1 Corinthians 16:21

21. Mine own hand—In 2Th_3:17, Paul adds, “which is the token in every epistle: so I write.” His autograph was security against forgery. See Rom_16:22; Gal_6:11; Philippians 19. Very probably the whole close (1Co_16:21-24) was autographic.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

1 Corinthians

ANATHEMA AND GRACE

1Co 16:21 - 1Co 16:24.

Terror and tenderness are strangely mingled in this parting salutation, which was added in the great characters shaped by Paul’s own hand, to the letter written by an amanuensis. He has been obliged, throughout the whole epistle, to assume a tone of remonstrance abundantly mingled with irony and sarcasm and indignation. He has had to rebuke the Corinthians for many faults, party spirit, lax morality, toleration of foul sins, grave abuses in their worship even at the Lord’s Supper, gross errors in opinion in the denial of the Resurrection. And in this last solemn warning he traces all these vices to their fountainhead-the defect of love to Jesus Christ-and warns of their fatal issue. ‘Let him be Anathema.’

But he will not leave these terrible words for his last. The thunder is followed by gentle rain, and the sun glistens on the drops; ‘The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all.’ Nor for himself will he let the last impression be one of rebuke or even of warning. He desires to show that his heart yearns over them all; so he gathers them all-the partisans; the poor brother that has fallen into sin; the lax ones who, in their misplaced tenderness, had left him in his sin; the misguided reasoners who had struck the Resurrection out of the articles of the Christian creed-he gathers them all into his final salutation, and he says, ‘Take and share my love-though I have had to rebuke-amongst the whole of you.’

Is not that beautiful? And does not the juxtaposition of such messages in this farewell go deeper than the revelation of Paul’s character? May we not see, in these terrible and tender thoughts thus inextricably intertwined and braided together, a revelation of the true nature both of the terror and the tenderness of the Gospel which Paul preached? It is from that point of view that I wish to look at them now.

I. I take first that thought-the terror of the fate of the unloving.

Now, I must ask you for a moment’s attention in regard to these two untranslated words. Anathema Maran-atha. The first thing to be noticed is that the latter of them stands independently of the former, and forms a sentence by itself, as I shall have to show you presently. ‘Anathema’ means an offering, or a thing devoted; and its use in the New Testament arises from its use in the Greek translation of the Old Testament, where it is employed for persons and things that, in a peculiar sense, were set apart and devoted to God. In the story of the conquest of Canaan, for instance, we read of Jericho and other places, persons, or things that were, as our version somewhat unfortunately renders it, ‘accursed,’ or as it ought rather to be rendered, ‘devoted,’ or ‘put under a ban.’ And this ‘devotion’ was of such a sort as that the things or persons devoted were doomed to destruction. All the dreadful things that were done in the Conquest were the consequences of the persons that endured them being thus ‘consecrated,’ in a very dreadful sense, or set apart for God. The underlying idea was that evil things brought into contact with Him were necessarily destroyed with a swift destruction. That being the meaning of the word, it is clear that its use in my text is distinctly metaphorical, and that it suggests to us that the unloving, like those cities full of uncleanness, when they are brought into contact with the infinite love of the coming Judge, shrivel up and are destroyed.

The other word ‘Maran-atha,’ as I said, is to be taken as a separate sentence. It belongs to the dialect, which was probably the vernacular of Palestine in the time of Paul, and to which belong, for the most part, the other untranslated words that are scattered up and down the Gospels, such as ‘Aceldama,’ ‘Ephphatha,’ and the like. It means ‘our Lord comes.’ Why Paul chose to use that untranslated scrap of another tongue in a letter to a Gentile Church we cannot tell. Perhaps it had come to be a kind of watchword amongst the early Jewish Christians, which came naturally to his lips. But, at any rate, the use of it here is distinctly to confirm the warning of the previous clause, by pointing to the time at which that warning shall be fulfilled. ‘If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be devoted and destroyed. Our Lord comes.’ The only other thing to be noticed by way of introduction is that this first clause is not an imprecation, nor any wish on the part of the Apostle, but is a solemn prophetic warning {acquiesced in by every righteous heart} of that which will certainly come. The significance of the whole may be gathered into one simple sentence-The coming of the Lord of Love is the destruction of the unloving.

‘Our Lord comes.’ Paul’s Christianity gathered round two facts and moments-one in the past, Christ has come; one in the future, Christ will come. For memory, the coming by the cradle and the Cross; for hope, the coming on His throne in glory; and between these two moments, like the solid piers of a suspension bridge, the frail structure of the Present hangs swinging. In this day men have lost their expectation of the one, and to a large extent their faith in the other. But we shall not understand Scripture unless we seek to make as prominent in our thoughts as on its pages that second coming as the complement and necessary issue of the first. It stands stamped on every line. It colours all the New Testament views of life. It is used as a motive for every duty, and as a magnet to draw men to Jesus Christ by salutary dread. There is no hint in my text about the time of the Lord’s coming, no disturbing of the solemnity of the thought by non-essential details of chronology, so we may dismiss these from our minds. The fact is the same, and has the same force as a motive for life, whether it is to be fulfilled in the next moment or thousands of years hence, provided only that you and I are to be there when He comes.

There have been many comings in the past, besides the comings in the flesh. The days of the Lord that have already appeared in the history of the world are not few. One characteristic is stamped upon them all, and that is the swift annihilation of what is opposed to Him. The Bible has a set of standing metaphors by which to illustrate this thought of the Coming of the Lord-a flood, a harvest when the ears are ripe for the sickle, the waking of God from slumber, and the like; all suggesting similar thoughts. The day of the Lord, the coming of the Lord, will include and surpass all the characteristics which these lesser and premonitory judgment days presented in miniature. I do not enlarge on this theme. I would not play the orator about it if I could; but I appeal to your consciences, which, in the case of most of us, not only testify of right and wrong, but of responsibility, and suggest a judge to whom we are responsible. And I urge on each, and on myself, this simple question: Have I allowed its due weight on my life and character to that watchword of the ancient church-Maran-atha, ‘our Lord cometh’ ?

Now, the coming of the Lord of Love is the annihilation of the unloving. The destruction implied in Anathema does not mean the cessation of Being, but a death which is worse than death, because it is a death in life. Suppose a man with all his past annihilated, with all its effort foiled and crushed, with all its possessions evaporated and disappeared, and with his memory and his conscience stung into clear-sighted activity, so that he looks back upon his former self and into his present self, and feels that it is all waste and chaos, would not that fulfil the word of my text-’Let him be Anathema’ ? And suppose that such a man, in addition to these thoughts, and as the root and the source of them, had ever the quivering consciousness that he was and must be in the presence of an unloved Judge; have you not there the naked bones of a very dreadful thing, which does not need any tawdry eloquence of man to make it more solemn and more real? The unloving heart is always ill at ease in the presence of Him whom it does not love. The unloving heart does not love, because it does not trust, nor see the love. Therefore, the unloving heart is a heart that is only capable of apprehending the wrathful side of Christ’s character. It is a heart devoid of the fruits of love which are likeness and righteousness, ‘without which no man shall see the Lord,’ nor stand the flash of the brightness of His coming. So there is no cruelty nor arbitrariness in the decree that the heart that loves not, when brought into contact with the infinite Lord of Love, must find in the touch death and not life, darkness and not light, terror and not hope. Notice that Paul’s negation is a negation and not an affirmation. He does not say ‘he that hateth,’ but ‘he that doth not love.’ The absence of the active emotion of love, which is the child of faith, the parent of righteousness, the condition of joy in His presence, is sufficient to ensure that this fate shall fall upon a man. I durst not enlarge. I leave the truth on your hearts.

II. Secondly, notice the present grace of the coming Lord.

‘Our Lord cometh. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all.’ These two things are not contradictory, but we often deal with them as if they were. And some men lay hold of the one side of the antithesis, and some men lay hold of the other, and rend them apart, and make antagonistic theories of Christianity out of them. But the real doctrine puts the two together and says there is no terror without tenderness, and there is no tenderness without terror. If we sacrifice the aspects of the divine nature, as revealed to us in the gentle Christ, which kindle a wholesome dread, we have, all unwittingly, robbed the aspects of the divine nature, which warm in us a gracious love, of their power to inflame and to illuminate. You cannot have love which is anything nobler than facile good nature and unrighteous indifference, unless you have along with it aspects of God’s character and government which ought to make some men afraid. And you cannot keep these latter aspects from being exaggerated and darkened into a Moloch of cruelty, unless you remember that, side by side with them, or rather underlying them and determining them, are aspects of the divine nature to which only child-like confidence and calm beatific returns of love do rightly respond. The terror of the Lord is a garb which our sins force upon the love of the Lord, and when the one is presented it brings with it the other. Never should they be parted in our thoughts or in our teaching.

Note what that present grace is. It is a tenderness which gathers into its embrace all these imperfect, immoral, lax, heretical people in Corinth, as well as everywhere else-’The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all.’ There were men in that church that said, ‘I am of Paul, I of Apollos, I of Cephas, I of Christ.’ There were men in that church that had defiled their souls and their flesh, and corrupted the community, and blasphemed the name of Christ by such foul, sensual sin as was ‘not even named among the Gentiles.’ There were men in that church so dead to all the sanctities even of the communion-table as that, with the bread between their teeth and the wine-cup in their hands, one was hungry and another drunken. There were men in that church, whose Christianity was so anomalous and singularly fragmentary that they did not believe in the resurrection of the dead. And yet Paul flings the great rainbow, as it were, of Christ’s enclosing love over them all. And surely the love which gathers in such people leaves none outside its sweep; and the tenderness which stoops from heaven to pity, to pardon, to cleanse such is a tenderness to which the weakest, saddest, sinfullest, foulest of the sons of men may confidently resort. Let nothing rob you of this assurance, that Christ, the coming Lord, is present with us all, and with all our weak and wicked brethren, in the full condescension of His all-embracing, all-hoping, all-forgetting, and all-restoring love. All that we need, in order to get its full sunshine into our hearts, is that we trust Him utterly, and, so trusting, love Him back again with that love which is the fulfilling of the Law and the crown of the Gospel.

III. And now, lastly, note the tenderness, caught from the Master Himself, of the servant who rebukes.

This last message of love from the Apostle himself, in 1Co 16:24, is quite anomalous. There is no other instance in his letters where he introduces himself and his own love at the end, after he has pronounced solemn benediction commending to Christ’s grace. But here, as if he had felt that he must leave an impression of himself on their minds, which corresponded to the impression of his Master that he desired to leave, he deviates from his ordinary habit, and makes his last word a personal word-’My love be with you all in Christ Jesus.’ Rebuke is the sign of love. Sharp condemnation may be the language of love. Plain warning of possible evils is the simple duty of love. So Paul folds all whom he has been rebuking in the warm embrace of his proffered love, which was the very cause of his rebuke. The healing balm of this closing message was to be applied to the wounds which his keen edged words had made, and to show that they were wounds by a surgeon, not by a foe. In effect, this parting smile of love says, ‘I am not become your enemy because I tell you the truth; I show my love to you by the plainness and roughness of my words.’ Generalise that, free it from its personal reference, and it just comes to this: There never was a shallower sneer than the sneer which is cast at Christianity, as if it were harsh, ‘ferocious,’ or unloving, when it preaches the terror of the Lord. No! rather, because the Gospel is a Gospel, it must speak plainly about death and destruction to the unloving. The danger signal is not to be blamed for a collision, which it is hoisted to avert; and it is a strange sign of an unfeeling and unsympathetic, or of a harsh and gloomy system, that it should tell men where they are driving, in order that they may never reach the miserable goal. ‘Knowing, therefore, the terror of the Lord, we persuade men.’ And when people say to us preachers, ‘Is that your Gospel, a Gospel that talks about everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord at the glory of His coming-is that your Gospel?’ We can only answer, ‘Yes, it is! Because, so to talk, may by God’s mercy, secure that some who hear shall never know anything of the wrath, save the hearing of it with the ear, and may, by the warning of it, be drawn to the Rock of Ages for safety and shelter from the storm.’

Therefore, dear friends, the upshot of all that I have been feebly trying to say is just this; let us lay hold with all our hearts, and by simple faith, of the present grace of the coming, loving Lord and Judge. You can do it. It is your only hope to do it. Have you done it? If so, then you may lift up your heads to the throne, and be glad, as those who know that their Friend and Deliverer will come at last, to help, to bless, to save. If not, dear friend, take the warning, that not to love is to be shrivelled like a leaf in the flame, at that coming which is life to them that love, and destruction to all besides. ‘Herein is our love made perfect, that we may have boldness before Him in the day of judgment.’

Alexander MacLaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture (1904–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

16:21 Paul takes up the pen and signs the letter in his own handwriting. As was common, Paul used a secretary to write this letter and others (see Rom 16:22; Gal 6:11; Col 4:18; 2 Thes 3:17).

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

1Co 16:21. Τῇ ἐμῇ χειρι, with mine own hand) He therefore dictated all the rest of the epistle.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Vv. 21, 22. “The salutation of me, Paul, with mine own hand. 22. If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be anathema! Maranatha.”

Paul, according to ancient custom, dictated his letters; but we see from 2Th 3:17 that he added the salutation and signature with his own hand, no doubt to guarantee their authenticity. This precaution was even then necessary, as is proved by the case to which he alludes, 2Th 2:2.

But in such a salutation there is implicitly contained a benediction; and here the apostle feels himself suddenly arrested. Can he really bless all the readers of his letter? Are there not some among them whom he is rather obliged to curse? He had more than once stigmatized the want of love as the radical cause of the disorders and vices which stained this Church (1Co 8:1-3, 1Co 11:23-26, and chap. 13). Now all lack of love to the brethren betrays lack of love to the Lord Himself. More than that, he had once (1Co 12:3) been obliged to refer to persons who said: Jesus accursed! and that while pretending to be organs of the Spirit of God. A burden weighs on his heart as he utters the prayer which should close his letter, and by a sudden impulse of the Spirit he gives vent to the feeling of indignation which fills him at the thought of such Christians: “If there is one among you who...” As every hearer listened to this εἰ τίς, if any man, he was called to ask himself, like the apostles at the Holy Table: “Is it I?” The more so because the conjunction εἰ implies the reality of the case. The term φιλεῖν, to cherish, has a shade of greater tenderness and more of a certain familiarity in it than ἀγαπᾷν, to love, which rather implies a feeling of veneration. It is an affection of a personal, cordial nature, which the apostle requires, that of friend for friend. The negative οὐ denotes more than the simple absence of affection; it includes the idea of the feeling opposed to love, positive antipathy. In the Alex., the object is τὸν κύριον, the Lord; the other two families, with the Itala and the Peschito, add the name Jesus Christ, and it must be confessed that the term φιλεῖν naturally calls for the name of the person who is to be the object of such an attachment. We have so often found the Alex. documents faulty, through the negligence of the copyist or otherwise, that we do not hesitate here again to give the preference to the received reading. Tertullian simply read ᾿Ιησοῦν, Jesus.

As to the word ἀνάθεμα, an offering devoted to destruction, see on 1Co 12:3. It is evident that the term cannot here, any more than elsewhere, denote ecclesiastical excommunication. — The word Maranatha belongs to the Aramaic language spoken in Palestine at that period. It is usually regarded as compounded of the two words Mar, Lord, with the suffix an, our, and atha, the perfect of the verb to come: and hence the meaning: “Our Lord has come.” The perfect has come may, in this case, be regarded as referring to the first coming of the Messiah; so Chrysostom and others. But it is impossible to establish a suitable relation between this first coming and the punishment of unfaithful Christians. Or has come may be taken as a prophetic perfect: “The Lord is present, ready to visit with a curse the man who, while professing to believe in Him, does not love Him.” This is the sense taken by Meyer, Beet, etc.; comp. Php 4:5 : “The Lord is at hand.” Edwards regards it at the same time as an echo of those discourses in tongues which celebrated in enthusiastic tones the near coming of Christ. But the use of the verb in the perfect to denote a future event, outside of prophecy strictly so called, is far from natural. How can we avoid recalling here the similar saying which closes the book of the Revelation: “Come, Lord Jesus!” and asking if such is not the meaning of the word Maranatha? Bickel has proved that the word can perfectly well be resolved into Marana, our Lord, and tha (the imperative of atha, in Western Aramaic), come! This formula would thus be exactly the same as that of which we have the Greek translation in the Apocalypse. It is perfectly in place here: the apostle appeals to the coming of Him who will purify His Church. But why reproduce this formula in Aramaic in a Greek Epistle addressed to Greeks? The term has been taken as a mysterious watchword common among Christians; or it has been thought that Paul wished thereby to give more solemnity to his threat. Finally, Hofmann thinks that when they heard this Aramaic expression, St. Paul’s Palestinian adversaries must immediately have understood that it was addressed to them. To these suppositions, all equally improbable, I may be allowed to add another which will perhaps have no more success than its predecessors. To the signature written with his own hand, did not Paul add the impression of the seal which he was in the habit of using? And did not this seal bear this prayer as a device in the Aramaic tongue: “Come, Lord Jesus!” In the copies of the letter, since the seal could not be reproduced, the copyists at least preserved the device.

It is remarkable that, in the Doctrine of the Twelve Apostles, this word Maranatha is used at the end of the Liturgy of the Holy Supper (c. 10), and immediately after the words: “If any man is not holy, let him repent!” Then follows: “Maranatha, amen!” But it is impossible to draw any inference from this passage for any of the interpretations which we have indicated.

The apostle cannot take leave of the Church under the impression of a threatening; the following verses are connected with the salutations of 1Co 16:21.

Frédéric Louis Godet — Commentaries on Luke, John, Romans, and 1 Corinthians — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1870s–1890s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

1Co_16:21

The salutation of (me) Paul with mine own hand.

As Paul commonly wrote by an amanuensis, he was accustomed to write with his own hand the concluding sentences of his epistle as an authentication of them, Col_4:18; 2Th_3:17. He remarks in Gal_6:11, on his having written that epistle with his own hand as something unusual, and as indicating a peculiar stress of feeling.

Charles Hodge — Commentary on Romans (1835), First Corinthians (1857), and Ephesians (1856) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

salutation . . . with mine own hand--He therefore dictated all the rest of the Epistle.

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 21. The salutation of me Paul with mine own hand.] This should be rendered: "The salutation is written by the hand of me Paul;" γεγραπται, is written, being understood. It is very likely that the apostle wrote this and the following verses with his own hand. The rest, though dictated by him, was written by an amanuensis.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

(21) The salutation of me Paul with mine own hand.—It was the Apostle’s habit to dictate his Epistles, but to add a few words at the end in his own handwriting. (See 2Th_3:17.) The concluding verses here are accordingly St. Paul’s autograph. The earlier portions had been written by Sosthenes. (See 1Co_1:1.)

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

21. The salutation of me Paul with mine own hand] It was the custom of St Paul to employ an amanuensis. See Rom_16:22. But in order that the Epistle should be recognized as his, it was his custom to add a salutation in his own handwriting, which he wished to be regarded as a token of genuineness. 2Th_3:17. See also Col_4:18 and Gal_6:11 (where it seems to be implied that St Paul wrote the whole of that particular Epistle himself).

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

21 The salutation of me Paul with mine own hand.

Ver. 21. With mine own hand] Well known to the Corinthians, to prevent imposture.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

The salutation of me, Paul, with mine own hand - It is evident that Paul was accustomed to employ an amanuensis (copyist) in penning his epistles (see the note on Rom 16:22), though he signed his own name, and expressed his Christian salutation in every epistle, 2Th 3:17; compare Col 4:18. This gave a sanction to what was written; was a proof that it was his own, and was a valuable token of affectionate regard. It was a proof that there was no fraud or imposition. Why he employed an amanuensis is not known.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

These words are judged to signify to us, that though the former part of the Epistle was written out of Paul’s copy by some others, yet the three last verses were written by him with his own hand.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

With mine own hand. Every one of St. Paul"s Epistles, except that to the Galatians, (Gal_6:11) seems to have been written by an amanuensis. The blaze of light in the vision on the road to Damascus seems to have left him with acute and permanent ophthalmia as his "thorn in the flesh;" and this would naturally disincline him to the physical labour of writing. When he did write, his letters seem to have been large and straggling, (Gal_6:11) But this was an age in which documents were frequently falsified by designing persons, and this seems to have happened to St. Paul after he had written his very first extant letter. After warning the Thessalonians not to be frightened "by epistle as from, (2Th_2:2) he adds, at the close of the letter, that henceforth he intends to authenticate every letter by an autograph salutation (2Th_3:17; Col_4:18; Rom_16:22) To this bad and dangerous practice of forgery is due the energetic appeal of Rev_22:18, Rev_22:19. A similar appeal to copyists, couched in the most solemn language, is found in Irenaeus ("Opp.," 1:821, edit. Stieren), and at the end of Rufinus"s prologue to his translation of Origen"s "De Principiis.

Vers. 21, 22.

A negative crime and positive punishment.

"If any man love not," etc. The words contain two things.

I A NEGATIVE CRIME. "If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ," etc. We make three remarks on this state of mind in relation to Christ.

1. It is unreasonable. There is everything in him to call out the highest love. There are three kinds of love to which we are susceptible, and which are incumbent on usgratitude, esteem, and benevolence. The first requires a manifestation of kindness; the second, of moral excellence; the third, a purpose for the common good. Christ manifests all these, and therefore deserves our highest love.

1. It is ascertainable. We can soon ascertain whether we love Christ or not. There are infallible criteria. For example, the chief object of love will always be

1. the engrossing subject of thought;

2. the attractive theme of conversation;

3. the source of the greatest delight in pleasing;

4. the most transformative power of character; and

5. the most identified with our conscious life.

6. It is deplorable. This love is the only true regulative power of the soul. Where this is not, all the powers of our nature are misemployed, and. all is confusion.

II A POSITIVE PUNISHMENT. "Let him be Anathema Maran-atha." These words intimate two things concerning the punishment.

1. Its nature. "Let him be Anathema." The word expresses some terrible amount of suffering. It is one of Paul"s strong words to express a terrible evil. Excommunication from all that is pure and good and happy is undoubtedly involved. The soul cut off from Christ, its Centre, Root, Fountain, Life, is utterly destroyed.

2. Its certainty. "Maran-atha," which means, "The Lord will come." This word is probably introduced by Paul in order to convey the certainty of the destruction of those who "love not the Lord Jesus Christ." Paul had written the other part of this letter by an amanuensis, but to write these terrible words he takes up the pen himself. "The salutation of me Paul with mine own hand." He felt the utmost recoil of heart for those who "love not the Lord Jesus Christ," and had the most overwhelming idea of the misery to which such will be exposed. Men are accursed, not merely because they hate Christ, rebel against his authority, and profane his ordinances, but because they do not love him.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

With my own hand - What precedes having been written by an amanuensis.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

21. “The salutation of Paul with my own hand.” Owing to ocular feebleness, Luke and others wrote for him. But we see that to this letter he appends his personal autograph.

William B. Godbey, Commentary on the New Testament (1896–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

The salutation of me Paul with mine own hand . [All of Paul's letters save Galatians appear to have been written by an amanuensis ( Gal_6:11 ). Inspired Scripture was too important to be wanting in authenticity, or to be subjected to suspicion as forgery.]

J. W. McGarvey (with Philip Y. Pendleton), Commentaries on the New Testament (The Fourfold Gospel, 1914; Acts; and the epistles) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

21–24. The salutation of me, Paul, with mine own hand. Paul's letters were written by an amanuensis (Rom. 16:22), but he always added a salutation in his own hand as a proof of genuineness (2 Thess. 3:17). 2 Thess. 2:2, implies that spurious letters were circulated.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

I, Paul, write this with my own hand

Paul was making it clear that the instructions in this letter are from him, even though one of his co-laborers wrote what Paul was saying in the rest of the letter. Paul wrote this last part with his own hand.

may he be accursed

"may God curse him." See how "accursed" was translated in 1 Corinthians 12:3.

translationWords

Paul

hand

love

grace

amen

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.

21. τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί. It was the custom of St Paul to employ an amanuensis. See Rom 16:22. But in order that the Epistle should be recognized as his, it was his custom to add a salutation in his own handwriting, which he wished to be regarded as a token of genuineness. 2Th 3:17. See also Col 4:18 and Gal 6:11 (where it seems to be implied that St Paul wrote the whole of that particular Epistle himself).

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

21-24.] Autograph conclusion. ὁ ἀσπασμός is the final greeting, which, according to ref. 2 Thess., was always in his own hand, the rest having been written (see Rom 16:22) by an amanuensis.

Παύλου is in apposition with ἐμοῦ implied in ἐμῇ, as Il. ρ. 226, ὑμέτερον δὲ ἑκάστου θυμὸν ἀέξω: ἐμὸς τοῦ ἀθλίου βίος, and the like. See Kühner, § 499. 4.

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

21. Ὁ ἀσπασμὸς τῇ ἐμῆ χειρὶ Παύλου. ‘The salutation with my own hand of me Paul’ The Apostle takes the pen from his amanuensis and himself finishes the letter, to authenticate it as coming from him: it must not be possible for his opponents in Corinth to question whether this letter is really St Paul’s: 2Th 3:17; Col 4:18. Up to this point he had been dictating (Rom 16:22), but he finishes the letter himself. In the papyri, the signature is sometimes in quite a different hand from the rest of the writing (Milligan, Thessalonians, p. 125). The Apostle’s handwriting would be known at Corinth; but we cannot safely infer from Gal 6:11 that it was unusually large: like other people, he sometimes wrote large, as we use large type, for emphasis (Ramsay, Galatians, p. 466; Deissmann, Light, pp. 153, 158). Παύλου is in apposition with the gen. implied in ἐμῇ.*

εἴ τις οὐ φιλεῖ τὸν Κ., ἤτω ἀνάθεμα. We might have expected ἀγαπᾷ, but the previous φιλήματι may have suggested the lower word. Or St Paul may have purposely chosen it, to indicate the poor character of the love indicated; ‘If anyone does not have even as much affection as φιλεῖν’; and those who were uncharitable to one another could not have this. For the difference between the two verbs see Trench, Syn. § xii.; Cremer, pp. 9f.; comm. on Joh 21:15-17; Swete on Rev 3:19. Nowhere else, excepting the somewhat similar Tit 3:15, does St Paul use φιλεῖν, which is rare in the N.T. outside the Gospels. The negative almost forms one word with φιλεῖ, ‘if anyone has no affection for Christ,’ is heartless towards Him. As a matter of fact, this was the case with some: comp. 7:9, 11:6. For ἤτω, a later form of ἔστω, see Jas 5:12; also ἤτω ἡ δόξα Κυρίου εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα, Psa 104:31; Ἰερουσαλὴμ ἤτω ἁγία, 1 Macc. 10:31. It may have been common in adjurations and curses. J. B. Mayor quotes two inscriptions; εἰ δέ τις κακουργήσει, ἤτω ἔνοχος Ἡλίῳ Σελήνῃ, and κατηραμένος ἤτω αὐτὸς καὶ τὰ τέκνα αὐτοῦ (St James, p. 155). Gal 1:8, Gal 1:9, we have ἀνάθεμα ἔστω: see on 12:3. See Enc. Bibl. 2. 1432.

Μαρὰν ἀθά. Perhaps the most curious mistake in the English Versions is that which attaches these words, combined into one, to the preceding ‘Anathema,’ as if they formed part of a formula of malediction, ‘be Anathema Maranatha.’ Coverdale has ‘be Anathema Maharan Matha,’ which has perhaps been influenced by Shammatha, the highest form of Jewish excommunication, like Luther’s ‘Maharam Motha.’ The Genevan translates the words; let him be had in execration, yea excommunicate to death’ But the error is far older than any English Version, and perhaps may be traced back to the fifth century. Down to the seventeenth century it was accepted as correct by many scholars; and although abandoned by scholars now, it survives here and there in popular literature, and in the Second Lesson one may still sometimes hear ‘Anathema Maranatha’ read as one expression. Scholars, however, are not agreed as to the exact meaning of Maranatha; as to whether it means ‘The Lord has come,’ or ‘Our Lord has come,’* or ‘Our Lord cometh,’ or ‘Our Lord, come.’ The last would resemble ‘Amen; come Lord Jesus’ (22:20). Yet another interpretation is, ‘Our Lord is the sign’ (Abbott, The Son of Man, p. 465; Ency. Bibl. iii:2935, from Klostermann, Probleme im Aposteltexte, pp. 220-246), but it is not likely to be right. With ‘Our Lord cometh’ compare Php 4:5; Jas 5:8; Rev 1:7, Rev 1:3:11; and this agrees with the context and the substance of the Epistle. If it be right, the saying, though in no way a malediction, is monitory in tone. It warns them that at any moment they may have to answer for their shortcomings. Why St Paul gives this warning in Aramaic rather than in Greek, is unknown. The most probable conjecture is that in this language it had become a sort of motto or password, among Christians, and familiar in that shape, like ‘Alleluia’ with ourselves. See Hastings, DB. iii. pp. 241 f.; Findlay ad loc.; Dalman, Words, p. 328. Zahn thinks that the Apostle uses “the language of the Palestinian Jews” because “the persons whom he has in mind are Christians who had come from Palestine” (Introd. to N.T., i. p. 288).

א* A B C* M 17 have τὸν Κύριον, without addition; D E F G K L P, Vulg. Syrr. Copt. Goth., Chrys. add ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦν χριστόν, as in AV. FG have μαρανναθά, which g renders in adventu domini.

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.