church so that the tested / experimented with / approved might be made manifest (1 Cor. 11:19). In these kinds of issues- division in the church, a case of an immoral brother or a project to support poor believers of a different ethnicity-&nbsp; the crucial issue is how we respond to the test or &quot;experiment&quot; which the situations provide. The apparently central issues (e.g. the poor at Jerusalem or the immoral brother) are in this sense the furniture of the scene. It is how we respond to the tests or experiments which is so critical. </p><p><i>They glorify God for your loyalty which you confess to the gospel of Christ, and for the generosity of your contribution to them and to all</i>- As noted above, Paul is speaking of his hopes as if they had actually happened. The Jerusalem Christians were not glorifying God for Corinthian generosity at that time; and there is no evidence they ever did, or that Corinth gave anything. The use of the word &quot;loyalty&quot; is unfortunate because the careful reader is already suspicious that Paul is too concerned with Corinthian loyalty to him and his pet project. It is also simply not the case that by not supporting a particular welfare initiative, we are being disloyal to the Gospel. Again the argument is high pressure and not completely sound. Here at the very end of the section about the Poor Fund, Paul perhaps betrays the way that what he hopes for in the Corinthians is what he wishes to see and states as having happened. He says that the Jerusalem poor are praising God for the way the Corinthians are generous to them &quot;and to all&quot;. But this was surely the fantasy of love. There was no evidence the Corinthians were donating &quot;to all&quot;, and all the other evidence in the letters reveals their serious immorality and spiritual weakness.</p><p>Initially, the Corinthians agreed to take up a collection for their poor Jewish brethren. Paul later encouraged them in this when their will to carry it out flagged, but the initial inspiration was from &quot;the obedience that accompanies your confession of the gospel of Christ&quot; (2 Cor. 9:13 NIV). That Gospel doesn\'t state that to obey it, one must give money to the poor believers in Jerusalem. But Paul perceived that <i>effectively</i> it did; this was, in their context, part and parcel of confessing the Gospel. We learn from this that the Gospel has abiding power to transform lives after conversion as well as before.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6255','1','47','9','14','14','<p>9:14 <i>While they also, with prayers on your behalf, long after you by reason of the exceeding grace of God in you</i>- I noted earlier that Paul had exaggerated about the Corinthians supposedly longing for Titus and himself. And he makes a similar exaggeration here. The Jerusalem Christians likely had little knowledge of the Corinthians, and so the language of longing and praying is exaggeration. It was Paul who uses the word &quot;long after you&quot; several times about his longing after his brethren; and he imagines that the Corinthians have the same attitude to their brethren as he does. The grace (gift) &quot;in you&quot; is a reference to the gift of the Holy Spirit in the hearts of the Corinthians, within them, which Paul has so often alluded to in his Corinthian correspondence. He urges the Corinthians to make use of that gift, to allow the path of the Spirit, which would elicit in them a giving of grace to others. But it is questionable whether in reality the Jerusalem Jewish Christians longed for the Corinthians upon that basis. But in theory, yes- the &quot;fellowship of the Spirit&quot; was and is a fellowship experienced on the basis of each believer having the Spirit at work in their hearts, and responding to it. This creates a fellowship with others who are allowing the same process.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6256','1','47','9','15','15','<p>9:15 <i>Thanks be to God for His unspeakable gift</i>- As noted on :14, the gift in view is that of the Spirit, within the hearts of the believers. Paul thanks God for it, with the implication that the Corinthians should be more appreciative of and responsive to it.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6257','1','47','10','1','1','<p>10:1 <i>Now I Paul-</i> The appeal to support the Jerusalem Poor Fund in chapters 7-9 is now finished, and Paul now returns to tackle the Corinthians over their serious spiritual inadequacies. For all the love, enthusiasm, imputation of righteousness, the loving them with a love which imagines good and exaggerated their spirituality- Paul was also realistically aware that they were heading the wrong way in their spiritual lives. &quot;Now I...&quot; suggests that the argument flows straight on from the preceding chapters. Chapters 7-9 appear to present the Corinthians in an unrealistically positive light, but now Paul turns to realities. The break in style is such that some have suggested that chapters 7-9 form a separate piece of correspondence. But &quot;Now I...&quot; indicates that Paul is fully aware of what he has just written, and is now returning to dealing with their suspicions of him and need for exhortation. </p><p><i>I myself urge you by the meekness and gentleness of Christ- </i>&quot;I myself&quot; emphasizes his personal approach to them. And he himself was acting as Christ to them, with His gentleness. His sarcasm and anger later in this letter must be read therefore either as a departure from his aim as here stated, or we are to read it as all the same expressing the Lord\'s meekness and gentleness. &quot;I beseech you by the meekness and gentleness of Christ&quot; is surely a reference to the Lord\'s description of Himself as being, there and then, &quot;meek and lowly of heart&quot; (Mt. 11:29; 2 Cor. 10:1). Paul\'s point is that as the Lord was in His life, so He is now, in His heavenly glory.</p><p><i>I who in your presence am lowly among you-</i> &quot;Lowly&quot; was likely a reference to how his critics described his literal presence, perhaps hinting at some physical deformity. But the ultimate &quot;lowly&quot; one was of course the Lord Jesus, and Paul has just stated that he seeks to relate to them as Him, with His meekness. For the same word is used by the Lord in saying that He was &quot;lowly in heart&quot; (Mt. 11:29). And he has earlier stated that he feels &quot;lowly&quot; because of the bad state of affairs in Corinth (2 Cor. 7:6 s.w.). The Lord\'s lowliness of mind (s.w.) was at its zenith during His time of dying (Phil. 2:3), and Paul sets that humbling of mind as the pattern for every Christian. </p><p><i>But being absent am bold toward you</i>- The contrast is between being present and yet being now absent from them. He is keenly aware of his absence from them (10:11; 13:2,10). But he warns them that he will visit them and be in presence as he is when absent in his letters (:11). He earlier warned them that although he was absent yet through the Spirit he was present with them (1 Cor. 5:3; also Col. 2:5 &quot;Though I be absent in the flesh, yet am I with you in the spirit&quot;). Therefore his presence or absence was not to be understood by them as significant. Any attempt to criticize the difference between his written style when absent and personal style when present was ill founded- because through the Spirit, he was present with them although absent. So they were not to think that what he was now going to write was just mere words, and his personal presence would be far less demanding. </p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6258','1','47','10','2','2','<p>10:2 <i>I beg you now, so that when I am present I may not be bold with that confidence by which I intend to be bold against some, who think of us as if we walked according to the flesh- </i>Paul has earlier expressed his fear that if he visits them, then he will boldly judge them. Indeed, he has given this as the reason why he delayed his planned visit to them. This attitude to his next visit stands in contrast to the claims in chapters 7-9 that they love him and he can\'t wait to see them and oversee the collection of their donations for the Jerusalem Poor Fund. He intended to boldly judge those who consider him as an unspiritual person, walking according to the flesh. The Spirit through Paul would judge them- and they would realize that he walked according to the Spirit and not the flesh. Paul was &quot;confident&quot; that he would judge some of them severely, and yet in 8:22 he has written of the confidence he has that they will respond to his appeals, and his &quot;confidence in you in all things&quot; (7:16). These were statements written on the cusp of loving enthusiasm for them, thinking the best of them. But he is also confident that not all is well with them, and that he shall have to judge some of them severely.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6259','1','47','10','3','3','<p>10:3 <i>For though we walk in the flesh, we do not fight in a fleshly way</i>- This is likely a quotation from the Corinthian detractors, who claimed that Paul conducted himself &quot;in a fleshly way&quot;. Walking after the flesh rather than the Spirit is the way of condemnation (Rom. 8:1,4; Gal. 5:16; 2 Pet. 2:10). Paul is having to defend himself against those who consider that he is not at all Spiritual. Paul has used the same word for &quot;fight&quot; with reference to his ministry generally in 1 Cor. 9:7, and uses the same metaphor to Timothy (1 Tim. 1:18; 2 Tim. 2:4). 2 Cor. 10:3,4 is perhaps an allusion to the way that Jericho was taken with such a humanly weak battle plan. The point of the allusion is for us to see ourselves as those nervous Israelites desperately clinging on to their faith in God\'s victory rather than human strength. And we each have our Jerichos- habits, life-dominating patterns of thinking, that seem so impossible to shift. </p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6260','1','47','10','4','4','<p>10:4 <i>For the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh but mighty before God to the casting down of strongholds-&nbsp;</i>The allusion is to the LXX of Prov. 21:22: &quot;A wise man attacks fortified cities and demolishes the fortress in which the ungodly trusted&quot;. Note that in 9:6 Paul has quoted from Prov. 22:8, so this part of Proverbs was in his mind in formulating his argument in this part of the letter. We see here how the inspiration process worked- the ideas of the Spirit are reworked by the Spirit within the mind or spirit of the inspired writer. Paul sees himself really at war, using wisdom (according to the Proverbs allusion) to bring down all kinds of apparently solid and impregnable structures. His sense here is exactly that of 1 Cor. 1, where he says that the Spirit overthrows the unspiritual wisdom of men which seems so strong. He perceives those strongholds as being in the minds of the Corinthians and the false teaching received.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6261','1','47','10','5','5','<p>10:5 <i>Casting down imaginations and every high thing that is exalted against the knowledge of God, and bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ- </i>The &quot;imaginations&quot; are the &quot;strongholds&quot; of :4. The &quot;high thing&quot; continues the metaphor of bringing down fortifications, the reference being to high towers of defence. The picture is of the strongholds being stormed, and the captives taken into another citadel- where they are obedient to Christ. The whole metaphor is descriptive of internal thought processes and reflects how Paul realized that the state of mind is what Christianity is all about. It is thoughts and prideful attitudes which have to be overcome before obedience to Christ can be achieved in the mind. Paul has just written of being obedient to the Gospel in obeying its implications- in giving to the poor (2 Cor. 9:13). It is pride and the strongholds of human strength which hinder that obedience. Paul parallels &quot;the knowledge of God&quot; and having our thoughts in &quot;captivity to the obedience of Christ&quot;. This is what it means to know God; the correct theological conclusions about God are not therefore in view when Paul writes of &quot;the knowledge of God&quot;; he uses \'knowledge\' in the sense of relationship. He has earlier lamented that some in Corinth &quot;have not the knowledge of God&quot;. To know God is to live in mental obedience to His Son. It is a matter of the Spirit in the mind, of having the spirit or mind of Christ within us.</p><p>Isaiah is full of references to the proud being &lsquo;made low&rsquo; by judgment- the same Hebrew word is common: Is. 10:33; 13:11; 25:11; 26:5. Perhaps Paul had this in mind when he said that our preaching is a bringing down of every high thing that is exalted against God (2 Cor. 10:5). Our message is basically that we must be humbled one way or the other- either by our repentance and acceptance of the Gospel today, or through the experience of condemnation at the day of judgment. We&rsquo;re calling people to humility. And we must ask whether the content and style of our preaching really does that.</p><p>Like John, Paul makes a seamless connection between defending true doctrine, and spiritually minded living in practice. Through destroying arguments and &ldquo;every pretension that exalts itself against the knowledge of God&rdquo;, we can &ldquo;bring every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ&rdquo; (2 Cor. 10:3-5 RV). This is because, as Neville Smart put it, &ldquo;of the radical part played in the salvation of the individual by the ideas and beliefs he holds in his mind. They are in fact the roots from which his fixed attitudes and his daily actions spring, and from which they take their particular tone and colouring&rdquo;.</p><p>&ldquo;Though we walk in the flesh (cp. Paul\'s recognition of his fleshly side in Rom. 7)... the weapons of our (mental) warfare are not carnal (of our fleshly man), but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds&quot;. These strong holds which are pulled down are defined in v.5 as &quot;imaginations... every thought&quot; which have to be \'cast (cp. \'pulled\') down\'. Those strong holds exist in the recesses of our natural minds. Rom. 6:13 encourages us not to yield our minds as weapons of sin, but as weapons of God (Rom. 6:13 AVmg.). Our thinking is a weapon, which both sides in this conflict can use. The sinful man within us is &quot;warring against the law of my (spiritual) mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin&quot; (Rom. 7:23). Yet 2 Cor. 10:5 describes our spiritual man as overthrowing our carnal man, and bringing those thoughts into captivity to the Christ man. The impression is created of constant attrition, with victories for both sides. In Rom. 7 the impression is given that the carnal man is winning; whilst 2 Cor. 10:2-5 paints the picture of the Christ man triumphant. To get this picture over, perhaps the Spirit used a spiritually depressed Paul in Rom. 7, and a triumphant Paul at the time of writing 2 Cor. 10?</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6262','1','47','10','6','6','<p>10:6 <i>And being in readiness to avenge all disobedience, when your obedience shall be made full- </i>This could mean that when they were fully obedient to Christ (:5), and had shown this in practice by obeying his command they donate to the Jerusalem Poor Fund, then he would punish the disobedience of others within the Corinthian church. On this basis we would have to assume that when Paul writes to \'you\' here, he is writing to a subgroup within the church who will be obedient to him. But he seems to use &quot;you&quot; in a more general and natural sense throughout the letter. We get no impression elsewhere that he is writing to an obedient subgroup within the church. So we must consider other possibilities for interpretation. One possibility is that the more God\'s word abides in us, the more we will know our sinfulness (1 Jn. 1:10). Thus Paul would be speaking here as if when Corinth are more obedient, he will reveal further to them the extent of their weakness (2 Cor. 10:6).</p><p>Or it could be that the obedience of Corinth to Christ refers to their general spiritual maturity; once that was complete, then Paul could go further and move on to judge the disobedience of others apart from Corinth. This would connect with how Paul goes straight on to speak of how he had received, as it were, a measuring line which enabled him to preach in certain areas, including Corinth. When the spiritual growth of the Corinthian converts was complete, then his measuring line would be extended, and the Lord would allow him &quot;to preach the gospel in the regions beyond you&quot; (this is how I would interpret 2 Cor. 10:6,13-16 RV). But a measuring line is Ezekiel\'s figure of Divine judgment; as if to say that once Corinth are obedient, then Paul can move on to other areas to revenge all disobedience / judge / measure them out.&nbsp;</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6263','1','47','10','7','7','<p>10:7 <i>Look at the things that are before your face, staring at you. If anyone trusts in himself that he is Christ\'s- </i>Any serious study of a Bible passage requires us to look at it in different translations and make some effort to understand the real meaning of the original- for sometimes the sense of a passage can completely change, depending on translation (especially in Job). Thus in the AV of 2 Cor. 10:7, Paul is made to ask a question: &quot;Do ye look on things after the outward appearance?&quot;. In the RV, this becomes an affirmation: &ldquo;Ye look at the things that are before your face&quot;. But in other versions, it becomes a blunt demand from Paul that the Corinthians should open their eyes to the true facts: &quot;Look at things which stare you in the face&quot; (J.B. Phillips).</p><p>On balance, on the strength of the context, I would go for a translation to the effect that Paul is rebuking them for looking at things from the outward appearance. For the same word translated &quot;before your face&quot; has been used by him in exactly this sense when he rebukes them for following those who look at life after the outward appearance (5:12). Paul\'s presence or face / outward appearance has just been described as unattractive and lowly (10:1). Paul is now rebuking them for looking at things externally, whereas he has just explained in :4,5 that the essence of the Gospel is about internal transformation and spiritual things.By judging according to external appearances, they were concluding that Paul was not even &quot;Christ\'s&quot;.</p><p><i>Let him remind himself that, even as he is Christ\'s, so also are we- </i>There\'s definitely a tendency to think that we can have a relationship with the Father and Son, and this is all that matters. John countered this tendency, by arguing that &quot;If a man say and apparently this <i>was</i> being said by some brethren, &quot;I love God&quot;, and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who loves not his brother whom he has seen, how can he love God whom he has not seen&quot; (1 Jn. 4:20). Paul foresaw this same tendency here in 2 Cor. 10:7: &quot;If any man trust to himself that he is Christ\'s, let him <i>of himself </i>think this again, that, as he is Christ\'s, even so are we Christ\'s&quot;. &quot;Of himself&quot; suggests that our internal thinking, our self-perception, of ourselves as &quot;in Christ&quot; cannot be valid unless we perceive &quot;Christ&quot; as having our brethren &quot;in Him&quot; also. And Paul\'s own example showed what he meant; for in all his hardships he was comforted not just by the Father and Son directly, but by the faith of his brethren- even if that faith was weak (e.g. 1 Thess. 3:7). If we are sure we are the Lord\'s, let\'s remember that we aren\'t the <i>only</i> person He died for. Therefore we <i>must</i> receive one another, as Christ received us, with all our inadequacies of understanding and behaviour (Rom. 15:7). We are thereby taught of God to love one another; we must forgive and forbear each other, as the Lord did and does with us (1 Thess. 4:9; Eph. 4:32).</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6264','1','47','10','8','8','<p>10:8 <i>I could boast, unashamedly and somewhat abundantly, concerning our authority- authority which the Lord gave for building you up and not for casting you down</i>- This doesn\'t mean that the authority given could not be used for \'casting down\'. For the same word is used about how Paul could do just that (:4; 13:10). The idea is that the power had been given Paul not so much for casting down, but for building up edifying. Paul had the power / authority to judge them, and he purposefully delayed visiting them lest the Spirit lead him to punish them, perhaps in a literal sense. His attitude reflects that of the Lord- who came more to save than to judge / condemn, although that doesn\'t mean that He will not judge / condemn some.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6265','1','47','10','9','9','<p>10:9 <i>But I will not, lest I appear to terrify you by my letters</i>- We see here how Corinthians is very much a flow of consciousness letter. He says he will not boast of his authority- but later he does, at great length (11:1,16). Likewise in chapter 7 he writes down his passionate feelings of love and confidence in the Corinthians- and then comes down to a more realistic view of them. And he begins this current section by saying he will have the meekness and gentleness of Christ (:1) when in fact chapters 10-13 are Paul at his most bitter, sarcastic and angry.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6266','1','47','10','10','10','<p>10:10 <i>For they say: His letters are weighty and strong, but his bodily presence is weak and his speech of no account</i>- But was his physical presence indeed &quot;of no account&quot;? The Roman Governor Felix <i>trembled</i> at Paul\'s incisive logic- even in his prison uniform (Acts 24:25). Hardened Agrippa was almost persuaded by Paul, on his own public admission, to become a Christian (Acts 26:28). The Galatian converts would have pulled out their eyes from their sockets and given them to partially sighted Paul (Gal. 4:15). The aggressive crowd, baying for Paul\'s blood, were held in one of history\'s most uncanny silences by the sheer personality of that preacher. He beckoned with his hand, and &quot; there was made a great silence...and when they heard how (Gk.) he spake... they kept the more silence&quot; (Acts 21:39-22:2). Pagans at Lystra were so overcome by his oratory that they were convinced he was the god Mercury come down to earth; it took Paul quite some effort to persuade them that he was an ordinary man (Acts 14:12). This was the man Paul. He had undoubted ability as a preacher. Yet apparently the Corinthians mocked his weak physical presence; although Paul had undoubted charisma and power of personality, right up to the end. Was it not that he consciously suppressed the power of his personality when he visited Corinth? This was humility and self-knowledge indeed. Indeed, his reasoning in 2 Cor. 10,11 is that he could present himself to Corinth as quite a different brother Paul than what he did. Although Paul did have a significant physical presence, he doesn\'t dispute with the Corinthians about it. Instead he more humbly makes the point that presence or absence is insignificant in spiritual terms.&nbsp;</p><p>So I suggest that Paul made himself a weak person in his dealings with Corinth, just as the Lord also humbled himself, made Himself lowly as an act of the will. He could truly be all things to all people, he wasn&rsquo;t constrained by his natural personality type as so many of us allow ourselves to be. This is why Paul could go on in :11 to warn Corinth that the next time he visits them, he won&rsquo;t be weak. He will &lsquo;be&rsquo; as he is in his letters. In all this we see the full import of the sacrifice and crucifixion of self of which the Lord repeatedly speaks. Putting meaning into words, this means that we will genuinely &lsquo;be&rsquo; the person we need to be in order to help others.</p><p>&quot;His letters, say they (Paul\'s detractors in the new Israel) are weighty and powerful; but his bodily presence is weak, and his speech contemptible... though I be rude in speech... Christ sent me... to preach the Gospel: not with wisdom of words (mg. speech)&quot; (2 Cor. 10:10; 11:6; 1 Cor. 1:17).&nbsp;This is all the language of Moses, Paul&rsquo;s hero. Paul would have remembered Stephen saying how Moses was formerly full of worldly <i>wisdom</i> and &quot;mighty in words&quot; (Acts 7:22), even though Moses felt &quot; I am not eloquent (mg. a man of words)... I am slow of speech, and of a slow tongue&quot; (Ex. 4:10). Maybe Paul likewise was mighty in words and wisdom, but felt like Moses that he wasn&rsquo;t. He allowed Moses&rsquo; legendary humility to personally inspire him, rather than just admire it from afar, ticking the box, saying yes, Moses was humble&hellip;</p><p>It was believed that nature and destiny had decreed your place, and there was to be no questioning of it. Thus according to the first century principle of \'physiognomics\', a slave was born with a muscular, servile body, an upper class female Roman was born beautiful, etc. The idea of education was to train them up to be as they were intended to be by nature. The ancient world believed that all that was decreed and predestined by nature would have some sort of physical reality in the appearance of a person. Hence the challenging nature of Paul\'s command not to judge by the outward appearance; and again, Divine providence overturned all this by choosing Paul as such a &quot;chosen vessel&quot;, when his outward appearance and manner of speaking were so weak and unimpressive, literally \'lacking strength\' (2 Cor. 10:10).</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6267','1','47','10','11','11','<p>10:11 <i>Well, let such a person reckon this, that what we are in word by letters, when we are absent, such will we be also in deed, when we are present</i>- As noted on :1 <i>But being absent am bold toward you</i>, there is effectively no difference between Paul\'s presence and his absence, for in his physical absence he is still spiritually present with them, just as the Lord Jesus is. Paul is moving towards the position that when he does come and visit Corinth in the flesh, he is likely to be led by the Spirit to be seriously judgmental towards them. This is a far cry from his earlier positive comments in this letter that he is delaying coming to them so that when he does come, they will have fixed things up and made donation to his Jerusalem Poor Fund. These apparent contradictions within the letter have been explained by some on the basis that we have here various letters stitched together. But why do that? And the various proposed sections all join to each other seamlessly. I therefore have adopted the view that the letter was written under inspiration as a flow of consciousness, just as the inspired Psalmists both curse and bless their enemies within the same Psalm.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6268','1','47','10','12','12','<p>10:12 <i>For we are not bold enough to class or compare ourselves with those that commend themselves</i>- The sarcasm here seems at variance with Paul\'s opening statement in :1 that he is going to appeal to them with the meekness and gentleness of Christ. Again, as noted on :11, this is a flow of consciousness letter, with Paul writing how he felt at the moment. The AV offers: &quot;We dare not make ourselves of the number&quot;, and &quot;the number&quot; may be a technical term referring to a group of self-declared apostles who claimed that they were &quot;the number&quot;, perhaps referring to how the initial apostles are described with the term &quot;the number of the names&quot; (Acts 1:15). Although Paul says he will not compare himself with those who commend themselves, he goes on at length to do just that in chapters 11 and 12. Rather like he begins this section by saying he will appeal by the meekness and gentleness of Christ (:1) and proceeds to write in anything but that tone. Once again- this is a flow of consciousness letter, with Paul expressing one feeling and then going on to write in a different way. The only other time the Greek word for &quot;compare&quot; occurs is again to the Corinthians, where Paul insists we must compare spiritual things with spiritual things and not confuse the categories by comparing fleshly things with spiritual (1 Cor. 2:13). But here Paul will go on to do just that, justifying himself in fleshly terms in order to confirm his spiritual authority. Paul has said that he needs no commendation of himself, because that commendation is known in their consciences, if they have the Spirit within and are in touch with it (2 Cor. 4:2). But then he says that in order for them to answer those who glory in outward appearance, he will give them some good ammunition to use by boasting of his qualifications (2 Cor. 5:12; 6:4). He will now go on again to commend himself, claiming that it is their fault, and their refusal to commend him according to their own consciences, the Spirit within them, has compelled him to boast (2 Cor. 12:11). In all this we see the rather jumbled logic which accompanies a desperate desire to persuade by all means, and even under Divine inspiration of the record, the jumbled logic reflects this desire of Paul to by all means get them onside.</p><p><i>These are without understanding, measuring themselves by themselves, and comparing themselves with themselves, which is unwise</i>- Paul points out the weakness of all peer-reviewed criticism. They measured themselves by their own standards and benchmarks which they themselves had chosen, rather than by God\'s standards. And Paul will now use the same word for \'measuring\' to describe how he has been given a measure by God to teach and pastor them (:13).</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6269','1','47','10','13','13','<p>10:13 <i>But we will not boast beyond our measure but rather according to the measure of the province which God apportioned to us- a measure to reach even to you</i>- The image of \'measuring\' according to the measure God had given Paul connects with how the false teachers measured themselves according to measures and benchmarks of their own creation (see on :12 <i>Measuring themselves</i>). Paul considered they were geographically and spiritually within a measure or allotted territory given to him and therefore they should respect him and not follow the false teachers. Whether he was specifically given such an allotment of authority is not recorded. We wonder whether Paul is now using every possible argument he can to get the Corinthians onside with him, rather as we saw him doing in appealing for them to donate to his Jerusalem Poor Fund. We recall from 1 Cor. 1 that Paul initially claimed to be approaching the Corinthians with only a Christ-centered attitude, stating he had baptized few of them, and all following of personal preachers was wrong. But his desperate appeal for authority at this final stage of the correspondence seems rather more human than that initial approach. Christ is not &quot;divided&quot;, Paul had originally argued (1 Cor. 1:13), but now he uses the same word to say that God had apportioned (s.w. &quot;divided&quot;) to him and his team the authority and responsibility for Corinth.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6270','1','47','10','14','14','<p>10:14 <i>For we are not overextending ourselves in our boasting, as though we did not reach unto you</i>- &quot;Overextending&quot; may be a quote from what the critics were saying about Paul. Perhaps the argument from the false teachers was that they were the local pastors, and for Paul to claim any authority in Corinth was an overextension of his authority.</p><p><i>For we were the first to come as far as you in preaching the gospel of Christ</i>- As noted on :13, Paul\'s claim to have authority over the Corinthians because he first preached to them is at variance with his attitude in 1 Cor. 1, where he rightly claims that Christ is paramount, and who preached or baptized them is irrelevant. And he repeated that in 1 Cor. 15:11, where he argues that God\'s grace working through the preachers is all important, and who preached the Gospel to the Corinthians is irrelevant because whoever it was (&quot;I or they&quot;), they were just vehicles for God\'s saving grace.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6271','1','47','10','15','15','<p>10:15 <i>So we are not boasting beyond our measure in other men\'s labours; but rather we hope that as your faith grows, our influence among you may be greatly increased- </i>The critics may have claimed that it was their labours which were responsible for the church at Corinth. Paul is paving the way to boast of all his labours for the Corinthians which we will read in chapters 11 and 12. Paul\'s hope was that his influence amongst the Corinthians would increase as they matured spiritually. But this desire for personal influence and loyalty (a card he played in his appeal for their donations to his Poor Fund in chapters 7-9) is a far cry from his earlier claim to not want any personal influence but just to see the influence of the Lord Jesus growing in his converts. See on :14. But the AV is again more literally faithful to the difficult Greek here: &quot;Having hope, when your faith is increased, that we shall be enlarged by you according to our rule abundantly&quot;. This could mean that their spiritual maturity would enable his line or territory of work to be expanded. For Paul felt he would not be given new areas to preach in if the Corinthians had not matured in the faith. He in this case would be arguing that their immaturity and revolt against him was holding up his spreading of the Gospel further, as if God would &quot;increase&quot; his sphere of work if the Corinthians matured; and:16 seems to confirm this. Again, whether or not God had specifically stated that is unrecorded, and we could read this as another desperate argument to by all means keep the Corinthians loyal to him.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6272','1','47','10','16','16','<p>10:16 <i>So that we may preach the gospel in lands beyond you, without boasting of work already done in another\'s area of influence</i>- See on :15. This can be read as a desperate appeal for Corinthian loyalty to him, lest other areas be as it were deprived of the Gospel. We are left to decide whether this was really the case or if it is just part of an increasingly desperate appeal for their personal loyalty. For Paul had earlier turned away from unresponsive Jewish audiences in order to go preach further to the Gentiles, rather than remaining with those Jews until they accepted his message.&nbsp;And in Romans 15 he openly speaks of his ambition to preach in Rome and Spain, the &quot;lands beyond&quot; Corinth. He gives no condition to be fulfilled for that, but rather perceives it all as part of his calling.</p><p>Paul spoke of how both he and other brethren had their specific &ldquo;line&quot; or sphere in which they were intended to witness (2 Cor. 10:16 cp. Ps. 19:4 AVmg.; Am. 7:17). We each have ours, whether it be the people who live in our block of flats, an area of our own country or city; or another part of the world. Paul clearly had a purpose- to spread the Gospel in a semi-circle around the Roman empire (2 Cor. 10:15), beginning from Jerusalem, through Asia and Italy, then Spain (Rom. 15:19), North Africa and back to Jerusalem. Speaking of how he planned his journeys, he comments in 2 Cor. 1:17:<b> &ldquo;</b>When I therefore was thus minded, did I use lightness? or the things that I purpose, do I purpose according to the flesh, that with me there should be yes yes, and no no?&rdquo;.&nbsp; Again we see a definite purpose, not the kind of human intention which vacillates between yes and no; for this is inimical to the person who has true purpose. The mission in our minds, the path ever before us, makes our decision making so much clearer than it is for those who dither over which flavour coffee to have tonight... Truly could Paul say at the end: &ldquo;But you have followed my teaching, my conduct, and my purpose in life; you have observed my faith, my patience, my love, my endurance, my persecutions, and my sufferings&rdquo; (2 Tim. 3:10,11). And he is set up as a model for each of us (1 Tim. 1:16).</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6273','1','47','10','17','17','<p>10:17 <i>But he that boasts, let him boast in the Lord- </i>This is the quotation from Jer. 9:24 with which Paul began his recorded letters to the Corinthians (1 Cor. 1:31). But I have shown in earlier commentary on this chapter that Paul\'s attitude is at variance with the non-partisan spirit which he had shown there. Despite knowing this principle, Paul is now as it were carried away to boast in the flesh. Again he states a principle and then appears to break it, as witnessed in his promise to entreat them by the gentleness of Christ (10:1) and going on to use bitter sarcasm and angry manipulation against them. This confirms my conclusion that this letter is an inspired \'flow of consciousness\' recording of Paul\'s feelings. The context of Jer. 9:24 urges glorying in the Lord because judgment is coming- and that rather fits what Paul is going on to threaten.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6274','1','47','10','18','18','<p>10:18 <i>For it is not he that commends himself that is approved, but he whom the Lord commends- </i>For &quot;commends&quot;, see on Lk. 12:8; 1 Cor. 4:5. And yet Paul goes on to commend himself in the next two chapters. Just as he says he will approach them in the gentle spirit of Christ (:1) and goes on to write to them otherwise. His immediate reference is to the false teachers who commended themselves (:12). Only the Lord\'s commendation is worth anything, and not the commendation of men. But in his desperate love for Corinth and desire to persuade them, he now embarks upon self-commendation, breaking his own principles and then blaming it on them for compelling him to do so (12:11).</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6275','1','47','11','1','1','<p>11:1 <em>I wish you would bear with me in a little foolishness. Do bear with me</em>- Paul is asking them to bear with, or stick with, his reasoning as an unwise fool. He laments that they \'bear with\' the false teachers, who demanded their loyalty and rejection of Paul; three times he uses the same word of how they \'bear with\' these men who abuse them (:4,19,20). So the emphasis should be on the <em>me</em> in &quot;Please bear with <em>me</em>&quot;, and not with these pretenders. This reading is confirmed by the way that :2 goes on to say that this is because Paul is as their father, who has betrothed them to Christ.&nbsp;</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6276','1','47','11','2','2','<p>11:2- see on Mt. 3:7; Acts 13:9; 1 Cor. 15:10.</p><p><em>For I am jealous over you with a Godly jealousy. For I betrothed you to one husband, that is, that I might present you a pure virgin to Christ- </em>The betrothal period lasted a year; the father of the bride was expected to keep her sexually pure. This period of a year may refer to the year he has already waited for them to produce the collection money (9:2). But during that betrothal period, he feared they had not been faithful to Christ because of their alliances with the false teachers. Paul considered himself their father and them to be his children (1 Cor. 4:15; 2 Cor. 6:13; 12:13-15). This analogy demonstrates that preaching is not all about getting a response which leads to conversion; the end point in view is not baptism, but a person remaining faithful for Christ until the end. The image of betrothal suggests that some guarantee had been given, and the guarantee in our relationship with the Lord Jesus is the Spirit given as the guarantee in our hearts; only here in 2 Corinthians is it spoken of in precisely that way (2 Cor. 1:22; 5:5).</p><p>Paul speaks in 2 Cor. 11:2 of &lsquo;presenting you&rsquo; at the last day- he uses the same Greek work in a context of &lsquo;standing before&rsquo; the judgment seat (Rom. 14:10; 2 Cor. 4:14). Christ will present us to Himself at judgment day, as an unspotted bride / church (Eph. 5:27)- but Paul perceived that Christ will achieve this by working through people and pastors like himself. Paul aimed to &ldquo;present&rdquo; s.w. every man perfect in Christ by warning and exhorting them (Col. 1:28). We will present ourselves (2 Tim. 2:15 s.w.) to Him at the judgment; but He presents us, and others who have laboured for us will present us, because Christ will have worked through them to present us to Himself unspotted. The cross results in the suffering Lord being able to &ldquo;<em>present</em> us holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight&rdquo; at the day of judgment (Col. 1:22; Eph. 5:27). Having said that, Paul goes right on to say that his goal is to &ldquo;<em>present</em> every man perfect in Christ Jesus&rdquo; (Col. 1:22,28; 2 Cor. 11:2). The sufferings of Jesus were not lost on Paul. He understood that he likewise must share in them, in order to &ldquo;present&rdquo; his brethren acceptable at the last day. For Paul, the events of Calvary were not far away in time and place, a necessary piece of theology... They compelled him to act, to stay up late at night preparing something, to pray, to live the life of true concern for others, to warn, encourage, write, endlessly review his draft letters to get them right, search through Scripture for relevant guidance for his friends&hellip; this was the life begotten in him by the cross. As the Lord died to present us &ldquo;perfect&rdquo;, so Paul laboured to present us perfect. And neither the Lord Jesus nor Paul are mere history for us. This is all our pattern&hellip; In one sense, we present ourselves before the judgment seat (Rom. 14:10 s.w.; AV &ldquo;stand before&rdquo;). In other ways, we are presented there by our elders, e.g. Paul; and yet above all, we are presented there spotless by the Lord&rsquo;s matchless advocacy for us. And of course the essence of judgment is being worked out right now, as we daily present ourselves to the Lord, as the bodies of the animals were presented to the priest for inspection before being offered (Rom. 12:1). We are presenting ourselves to the judge right now.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6277','1','47','11','3','3','<p>11:3 <em>But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve with his craftiness, your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ</em>- Note the focus upon their minds. Throughout Corinthians, Paul has taught that the role of the Spirit in the heart / mind is crucial to spirituality. The mind was and is the battleground for temptation, and the arena in which we develop spirituality. Paul did not want their minds to be led astray NEV &quot;corrupted&quot; from Christ. NEV &quot;the simplicity that is in Christ&quot; could as well be rendered as NIV &quot;<em>to </em>Christ&quot;. The idea is that the Christian is mentally focused upon a man, the Lord Jesus. The problem with false theologies and other gospels is that they remove that focus, they are a corruption of the mind, and hence a different spirit (:4) from that which is to be Christ\'s. The corruption of the mind from this focus is described in :4 as receiving &quot;a different spirit&quot;. The focus is intensely upon the human mind or heart, and whether or not the spirit of Jesus is there. This, in summary, is what Christianity is all about and how a Christian is defined- whether the spirit of Christ is in the heart or not. All the <em>angst </em>about doctrinal correctness and the struggle for correct interpretation must be seen in that light. If we have not the spirit of Christ, we are none of His; and if we do, then we are His.</p><p>Paul\'s imputation of righteousness to the Corinthians is reflected in the way he likens them here to the innocent Eve in Eden, when previous correspondence has revealed the depth of their moral (especially sexual) depravity. Clearly Paul read the Genesis account of the serpent as literal, seeing the literal serpent as now representative of the Judaizers who were preying upon the minds of the believers.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6278','1','47','11','4','4','<p>11:4 <em>For if he that comes- </em>&quot;He that comes&quot; could be a generic reference to the false teachers who came to them, presumably sent from Jerusalem to destabilize Paul\'s work; their \'coming\' suggests they were not local Corinthians. There could however be a specific individual in view, whom Paul is careful not to name because he was well known and perhaps for fear of difficulties which would be created by specifically naming him.&nbsp;This may be the reference of 12:7, which speaks of a particular messenger or envoy of \'Satan\', the Jewish opposition, sent to be a pain in the side for his ministry. The coming one, &ldquo;he that comes&rdquo;, was understood in Judaism as the Messiah, &ldquo;he that comes in the name of the Lord&rdquo;. The false teachers in view are therefore presented as anti-Christs, fake Messiahs, teaching and embodying &ldquo;another Jesus&rdquo;.</p><p><em>Preaches another Jesus, whom we did not preach, or you receive a different spirit, which you did not receive, or a different gospel, which you did not accept- </em>Receiving the spirit and accepting the Gospel of Jesus are paralleled. The situation in 1 Cor. 14 see notes there was that the Corinthians claimed to have Holy Spirit gifts, but actually the manifestations of ecstatic utterances they were claiming to experience were not at all Holy Spirit gifts, but rather an imitation of the idol cults. The aorists here would seem to imply that they accepted a gospel, another Jesus and another spirit at one specific moment. As if an individual had come and preached a fake imitation of Christianity- replete with a Jesus, a gospel and a spirit to be received. We note that the true Gospel features a receipt of the Spirit when the real Christ is accepted. This is not a reference to the miraculous gifts, but to the guarantee of salvation received in the heart, which must be responded to (1:22; 5:5; Gal. 4:6; Rom. 8:15). Perhaps the \'other Jesus\' being taught was a Jesus who did not rise from the dead and was therefore currently inactive (recall the arguments of 1 Cor. 15) and who ministers no Spirit, therefore, to believers. This is worryingly similar, in practice, to the approach to Jesus taken by some conservative forms of Christianity today.</p><p><em>It seems you think you do well to go along with him</em>- See on :3. They \'bore with\' &quot;go along with&quot; these false teachers instead of bearing with Paul (:1).</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6279','1','47','11','5','5','<p>11:5- see on 1 Tim. 1:16; Acts 23:6.</p><p><em>But I reckon that I am not in the least inferior to these so called super apostles</em>- This group declared themselves to be &quot;the number&quot; (see on 10:12), the true apostles. But they had declared themselves as this, without any signs from the Lord affirming them as such. Paul &ldquo;supposed&rdquo;, the same word translated &ldquo;impute&rdquo; as in &lsquo;imputed righteousness&rsquo;, that he was not inferior to these apostles, because he was a true apostle. He knew this was how his Lord counted him. But he felt himself as less than the least of all saints (Eph. 3:8) and quite unworthy of the title apostle: &ldquo;For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. But by the grace of God I am what I am&rdquo; (1 Cor. 15:9-10). He felt the status and acceptance imputed to him, as we should.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6280','1','47','11','6','6','<p>11:6 <em>Although rude in speech, I am not in knowledge. No, in every way have we made this manifest to you in all things</em>- Paul was falsely accused of being an <em>idiotes</em> &quot;rude&quot;, an uneducated and simple person who pretended to the intelligentsia. This was patently untrue. But Paul doesn\'t attack the lies, he argues that even if that is true, and he doesn\'t bother justifying himself, then it could not be said that he was lacking in true knowledge. Again he is appealing to them to stop judging after the outward appearance (see on 10:7), but to look to the essence, the Spirit within. Paul can say that they surely know what &ldquo;knowledge&rdquo; he has, because he has been thoroughly manifested Gk. <em>phaneroo</em> to them in absolutely every way; there was nothing he knew which he hadn&rsquo;t shared with them. He is so open with them that he doesn&rsquo;t just write in a political, guarded way to them, watching every word.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6281','1','47','11','7','7','<p>11:7- see on Phil. 4:16; Lk. 3:5.</p><p><em>Or did I commit a sin- </em>This kind of sarcasm is hardly in line with Paul\'s claim to now be appealing to them in the spirit of the Lord\'s gentleness and meekness (10:1). His bitterness reveals that his previous positivity about them in chapter 7 was uttered on the cusp of emotion, hoping against hope because of the love he had for them.</p><p><em>In abasing myself so you might be exalted, because I preached to you the gospel of God for nothing?</em>- Paul told Corinth that he had abased himself so that <em>they</em> might be exalted. This is one of Paul\'s many allusions to the Gospels; this time to Lk. 14:11; 18:14, which teach that he who abases himself will <em>himself</em> be exalted. But Paul was abasing himself so that Corinth could be exalted, so that they could share the exaltation he would receive on account of his humility. In all this, of course, he reflected to his brethren the very essence of the attitude of the Lord Jesus for toward us. It was through refusing funding for his work from the Corinthians that he <em>abased</em> himself that they might be <em>exalted</em>- all language of the crucifixion (cp. Phil. 2:8,9). Thus his refusing of legitimate help to make his way easier was an enactment in himself of the cross. We live in a world which has made the fulfilment of personal aims of paramount importance. It has affected the fabric of every society, and become embedded in every mind. To <em>live to serve</em>, to put oneself down that others may rise&hellip; this is strange indeed. John the Baptist had this spirit, for he rejoiced that he decreased whilst the Lord&rsquo;s cause increased. Paul likewise abased himself that others might be exalted, after the pattern of the cross. God&rsquo;s gentleness, His humility / bowing down (Heb.) has made us great, lifted us up (Ps. 18:35). And we respond to it by humbling <em>our</em>selves.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6282','1','47','11','8','8','<p>11:8 <em>I robbed other churches by accepting support from them in order to serve you</em>- Accepting support from other churches was hardly robbing them, and the idea of robbing holy places / churches was particularly viewed as the language of sacrilege (Rom. 2:22). Paul uses this particularly arresting term to grab attention, but it is also true to say that he was exaggerating his case, as so often in his very emotionally charged relationship with the Corinthians. His refusal to take money from the Corinthians is presented as a self-abasement; but his decision must be tempered against the fact that he did in fact take support from others, just not Corinth.</p><p><em>Took wages</em>- See on Acts 20:24 <em>The ministry that I received</em>.</p><p>2 Cor. 11:8-15, when properly translated, perhaps reflects Paul at his angriest and most abrasive: &ldquo;I robbed other churches an exaggeration, getting money from them to be a minister to you...as the truth of Christ is in me- I swear that this reason to be proud will not be stopped as long as I work in the area of Achaia You ask me why do I do this? Do you think it&rsquo;s because I don&rsquo;t love you? God knows I do It&rsquo;s because what I do- and I am going to go on doing it- shuts up some people who are trying to pretend they are as good as we are, those fakes Such apostles are treacherous workmen. They deck themselves out as apostles of Christ and it&rsquo;s no wonder people are fooled&hellip; but they&rsquo;ll get what&rsquo;s coming to them&rdquo;. Even through the barrier of words, time, culture and distance, the abrasion of Paul in full-flow comes down through the centuries. This was hardly the promised approach in the meekness and gentleness of Christ (10:1), which all goes to show that 2 Corinthians is written as a flow of consciousness letter- which explains many of the apparent contradictions and tensions within it.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6283','1','47','11','9','9','<p>11:9- see on 2 Cor. 13:4.</p><p><em>And when I was present with you and was in want- </em>His time of &quot;want&quot; in Corinth was part of being &quot;abased&quot; whilst there amongst them (:7). The same word is translated &quot;destitute&quot; in Heb. 11:37. If he had asked for support or accepted it from the local Corinthians, the implication is that this abasement and want would have been avoided. Perhaps he was indeed destitute, until the Macedonians got assistance to him. &quot;In want&quot; is the Greek word translated &quot;inferior&quot; in :5. Paul was not at all lacking behind the so called &quot;apostles&quot;; but he had been lacking in material things. And that was his qualification as a true apostle. The fact Paul clearly at times had money, and came from a wealthy background, makes all the more impressive his being destitute and &quot;abased&quot; for the Gospel.</p><p><em>I was not a burden on anyone. For the brothers, when they came from Macedonia, supplied all my needs; indeed in everything I kept myself from being burdensome to you, and so will I remain</em>- Paul had the same policy in Thessalonica where he also resisted being burdensome (1 Thess. 2:6 s.w.). Acts 18:3 says that Paul worked in Corinth as a tentmaker when he first arrived there. The fact his needs had to be supplied by the Macedonians would indicate that he was unable to continue being self-supporting in this way, presumably because of an economic blockade against him organized by the Jews.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6284','1','47','11','10','10','<p>11:10 <em>As the truth of Christ is in me, no one shall stop me boasting about this throughout the regions of Achaia</em>- Paul\'s boasting about his independence from the Corinthians seems rather strange and somewhat human rather than spiritual. Seeing that he had been supported by wages paid by the Macedonians (:8,9), his financial independence from the Corinthians was not a great thing to boast about.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6285','1','47','11','11','11','<p>11:11 <em>And why? Because I do not love you? God knows, I do</em>- &quot;God knows&quot;, along with his appeal to the truth of Christ within him (:10), all suggests that Paul\'s claims here would be received cynically by the Corinthians, and so Paul feels the need to swear in some way to his truthfulness. But he might have perhaps taken more comfort from his own observation earlier, that his authenticity as an elder having authority over them was in fact known by them within their own consciences (see on 5:11). Yet in this section (chapters 10-13) Paul often seems to stray from his own principles as he is overly caught up with his personal investment in the situation at Corinth. He should have left it at that, but instead, he makes all kinds of oaths &quot;God knows&quot; and human self-justification. We too can clearly understand and espouse a principle yet allow the humanity of a situation to allow us to indulge in personal self-justification when we have claimed to understand that this is not the way to go.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6286','1','47','11','12','12','<p>11:12 <em>But what I do, that I will continue to do, so I may not provide an opportunity to those that desire such an opportunity, and so that their boasting will be shown to be not the same as ours</em>- Clearly there were some at Corinth seeking opportunity to bring Paul down. He was up against consciously organized opposition, which he understandably sums up as &quot;the satan&quot; / adversary. Paul\'s boasting is made, he claims, so that he can as it were out boast the opposition. He has made up his mind to go down the path of human boasting, and says he will continue to do so, because he will deprive his critics of any opportunity to boast. But as observed many times in this letter, we are here reading flow of consciousness writing. Paul is writing down his thoughts as they come into his mind, and all emotions are at first blush contradictory. For it is obvious that my justifying himself, he will not by any amount of autobiographical truth somehow shut down his opponents by outboasting them. Nor will be rid them of opportunity to attack him. And such a path of action is in contradiction to his correct principle of not comparing ourselves amongst ourselves as men (10:12).</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6287','1','47','11','13','13','<p>11:13 <em>For such men are false apostles, deceitful workers, fashioning themselves into apostles of Christ</em>- Paul claimed Divine qualification and authentication of his apostleship, whereas these men had merely declared themselves &quot;fashioning themselves&quot; apostles. They branded themselves as &quot;super apostles&quot; (:5); Paul calls them <em>false</em> apostles. The transformation of these men into something they were not is the basis for :14; as these men \'fashioned themselves\' so &quot;Satan fashions himself&quot;. But the connection is not historical, to some supposed even in Eden when Satan turned into an Angel. For Genesis and the Bible are silent about this; it is an import from paganism. The present tenses here must be given their due weight. As the false apostles were fashioning themselves into apostles of Christ, so \'Satan\' was fashioning himself into an angel of light. I take this as meaning that these men were part of a much larger system of adversarial opposition to Paul\'s work, which he sums as \'Satan\', the adversary. And the context here and elsewhere points unmistakeably to a Jewish satan. I have written about this at length in <a href=http://www.realdevil.info/2-4.htm><i>The Real Devil 2-4. </i></a></p><p>There is indeed allusion to the deceit of the serpent in Eden, who was of course adversarial \'satan\' = adversary, but this is not to say that Paul read the serpent as anything more than a literal &quot;beast of the field&quot; as indeed the serpent is presented in Genesis. As the serpent deceived Eve by his subtilty, so these false apostles worked deceitfully. These false apostles accused Paul of having the characteristics of the serpent- crafty and taking people in with guile (12:16). It is these very words and allusion to the serpent which Paul now uses about the false apostles here and in :3 and this explains the usage of serpent imagery. It all seems a rather tit for tat situation- he was trying to outboast them, and calls them the names they call him. This is all in contradiction of Paul\'s earlier arguments that he will not commend himself as others do nor compare himself with others. But he is carried away in a desire by all means and by every kind of argument to try to win the Corinthians to Christ and to himself.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6288','1','47','11','14','14','<p>11:14 <em>And no marvel. For even Satan fashions himself into an angel of light</em>- See on :13. For reasons why this is not supporting any idea of a cosmic satan, see my <a href=http://www.realdevil.info/5-21.htm><i>The Real Devil 5-21</i></a><em> . </em>It needs to be recognized that Paul&rsquo;s writings very often allude to extant Jewish and Gentile literature, sometimes quoting verbatim from them, in order to correct popular ideas. Thus Paul quotes Aratus (Acts 17:28), Menander (1 Corinthians 15:33) and Epimenides (Titus 1:12) &ndash; he uses odd phrases out of these uninspired writings by way of illustration. I&rsquo;ve shown in <i>The Real Devil</i> that much of the Biblical literature does this kind of thing, e.g. the entire Pentateuch is alluding to the various myths and legends of creation and origins, showing what the truth is. The fact Paul&rsquo;s 21st century readers are largely ignorant of that literature, coupled with Paul&rsquo;s rabbinic writing style not using specific quotation rubric or quotation marks, means that this point is often missed. It&rsquo;s rather like our reading of any historical literature &ndash; parts of it remain hard to understand because we simply don&rsquo;t appreciate the historical and immediate context in which it was written. When Paul speaks of Satan being transformed as a bright Angel, he&rsquo;s actually quoting from the first century AD <em>Life of Adam and Eve</em> (12&ndash;16) which speculated that &lsquo;Satan&rsquo; refused to worship the image of God in Adam and therefore he came to earth as a bright Angel and deceived Eve: &ldquo;Satan was wroth and transformed himself into the brightness of angels, and went away to the river&rdquo; (For references, see Susan Garrett, <em>The Temptations of Jesus in Mark&rsquo;s Gospel</em> (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998) p. 45. <em>The</em> <em>Life of Adam and Eve</em> was apparently widely quoted and alluded to in the first century &ndash; see throughout M. Stone,<em> A History of the Literature of Adam and Eve</em> (Atlanta: Scholar&rsquo;s Press, 1992)). Paul&rsquo;s quoting from that document; although in a preceding verse (2 Cor. 11:3) he has stressed that &ldquo;the <em>serpent</em> beguiled Eve by his subtilty&rdquo;. He&rsquo;s reaffirming the Genesis account, which doesn&rsquo;t speak of a personal Satan, but rather simply of a serpent, created as one of the &ldquo;beasts of the field&rdquo;. So we could paraphrase Paul here: &lsquo;I know that the Jewish writings say that the serpent wasn&rsquo;t really a serpent, it was &lsquo;Satan&rsquo;, and was actually in the form of a bright Angel. Now that&rsquo;s not the case &ndash; let&rsquo;s stick with Genesis, which speaks of a literal serpent. But OK, in the same way as in the Jewish myth Satan became a bright, persuasive Angel, well, these false teachers from the Jews appear as wonderful, spiritual people &ndash; but following them will lead you to the same catastrophe as fell upon Eve as a result of being deceived&rsquo;.</p><p>The way Paul uses the word <em>metaschematizo</em> &ldquo;transform&rdquo; three times is interesting &ndash; &ldquo;the stress is so heavy here because Paul is turning their own word against his opponents&rdquo; (Neil Forsyth, <em>Satan and the Combat Myth</em> (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1989) p. 269). If this is the case, then we would yet another example of which there are so many in Corinthians of Paul using a term used by his enemies in order to answer them &ndash; which would mean that he is not necessarily agreeing with it. Indeed the apocryphal Jewish <em>Apocalypse of Moses</em> claims that because Satan appeared as such a dazzling, shining Angel, Eve was inevitably deceived by him. Paul here would thus be alluding to this idea &ndash; not that his allusion means that he supported the idea.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6289','1','47','11','15','15','<p>11:15 <em>It is no great thing therefore if his servants also fashion themselves as servants of righteousness</em>- Servants or ministers of righteousness is a Jewish term, allusive to the priests. The Jewish satan or opposition to Paul\'s work had servants / ministers who appeared to be righteous people.&nbsp;Judaism presented the faithful as &quot;the righteous&quot; and the servants of righteousness were those who ministered to Judaist congregations. But they were in fact servants of what Paul terms \'the satan\', his term as previously referenced for the Jewish opposition. And his later self-justification in this chapter implies that they presented themselves as true Jews of the seed of Abraham.&nbsp;</p><p><em>Whose end shall be according to their work- </em>The lazy servant was punished out of his own mouth (Lk. 19:22); and even in Job\'s time, this principle of Divine condemnation was known (Job 9:20; 15:6). The Judaizers too were to have an &quot;end that will correspond to their deeds&quot; (2 Cor. 11:14,15 RSV). Jewish theories of the time accept that God punished the Satan figure, but the demons got around the punishment and tempt men to sin&ndash; as if God somehow was outwitted in the supposed struggle. But here Paul says that these men will indeed be punished and will not get out of it. The <em>Apocalypse of Adam</em> likewise minimizes human sin by claiming that &lsquo;Satan&rsquo; in fact raped Eve, thus leading to the fall; the <em>Apocalypse of Moses</em> claims that because Satan appeared as such a dazzling, shining Angel, Eve was inevitably deceived by him. Paul here alludes to this idea&ndash; not that his allusion means that he supported the idea.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6290','1','47','11','16','16','<p>11:16 <em>I say again, let no one think me foolish; but if you do, accept me as a fool so that I may also boast a little</em>- The accusation was that Paul was &quot;foolish&quot;, lacking the wisdom which the false teachers claimed to have. Paul is breaking his own principles now, acting as a fool, comparing himself with others, boasting in the flesh rather than the Spirit, and not as earlier leaving the Corinthians to realize his sincerity in their own spirit / conscience. He is driven by a desire as he puts it elsewhere to &quot;speak in human terms&quot; to by all means persuade them to remain with him and not go after the false teachers. Again we note that he (like the Lord Jesus) faces false statements and beliefs by going along with them and reasoning from their wrong perspective. If they thought him a fool, he will reason with them from the starting point that he is a fool- rather than protesting multiple times that he is being slandered and is no fool.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6291','1','47','11','17','17','<p>11:17- see on 1 Cor. 7:11.</p><p><em>What I will now speak in this confidence of boasting, I speak not after the Lord but as in foolishness</em>- &quot;After the Lord&quot; is a reference to his opening statement in this section that he is now going to reason with them according to the gentle humility of Christ (10:1). He is not saying that this record of his words is not Divinely inspired. This is yet further evidence that 2 Corinthians is an inspired record of a flow of consciousness, whereby Paul wrote down what he thought and felt at the time. This explains the apparent tensions- in this case, between approaching them &quot;after the Lord&quot; Jesus, and yet now departing from His meekness and gentleness in order by all means to persuade them on the terms of comparison which they had set up.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6292','1','47','11','18','18','<p>11:18 <em>Seeing that many boast after the flesh, I will boast also</em>- He is seeking to outboast his boastful competitors, despite having earlier stated that he dare not ever compare himself with others, for that was &quot;not wise&quot; (10:12). As noted on :16 and :17, this was a departure from his own principles.&nbsp;</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6293','1','47','11','19','19','<p>11:19 <em>For being wise, you bear with the foolish gladly</em>- This kind of sarcasm is not really much of an argument, and seems more reflective of Paul\'s anger, the anger of love unrequited, than any serious attempt to persuade the Corinthians. He is calling the competitors &quot;foolish&quot;, and clearly thinks the Corinthians are not really &quot;wise&quot; because they are following such fools. But in terms of winning their hearts and minds for Christ and himself, such language and quips were surely hardly effective, indeed quite the opposite.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6294','1','47','11','20','20','<p>11:20 <em>For it seems you follow a man if he brings you into bondage, if he devours you, if he takes you captive, if he exalts himself, if he hits you on the face</em>- The &quot;bondage&quot; and &quot;captivity&quot; was to the Mosaic law, and Paul often uses this imagery in writing of the Law in Romans and Galatians. The \'devouring\' probably referred to the financial demands made upon them by the false teachers. Why would immoral Gentile Christians be at all attracted by such Judaists? As noted on Titus, such false teachers were attractive to the weak Gentile Christians because their conscience about their misbehaviour was salved, on the basis of paying some money and doing a few symbolic acts of obedience. Many religions have swept to mass popularity on the same basis. These false teachers exalted themselves over their flock and were aggressive to them (&quot;hits you on the face&quot;). And still they returned for more. One wonders why aggressive priests in popular churches have any loyalty from their flocks when they behave likewise. But they do- because they are all about guilt tripping a spiritually weak flock and then demanding money and symbolic obedience. Smiting on the face was a punishment for heresy or blasphemy within the synagogue system (Mt. 5:39; Acts 23:2), although it was often administered gently and more as a symbolic gesture. They who were so immoral, replete with church prostitutes according to 1 Corinthians, were willing to be beaten for their supposed apostasy from Jewish ritual law. And doubtless after receiving it, they felt clean in their conscience and were willing to support and pay those who had punished them.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6295','1','47','11','21','21','<p>11:21 <em>To my shame, I can say, we were too weak to do that- </em>Such leadership as discussed on :20 was seen as &quot;strong&quot;. Paul sarcastically says that he was too weak to have treated his flock like that.</p><p><em>Yet wherein any is bold (I speak in foolishness), I am bold </em>also- What follows is some sort of encomium, a list of a person\'s biographical achievements. But it is presented as a sarcasm about Paul&rsquo;s encomium see on Gal. 1:10. Here in 2 Cor. 11:21-12:10, all the classic elements of the encomium are to be found- his origin and birth, training, accomplishments, comparison with others etc. But he has written that those who compare themselves with others (<em>synkrinontes</em>) are fools (2 Cor. 10:12), and that he himself has been speaking as a fool, a raving madman. That was what he thought of an encomium after the flesh. This is all a needful lesson for our generation, surrounded as we are by pressure to trust in education, achievements, being humanly cool and impressive. Paul goes on to say that actually, he prefers as a Christian to &quot;boast of things that show my weakness&quot; (2 Cor. 11:30). Instead of speaking of glorious &quot;deeds of the body&quot;, he speaks of his labours, imprisonments, beatings etc. And thus he draws out the paradox, incredible for the first century mind- his real strength and power is in his weakness, for it was this that made him trust in God and in the grace of the Lord Jesus (2 Cor. 12:10). Instead of impressing those around him, Paul sought to impress the Father and Son above. His strength was not, as society then thought, in what he had inherited and developed from the communities into which he was born- it was rather in the grace of God transforming his character. His patron, his teacher and elder, was the Lord Jesus, and the God who raised Jesus from the dead (Gal. 1:1; Rom. 8:11), rather than any visible \'elder\' of his natural communities.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6296','1','47','11','22','22','<p>11:22 <em>Are they Hebrews? So am I. Are they Israelites? So am I. Are they the seed of Abraham? So am I</em>- Clearly the false teachers were Jews, confirming that the \'Satan\' referred to in :14 is some kind of personification of the entire Jewish resistance to Paul\'s work. Paul could have argued on a more spiritual level, as he does in Romans and Galatians, that ethnic descent is irrelevant. But here he takes a more human approach, arguing with them on the same terms of reference which they use.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6297','1','47','11','23','23','<p>11:23 <em>Are they servants of Christ? (I speak as like a madman) I more, with far greater labours, far more imprisonments, with countless beatings, and often near death</em>- We note that only a fraction of Paul\'s sufferings are recorded in Acts, which is a reminder that Biblical history is highly condensed. We see a fraction of the biography of the people we encounter in the pages of the Bible. Many of the imprisonments and beatings would have been at the hand of the synagogue system, which had the authority to discipline their members with temporary arrests and beatings. As we will also note on :24, Paul could have avoided these by making a clean break with Judaism, leaving the ministry to the Jew to Peter as the Lord intended, and going solely to the Gentiles. But he chose not to follow completely the Lord\'s intention for his ministry- and suffered for it. I have given multiple examples in commentary on Acts. This doesn\'t mean the Lord didn\'t work with him; but as in our own lives, going His way is easier than insisting upon our own ways. Some of the beatings may have been from the Romans; but in this case, we wonder why they beat him, seeing that they did not beat Roman citizens like Paul (Acts 22:25,26; 23:27). Perhaps he had been unable to prove his citizenship in some cases; or perhaps he preferred to identify as a Jew and downplayed his Roman citizenship, suffering for it, because he so wished to identify with Israel in order to bring Israel to the Lord Jesus. In Philippi he seems to have kept quiet about his citizenship until after he had been scourged. But again, so much of this could have been avoided if Paul had followed the path of ministry envisaged by the Lord, to go to the Gentiles and leave the Jews to Peter.</p><p>Paul was ever aware of his own proneness to failure. He saw himself as tempted to be like the man in the parable who thought he should have more, because he had laboured more abundantly than the others (Mt. 20:12 Gk. = 2 Cor. 11:23).</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6298','1','47','11','24','24','<p>11:24 <em>Of the Jews five times I received thirty nines lashes- </em>When the world reviled him, Paul saw himself as the beaten prophets Jesus had spoken about (2 Cor. 11:24,25 = Mt. 21:35).&nbsp;But such punishments from the synagogue system could have been avoided if Paul had not gone to the Jews and left them to Peter; see on :23. Forty lashes were thought enough to kill a man, and the thirty nine lash punishment was only to be given to a man once in his lifetime, according to synagogue law. The repeated experience of such major beating would have left Paul\'s back a real mess. In Acts 22:25 we get the impression Paul was willing to be scourged yet again, but at the last minute played the card of his Roman citizenship to avoid it. Perhaps this was because the previous lashings had left him so deformed and infected that he realized that if he were to be lashed again he would probably die.</p><p>The pattern of preaching which we see in the Father and in the Lord Jesus must be our model. He identified with us in order to \'get through\' to us; the power of His personality and work rests in the fact that He was genuinely human. God Himself chose this method, of manifestation in a Son of our nature, in order to redeem us. We can do likewise, in identifying with our audience; living as they do when in a mission field; learning their language, both literally and metaphorically; patient bearing with those suffering from depression, Aspergers, alcoholism, various neuroses... to win them. Thus to the Gentiles Paul became as a Gentile; and as a Jew in order that he might win them who were under the law (1 Cor. 9:20). This is exemplified by the fact that he underwent synagogue floggings (2 Cor. 11:24)- which were only administered to Jews who willingly submitted to the punishment because they were orthodox Jews. This was the extent to which Paul became as a Jew in the hope of winning the Jews. Fly by preachers, seeking to establish a colony of their home base, will never achieve much lasting success. Paul would pay any price in order to identify with his audience, in order to win them to Christ. He was living out the spirit of Jesus, who likewise identified Himself with us to the maximum extent in order to save us. &ldquo;Forty lashes minus one&rdquo; was a synagogue punishment, based on Dt. 25:2,3, which could only be administered to members of the synagogue community- and apparently, the members had the right under local Roman law to resign from the synagogue and escape the punishment. It would&rsquo;ve been far easier for Paul to disown Judaism and insist he was not a member of any synagogue. But he didn&rsquo;t. Why? Surely because this was the extent to which he was willing to be all things to all men, to truly be a Jew in order to save the Jews. And we too can choose daily the extent to which we identify ourselves with those whom we seek to save. It&rsquo;s not simply the case of a Western missionary suffering privations along with the impoverished local population to whom he or she seeks to preach. It&rsquo;s about us each getting involved in the mess of others&rsquo; lives, at great personal cost, in order to show true solidarity with them, on which basis we can more effectively witness to them. This is surely the way in which we are to &lsquo;love the world&rsquo;; this inhuman world, this enormous collection of desperate, lonely people, into whose mundane experiences we can enter simply through genuine, caring, person-to-person encounter. And by doing this we will find ourselves. For it seems to me that the truly creative and original personalities, the Lord Jesus being the supremest, are those who give of themselves in order to enter into the lives and sufferings of others. And that, by the way, may explain why there are so few truly freethinking minds. Paul didn&rsquo;t just love the Jewish people in theory, he didn&rsquo;t draw a distinction between the Jews as persons, and their role or status before God. He loved them as persons, and so he suffered for them in order to save them.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6299','1','47','11','25','25','<p>11:25 <em>Three times I was beaten with rods, once was I stoned, three times I suffered shipwreck, a night and a day have I been adrift at sea- </em>Only one beating with rods is recorded (Acts 16:22 s.w.), but Acts records only a fraction of Paul\'s sufferings. Beating with rods was forbidden to Roman citizens by the <em>Lex Porcia</em>, but Paul kept quiet about his Roman citizenship in order to receive it (Acts 16:37). He so wished to identify as a Jew in order to save the Jews; all he had to do was utter the words <em>Civis Romanus sum </em>and he could have avoided these beatings with rods, which often caused the death of the victim. We must ask to what extent we are willing to suffer in order to achieve identity with those we seek to save by our witness. The shipwrecks were prior to that on the journey to Rome; the Acts record of Paul\'s travels says nothing of them and we wonder how many other dramas were not recorded.</p><p>Paul endured one of the most traumatic lives ever lived- beaten with rods, shipwrecked, sleepless, cold, naked, betrayed, robbed, beaten, and so much of this isn&rsquo;t recorded (e.g. the three shipwrecks and two of the beatings with rods he speaks of in 2 Cor. 11 aren&rsquo;t mentioned in Acts). And yet he implies that even more than all that, he felt the pressure of care for his brethren in the churches. His heart so bled for them&hellip; Paul lived a traumatic life, lived with weakness, fear, trembling, tears, distress, dying daily, burdened beyond measure, despairing of life, having the sentence of death, sleeplessness&hellip; and all this would have had quite some effect upon him nervously. Almost certainly it would have lead him to be depressive, and this may explain some of these flashes of anger. Yet these flecks of pride and anger reflect something of Paul\'s former self. He is described as fuming out hatred against the Christians like an animal; he was driven by hate and anger. Stephen\'s death sentence was against Pharisaic principles; and it was a studied rejection of the more gentle, tolerant attitude taught by Gamaliel, Paul\'s early mentor (&quot;though I distribute all my belonging to feed the poor...&quot; is Paul virtually quoting Gamaliel- he clearly was aware of his stance). People like Paul who come from strict, authoritarian backgrounds can have a tendency to anger, and yet in Paul there seems also to have operated an inferiority complex, a longing for power, and a repressed inner guilt. Although Paul changed from an angry man to one dominated by love, to the extent that he could write hymns of love such as 1 Cor. 13, there were times when under provocation the old bitterness and anger flashed back. We too have these moments, and yet in the fact that Paul too experienced them even in spiritual maturity, we have some measure of comfort. &nbsp;</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6300','1','47','11','26','26','<p>11:26 <em>On frequent journeys, in danger from rivers, in danger from robbers, in danger from my own people, in danger from Gentiles, in danger in the city, in danger in the wilderness, in danger at sea, in danger from false brothers</em>- Travel in the first century was a risky business; flash floods &quot;rivers&quot; in Asia Minor claimed many lives. And Paul additionally had to cope with the opposition of both Jews and Gentiles. To obey the great commission to take the Gospel out into the world was therefore a call to face danger and hardship. In spiritual terms, that same calling has not been made any less radical for we who face so many distractions and issues which would likewise discourage us from obeying it.</p><p>The &quot;false brothers&quot; were surely those of Gal. 2:4, the Jews bent on derailing Paul\'s missionary work by entering the churches he founded under the guise of being converts. Paul is here hinting that he knows exactly who the false teachers of Corinth are; or as he puts it in 2:11, he was not ignorant of the devices of the Jewish satan. Paul mentions this problem last in this list because he wanted to highlight how aware he was of it.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6301','1','47','11','27','27','<p>11:27 <em>In toil and hardship</em>- Literally, weariness and pain. Perhaps Paul\'s traumatic life resulted in some form of M.E. or similar disease, causing pain and sucking his energy, resulting in insomnia.</p><p><em>In many a sleepless night, in hunger and thirst, in frequent fastings, in cold and nakedness- </em>Paul loved Israel with the love of Christ: he describes his hunger, thirst, nakedness, insomnia and loss of all things in the very language used about Israel\'s condemnation (2 Cor. 11:27 alludes Dt. 28:48). In other words, he saw himself as somehow bearing their punishment for apostasy in his own life, as if he was some kind of suffering representative for them. His sufferings were the very opposite of what the Judaists believed should accompany an accredited spiritual teacher, for they practiced a form of the prosperity Gospel, having a proverb that &quot;a goodly house, a fair wife, and a soft couch&rdquo; were the prerogatives of the &ldquo;disciples of the wise&rdquo;. Paul is in a way confirming their secular view that he was \'unwise\'. But as he has stated in 1 Cor. 1, there is a total inversion of secular wisdom and blessing for those who are of the Spirit.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6302','1','47','11','28','28','<p>11:28 <em>Besides those things that are without, there is the daily pressure of my anxiety for all the churches</em>- Paul identified his biggest pressure as &quot;the care of all the churches&quot; which he said \'came upon (Gk. to throng / mob / rush at) (him) daily\' (2 Cor. 11:28)- as if he woke up each morning and had these anxieties thronging his mind.&nbsp;</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6303','1','47','11','29','29','<p>11:29- see on 1 Cor. 8:9.</p><p><em>Who is weak, without me being weak? Who is made to fall, and I am not indignant?</em>- The word he uses for &ldquo;weak&quot; is one which features frequently in his writings, and it nearly always refers to the spiritually weak (Rom. 4:19; 14:1,2,21; 1 Cor. 8:9,11,12). He was so sensitive to his brethren that when he considered their spiritual weakness, he felt the same. He identified with them, he could put his arm around someone who was all slipping way and say &ldquo;I&rsquo;m with you&quot; and so evidently mean it. He had a genuine and obvious sense of solidarity with them. He wasn&rsquo;t critical of them to the extent that he made a barrier between him and them. They knew his disapproval of their ways, but yet it was so evident that his heart bled for them. And when Paul saw a brother being offended, he burnt. His heart burnt and bled as he saw someone drifting away with a chip on their shoulder. He didn&rsquo;t just shrug and think \'Well that&rsquo;s up to them, their choice\'. He cared for them. That brother, that sister, and their future meant so much to him. If Paul had lived in the 21st century, he would have telephoned them, written to them, visited them, met with them regularly. To be weak and to be offended are bracketed in Rom. 14:21: &quot;Your brother is offended, or is made weak&quot;. And here in 2 Cor. 11:29 we have the same idea: &quot;Who is weak, and I am not weak? Who is offended, and I burn not?&quot;. The parallels imply that if the weak brother was offended, Paul himself was as it were offended, even though he himself didn&rsquo;t stumble. He could identify with the spiritual weakness of others to the point of feeling that he himself had committed it or was in the shoes of the sinner- even though he himself was innocent. Paul could share with the Corinthians that he &lsquo;burnt&rsquo; every time a brother stumbled from the way, feeling weak with the weak. The \'burning\' could be a reference to the figurative usage of fire as the end destruction of the condemned at the last day. Paul felt their condemnation as if it were happening to him. He did not shrug and turn away but rather felt their spiritual situation as being his, such was his identity with them. He was no mere platform speaker, or a church member only theoretically connected with their brethren by common ascent to a statement of faith.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6304','1','47','11','30','30','<p>11:30 <em>If it is necessary for me to boast, I will boast of the things that concern my weakness</em>- The supreme qualification was in his weakness. We noted on :21 that Paul has been presenting a kind of inverted form of the biographical list of achievements which was commonly known as an \'encomium\'. And now he sums up his humiliations with an incident which for him epitomized the humiliation which characterized his entire ministry. His glorying in his infirmities in 12:5 is similar.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6305','1','47','11','31','31','<p>11:31 <em>The God and Father of the Lord Jesus, He who is blessed for always, knows that I do not lie to you</em>- The Corinthians considered Paul to be a liar, hence his frequent protestations that he is speaking the truth before God. Judaism spoke of God as the ever blessed One, but Paul here makes it clear that this title is true through His being the Father of the Lord Jesus, through whom His blessings are now articulated to men.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6306','1','47','11','32','32','<p>11:32 <em>In Damascus, the governor, under Aretas the king, guarded the city of the Damascenes in order to capture me</em>- Paul has his historical facts correct, for Aretas was an Arabian king from Petra who briefly ruled over Damascus. If the Bible is a forgery or uninspired, there would be major blunders in historical fact; but there are not. The Jews clearly had influence with him, far more than the Acts record indicates, and had his whole garrison (AV- an appropriate term, seeing Aretas of Petra had only recently taken control in Damascus) trying to catch Paul. There was therefore a mobilization of a large number of soldiers in order to stop Paul escaping Damascus. Hence the impression it left upon Paul.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6307','1','47','11','33','33','<p>11:33 <em>And only through a window I was let down in a basket by the wall and escaped his hands</em>- Paul sees this escape through a window in a basket as so humiliating because it associates him with David\'s escape from Saul\'s persecution. And Paul- the former Saul- saw himself as having persecuted David-Jesus and was ashamed of it. Paul seems to take a certain pleasure in this inversion of values. He boasts of how his greatest moment was when he was let <em>down</em> a wall in a basket, in fear for his life (2 Cor. 11:30-33). &quot;In antiquity a Roman soldier who was first up a wall and into a conquered city would win a special award called a wall crown. Paul says he will boast of being first <em>down</em> the wall&quot;- running from the enemy (Ben Witherington, <em>The Paul Quest</em> p. 124). He was the very reverse of the classical ancient warrior. This inversion of values is just as hard and counter-cultural to live by in our world. It\'s quite possible that garbage was lowered over the wall into a rubbish tip at the foot of the wall, which would have added to the humiliation. Outside the city, with wild dogs howling amongst the stinking garbage... this was the Biblical picture of condemnation. And Paul experienced it and through that humiliation was saved. In essence, we pass through the same experience.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6308','1','47','12','1','1','<p>12:1 <i>I must go on boasting (though there is nothing to be gained by it). I will go on to visions and revelations of the Lord</i>- I have earlier explained the various tensions and apparent contradictions within 2 Corinthians by proposing that Paul is writing down his feelings and emotions as a flow of consciousness, albeit recorded under inspiration. This explains the volatile change of feelings and approach, one moment passionately \'in love\' with them, the next bitterly angry and resentful against them. He has explained that indeed boasting or attempting to outboast his competitors is not the way to go. Here in 12:1 he again recognizes that, but feels compelled to go on boasting. In chapter 11, Paul has as it were concluded his list of sufferings by citing what to him was the supremest humiliation- being lowered in a basket from the walls of Damascus into the rubbish tip beneath. But now he seems to revert to boasting about his qualifications in terms which might impress his competitors and their supporters. This reversion to a previous theme which he had supposedly concluded is evidence enough that indeed, we are dealing with a flow of consciousness record. &quot;Visions and revelations&quot; were the very things which the false teachers claimed to have. </p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6309','1','47','12','2','2','<p>12:2 <i>I knew a man in Christ, fourteen years ago-</i> Paul makes one of his most significant boasts mindful that he should not be boasting really. This may explain his reference to himself only in indirect terms, in an attempt not to boast overmuch about such a holy thing. He does this elsewhere (see on Gal. 1:6). &quot;I knew a man&quot; would be better &quot;I know a man&quot; (RV); the person in view was still alive. The vision which he received may well have included something about Jew and Gentile unity; for 14 years previously on some chronologies would take us to the time of the Jerusalem Council. Or the reference could be to the trance in the temple (Acts 22:17) in which he was told to go to the Gentiles.</p><p><i>Whether in the body, I do not know, or whether out of the body, I do not know; God knows- </i>Paul stresses this twice. Perhaps his idea was that the mode of the vision was unimportant; it was the message which was all important. The mode of revelation was important to the Jewish mysticists; whilst Paul is indeed trying to outboast them \'foolishly\', he is also saying that the mode is insignificant. Whether a man went to Heaven in a bodily form to get a revelation is irrelevant compared to the message.</p><p><i>Such a person was caught up to the third heaven</i>- The picture of being &quot;caught up&quot; is presented right after that of Paul being let down the wall of Damascus as refuse, into the rubbish tip at the foot of the walls; an incident he presents as his greatest humiliation. But it was that bringing down which was the basis for his being lifted up so high, following the pattern of the Lord Jesus.</p><p>The idea of seven heavens currently held in Judaism and Islam is not Biblical. There were at Paul\'s time only three understandings of heaven: the literal air, the sky, and Heaven itself where God dwells. Paul may simply mean \'Heaven\' but he uses this Jewish terminology because his opponents in view were Judaists. Another popular suggestion is that the first heaven refers to the Mosaic law; the second heaven to the Christian dispensation, and the &quot;third heaven&quot; to the Kingdom age. But this is problematic because one would expect \'heavens and earth\' to be the phrase used for a dispensation of things. And before the Mosaic law there was also some form of Divine dispensation upon earth, which this schema ignores. So I read Paul as simply referring to \'Heaven\', which he parallels with &quot;paradise&quot; (:4). Paradise was understood in Jewish terms as Heaven; although one could argue that it refers to the Kingdom of God on earth when the paradise of Eden is restored. We would note in that case that Paul has recently presented the Corinthian church as Eve in paradise, now tempted by the serpent of the Judaizers (11:3). If paradise was where the Corinthians were now situated, in prospect at least, perhaps Paul means that he saw a heavenly vision of how things really are for the church from the Heavenly viewpoint. It would be this vision which motivated Paul to keep on keeping on so tenaciously with the Corinthians, and would explain his obsessive insistence upon the success of the Jerusalem Poor Fund. This heavenly vision of how God saw the Gentile believers would have likewise inspired Paul to continually view them as being&nbsp;justified in Christ and acceptable to God. It would explain his extraordinary motivation for the Corinthians, and why he mentions this vision at this point. He doesn\'t utter in words what he saw- because his ministry for them was a public statement of his striving to achieve that ideal.</p><p><br />We are real life men and women, only too aware that although yes, we are in Christ, we are also all too human still. We still sin the sins and think the thoughts and feel the feelings of those around us. We are only who we are, born in such a town, living in such a city, doing a job, trying to provide for a family. In our minds eye we see the spotless lamb of God, moving around Galilee 2000 years ago, doing good, healing the sick. But He was there, and we are here now, today, in all our weakness and worldly distraction. He was as He was, but <i>we</i> are as we are. Reading through his letters, it is apparent that Paul saw himself as two people: a natural man, a Jew from Tarsus, a Roman citizen living in the Mediterranean world... and also, a man in Christ. This is why he here says of himself: &ldquo;I knew a man in Christ&rdquo;, who had great visions 14 years previously (at the council of Jerusalem of Acts 15), and who was subsequently given a &ldquo;thorn in the flesh&rdquo;. &ldquo;Of such an one will I glory: yet of myself I will not glory&rdquo;, he writes (2 Cor 12:5), as if separating himself from this more spiritually exalted man who saw these visions. Paul is surely telling us that he sees himself as two people. He makes the point clearly: &ldquo;I will not be a fool... I am become a fool&rdquo; (:6,11). He was the greatest apostle; although he was nothing (:11). This language comes to a crisis in 12:10: &ldquo;When I i.e. the natural Paul am weak, then am I the spiritual Paul strong&rdquo;.</p><p>The Corinthians were mainly Gentiles, but Paul speaks of them as &ldquo;When you were Gentiles&hellip;&rdquo; (1 Cor. 12:2 RV). They had a new racial identity in Christ, and yet, he also reminded them at times that they were Gentiles. We too cannot obliterate who we are or where we came from. But superimposed upon this must be the realisation than now, we are in Christ.</p><p>Paul is in many ways a working model of how we should be aware of the two people within us. In writing to Corinth, he was highly sensitive to the danger of sinning by justifying himself as he needed to. To overcome this problem, he speaks (through the Spirit) as if he is two quite different people; the fleshly man, and the spiritual man. 2 Cor. 11 is full of statements concerning himself, which he makes &quot;as a fool&rdquo;. His frequent usage of this word &quot;fool&quot; points us back to the Proverbs, where a &quot;fool&quot; is the man of the flesh. Ecc. 10:2 says that a fool has a \'left handed\' mind, which in Jewish thinking was a reference to the &quot;man of the flesh&quot; of the N.T. There are a number of apparent contradictions between passages in 2 Cor. 11,12 which are explicable once it is appreciated that Paul is speaking firstly &quot;in the flesh&quot;, and then concerning his spiritual man. Thus he insists that he is not a fool (11:16; 12:6), whilst saying that he is a fool (12:11). He says he will not boast about himself, but then he does just that. He claims to be among the greatest apostles, and in the same breath says he is nothing (12:11). His boasting was &quot;not after the Lord&quot;, i.e. the man Christ Jesus within Him was not speaking, but the fool, the man of the flesh, was speaking (11:17). The supreme example of this separation of flesh and spirit in Paul\'s thinking is shown by 12:2: &quot;I knew a man in Christ (who heard great revelations)... of such an one will I glory, but of myself will I not glory&quot;. But 12:7 clearly defines this &quot;man&quot; as Paul: &quot;lest I should be exalted... through the abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh&quot;. The &quot;man in Christ&quot; of whom Paul spoke was his own spiritual man, who was &quot;in Christ&quot;. It is interesting that here Paul defines &quot;myself&quot; as his natural man, whereas in Rom. 7:25 he speaks of &quot;myself&quot; as his spiritual man. The point is made that at different times we identify ourselves either with the man of the flesh, or with the spiritual man within us. In 2 Cor. 11,12, Paul consciously chose to identify himself with the natural man, in order to boast to the Corinthians. It is worth noting that &ldquo;fourteen years ago&quot; takes us back to the Council at Jerusalem. The revelations given to Paul then were probably confirmation that the Gospel should indeed be preached to the Gentiles. This was the &quot;third Heaven&quot; dispensation. The wonder that Paul would be used to spread the Gospel world-wide so mentally exalted Paul that he needed a thorn in the flesh to bring Him down to earth. Yet, for the most part, we seem to shrug our shoulders at the wonder of our preaching commission.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6310','1','47','12','3','3','<p>12:3 <i>And I knew such a man (whether in the body, or apart from the body, I do not know; God knows)</i>- See on :2 <i>Whether in the body, I do not know, or whether out of the body, I do not know; God knows</i>. The word for word repetition is the way Jews emphasized the totality of their truthfulness. Paul is emphasizing the wonder of the things heard; the form in which they were heard was utterly unimportant compared to the content of the message. And that principle remains true to this day.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6311','1','47','12','4','4','<p>12:4 <i>How he was caught up into Paradise- </i>See on :2 <i>Such a person was caught up to the third heaven</i>. Paul appears to equate paradise with &quot;the third heaven&quot;, but it\'s also feasible that he is describing two stages of exaltation; one to the third heaven, i.e. Heaven, and then further into &quot;paradise&quot;.</p><p><i>And heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter</i>- Alluding to how Moses saw the greatest visions of God of any man in the Old Testament; visions which he could not repeat; he only repeated the words of command which he was given. He did not tell Israel what he saw in Ex. 34. It could be that Paul is saying that what is heard in Paradise cannot be spoken on earth; or at least, cannot be articulated \'lawfully\', in the terms of the Mosaic law. In this case, such visions are not really any confirmation of having Divine authority in one&rsquo;s message. Therefore the claims of the Jewish false teachers, and those of Paul, were equal on one level- but were unimportant, because their message was not going to be comprised of what they may or may not have heard in Paradise. Because what is heard there is &quot;unspeakable&quot;.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6312','1','47','12','5','5','<p>12:5- see on 1 Cor. 8:9.</p><p><i>On behalf of such a one will I boast, but on my own behalf I will not boast, save in my weaknesses- </i>This is as stated in 11:30. Paul is inverting all human wisdom and worldviews here by saying that greatness and qualification is in weakness and not human strength. Earlier Paul has reminded them that he first preached the Gospel to them in &quot;weakness&quot; (1 Cor. 2:3 s.w.). He seems to have in view physical frailty of health, which would encourage the view that the thorn in the flesh which we will now read of was some physical weakness.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6313','1','47','12','6','6','<p>12:6 <i>For if I wanted to boast, I would not be foolish, for I would be speaking the truth. But I will not boast, lest anyone should account me above that which he saw me to be, or hears from me- </i>This awkward statement would appear to be Paul\'s way of explaining why he has just written about himself in the third person, and apparently distancing himself from the Paul who really did have things to truthfully boast about. Paul has now twice stated in two verses &quot;I will not boast&quot;, whilst he is evidently doing just that. His argument that \'This isn\'t really me...\' has limited value. I would say that this letter is the record of a flow of consciousness, and Paul is baring his heart to them. The very genuine love he has for them and passion for their salvation and the unity of Christ\'s body has led him to get worked up into a frenzy of trying to persuade them by all means.&nbsp;</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6314','1','47','12','7','7','<p>12:7 <i>That I should not be exalted overmuch</i>- The usage of words with the <i>huper</i> prefix is common in this section. The self proclaimed <i>huper</i> or super apostles could not be equalled by Paul because a true servant of Christ will be held back from being <i>huper</i> exalted. Paul repeats this phrase twice in this verse to emphasize the point.</p><p><i>A thorn in the flesh</i>- An impediment of some sort. Whatever or whoever the opposition, there could be no thorn in the Spirit; any retardation of Paul\'s work was only on a human level. The thorn was Satan\'s &quot;messenger&quot;, and I suggest below that this refers to an individual coordinating the Jewish campaign against Paul\'s missionary endeavours. But there are other quite feasible suggestions about the thorn in the flesh; and these are not to be excluded. It\'s quite possible that the repeated beatings Paul suffered from the Satan the Jews resulted in various health issues such as poor eyesight which meant that indeed, the human &quot;thorn&quot; resulted in \'thorns\' in Paul\'s physical health. </p><p>Here, then, are some other alternatives concerning the thorn:<br /><b>Poor Eyesight</b><br />Gal. 4:10-13 speaks of an \'infirmity in the flesh\' which would have led many to despise Paul\'s preaching; and yet the Galatians overlooked this when they first heard Paul\'s preaching. Speaking of the same period of time, Paul reminisces how they would have been willing to pluck out their own eyes and give them to him (Gal. 4:15). This would seem to make a fairly firm connection between the &quot;thorn in the flesh&quot; of 2 Cor. 12:7 and the &quot;infirmity in the flesh&quot; of poor eyesight. Thus he concludes the Galatian letter with a&nbsp;reference to the large letter he had written with his own hand (Gal. 6:11); not &quot; large&quot; in the sense of long, but perhaps referring to his physically large and unimpressive handwriting. Paul &quot;earnestly beholding the council&quot; employs a Greek medical term for squinting as a result of poor eyesight (Acts 23:1). <b>&nbsp; <br /></b><br /><b>Malaria</b><br />The description of Paul being with the Corinthians in &quot;weakness and... trembling&quot; (1 Cor. 2:3) uses a specific medical term describing the malaria shakes. &quot;Weakness&quot; is the same word as here in 2 Cor. 12:5, where the thorn in the flesh is a &quot;weakness&quot; given which actually qualifies Paul as an apostle. This would explain why he was &quot;in peril of waters&quot; (Gk. \'rivers\'; 2 Cor. 11:26)- the breeding grounds of mosquitoes. Poor eyesight could be associated with malaria; although it us difficult to understand the malaria just beginning in mid-life as suddenly as the \'thorn in the flesh\' passage seems to suggest. Paul may well have had malaria, as any such traveller was likely to- quite in addition to any physical \'thorn in the flesh\'.&nbsp; </p><p><b>A Spiritual Struggle</b><br />However, there are reasons to think that whilst Paul may have had a physical ailment, the &quot;thorn in the flesh&quot; may have referred to a spiritual affliction. One would expect to read about a thorn in the <i>body</i> if Paul was only speaking of a physical weakness. But in Paul\'s thinking, &quot;the flesh&quot; so evidently refers to the more abstract things of human nature. The context of the &quot;thorn in the flesh&quot; passage would suggest that it was a spiritual weakness. Paul says that he will not boast of himself, &quot;except in my infirmities&quot; (2 Cor. 12:5). One of his &quot;infirmities&quot; was therefore his &quot;thorn in the flesh&quot;. He is saying that he will not boast of his physical sufferings (which might include his weak eyesight) and achievements, rather he will exult in the fact that he, a man riddled with spiritual infirmity, especially one particular thorn in the flesh, had been used by God, and God\'s grace was sufficient to overcome all his spiritual weakness. Now this would fit in with the quintessence of Paul\'s belief: that by grace alone, not human achievement, God works through human weakness to bring about His purpose. Paul isn\'t adding to his list of physical glorying by saying \'And you know, on top of all this, I\'ve had to struggle all my life with physical weakness\'. This would only be continuing his boasting of 2 Cor. 11. But now he changes, and says that he wants to glory in his spiritual weakness, and how God has worked with him despite that.&nbsp; </p><p>Paul asked for the thorn to be taken away; but the answer was that God\'s <i>grace</i> was sufficient. Grace tends to be associated with forgiveness and justification, rather than with the ability to keep on living with a physical ailment. Likewise Moses, Paul\'s hero and prototype, asked a similar three times for entry to the land, and was basically given the same answer: that God\'s gracious forgiveness was sufficient for him. &nbsp; </p><p><b>Women?</b><br />When Paul talks about being buffeted by a thorn in the flesh, he is in fact almost quoting passages from the LXX of Num. 33:55 and Josh. 23:13, where &quot;thorns&quot; which would buffet the <i>eyes</i> of Israel&nbsp;were the Canaanite tribes (cp. Ez. 28:24); and especially, in the context, their women. If they intermarried, those women and what they brought with them would be made by God as thorns in Israel\'s flesh. The implication could be that Paul had not driven out his Canaanites earlier, and therefore God gave them to Him as a thorn in the flesh, just as He had done to Israel earlier. There is fair reason to think that Paul had been married; he could not have been a member of the Sanhedrin and thus had the power to vote for the murder of the early martyrs unless he had been married and had children (Acts 26:10). His comment that he wished all men to be in his marital position (1 Cor. 7:8) has another slant in this case: he wished them to have had the marriage experience, but be in the single state. As a leading Pharisee, his wife would have been from an appropriate background. &quot; ...for whom I have suffered the loss of all things&quot; would then have been written with a sideways glance back at his wife, children he never saw... all that might have been. In gripping autobiography, Paul relates the innocent days when (as a child) he lived without the knowledge of law and therefore sin. But then, the concept of commandments registered with him; and this &quot;wrought in me all manner of concupiscence&quot; (Rom. 7:8). &quot;Concupiscence&quot; is a conveniently archaic word for lust; and in the thinking and writing of Paul, the Greek <i>epithumia</i> is invariably used in a sexual context.&nbsp; &nbsp; </p><p>As an ardent Pharisee, with all the charisma of the unashamed extremist and evidently rising leader, it is almost certain that the inevitable interplay of sexuality and spirituality, of flesh and spirit, would have played itself out. And after conversion, the inevitable attraction of the committed missionary would have been evident; not least in the charismatic preaching of a new and ultimately true religion which was largely comprised of young / middle aged females (according to contemporary historians). No wonder Paul\'s slanderers made him out to be immoral; it was the easiest slur to cast. At Thessalonica he was even accused of preaching solely in order to get the praise and financial support of women (so 1 Thess. 2:3-12 implies). And as a man, with the commandments of God producing in him all manner of concupiscence, he would not have lightly shrugged off all these temptations. If this &quot; thorn in the flesh&quot; became particularly strong at a certain time, this could be seen as reference to the beginning of some illicit relationship.&nbsp; <br />And yet it cannot be overlooked that as outlined above, there does seem to be an evident link between the thorn in the flesh and literal blindness (Gal. 4:10-13 = 2 Cor. 12:7). The explanation may be that because of Paul\'s wandering eyes and mind, his sight was severely impaired. He likens his ailment to a man plucking out his eyes with his own hands (Gal. 4:15), using language unmistakably recalling the Lord\'s command to pluck out, with ones\' own hands, the eyes that offend, that we might enter the Kingdom. The command of Mt. 5:28,29 is in the very context of lustful thinking and looking. In His desire to save us, God has His way. Paul saw that his weakness for women would have cost him the Kingdom, and that therefore the Lord had plucked out his eyes. He had been given a thorn in his flesh spiritually; and so the Lord had given him a thorn in the flesh physically, that he might conquer that spiritual weakness. The other reference to plucking out the offending eye is in Mt. 18:9, in a context regarding the paramount need not to offend the little ones. Could it be that Paul\'s limitation was to protect some of his converts from stumbling? And so with us, the offending eye or limb must be plucked out or cut off; and if we will not do it, the Lord will: either now, by grace, or in the final destruction of condemnation. We either fall on the stone of the Lord and are broken now, or that stone will fall upon us, and grind us to powder. We either chose the baptism of fire now, or we will be consumed anyway by the fire of judgment. The logic of devotion, self-control and self-sacrifice is powerfully appealing.&nbsp; </p><p>God <i>gave</i> Paul his thorn in the flesh. Whilst God tempts no man- for temptation is a process internal to human nature- He may still have a hand in controlling the situations which lead to temptation. Hence the Lord bid us pray that the Father lead us not into temptation. Each of us has his own specific human weaknesses. When the apostle wrote of shedding <i>the</i> sin which doth so easily beset us (Heb. 12:1), he may have been suggesting that we each have our own specific weakness to overcome. This is certainly a comfort to us in our spiritual struggles. We aren\'t alone in them. They were given to us. We aren\'t alone with our nature. The purpose and plan of God for us is articulated even through the darkest nooks of our very essential being. Understanding this should make us the more patient with our brethren, whose evident areas of weakness are not ours. </p><p><i>A messenger of Satan</i>- The Satan in view is the Jewish opposition to Paul\'s missionary work. An envoy / messenger / representative of that Satan had been allowed by God to operate in order to stop Paul being over exalted. And yet the work of this &quot;thorn&quot; was a hindrance to the spread of the Gospel. It is quite possible that the Lord\'s work suffers because He has to work in such a way so as not to allow our pride to arise to such a point that we are turned out of the way to salvation. If we had developed to the point that we were not so prone to pride or other weaknesses, His work would prosper the more. There is the implication that one particular &ldquo;messenger&rdquo; of the Jewish Satan organized the persecution of Paul &ndash; Alexander (2 Tim. 4:14&ndash;15; 1 Tim. 1:20). The link between the messenger of Satan in 2 Corinthians 12:7 and those of 2 Corinthians 11:13&ndash;15 indicates that this person was a member of the ecclesia also. A primary application of the &quot;man of sin&quot; passage in 2 Thess. 2 may well be to this individual being in the temple (i.e. the church &ndash; 1 Tim. 3:15) of God, &ldquo;whose coming is after the working of (the Jewish) Satan&rdquo; (2 Thess. 2:9). This person could apparently do miracles &ndash; as could the Jewish Christians in the early church (Heb. 6:4&ndash;6). This man of sin is &ldquo;the son of perdition&rdquo; (2 Thess. 2:3), a phrase used to describe Judas (Jn. 17:12). This suggests an allusion back to Judas, and indicates that the man of sin might also be a Jew, who was within the ecclesia, as Judas was, but who betrayed Christ because he wanted the aims of Judaism to be fulfilled rather than those of Christ. The &ldquo;day of Christ&rdquo; referred to in 2 Thessalonians 2:2&ndash;3, before which time the man of sin must be developed, was primarily the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 &ndash; which again indicates a primary Jewish fulfilment of the &ldquo;man of sin&rdquo;. Notice that organized Jewish opposition to Paul&rsquo;s preaching was very intense at Thessalonica &ndash; Acts 17:5&ndash;13. The Lord Jesus could have returned in AD70 and therefore passages like 2 Thess. 2 had a possible fulfilment in the first century. His coming was delayed because the various preconditions were not met- so that such prophecies will be fulfilled in spirit but perhaps not to the letter in our last days.</p><p>The work of this messenger of Satan resulted in Paul developing the spiritual characteristic of humility. The Satan stopped Paul from being proud. Pride is produced by the Devil &ndash; 1 Timothy 3:6,7. So we have the situation where Satan stops the work of Satan. Again, this does not make sense under the traditional interpretation of Satan. Mark 7:20&ndash;23 says that pride is a result of our evil heart. Thus the trial brought on Paul by a person acting as a Satan to him stopped his evil desires &ndash; another use of the word &ldquo;Satan&rdquo; &ndash; from leading him into the sin of pride. &ldquo;Satan&rdquo; can be used to describe a man (e.g. Mt. 16:23) and the Greek word for messenger / angel can also apply to men (e.g. Mt. 11:10; Lk. 7:24; James 2:25). &ldquo;Satan&rdquo; may also refer to the adversarial Jewish system, and thus the messenger of Satan is most likely a man acting on behalf of the Jews.</p><p>Everywhere in Paul&rsquo;s writings, as well as in Revelation, &lsquo;Satan&rsquo; always has the definite article &ndash; apart from here. Likewise, this is the only time Paul uses the form <i>Satan</i> rather than his usual <i>satanas</i>. One reason for that could be that Paul is alluding to or quoting from known Jewish literature or ideas which mentioned a &ldquo;messenger of Satan&rdquo;. Another possibility is that he refers here to an Angel&ndash;Satan &ndash; for the Greek word translated &ldquo;messenger&rdquo; is also that for Angel. In this case, he saw himself as Job, suffering affliction from an Angel&ndash;adversary, in order to bring about his spiritual perfection. I have noted the similarities between Job and Paul elsewhere (See my<i> Bible Lives</i> Section 3-3-8).</p><p><i>To harass me, that I should not be exalted too much</i>- Paul uses the same word in 1 Cor. 4:11 concerning how Paul right then was being harassed. The reference was to Jewish instigated opposition to his mission. &ldquo;The messenger of Satan&rdquo; is probably the same as the ministers of Satan referred to in 2 Corinthians 11:13&ndash;15, which we have interpreted as the Judaizers in the early church who were discrediting Paul and seeking to undermine Christianity. The buffeting done by this &ldquo;messenger of Satan&rdquo; is defined in v. 10: &ldquo;Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in necessities, in persecutions...&rdquo; (i.e. in my thorn in the flesh which God will not take away). Note the parallel between the thorn and those things it caused. The reproaches refer to the Jewish ministers of Satan saying things like, &ldquo;his bodily presence is weak, and his speech contemptible&rdquo; (2 Cor. 10:10), as previously explained. The necessities and persecutions quite clearly refer to the constant waves of persecutions he received by the Jews which the book of Acts describe. This would fit the language of &ldquo;buffeting&rdquo; &ndash; implying physical discomfort that he experienced periodically. The infirmities would refer to the ill health which his persecutions by the Jews no doubt resulted in &ndash; being beaten until he appeared dead (Acts 14:19) must have done permanent damage, as would receiving &ldquo;forty stripes save one&rdquo; five times and thrice being &ldquo;beaten with rods&rdquo; because of the Jews (2 Cor. 11:24&ndash;25). Thus the passage probably refers to an organized program of persecution of Paul by the Jews which began after the vision of 2 Corinthians 12:1&ndash;4, from which time he dates his experience of the thorn in the flesh. It was from this time that Paul&rsquo;s zealous preaching to the Gentiles no doubt stimulated the Jews to more violent opposition to him. Their complaint against him was often that he was adulterating the Jewish religion by allowing Gentiles the chance of salvation by what he preached.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6315','1','47','12','8','8','<p>12:8- see on Mt. 26:39.</p><p><i>Concerning this thing- </i>The Greek could as well be translated \'this person\', reinforcing the possibility that one particular envoy from the Jewish satan is in view. This singular &quot;thing&quot; is paralleled with the string of afflictions listed in :10 which were all brought upon Paul due to the Jewish opposition to his ministry: &quot;weaknesses, in injuries, in necessities, in persecutions, in distresses...&quot;. They were all orchestrated not simply by the &quot;satan&quot;, the Jewish system, but by a specific envoy of it. It would not be going too far to think that the man of sin envisaged in 2 Thess. 2 refers to this same individual. He was envisaged as taking power in the temple and being destroyed at the Lord\'s return. I would say that this was one of the possible scenarios which could have been fulfilled if there had been enough spiritual fruit to have enabled the Lord\'s return in AD70. There was not and therefore His return has been delayed until our last days, and the &quot;man of sin&quot; will have a slightly different fulfilment.</p><p><i>I pleaded with the Lord three times that it might depart from me</i>- The Greek word for &ldquo;thorn&rdquo; can mean a &ldquo;stake&rdquo; &ndash; as was used for crucifying. This was to buffet Paul, as Christ was buffeted at the crucifixion (Mt. 26:67). Like Christ in His last hours, Paul prayed for the buffeting of Satan to be removed (2 Cor. 12:8 cp. Lk. 22:42). Paul &ldquo;besought the Lord thrice&rdquo; for this and so did Jesus in the Garden (Mt. 26:39, 42, 44). Also like Christ, Paul&rsquo;s prayer for release was not granted, ultimately for his spiritual good. Thus it is implied that because of Paul&rsquo;s sufferings at the hands of the Jewish Satan throughout his life, his whole life was &ldquo;crucified with Christ&rdquo; in that he experienced constantly the sufferings Christ had in His last few hours. This is exactly what we see in Acts 26:18.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6316','1','47','12','9','9','<p>12:9 <i>And he said to me-</i> We are left to speculate as to whether this was the answer Paul perceived in the lack of answer to his prayer, or whether the Lord actually spoke this to Paul in a vision. We can interpret God\'s silence as His word to us.<br /><i><br />My grace is sufficient for you. For my power is made perfect in weakness- </i>This is an allusion to the LXX of Gen. 33:11, where Jacob has been made weak with his thigh dislocated, in order to learn that God\'s grace is sufficient for him, and he needs literally nothing else. Paul would be saying that he has been taught (and learned) the same lesson as Jacob. Strength being perfected through human weakness is the whole lesson of the cross (13:4). It could be that the example of the Lord was the answer Paul received- perhaps there was no vision or statement from the Lord to Paul, but he deduced the Lord\'s word to him from the cross of his Lord. &quot;My power&quot; is interpreted in the next sentence as &quot;the power of Christ&quot;. This would confirm such a line of interpretation. By sharing in the weakness of Christ, in His sufferings, then God\'s resurrection power shall be manifested in us. Paul has used the same word for &quot;weakness&quot; in saying earlier that human weakness shall finally be changed by experiencing a resurrection after the pattern of Christ\'s (1 Cor. 15:43).</p><p><i>Therefore most gladly will I rather boast in my weaknesses, that the power of Christ may rest upon me</i>- As suggested above, connection with the weakness / suffering of Christ means that His power shall be manifest in us (13:4 &quot;For he was crucified through weakness, yet he lives through the power of God. For we also are weak in him; but we shall live with him through the power of God toward you&quot;).&nbsp;</p><p>Paul earnestly asked three times for his &quot;thorn in the flesh&quot; to be removed (:9). The wonder is that he only asked three times. He knew it was for his spiritual good, and he believed this. Moses asked at least twice (maybe three times?) for him to be allowed to enter the land (Dt. 3:25; Ps. 90); but the answer was basically the same as to Paul: &quot;My grace is sufficient for thee&quot;. The fact Moses had been forgiven and was at one with his God was so great that his physical entering the land was irrelevant. And for Paul likewise, temporal blessings in this life are nothing compared to the grace of forgiveness which we have received (Ex. 34:9).</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6317','1','47','12','10','10','<p>12:10 <i>Therefore I take pleasure in weaknesses, in injuries, in necessities, in persecutions, in distresses, for Christ\'s sake. For when I am weak, then am I strong</i>- It is in our very weakness, the weakness of the man made to realize the weight of his own mediocrity and failure to achieve, that <i>the power of God breaks forth</i>. Reading through his letters, it is apparent that Paul saw himself as two people: a natural man, a Jew from Tarsus, a Roman citizen living in the Mediterranean world... and also, a man in Christ. He speaks of how &ldquo;I bruise myself&rdquo;, as if the one Paul was boxing against the other Paul (1 Cor. 9:27 RVmg.). This is why in this autobiographical passage in 2 Cor. 12, he says of himself: &ldquo;I knew a man in Christ&rdquo;, who had great visions 14 years previously (at the council of Jerusalem of Acts 15), and who was subsequently given a &ldquo;thorn in the flesh&rdquo;. &ldquo;Of such an one will I glory: yet of myself I will not glory&rdquo;, he writes (2 Cor. 12:5), as if separating himself from this more spiritually exalted man who saw these visions. Paul is surely telling us that he sees himself as two people. He makes the point clearly: &ldquo;I will not be a fool... I am become a fool&rdquo; (:6,11). He was the greatest apostle; although he was nothing (:11). This language comes to a crisis in 12:10: &ldquo;When I i.e. the natural Paul am weak, then am I the spiritual Paul strong&rdquo;.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6318','1','47','12','11','11','<p>12:11- see on 2 Cor. 11:5.</p><p><i>I have become foolish. You compelled me. For I ought to have been commended by you. For in nothing was I behind the super apostles, though I am nothing- </i>Paul has written that it is inappropriate to commend ourselves or get involved in comparisons amongst ourselves. But carried away in a desperate desire to prove himself to them in their terms, which was surely rooted in love for them, he has done just that. But he now blames them for his lack of self control. And yet even in 1 Corinthians, Paul clearly had a tendency to boast: &quot;For it is better for me to die, than that anyone should make my boasting void&quot; (1 Cor. 9:15). Perhaps he would have been better to just admit his weakness here rather than blaming it on others. And we can take a lesson from that in many other aspects of life apart from a tendency to boast.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6319','1','47','12','12','12','<p>12:12 <i>Truly the signs of an apostle were done among you in all patience, by signs and wonders and mighty works- </i>Paul rightly considers his patience with the Corinthians as a sign even greater than all the miracles he had worked amongst them. We recall that the Acts record doesn\'t mention all these miracles performed by Paul in his 18 months in Corinth- reflective of the inspired record\'s lack of emphasis upon the miraculous element. The message was and is all important. All these miracles were done, but the Corinthians now doubted Paul\'s credentials as a Divinely approved apostle. Likewise Israel saw miracles daily in the wilderness through the provision of manna and water- but like the Corinthians, they did not believe. And so the role of miracles in eliciting real faith is demonstrated to be minimal. Not only does Pentecostalism need to consider this fact; but we too need not wish that God would miraculously intervene in human life in order to strengthen our faith. In the long run, even in the medium term, that is not what is achieved by the miraculous. The message, the Spirit within the heart, real relationship with the living, risen Lord Jesus- this is of the essence.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6320','1','47','12','13','13','<p>12:13 <i>For in what way were you made inferior to the other churches, except that I was not a burden to you? Forgive me this wrong</i>- Paul\'s sarcasm here will hardly win him the desired result- the return of the Corinthians both to him and to the truth of the Lord Jesus. We have here an example of his emotionally charged state shining through in the letter, especially when we recall how he began this section by writing that he would now appeal to them in the meek and gentle spirit of the Lord Jesus (10:1). The &quot;burden&quot; in view appears to be financial- he had not asked them for material support, although he had been in need of it, and this was now misinterpreted as meaning that he had treated them as inferior to the other churches, especially those in Macedonia, who had supported him whilst he had lived in Corinth. Whichever way Paul turned, no matter how he argued, the Corinthians were falling out of love with him. And his desperation shows. The whole record here is a worked example of how relationships amongst baptized believers can go sour, and even if one party is innocent, the psychological processes will continue until there is a permanent rift.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6321','1','47','12','14','14','<p>12:14 <i>Behold, this is the third time I have been ready to come to you, and I will not be a burden to you- </i>The &quot;burden&quot; appears to be of asking for money, according to the second part of the verse. We could even read this statement as Paul saying \'Forget about all I wrote previously about your giving to the Jerusalem Poor Fund. I don\'t seek even that now\'. This retreat from a previously held and strongly argued position is typical of the lover who is losing the beloved being willing to make any compromise. The &quot;third time&quot; doesn\'t have to mean that he was planning his third visit to them; rather does he mean that twice before he has planned a visit, but changed his plan because he realized that if he came, they would not be spiritually ready for him, and the Spirit would lead him to judge them. And now a third time he was contemplating making a visit to them, aware of the same possible negative outcome.</p><p><i>For I do not seek your things, but you. For the children ought not to save up for the parents, but the parents for the children- </i>Paul was seeking \'them\', their salvation, their relationship with him. He had earlier advised them to &quot;save up&quot; for his coming by putting aside something each week, so that they could present it to him as an offering for his Jerusalem Poor Fund (1 Cor. 16:2). But he appears to now be saying that they needn\'t do even that. They could forget all he had written about the Fund. He wanted by all means to preserve his relationship with them as his children. He even takes some false guilt over the matter by saying that it wasn\'t right of a father to ask his children to save up for him- it ought to be the other way around. Yet such passionate love comes just a verse after the bitter sarcasm of :13. Indeed this is a flow of consciousness being written and recorded under inspiration, giving us a unique insight into Paul\'s thought and feelings, and enabling us to thereby fully enter into the tragic falling out of love which happened between Paul and Corinth.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6322','1','47','12','15','15','<p>12:15- see on Lk. 15:24; Rom. 9:3.</p><p><i>And I will most gladly spend and be spent for your souls. If I love you more abundantly, am I loved the less by you because of this?</i>- Paul\'s spending and being spent was for &quot;you&quot; (:14), &quot;your souls&quot;, i.e. yourselves. He refers to their salvation; not because he believed in an immortal soul, but in the sense that he understand that salvation is personal. They themselves, as persons or selves / souls, could be saved and he was prepared to sacrifice all for this end. He did so inspired by the Lord, who for our sakes became a pauper in his death on the cross (8:9). Confronted with spiritual weakness we can so easily just turn away, considering it \'their problem\'. But Paul physically and&nbsp;mentally expended himself for them, motivated by the Lord\'s love on the cross. He sets us a huge challenge. And the more abundantly he poured out his love, the less they loved him. This is really the classic, tragic final stage of the falling out of love process, all recorded in great detail for our learning. They were guilty, in the bigger picture; but the situation was made the more painful for everyone by Paul\'s way of seeing them as he wished them to be, rather than more realistically facing up to the fact that his hopes and expectations of them were not going to be realized.&nbsp;</p><p>Paul had enough self-knowledge to say that his love for Corinth was growing more and more (although this was expressed in an ever-increasing concern for their doctrinal soundness); he told the Thessalonians likewise that his love for them was increasing and abounding (2 Cor. 12:15; 1 Thess. 3:12). And Paul could therefore exhort the Philippians and Thessalonians to also increase and abound in their love for each other, after Paul\'s example (Phil. 1:9; 1 Thess. 3:12). Paul\'s love for his brethren grew and grew, <i>even though they didn\'t notice this</i>. The \'you don\'t know just how much I love you\' syndrome is surely one of the cruellest in human experience. A growth in true love, true concern, isn\'t always apparent to our brethren. But if our growth is after Paul\'s pattern then this will be our experience too.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6323','1','47','12','16','16','<p>12:16 <i>But granting that I myself did not burden you, you say I was crafty, and got the better of you by deceit</i>- Throughout Corinthians Paul is quoting phrases from their allegations and questions, but it is not always exactly apparent. Perhaps using quotation marks we could translate: &quot;Nevertheless, &quot;being crafty&quot;, I &quot;caught you with guile&quot;&quot;. The New Testament so often seems to mix interpretation with Old Testament quotation; here especially we need to imagine the use of quotation marks. Given these feelings about Paul by &quot;you&quot;, the church at Corinth (for there is no hint that only a small subgroup is being addressed), we conclude that his earlier joy at their love for him, and his confidence in them in all things (7:4) was written on the cusp of emotion, making them be in his own mind what he hoped they could be. The imagery of craft and deceit recall the serpent in Eden; this would explain why Paul has earlier claimed that it is the Jewish false teachers who were like this, and not him (11:3). Paul\'s lack of demand for material support from them was being read by them now as an example of craft- because he wanted to only get money out of them in the longer term. When relationships deteriorate to this extent, every act or word past or present, no matter how sincere and loving, is going to be misinterpreted. Perhaps this whole miserable account is recorded for us as comfort- that when these things happen to us in our relationships, it\'s not a sign of failure on our part. For Paul went through the same.&nbsp;</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6324','1','47','12','17','17','<p>12:17 <i>But did I really take advantage of you by any one of them whom I have sent to you?- </i>The fact Paul had not asked them to materially support him was being twisted by some conspiracy theory to mean that when Titus was sent to them, he was really working for Paul in order to get cash out of them for Paul personally. Yet in chapter 7, Paul has claimed that Titus was much encouraged by their attitude, and he himself was \'over the moon\' with confidence in them because of the good news brought by Titus. But the visit of Titus was clearly interpreted as Paul craftily taking advantage of them; and we conclude again that his statements about the Titus visit in chapter 7 were his own wild over interpretation of a few ambiguous words. If Paul was capable of that, even with Spirit guidance, we are too.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6325','1','47','12','18','18','<p>12:18 <i>I urged Titus to go and I sent the brother with him. Did Titus take any advantage of you? Did we not act in the same spirit? Did we not take the same steps?</i>- The accusation was apparently that Titus was Paul\'s instrument and part of his crafty plan to extract money from them for his own benefit. Paul agrees that Titus had visited Corinth as a result of his \'urging\', perhaps implying that Titus himself had doubted the wisdom of the visit. And Paul agrees that Titus shared Paul\'s spirit to the extent that effectively, his visit was Paul\'s visit. They \'took the same steps\'. But he goes on to say that his spirit was solely to upbuild them (:19). Paul has elsewhere explained that he had changed his plans to personally visit them because he feared that the Spirit would lead him to severely judge the Corinthians if he visited them. But here he says that the visit of Titus was effectively Paul\'s visit, because they took &quot;the same steps&quot;. Both Titus and Paul were motivated by the same Spirit and therefore their steps were identical. This same association of the Spirit with &quot;steps&quot; is found in Gal. 5:25: &quot;If we live by the Spirit, let us also walk in step with the Spirit&quot;. His refusal to personally visit Corinth was therefore surely playing some kind of game with God\'s Spirit, a form of brinkmanship. He and Titus were led by the same Spirit and therefore the visit of Titus was as it were the visit of Paul. They took the same steps as they were in step with the same Spirit- for &quot;the same spirit... steps&quot; refers to the Spirit and steps of the Lord Jesus (1 Pet. 2:21 &quot;That you should follow His steps&quot;). But Paul did not go personally because he feared the Spirit would lead him to judge and condemn the Corinthians for their unspirituality. Perhaps Paul would have done better to follow the Spirit\'s lead and recognize Corinth for who they were, and judge them as the Spirit led him to- rather than wilfully misinterpret the reception of Titus by the Corinthians (see on 2 Cor. 7) and hold on to his own obsessively positive view of them against all evidence.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6326','1','47','12','19','19','<p>12:19 <i>You think all this time that we are excusing ourselves to you. But in the sight of God we speak in Christ- </i>&quot;All this time&quot; is a significant phrase, in that it means that Paul\'s exuberant rejoicing at the Corinthians\' loyalty and warm reception of Titus (2 Cor. 7) was him believing these things in his own mind, having the love which turned hope and fantasy into reality in his own imaginations. As often demonstrated, this letter is a flow of consciousness piece of writing, recorded under inspiration, allowing us a unique insight into the feelings of Paul- a man who so loved the weakest of his converts and lived out in psychological reality the truths expressed in his great love poem of 1 Cor. 13. All along, &quot;all this time&quot;, they had been sceptical, and Paul knew it; but he had the love that hoped and believed all things.</p><p><i>All things, beloved, are for your upbuilding- </i>Paul had earlier written exactly this to the Corinthians, when urging that &quot;all things be done unto upbuilding&quot; (1 Cor. 14:26). The recurring theme of 1 Corinthians was that the upbuilding of others should be paramount in the Christian life; and it was &quot;upbuilding&quot; which the way of the Spirit was all about. And Paul can say that it was this Spirit which motivated both Titus and himself (:18). It was God who was upbuilding the Corinthians (1 Cor. 3:9 s.w.), but He operates in this work through human agents- every willing member of the body of Christ. All and every effort to upbuild others will have His blessing and we will sense that we are His vehicle in the work. But as with the case at Corinth, this is not to say that those we work with will necessarily respond.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6327','1','47','12','20','20','<p>12:20 <i>For I fear, lest by any means, when I come, I should find you not as I would wish, and should myself be found by you such as you would not wish. Lest by any means there should be quarrelling, jealousy, anger, hostility, slander, gossip, conceit, and disorder</i>- The issues Paul had raised in 1 Corinthians had not really been dealt with; the extreme sexual immorality and use of church prostitutes had not been addressed. And yet he still places issue like gossip, belligerent attitudes and division as of primary concern, even before the sexual issues he will raise in :21. We noted on 1 Corinthians that he had done the same there. The presence of these things would mean that he would act towards them in an unpleasant way- through the direct judgment of the Spirit. The sober warning to us all is that the wrong attitudes listed here, so commonly encountered in church life, warrant direct Divine judgment just as much as the sexual immorality of the next verse. The list of wrong behaviours listed here corresponds with the list of works of the flesh in Gal. 5:20. We noted on :18 that Paul feels that he and Titus are walking according to the Spirit, not the flesh, and there is a connection made with Gal. 5:25. Paul is therefore continuing his great theme to the Corinthians- that their problems with the flesh all arose from a refusal to allow the Spirit to operate.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6328','1','47','12','21','21','<p>12:21 <i>I fear that when I come again my God may humble me before you- </i>Paul has in view that the Spirit may well lead him to severely judge them. But to be used in that way would be a very humbling experience for Paul. Any disciplining of others should likewise be a humbling for us, rather than any expression of pride or superiority (as in Gal. 6:1). The idea of being humbled is exactly that used by Paul regarding the Lord\'s death (Phil. 2:8 s.w.). Paul had earlier been humbled in Corinth, when he was left destitute and yet never asked the Corinthians for material help (2 Cor. 11:7). For Paul to meet the Corinthians and have to judge them as unspiritual would be humbling for Paul, as he had boasted about their strengths to others and inflated them in his own mind. To have to judge them for not being like that would be humbling for Paul.</p><p><i>And I may have to mourn over many of those who sinned earlier and have not repented of the impurity, sexual immorality and sensuality that they have practiced</i>- Paul had earlier urged them to mourn over those they had to discipline for sexual immorality (1 Cor. 5:2). All such discipline should be done in genuine mourning. The sexual issues raised with the Corinthians in 1 Corinthians are not raised by Paul in2 Corinthians until this point. He has been giving them exaggerated praise for separating from the immoral man of 1 Cor. 5, and trying to get them to donate to his Jerusalem Poor Fund. And he has written in very inflated terms about their devotion to him and the Lord in chapters 7-9. Through all that, he has not raised with them the obvious issue as to why they had not dealt with their issues of sexual immorality. Now he has apparently given up any hope of getting any donations out of them (see on :14) and is realizing the reality of things with them, he returns to these more obvious concerns. Paul knew they were impenitent of these sexual issues- and yet speaks so glowingly of them in chapter 7 and elsewhere. Yet again I have to make the point that he was so in love with them that he wrote on the cusp of emotion, and the inspired record has preserved his feelings and flow of consciousness- for our learning.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6329','1','47','13','1','1','<p>13:1 <i>This is the third time I am coming to you</i>- Paul connects this &quot;third time&quot; with the need for two or three witnesses. Is he trying to argue that the three witnesses against Corinth equate with his three visits to them? For each time the Spirit would have witnessed against them. Here we have an example of the liberal interpretation of Old Testament passages; for the requirement of two or three witnesses obviously refers to two or three separate witnesses, and not one person witnessing the same behaviour two or three times. Such out of context allusion is common in the Bible and in rabbinic interpretations. This doesn\'t justify us in treating the text likewise (seeing we are not inspired), but it should also serve as a foil to the claim that context and logical corollary are all important in Biblical interpretation.</p><p><i>At the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established- </i>The quotation from Dt. 19:15 suggests that the consequences of the trial would be serious, perhaps involving death or being cut off from the Lord\'s people. Such severe punishments could be executed by the apostles in the first century; we think of Ananias and Sapphira. The same words are used as in Mt. 18:16,17 concerning dealing with personal offences; but they are applied by Paul to dealing with moral and doctrinal problems at Corinth (= 2 Cor. 13:1; 1 Cor. 5:4,5,9; 6:1-6).</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6330','1','47','13','2','2','<p>13:2- see on 1 Cor. 15:10.</p><p><i>I warned those who sinned before and all the others, and I warn them now while absent, as I did when present on my second visit, that if I come again I will not spare them-</i> The enumeration of the visits is because Paul is viewing his two or three visits as the two or three witnesses against Corinth (see on :1). This threat of judgment for unrepented of moral sin had therefore hung over the Corinthians ever since the time of 1 Corinthians. This makes Paul\'s expression of confidence in them &quot;in all things&quot; in chapter 7 rather questionable. He appears to have written that on the cusp of emotion, obsessed with the possibility of their giving to the Jerusalem Poor Fund to the extent that he overlooked their unresolved gross moral failings. &quot;I will not spare&quot; calls for comparison with how Paul had earlier aborted a planned visit to Corinth in order to &quot;spare&quot; them judgment (2 Cor. 1:23). There is no record however that Paul ever made the threatened visit. The silence of the record is intentional, as we are left to struggle with the issues of whether patience with apostasy is to be limitless, or whether we are at times to act; and with the obvious question as to how far we can take precedent from an apostle who had the Spirit gifts of discernment and judgment.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6331','1','47','13','3','3','<p>13:3 <i>Seeing you seek proof that Christ speaks in me (who toward you is not weak but is powerful in you)- </i>Gk. &quot;of the Christ that speaks in me&quot;. &quot;Toward you&quot; could as well be rendered \'among / within you\'. His threatened judgment of them would be the final proof that indeed, he is of Christ. His words were those of Christ. And yet 2 Corinthians is a flow of consciousness letter, recording the emotions and gut reactions of Paul with all the contradictions and paradoxes which there are within human emotions. His final judgment of them, however, would be the word of Christ toward them. Again Paul returns to his favourite theme with the Corinthians- that Christ is indeed potentially within them through the gift of His Spirit / presence in their hearts (1:22; 5:5). They had not actualized it, they acted as if He was &quot;weak&quot; within them; but if only they would, they would perceive a perfect congruence between the Spirit in them and them and that within Paul. For Christ at least potentially is all and within all those baptized into Him.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6332','1','47','13','4','4','<p>13:4 <i>For he was crucified through weakness, yet he lives through the power of God. For we also are weak in him; but we shall live with him through the power of God toward you-</i> Paul\'s much mocked &quot;weakness&quot; in the flesh was on account of his identification with the crucified but glorified Christ. Because we are in Christ, His death was not an isolated historical event. We also are weak <i>with</i> Him, on account of having been baptized into Him (2 Cor. 13:4 RV), such is the identity between us and Him. When Paul reflected upon his own sickness which the RVmg. calls his stake / cross in the flesh, he could say in all sober truth that he gloried in his weakness, because his identity with the weakness of Christ crucified also thereby identified him with the strength and power of the risen Lord (2 Cor. 11:9). The same spirit of Christ which is within us now is the basis upon which we shall be immortalized in a bodily form at the last day. Rom. 8:11 says this explicitly: &quot;But if the Spirit of Him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwells in you now, He that raised up Christ Jesus from the dead shall then, at the last day give life also to your mortal bodies- through His Spirit that dwells in you now&quot;. This is why if we do not have the Spirit of Christ transforming us now, we are none of His both now and eternally. That same &quot;power of God&quot; was as equally available to the Corinthians as it was to Paul; he would live eternally with Christ on account of God\'s power &quot;toward within you&quot;. All accusation and answers to them would unnecessary if they would only perceive that the same Spirit worked within Paul as was within them. It was Judaism which did not know &quot;the power of God&quot; (Mt. 22:29) and their influence led the Corinthians to likewise not recognize that power which was potentially within them by the Spirit.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6333','1','47','13','5','5','<p>13:5- see on 2 Tim. 4:6.</p><p><i>Examine yourselves, to see whether you are in the faith. Test yourselves. Or do you not realize this about yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you? Unless indeed you fail to meet the test</i>- The Greek grammar suggests an emphasis upon &quot;yourselves&quot;. They were to test themselves, rather than putting Christ and Paul to the test. As explained on :4, if they were in touch with the Spirit of Christ within them, then they would perceive that it was the same Spirit within Paul. All examination of his legitimacy as a brother and apostle would therefore be unnecessary, because the answer would be found within them, in their own hearts and consciences where the Spirit ought to have been active (see on 5:11). This is why Paul urges them to realize that Christ was within them. And if they did not know that, then they had failed the test.</p><p>If we cannot examine ourselves and know that Christ is really in us, then we are reprobate; we &quot;have failed&quot; (2 Cor. 13:5 G.N.B.). Self-examination is therefore one of those barriers across our path in life which makes us turn to the Kingdom or to the flesh. If we can\'t examine ourselves and see that Christ is in us and that we have therefore that great salvation in Him; we\'ve failed. I wouldn\'t be so bold as to throw down this challenge to any of us in exhortation. But Paul does. It\'s a powerful, even terrible, logic.</p><p>The NT speaks of &quot;the faith in Christ&quot; or &quot;the doctrine of Christ&quot;. &quot;The faith&quot;, the body of doctrine comprising the Gospel, is all epitomized in a real person. To know we are &quot;in the faith&quot; is to know that Christ is in us (2 Cor. 13:5). &quot;The faith&quot;, the set of doctrines we must continue believing, is paralleled with the man Christ Jesus. Jesus was &quot;the word made flesh&quot;, and &quot;the word&quot; very often refers to the word of the Gospel rather than the whole Bible. The life which the corpus of doctrine brings forth is essentially the life and living of the man Christ Jesus. He was and is the supreme and living example of the living out of all the doctrines. It has been well said by Frank Birch that&nbsp; &ldquo;Faith is not simply the intellectual acceptance of a body of doctrine. Faith is ultimately shown in a person, the man, Christ Jesus&quot;.</p><p>There is a question which cuts right to the bone of each of us; right through the debates and semantics which increasingly shroud our Christian lives. \'Can we be completely certain that should Christ return now, we will be in the Kingdom?\'. Posing this question provokes widely different response- from \'Of course not How presumptuous\', to that of the present writer: \'By God\'s grace- yes\'. We can\'t say ultimately because we may fall away in the future- but we should be able to assess the spiritual state we are in at this present point in time. If we cannot do this, then our salvation is very much at risk; as Paul bluntly told Corinth: &ldquo;Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?&quot; (2 Cor. 13:5). They sought proof that Christ was in Paul (2 Cor. 13:3), yet he challenges them to know whether Christ is in them personally. The implication was that if they could not judge that, they were in no position to ask whether Christ was in Paul- or any other. This is vintage Paul; the logic is irresistible.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6334','1','47','13','6','6','<p>13:6- see on Mt. 3:11.</p><p><i>But I hope you shall know that we have not failed the test</i>- Paul\'s hope as ever is for their repentance, through recognizing the Spirit of Christ within them and walking according to the Spirit. If they did that, as explained on :4 and :5, they would perceive that the same Spirit was within Paul, and he too had not failed the test but was legitimate.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6335','1','47','13','7','7','<p>13:7 <i>Now we pray to God that you do no evil. Not so we may appear to have met the test, but so you may do what is right- </i>This prayer raises the question as to whether our prayers can influence the moral behaviour of others. And surely we can have such influence, otherwise such prayer would be unnecessary and pointless. In the final unenterable algorithm of salvation, there is a role played by the prayers and faith of third parties. when the Lord saw the faith of the friends, he forgave the sins of the paralyzed man (Mk. 2:5). In His wisdom, God has set up the whole algorithm to include these factors. This is why we like Paul should continually be in prayer and concern for our erring brethren, and why we should invite their prayers for our salvation and forgiveness. This is one reason why we need fellowship with each other- real fellowship, sharing our real spiritual situations with each other, and not simply spending a few hours each week in the same hall going through well established rituals which salve our religious consciences.</p><p>David\'s requests in areas apart from forgiveness and salvation largely centred around his desire for God to grant spiritual help to others. There are many examples of praying for God to help others spiritually: 2 Kings 19:4; 2 Chron. 30:18; Job 42:10; Rom. 10:1; 2 Cor. 13:7; Phil. 1:9,19; Col. 1:9; 1 Thess. 3:10; 2 Thess. 1:11; 2 Tim. 4:16; 1 Jn. 5:16. Surely this was also the spirit behind Abraham\'s intercession for Lot to be saved out of Sodom. Granted a certain modicum of spirituality in those being prayed for, Noah, Daniel and Job all delivered the souls of others by their prayerful righteousness (Ez. 14:14). When we pray for others, God sees it as them praying (if they have a modicum of spirituality), in the same way as when the Lord Jesus prays for us, He interprets what He knows to be our spirit to God, recognizing that we don\'t know how to pray in words as we should (Jer. 11:14). The Lord Jesus prayed for us concerning spiritual issues which at the time we did not understand (Lk. 22:32; Jn. 17:9,15,20), and Paul especially seems to have grasped this example.</p><p><i>Though we may seem to have failed</i>- The idea may be as Vine suggests: &quot;We pray God that you do no evil, not in order that your good conduct may attest the excellence of our teaching and example, so that we shall be approved; but in order that you may do what is good, thus rendering it impossible for us to prove our apostolic authority by administering discipline. In that case we shall be as men unapproved&quot;. We must find a true, self-condemning humility now, unless it will be forced upon us at the judgment. And thus Paul can say that &ldquo;we be <i>as</i> reprobates&rdquo; (2 Cor. 13:7), using a Greek word elsewhere translated &ldquo;castaway&rdquo;, &ldquo;rejected&rdquo;, in the context of being rejected at the judgment seat (1 Cor. 9:27; Heb. 6:8). Yet he says in the preceding verse that he is most definitely <i>not</i> reprobate (2 Cor. 13:6). Here we have the paradox: knowing that we are not and by grace will not be rejected, and yet feeling and reasoning as if we are.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6336','1','47','13','8','8','<p>13:8 <i>For we can do nothing against the truth but only for the truth- </i>If our motivation is for the salvation of others to God\'s glory, whatever choices we make in exercising that conscience cannot be ultimately against that final truth of eternal salvation. The Paul-Corinth had focused upon specifics- whether he was correct to ask them to support the Jerusalem Poor Fund, right or wrong in his attitude to taking material support from them, justified or not in considering himself their spiritual father etc. But these questions are merely cosmetic. The essence comes down to our motivation, and if that is pure, then we cannot be legitimately accused of doing anything &quot;against the truth&quot;. The tension between<i> kata</i> &quot;against&quot; and <i>huper</i> &quot;for&quot; is to be found in Mk. 9:40, to which Paul surely alludes: &quot;He that is not against us is for us&quot;. God likewise is &quot;for&quot; us and therefore nothing and nobody can be &quot;against&quot; us (Rom. 8:31); and that same positive spirit is found in His ultimate usage of all we seek to do towards the salvation of others to His glory.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6337','1','47','13','9','9','<p>13:9 <i>For we rejoice, when we are weak and you are strong- </i>The \'weakness\' could mean that if they were truly strong in the Lord, then Paul would be \'weak\' to administer discipline. <i>We </i>are weak and <i>you </i>are strong connects to the paradox established in 12:10, the only place where these words for &quot;weak&quot; and &quot;strong&quot; occur. Paul had learned that when <i>he</i> was weak, then <i>he </i>was strong. But now he speaks of how he wishes <i>his</i> weakness to be <i>their </i>strength. He wished the strength he experienced from his weakness to be shared with and experienced by them. The strength he gained through weakness was the strength of Christ; and he wished that same strength to be experienced by them. And he believed that his sufferings for them in his weakness could actually lead to their spiritual strengthening (see on :7). The same ideas are expressed in :4, where Paul says that the power of God which shall energize him is the same &quot;power of God toward <i>you</i>&quot;.</p><p><i>This we also pray for, even your perfecting</i>- Their perfecting was perhaps the outcome Paul wished to arise out of his visit to them; for he uses the same word in 1 Thess. 3:10 of how he longed to visit the Thessalonians and &quot;perfect that which is lacking in your faith&quot;. He would far rather that be the outcome to his visit than judgment unto condemnation. Again we see that the efforts of a third party, in this case through visiting weaker believers, could result in their spiritual strengthening towards salvation (see on :7). God is able to &quot;perfect&quot; the faith and spirituality of His children (Heb. 13:21; 1 Pet. 5:10); and this surely is done by the work of the Spirit on the hearts of believers. This is why Paul concludes by wishing that this process of perfecting s.w. &quot;mending&quot; would be permitted by them in their hearts (:11); and connected with this wish is his final desire that the <i>koinonia</i>, the participation &quot;fellowship&quot; of the Holy Spirit would be experienced by them.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6338','1','47','13','10','10','<p>13:10 <i>For this cause I write these things while absent, that I may not when present with you deal sharply with you, according to the authority which the Lord gave me for building up, and not for casting down</i>- &quot;Deal sharply&quot; may be a technical term for a rebuke from the Holy Spirit; it is only elsewhere used in Tit. 1:13 &quot;rebuke them sharply&quot;. If they did not change, then Paul\'s Spirit power would have to be used to \'cast them down\'. But the Spirit was given for their building up more than their casting down. We are surely correct to read in this ellipsis. \'Not A but B\' doesn\'t have to mean \'not at all B\'; but rather \'More for B than for A\'.&nbsp;Paul was desperately hoping that they would change so that his visit would not result in judgment for them.&nbsp;</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6339','1','47','13','11','11','<p>13:11- see on 1 Cor. 11:18.</p><p><i>Finally, brothers, farewell. Be perfected- </i>Being perfected by the Lord\'s ongoing work with us is in view in Lk. 6:40 and 1 Pet. 5:10. He is indeed active in human hearts by the Spirit. See on :9 <i>Your perfecting</i>. There are times when Paul\'s inspired commentary opens up some of the Lord\'s more difficult sayings. &quot;Be you therefore perfect&quot; has always been hard to understand (Mt. 5:48). Paul\'s comment is: &quot;Be perfected&quot; (2 Cor. 13:11). This is quite different to how many may take it- \'Let God perfect you\' is the message.</p><p><i>Be comforted. Be of the same mind. Live in peace, and the God of love and peace shall be with you</i>- The <i>parakleo</i> or comfort in view was that of the Comforter, the Holy Spirit. This is Paul\'s final appeal for them to allow the Spirit given in their hearts at baptism to work and transform them (1:22; 5:5). The &quot;same mind&quot; appealed for is not asking them to have identical positions on everything. Rather it is an appeal to accept the mind of Christ, the Spirit. As demonstrated in notes :4 and :9, this was the real basis for unity between the Corinthians and Paul; and between them and the Lord Jesus. Allowing the work of the Spirit in their hearts would empower them to live in peace with each other, as they were seeking to emulate the same one mind that of the Spirit, of the Lord Jesus. And through this they would experience the presence of the God of love and peace.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6340','1','47','13','12','12','<p>13:12- see on Rom. 16:16.</p><p><i>Greet one another with a holy kiss</i>- According to the <i>Apostolic Constitutions</i>, the early church kissed each other at the breaking of bread meeting. This would have been the one time in the week that the church gathered together, as typically many would have been at work, as a fair proportion of the converts were apparently slaves. This was the time when the letters from Paul would be read.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6341','1','47','13','13','13','<p>13:13 <i>All the saints greet you</i>- Paul was writing from Macedonia, where he claimed the brethren would be disappointed if Corinth didn\'t come through on the promise to support the Jerusalem Poor Fund. All the same, they sent their greetings to these weaker brethren.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6342','1','47','13','14','14','<p>13:14 <i>The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the communion of the Holy Spirit be with you all</i>- Paul\'s parting statement is an appeal for them to allow the gift of the Spirit to be with them. &quot;Grace&quot; is <i>charis</i>, \'gift\'. The gift of the Lord Jesus is the Comforter, the Spirit given to every baptized believer in Him- including the Corinthians (1:22; 5:5). Despite having received it, they were not spiritual (1 Cor. 3:1). There is a fellowship of the Spirit (2 Cor. 13:14) in the sense that all who live the same spiritually-centred life will thereby be bound together in a powerful and inevitable fellowship. When, for example, two Christian mothers strike up conversation about the difficulty of raising children in this present evil world, when two brethren talk about the difficulties of living as Christ would in today&rsquo;s business world&hellip; there is, right there, in those almost casual conversations, the fellowship of the spirit. It isn&rsquo;t just a social connection because we belong to the same denomination.</p><p>Paul\'s farewell is no standard wish for their general wellbeing; it is a desire that they allow this gift to be with them. This is the fellowship or participation of the Holy Spirit in their lives which was and is the key to all spiritual progress. The &quot;all&quot; in &quot;be with you all&quot; is the last word, but is significant- for there were some without the knowledge of God, deeply in sin and now ignorant of the basic Gospel they had once espoused. But still Paul wished the activity of the Spirit in their hearts; he was not writing to some subgroup of more committed believers at Corinth. It was and is the only hope for transformation towards salvation.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6343','1','48','1','1','1','<p>1:1 <em>Paul, an apostle (not from men, nor through man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised him from the dead)</em>- Consider how in Galatians Paul uses so many negatives, as if his passion and almost rage at the false teachers is coming out: &ldquo;An apostle <em>not</em> from men&hellip; the gospel preached by me is <em>not</em> man&rsquo;s gospel&hellip; <em>nor</em> was I taught it&hellip; I did <em>not</em> confer with flesh and blood, I did <em>not</em> go up to Jerusalem&hellip; I do <em>not</em> lie&hellip; Titus was <em>not</em> compelled&hellip; to <em>false</em> brethren we did <em>not</em> yield&hellip; those &lsquo;of repute&rsquo; added <em>nothing</em>&rdquo; (Gal. 1:1,11,12,16,20; 2:3,4,6). The way he says &ldquo;Ye have known God, or rather, are known of God&rdquo; (Gal. 4:9) seems to indicate through the &ldquo;or rather&hellip;&rdquo; a very human and passionate touch in his writing, as if he was thinking out loud as he wrote. Throughout 2 Corinthians particularly his writing in places can be described as an inspired flow of consciousness.</p><p>Authority in spiritual ministry doesn\'t depend upon any human authorisation. Paul\'s authority is linked specifically to the fact God raised Jesus from the dead. That resurrection led to the great commission and the Lord\'s empowerment of all witness to Him as risen and exalted. But this empowerment is given not only to Paul. All demands for authorization of ministry, e.g. to perform baptisms or decide who to fellowship in the church, is therefore utterly missing the point. We are authorized by the Lord, and the great commission applies to us all. In any case, once we start arguing that only some are authorized to perform ministry, the question is raised as to <em>how</em> they are authorized. And the Bible is silent about that. All manner of secular power brokering philosophy comes into play, but Paul and anyone led by the Spirit of the risen Lord will have nothing to do with that.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6344','1','48','1','2','2','<p>1:2 <em>And all the brothers that are with me, to the churches of Galatia</em>- Those <em>sun</em> Paul may refer to brothers who supported Paul\'s position on the Law, which was going to be the burden of this letter. It was Paul who was the inspired author but he is making the point that there were other brethren who agreed with his position. The churches of Galatia could have referred to quite a few of the congregations Paul is recorded as founding in Acts; because he sees his responsibilities as being to his own converts and his letters are generally addressed to those he has converted. These groups were largely Gentiles. I have noted elsewhere, especially on Titus, Corinthians and 1 Timothy, that Gentile converts often brought with them immoral practices. Yet they became attracted to Judaism because their religious conscience could be more easily salved by obedience to a set of ritual requirements, and their more fundamental moral habits would then be left unquestioned. Legalism to this day remains incredibly attractive to those who subconsciously seek to justify themselves in immoral practices. This is why the Galatian letter begins with strong theological arguments against returning to the Law, and then moves on to tackle practical issues of immorality.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6345','1','48','1','3','3','<p>1:3 <em>Grace to you and peace from God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ</em>- Although Paul is going to upbraid them, he sincerely wishes them, as no mere formality, the peace with God which comes from His grace, rather than legalistic obedience to Jewish laws.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6346','1','48','1','4','4','<p>1:4 <em>Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us out of this present evil world, according to the will of our God and Father</em>- The Lord\'s death is presented as the supreme sin offering, which had an outcome in practice- separation from this present evil world. Judaism tacitly allowed the Gentile converts to remain effectively in that world, but with a conscience cosmetically salved by a few acts of ritual obedience. The purpose of the cross was so that we might be separated out from this present evil world. To remain in the world, to stay in the crowd that faced the cross rather than walk through the no man\'s land between, this is a denial of the Lord\'s death for us. See on Gal. 6:14. Paul had his inspired mind on the phrase in the Lord&rsquo;s prayer which requests deliverance from evil. Clearly enough, Paul didn&rsquo;t understand &ldquo;the evil&rdquo; to be a personal cosmic Satan, but rather the moral &ldquo;evil&rdquo; of this world and those who seek to persecute believers.</p><p>Much of Paul&rsquo;s writing is understandable on various levels. In some places he makes allusions to contemporary Jewish writings and ideas &ndash; with which he was obviously very familiar given his background &ndash; in order to correct or deconstruct them. This is especially true with reference to Jewish ideas about Satan and supposedly sinful Angels ruling over this present world. The idea of deliverance from this present evil world or age is an example. As more and more Jewish writings of the time become more widely available, it becomes increasingly apparent that this is a major feature of Paul&rsquo;s writing. The Jewish writings all held to the teaching of the two ages, whereby this current age was supposed to be under the control of Satan and his angels, who would be destroyed in the future age, when Messiah would reign and Paradise would be restored on earth (see 1 Enoch 16.1; 18.16; 21.6; Jubilees 1.29; T. Moses 1.18; 12.4). Paul frequently uses terms used in the Jewish writings concerning the Kingdom age, the eschatological age, and applies them to the experience of Christian believers <em>right now</em>. When Heb. 2:14 states that Christ killed the Devil in His death on the cross, this is effectively saying that the future age has come. For the Jews expected the Devil to be destroyed only at the changeover to the future Kingdom age. In 4 Ezra, &ldquo;This age&rdquo; (4.27; 6.9; 7.12), also known as the &ldquo;corrupt age&rdquo; (4.11) stands in contrast to the &ldquo;future age&rdquo; (6.9; 8.1), the &ldquo;greater age&rdquo;, the &ldquo;immortal time&rdquo; (7.119), the future time (8.52). 4 Enoch even claims that the changeover from this age to the future age occurs at the time of the final judgment, following the death of the Messiah and seven days of silence (7.29&ndash;44, 113). So we can see why Paul would plug in to these ideas. He taught that Christ died &ldquo;in order to rescue us from this present evil age&rdquo; (Gal. 1:4; Rom 8:38; 1 Cor. 3:22). Therefore if the old age has finished, that means Satan is no longer controlling things as the Jews believed. For they believed that Satan&rsquo;s spirits &ldquo;will corrupt until the day of the great conclusion, until the great age is consummated, until everything is concluded (upon) the Watchers and the wicked ones&rdquo; (1 Enoch 16:1, cf. 72:1). And Paul was pronouncing that the great age had been consummated in Christ, that the first century believers were those upon whom the end of the <em>aion</em> had come (1 Cor. 10:11).</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6347','1','48','1','5','5','<p>1:5 <em>To whom be the glory for ever and ever. Amen</em>- Christianity seeks to give eternal glory to the Lord Jesus; this is what we shall be doing eternally, and we must begin now. But Judaism devalued the role of Messiah. And we too can usefully assess teachings according to how far they give glory to the Lord Jesus.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6348','1','48','1','6','6','<p>1:6 <em>I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you to the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel</em>- Paul describes himself as having been called by God, by grace; and in this context he comments how <em>he</em> called the Galatians to the grace of Christ (Gal. 1:6 cp. 15). His response to his calling of grace was to go out and preach, thereby calling men to that same grace, replicating in his preaching what God had done for him. True preaching reflects a certain artless selflessness. And so here Paul writes of his preaching to the Galatians in the third person: &ldquo;him Paul that called you into the grace of Christ&rdquo; (Gal. 1:6 AV). And likewise he talks about himself while at the Jerusalem conference, where he was given so clearly the ministry of converting the Gentiles, as if he hardly identifies himself with himself: &ldquo;I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago... I knew such a man... of such an one will I glory, yet of myself I will not glory&rdquo; (2 Cor. 12:1-4- the context makes it clear that Paul refers to himself, seeing that he was the one given the thorn in the flesh as a result of the revelations given to this &ldquo;man&rdquo;). In 1 Thess. 1:5 Paul could have written: &lsquo;We came with the Gospel&rsquo;, but instead he uses the more awkward construction: &lsquo;Our Gospel came&hellip;&rsquo;. He, Paul, was subsumed beneath the essence of his life work- the preaching of the Gospel.</p><p>And yet we could also argue that Paul had a way of turning things rather too personally. They had deserted the grace of Christ, yet Paul expresses this in terms of them turning away from him personally. This tendency to over personalize things, it could be argued, was at the root of so much of his pain with the Corinthians as expressed in 2 Corinthians.</p><p>&quot;Deserting&quot; translates <em>metatithemi</em>, literally \'handed over\', implying there was some other hand at work. As there is no cosmic satan doing this, I conclude that this higher hand was God\'s, confirming them in the way they wished to go. Romans 1:26,28 speaks of God doing likewise, giving people over to the mindset they themselves desired. He confirms us in the path we wish to go.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6349','1','48','1','7','7','<p>1:7 <em>Not that there is another one; but there are some who trouble you, and want to distort the gospel of Christ</em>- A distorted Gospel was no Gospel. The Judaizers were not calling for a wholesale abandonment of Christianity; rather they were preaching a Judaized version of the Gospel which was so distorted that it was not a Gospel. We note from this that a belief system which merely names the name of Christ is not therefore acceptable just because it claims to be an interpretation of Christianity. The \'troublers\' are described with the same word in Acts 15:7 concerning the Jewish Christians who went out from the Jerusalem ecclesia to urge the Gentile converts to be circumcised; and of the Jews in Thessalonica who troubled the crowds to persecute Paul. It would seem that the same elements were involved- Jews driven by jealousy and anger at the perversion of the Jewish faith, as they saw it, by Paul\'s message of Christianity. It was part of a well organized system of derailing the churches Paul founded, referred to by him at times as the \'satan\', the adversary. The same word is used in Gal. 5:10 about some single individual who was the troubler in Galatia; as if in that locality they were controlled by a particularly charismatic and influential individual whom Paul leaves nameless.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6350','1','48','1','8','8','<p>1:8 <em>But though we, or an angel from heaven</em>- God can deceive people to confirm them in the way of understanding they wish to go in (Ez. 14:9; 2 Thess. 2:11). But this could simply be hyperbole. But perhaps the individual troubler of Galatia in 5:10 (and see on :7 above) was being presented as an angel, a Divine messenger. This would then enable us to understand 2 Cor. 11:14 as referring to the same individual troubling Corinth which the same Judaistic message- the satan there was apparently revealed as an Angel of light, and he had his followers; just as there was one specific \'troubler\' in Galatia (Gal. 5:10) who had fellow \'troublers\' (Gal. 1:7).</p><p><em>Should preach to you any gospel other than that which we preached to you, let him be accursed</em>- Again it could be argued that Paul was over personalizing the issue by writing of the Gospel &quot;which we preached to you&quot;. The <em>anathema</em> (&quot;accursed&quot;) was a Jewish synagogue term meaning excommunication. This may be the closest we get in Paul\'s writings to a request to actually excommunicate anybody in a religious sense; and it was clearly necessary. Seeing he is not afraid to ask for someone to be excommunicated, it is noteworthy that he doesn\'t recommend it for dealing with the huge raft of immoral individual behaviour and other moral and intellectual failure which filled the early churches.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6351','1','48','1','9','9','<p>1:9 <em>As we have said before, so I now say again: If anyone preaches to you any gospel other than that which you received, let him be accursed</em>- The <em>anathema</em> (see on :8) was for those who were teaching a false Gospel. Paul\'s approach to his churches, full as they were of moral and doctrinal failure, was to insist that the platform be secured; it was the false teachers who were to be removed. But he exemplifies endless patience with the flock who had been misled or were simply weak in the faith. Paul often refers to the \'receipt\' of the Gospel; he saw &quot;the Gospel&quot; as definable and something which was received upon hearing the preaching of it. And yet clearly there was no lengthy package of theology in view.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6352','1','48','1','10','10','<p>1:10 <em>For am I now seeking the favour of men or of God? Or am I striving to please men? If I were still pleasing men, I should not be a servant of Christ</em>- Although Paul made himself all things to all men, he didn&rsquo;t just seek to please men (Gal. 1:10; 1 Thess. 2:4). He sought their salvation and approached them in appropriate terms, but he didn&rsquo;t just seek to please them from a human viewpoint. He didn&rsquo;t cheapen the Gospel. The argument here suggests that serving<em> Christ</em> is being placed in opposition to serving<em> men.</em> Thus he sees one application of serving mammon as acting in a hypocritical way in order to please some in the ecclesia (Mt. 6:24 = Gal. 1:10).</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6353','1','48','1','10','10','<p>1:10 <i>For am I now seeking the favour of men or of God? Or am I striving to please men? If I were still pleasing men, I should not be a servant of Christ</i>- Cultured, educated people in the first century presented themselves to others by means of an \'encomium\'. This was a document or major speech which included five sections, clearly defined in the various manuals of rhetoric which survive, and which surely Paul would have been taught. The purpose of the encomium was to demonstrate how the person was an upright member of the community and worthy of honour within it. Students of the letter to the Galatians have detected these five sections of the encomium followed in an almost classic manner by Paul in Galatians 1:10-2:21:<br />1. Opening (<em>prooimion</em>) 1:10-12: Paul\'s Gospel<br />2. Lifestyle (<em>anastrophe</em>) 1:13-17: Paul as persecutor of the church and preacher of the Gospel. Gal. 1:13 uses the very word <em>anastrophe</em> (&quot;way of life&quot;)<br />3. Achievements (<em>praxeis</em>) or &quot;deeds of the body&quot; 1:18-2:10- Paul\'s work in Jerusalem, Syria and again in Jerusalem<br />4. Comparison with others (<em>synkrisis</em>) 2:11-21- Paul and Peter; Paul and the Jews<br />5. Conclusion (<em>epilogos</em>)- 2:21 Paul and grace.</p><p>The encomium was essentially self-praise and self-justification within society. Paul almost mocks the encomium, by using its elements to show how radically different are the standards of thinking and behaviour for the Christian. In Gal. 1:15 Paul speaks of his birth (<em>genesis</em>), which in the usual encomiums would\'ve been a reference to his family of origin, which as we\'ve shown was all important in a collectivist society. Paul never speaks of his parents, as would\'ve been normal in an encomium- and seeing he was born as a free man, he could\'ve made an impressive point at this stage had he wished. But the birth he speaks of is that which came from God, who gave Paul birth by grace. His place in God\'s invisible household was all important, rather than what family he belonged to naturally. An encomium would typically have a reference to a man\'s education- and Paul could\'ve made an impressive case for himself here. But rather he speaks of how God Himself revealed Christ to him, and how his spiritual education was not through interaction with any other men of standing in the Christian community, but rather in his three years alone in Arabia (Gal. 1:18). It has been suggested that Paul actually coined a new Greek term in 1 Thess. 4:9, when he spoke of how he had been taught-by-God (<em>theodidaktos</em>). To claim an education \'not by flesh and blood\' (Gal. 1:16) was foolishness to 1st century society. In the description of his &quot;deeds&quot;, Paul could\'ve made a fair case both as a Jew and as a Christian. But instead he spends Gal. 2:1-10 speaking of how he had laboured so hard to avoid division in the church of Christ, to teach grace, avoid legalistic obedience to the norms of Jewish society, and to help the poor. <em>These</em> were the works he counted as significant. It was usual in an encomium to speak of your courage (<em>andreia</em>) and fortitude. Paul uses the word <em>andreia</em>, again in conscious imitation of an encomium, but he relates it to how he courageously refused to &quot;yield submission even for a moment&quot; to the pressures to conform to Jewish societal expectations (Gal. 2:5). When it comes to the <em>synkrisis</em>, the comparison with others, he chooses to compare himself with Peter, who caved in to the pressures from the Jews, agreeing to act smart before men rather than God, whereas Paul says he withstood this and insisted upon a life of radical grace which paid no attention to what others thought of his appearances.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6354','1','48','1','11','11','<p>1:11 <em>For, brothers, I make known to you, as regards the gospel which was preached by me, that it is not from man</em>- The implication was that the Judaist opposition were claiming that Paul had just made up his interpretations and called it &quot;the Gospel&quot;. Or perhaps there was some conspiracy theory that he was the agent of some other man. Whilst the Gospel was not &quot;from man&quot;, <em>kata anthropos</em>, yet Paul uses that same term in saying that he can reason at times in that way, &quot;after the manner of men&quot;, humanly speaking (3:15). But the core of the Gospel was from the Lord Jesus and not from men.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6355','1','48','1','12','12','<p>1:12 <em>For neither did I receive it from man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through direct revelation from Jesus Christ</em>- See on :1. As a rabbi, it was important to justify teaching by explaining that he had been taught it by some greater rabbi. Paul cuts right across these expectations (see on :10), and says that his message had not been taught to him. He had received it directly from the Lord Jesus, who is the central part of the message he preached.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6356','1','48','1','13','13','<p>1:13 <em>For you have heard of my manner of life in time past in the Jews\' religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God and made havoc of it</em>- &quot;Made havoc&quot; is literally \'destroyed\', and the same word is used in 1:23 of how he \'destroyed\' &quot;the faith&quot;. He draws a parallel between the church and the faith; for the true church is based upon the true faith. The same word is used of how he &quot;destroyed&quot; the Christians in Jerusalem (Acts 9:21). This clearly means he murdered Christians, including perhaps some of those who were converted in Jerusalem at Pentecost. This sort of behaviour was a way of life elicited by Judaism; and Judaism is therefore to be judged by its fruits as seen in Paul. Whilst repeatedly taking full personal responsibility for his actions, Paul sees that they had been elicited by Judaism, &quot;the Jews\' religion&quot;. To return to that was therefore serious indeed.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6357','1','48','1','14','14','<p>1:14- see on Mt. 15:2.</p><p><em>And I advanced in the Jews\' religion beyond many of my own age among my fellow countrymen, being even more exceedingly zealous for the traditions of my fathers</em>- Paul could have been such a high flyer; he profited (materially, the Greek could imply) in the Jews\' religion above any one else. But he resigned it all. He wrote some majestic words which ought to become the goal of every one of us: &quot;But what things were gain to me materially?, those I counted loss for Christ. Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss <em>for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord</em>: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I way win Christ&quot; (Phil. 3:7,8). As noted on :13, whilst not at all dodging his personal responsibility for his actions, he sees the murder and hatred towards Christians as the fruit of zeal for Judaism. The traditions of Paul\'s fathers cp. &quot;our fathers&quot; when referring to the patriarchs refers surely to Paul\'s rabbinic forefathers. Casuistic following of the implications of previous expositions and judgments of those who have gone before resulted in murder. This was the fruit of Judaism, and all belief systems are to be judged by their fruits.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6358','1','48','1','15','15','<p>1:15- see on Acts 18:18.</p><p><em>But when-</em> &quot;But when&quot; suggests there was a specific time when God decided to call Paul to manifest His Son. But we should not too quickly assume that this time was on the Damascus road, for the Lord there made the point that Paul had been pushing against the pricks of conscience for some time. Perhaps the calling was at the time of Paul\'s birth, when the umbilical cord was cut and he was separated from his mother\'s womb. The calling of grace is an idea Paul uses in Romans to exemplify God\'s grace, and he thereby makes himself the parade example of grace to all believers. In Gal. 1:15,16, Paul speaks as if his calling to preach the Gospel and his conversion co-incided. He clearly understood that he had been called so as to spread the word to others. Paul uses the word <em>kaleo </em>to describe both our call to the Gospel, and the call to preach that Gospel (Gal. 1:15 cp. Rom. 8:30; 1 Cor. 1:9; 7:15; Gal. 1:6; 5:13; 2 Tim. 1:9). He doesn&rsquo;t separate his call from that of ours; he speaks of how God called &ldquo;us&rdquo; (Rom. 9:24; 1 Thess. 4:7). We may not all be able to live the life of itinerant preaching and spreading the word geographically which Paul did. And yet clearly enough Paul sets himself up as our pattern in the context of his attitude to preaching. Our lamps were lit, in the Lord&rsquo;s figure, so as to give light to others. We are mirrors, reflecting to others the glory of God as far as we ourselves behold it in the face of Jesus Christ.</p><p><em>It was the good pleasure of God- </em>Our salvation was &quot;not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, by... renewing of the Holy Spirit&quot; (Tit. 3:5). Thus in Paul\'s case &quot;it pleased (lit. \'willed\') God, who separated me from my mother\'s womb, and called me by His grace&quot; (Gal.1:15) - not Paul\'s works. Thus our obedience to the truth was &quot;through (on account of) the Spirit&quot; (1 Pet. 1:22). Against this must be balanced Rom. 10:17: &quot;Faith cometh by hearing... the word of God&quot;. God\'s Spirit was involved in bringing about our calling, and is also present in the word by which we are called.</p><p><em>Who separated me from my mother\'s womb, and called me through His grace</em>- Paul seems to have admired the humility John the Baptist manifested in his preaching, for he often alludes to John- perhaps because he heard him live. For he was living in Jerusalem at the same time as John\'s ministry. He knew he had been chosen from the womb for his mission, as John had been (Gal. 1:15 =&nbsp; Lk. 1:15). There is also allusion to Jeremiah being likewise known from the womb. Paul felt he had been &ldquo;separated unto the preaching of the gospel of God&rdquo;; and he uses a word which the LXX uses for the separation of part of a sacrifice to be consumed (Ex. 29:24,26). The Greek word for &quot;witness&quot; is <em>martus</em>, from whence \'martyr\'. To witness to Christ is to live the life of the martyr; to preach Him is to live out His cross in daily life. Yet the Lord&rsquo;s servant being called from the womb (Is. 49:1) was applied by Paul to himself (Gal. 1:15)- see on Rom. 8:31. Choice from birth, calling, ministry to the Gentiles all recalls the servant known from birth (Is. 49:1,5). This is one of a number of instances of where Old Testament Messianic Scriptures are applied to Paul in the context of his preaching Christ. He saw himself as in Christ, and so the Lord\'s mission became his as it becomes ours.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6359','1','48','1','16','16','<p>1:16- see on Acts 9:20.</p><p><em>To reveal His Son in me- </em>Saul of Tarsus must&rsquo;ve seemed the most unlikely of men to convert to Christ. But he later refers to how God chose &ldquo;to <em>reveal</em> his son in me&rdquo;. The Greek word <em>apokalupto</em> means literally &lsquo;to take the cover off&rsquo;. The implication is that Christ is passively within each person, but has to be revealed in them, through response to the Gospel. The cover can be taken off every single man or women with whom we come into contact The Galatians passage could equally mean that Paul was called as an apostle to &lsquo;take the cover off&rsquo; Christ to others; and yet Paul felt his calling was to all people on earth, to the ends of the world (Acts 13:47)- to every single person of all the Gentile nations (Rom. 15:11; 2 Tim. 4:17).</p><p><em>That I might preach him among the Gentiles-&nbsp; </em>To preach Christ is to reveal Him to men through ourselves- this is the purpose for which we are called, that our lamp was lit, to reveal Christ to others through us. And thus Paul could conclude by saying that he bore in his body perhaps an idiom for his life, cp. the &lsquo;broken body&rsquo; of the Lord we remember the stigmata of the Lord Jesus (Gal. 6:17). The whole burden of his message was therefore the Lord Jesus, rather than theology or clever apologetic arguments.</p><p><em>Immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood</em>- Paul\'s attitude to his brethren seems to have changed markedly over the years. He begins as being somewhat detached from them; perhaps as all new converts are initially. We see the Truth for what it is, we realize we had to make the commitment we did, and we are happy to do our own bit in preaching the Truth. But often a real concern and care for our brethren takes years to develop. Paul seems to tell the Galatians that the Gospel he preached had not been given to him by men, because in the early days after his conversion he was rather indifferent towards other Christian believers; &quot;(Paul) conferred not with flesh and blood&quot; after his conversion, neither did he go to see the apostles in Jerusalem to discuss how to preach to Israel; instead, Paul says, he pushed off to Arabia for three years in isolation. He was unknown by face to the Judean ecclesias, and even after his return from Arabia, he made no special effort to meet up with the Apostles (Gal. 1). The early Paul comes over as self-motivated, a maverick, all too ready to fall out with Barnabas, all too critical of Mark for failing to rise up to Paul\'s level of fearless devotion (Acts 15:39).</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6360','1','48','1','17','17','<p>1:17- see on Acts 26:16-19; 1 Cor. 9:17.</p><p><em>Nor did I go to Jerusalem to those that were apostles ahead of me; but I went away into Arabia, and returned to Damascus</em>- As noted on :12, Paul resists the Rabbinic style of saying that his message is supported by the opinions of other learned men from the same religion who had preceded him. This is the force of his statement that he did not go to see those who had been in Christ &quot;ahead of me&quot;. Arabia could refer to various desert areas; we are left to imagine that this period in the wilderness formed his spiritual position by direct contact with the Lord Jesus. But it could also be read as a recognition of weakness- that instead of going to preach the Gospel he went instead into isolation. And thus he was glorying in his weakness as a qualification; see on :10. The return to Damascus, where he had almost been lynched and escaped it in a most humiliating way (2 Cor. 11:31-33), is really impressive; just as Paul returned to cities where he had been badly persecuted. Such was his care for his converts.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6361','1','48','1','18','18','<p>1:18 <em>Then after three years I went to Jerusalem to visit Cephas and stayed with him fifteen days</em>- The mention of three years may be another hint that he had not got on with witnessing to the Gentiles as he might have done; he is glorying in his weakness, as noted extensively on :10. &quot;Visit&quot; translates a term which can mean \'to learn from\'; we see here Paul\'s humility. He as the literate, intellectual rabbi went to Jerusalem not to sit at the feet of some learned rabbi, but to be taught by an illiterate fisherman from Galilee. This again is a reversal of all the qualifications Judaism boasted in; see on :10.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6362','1','48','1','19','19','<p>1:19 <em>But none of the other apostles did I see, except James, the Lord\'s brother</em>- Judaism stressed which big names were supporting a position or individual, and Paul is consciously subverting this. See on :10. We likewise should be unashamed to subvert the peer review qualifications which are so popular these days. Observe how Paul counts James as an &quot;apostle&quot; although he was not one of the 12, perhaps anticipating the objection raised in Corinth that Paul was not really an apostle because he was not one of the 12.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6363','1','48','1','20','20','<p>1:20- see on Gal. 1:1.</p><p><em>In what I am writing to you, before God, I do not lie</em>- Clearly Paul\'s version of events was questioned. All manner of conspiracy theories and slander had arisen, as they do in the life of anyone who devotes themselves to preaching Christ in truth. The origin of the \'troublers\' of 1:7 was likely Jerusalem (see note there). Paul is answering the objection that \'Jerusalem\' did not support him by strongly agreeing with it- and insisting that he had higher authority than Jerusalem, namely, his direct relationship with the Lord Jesus.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6364','1','48','1','21','21','<p>1:21 <em>Then I came to the regions of Syria and Cilicia</em>- Cilicia was Paul\'s home area. Again, he may be glorying in his spiritual weakness, saying that he had returned to his roots rather than going out into the world as he had been commissioned. For Barnabus had to come to Tarsus and as it were drag Paul with him on his first missionary journey. Such boasting in weakness is a subversion of any attempt to present a humanly strong case for authority; see on :10. &quot;Regions&quot; translates <em>klima</em>, which according to Vine referred &quot;originally to an inclination or slope of ground: the supposed slope of the earth from the equator to the pole&quot;. Here we have an example of scientifically incorrect terms being used in the Bible without correction; and this helps explain the language of demons being used in the Gospels regarding mental illnesses.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6365','1','48','1','22','22','<p>1:22 <em>But I was still unknown by face to the churches of Judea which were in Christ</em>- Paul speaks warmly of these churches in 1 Thess. 2:14, showing his eagerness to believe the best about others, with the love that believes all things. The churches which were in Christ suggests there were some \'churches\' not in Christ. The term <em>ekklesia</em> was used for any gathering or assembly, and referred to the synagogues in small town and villages, some of whom had become Christian, and thus become assemblies which were in Christ. Christianity would have spread by the conversion of such synagogue assemblies here and there. The Lord did not ask His people to leave the synagogue system as part of their acceptance of Him; He just predicted that the time would come when His converts would be thrown out of that system (Jn. 16:2). This reflects how there was no concept of guilt by association, no demand of breaking association with an apostate system. If Jesus was accepted as Christ and preached as such, then the systems antithetical to that would themselves cast out the Lord\'s people. The <em>angst</em> about separation from error which has blighted the body of Christ was therefore unknown in the first century church.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6366','1','48','1','23','23','<p>1:23 <em>They only heard say: He that once persecuted us now preaches the faith of which he once made havoc</em>- See on :13 &quot;made havoc&quot;. Paul had arranged their persecution without seeing their faces (:22). But he was a household name amongst the Christian synagogues (see on :22).</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6367','1','48','1','24','24','<p>1:24 <em>And they glorified God in me</em>- The house churches in the area around Jerusalem &quot;Judea&quot; were obvious targets for Paul, who sought to drag Christians Jews into Jerusalem for punishment. They glorified not Paul but God\'s grace which had worked within Paul to bring about his conversion.</p><p><b><font size=5>Chronology of Paul&rsquo;s Life</font></b></p><div align=center><table border=0 cellspacing=4 cellpadding=0 width=100%>    <tbody>        <tr>            <td width=46%>            <p>Standard Chronology Of Paul\'s Life</p>            </td>            <td width=54%>            <p>John Robinson\'s Chronology Of Paul\'s Life (2)</p>            </td>        </tr>        <tr>            <td>            <p>AD 35 Paul&rsquo;s conversion <br />            36-38 In Arabia (1)<br />            38-43 Preaching in Damascus and Jerusalem<br />            44-46 Working in Antioch and Syria<br />            46-48 First missionary journey<br />            49-50 Jerusalem Conference<br />            50-52 Second missionary journey<br />            53-57 Third missionary journey<br />            57-59 Arrest- Jerusalem-Caesarea<br />            59-62 To Rome; first imprisonment<br />            63-66 Release; travels in Asia, Greece, Spain<br />            64-68 Nero&rsquo;s persecution of the Christians<br />            67 Arrest, imprisoned in a dungeon in Rome<br />            68 Final trial; executed.</p>            </td>            <td>            <p>AD33 Conversion <br />            35 First visit to Jerusalem<br />            46 Second famine-relief visit to Jerusalem<br />            47-48 First missionary journey<br />            48 Council of Jerusalem<br />            49-51 Second missionary journey<br />            52-57 Third missionary journey<br />            57 Arrival in Jerusalem<br />            57-59 Imprisonment in Caesarea<br />            60-62 Imprisonment in Rome</p>                                    </td>        </tr>    </tbody></table></div><p><strong>Notes</strong></p><p>(1) &quot;Arabia&quot; is from the word \'Arabah\', and occurs in the LXX in Dt. 2:8; 3:17; 4:49 to mean simply the wilderness. Since Paul went there from Damascus, it has been suggested that he mixed with the Damascene Essene group. There are extensive parallels between the Qumran texts and the letter to the Hebrews, which could lend support to this suggestion- as if Paul wrote to an audience he knew. <br />(2) J.A.T. Robinson, <em>Redating The New Testament</em> (London: SCM, 1976) pp. 52,53.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6368','1','48','2','1','1','<p>2:1 <i>Then after the space of fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, also taking Titus with me</i>- See chronology of Paul&rsquo;s life on 1:24. The events and agreement mentioned in 2:1-10 need not be identical with the council of Acts 15. It could\'ve occurred at the visit of Acts 11:30. Paul&rsquo;s various visits to Jerusalem recorded in Acts are hard to mesh into what he writes in Galatians. It seems that his visit to Jerusalem of Acts 9:26 is that referred to in Gal. 1:18-21; and the visit spoken of in Gal. 2:1-10 is that of Acts 11:1-18 rather than that of Acts 15. The fact Titus wasn&rsquo;t compelled to be circumcised (Gal. 2:3) matches the outcome of Acts 11:18; and Paul&rsquo;s description of the meeting as private (Gal. 2:2) sounds more like the visit of Acts 11 rather than the public council of Acts 15. In a long and fascinating study, Paul Achtemeier makes a good case that the decree of Acts 15 was not &ldquo;the <i>result</i> of the conflict in Antioch reported in Gal. 2:11-14, but the <i>cause </i>of that conflict&rdquo;- Paul J. Achtemeier, <i>Paul and the Jerusalem Church</i> (Eugene, OR: Wipf &amp; Stock, 2005) p. 58. This would mean that the advice Paul gave to the Corinthians about food which was contrary to the Acts 15 decree was actually given before that decree was given (1 Cor. 9:19-22; 10:32).</p><p> <br />2:2 <i>And I went up there by revelation</i>- He means that he didn\'t go and attend a unity meeting from any political reasons, there was no human buying in or selling out. He was told by Spirit revelation to go there, and he did.<br /><i><br />And I laid before them the gospel which I preach among the Gentiles</i>- Paul says something similar in 1 Cor. 15:1, where he again declares to the Corinthians the content of the Gospel message he had preached to them. The content he summarizes in 1 Cor. 15:1 ff. is quite basic. The message of the Gospel was simple, not complicated.</p><p><i>But privately before them who were of repute</i>- This is a lovely example of considering others\' positions and being sensitive and wise. Paul didn\'t want to engage the well known names in public debate. He knew that human pride being what it is, they might be unable to humble themselves before others and accept what he was saying as right. He knew he was in the right, but he engaged them privately so that there would be no public showdown. He knew that if there were to be that, then the Lord\'s work might well be damaged and his overall work would be in vain if converts turned away because of division. The problem with those who know they are in the right is that they often feel thereby empowered to get involved in public debate and demonstration of the error of others; my earlier years were characterized by such wrong attitudes. Possession of truth is like driving a very powerful car. You don\'t drive it as fast as you can just because you have that car and you can drive it fast. We must consider the slowness of others. The Lord knew the truth about demons, but He used that truth appropriately. And Paul did likewise in this matter of Gentile inclusion and the passing of the Mosaic law. He considered his audience and their weakness, realizing that it is so hard for public figures to backtrack and admit being in the wrong. He sought an appropriate forum in which to engage them- and that was a private meeting. There\'s so much we can learn from this. The same word translated &quot;repute&quot; is found in 2:6,9 and James, Peter and John who were \'reputed\' pillars of the church are clearly in view. We note that even believers of their standing were liable to find it hard to backtrack on publicly advertised positions. And Paul showed the grace to appreciate that, rather than launching a head on public attack on their positions. By contrast, Paul records how later, after Peter had privately agreed with Paul\'s position in Jerusalem, Paul had to publicly confront him at Antioch when Peter backtracked on the private agreement (:11). There&rsquo;s a place for public confrontation, but only after private entreaty. Indeed the whole account here sounds like a parade example of following the Lord\'s advice in Matthew 18, to approach a brother privately and only then publicly rebuke him before the church.</p><p><i>Lest by any means I should be running, or had run, in vain</i>- Unity and avoiding division is vital. Paul even argues in Gal. 2:2 that all his colossal missionary effort would have been a \'running in vain\' if the ecclesia divided into exclusive Jewish and Gentile sections. This may be hyperbole, but it is all the same a hyperbole which reflects the extent to which Paul felt that unity amongst believers was vital.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6369','1','48','2','3','3','<p>2:3 <i>But not even Titus who was with me, being a Gentile, was compelled to be circumcised</i>- See on Gal. 1:1. Paul\'s comment that Gentile Titus was not compelled to be circumcised would suggest that actually, James and the Jerusalem elders were now compelling&nbsp;Gentiles to be circumcised.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6370','1','48','2','4','4','<p>2:4 <i>In view of the false brothers unknowingly brought in, who came in secretly to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus</i>- Did Judaizers pose as Christians and get baptized even, in order to infiltrate and undermine the Christian church? But &quot;unknowingly brought in&quot; translates a Greek word used for smuggling in; as if there were Judaists already embedded within the church who smuggled in others who they knew would purposefully disrupt the church. &quot;Spy out&quot; suggests a conscious, cunning plan; to observe the &quot;liberty&quot; and then subvert it, in order to return the community to bondage to the Mosaic law. This &quot;Jewish plot&quot;, as Harry Whittaker labelled it, was perhaps Paul\'s thorn in the flesh; a group of Judaists who intentionally sought to derail his ministry of grace. I have expanded upon this at great length in &quot;The Jewish Satan&quot; in <a href=http://www.realdevil.info/>The Real Devil</a>. Peter was up against the same problem, when he writes of false teachers secretly entering in (2 Pet. 2:1). His usage of the same word as Paul here uses is a reflection of Peter\'s humility. For here, Paul is criticizing Peter for allowing this false teaching to enter unopposed. And Peter in his maturity realizes his error, and appeals to others not to repeat it. This is the humility of maturity in Christ.</p><p><i>That they might bring us into b</i><i>ondage</i>- The term used in Acts 15:10 about the Judaizing element within the church, seeking to bring believers into the bondage of the Mosaic law. We naturally wonder why they went to such an extent in doing this. But this is all an essay in the power of legalism, and the way legalists consider that anything justifies the end of maintaining a traditional, legalistic system. Such defence of entrenched legalism is a psychological classic- it releases extraordinary energy and bitterness because of the belief that the end must justify any means. These same &quot;false brothers&quot; are referred to with the same word in 2 Cor. 11:26 as a group who literally endangered Paul\'s life. They were within the ecclesia. But legalists within ecclesias today show a similar hatred which the Lord judges as murder.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6371','1','48','2','5','5','<p>2:5 <i>We did not yield to them in submission- </i>Even though they &ldquo;seemed to be somewhat&rdquo; and were in the eyes of some &ldquo;in repute&rdquo; (Gal. 2:6 ASV). The same Greek word translated &ldquo;subjection&rdquo; is found in 1 Cor. 16:16; Tit. 3:1 and 1 Pet. 5:5 about submission to elders in the ecclesia. Paul&rsquo;s example shows that merely because an elder demands subjection, this doesn&rsquo;t mean we should automatically give it- even if others do. We should be &ldquo;subject&rdquo; to those who are in our judgment <i>qualified</i> to demand our subjection (1 Cor. 16:16); and &ldquo;subjection&rdquo; in Paul&rsquo;s&nbsp;writings usually refers to our subjection to the Lordship of Jesus. Our subjection must be to Him first before any human elders.</p><p><i>Even for a moment- </i>There would have been a temptation to just make a momentary acquiescence to the demands of the legalists. But such politics was not acceptable to Paul.</p><p><i>So that the truth of the gospel might be preserved for you</i>- If we give in to legalists, then others lose the truth of the Gospel. The salvation of others can be affected by third parties. We really can make others stumble, and legalism is one of the most common forms of this happening. We enter the one body of Christ by baptism into the one body of the Lord Jesus (1 Cor. 12:13). We therefore have a duty to fellowship all who remain in the body (1 Cor. 10:16). Paul describes Peter as not walking according to the truth of the Gospel (Gal. 2:14) by effectively saying there were two bodies, of Jews and Gentiles, and only fellowshipping one of these groups rather than the entire one body. Paul says that this would mean that the truth of the Gospel would be lost. Paul put all the ecclesial politics behind him and withstood Peter &quot;to his face&quot;. If we know &quot;the truth&quot; of Christ\'s Gospel, we will fellowship all those in Him and in that Truth. If we don\'t, Paul foresaw that ultimately &quot;the truth of the Gospel&quot; would be lost (Gal. 2:5). Tragically, in man-made attempts to preserve the Gospel\'s Truth the rest of the body has often been disfellowshipped. But by fellowshipping all the body, the &quot;Truth&quot; is kept</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6372','1','48','2','6','6','<p>2:6 <i>But from those who were reputed to be somewhat (whatever they were, it makes no matter to me, God does not accept man\'s person) they</i><i>, I say, who were of repute added nothing to me</i>- The Greek is hard to translate. The idea, I suggest, is that when these brethren were &quot;in conference&quot; AV they had something added to them; but this meant totally nothing to Paul. This is indeed true to experience- when men, even brethren, come together, they can have an aura and power greater than the sum of their component parts. But this \'buzz\' was seen through by Paul as he kept strictly to spiritual principle and would not be swayed by the power attached to men publicly together as it were on the platform.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6373','1','48','2','7','7','<p>2:7 <i>But on the contrary, when they saw that I had been entrusted with the gospel of the uncircumcision, even as Peter with the Gospel to the circumcision</i><i>- </i>&ldquo;The gospel of the circumcision&rdquo; being given to Peter and that of the Gentiles to Paul evidently means &lsquo;the duty of preaching the gospel&rsquo;. The Gospel is in itself the duty of preaching it.</p><p>I have noted throughout the commentary on Acts that Paul in fact went to the Jews in practice, and suffered because of it. So what he is saying here may be theory rather than practice.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6374','1','48','2','8','8','<p>2:8 <i>For he that worked through Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, worked through me also to the Gentiles</i>- In Gal. 2:7,8, we read that Peter was given a ministry to preach to Jews, and Paul to the Gentiles. But in Acts 15:7 Peter says that God used him to take the Gospel to the Gentiles- and the implication of 1 Peter is that he had made many converts in Gentile areas of Asia Minor. The reconciliation of these statements may be that God changed things around- Peter\'s ministry to the Gentiles was handed over to Paul, and Paul\'s initial work amongst the Jews was not for him to continue but for Peter. And so the Father may work with us, too. My simple point is that we are each given our group or area of potential responsibility for preaching, and we should be workers together with the Father and Son to achieve what they have potentially made possible for us. And we each, in God&rsquo;s master plan, have an area of opportunity opened up to us for us to preach in, and this area may be changed, reduced, moved or expanded according to our freewill response to God&rsquo;s desire to use us.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6375','1','48','2','9','9','<p>2:9 <i>A</i><i>nd when they perceived the grace that was given to me, then James, Cephas and John, they who were reputed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship</i>- Yet the Lord promises each believer that we can become &quot;pillars&quot; in His future temple (Rev. 3:12). We will all therefore in spirit take on the position of elders. In no way are we to see Christianity as a spectator religion, with a group of specialists acting effectively as priests. We are all to enter the spirit of responsibility which goes with eldership.</p><p><i>That we should go to the Gentiles a</i><i>nd they to the circumcision</i><i>- </i>James, the leader of the Jerusalem ecclesia, got Peter and John to join him in making Paul to agree to preach only to Gentiles, whilst they would teach the Jews (Gal. 2:9 NIV). This was contrary to what the Lord had told Paul in Acts 9:15- that he had been converted so as to preach to both Jews and Gentiles. And Paul took no notice of the &lsquo;agreement&rsquo; they tried to force him into- he always made a priority of preaching first of all in the Jewish synagogues and to the Jews, and only secondarily to Gentiles. He did this right up to the end of the Acts record. Paul got drawn into politics in the church. Although he went along with the Acts 15 decree and even agreed to propagate it, he never mentions it in his writing or speaking, and later he writes about food regulations and the whole question of Gentiles and the Law as if he disagreed with it. Perhaps as he matured, he saw the need to speak out against legalism in the ecclesias rather than go along with it for the sake of peace.&nbsp;</p><p>We can ourselves so easily form into groups of brethren and ecclesias, papering over our differences as happened in Acts 15, adopting a hard line (as Jerusalem ecclesia did in Gal. 2:9 over Gentile believers), then a softer line in order to win political support (as in Acts 15), then back to a hard line (as in Acts 21). We ought to be men and women of principle. We look back at the senior brethren of those days arguing so strongly about whether or not it was right to break bread with Gentile believers, &ldquo;much disputing&rdquo; whether or not we should be circumcised&hellip; and it all seems to us such an elemental disregard of the clear teaching of the Lord Jesus and so many clear Old Testament implications. But there were background factors which clouded their perceptions, although they themselves didn&rsquo;t realise this at the time. And so it can be with us, if we were to see ourselves from outside our own historical time, place and culture, it would probably be obvious that we are disregarding some most basic teachings of the Word which we know so well. Like them, our blindness is because the environment we live in blinds us to simple Bible truth.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6376','1','48','2','10','10','<p>2:10 <i>Only they asked us to remember the poor, which very thing I was also zealous to do</i>- The Jewish poor at Jerusalem. Paul\'s attempts to do this via the Jerusalem poor fund weren\'t particularly successful; another indication that this compromise was not ultimately blessed by the Lord.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6377','1','48','2','11','11','<p>2:11 <i>But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned</i><i>- </i>This is extreme language. Peter&rsquo;s name Cephas is used because he had reverted to his Jewish roots. Refusing to fellowship our brethren because of pressure from more conservative brethren can make us stand condemned. There is a <i>direct</i> relationship, in God\'s judgment, between how we treat others and what will happen to us. This is to the extent that what we do to others, we do to ourselves. If we condemn others, we really and truly do condemn ourselves. Thus when Peter refused to fellowship Gentiles, Paul &quot;opposed him to the face, because he stood condemned&quot;. Just as Peter had condemned himself by denying the Lord, so he had done again in refusing to fellowship the Lord\'s brethren. Realizing the seriousness of all this, Paul didn\'t just let it go, as many of us would have done in such an ecclesial situation. He realized a man was condemning himself; and so he risked causing a lot of upset in order to save him from this. Many of us could take a lesson from this.</p><p>The Peter who had come so far, from the headstrong days of Galilee to the shame of the denials, and then on to the wondrous new life of forgiveness and preaching that grace to others, leading the early community that developed upon that basis&hellip;that Peter almost went wrong later in life. Peter and the Judaizers makes a sad story. And as always, it was a most unlikely form of temptation that arose and almost blew him right off course. As often, the problem arose from his own brethren rather than from the hostile world outside. There was strong resistance in the Jewish mind to the idea that Gentiles could be saved without keeping the Mosaic law. And more than this, there was the feeling that any Jewish believer who advocated that they could was selling out and cheapening the message of God to men. Paul has to write about this whole shameful episode in Gal. 2. It becomes apparent that Peter very nearly denied the Lord that bought him once again, by placing on one side all the evidence of salvation by pure grace, for <i>all </i>men whether they be Jew or Gentile, which he had progressively built up over the past years. Paul, using Peter&rsquo;s old name, comments how Cephas seemed to be a pillar- but wasn&rsquo;t (Gal. 2:9). Paul &ldquo;withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed&rdquo; (2:11). Peter and some other Jewish believers &ldquo;dissembled&rdquo; and along with Barnabas &ldquo;was carried away with their dissimulation&rdquo;, with the result that they &ldquo;walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel&rdquo;&nbsp;(2:12-14). Paul&rsquo;s whole speech to Peter seems to be recorded in Gal. 2:15-21. He concludes by saying that if Peter&rsquo;s toleration of justification by works rather than by Christ was really so, then Christ was dead in vain. Paul spoke of how for him, he is crucified with Christ, and lives only for Him, &ldquo;who loved me and gave himself for me&rdquo;. These were exactly the sentiments which Peter held so dear, and Paul knew they would touch a chord with him. &nbsp;</p><p>Yet Peter very nearly walked away from it all, because he was caught up in the legalism of his weaker brethren, and lacked the courage to stand up to the pressure of the Judaizers on him. Peter had earlier stayed with a tanner, a man involved in a ritually unclean trade (Acts 9:43). This would indicate that Peter was a liberal Jew, hardly a hard-liner. His caving in to the Judaist brethren was therefore all the more an act of weakness rather than something he personally believed in. For it was Peter, too, who had gone through the whole Cornelius experience too And many a humble, sincere man in Christ since has lost his fine appreciation of the Lord&rsquo;s death <i>for him</i> and the whole message of grace, through similar sophistry and a desire to please \'the brethren\'. In some of his very last words, facing certain death, Peter alludes to this great failure of his- his second denial of the Lord. He pleads with his sheep to hold on to the true grace of God, lest &ldquo;ye <i>also</i>, being led away (s.w. Gal. 2:13 &ldquo;carried away&rdquo;) with the error of the lawless, fall&hellip;&rdquo; (2 Pet. 3:17). Ye <i>also</i> invites the connection with Peter himself, who was led away by the error of the lawyers, the legalists- whereas his sheep had the error of the law<i>less</i> to contend with. The point surely is that to go the way of legalism, of denying the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, is every bit as bad as going to the lawless ways of the world. Peter was carried away with the &ldquo;dissimulation&rdquo; of the Judaizers (Gal. 2:13), and he uses the same word when he appeals to the brethren to lay aside &ldquo;all hypocrisies&rdquo; (1 Pet. 2:1); he was asking them to do what he himself had had to do. He had been a hypocrite, in living the life of legalism within the ecclesia whilst having the knowledge of grace. We may so easily pass this off as a mere peccadillo compared to the hypocrisy of living the life of the world 6 days / week and coming to do one&rsquo;s religious devotions at a Christian church on a Sunday. But Peter draws a parallel between his own hypocrisy and that of such brethren; this is how serious it is to bow to the sophistry of legalism. It may be that an unjust disfellowship ought to be contended, and we say nothing. Or that a sincere, spiritual brother who places his honest doubts on the table is elbowed out of being able to make the contribution to the community he needs to. In our after the meeting conversations and in our&nbsp;Sunday afternoon chats we can go along with such things, depending on the company we are in. And it seems just part of Christian life. The important thing, it can seem, is to stay within the community and keep separate from the world. But not so, is Peter&rsquo;s message. His ecclesial hypocrisy was just as bad as that of the worldly believer whom Peter wrote to warn. Paul seems to go even further and consciously link Peter&rsquo;s behaviour with his earlier denials that he had ever known the Lord Jesus. He writes of how he had to reveal Peter&rsquo;s denial of the Lord&rsquo;s grace &ldquo;before them all&rdquo; (Gal. 2:14), using the very same Greek phrase of Mt. 26:70, where &ldquo;before them all&rdquo; Peter made the same essential denial. &nbsp;</p><p>The sad thing about Peter&rsquo;s reversion to the Judaist perspective was that it was an almost studied undoing of all the Lord had taught him in the Cornelius incident. There he had learnt that the Lordship of Jesus, which had so deeply impressed him in his early preaching, was in fact universal- because &ldquo;He is Lord <i>of all</i>&rdquo;, therefore men from <i>all</i> (s.w.) nations were to be accepted in Him (Acts 10:35,36). God shewed him that he was not to call any man common or unclean on account of his race (Acts 10:28). But now he was upholding the very opposite. And he wasn&rsquo;t just passively going along with it, although that&rsquo;s how it doubtless started, in the presence of brethren of greater bearing and education than himself. He &ldquo;compelled&rdquo; the Gentile believers to adopt the Jewish ways, as if Peter was a Judaizer; and every time that word is used in Galatians it is in the context of compelling believers to be circumcised (Gal. 2:14 cp. 2:3; 6:12). So it seems Peter actually compelled brethren to be circumcised. And the Galatian epistle gives the answer as to <i>why</i> this was done; brethren chose to be circumcised and to preach it lest they suffer persecution for the sake of the cross of Christ (Gal. 5:11; 6:12-14). Consistently this letter points an antithesis between the cross and circumcision. The body marks of Christ&rsquo;s cross are set off against the marks of circumcision (Gal. 6:17); and the essence of the Christian life is said to be crucifying the flesh nature, rather than just cutting off bits of skin (Gal. 5:24). Peter&rsquo;s capitulation to the Judaizers, Peter\'s revertal to circumcision, was effectively a denial of the cross, yet once again in his life. There was something he found almost offensive about the cross, an ability to sustainedly accept its message. And he turned back to circumcision as he had earlier turned to look at John&rsquo;s weaknesses when told he must carry the cross. And we turn to all manner of pseudo-spiritual things to excuse our similar inability to focus upon it too. &nbsp;</p><p>Eventually Peter wouldn&rsquo;t eat with the Gentile brethren (Gal. 2:12). But he had learnt to eat with Gentile brethren in Acts 11:3; he had justified doing so to his brethren and persuaded them of its rightness, and had been taught and showed, so patiently, by his Lord that he should not make such distinctions. But now, all that teaching was undone. There&rsquo;s a lesson here for many a slow-to-speak brother or sister- what you start by passively going along with in ecclesial life, against your better judgment, you may well end up by actively advocating.&nbsp; It can be fairly conclusively proven that Mark&rsquo;s Gospel is in fact Peter&rsquo;s. Yet it is there in Mk. 7:19 that Mark / Peter makes the point that the Lord Jesus had declared all foods clean. He knew the incident, recalled the words, had perhaps preached and written them; and yet Peter acted and reasoned as if he was totally unaware of them.&nbsp;</p><p>Paul gently guided Peter back to the Cornelius incident, which he doubtless would have deeply meditated upon as the inspired record of it became available. Peter had been taught that God <i>accepted</i> <i>whoever</i> believed in Him, regardless of their race. But now Paul had to remind Peter that truly, God &ldquo;<i>accepteth </i>no man&rsquo;s person&rdquo; (Gal. 2:6). The same Greek word was a feature of the Cornelius incident: whoever believes <i>receives</i>, accepts, remission of sins (Acts 10:43), and they <i>received</i>, accepted, the Holy Spirit as well as the Jewish brethren (Acts 10:47). With his matchless humility, Peter accepted Paul&rsquo;s words. His perceptive mind picked up these references (and in so doing we have a working model of how to seek to correct our brethren, although the success of it will depend on their sensitivity to the word which we both quote and allude to). But so easily, a lifetime of spiritual learning could have been lost by the sophistry of legalistic brethren. It&rsquo;s a sober lesson. And yet Peter in his pastoral letters (which were probably transcripts of his words / addresses) makes these references back to his own failure, and on the basis of having now even more powerfully learnt his lesson, he can appeal to his brethren. And so it should be in our endeavours for our brethren. Paul warned him that by adopting the Judaist stance, he was <i>building again </i>what had been destroyed (Gal. 2:18). And Peter with that in mind can urge the brethren to <i>build up</i> the things of Christ and His ecclesia (1 Pet. 2:5,7 s.w.), rather, by implication, that the things of the world and its philosophy.&nbsp;</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6378','1','48','2','12','12','<p>2:12 <i>F</i><i>or before that certain men came from James, he would eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing those who were of the circumcision</i>- The whole nature of the agreement in Gal. 2:6-10 could be read as smacking of dirty politics- Paul could continue to convert Gentiles and not force them to be circumcised, but James and Peter would continue their ministry to the Jews, and Paul would get his Gentile converts to donate money to the Jewish Christians in Jerusalem. It all could be read as having the ring of a \'deal\' rather than an agreement strictly guided by spiritual principles. James not necessarily the same James who wrote the epistle seems to have acted very &lsquo;politically&rsquo;. He sent his followers to pressurise Peter not to break bread with Gentiles in Antioch (Gal. 2:12). Then there was a conference called at Jerusalem to discuss the matter. There was &ldquo;much disputing&rdquo;, there wasn&rsquo;t the clear cut acceptance of Gentiles which one would have expected if the words of Jesus had been taken at face value, and then James said &lsquo;Nobody ever came from me telling any Gentile they must be circumcised and keep the Law. They are all welcome, just that they must respect some of the Mosaic laws about blood etc., and keep away from fornication&rsquo;. This contradicts Paul&rsquo;s inspired teaching that the Mosaic Law was totally finished. Gal. 2:12 records that James <i>had</i> sent brethren to Antioch trying to enforce the Law upon Gentiles And then later, the Jerusalem ecclesia boasted of how many thousand members they had, &ldquo;and they are all zealous of the law&rdquo;. They then asked Paul to make it clear that he supported circumcision and keeping the Law (Acts 21:19-24). In passing, we note how hurtful this must have been, since Paul was bringing funds for their ecclesia which he had collected at the cost of damaging his relationship with the likes of Corinth. He meekly obeyed, perhaps it was playing a part in the politics in the church, although he had written to the Colossians and others that there was no need for any to be circumcised nor keep the Law, indeed these things were a denial of faith in Jesus. &nbsp;</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6379','1','48','2','13','13','<p>2:13- see on Mt. 23:28.</p><p><i>And the rest of the Jews acted hypocritically along with him, so that even Barnabas was led astray by their hypocrisy</i>- Peter uses the same word in warning his flock against hypocrisy (1 Pet. 2:1); knowing full well that he had publicly rebuked for being a hypocrite. In this we see the humility which made him a true elder, appealing to others not to make the same mistakes he had made.</p><p>Paul withstood the pressures of the &lsquo;circumcision party&rsquo; within the early church, and rebuked Peter for caving in to them (Gal. 2:12,13). But then he himself caved in under pressure from the same group, and obeyed their suggestion that he show himself to be not opposed to the keeping of the Mosaic Law by paying the expenses for the sacrifices of four brethren.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6380','1','48','2','14','14','<p>2:14 <i>But when I saw that they did not walk straightly according to the truth of the gospel</i>- Gk. \'with straight feet\', like the cherubim. Correct walk / behaviour is therefore related to the fact we have believed the <i>true</i> Gospel, i.e. we hold the right Gospel rather than the wrong one. The true Gospel was simple- believe in the Lord\'s death and resurrection and the salvation in Him, identify with it in baptism, and indeed it shall be true for us. In this lies the importance of doctrine. This is why Is. 29:13,24 speaks of repentance as \'learning doctrine\'; Israel went astray morally because they allowed themselves to be taught wrong doctrine.</p><p><i>I said to Cephas before all: If you, being a Jew, live as do the Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why do you compel the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?</i>- Paul uses Peter\'s old name because he feels Peter has slipped back to his old positions and is at this time not living according to the Lord\'s hope and expectation of him, which was that he would be a rock, Peter, the rocky one.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6381','1','48','2','15','15','<p>2:15- see on Acts 23:6.</p><p><i>We being Jews by nature and not sinners of the Gentiles</i>- Paul is using here terms well known within Judaism, appealing to people, as we should, in their own terms and language. But Paul returns to allude to this term &quot;sinners&quot; in :17. There he reasons that if we seek to be justified by the Law whilst in Christ, then we shall be left unredeemed sinners. Thus, he reasons, you who are so defiantly Judaistic are declared sinners, and even worse than ignorant &quot;sinners of the Gentiles&quot;.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6382','1','48','2','16','16','<p>2:16 <i>Y</i><i>et knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law</i>- Paul seems to be saying that their very reason for belief in Jesus for justification was because they knew there was no justification through keeping the Law. In our commentary on Acts 7, we sought to develop the idea that Paul was deeply touched by the inability of Law to save, and this led to the pricks in his conscience towards throwing himself upon faith in Jesus for justification. The motive for \'belief in Jesus\' is therefore no mere agreement with an impressively interlinking set of theologies, but rather a desperate awareness that apart from Him, I cannot be saved from my sins. See on :19 <i>I through the law...</i></p><p><i>But through faith in Jesus Christ, even we believed in Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law. Because by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified</i><i>- </i>Like Abraham, we are justified by the faith in Christ; not faith in Christ, but more specifically the faith in Christ (Gal. 2:16). The use of the definite article surely suggests that it is our possession of the same doctrinal truths (the Faith) which Abraham had, which is what leads to faith in Christ and thereby our justification. The life Paul lived was by the Faith of Christ; not simply by faith, as a verb, which is how grammatically it should be expressed if this is what was meant; but by the Faith (Gal. 2:20).There is an intended ambiguity in the phrase &ldquo;the faith of Abraham&quot; (Rom. 4:16); this \'ambiguous genitive\' can mean those who share &quot;the (doctrinal) faith&quot;, which Abraham also believed; or those who have the kind of belief which Abraham had.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6383','1','48','2','17','17','<p>2:17 <i>But if, while we seek to be made righteous in Christ, we</i> <i>ourselves also are found sinners</i>- See on 2:15 <i>Sinners of the Gentiles</i>.</p><p><i>Is Christ then a servant of sin? God forbid- </i>Christ would be bringing people into sin if He on one hand offered justification by faith in Him, and yet on the other, demanded obedience to the Mosaic law. &quot;Servant&quot;, <i>diakonos</i>, means that &quot;sin&quot; is a personification. If Paul had believed in a personal Satan, surely this would\'ve been the place to use that word. </p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6384','1','48','2','18','18','<p>2:18 <i>For if I build up again those things which I destroyed, I prove myself a transgressor</i>- The &quot;things&quot; of justification by the Mosaic law. The same word is used by the Lord in saying that He had not come to &quot;destroy&quot; the Law but to fulfil it (Mt. 5:17). Paul surely alludes here, and understood the Lord to be saying that He had indeed come to destroy the Law, but through fulfilling it; and that although He had not at that early point in His ministry destroyed the Law, yet He would do so- in His death. Paul thus sees his own part in the things which the Lord Himself achieved, just as we too can play our part in things like reconciling the world to God, which were personally achieved by the Lord\'s sacrifice.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6385','1','48','2','19','19','<p>2:19 <i>For I through the law died to the law, that I might live to God</i>- This is very much the language of baptism in Romans 6. Paul understood that at baptism, he had died, which meant that he was no longer bound to obey the law, but rather, more positively, he was obligated to &quot;live to God&quot;. Peter makes the same point, probably also in a baptism context (1 Pet. 4:2,6). Paul says that &quot;through the law&quot; he had come to this position; and his autobiographical comments in Romans 7 suggest that it was through his experience of failure to obey the law that he was driven to throw himself upon Christ and death with Him. This was his point in 2:16- see notes there.</p><p>Galatians was one of Paul&rsquo;s earlier letters. In it, he speaks of his own baptism: &ldquo;I have been crucified with Christ; it is no longer I who live&rdquo; (Gal. 2:19-21). Years later he writes to the Romans about <i>their </i>baptisms, in exactly the same language: &ldquo;All of us who have been baptized&hellip; our old self was crucified with him&hellip; the life he lives he lives to God&rdquo; (Rom. 6:1-10). He clearly seeks to forge an identity between his readers and himself; their baptisms were and are as radical as his in their import. Note how in many of his letters, especially Galatians and Corinthians, he switches so easily between &ldquo;you&rdquo; and &ldquo;we&rdquo;, as if to drive home the fact that there was to be no perception of distance between him the writer and us the readers. &nbsp;</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6386','1','48','2','20','20','<p>2:20- see on Mt. 27:26; 1 Cor. 15:10; Gal. 2:16.</p><p><i>I have been crucified with Christ</i>- Another reference to his baptism and the subsequent life spent living out those principles in practice (see on :19). Rom. 6:6 uses the same term for baptism- &quot;crucified with Him&quot;. This is the idea of co-crucifixion, and the word is used about the thieves being crucified with Jesus (Lk. 23:42). The repentant thief is a type of us all. We died with Christ there; everything within us cries out that \'I would not have done this\'. But we did. We through baptism are counted as having died and risen with Him. To be crucified is not so much a command we are to obey but a fact about our status in Christ which is to be believed. We count ourselves as dead to sin with Christ on the cross (Rom. 6:11).</p><p><i>And it is no longer I that live but Christ living in me</i>- &quot;I have been crucified with Christ: the life I now live is not <i>my </i>life, but the life which <i>Christ lives </i>in me; and my present bodily life is lived by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself up for me&quot;. The spirit of the risen Christ lived out in our lives is the witness of His resurrection. We are Him to this world. His cross affects our whole life, our deepest thought and action, to the extent that we can say with Paul, in the silence of our own deepest and most personal reflection: &ldquo;I live, yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh, I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me&quot; (Gal. 2:20).</p><p><i>I live in faith</i>- The Gospel of the Lord Jesus isn\'t a collection of ideas and theologies bound together in a statement of faith. It is, rather, a proclamation of facts (and the Greek words used about the preaching of the Gospel support that view of it) concerning a flesh and blood historical person, namely the Lord Jesus Christ. The focus is all upon a concrete and actual person. Paul in Gal. 2:20 doesn\'t say: \'I live by faith in the idea that the Son of God loved me\'. Rather: &quot;I live in faith, the faith which is in the Son of God, who loved me, and gave Himself up for me&quot; (RV). Faith is centred in a person- hence the utterly central importance of our correctly understanding the Lord Jesus. We are clearly bidden see the man Jesus as the focus of everything.</p><p><i>And that life which I now live in the flesh I live in faith, the faith which is in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself up</i>- A reference to the unique method of the Lord\'s death, consciously giving up His last breath in the words &quot;Father into Your hands I commend my spirit&quot;, a life not taken from the Lord but consciously given up by Him. And that supreme act of self giving was &quot;for me&quot;.</p><p><i>For me- </i>There is the sustained implication that the personal relationship between Jesus and each of His followers is totally personal and unique. The Abrahamic covenant is made personally with every member of the seed &ldquo;in their generations&quot; (Gen. 17:7). The records of the renewing of the covenant to Isaac and Jacob are but indicators that this is the experience of each one of the seed. This means that the covenant love of God and the promise of personal inheritance of the land is made personally, and confirmed by the shedding of Christ\'s blood, to each of us. Paul appreciated this when he spoke of how the Son of God had loved him and died for him personally, even though that act of death was performed for many others (Gal. 2:20). This is one of the most essential mysteries of our redemption; that Christ gave Himself <i>for me</i>, so that He might make <i>me</i> His very own; and therefore I wish to respond in total devotion to Him and His cause, to make Him the Man I fain would follow to the end. And yet He did it for <i>you</i> and for <i>you</i>; for <i>all</i> of us His people. All the emphasis on fellowship and family life, good as it is, must never blind us to this ultimately <i>personal</i> relationship with the One who gave Himself for us. Each time a believer enters into covenant with Christ through baptism, blood is in a sense shed; the Lord dies again as the believer dies again in the waters if baptism. The Hebrew word translated &lsquo;to cut a covenant&rsquo; is also translated &lsquo;cut off&rsquo; in the sense of death (Gen. 9:11; Lev. 20:2,3; Is. 48:9; Prov. 2:21). Death and blood shedding are essential parts of covenant making.&nbsp;In Gal. 2:20, Paul wrote of &ldquo;the son of God who loved me and gave himself for me&rdquo;; and yet some years later he wrote in conscious allusion to this statement: &ldquo;Christ loved <i>the church</i> and gave himself <i>for it</i>&rdquo; (Eph. 5:25). He looked out from beyond his personal salvation to rejoice in the salvation of others. He learnt that it was God manifestation in a multitude, not individual human salvation, that was and is of the essence. And we follow a like path, from that day when we were asked &lsquo;why do you want to be baptized&rsquo;, and we replied something to the effect &lsquo;because I want to be in the Kingdom&rsquo;. &nbsp;</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6387','1','48','2','21','21','<p>2:21 <i>I do not make void the grace of God. For if righteousness is through the law, then Christ died for nothing</i>- Strong language, but this is what all trust in legalistic obedience to law amounts to. We can frustrate the intention of God\'s grace, we can void or frustrate s.w. the will of God against ourselves by refusing baptism (Lk. 7:30). So much can be wasted, like the wine / blood of Christ pouring out on the earth unless we become new wineskins. &quot;Make void&quot; means literally to abrogate; perhaps the idea is that Paul had abrogated the Law, and not God\'s grace. And all this terrible waste of God\'s grace can come about, in the context of this chapter, by being pressured by legalistic brethren into rejecting salvation by grace alone.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6388','1','48','3','1','1','<p>3:1- see on Rom. 1:18; Gal. 4:16.</p><p><i>O foolish Galatians Who has bewitched you?</i>- Literally, \'cast the evil eye over you\'. Paul didn\'t surely believe in such things, but like the Lord Jesus, he uses the language of the day without as it were footnoting the fact he doesn\'t literally believe in those things. Paul is writing to those who thought they were now going to be saved by obedience to the Jewish law. But Judaism taught that obedience to the Law shielded Judaists from the \'evil eye\' and magic spells. Paul is saying that the opposite is, as it were, the case. They had been &quot;bewitched&quot; to return to the Law, and were thus under, as it were, the curse which comes to those who seek justification by it. He goes right on to talk about the &quot;curse of the law&quot; and how believers in Christ are saved from this (Gal. 3:10,13). His references to salvation from this &quot;curse&quot; must be read in the context of this opening play on the idea of being bewitched or under a curse.</p><p><i>It was before your own eyes that Jesus Christ was openly</i><i> displayed as crucified</i>- Gk. \'placarded\'. When Paul preached to the Galatians, he placarded forth Jesus Christ crucified in front of them: his preaching of the Gospel involved a repeated and graphic portrayal of the crucified Jesus of Nazareth as a historical event (Gal. 3:1). We are &ldquo;in Christ&rdquo; to the extent that we <i>are</i> Christ to this world. In this sense He has in this world no arms or legs or face than us. Paul was a placarding of Christ crucified before the Galatians; to the Corinthians he was &ldquo;the face of Christ&rdquo; (2 Cor. 2:10 RSV). It was this marred visage of Paul which had impressed the Galatians with how much Paul was Christ-manifest: &ldquo;Ye know how through infirmity of the flesh I preached the gospel unto you at the first. And my temptation which was in my flesh ye despised not, nor rejected; but received me as an angel of God, even as Christ Jesus&rdquo; (Gal. 4). He could truly say in Gal 2:20: &ldquo;I am crucified with Christ&rdquo;, and that before their eyes &ldquo;Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth &lsquo;placarded&rsquo;, crucified among you&hellip; for I bear in my body the marks of the Lord Jesus&rdquo; (Gal. 3:1; 6:17). Thus to preach through cross carrying means sharing in the Lord&rsquo;s sufferings. It may mean being crucified by our brethren for it as He was, physical hardship and pain&hellip;&nbsp; but this is the ground of credibility for our witness.</p><p>It seems that Paul had gone through the process of crucifixion with them so realistically, that it was as if Christ had suffered before their eyes. If you have seen that, Paul says, and the vision remains with you, how can you turn away? And this is a powerful motivator for us too. The man who sees, really sees, something of the Lord\'s agony, simply won\'t turn away, doctrinally or practically. But if we turn away from the consideration, the motivation will not be there to keep on responding. In this sense the crucifixion record <i>almost</i> has a mystical power in it, if it is properly apprehended. Thus Paul could tell the Galatians that in him they had seen Jesus Christ placarded forth, crucified before their own eyes (3:1). Paul knew that when people looked at his life, they saw something of the crucifixion of the Lord. The Galatians therefore accepted him &quot; even as Christ Jesus&quot; (Gal. 4:14). He could describe his own preaching as &ldquo;this Jesus, whom I preach unto you&hellip;&rdquo; (Acts 17:3), as if Jesus was right there before their eyes, witnessed through Paul. As the Lord was Paul&rsquo;s representative, so Paul was Christ&rsquo;s. The idea of representation works both ways: we see in the Gospel records how the Lord experienced some things which only we have; and we show aspects of His character to the world which nobody else can manifest.</p><p>If we can rise up to all this, placarding forth the Lord\'s crucifixion sufferings in our lives, then there will be a power and credibility to our preaching which will be hard to resist. It was before the eyes of the Galatians that they saw in Paul, Jesus Christ crucified (Gal. 3:1). But the only other reference to the eyes of the Galatians is in Gal. 4:15- where we read that they had been so transfixed by Paul\'s preaching that they had been ready to pluck out their eyes. And where\'s the only other reference to plucking out eyes? It\'s in the Lord\'s teaching, where He says that if our eye offends us, we should pluck it out Mt. 5:29- same Greek words used. The connection is surely this: Paul\'s personal reflection of the crucified Jesus was so powerful, so compellingly real and credible, that it motivated his hearers to rise up to the spirit of the very hardest demands of the moral teaching of that same Jesus. Insofar as we genuinely live out the crucifixion of the Lord Jesus, our preaching of His radical moral demands will likewise be heeded. The crucified Christ that Paul placarded before their eyes was &quot; the truth&quot; (Gal. 3:1; 4:14-16); and the integrity and reality of that truth was confirmed by the congruence between the example of Paul, and the reality of the crucified Jesus whom he manifested to them. In Paul\'s body language, in his character, in his response to problems and frustrations great and small, in the way he coped with physical weakness, his audience somehow saw the crucified Christ. In the same letter, Paul reminds the Galatians how they had initially seen him preaching to them in a weak bodily state, and had seen Christ in him then (Gal. 4:13,14). He says in Gal. 3:1 that they saw Christ crucified in him. Perhaps the way Paul handled a sickness or bodily weakness which he then had, somehow reflected to his audience the spirit of Christ crucified.</p><p>The effort we should consciously make to allow the life of Christ to be lived in us, is a natural outflow of the basic doctrine: that Christ was our representative. If we love Him and the record of His life, we will see in Him and His living the essence of our own: the same betrayal, barriers with His family and all close relationships, the pouring out of the love of God to a world and people who misunderstood, who thought they understood but didn&rsquo;t, who were blind, who thought they saw, who only broke from the petty materialism of their lives to listen to Him because they thought they might get some personal benefit&hellip;all the time, He poured out His grace and the Father&rsquo;s love. And He kept on to the final unspeakable, unwriteable, unenterable agony at the end. And even there, we sense He was not gritting His teeth trying to be patient, trying not to sin&hellip;He was pulsating with a love for men, a care for Pilate (comforting him that another had a greater sin); concern for the women who wept crocodile tears, that they might really repent; praying for forgiveness for those who knew not i.e., fully what they did; preaching to the thieves in whispers, each word taking an agony of pain, heaving Himself up on the nails to get the air to speak it&hellip; To love one&rsquo;s neighbour as oneself is to fulfil the law (Gal. 5:14; Rom. 13:10); and yet the Lord&rsquo;s death was the supreme fulfilment of it (Mt. 5:18; Col. 2:14). Here was the definition of love for one&rsquo;s neighbour. Not a passing politeness and occasional seasonal gift, whilst secretly and essentially living the life of self-love and self-care; but the love and the death of the cross, for His neighbours as for Himself; laying down His life &ldquo;for himself that it might be for us&rdquo; in the words of Bro. Roberts. In Him, in His time of dying, we see the definition of love, the fulfilment of the justice and unassuming kindness and thought for others which was taught in the Mosaic Law. And we through bearing one another&rsquo;s burdens, through bearing with their moral and intellectual and spiritual failures, must likewise fulfil the law, in a voluntary laying down of our lives for each other (Gal. 6:2). And in this, as with the Lord, will be our personal salvation.</p><div align=center><table border=0 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=0 width=100%>    <tbody>        <tr>            <td>                        </td>        </tr>    </tbody></table></div><p>1 Cor. 11:26 AVmg. makes the act of breaking bread a command, an imperative to action: &ldquo;As often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, shew ye the Lord&rsquo;s death, till he come&quot;. If we are going to eat the emblems, it is axiomatic that we will commit ourselves to shewing forth His death to the world, like Paul placarding forth Christ crucified in our lives (Gal. 3:1 Gk.). The Passover likewise had been a &lsquo;shewing&rsquo; to one&rsquo;s family &ldquo;that which the Lord did unto me&quot; (Ex. 13:8), the redemption we have experienced.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6389','1','48','3','2','2','<p>3:2 <i>Let me ask you only this: Did you receive the Spirit by doing works of the law, or by hearing with faith?</i>- This is not a reference to receipt of the miraculous Spirit gifts; for only some received these in the first century. 3:5 is clear about the difference: &quot;He that supplies to you the Spirit and works miracles among you&quot;. Not all had the miraculous gifts, indeed Paul downplays their importance in 1 Corinthians. But all the Galatians are spoken of as having \'received the Spirit\'. I suggest this refers to the gift of the Spirit which all believers in Christ receive at baptism (Acts 2:38)- the internal power towards holiness and spirituality, Christ in us, His mind / spirit within us. The same words are used in Jn. 7:39 of how the Spirit was to be received once Christ was glorified and had poured out this gift upon His people. This Spirit is received by the believers, not by the world, and is <i>within</i> us (Jn. 14:17). The receipt of this Spirit means that we in our hearts can cry &quot;Abba, Father&quot; (Rom. 8:15). Later in our chapter here, Paul speaks of receiving the Spirit as receiving the blessing of Abraham (Gal. 3:14)- the blessing which in Acts 3:26 is defined as the power to turn us away from sin. Paul\'s immediate point here is that the Spirit was received by them not because they obeyed law, but because they had believed and been baptized into Christ. Gal. 4:6 is quite clear that the Spirit received by all the Galatian converts was a gift of Divine relationship within their hearts: &quot;And because you are sons, God sent the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying, Abba, Father&quot;.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6390','1','48','3','3','3','<p>3:3 <i>Are you so foolish? Having begun in the Spirit</i>- The reference is to having begun spiritual life at their baptisms by receiving the Spirit (see on :2).</p><p><i>Are you now perfected in the flesh?</i>- The function of the Holy Spirit is to guide our spiritual development unto maturity or \'perfection\'. Obedience to Law will not achieve this. The same word is used in describing how the Lord has &quot;begun a good work within you&quot; and will perform or \'perfect\' it until the day we meet the Lord (Phil. 1:6). This work is essentially <i>within</i> us. We are in a program of development, and attempting to justify ourselves by work will interrupt that program. </p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6391','1','48','3','4','4','<p>3:4 <i>Did you suffer so many things in vain? If it be indeed in vain- </i>The connection is with Paul\'s thought in Gal. 2:21 a few verses earlier- that if we are justified by works, then Christ has suffered in vain. And our sufferings, which are a sharing in His sufferings, will likewise be in vain. Paul several times uses this powerful idea of life &quot;in vain&quot;. If we do not enter the Kingdom, if we refuse to be new wineskins, then the blood of the new covenant flows out wasted on the ground. All is vain, compared to salvation. This general attitude to life under the sun and all human endeavour is indeed powerful.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6392','1','48','3','5','5','<p>3:5 <i>Does he that supplies to you the Spirit</i>- As noted on :2, this refers to the gift of the Spirit in the hearts of believers after baptism. The same word for &quot;supplies&quot; is used in Col. 2:19 of how the Lord Jesus as the head of the body supplies nourishment to every part. The Lord Jesus is indeed an active Lord. He ministers psychological, spiritual strengthening to all parts of His body, which is the church.</p><p><i>And works miracles </i><i>among you, do it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?</i>- See on :2 <i>Did you receive the Spirit</i>. Note the present tenses. Despite the apostasy in Galatia, the Lord Jesus still actively ministered His Spirit and enabled miracles to be done, just as God did to an apostate Israel in the wilderness. Even in the first century, the work of the Spirit was not just confined to the miraculous gifts; thus &quot;He that supplies to you the Spirit <i>and</i> works miracles among you&quot; suggests that there was a non-miraculous work of the Spirit then. It seems clear that the miraculous gifts of the Spirit were not possessed by all first century believers; and yet the epistles often imply that all believers had received the Spirit (e.g. 2 Cor. 1:22). The resolution of this is in the fact that all believers then and now receive the non-miraculous effect of the Spirit. Indeed, Jude 19 suggests that \'having the spirit\' could just refer to someone who is not &quot;sensual&quot;, i.e. of the flesh. John was &quot;filled with the Holy Spirit, even from his mother\'s womb... (going) in the Spirit and power of Elias... waxed strong in spirit&quot; (Lk. 1:15,17,80); but &quot;John did no miracle &quot; (Jn. 10:41). David associated having God\'s holy Spirit with having free fellowship with Him due to sins being forgiven, paralleling the holy Spirit with &quot;a right spirit within me... a clean heart&quot; (Ps. 51:10,12); and Paul spoke of God\'s willingness to forgive us as &quot;the spirit of grace&quot; (Heb. 10:29), i.e. His spiritual gift. Paul\'s reasoning in Gal. 3:5,6 is similar- the Spirit is ministered to us by faith, in the same way as Abraham\'s faith resulted in righteousness being imputed (\'ministered\') to him. Thus imputed righteousness is made parallel to the gift of the Spirit.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6393','1','48','3','6','6','<p>3:6- see on Phil. 3:6.</p><p><i>Even as Abraham believed God, and that faith was imputed to him for righteousness</i>- His faith was weak, just as faith was weak in Galatia. See on Rom. 4:1-4,18,19. Paul\'s point in Rom. 4:3-5 is that Abraham was counted as righteous for his faith and not because of his works; the promises of the Kingdom salvation were made to him whilst he was uncircumcised.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6394','1','48','3','7','7','<p>3:7 <i>Know that they that are of faith, the same are sons of Abraham</i>- \'Of\' in the sense of being the descendant of. Faith is the defining family characteristic of the Abraham family- and not race or physical descent. &quot;The real descendants of Abraham are the people who have faith&quot; (GNB).</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6395','1','48','3','8','8','<p>3:8- see on Rom. 9:17.</p><p><i>And the scripture, foreseeing that God would make the Gentiles righteous by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham</i>- Abraham was promised that &quot;all the nations&quot; i.e. &quot;the Gentiles&quot; would be blessed. Paul strains from this so it could seem to those not used to rabbinic exegesis that this blessing was not stated to be in response to any works- so it must therefore have been offered purely on the basis of faith. If they were to be given a blessing not on the basis of works, but on account of Abraham\' singular seed, Jesus... then such blessing would involve them being counted righteous, i.e. worthy of blessing, just because they believed this promise.</p><p><i>When it says: In you shall all the nations be blessed</i>- This was \'preached to Abraham\'; and he chose to believe it. It was spoken to him before he had done any works of obedience or before he had believed anything. He was told, effectively, that he would be blessed / saved. And he believed it. The Gospel likewise comes to us out of left field, as it were. We are promised that we shall be saved- and if we believe it, we shall be.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6396','1','48','3','9','9','<p>3:9 <i>So then, they that are of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham</i>- &quot;With&quot; translates <i>sun, </i>the idea being that believers are blessed by association with Abraham. And :27-29 explain that this is through baptism into Christ, who is Abraham\'s specific seed.</p><p>Verses 10-13 are a parenthesis concerning the curse of the Law. If read without the parenthesis, the flow of thought goes straight on: &quot;They which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham (v.9)... that the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles&quot; (v.14).</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6397','1','48','3','10','10','<p>3:10 <i>For as many as are of the works of the law are under a curse</i>- See on 3:1 <i>Bewitched you</i>.</p><p><i>For it is written: Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do all things that are written in the book of the law</i>- The quotation is from the LXX of Dt. 27:26. The Masoretic text is different: &quot;Cursed is he who doesn&rsquo;t confirm the words of this law to do them&quot;. This is an example of where so often the NT seems to prefer to quote the LXX over the MT. This has significant implications for any who insist upon the earth being 6000 years old as based upon the OT genealogies, for the figures are significantly different in the LXX.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6398','1','48','3','11','11','<p>3:11 <i>Now it is evident that no one is justified by the law before God For, The righteous shall live by faith</i>- The thought is very similar to that in Romans. Rom. 2:13 uses the same phrase <i>para Theos</i> to reason that the <i>doers</i> of the law are justified before God; and nobody does the entire law. But here (as in Rom. 1:17) Paul uses a related but slightly different argument. He says that we are not justified by deeds &quot;before God&quot; because of the very existence of the concept of justification <i>by faith</i>; and he quotes Hab. 2:4 as an exemplification of this.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6399','1','48','3','12','12','<p>3:12 <i>And the law is not of faith</i>- Today likewise, legalism does not induce faith. It is our awareness of our disobedience and a deep sense of inability to be righteous which leads us to the faith which is a throwing of ourselves upon Divine grace and the Lord\'s cross.</p><p><i>But: He that does the commandments shall live in them</i>- The \'living\' in view, in the context, seems to be \'living eternally\'; for Paul has just said that the righteous shall live eternally by faith (:11). He therefore understood Lev. 18:5 to mean that life eternal was possible through perfect obedience to the Mosaic law: &quot;You shall therefore keep My statutes and My ordinances; which if a man does, he shall live in them&quot;. Notice that &quot;in them&quot; is added by the translators to make better sense of the simple statement that the obedient man &quot;shall live&quot;. The truth of this interpretation is in the fact the Lord Jesus was indeed perfectly obedient to the Law and therefore lived for ever; He had to die for multiple reasons, but it was not possible that death should hold Him, seeing He had the right to eternal life through His perfect obedience; and therefore He was resurrected.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6400','1','48','3','13','13','<p>3:13- see on Acts 5:30.</p><p><i>Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us</i>- See on 3:1 <i>Bewitched you</i>.</p><p><i>For it is written: Cursed is everyone that hangs on a tree</i>- The idea is not that for some reason, being hung on a tree made a person &quot;cursed&quot;. Those who had sinned unto death, according to the law of Moses, were &quot;cursed&quot; by that law; and those dead, legally cursed people were then hung on a tree. The point is that we have each become cursed by the Law of Moses through failing to completely obey it. And the perfect Lord Jesus was our representative; He there on the cross was and is everyman. It flows naturally from this that we would wish to immerse ourselves into His body there on the cross, identifying with Him, so that His resurrection can become ours. That is of course the meaning of baptism, but the spirit of that identification is to carry on through daily life and thought afterwards.</p><p>Note that Paul likens the Lord on the cross to the body of the criminal lifted up <i>after</i> death, not in order to lead to death (Gal. 3:13; Dt. 21:23)- as if he understood the Lord to have been effectively dead unto sin at the time the body was lifted up on the cross. It was as if the idea of the cross had been lived out throughout the Lord&rsquo;s life; He was dead as He lived, and dead to sin at the point that His body was lifted up on the tree.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6401','1','48','3','14','14','<p>3:14 <i>This was so that upon the Gentiles might come the blessing of Abraham in Christ Jesus, so that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith</i><i>- </i>Paul was so positive about his Galatians, many of whom he says seemed to be departing from the Christian faith. He feared he may have &ldquo;laboured in vain&rdquo; for some of them (Gal. 4:11), but he writes of his expectations in a totally positive way: &ldquo;Christ hath redeemed us&hellip; that the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ: that we might receive the promise of the Spirit i.e. salvation&rdquo; (Gal. 3:13,14). &ldquo;For ye are <i>all</i> the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus; for as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ&hellip; then are ye Abraham&rsquo;s seed, and heirs according to the promise&rdquo; (Gal. 3:27-29)- yet Paul could write this despite knowing his readers&rsquo; lack of faith in Christ (Gal. 1:6; 3:1,3-5; 4:9,11,19,21; 5:4,7).&nbsp; &ldquo;And because ye are sons&hellip; thou art no more a servant, but a son: and if a son, then an heir of God though Christ&rdquo; (Gal. 4:6,7). &ldquo;So then brethren we are not children of the bondwoman but of the free&rdquo; (Gal. 4:31). If we believe that we ourselves will be there, we will spark off an upward spiral of positive thinking in the community of believers with whom we are associated. Think carefully on the Lord&rsquo;s words to the Pharisees: &ldquo;For ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in&rdquo; (Mt. 23:13). If we don&rsquo;t believe we will be there, we end up discouraging others.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6402','1','48','3','15','15','<p>3:15- see on 1 Cor. 15:57.</p><p><i>Brothers, I speak in human terms. Though it be but a man\'s covenant, yet when it has been confirmed, no one makes it void, or adds thereto</i>- The confirmation of the covenant was \'previous\' to the giving of the Law of Moses (:17). The confirmation was in the fact that God made an oath by Himself (Heb. 6:13-18); the promise itself, and then His word of oath, made two immutable things in which it was impossible for God to lie. The simple covenant of salvation was that anyone who believed the promises to Abraham and associated themselves with his seed will be eternally saved and blessed. Nothing has been added or subtracted from that ever since it was given. The Lord\'s death was yet another act of confirming that covenant, and appealing to men and women to believe it and participate in it; but His life and death did not of themselves add anything to the salvation covenant promise given to Abraham, and which forms the basis of the Gospel. And likewise, the law of Moses did not void nor add to that covenant.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6403','1','48','3','16','16','<p>3:16 <i>Now to Abraham were the promises spoken, and to his seed. He did not say: And to seeds, in the plural, but in the singular: And to your seed, who is Christ</i>- A case can be made that the whole New Testament is a form of <i>Midrash</i> on the Old Testament, re-interpreting it in the light of Christ. Paul so often employs the same literary devices found in the rabbinic <i>Midrashim</i>, e.g. <i>al tiqra</i> read not thus, but thus- Gal. 3:16 is a classic example.</p><p>The promises were made to Abraham\'s future seed, the Lord Jesus. He did not personally pre-existed.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6404','1','48','3','17','17','<p>3:17 <i>This is what I mean; the law which came years afterward, does not annul a covenant previously ratified by God, so as to make the promise of no effect</i><i>- </i>The confirmation of the covenant s.w. :15 &quot;confirmed&quot; was in that God swore it with an oath. The promise to save people who believed in His offer of blessing / salvation was absolutely certain. The logic of the argument here could suggest that actually, salvation was open to Gentiles in Old Testament times if they simply believed in the Abrahamic covenant. For it was not in any sense annulled; the Lord\'s death was simply an extra confirmation of it, and enabled believers to identify with the seed.</p><p>Gal. 3:15-20 stresses how the Law came after the promises to Abraham, and cannot disannul them. Reasoning back from Paul\'s writing, we can arrive at some understanding of what the Judaists were saying. Their position was that baptism of Gentiles into the Abrahamic covenant was fine, but they must keep the Law for salvation. Paul is pointing out that the promises to Abraham offer eternal inheritance in the Kingdom on the basis of faith and grace, and neither the Law of Moses nor any other form of legalism can change that fundamental basis. An appreciation of the promises will therefore root us in the wonder of salvation by grace, to the point that we will reject all forms of legalism whenever they are proposed in the ecclesia, and whenever our own flesh seeks to justify itself by works achieved rather than by humbly accepting forgiveness of sins. That the Lord\'s death took away the Law can be assented to us and passed by. But the RV of Romans draws a difference between &quot;<i>the</i> law&quot; and &quot;law&quot; without the article, i.e. legality. Because we are saved by grace, no legal code, of Moses or anyone else, can save us. Therefore we are free- but that freedom is so wonderful that we are under &ldquo;the law of Christ&quot;, the rigid principle of always seeking to act as this Man would do, who freed us from law. Otherwise, we end up replacing one form of legalism under Moses with another, a set of laws given by Jesus. He <i>has</i> saved us in prospect, outside of any law. And we are to rejoice in this and yet respond to it. Dostoevsky\'s epic <i>The Brothers Karamazov</i> is really a parable of the terrible burden of this freedom and the forgiveness of sins. In it, Jesus returns to earth. He is arrested, and the Inquisitor visits Him in the middle of the night. He tries to explain to Jesus that people do not want freedom. They want security. He argues with Jesus, that if one really loves people, then you make them happy- but not free. Freedom is dangerous. People want law, not responsibility; they want the neurotic comfort of rules, not the danger of decision making and the burdens it brings. Christ, says the Inquisitor, must not start up this business about freedom and grace and the commitment and responsibility it demands. Let things be; let the church have its laws. And will Jesus please go away. The life of grace to the extent that it must be lived is a radical confrontation- it creates the necessity of making pure freewill decisions to do and think acts of grace in response to God\'s grace. Grace has been presented as the easy way out. It isn\'t. It is far, far more demanding than legalism.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6405','1','48','3','18','18','<p>3:18 <i>For if the inheritance is of the law, it is no more of promise</i>- The inheritance of &quot;the land of promise&quot; was made possible <i>before</i> the Law of Moses was given. Israel were given Canaan on the basis of the promises to Abraham, and not the Law of Moses.</p><p><i>But God has granted it to Abraham by promise</i>- Abraham was not given any set of laws he must obey. He was simply asked to believe, and go inherit the promised land. And the Gospel to us is really also that simple. Its very simplicity is why the demand for faith is so intense, and why people would prefer to slip back into some legal system, with a promised reward for obedience which can never be a certain hope because of our disobedience in some ways.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6406','1','48','3','19','19','<p>3:19 <i>For what, then, was the law? It was added because of transgressions</i>- The descendants of Jacob / Israel were not righteous, although they were God\'s people. The law of Moses was given to them &quot;because of transgressions&quot;. And yet the very existence of the Mosaic Law generated sin, and thereby the experience of God\'s wrath upon His people (Rom. 4:15). So why were Israel given the Law? In some ways (and this isn\'t the only reason) to confirm them in their sinfulness. The original Mosaic Law was &quot;holy, just and good&quot; in itself (Rom. 7:12). But later, God gave Israel &quot;laws that were not good&quot; (referring to the Halachas of the Scribes?) so that they would go further away from Him (Ez. 20:25). He must have done this by inspiring men to say things which were genuinely communicated by God, but which were false.</p><p><i>Until the seed should come to whom the promise had been made</i><i>. The law was given through angels by the hand of a mediator</i><i>- </i>The promise was made to the Lord Jesus, therefore, when as yet He did not exist. In this sense the promises were spoken to Christ, the seed of Abraham (:16). God\'s word of promise likewise spoke to us right back then in Abraham\'s time- even though we had not then associated with his seed.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6407','1','48','3','20','20','<p>3:20 <i>Now an intermediary implies more than one party, but God is one</i>- The oath of God to Abraham was a unilateral undertaking. He alone passed through the burning pieces. Likewise the mediation of the Angels implied two parties in a contract- but actually the covenant was unilateral, only God bound Himself by terms and conditions. He simply wanted to pass on the blessing to us. All we have to do is believe it and accept the covenant.</p><p>Reflect a moment upon the sheer power and import of the fact that the Father <i>promised</i> things to us, who are Abraham&rsquo;s seed by faith and baptism. The Law of Moses was a conditional promise, because there were two parties; but the promises to us are in some sense unconditional, as God is the only &ldquo;one&rdquo; party (Gal. 3:19,20). And as if God&rsquo;s own unconditional promise isn&rsquo;t enough, He confirmed those promises to us with the blood of His very own son. Bearing this in mind, it\'s not surprising that Ps. 111:5 states that God &quot;will <i>ever</i> be mindful of His covenant&quot;. This means that He\'s thinking about the covenant made with us <i>all</i> the time And yet how often in daily life do we reflect upon the fact that we really are in covenant relationship with God... how often do we recollect the part we share in the promises to Abraham, how frequently do we feel that we really are in a personal covenant with God Almighty? In Genesis 15, He made a one-sided commitment to Abraham. The idea of the dead animals in the ceremony was to teach that \'So may I be dismembered and die if I fail to keep my promise\'. Jer. 34:18 speaks of how Israelites must die, because they passed between the pieces of the dead animal sacrifices in making a covenant. But in Gen. 15, it is none less than the God who cannot die who is offering to do this, subjecting Himself to this potential curse And He showed Himself for real in the death of His Son. That was His way of confirming the utter certainty of the promises to Abraham which are the basis of the new covenant which He has cut with us (Rom. 15:8; Gal. 3:17). Usually both parties passed between the dead animals- but only Yahweh does. It was a one-sided covenant from God to man, exemplifying His one-way grace. The Lord died, in the way that He did, to get through to us how true this all is- that God Almighty cut a sober, unilateral covenant with us personally, to give us the Kingdom. We simply can\'t be passive to such grace, we have no option but to reach out with grace to others in care and concern- and we have a unique motivation in doing this, which this unbelieving world can never equal. From one viewpoint, the only way we can not be saved is to wilfully refuse to participate in this covenant. The Lord laboured the point that the &quot;unforgivable sin&quot; was to &quot;blaspheme the Holy Spirit&quot; (Mk. 3:28-30; Mt. 12:31-37; Lk. 12:10). But it\'s been demonstrated that this is a reference to Jewish writings and traditions such as Jubilees 15:33 &quot;where not circumcising one\'s child is unforgivable, because it is a declaration that one does not belong to the covenant people&quot;.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6408','1','48','3','21','21','<p>3:21 <i>Is the law then against the promises of God?</i> <i>God forbid For if there had been a law given which could give life, truly righteousness would have been of the law</i>- Under inspiration, Paul so often addresses the unspoken thoughts of his readers. If salvation was promised by faith alone under the Abrahamic covenant, then why ever introduce a law which was impossible to keep? This connects on the same large scale canvas with the question as to why God allowed sin, why there is even the concept of sin. And Paul speaks to these natural and obvious concerns. His answer is that we had to realize our desperation, our need, our hunger, our inability to achieve salvation by any other means- so that we would throw ourselves upon God\'s grace in Christ as it is presented in the Abrahamic covenant. Perhaps it was the lack of human interest in that wonderful covenant which led God to introduce the Mosaic Law- in order to thereby drive man to Christ. Likewise God uses human sin in order to bring us to Him. If there were no sin, no Law to place accent upon human desperation, then who would need Christ? How much less glory would be given to God and His grace if in fact there was no sin, if there had been no law... It was in this sense that the Law was a teacher / teaching slave to bring us to Christ. Not in that people understood the types and patterns as being Messianic; for here in Galatians 3, Paul says that mankind was &quot;shut up&quot; to all that; but rather in bringing us to know our desperation.</p><p>To be given life is paralleled with being given righteousness. Those without sin can live for ever; so the imputation of righteousness means eternal life.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6409','1','48','3','22','22','<p>3:22 <i>But the Scripture imprisoned everything under sin</i><i>, so that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe</i>- See on :14. Sin occurs as a major them in Paul&rsquo;s writings&ndash; not just in Romans, where he speaks so much about sin without hinting that a supernatural &lsquo;Satan&rsquo; figure is involved with it. He sees sin as playing an almost positive, creative role in the formation of the true Christian, both individually and in terms of salvation history. He speaks of how the Mosaic law was given to as it were highlight the power of sin; but through this it lead us to Christ, through our desperation and failure to obey, &ldquo;that (Gk. <i>hina</i>, a purpose clause) we might be righteoused by faith&rdquo; (Gal. 3:24&ndash;26). The curses for disobedience were &ldquo;<i>in order that</i> (Gk. <i>hina</i>) the blessing of Abraham would come upon the Gentiles&rdquo; (Gal. 3:10&ndash;14); &ldquo;the Scripture consigned all things to sin, <i>in order that</i> (Gk. <i>hina</i>) what was promised to faith in Jesus Christ, might be given to those who have faith&rdquo; (Gal. 3:22). Note that it was the Law, &ldquo;the Scripture&rdquo;, which consigned things to sin&ndash; not a personal Satan. My point is that sin was used by God, <i>hina</i>, &lsquo;in order that&rsquo;, there would be an ultimately positive spiritual outcome. Indeed this appears to be the genius of God, to work through human failure to His glory. This view of sin, which any mature believer will surely concur with from his or her life experience, is impossible to square with the ideas of dualism, whereby God and &lsquo;sin&rsquo; are radically opposed, fighting a pitched battle ranging between Heaven and earth, with no common ground. No &ndash; God is truly Almighty in every sense, and this includes His power over sin. The life, death and resurrection of His Son were His way of dealing with it &ndash; to His glory.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6410','1','48','3','23','23','<p>3:23<i>Now before faith came, we were held captive under the law</i><i>- </i>Paul sees the Law as a prison house, a law which held us captive in bonds. In the first century, a person was defined not so much by their unique personal character, credit was not given for who they had become or stopped being... but rather by the place in society into which they were born. And so these group-oriented people came to live out the expectations of society- and so the whole process rolled on through the generations. It was continuity rather than change, tradition rather than transformation, which was valued. Change was seen as some kind of deviancy- whereas the Christian gospel is all about change The past was seen as more glorious than the present and the future, a pattern to be followed- whereas the Gospel of the future Kingdom of God on earth taught that the best time is <i>ahead</i>. And so often Paul compares the &quot;past&quot; of our lives with the much better &quot;now&quot; in Christ (Gal. 3:23-27; 4:8,9; Rom. 6:17-22; Eph. 2:11-22; 5:8).</p><p><i>Imprisoned </i><i>until the coming faith would be revealed</i><i>- </i>On one level, the Mosaic Law was a set of such intricate regulations that was almost impossible to keep. And yet it led men to Christ as a gentle slave leading the children to the teacher. I don&rsquo;t think that the Law of Moses led people to Christ in the sense that they cracked the various types and worked it all out. There&rsquo;s not one example that I can think of where an Old Testament character did this. Indeed it could appear from Gal. 3:23 and other New Testament passages that until Christ actually came, the Old Testament believers were &ldquo;shut up unto the faith which should afterward be revealed&rdquo;. Therefore the types etc. of the Law of Moses couldn&rsquo;t have been perceived by them in the same way as we understand them. Hence the Lord&rsquo;s comment that many righteous men had longed to understand the things of Jesus which the disciples saw and heard in reality. &ldquo;In other ages&rdquo; those things of Christ were not made known to men as they were revealed in the New Testament by the preaching of the apostles and New Testament prophets (Eph. 3:5). The Old Testament prophets even seemed to understand that the things they saw and wrote were not so much for themselves as for us (1 Pet. 1:12). Or as Paul says here in Gal. 3:23: &ldquo;Before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith in Jesus which should afterwards be revealed&rdquo;. The Law was a shadow created as it were by the concrete reality of Christ. We can look back and see it all now, but I don&rsquo;t think the types predicted anything to the people of the time. So how then did the Law lead people to Christ? Was it not that they were convicted of guilt, and cried out for a Saviour? &ldquo;The law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound: that&hellip; grace might reign&hellip; unto eternal life by Jesus&rdquo; (Rom. 5:20,21). This was the purpose of the Law. And thus Paul quotes David&rsquo;s rejoicing in the righteousness imputed to him when he had sinned and had no works left to do- and changes the pronoun from &ldquo;he&rdquo; to &ldquo;they&rdquo; (Rom. 4:6-8). David&rsquo;s personal experience became typical of that of each of us. It was <i>through </i>the experience of that wretched and hopeless position that David and all believers come to know the true &lsquo;blessedness&rsquo; of imputed righteousness and sin forgiven by grace. Perhaps Gal. 3:22 sums up what we have been saying: &ldquo;The Scripture in the context, this refers to the Mosaic Law hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe&rdquo;. And Paul goes on to say in this very context that the law brings us unto Christ (Gal. 3:24). It brings us- not those who lived under the law. How does it do that? By convicting us of sin, &lsquo;concluding&rsquo; us as being under the control of sin.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6411','1','48','3','24','24','<p>3:24 <i>S</i><i>o that the law became our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith</i> - The ultimate teacher must be the Lord Himself, not the pastor or speaking brother. The Law was a <i>paidogogos</i>, a slave who lead the children to the school teacher. And the teacher, Paul says, is Christ (Gal. 3:23-25). He uses the whole body to make increase of itself in love- not just the elders. As explained under 3:21, the law\'s bringing men to Christ was not in that people understood the types and patterns as being Messianic; for here in Galatians 3, Paul says that mankind was &quot;shut up&quot; to all that; but rather in bringing us to know our desperation, to highlight our sin, our chronic lack of steel within the soul to bring ourselves to obedience.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6412','1','48','3','25','25','<p>3:25 <i>But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor</i>- The idea could be that the &quot;tutor&quot; was in fact a slave who lead the child to the teacher, and remained with them until the teacher came. The terms &quot;Christ&quot; and &quot;faith&quot; are thus put for the same thing- \'justification by faith in Christ\'. &quot;Faith&quot; is put for the object of that faith, which is Christ.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6413','1','48','3','26','26','<p>3:26 <i>For you are all sons of God</i> <i>, through faith in Christ Jesus</i>- The &quot;all&quot; suggests that as Christ is the son of God, so are we. For by being baptized into Christ, all that is true of Him becomes true of us. Entering the body of Christ carries this implication. We must aspire to be united, with neither Jew nor Gentile, male nor female etc., because &quot;ye are all one man in Christ&quot; (Gal. 3:28 RV). We &quot;are all sons of God&quot; (3:26 RV) because of our baptism into the Son of God. And so Paul goes on to reason that just as Christ was &quot;the heir&quot; (cp. &quot;this is the heir&hellip;&quot;), who is &quot;lord of all&quot;, &quot;even so we&hellip;&quot; were kept under the law for a time (Gal. 4:1-3). The basis of our unity is that there is only one Jesus, and by being in Him we are living lives committed to the imitation of that same man. It\'s painless enough to read Gal. 3:27-29- that all those baptized &quot;in Christ&quot; therefore are in a status where there is neither Jew nor Gentile, no human barriers between us. But this is actually something we have to live out in life in order for it to become reality.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6414','1','48','3','27','27','<p>3:27 <i>For as many of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ</i>- Elsewhere Paul urges already baptized believers to clothe themselves with Christ, to put on s.w. the new man etc. Baptism is a putting on of the Lord Jesus, a union with Him; but it is something essentially ongoing. The Lord Himself spoke of sharing His baptism as being the same as drinking His cup, sharing His cross (Mk. 10:39); which, again, is a process. Likewise Peter saw baptism as not only the one off act, but more importantly a pledge to live a life in good conscience with God (1 Pet. 3:21). \'Obeying the truth\' is not only at baptism, but a lifelong pursuit (Gal. 5:7). The whole body of believers in Christ are being baptized into the body of the Lord Jesus in an ongoing sense (1 Cor. 12:13 Gk.), in that collectively and individually we are growing up into Him who is the Head (Eph. 4:15). See on Col. 2:6; 1 Pet. 1:23.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6415','1','48','3','28','28','<p>3:28 <i>There can be neither Jew nor Gentile, there can be neither slave nor free, there can be no male and female</i><i>- for you all are one in Christ Jesus</i>- For Paul to calmly teach that baptism into Christ meant that there was now no longer differentiation between male and female, slave and free, Jew, Greek or any other ethnic group- this called&nbsp;into total question all the first century understandings of society. Indeed, the idea that Gentiles could become spiritual &quot;Jews&quot;, and that the Jews weren\'t the <i>real</i> children of Abraham, was an intentional reversal of the categories around which society had been built. Much of the early \'geography\' of the first century involved stereotypical descriptions of ethnic and geographical groups, usually ending up with praising the Greco-Roman peoples as being superior in every way to all others. Yet this worldview, which was accepted even by the despised ethnic groups about themselves, had to be ended for those in Christ. Being in <i>Him</i> was to be their defining feature. This was equally radical for the Jews, who held themselves above these stereotypes about themselves. Contrary to what is often claimed, Paul went out of his way to show that contemporary views of women were unacceptable for those in the Lord. His teaching here is that in Christ, there is neither Jew nor Gentile, slave nor free, male or female, is surely conscious allusion to the Jewish traditional morning prayer for men: &ldquo;My God, I thank thee that I was not born a Gentile but a Jew, not a slave but a free man, not a woman but a man&rdquo;. He is surely saying that for those in Christ, the Jewish male world-view is unacceptable.</p><p>It was hard psychologically for Jews to convert to Christianity. There were elements of Christian teaching which were a direct affront to Judaism. Part of being&nbsp;a Christian was to expect to be treated by the Jews in just the same way as they had treated Jesus. The Sabbath was replaced with keeping the first day of the week for worship; the food laws were reduced by Paul&rsquo;s inspired teaching to parts of &ldquo;the weak and beggarly elements&rdquo;. The Jewish hatred of the Christians is revealed by the riots that ensued when the Gospel was preached in the synagogues, and in the persecution of the Christians at the hands of the Jews in Jerusalem, Damascus and in the Asian cities (according to the letters in Rev. 2,3). The insistence that Jewish converts be baptized would have been hard of acceptance; for Gentiles took just such a ritual bath when they converted to Judaism. &nbsp;For orthodox Jews to submit to baptism demanded a lot- for it implied they were not by birth part of the true Israel as they had once proudly thought. The Jews thought of Israel in the very terms which Paul applies to Jesus: &quot;We Thy people whom Thou hast honoured and hast called the Firstborn and Only-Begotten, Near and Beloved One&quot;. The New Testament uses these titles to describe the Lord Jesus Christ- and we must be baptized into Him in order to be in His Name and titles. The Lord Jesus was thus portrayed as Israel idealized and personified, all that Israel the suffering servant should have been; thus only by baptism into Christ of Jew and Gentile could they become part of the true seed of Abraham, the Israel of God (Gal. 3:27-29). The act of baptism into Christ is no less radical for us in our contexts today than it was for first century Jews. All we once mentally held dear, we have to give up.</p><p>Gal. 3:27-29 explains that through baptism into the Abrahamic covenant, there is a special unity between all in that covenant. Slave and free, male and female, Jew and Gentile are all thereby united, as they were in the early church. David Bosch comments: &quot;The revolutionary nature of the early Christian mission manifested itself, <i>inter alia</i>, in the new relationships that came into being in the community. Jew and Roman, Greek and barbarian, free and slave, rich and poor, woman and man, accepted one another as brothers and sisters. It was a movement without analogy, indeed a sociological impossibility&quot;. Likewise ecclesial life today can seem &quot;a sociological impossibility&quot;, but through the power of the most basic facts of the Gospel preached to Abraham, this incredible unity is possible. As a nexus &quot;without analogy&quot;, the true Christian community of itself ought to attract the attention of earnest men and women- just as the Lord predicted. Our unity should be the basis of our appeal to men. And yet our divided state is a tragic witness against us in this regard. Because there is neither Jew nor Gentile in Christ means that in practice, amongst those that &quot;have put on the new man a reference to baptism into Christ&hellip; there cannot be Greek and Jew, circumcision and uncircumcision, barbarian, Scythian, bondman, freeman clear allusion to Gal. 3:27-29. But Christ is all, and in all. Put on <i>therefore</i>&hellip; a heart of compassion, kindness, humility, meekness, longsuffering; forbearing one another and forgiving one another&quot; (Col. 3:10-13 RV). <i>These things</i> are what the promises to Abraham are all about in practice Because we are all now united in Christ in our status as Abraham\'s seed, <i>therefore</i> we must see to it that through kindness, patience etc. there really <i>is not</i> Jew and Greek, or division of any kind, between us.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6416','1','48','3','29','29','<p>3:29- see on Mt. 25:34.</p><p><i>And if you are Christ\'s, then you are Abraham\'s seed, and the heirs according to the promise</i>- The promise was made to two people- Abraham and his seed, the Lord Jesus. By being in Christ, all that is true of the seed is true of us. And so the paradox is fulfilled- the singular seed (:16) is also as many as the stars of the sky.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6417','1','48','4','1','1','<p>4:1 <i>But I mean so long as the heir</i> <i>is a child, he differs nothing from a slave, though he is lord of all</i>- The argument carries straight on from 3:29, where those baptized into Christ have been declared heirs along with Abraham. But Paul is saying that heirs don\'t receive anything &quot;until the day appointed by the father&quot; (:2). Inheritance in the first century wasn\'t necessarily received on the death of the parent. We think of the younger son in the parable demanding his inheritance whilst his father was still living. The father appointed a time or age at which the heir would receive the inheritance. Until that day, although the child was heir, even of absolutely everything &quot;though he is lord of all&quot;, it was of no real meaning- the child had as much legal right to it as a slave. Children had no real value as persons- they were effectively treated as slaves. Many women were in the same position, which explains why the early critics of Christianity mocked it as a religion largely comprised of women and children. True Christianity is attractive today likewise to those who are seen by others as non persons.</p><p>The heir in view is the &ldquo;seed&rdquo; of chapter 3, the Lord Jesus, who is now &ldquo;Lord of all&rdquo;. But Paul now argues as if the heir in view is everyone who was led by the law to become the seed of Abraham by faith. All that is true of the Lord is true of us personally.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6418','1','48','4','2','2','<p>4:2 <i>But the child is under guardians and stewards</i>- This continues the thought of 3:24; the Law was our tutor to bring us to Christ.</p><p><i>Until the day appointed by the father</i>- Paul argues that the day of inheritance has now come. We were proven to be the true adult sons of our Father, God, when He sent forth the Spirit of adoption into our hearts (:6). &quot;The day appointed&quot; sounds very much like that of the Lord\'s second coming; but the point is that for those who have received the Lord Jesus now, He has \'come\' into their hearts, and our experience of Him now is a foretaste of what we shall eternally experience in the Kingdom age. The implication of the argument is that in some sense, we are &quot;heirs&quot;, inheritors, in that we are those who have now received the inheritance. This does not preclude a future, literal receipt of the land inheritance; but we have received the spiritual blessings promised Abraham, which Acts 3:26 interprets as the turning away of our hearts from sin.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6419','1','48','4','3','3','<p>4:3 <i>So we also When we were children, we were held in bondage under the elementary principles of the world</i>- Paul paints a rather onerous picture of childhood. It perhaps reflected his own experience, but all the same as noted on :1, children were seen as non-persons in first century Mediterranean society.</p><p>Paul says that the Galatians formerly lived as enslaved to the &ldquo;elements of the cosmos&rdquo; (Gal. 4:3), also a phrase used in the Jewish apostate writings; &ldquo;what by nature are not gods&rdquo; (<i>tois phusei m&ecirc; ousin theois</i>; Gal. 4:8,9). They are &ldquo;weak and powerless elements&rdquo; (<i>ta asthen&ecirc; kai ptocha stoicheia</i>; Gal. 4:9). The system of Satan, sinful Angels, demons etc. which the Jews believed in, Paul is showing to now be non-existent and at the best powerless. The real background problem, Paul is saying, is not a personal Satan and a network of demons; rather is it the influence of the Mosaic law and Judaism. See on Col. 2:17.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6420','1','48','4','4','4','<p>4:4 <i>But when the fullness of the time came</i>- As if God carefully set a time period for the operation of the Mosaic law, just as He brought it into operation at a specific point 430 years after the covenant with Abraham (3:17). This idea of a specific time period is in keeping with the analogy regarding a child being set a period of time to live under governors, until he receives the inheritance as a young adult. I discussed under Galatians 3 the whole reason why the Law was given; its intention was to highlight sin and grace, and to make men throw themselves upon God\'s grace in Christ when this appeared in the person of the historical Jesus. The time period was optimal for that purpose to be achieved; yet many preferred the Law and effectively rejected Jesus, or like the Galatians, accepted Him but then went to the Law. That shows how God carefully set up a potential, but people preferred not to make use of it. He prepared and put them through a course of education, if you like; but they didn\'t engage with it, didn\'t get it, and went their own ways.</p><p><i>God sent His Son, born of a woman, born under the law</i>- The purpose for this was &quot;that we might receive the adoption of sons&quot; (:5). Paul has just explained in chapter 3 that by baptism into Christ, we are counted as Him. All that is true of Him becomes true of us; He was Abraham\'s seed, so are we. Paul is explaining how the heirs came to receive the inheritance. We became the full sons of God because God\'s Son was born and was human. As our representative, we can identify with Him by baptism (3:27-29) and thus become Him, as it were. Again note that the implication of the argument is that in some sense, we are &quot;heirs&quot;, inheritors, in that we are those who have now received the inheritance. This does not preclude a future, literal receipt of the land inheritance; but we have received the spiritual blessings promised Abraham, which Acts 3:26 interprets as the turning away of our hearts from sin.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6421','1','48','4','5','5','<p>4:5 <i>That He might redeem those that were under the law</i>- To return &quot;under the law&quot; therefore makes the Lord\'s work vain (2:21). The Lord\'s death was primarily to save Israel, those under the law. This was the focus of His work; it was their general rejection of it which made the more universal aspect of His death more public, as it were.</p><p><i>That we might receive the adoption of sons</i>- See on :4. Because He was human, of our nature, our representative, we can thereby be adopted as the sons of God- if we identify with Him. The proof this wonderful plan has been achieved is by the Spirit of adoption being sent forth into our hearts, whereby we are enabled to cry to God as \'Abba\', \'daddy\', just as God\'s only begotten Son did. The role of the Spirit is therefore crucial and cannot just be ignored or downplayed or manhandled to refer only to miraculous gifts in the first century. That is clearly not the reference here at all, for the Spirit is sent into our <i>hearts</i>.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6422','1','48','4','6','6','<p>4:6- see on Mk. 14:36; Rom. 8:15; Jude 20.</p><p><i>And because you are sons, God sent the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying, Abba, Father</i>- Note this was said to the apostate Galatians. The work of God\'s Spirit was still active within them, and they were still to be treated as His beloved sons. Clearly at the point of commitment to Christ in baptism, the Spirit is sent into the heart of the believer; a psychological strengthening, enabling us to feel towards God as the Lord Jesus did, addressing Him as the Lord did: Abba, Father. This strange method of addressing God was characteristic of Jesus, and must\'ve been very noticeable and provoked much wonder and comment. Thus we are being told that His characteristic personal style of relationship with the Father is now ours; and this is very much the idea of His discourse about the Comforter. See on 3:2.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6423','1','48','4','7','7','<p>4:7- see on Mt. 25:34.</p><p><i>So you are no longer a slave but a son</i>- Paul is slightly stretching the bounds of the analogy here. He began by saying that we are heirs, but an heir who is a child is no better than a slave (:1). Now Paul is saying that under the Law of Moses, people were slaves. They had not received the inheritance promised by the Abrahamic covenant, even though it had been promised to them.</p><p>An advantage of reading versions that use &ldquo;ye&rdquo; and &ldquo;thou&rdquo; is that one can discern at a glance when &lsquo;you&rsquo; plural and &lsquo;you&rsquo; singular is being used. Gal. 3:26-29 speaks in the plural: &ldquo;<i>Ye </i>are all the children of God by faith in Christ... and if <i>ye </i>be Christ&rsquo;s by baptism into Him, then are <i>ye </i>Abraham&rsquo;s seed and heirs&rdquo;. The very same ideas are then repeated a few verses later, but with the singular &lsquo;you&rsquo;: &ldquo;And because <i>ye</i> are sons... wherefore <i>thou </i>art no more a servant but a son; and if a son not &lsquo;sons&rsquo;, then an singular heir of God through Christ&rdquo; (Gal. 4:6,7); and just to press the point home, he reverts to speaking of &ldquo;you&rdquo; plural in the subsequent verses. It&rsquo;s as if Paul is talking generally, in the plural, of us all as a baptized community, heirs together of the promises, all in covenant relationship with God; but then he as it were swirls in upon us each individually; these promises really apply to us each one personally. And the outcome of this must be a deep seated joy and gratitude for God&rsquo;s grace. The focus of Scripture and the Lord Jesus is upon individuals, not upon the building of a faceless and person-less social structure. Notice how often Paul talks of &ldquo;you&rdquo; or &ldquo;ye&rdquo;, and then focuses down to &ldquo;thee&rdquo; or &ldquo;thou&rdquo;- from the you plural to the you singular. Take Gal. 4:6,7: &ldquo;Your plural hearts&hellip; thou singular art&hellip;&rdquo;; or &ldquo;Ye plural are all sons of God&hellip; thou art&hellip; a son&rdquo; (Gal. 3:26; 4:7 RV). It all comes down to us personally&hellip;</p><p><i>And if a son, then an heir of God through Christ</i>- We become legitimate heirs because the Lord Jesus was the &quot;heir of all&quot; (:1; Heb. 1:2), &quot;heir of the world&quot; (Rom. 4:13). Rom. 4:13,14 use the same language; it was the promise to Abraham which promised an inheritance. The Law of Moses didn\'t promise any inheritance. Another similarity with Romans is the idea of being an heir of God; He as our Father didn\'t die and thus pass us the inheritance; rather God decided to give us the inheritance after a period of preparing us, as we entered adulthood: &quot;The Spirit himself testifies with our spirit, that we are children of God. And if children, then heirs- heirs of God and joint-heirs with Christ. If so be that we suffer with him, that we may also be glorified with him&quot;. Here in Galatians, the same point is made- the receipt of the Spirit proves that we are God\'s children. Because we are identified with Christ\'s death, then we are joint-heirs with Him. Or as Galatians here puts it, we are heirs of God on account of Christ.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6424','1','48','4','8','8','<p>4:8 <i>However, at that time, not knowing God, you were in bondage to those that by nature are not gods</i>- This sounds as if Gentiles are being addressed. It\'s hard to decide to whom Paul is writing Galatians- whether to Gentile or Jewish Christians. Acts portrays Paul as going to cities in Galatia and preaching to Jews within the synagogue system. On that basis, we would assume that he is writing to Jewish Christians who are returning to the Law. This is why he speaks of how they have &quot;turned back <i>again</i> to the weak and worthless elementary principles of the world, whose slaves you want to be <i>once more&quot; </i>(:9). Likewise 5:1 &quot;do not get entangled <i>again</i> in a yoke of bondage&quot;. The pronouns in 2:15 seem to connect Paul the Jew with a Jewish readership in Galatia: &quot;<i>We</i> being Jews by nature and not sinners of the Gentiles... <i>we...</i>&quot;. On the other hand, the language here sounds as if the audience were once Gentiles; and in 5:2 he speaks as if they were being circumcised in order to be acceptable with God (although the Greek could mean that they were thinking that their circumcision made them acceptable). However 6:12,13 definitely speaks of false teachers encouraging the Galatians to be circumcised: &quot;who would force you to be circumcised... they desire to have you circumcised&quot;. Perhaps some were Jews, some Gentiles. Yet the argument seems to be that those under the Law, without faith in Christ, were not actually &quot;knowing God&quot; and were in bondage to false gods. This is far from the only place where Paul develops the paradox that Judaism is in fact a form of pagan idolatry (see on 3:1 and 4:25). At very least, Paul would be saying that the Gentiles amongst them, who had previously worshipped idols, were in the same position as Jews under the Law without Christ. However the kind of complex argument in 4:21 ff., using Biblical history as &quot;law&quot; and arguing in a strictly rabbinic style, makes us wonder whether the Galatian audience were in fact Jewish; for surely the power and nuances of the argument would be lost on any not highly familiar with the Jewish scriptures and style of Rabbinic reasoning; the references to desiring their circumcision in chapter 5 would then refer to desiring them to be circumcised in order to be saved.</p><p>Paul challenges the Galatians: &ldquo;You who were enslaved to those who were not really gods... How can you turn back again to those weak and beggarly spirits (<i>stoicheia</i>), whose slaves you want to be once more?&rdquo; (Gal. 4:8,9). Here he parallels demonic spirits with &lsquo;gods who are not really gods&rsquo;. But note how Paul argues under Divine inspiration &ndash; &ldquo;<i>even if</i> there are&rdquo; such demons / idols... <i>for us</i> there is to be only one God whom we fear and worship. This in fact is a continuation of the Psalmists&rsquo; attitude. Time and again the gods / idols of the pagan nations are addressed <i>as if they exist</i>, but are ordered to bow down in shame before Yahweh of Israel (Ps. 29:1,2,10; 97:7). Whether they exist or not becomes irrelevant before the fact that they are powerless before the one true God &ndash; and therefore it is He whom we should fear, trusting that He alone engages with our lives for our eternal good in the end. &ldquo;Yahweh is a great King above all gods&rdquo; (Ps. 95:3) shows the Divine style &ndash; rather than overly stressing that the gods / idols / demons don&rsquo;t exist, the one true God isn&rsquo;t so primitive. Neither were the authors and singers of Psalm 95. The greatness of His Kingship is what&rsquo;s focused upon &ndash; not the demerits and non-existence of other gods. To do so would be altogether too primitive for the one true God. And likewise with the Lord&rsquo;s miracles &ndash; God&rsquo;s gracious power to save was demonstrated, <i>this</i> was where the focus was; and its very magnitude shows the relative non-existence of &lsquo;demons&rsquo;.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6425','1','48','4','9','9','<p>4:9- see on Gal. 1:1.</p><p><i>But now that you have come to know God, or rather to be known by God</i>- This is not Paul as it were correcting himself. &quot;Rather&quot; would be better rendered \'moreso\'. God\'s knowledge of us is what results in our responding by seeking to know Him. Likewise Paul writes in Phil. 3:12 of grabbing hold of the Lord who had grabbed hold of him. It\'s not that God plays hard to get, and whoever figures out His word correctly will find Him, hidden behind a mass of theology and interpretation which we must get right. God is in search of man. He knows / recognizes us, and we in turn know Him. Understanding this puts paid to all intellectual pride in having \'found\' God by our own searching of the scriptures. The initiative was with Him. Paul considers that coming to believe in imputed righteousness, salvation by faith alone rather than by works of the Law, was and is &quot;to know God&quot;. Justification by works and legalism is an attitude that does not know God. For God is His grace and salvation by that grace.</p><p><i>How can you turn back again to the weak and worthless</i>- Literally, \'poverty stricken, poor\'. Paul only elsewhere uses the word in Galatians for the Jewish poor (2:10).</p><p><i>Elementary principles of the world</i>- The Greek for &quot;elements&quot; is always used concerning the elements of the Mosaic Law.</p><p><i>Whose slaves you want to be</i>- There is a tendency in human nature to actually desire servitude. We see it most clearly in the tendency to addiction which there is in us all. But that is just a very public, open manifestation of what is latent within us each. The call to radical freedom in Christ is such that when people really see it, they shy away from it. The Galatians are a parade example for all time.</p><p><i>Once more</i>- See on :8.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6426','1','48','4','10','10','<p>4:10 <i>You observe</i>- The Greek word used is not the most natural nor obvious one to use if Paul meant \'You are now keeping the Jewish feasts\'. The word is elsewhere only translated \'watching\' or \'looking towards\', as if they were considering keeping the feasts. Paul himself kept some Jewish feasts, so we must read him as meaning that they were considering keeping them as a means to salvation.</p><p><i>Days and months and seasons and years</i>- &quot;Sabbatical years, occurring every seventh year. Not years of Jubilee, which had ceased to be celebrated after the time of Solomon&quot;.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6427','1','48','4','11','11','<p>4:11 <i>I am afraid I may have laboured over you in vain</i>- The implication is that any labour is in vain if it does not result in a person entering God\'s Kingdom. And Paul knew that attempting to enter the Kingdom by obedience was doomed to failure. But see on 4:17 <i>They zealously seek you. </i>We too are surrounded by believers who are not completely certain of their salvation, because they have not fully accepted total salvation by grace through faith in Christ. Our labour too must be to persuade them of that simple, all demanding message of the true Gospel- and keep them believing it.</p><p>Paul feared he may have &ldquo;laboured in vain&rdquo; for some of them, but he writes of his expectations in a totally positive way: &ldquo;Christ hath redeemed us&hellip; that the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ: that we might receive the promise of the Spirit i.e. salvation&rdquo; (Gal. 3:13,14). &quot;I am afraid of you (i.e. what your position will result in for both you and me at the judgment?), lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain&quot; (Gal. 4:11).</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6428','1','48','4','12','12','<p>4:12 <i>Brothers I urge you to become as I am, for I also have become as you</i>- &quot;As I am&quot; may mean \'One who once believed in the necessary to keep the Jewish laws, but who ditched it\'; and &quot;become as you&quot; may mean \'Become effectively a Gentile, saved by faith in the Abrahamic covenant\'. This assumes he is writing to a Gentile audience- see on :8. Paul aimed to become as his audience: &quot;to those without law, I became as without law&quot; (1 Cor. 9:21). God in Christ became as us, indeed even in OT times He limited Himself in some ways, to be as we are. And we reflect that spirit by seeking to become as others are, that we might win them to Christ. This means that preaching is infinitely more than holding out a set of doctrinal truths and waiting for some curious passer-by to grasp them from us.</p><p>The way Paul <i>begs</i> us to follow him (e.g. &quot;become as I am&quot;) indicates the degree of confidence he had in acceptance by his Lord, his certainty that his way to the Kingdom was valid (Surely he had been told this by some Divine revelation?). See on Phil. 1:10 and Gal. 4:29 <i>Persecuted him that was born after the Spirit</i>.</p><p>Paul plays powerfully upon the idea of the two selves when he appeals to the Galatians &quot;be as I am; for I am as you are&quot; (Gal. 4:12). At first hearing, this seems nonsensical- how can Paul beseech the Galatians to be like him, if he was already like them? Fact is, their behaviour was unlike him; yet he saw their spiritual selves as being like him. And he asks them to be that spiritual self which he perceived them to have. We likewise need to perceive our difficult brethren as having a spiritual self, which they need to live up to.</p><p><i>You did me no wrong</i>- The aorist means \'To date you did me no wrong- don\'t do so now by returning to the Law\'.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6429','1','48','4','13','13','<p>4:13 <i>You know it was because of a bodily ailment that I preached the gospel to you at first</i>- William Barclay comments: &ldquo;Paul never saw a boat riding at anchor or moored at a quay but he wanted to board her and to preach the gospel to the lands beyond. He never saw a range of hills in the distance but he wanted to cross them and to preach the gospel to the lands beyond&rdquo;. When Paul was in Pamphylia, he decided to go on to Galatia, where on account of infirmity of the flesh he preached to the Galatians (Gal. 4:13). The suggestion has been made that the low-lying Pamphylia was a source of malaria, which may have been Paul&rsquo;s &ldquo;thorn in the flesh&rdquo;, and he therefore sought the uplands of Galatia. And yet he could easily have returned to Antioch. But instead, he went on, up into the highlands, to spread the Gospel yet further. The way there led up precipitous roads to the plateau; the roads were cut by mountain streams, prone to flash floods which often carried travellers to their death. And these roads were the haunt of bandits, who would murder a man just for a copper coin. No wonder Mark went back. But as William Barclay observes, &ldquo;the wonder is not so much that Mark went back as that Paul went on&rdquo;. Although a sick man, he was driven by that desire to spread the Gospel further. Surely this is why his Lord was so pleased to open the hearts of the Galatians to the Gospel. The way the Holy Spirit controlled Paul\'s missionary itineraries is an example of how mission work is almost purposefully made difficult at times. Thus Paul was forbidden to go north into Bithynia, and from going Southwest into coastal Asia Minor- and there were good roads leading to those places from where he was, and it would\'ve seemed they were the logical places to go and expand the work of the Gospel. But instead Paul was told to go diagonally, cross country, through the rough roads and passes of central Asia Minor, to Troas- from where he was told to go to Macedonia. And on the way through that wild mountainous area, it seems Paul became sick. And we follow similar paths in our witness, if it is truly God directed.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6430','1','48','4','14','14','<p>4:14 <i>A</i><i>nd though my condition was a trial to you, you did not scorn or despise me, but received me as a messenger of God, as Christ Jesus</i><i>- </i>Perhaps it was a test in that like many today, people prefer their preacher to be dashing, handsome, healthy and successful. Not a sick man, through whom the very picture of the crucified Christ was placarded before their eyes (see on 3:1). It was by Paul\'s manifestation of the crucified Christ through his sickness that they were persuaded of Christ; and specifically, of salvation by faith rather than works. For Paul\'s sickness likely left him without the possibility of performing works for salvation.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6431','1','48','4','15','15','<p>4:15- see on 2 Cor. 12:7.</p><p><i>Where then is that satisfaction you felt?</i>- Not a good translation. The word is translated &quot;blessedness&quot; elsewhere, and always in the context of the blessing promised to Abraham being that of imputed righteousness (Rom. 4:6,9). They no longer felt that blessedness because they were seeking their justification by acts of obedience rather than faith alone. If we truly believe in the blessing promised to Abraham, and have received it, we too will speak of that blessedness as the Galatian converts did. Note that the blessings promised to Abraham had been received by them, the fulfilment of them is not solely and only in the future; see on 4:1.</p><p><i>For I testify, that if possible, you</i><i> would have plucked out your eyes and given them to me</i>- It was before the eyes of the Galatians that they saw in Paul, Jesus Christ crucified (Gal. 3:1). But the only other reference to the eyes of the Galatians is in Gal. 4:15- where we read that they had been so transfixed by Paul\'s preaching that they had been ready to pluck out their eyes. And where\'s the only other reference to plucking out eyes? It\'s in the Lord\'s teaching, where He says that if our eye offends us, we should pluck it out Mt. 5:29- same Greek words used. The connection is surely this: Paul\'s personal reflection of the crucified Jesus was so powerful, so compellingly real and credible, that it motivated his hearers to rise up to the spirit of the very hardest demands of the moral teaching of that same Jesus. Insofar as we genuinely live out the crucifixion of the Lord Jesus, our preaching of His radical moral demands will likewise be heeded. The crucified Christ that Paul placarded before their eyes was &ldquo;the truth&quot; (Gal. 3:1; 4:14-16); and the integrity and reality of that truth was confirmed by the congruence between the example of Paul, and the reality of the crucified Jesus whom he manifested to them. In Paul\'s body language, in his character, in his response to problems and frustrations great and small, in the way he coped with physical weakness, his audience somehow saw the crucified Christ. In the same letter, Paul reminds the Galatians how they had initially seen him preaching to them in a weak bodily state, and had seen Christ in him then (Gal. 4:13,14). He says in Gal. 3:1 that they saw Christ crucified in him. Perhaps the way Paul handled a sickness or bodily weakness which he then had, somehow reflected to his audience the spirit of Christ crucified.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6432','1','48','4','16','16','<p>4:16 <i>So then have I become your enemy, by telling you the truth?</i>- Society and human existence was all about what others thought of you; appearances were all important, loss of face before your community was a fate worse than death, and the honour of your family or community was crucial. You had to be polite, say what was right in the ears of your hearers rather than what was true, never shame those in your \'group\' by telling inconvenient truths, say what the others want to hear. Against this background, and it\'s a background not so strange for any of us today in essence, the commands to be truthful, even if it meant becoming the enemy of some because you told the truth (Gal. 4:16), take on a new challenge.</p><p>Gal. 3:1 remonstrates with the Galatians as to how they could not obey the truth when the crucified Christ had been so clearly displayed to them; clearly Paul saw obedience to the truth as obedience to the implications of the cross. There is a powerful parallel in Gal. 4:16: I am your enemy because I tell you the truth... you are enemies of the cross of Christ. Thus the parallel is made between the cross and the truth. We are sanctified by the truth (Jn. 17:19); but our sanctification is through cleansing in the Lord&rsquo;s blood. The same word is used of our sanctification through that blood (Heb. 9:13; 10:29; 13:12). Perhaps this is why Dan. 8:11,12 seems to describe the altar as &ldquo;the truth&rdquo;. The cross of Jesus is the ultimate truth. There we see humanity for what we really are; there we see the real effect of sin. Yet above all, there we see the glorious reality of the fact that a Man with our nature overcame sin, and through His sacrifice we really can be forgiven the untruth of all our sin; and thus have a real, concrete, definite hope of the life eternal.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6433','1','48','4','17','17','<p>4:17 <i>They zealously seek you for no good purpose. On the other hand, they desire to exclude you- so you might go running after them</i>- The GNB may have it about right in paraphrasing: &quot;Those other people show a deep interest in you, but their intentions are not good. All they want is to separate you from me, so that you will have the same interest in them as they have in you&quot;. Thus zeal is no sign of acceptability with God. Paul talks of how he is \'zealous over\' s.w. his converts (2 Cor. 11:2). But the Judaizers were likewise \'zealous over\' the same converts. They were involved in a political tug of war, and the Judaizers won, despite all Paul\'s work for them. I have often been involved in this kind of thing, and seen others involved in it, and my conclusion is that we need to do our part and not get involved in feeling personally wronged or fought against. I wonder if Paul was not completely mature in his attitude to the conflict; he was so personally invested in it that he felt that his work had been &quot;in vain&quot; if his converts went to Judaism (see on :11). My impression however after these kinds of experiences is that finally, nothing is in vain, no service of the Lord can be looked back upon as purely wasted time. Yet Paul speaks like this because he was overly personally invested in the conflict.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6434','1','48','4','18','18','<p>4:18 <i>But it is good to be zealous in a good matter at all times, and not only when I am present with you</i>- Paul recognized that their enthusiasm was greater when he was with them. And he says this is no bad thing- but it must continue. Such inspiration by human personalities is therefore not to be totally despised; the problem is that such zeal tends not to continue once those personalities are off the scene. See on :20 <i>I so wish</i>.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6435','1','48','4','19','19','<p>4:19 <i>My little children, of whom I am again in the pains of childbirth</i>- See on :17. I do wonder whether this kind of figure suggests Paul was taking it all rather too personally; for the converts were not born out of him personally, but from the Lord. But then it is also true that the work of converting others is ultimately personal and involves intense personal engagement.</p><p><i>Until Christ be formed in you</i>- The Galatians had not <i>per se</i> left Christianity; they had adopted a version of Christianity which trusted in works for salvation. Paul understands this as meaning that Christ is no longer within them. This is the scary thing, as we survey our surrounding Christian scene in which so few seem solidly persuaded that if the Lord returns today, they will surely be saved because of their faith in His grace. It is having &quot;Christ in you&quot; which is &quot;the hope of glory&quot;, the guarantee that we shall eternally live with Him (Col. 1:27). Here in Galatians Paul has expressed that truth in terms of the Spirit of Christ being placed within the believer as a guarantee of salvation (4:6), what Eph. 1:13,14 calls sealing with the promised Holy Spirit as &quot; a guarantee of our inheritance, of the final redemption&quot;. But the Galatians no longer had this, because they sought salvation not by the Spirit but by obedience to the letter.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6436','1','48','4','20','20','<p>4:20 <i>I so wish I could be present with you now and change my tone</i><i>, for I am in doubt about you</i><i>-</i> The idea is that Paul felt that if he were present with them, then he would be able to change his upbraiding tone towards them because he would successfully persuade them to remain with grace rather than Judaism (see GNB). As noted on :18, Paul knew that his presence with them affected them positively. But if physical presence is required, then there is no depth of conviction. So many examples from church life flood to mind; of those who lived highly committed lives until influential figures passed off the scene, and then the commitment ended. It is only personal connection with the Lord Jesus which will provide lasting motivation right up until our last mortal breath.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6437','1','48','4','21','21','<p>4:21 <i>Tell me, you that want to be under the law, do you not hear the law?</i>- This kind of complex argument which follows, using Biblical history as &quot;law&quot;, makes us wonder whether the Galatian audience were in fact Jewish, for surely the power and nuances of the argument would be lost on any not highly familiar with the Jewish scriptures; the references to desiring their circumcision in chapter 5 would then refer to desiring them to be circumcised in order to be saved.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6438','1','48','4','22','22','<p>4:22 <i>For it is written that Abraham had two sons. One by the handmaid, and one by the freewoman</i>- The allegory, like all such methods of presenting, is presenting history selectively; although it is axiomatic that history of itself is selective. Abraham had far more than two sons; he had others by Keturah and other handmaids, indeed it could be argued that he had them before the birth of Isaac and Ishmael. But the two sons are chosen here for the purposes of the allegory.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6439','1','48','4','23','23','<p>4:23 <i>However the son by the handmaid was born after the flesh, but the son by the freewoman was born through the promise</i>- The usual NT contrast is between flesh and spirit. Here it is between flesh and promise, because the promise in view is that of the Spirit.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6440','1','48','4','24','24','<p>4:24 <i>Such things contain an allegory. For these women are two covenants. One from mount Sinai, bearing children to bondage, which is Hagar</i>- The two sons are presented as being a slave and a freeborn son. This connects with the previous argument in 4:7; that we are no longer slaves under the Law, but sons. The tension between bond and free has been introduced in 3:28; in Christ there is no longer bond and free. And that is because we are &quot;in Christ&quot; and thus are all the free born children, the Son of God as He was. The argument in 3:27-29 is not so much that it simply doesn\'t matter of what gender, ethnicity or social status we are. Those things don\'t matter because we are Christ; all of us are Him. Who He was and is becomes who we are. He is the freeborn Son of God; and so we are too. Therefore there is no difference between bond and free because we are all free, the freeborn sons of God.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6441','1','48','4','25','25','<p>4:25 <i>Now this Hagar represents mount Sinai in Arabia, she corresponds to the Jerusalem that now is; for she is in bondage with her children</i>- It can be argued that Paul\'s extended allegory in Gal. 4:24-31 about &quot;Jerusalem which now is&quot; has some reference to the Jewish Christian elders in Jerusalem who had made the deal with him about making the Gentile converts keep at least some of the Jewish laws. The heavenly Jerusalem which is &quot;free&quot; would then be a reference to the freedom Paul felt for his Gentile converts; and the persecution of those born after the spirit would then be a sideways reference to the trouble he was experiencing from the Jewish-Christian attacks upon him. Paul observes earlier that &quot;I speak after the manner of men: Though it be but a man\'s covenant, yet when it hath been confirmed, no one maketh it void, or addeth thereto&quot; (Gal. 3:15). His speaking humanly was perhaps because he was tongue in cheek alluding to the human covenant of Acts 15, to which he believed the Jewish Christian elders in Jerusalem had &quot;added&quot; by still demanding that Christian converts lived in a Jewish manner.</p><p>Paul\'s argument is that Judaism was to be associated with Hagar and Ishmael; whereas every Jew was insistent that they were from the line of Isaac. Again, Paul is arguing that Judaism is in fact paganism (see on 3:1 and 4:8).</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6442','1','48','4','26','26','<p>4:26 <i>But the Jerusalem that is above is free, which is our mother</i><i>- </i>The Jews believed that &quot;as the navel is found at the centre of a human being, so the land of Israel is found at the centre of the world... Jerusalem is the centre of the land of Israel, the temple is at centre of Jerusalem, the Holy of Holies is at the centre of the temple, the ark is at the centre of the Holy of Holies... which spot is the foundation of the world... the holy city... is also the mother city&quot;. This was all consciously countermanded in Hebrews, where each of these features of the temple is shown to have been surpassed in Christ; and it is the <i>Heavenly</i> Jerusalem which is now &quot;the mother of us all&quot; (Heb. 12:22; Gal. 4:26). And of course Gal. 4 drives home the point that it is the &quot;Jerusalem which is above&quot; which is the true Jerusalem, whereas the earthly Jerusalem and temple are in fact now to be associated with bondage and Abraham\'s illegitimate seed. This language of Hebrews and Galatians was just as tough on the Romans, who considered <i>Italia</i> as the &quot;mother of all lands&quot;, and Rome to be the mother city. Paul\'s language was geared to provoke his readers to decide strongly one way or the other.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6443','1','48','4','27','27','<p>4:27 <i>For it is written: Rejoice, O barren one who did not bear; break forth and cry aloud, you who were not in labour For the children of the desolate woman will be more than those of the one who has a husband</i>- Abraham&rsquo;s relationship with Hagar doesn&rsquo;t really sound like marriage. And yet she is called &ldquo;the one who has a husband&quot;, as if God recognized the relationship even though it was less than ideal.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6444','1','48','4','28','28','<p>4:28 <i>Brothers: We, as Isaac was, are children of promise</i>- Note the warmth of the language. These &quot;brothers&quot; had chosen Judaism, and Paul has just told them that Christ must be formed in them again seeing they are devoid of the Spirit, not experiencing the promised &quot;blessedness&quot;, and had effectively precluded themselves from salvation by seeking to achieve it by works. He felt his work for them had been in vain. And yet Paul now speaks of them as if they are saved, and his full brothers. Likewise he says that the Lord still ministers the Spirit to them and ministers amongst them (3:5). It could be argued that Paul\'s protestations about the Galatians were exaggerated and reflective of how he had become far too personally invested in them. Or it could be that as with the Corinthians, he accepts them as his brethren in Christ by status, assuming their salvation because it was not for him to condemn them; whilst at the same time openly facing their failures and addressing them.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6445','1','48','4','29','29','<p>4:29 <i>But as then, he that was born after the flesh</i>- Identifying Ishmael with the Judaizers and those who sought to obey the Mosaic Law was highly provocative. Their attempts at super righteousness were in fact effectively paganic. See on 3:1 and 4:8.</p><p><i>Persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, so also it is now</i>- Birth after the Spirit would refer to the Lord Jesus and all in Him. The language of persecuting naturally suggests what Paul himself had done to Him and those born after the Spirit. Hence he wishes the Galatians to make the same huge change which he had made (:12). Birth after the Spirit may well allude to Jn. 3:3-5. It is the Spirit which is used in our figurative conception. This is the vehicle through which God shows His grace, in beginning spiritual life in one but not another.</p>');
insert into `nev_dcomm` (`id`, `active`, `book`, `chap`, `startverse`, `endverse`, `html`) values('6446','1','48','4','30','30','<p>4:30 <i>However, what does the scripture say</i>- Sarah\'s screaming indignation can be well imagined. Consider which words were probably stressed most by her: &quot;Cast out <i>this bondwoman</i> and her son: for the son of this bondwoman <i>shall not be heir</i> (just hear her voice) with <i>my</i> son, even with <i>Isaac</i>&quot; (Gen. 21:10). This is in harmony with her previous bitterness and aggression to Hagar and Abraham.&nbsp; Her attitude in implying that Ishmael was <i>not</i> the seed is gently rebuked by God in his subsequent words to Abraham concerning Ishmael: &quot;He <i>is</i> thy seed&quot; (Gen. 21:13).&nbsp; <i>And yet Sarah&rsquo;s</i> words are quoted in Gal. 4:30 as inspired Scripture Here we see the wonder of the God with whom we deal, in the way in which He patiently bore with Sarah and Abraham. He saw through her anger, her jealousy, the pent up bitterness of a lifetime, and he saw her faith. And he worked through that screaming, angry woman to be His prophet. According to Gal. 4:30, God Himself spoke through her in those words, outlining a principle which has been true over the generations; that the son of the slave must be cast out, and that there must always be conflict between him and the true seed. Sarah in her time of child-birth is likened to us all as we enter the Kingdom, full of joy (Is. 54:1-4); and yet at that time she was eaten up with pride and joy that she could now triumph over her rival. And yet Sarah at that time is seen from a righteous perspective, in that she is&nbsp;a type of us as we enter the Kingdom.&nbsp; God\'s mercy to Sarah and Abraham is repeated to us daily. See on Heb. 11:11.</p><p><i>Cast out </i><i>the handmaid and her son, for the son of the handmaid shall not inherit with the son of the freewoman</i>- Hinting at the need to eject the Judaist false teachers from within the church? Paul warns that the Galatian Jews had suffered so much but in vain, seeing they were returning to the Law (Gal. 3:4). It is no accident that Gal. 4:25 draws the contrast between the two Jerusalems- perhaps a reference to the Jerusalem ecclesia, who had returned to the bondage of the law, and the spiritual Jerusalem. And now Paul goes so far as to say that the Legalists must be cast out of the true ecclesia (Gal. 4:30). Circumcision shielded from persecution in Galatia (Gal. 6:12) in that it was the Jews and their &ldquo;false brethren&rdquo; who infiltrated the ecclesias (Gal. 2:4), and who were responsible for the deaths of many of the first century apostles and prophets. This suggests that the circumcision party within the ecclesias was linked with the Roman and Jewish authorities, and therefore &lsquo;satan&rsquo; is a term used for them all. It got beyond dirty politics in the church.</p><p>Paul here quotes the bitchy, unspiritual words of Sarah in Gen. 21:10 with approval and as &ldquo;scripture&rdquo;. God surely did not approve of her hot tempered nastiness; but He worked through that as we should see to work through others&rsquo; sin and weakness, and try to incorporate it into a far greater narrative.</p>');
