2 Corinthians 1:19

For the Son of God - In this verse, and the following, Paul states that he felt himself bound to maintain the strictest veracity for two reasons; the one, that Jesus Christ always evinced the strictest veracity 2Co 1:19; the other, God was always true to all the promises that He made 2Co 1:20; and as he felt himself to be the servant of the Saviour and of God, he was bound by the most sacred obligations also to maintain a character irreproachable in regard to veracity on the meaning of the phrase “Son of God,” see the note, Rom 1:4.

Jesus Christ - It is agreed, says Bloomfield, by the best commentators, ancient and modern, that by Jesus Christ is here meant his doctrine. The sense is, that the preaching respecting Jesus Christ, did not represent him as fickle, and changeable; as unsettled, and as unfaithful; but as true, consistent, and faithful. As that had been the regular and constant representation of Paul and his fellow-laborers in regard to the Master whom they served, it was to be inferred that they felt themselves bound sacredly to observe the strictest constancy and veracity.

By us ... - Silvanus, mentioned here, is the same person who in the Acts of the Apostles is called Silas. He was with Paul at Philippi, and was imprisoned there with him Acts 16, and was afterward with Paul and Timothy at Corinth when he first visited that city; Act 18:5. Paul was so much attached to him, and had so much confidence in him, that he joined his name with his own in several of his epistles; 1Th 1:1; 2Th 1:1.

Was not yea and nay - Our representation of him was not that he was fickle and changeable.

But in him was yea - Was not one thing at one time, and another at another. He is the same, yesterday, today, and forever. All that he says is true; all the promises that he makes are firm; all his declarations are faithful. Paul may refer to the fact that the Lord Jesus when on earth was eminently characterized by truth. Nothing was more striking than his veracity. He called himself “the truth,” as being eminently true in all his declarations. “I am the way, and the truth, and the life;” Joh 14:6; compare Rev 3:7. And thus Rev 3:14 he is called “the faithful and true witness.” In all his life he was eminently distinguished for that. His declarations were simple truth; his narratives were simple, unvarnished, uncolored, unexaggerated statements of what actually occurred. He never disguised the truth; never prevaricated; never had any mental reservation; never deceived; never used any word, or threw in any circumstance, that was suited to lead the mind astray. He himself said that this was the great object which he had in view in coming into the world. “To this end was I born and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth;” Joh 18:37. As Jesus Christ was thus distinguished for simple truth, Paul felt that he was under sacred obligations to imitate him, and always to evince the same inviolable fidelity. The most deeply felt obligation on earth is that which the Christian feels to imitate the Redeemer.

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

19. For—Paul exemplifies this denial of selfish fickleness, first, 2Co_1:19-22, in regard to his preaching, and then, 2Co_1:23 to 2Co_2:4, in regard to the case in question, his change of journey-plan.

The Son of God. The great theme and soul of all our preaching, Christ, is the ever changeless affirmative, the immutable yea.

Silvanus and Timotheus—The true Pauline preachers, in distinction from the Judaizers and other factionists.

Not yea and nay—Fickle and contradictory; sometimes affirmative and sometimes negative.

But in him was yea—God’s blessed gospel affirmation resided in him.

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

1:19 Silas was a well-known Christian leader from the church in Antioch (see Acts 15:22, 27, 32; 1 Thes 1:1; 2 Thes 1:1; 1 Pet 5:12).

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

2Co 1:19. Ὁ γὰρ τοῦ Θεοῦ υἱὸς, Ιἠσοῦς Χριστὸς, for the Son of God, Jesus Christ) who is the principal subject of our discourse. We should observe the joining together of the three appellations, thereby showing forth firmness;[7] as also their position in the natural order; for the first is evidently not the same as the third.—καὶ Σιλουανοῦ, and Silvanus) Luke calls him Silas; Act 15:22 note.—ἀλλὰ ναὶ) but yea pure and unmixed, on our part and yours.—ἐν αὐτῷ, in Himself) Christ preached, i.e. our preaching of Christ became yea in Christ Himself. So the reason assigned [aetiologia, end.] in the following verse is in consonance. All the promises in Christ are yea. Therefore truly also the testimony concerning Christ Himself is yea in Christ.

[7] For “union is strength.”—ED.

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

2Co_1:19. Ὁ γὰρ τοῦ Θεοῦ υἱός] or, as Lachmann, Rückert, and Tischendorf, following preponderating testimony, have it rightly: ὁ τοῦ Θεοῦ γὰρ υἱός (γάρ in the fourth place; see Fritzsche, Quaest. Luc. p. 100; Ellendt, Lex. Soph, I. p. 339; Hermann, ad Philoct. 1437), marks the τοῦ Θεοῦ as emphatic, in order to make what is to be said of Christ, οὐκ ἐγένετο ναὶ κ. οὔ, felt at once in its divine certainty. To be Gods Son and yet ναὶ κ. οὔ would be a contradiction. In the whole ὁ … Ἰ. Χ. there lies a solemn, sacred emphasi.

ὁ ἐν ὑμῖν διʼ ἡμῶν κηρυχθείς] reminds the readers of the first preaching of Christ among them, of which Paul could not but remind them, if they were to become perfectly conscious, from their experience from the beginning, that Christ had not become ναὶ κ. οὔ. But in order to make this first preaching come home to them with the whole personal weight of the preachers, he adds, in just consciousness of the services rendered by himself and his companions as compared with the later workers, a more precise definition of the διʼ ἡμῶν, with more weighty circumstantiality: διʼ ἐμοῦ κ. Σιλουανοῦ κ. Τιμοθέου. For the two latter had been his helpers in his first labours in Corinth. See Act_18:5. From this it is obvious why he has not named others, as Apollos, but simply these (Calvin thinks, that these had been most calumniated); hence also there is no need to suppose any intention of making his assurance more credible (Chrysostom, Theophylact, and many others). A side glance at the Christ preached by Judaistic opponents (2Co_11:4) is here quite foreign to the connection (in opposition to Klöpper, p. 86 f.).

Σιλουανοῦ] Universally so with Paul (1Th_1:1; 2Th_1:1); also in 1Pe_5:12. In the Acts of the Apostles only the shortened name Σιλας appears. Silvanus is here placed before Timothy, because he was an older apostolic helper than the latter. See Act_15:22 ff.

οὐκ ἐγένετο ναὶ κ. οὔ] He has not become affirmation and negation, has not showed Himself as untrustworthy, as one who affirms and also denies (the fulfilment of the divine promises, 2Co_1:20), as one who had exhibited such contradiction in himself. This Paul says of Christ Himself, in so far as in the personal objective Christ, by means of His appearance and His whole work, the ναί in reference to the divine promises, the affirmation of their fulfilment, is given as a matter of fact. Wrongly most expositors (comp. Chrysostom, Theodoret, Theophylact) understand Χριστός as doctrina de Christo (our gospel of Christ is not changeable, sometimes one thing, sometimes another, but it remains ever the same), an interpretation here specially precluded by verses 20 and 21. This may be urged also against the similar interpretation of Hofmann, that, with the very fact that Christ has come to the readers through preaching, there has gone forth a Yea (the affirmation of all divine promises), without any intervention of Nay. Olshausen and Rückert take it rightly of Christ Himself; but the former puts in place of the simple meaning of the word the thought not quite in keeping: Christ is the absolute truth, affirmation pure and simple; in Him is the real fulfilment of the divine promises; in Him negation is entirely wanting; and the latter arbitrarily limits ἐγένετο merely to the experience of the Corinthians (among you He has not shown Himself untrustworthy). Paul, however, uses the words οὐκ ἐγένετο ναὶ κ. οὔ of Christ in general, and by ὁ ἐν ὑμῖν … Τιμοθ. directs the attention of the Corinthians to the recognition of the truth on their part and out of their own experienc.

ἀλλὰ ναὶ ἐν αὐτῷ γέγονεν] of the two only the former, i.e. affirmation (that the divine promises are fulfilled and shall be fulfilled) is established in Him: in Christ is actually given the yea, that, etc. In the perfect γέγονεν (different from the previous aorist ἐγένετο) is implied the continuance of what has happened. Comp. on Col_1:16; Joh_1:3. Grotius, in opposition to the context (see 2Co_1:20), referred ναὶ ἐν αὐτῷ γέγ. to the miracles, by which Christ confirmed the apostolic preaching. And Beza awkwardly, and, on account of 2Co_1:20, erroneously, took ἐν αὐτῷ of God, whose Son is constantissima Patris veritas.

2Co_1:19-22. Paul furnishes grounds in 2Co_1:19 f. for the assurance he had given in 2Co_1:18; then refers his veracity to the stedfastness bestowed on him by God, 2Co_1:21 f.; and finally, 2Co_1:23, makes protestations as to the reason why he had not yet come to Corinth.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

2Co 1:19 . He has appealed to the faithfulness of God, and this suggests the thought of the unchangeableness of Christ. ὁ τοῦ Θεοῦ γὰρ υἱὸς κ . τ . λ .: for the Son of God, Christ Jesus, who was proclaimed among you by us . The position of τοῦ Θεοῦ before γάρ (as in the true text) brings out the sequence of thought better, as it brings Θεοῦ (the connecting word) into prominence. διʼ ἐμοῦ καὶ Σιλουανοῦ καὶ Τιμοθέου : even by me and Silvanus and Timothy . These three brought the Gospel to Corinth (Act 18:5 ), and were closely associated during the Apostle’s labours in that city (1Th 1:1 , 2Th 1:1 ). Silvanus is only another form of the name Silas ; he was a prophet (Act 15:32 ), and apparently, like St. Paul, a Roman citizen (Act 16:37 ), and shared the Apostle’s perils during the whole of his second missionary journey (Act 15:40 to Act 18:18 ). We hear of him again at Rome (1Pe 5:12 ). οὐκ ἐγένετο ναὶ καὶ οὔ , ἀλλὰ ναὶ ἐν αυτῷ γέγονεν : was not Yea and Nay, but in Him is ( sc. , has been and continues to be) Yea . There is no doubtfulness or vacillation in the words of Christ (Mat 7:29 , Joh 12:50 ); and He continually emphasised the positive and certain character of His teaching by the introductory formula Ἀμὴν , ἀμήν . More than this, however, is involved here. Christ, who is the Object and Sum of St. Paul’s preaching, is unchangeable (Heb 13:8 ), for He is not only “true” (Rev 3:7 ), but “the Truth” (Joh 14:6 ): He is, in brief, ὁ Ἀμήν (Rev 3:14 ), and so it may be said that an Eternal “Yea” has come into being ( γέγονεν , through His incarnate Life) in Him.

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Was not divers and wavering.

He joineth also with himself, his fellows as witnesses, with whom he fully consented in teaching one selfsame thing, to wit, one selfsame Christ.

That is in God.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

Proof of the unchangeableness of the doctrine from the unchangeableness of the subject of it, namely, Jesus Christ. He is called "the Son of God" to show the impossibility of change in One who is co-equal with God himself (compare Sa1 15:29; Mal 3:6).

by me . . . Silvanus and Timotheus--The Son of God, though preached by different preachers, was one and the same, unchangeable. Silvanus is contracted into Silas (Act 15:22; compare Pe1 5:12).

in him was yea--Greek, "is made yea in Him"; that is, our preaching of the Son of God is confirmed as true in Him (that is, through Him; through the miracles wherewith He has confirmed our preaching) [GROTIUS]; or rather, by the witness of the Spirit which He has given (Co2 1:21-22) and of which miracles were only one, and that a subordinate manifestation.

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 19. For the Son of God, &c.] If I could have changed my purpose through carnal or secular interests then I must have had the same interest in view when I first preached the Gospel to you, with Silvanus and Timotheus. But did not the whole of our conduct prove that we neither had, nor could have such interest in view?

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

19. For the Son of God Here we have the proof — because his preaching contained nothing but Christ alone, who is the eternal and immutable truth of God. The clause preached by us is emphatic. For, as it may be, and often does happen, that Christ is disfigured by the inventions of men, and is adulterated, as it were, by their disguises, he declares that it had not been so as to himself or his associates, but that he had sincerely and with an integrity that was befitting, held forth Christ pure and undisguised. Why it is that he makes no mention of Apollos, while he mentions by name Timotheus and Silvanus, does not exactly appear; unless the reason be, as is probable, that the more that individuals were assailed by the calumnies of the wicked, he was so much the more careful to defend them.

In these words, however, he intimates that his whole doctrine was summed up in a simple acquaintance with Christ alone, as in reality the whole of the gospel is included in it. Hence those go beyond due limits, who teach anything else than Christ alone, with whatever show of wisdom they may otherwise be puffed up. For as he is the end of the law, (Romans 10:4,) so he is the head — the sum — in fine, the consummation — of all spiritual doctrine.

In the second place, he intimates that his doctrine respecting Christ had not been variable, or ambiguous, so as to present him from time to time in a new shape after the manner of Proteus; as some persons make it their sport to make changes upon him, just as if they were tossing a ball to and fro with their hand, simply for the purpose of displaying their dexterity. Others, with a view to procure the favor of men, present him under various forms, while there is still another class, that inculcate one day what on the next they retract through fear. Such was not Paul’s Christ, nor can that of any true apostle be such. Those, accordingly, have no ground to boast that they are ministers of Christ, who paint him in various colors with a view to their own advantage. For he alone is the true Christ, in whom there appears that uniform and unvarying yea, which Paul declares to be characteristic of him.

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

(19) By me and Silvanus and Timotheus.—We note an undesigned coincidence with Act_18:5, where Silas (whose identity with Silvanus is thus proved) is related to have come with Timotheus to join St. Paul at Corinth. The three names are joined together in the same order in 1Th_1:1, and 2Th_1:1.

Was not yea and nay, but in him was yea.—From the forensic point of view, this was, of course, hardly an adequate defence against the charge of inconsistency. The argument was, so to speak, one of ethical congruity. It was infinitely unlikely that one who preached Christ, the absolutely True Christ, who enforced every precept with the emphatic “Amen, Amen” (the word occurs thirty-one times in St. Matthew, fourteen times in St. Mark, seven times in St. Luke, and in its reduplicated form twenty-five times in St. John), “Verily, verily,” should afterwards be shamelessly untruthful, and use words that paltered with a double sense.

But in him was yea.—Better, but in him Yea has been and still is so, as His great characterising word.

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

19. For the Son of God, Jesus Christ] St Paul now labours to impress the Corinthians with the weight of the commission with which he had been entrusted to them. It was nothing less than Jesus, the Promised and Anointed One, the Son of God, Whom he had preached.

was preached] Literally, proclaimed, as by a herald. The word has come usually to mean an exposition of God’s Word in the Christian congregation.

Silvanus] Called Silas in the Acts. He was sent with Paul and Barnabas, as ‘a chief man among the brethren,’ to guarantee the authenticity of the Apostolic letter which the former brought back with them from Jerusalem to Antioch after the discussion recorded in Acts 15, since, had Paul and Barnabas returned alone, their opponents might not improbably have disputed its genuineness. See Act_15:22; Act_15:25; Act_15:27. He was a prophet, Act_15:32 (see 1 Corinthians 14), and was chosen by St Paul, after his dispute with St Barnabas, as his fellow-traveller, by the advice of the Churches. Some have thought that he was the brother mentioned in ch. 2Co_8:18, 2Co_12:18. He is mentioned by St Paul with himself in the opening of each of the Epistles to the Thessalonians. He was with the Apostle at Philippi (Act_16:19-40), at Thessalonica (Act_17:1; Act_17:4; Act_17:10), at Berea (Act_17:10), at Corinth (not at Athens, Act_17:15, Act_18:5). He is not mentioned again in Scripture save by St Peter in his first Epistle (ch. 2Co_5:12), in which he speaks of him as one with whom he has little personal acquaintance, but much confidence. Silas is contracted from the fuller form Silvanus as Lucas from Lucanus. The similar signification of the two words Lucas and Silvanus have led some to suppose that St Luke and St Silas were the same person. But a perusal of the narrative in Acts 16, 17, especially Act_16:4-8; Act_16:10-17; Act_16:19-20, will shew that they were two distinct persons. See Alford, Prolegomena to Acts of the Apostles, for a fuller investigation of this point. We may observe that not only does St Paul, in his humility, identify himself with the Corinthians (2Co_1:14) but he takes care to associate his subordinates with him as fellow labourers in a common work. Paley, Horae Paulinae, remarks on the undesigned coincidence between this verse and Act_18:5. The two books are not written by the same person. There is no particular stress laid on the fact of Silas and Timotheus having been with the Apostle in either book, but the reference to them slips out quite accidentally. But both declare in this accidental way that Silas and Timotheus were with the Apostle at Corinth. Such minute agreement is beyond the power of the compiler of fictitious narrative. See a fuller discussion of this subject in the Introduction.

was not yea and nay, but in him was yea] The Son of God, the subject-matter of the Gospel, was no uncertain conception, sometimes affirmed and sometimes denied. The preaching of Him was the constant affirmation of a truth, an unchangeable blessing vouchsafed in Him to mankind. For ‘in Him was yea;’ the original has the perfect, ‘in Him i.e. in God, 2Co_1:18) hath been (or become) yea.’ For in Him ‘is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.’ Num_23:19; Jas_1:17. How then could the change of purpose in His minister be ascribed to the capricious infirmity of the mere human will? Cf. also Rom_15:8; Heb_13:8.

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.

For the Son of God, Jesus Christ,.... The apostle having asserted that the Gospel preached by them was not yea and nay, variable and different, or what was affirmed at one time was denied at another, proceeds to point out the subject of the Gospel ministry,

the Son of God, Jesus Christ; that Christ is "the Son of God": this article he began his ministry with, Act 9:20, and all the apostles affirmed the same thing; and which is of the greatest moment and importance, and ought to be abode by, insisted on, and frequently inculcated; as that he is the eternal Son of God, existed as such from everlasting, is of the same nature, and has the same perfections with his Father; and therefore is able to destroy the works of the devil, for which he was manifested in the flesh, and every way equal to the business of redemption, which he has finished; and having passed into the heavens under this character, is a powerful advocate with the Father; and which renders him a sure foundation for the church, and a proper object of faith: that the Son of God is Christ, anointed to bear and execute the office of a mediator in the several parts and branches of it; a prophet to teach his people, a priest to make atonement and intercession for them, and a King to govern and protect them: and that the Son, who is become the Lord's Christ, is Jesus, a Saviour; and that salvation is alone by him, to which he was appointed from eternity, and was sent in the fulness of time to effect it; and by his obedience, sufferings, and death, is become the author of it, and is the only able, willing, and suitable Saviour for poor sinners. This is the principal subject and strain of the Gospel ministry; and which makes it good news, and glad tidings to lost perishing sinners. The agreement between the faithful ministers of the Gospel is here plainly hinted,

who was preached among you by us, even by me, and Silvanus and Timotheus. These ministers being mentioned by the apostle with himself, shows his humility in putting them on a level with himself; and his modesty and candour in not monopolizing the Gospel to himself, but allowing others to be preachers of it as well as he: and his design herein seems to be for the confirmation of the Gospel, and to show that he was not singular and alone, and could not be blamed by them, without blaming others; and chiefly to express the harmony and unanimity of Gospel preachers. The prophets of the Old Testament, and the apostles of the New, agreed in all the doctrines and truths of the Gospel; so did the apostles themselves; and so all faithful dispensers of the word have in all different times and places agreed, and still do agree; which serves greatly to corroborate the truth of the Gospel. The Gospel being faithfully preached by these persons,

was not yea and nay; it had no contradiction in it; each part agreed together, was entirely harmonious, and consistent. Their doctrine was, that Christ is the Son of God, truly and properly God; that he took upon him the office of a Mediator, and executes it; that he is the only Saviour of sinners; that God has chosen a certain number of men in Christ before the foundation of the world, has made a covenant with them in Christ, and blessed them in him; that Christ has redeemed them by his blood; that these are regenerated by the Spirit and grace of Christ, are justified by his righteousness, and shall finally persevere, and be partakers of eternal life; which is all of a piece, and in it no yea and nay. Yea and nay doctrines are particular election, the possibility of the salvation of the non-elect, the salvability of all men, and universal redemption; justification by faith, and, as it were, by the works of the law; conversion, partly by grace, and partly by the will of man; preparatory works, offers, and days of grace; and final perseverance made a doubt of: but such is not the true ministry of Christ and his apostles,

but in him was yea; the Gospel, as in Christ, and as it comes from him, and has been preached by his apostles, and faithful ministers, is all of a piece; its constant and invariable strain, and by which it may be known and distinguished, is, to display the free, rich, and sovereign grace of God, to magnify and exalt the person and offices of Christ, to debase the creature, and to engage persons to the performance of good works, on Gospel principles, and by Gospel motives, and for right ends. The apostle using those words, "yea and nay", conforms to the language of the Jews, his countrymen, who to magnify their doctors and Rabbins, and to raise their credit, say such things of them;

""yea, yea", are the words of the house or school of Shammai; , "yea, yea", are the words of the school of Hillell (b).''

And in another place (c);

"the receiving and giving, or the dealings of a disciple of a wise man, are in truth and faithfulness. He says, , "concerning nay, nay, and concerning yea, yea".''

But what is here said better agrees with the principles and practices of the disciples and followers of Christ.

(b) T. Bab. Moed Katon, fol. 20. 1. (c) Maimon. Hilch. Dayot, c. 5. sect. 13.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

19 For the Son of God, Jesus Christ, who was preached among you by us, even by me and Silvanus and Timotheus, was not yea and nay, but in him was yea.

Ver. 19. For the Son of God] What is that to the purpose? Thus: if the gospel that Paul preached be not yea and nay, then neither are Paul’s promises yea and nay. This is his intendment, else his inference is nothing. And by that which follows, it reacheth all Christians; q.d. Look what a Christian doth promise, he is bound by the earnest penny of God’s Spirit to perform. He dares no more alter his words to the discredit of his profession than the Spirit of God can lie. (Mr Cotton on the Seven Vials.)

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.

It is, was in him. There was no inconstancy in the doctrine of the apostles, sometimes, like modern sectaries, saying, It is, and at other times saying, It is not. But their doctrine was ever the same, one uniform yea, is Jesus Christ, one Amen, that is, one truth in him. (Challoner)

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

The apostle here glveth a reason why he had made truth and sincerity so much his business (which reason obligeth us also, who are as much bound as he to study a conformity to Christ); saith he:

The Son of God, who was preached among you, that is, Jesus Christ; who, though (as some observe) he is in these Epistles no where called God, but Lord, is here called

the Son of God; which can be understood in no other sense, than by eternal generation; for those who are only the sons of God by adoption, are not the subjects of ministers’ preaching. We read of this Silvanus, 1Th 1:1; 1Pe 5:12; some think that he was the same person who is called Silas, Act 16:19.

Of

Timothy we have heard before. They were both ministers who (as well as Apollos before mentioned) had laboured in the gospel amongst the Corinthians.

Was not yea and nay, but in him was yea: now (saith the apostle) that Christ, whom both I, and other ministers of the gospel, have preached to you, is not uncertain and unconstant, one thing at one time, and in one place, another thing at another time, and in another place. He was only one and the same; his doctrine was always certain and uniform, and consistent with itself; and our conversation ought to be suitable to him and his doctrine.

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

For. This is a proof of what he has just said. His preaching was as firm as a rock; for, tried by time, it had proved itself a changeless" yea," being a preaching of Christ, the same yesterday, today, and forever. By me and Silvanus and Timotheus. They are mentioned because they had been his companions in the first visit to Corinth, (Act_18:5) and he wishes to show that his preaching of Christ had never wavered. "Silvanus" (1Th_1:1; 2Th_1:1) is the "Silas" of Act_15:22. He disappears from the New Testament in this verse, unless he be the "Silvanus" of 1Pe_5:12. Was not yea and nay, but in him was yea. "Became not (proved not to be) yes and no (in one breath, as it were, and therefore utterly untrustworthy), but in him there has been a yea." The perfect, "has become," means that in him the everlasting" yes" has proved itself valid, and still continues to be a changeless affirmation. (Heb_13:8)

Christ is "yea.

The apostle defended himself against imputations of levity and self-contradiction. He did not lightly form or change his plans. He did not bandy about "yea and nay." The serious theme of his ministry was some security for its grave and consistent treatment. At the present day one hears a good many complaints of vagueness and vacillation in the pulpit. Preachers are said to use ambiguous phrases, propound shifting opinions, and leave their hearers unsettled and perplexed. They seem to have no certainty in their own minds, and therefore cannot convey a sure and straightforward gospel to others. Their word is "yea and nay." Now, there may be reason for hesitancy on some topics of religion. It may be a great deal wiser than absolute assertion. But as to the main theme of gospel preaching there should be perfect certainty; for the very essence of it is the setting forth of Jesus Christ, the Son of God. He is the True One, and ought to be proclaimed with firmness, consistency, and "much assurance." The Greeks were fond of speculation. At Athens they inquired after some new thing. At Corinth they were fickle and disputatious. On such a people the calm certainty of St. Paul"s preaching must have fallen with surprise. It was testified that Jesus, who had taught in Judaea, but never even visited Greece, and who had been crucified at Jerusalem, was the Son of God; that he had ascended to heaven, and would judge the world on an appointed day. This was not submitted to the critical acumen of the Greeks for their examination and approval. It was delivered as truth, and not as a lie yea, and not nay. Jesus, the Son of God, was the grand Reality in a world of delusions, and the grand Essence in a world of shadows. Such had been the teaching of St. Peter and the other apostles at Jerusalem, of Philip at Samaria, and of the Cypriote and Cyrenian brethren who first delivered the testimony at Antioch. No one was more clear or more intent upon this than St. Paul. Though his powerful mind could easily have dealt with many questions that would have interested the Greeks, he resolved to adhere to the simple testimony to Jesus, the Son of the living God. It may be said that, though this was right and needful in the world which St. Paul looked upon, and is right and needful still among Jews and heathens, it is not necessary in Christian countries. But alas! it is necessary. Countries called Christian are still very ignorant of Christ; all of them need full, definite, and firm preaching of the Son of God. There is nothing like it for delivering men from their sins, and drawing them away alike from the arid sands of unbelief and from the marshy places of superstition. But the testimony must be delivered with unfaltering heart and voice; for it is the preaching of the Yea, the Faithful and True a pillar that cannot be shaken, a foundation that cannot be moved. Heathenism was full of contradiction, incoherence, and contrast. Its gods conflicted with each other and its oracles were uncertain. It was and still is a thing of "yea and nay." Buddhism, in some respects an improvement on the heathenism which it supplanted, after all amounts to a mere dreary nihilism. One who had studied it carefully (Sir J. Emerson Tennant) said of Buddhism that, "insufficient for time and rejecting eternity, the utmost triumph of this religion is to live without fear and to die without hope." This is not "yea," not even "yea and nay," but a perpetual dismal "nay." In Christendom, too, something like it appears. There is a weary scepticism which a famous writer described as "the everlasting No." Partly it is a shallow fashion, partly it is a real plague and misery of the generation to have "nay" only in regard to the unseen. God is not. The Bible is not. The devil is not. Heaven is a dream. Hell is a fable. Prayer is useless. Faith is a fond fancy. So the mist wraps men in its chilly fold. Against all this we place the everlasting Yea. Jesus Christ is God"s mighty and loving Yes to the children of men. And whatever the differences among our religious communities, in this testimony all are at one. The Son of God is he who can give light to the darkened mind, rest to the weary spirit, warmth to the frozen heart. In him desire is satisfied, apparent contradictions are reconciled, or hope is given of solutions by and by, for which we can well afford to wait. Some contrast the Christian faith unfavourably with the physical sciences. They say that it is full of mysticism and loose conjecture, whereas the sciences proceed by rigorous induction of facts observed, collated, and scrutinized. In the former we are asked to walk on air; in the latter, every step we take is on sure and solid ground. This we totally deny. There is no fair and proper test of historical and moral truth to which our holy religion refuses to be subjected. We have the well-authenticated records spoken and written by those who saw and heard Jesus Christ. We have the best reasons for trusting their testimony; and in the words, and works, and character, and suffering of Jesus, in his reappearance after death, and in the whole influence which he has exerted over millions of men for nearly nineteen centuries, we have overwhelming proof that, while human, he is superhuman he is the Son of God. It is science that has to change its voice, not religion. It has to modify its assertions, correct its conclusions, and reconsider its theories; but Jesus Christ is "the same yesterday, and today, and forever;" and the gospel which proclaims him brings to us the Divine "yes" to which we have only to respond with the human "yes" of an unwavering faith. The Saviour asks, "Believest thou that I am able to do this?" Be ready with the answer, "Yea, Lord. F.

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

For Jesus Christ, who was preached by us - That is, our preaching concerning him. Was not yea and nay - Was not variable and inconsistent with itself. But was yea in him - Always one and the same, centering in him.

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

This verse contains a new argument for the constancy and immutability of St. Paul’s doctrine, drawn from the subject matter of his preaching; namely, Jesus Christ. As Christ is always one and the same, whom himself and other ministers did preach, so is our doctrine one and the same also.

Note here, 1. The subject matter of St. Paul’s preaching, what was the sum of his own and his companion’s sermons, (Sylvanus and Timotheus,) it was not his own imagination, or the Jewish rites and ceremonies, but Christ in his nature and offices; The Son of God, Jesus Christ, was preached among you by us.

Note, 2. The happy unity and accord which was found among all these ministers, St. Paul, Sylvanus, and Timotheus, in preaching Christ.

O blessed agreement! when all the ministers of God with one consent conspire and agree to advance and extol our Lord Jesus Christ.

Note, 3. That the course of St. Paul’s and his assistants’ preaching; Christ Jesus, fixedly and unchangeably the same; not yea at one time, and nay at another.

Learn hence, That it is a proper note of God’s truth, and the true preachers thereof, that they are always one and the same, always yea, and not nay; there is no change or contrariety in their doctrines.

William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

For the Son of God, Jesus Christ, who was preached among you by us, even by me and Silvanus and Timothy [Paul's fellow-laborers in founding the church at Corinth], was not yea and nay, but in him is yea .

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.

19. For the Son of God, etc. The idea is that there was no vacillation and uncertainty about Paul's preaching when he was in Corinth. In him was yea. There was positive affirmation.

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.

For the Son of God ... is not "Yes" and "No." Instead, he is always "Yes."

Jesus says "Yes" concerning the promises of God, which means that he guarantees that they are true. AT: "For the Son of God ... does not say 'Yes' and 'No' concerning God's promises. Instead, he always says 'Yes.'" (See: Assumed Knowledge and Implicit Information)

the Son of God

This is an important title for Jesus that describes his relationship to God. (See: Translating Son and Father)

all the promises of God are "Yes" in him

This means that Jesus guarantees all of God's promises. AT: "all the promises of God are guaranteed in Jesus Christ" (See: Assumed Knowledge and Implicit Information)

"Yes" in him ... through him we say

The word "him" refers to Jesus Christ.

translationWords

Son of God

Jesus

Silas

Timothy

preach

promise

amen

glory

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

19–22. Closely connected with what precedes, as is shown by the γάρ, extending and confirming the argument.

19. ὁ τοῦ θεοῦ γὰρ υἱός. The position of γάρ throws great emphasis on to τοῦ θεοῦ: for God’s Son: Blass § 80. 4. ‘There was no inconsistency in our doctrine, for what we preached was One in whom inconsistency is impossible.’ It is perhaps in order to show “the impossibility of His connexion with any littleness or levity” (Stanley) that he gives the full title, ὁ τοῦ θεοῦ υἱὸς Χριστὸς Ἰησοῦς. On S. Paul’s “Names for Christ” see Stead in the Expositor, 1888, pp. 386–395.

διʼ ἡμῶν. The Apostles were instruments, through whom (2Co 1:20, 2Co 2:14; 1Co 3:5) the Gospel was proclaimed. Comp. διὰ τοῦ προφήτου, not ὑπό (Mat 1:22; Mat 2:5; Mat 2:15; Mat 2:17; Mat 3:3; Mat 4:14, &c.). They were not independent agents.

διʼ ἐμοῦ καὶ Σιλουανοῦ καὶ Τιμοθέου. Not only was his own teaching consistent with itself, it was also harmonious with that of his fellow-missioners. It was one and the same Christ that was preached always by all three.

There is not much doubt that the Silvanus of the Pauline Epistles (1Th 1:1; 2Th 1:1) is the Silvanus of 1Pe 5:12 and the Silas of Act 15:22; Act 15:27; Act 15:32 [not 34], Act 15:40, Act 16:19-29, Act 17:4-15, Act 18:5. As in the case of Saul and Paul, the relation of the name Silas to the name Silvanus is doubtful. Abbreviated names often ended in -as, as Epaphras, Hermas, Nymphas, Zenas. But the usual abbreviation of Silvanus would be Silvas (Joseph. Bel. Jud. VII. viii. 1); and, if Silas be the original name, the common enlargement of that would be Silanus. But this is not conclusive, for experience shows that great freedom exists as to the modification of names. Silas may be the Aramaic Sili with a Greek termination. Silas was a Roman citizen (Act 16:37), and as such, and in connexion with the Roman family of the Silvani, he may have got the name Silvanus. A Silvanus may have manumitted Silas or one of his forefathers. In that case neither name is derived from the other. See Bigg, St Peter and St Jude, pp. 84, 85. We know nothing more of Silvanus or Silas after his working at Corinth with Paul and Timothy, except that he was the bearer or draughtsman of 1 Peter (2Co 5:12). It is at Corinth that we lose sight of him. The agreement of Act 18:5 with the mention of Silvanus and Timothy here is an undesigned coincidence which confirms both writings. The identification of Silvanus with Luke maybe safely rejected: see Lightfoot’s article on Acts in Smith’s Dict. of the Bible, 2nd ed.

οὐκ ἐγένετο Ναί καὶ Οὔ, ἀλλὰ Ναί ἐν αὐτῷ γέγονεν. The Christ whom we preached did not prove to be yea and nay, but in Him yea has come to be. He did not show Himself to be one who said both Yes and No to the promises of God, but in Him the fulfilment of them has come to pass. It is simplest to make ἐν αὐτῷ refer to Christ.

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.

19.] Confirmation of the last verse, by affirming the same of the great Subject of that doctrine, as set before them by Paul and his colleagues.

χριστός, personal—not for ‘doctrina de Christo’—He Himself is the centre and substance of all Christian preaching: see 1Co 1:23, and note at 2:2.

ὁ τοῦ θεοῦ υἱός is prefixed for solemnity, and to shew how unlikely fickleness or change is in Christ, being such as He is. Cf. 1Sa 15:29, ‘the Strength of Israel will not lie nor repent.’

Σιλουανοῦ] so 1Pe 5:12; = Silas, see Act 18:5 and al. He names his companions, as shewing that neither was he inconsistent with himself, nor were they inconsistent with one another. The Christ was the same, whether preached by different persons or by one person at different times.

ἀλλὰ ναὶ ἐν αὐτ. γέγ.] ‘Christus prædicatus, i.e. prædicatio nostra de Christo, facta est næ in Ipso Christo.’ Bengel. This seems to me far better than with De Wette, al., to make ναί the subject, and γέγονεν predicatory. The absence of the art. before ναί, as well as the sense, stamps it as the predicate. ‘Christ preached as the Son of God by us, has become yea in Him,’ i.e. has been affirmed and substantiated as verity by the agency of the Lord Himself.

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

19. ὁ τοῦ Θεοῦ γάρ υἱός. The usual order would be ὁ γάρ υἱός τ. Θ. The transfer of γάρ from the second to the fourth place throws great emphasis on τ. Θεοῦ and marks the connexion with what precedes. ‘For it is this faithful God’s Son.’ Comp. the position of μέν in 10:1, and of οὖν in 1Co 8:4, where, as here, some MSS. put the particle back to the usual place. Winer, p. 699; Blass, § 80. 4. ‘That ὁ πιστὸς Θεός should have a Son who was Yes, and No would be a monstrous contradiction, and it is His Son who is the subject of ὁ λόγος ἠμῶν. Ἀντί τοῦ κηρύγματος αὐτὸν κηρυττόμενον τέθεικε (Thdrt.) His title is given with solemn fulness. The full expression, ὁ υίὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ, is used by St Paul in only two other places, Gal 2:20, Eph 4:13 (in Rom 1:4, υἱὸς Θεοῦ), in both of which there is an emphatic change of titles from ‘Christ’ to ‘the Son of God.’ See J. A. Robinson, Ephesians, pp. 100, 183. The rareness of use may be accidental, for St Paul often refers to Christ as the ‘Son’ (1Co 1:9, 1Co 1:15:28; 1Th 1:10; Gal 1:16, Gal 1:4:4, Gal 1:6; Rom 1:3, Rom 1:9, Rom 1:5:10, Rom 1:8:3, Rom 1:29, Rom 1:32; Col 1:13), i.e. in all groups, excepting the Pastorals. St Paul’s usage has to be compared with the evidence of papyri and inscriptions, in which θεοῦ υἱός, or in Latin inscriptions divi filius, is frequently used of Augustus. In a votive inscription from Magnesia on the Menander, now at Pergamum, for Nero between his adoption by Claudius and his accession (a.d. 50-54), Nero is called “the son of the greatest of the gods, Tib. Claudius,” τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ μεγίστου θεῶν Τιβερίου Κλαυδίου. Deissmann gives an illustration of it, Light from Anc. East, p. 351; see also Bible Studies, p. 166. Hence two opposite suggestions. St Paul used υἱὸς Θεοῦ rarely, because its evil associations would cause it to be misunderstood by converts from heathenism. He uses it, and the still stronger ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ, and frequently uses υἱός of Christ’s relationship to God, because he wished to point out that there was only one Son to whom the title rightly belonged. See Milligan, Thessalonians, p. lxvi ; F. H. Stead, Expositor, 3rd series, 1888, vii. pp. 386-395. The full title is found Heb 4:14, Heb 6:6, Heb 7:3, Heb 10:29, and very often in 1 Jn. See on 1Jn 1:3; also Swete, Apost. Creed, pp. 24 f.; Menzies, 2 Corinthians, p. lii.

ὁ ἐν ὑμῖν διʼ ἡμῶν κηρυχθείς. The verb is very frequent in Paul (all four groups) of preaching Christ and the Gospel (4:5, 11:4; 1Co 1:23, 1Co 1:15:12; Php 1:15; 1Ti 3:16 ; etc.). The Apostle places the two related pronouns in close proximity, bound together in one expression between the article and the participle ; the Christ ‘who was preached among you by our instrumentality’ (διά not ὑπό). He is not claiming what belongs to ὁ αὐξάνων Θεός. He and his colleagues are only διάκονοι διʼ ὧν ἐπιστεύσατε: see on 1Co 1:5, 1Co 1:6. This διά is also used of Christ (vv. 5, 20, 3:4, etc.), and therefore is no evidence that St Paul regarded himself as a mere machine; but he is not the supreme worker. Here he is appealing to the probability that there is moral resemblance between master and servant. The Son of the God who cannot lie is one who may be trusted and has proved to be trustworthy. Therefore the message which His ministers bring— ὁ λόγος ἡμῶν ὁ πρὸς ὑμᾶς—is likely to be trustworthy. On St Paul’s use of ὁ λόγος, often with a genitive following,— τοῦ Θεοῦ, τοῦ Κυρίου, τῆς ἀληθείας, and (v. 19) τῆς καταλλαγῆς, —see Harnack, The Constitution and Law of the Church, pp. 339-343. It is clear from v. 20 that ‘the Son of God, Jesus Christ,’ does not mean ‘the doctrine about Jesus Christ.’ The meaning of v. 19 is not doubtful. The Apostle reminds the Corinthians of the way in which he and his colleagues proclaimed Christ among them at first. To make it quite clear what is meant by ‘proclaimed by us,’ he names the missionaries. Paul and Silvanus were working together in Corinth for a time before Timothy, who had been left behind at Beroea and had afterwards been sent to Thessalonica, joined them. All three are associated in writing 1 and 2 Thess.* Chrys. may be right in suggesting that the appeal to the preaching by three different agents is given as a guarantee for consistency. Calvin suggests that these three had been specially maligned by the Apostle’s opponents. More probably St Paul is simply recalling the time when all three were working happily together.† He does not mention Apollos, who came later, after St Paul had left.

We may safely assume that the Silvanus of the Pauline Epistles and of 1Pe 5:12 and the Silas of Acts may be identified, and that the proposal to identify him with St Luke is to be rejected. See Bigg, St Peter and St Jude, pp. 85, 86, art. ‘Silas’ in Hastings’ DB. 4., art. ‘Acts’ in Smith, DB., 2nd ed. We know very little about him after his work in Corinth.

οὐκ ἐγένετο Ναί καὶ Οὔ, ἀλλὰ Ναί ἐν αὐτῷ γέγονεν. ‘The Son of God, who was proclaimed by us among you, did not prove to be Yes and No, but in Him Yes has proved true.’ The Corinthians’ experience of Him had shown that He was a Son who faithfully fulfilled the promises of His faithful Father.‡ The change to the perfect (γέγονεν) marks the permanent result: comp. the change from ἐκτίσθη to ἔκτισται (Col 1:16). For this use of γὶνεσθαι, comp. γινέσθω ὁ Θεὸς ἀληθής (Rom 3:4), ‘prove to be,’ ‘be seen to be.’ Ἐν αὐτῷ means ‘in Christ.’

ὁ τοῦ Θεοῦ γάρ (א A B C P) rather than ὁ γὰρ τοῦ Θεοῦ (D E F G K L; F G omit τοῦ); correction to more usual order. Χριστὸς Ἰησοῦς (א* A C) may be right, but Ἰης. Χρ is powerfully supported (א3 B D E F G K L P, Vulg.). 17 omits Χριστός. See critical note on v. 1. D E F G have Σιλβανοῦ for Σιλουανοῦ, but f g have Silvanum.

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

Was not [ουκ εγενετο] . Rather, did not prove to be, in the result. In Him was yea [ναι εν αυτω γεγονεν] . Lit., yea has come to pass in Him. He has shown Himself absolutely the truth. Compare Joh 14:6; Rev 3:7, 14.

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.