2 Corinthians 8:18

8:18-24 Two other Christian men would travel with Titus to Corinth in order to guard against any criticism over the handling of the relief funds that they collected (8:20-21). Titus and his companions would ensure that the money was properly handled. The identity of the two companions is unknown.

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

2Co 8:18. Συνεπέμψαμεν, we have sent along with him) Timotheus and I. So 2Co 8:1, etc. This word is repeated at 2Co 8:22 by anaphora;[48] and in this passage, where it first occurs, is emphatic with μετὰ.—τὸν ἀδελφὸν, the brother) It was unnecessary to name this companion of Titus, and that ‘brother,’ who is spoken of at 2Co 8:22. See ch. 2Co 12:18. The ancients were of opinion, that Luke was intended; see the close of the epistle; comp. Phm 1:24.—οὗ, of whom) He, who is faithful in the Gospel, will be faithful also in matters of inferior importance.

[48] See Append. The repetition of the same word marking the beginnings of sections.

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

2Co_8:18. Recommendation of the first companion of Titu.

συνεπέμψ. δὲ μετʼ αὐτοῦ] The σύν refers, like μετʼ αὐτοῦ, to Titus: we have sent along with him. Comp. 2Co_8:22. See Lobeck, ad Phryn. p. 354. Comp. Gal_2:12; Act_1:26; Act_25:12; Mat_17:3. Bengel takes it incorrectly: una misimus ego et Timotheus, which is contained in the plural, but not in the compoun.

τὸν ἀδελφὸν κ.τ.λ.] is understood by Heumann and Rückert of an actual brother, viz. a brother of Titus. But ἀδελφοὶ ἡμῶν in 2Co_8:23 shows that Paul has here and in 2Co_8:22 f. taken ἀδελφός in the sense of Christian brotherhood. It would not have been in keeping with the prudence of the apostle to send with Titus the very brother of the latter and even his own brother (according to Rückerts view of τ. ἀδελφ. ἡμ., 2Co_8:22). Who is meant, remains quite an open question. Some have conjectured Barnabas (τινές in Chrysostom, and Chrysostom himself, Theodoret, Oecumenius, Luther, Calvin, and others) or Silas (Baronius, Estius); but the rank of these was not consistent with the position of a companion subordinate to Titus; nor is there anywhere a trace of Barnabas and Paul having ever united again for common work after their separation (Act_15:39). Others (comp. also the usual subscription of the Epistle) think that it was Luke. So Origen, τίνες in Chrysostom, Jerome, Ambrosiaster, Pelagius, Primasius, Anselm, Cajetanus, Cornelius a Lapide, and others, including Grotius, Emmerling, Schrader, Olshausen, Köhler (Abfassungszeit, p. 85), of whom those named before Grotius referred ἐν τῷ εὐαγγ. to the Gospel of Luke (at that time not yet even in existence). But from the very brief statement of Act_20:1 ff. there is no proof to be drawn either for (Olshausen) or against (Rückert); and Ignatius, ad Ephes. (interpol.) 15, to which Emmerling, after Salmeron and others, has again appealed, proves nothing further than that this unknown author either referred or merely applied our passage to Luke. The conjecture which points to Erastus (Ewald, following Act_19:22; 2Ti_4:20) cannot be made good. With just as little proof some have thought of Mark (Lightfoot, Chron. p. 118; Storr, Opusc. II. p. 339; Tobler, Evangelienfr. p. 12). The result remains: we do not know who it was. So much only in reference to the two persons indicated here and in 2Co_8:22, and in opposition to the conjectures adduced, is clear from 2Co_8:23, that they were not fellow-labourers in the apostolic work, like Titus, but other Christians of distinction.[279] See on 2Co_8:23. Against this non liquet Rückert indeed objects, that in that case the Corinthians would not have known which of the two was meant to be here designated, since in 2Co_8:23 both are called ἀπόστολοι ἐκκλησιῶν, by which all distinction is precluded. But this first companion is in 2Co_8:19 so distinctively indicated as appointed by a special elective act of the churches concerned, and appointed just for this particular work, that he could not be unknown by name to the Corinthians, after Titus had already begun there the work of collection (2Co_8:6). Besides, Paul might leave all further information to Titu.

οὗ ὁ ἔπαινος κ.τ.λ.] i.e. who possesses his praise (that duly belonging to him) in the gospel (in the cause of the gospel, in confessing, furthering, preaching, defending it, and the like), spread through all the churches, throughout the whole Christian body. He was a Christian worthy of trust and praised by all.

[279] Hence also we can hardly think of Trophimus (de Wette, Wieseler), Act_20:4; Act_21:29 : nor, with Hofmann, of Aristarchus, Act_19:29; Act_20:4.

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 8:18 . συνεπέμψαμεν δὲ κ . τ . λ .: and we have sent (the epistolary aorist; cf. Act 23:30 , chap. 2Co 9:3 , Phi 2:28 , Phm 1:12 ) together with him the brother, sc. , the brother whom you know ( cf. chap. 2Co 12:18 ), whose praise in the Gospel, i.e. , whose good repute as a labourer in the cause of the Gospel ( cf. chap. 2Co 10:14 , Phi 4:3 , Rom 1:9 ), is throughout all the Churches, i.e. , is spread abroad in all the Churches through which I have passed ( cf. 1Co 7:17 ; 1Co 14:33 ; see 2Co 11:28 ). The Patristic reference (Origen, Jerome, etc.) of these words to St. Luke is stereotyped in the Collect for St. Luke’s Day, but there is hardly room for doubt that this is due to a mistaken interpretation of εὐαγγέλιον as signifying a written Gospel, rather than the “good news” of God delivered orally by the first Christian preachers. We have no positive data by which to determine which of St. Paul’s contemporaries is here alluded to. It has been argued that as this unnamed “brother” is seemingly subordinate to Titus, he must not be identified with persons so important as ( e.g. ) Apollos or Silas; and, again, that, as he was apparently not a Macedonian (2Co 9:4 ), he cannot be any of the prominent members of the Macedonian Church (see on 2Co 8:5 above). Trophimus the Ephesian is not impossible (see Act 20:4 ; Act 21:29 ), but it is idle to speculate where the evidence is so scanty. The important point about this unnamed brother is that he was selected not by St. Paul, but by the Churches who took part in the work of collecting money as their representative as is now explained.

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

In the preaching of the Gospel.

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

the brother, whose praise is in the gospel--whose praise is known in connection with the Gospel: Luke may be meant; not that "the Gospel" here refers to his written Gospel; but the language implies some one well known throughout the churches, and at that time with Paul, as Luke then was (Act 20:6). Not a Macedonian, as appears from Co2 9:4. Of all Paul's "companions in travel" (Co2 8:19; Act 19:29), Luke was the most prominent, having been his companion in preaching the Gospel at his first entrance into Europe (Act 16:10). The fact that the person here referred to was "chosen of the churches" as their trustee to travel with Paul in conveying the contribution to Jerusalem, implies that he had resided among them some time before: this is true of Luke, who after parting from Paul at Philippi (as he marks by the change from "we" to "they," Act 16:11) six years before, is now again found in his company in Macedonia. In the interim he had probably become so well known that "his praise was throughout all the churches." Compare Co2 12:18; Plm 1:24. He who is faithful in the Gospel will be faithful also in matters of inferior importance [BENGEL].

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 18. The brother, whose praise is in the Gospel] Who this brother was we cannot tell; some suppose it was St. Luke, who wrote a gospel, and who was the companion of St. Paul in several of his travels; others think it was Silas; others, Barnabas; others, Mark; and others, Apollos. Neither ancients nor moderns agree in either; but Luke, John, and Mark, seem to have the most probable opinions in their favour. Whoever the person was he was sufficiently known to the Corinthians, as we learn by what the apostle says of him in this place.

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

18. We have sent with him the brother. The circumstance that three persons are sent, is an evidence, that great expectations were entertained respecting the Corinthians, and it became them to be so much the more attentive to duty, that they might not disappoint the hopes of the Churches. It is uncertain, however, who this second person was; only that some conjecture that it was Luke, others that it was Barnabas. Chrysostom prefers to consider it to have been Barnabas. I agree with him, because it appears that, by the suffrages of the Churches, he was associated with Paul as a companion. As, however, it is almost universally agreed, that Luke was one of those who were the bearers of this Epistle, I have no objection that he be reckoned to be the third that is made mention of.

Now the second person, whoever he may be, he honors with a signal commendation, that he had conducted himself as to the gospel in a praiseworthy manner, that is, he had earned applause by promoting the gospel. For, although Barnabas gave place to Paul in the department of speaking, yet in acting they both concurred. He adds farther, that he had received praise, not from one individual, or even from one Church merely, but from all the Churches. To this general testimony he subjoins a particular one, that is suitable to the subject in hand — that he had been chosen for this department by the concurrence of the Churches. Now it was likely, that this honor would not have been conferred upon him, had he not been long before known to be qualified for it. We must observe, however, the mode of election — that which was customary among the Greeks — χειροτονία, (a show of hands,) in which the leaders took the precedence by authority and counsel, and regulated the whole proceeding, while the common people intimated their approval.

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.

(18) The brother, whose praise is in the gospel.—We cannot get beyond probable conjecture in determining who this was. The general current of patristic interpretation (represented, we may add, in the Collect for St. Luke’s Day in the Prayer Book of the Church of England, though not in that of the Breviary of the Church of Rome) ran in favour of St. Luke; but this rested on the assumption, for which there is no evidence, and against which there is a strong balance of probabilities, that he was already well known as the writer of a Gospel. (See Introduction to St. Luke, Vol. I., p. 239.) Apart from this, however, it may be urged that there is more evidence in favour of this hypothesis than of any other. If the words be interpreted, as they must, as pointing to a preacher of the gospel, we have indications of St. Luke having done this at Antioch, at Troas, and at Philippi. None of the other companions of St. Paul who have been suggested, such as Tychicus or Trophimus, was likely to have so wide-spread a reputation. None was so likely to be with him at the time at Philippi. And it may be noted further—and this, so far as I know, is a point which has not hitherto been dwelt on—that there was no man so fitted to stir up the Corinthians, by his personal character, to a worthy completion of the good work they had begun. We have seen that in his Gospel he dwells emphatically on all parts of our Lord’s teaching that point out the danger of riches and the blessedness of a generous almsgiving (see Introduction to St. Luke, Vol. I., p. 242); how at Philippi his influence was traceable in the liberal supplies sent to St. Paul at Thessalonica (see Note on Act_16:40, and Php_4:15) and at Corinth (see Note on 2Co_11:9). Was not such a man, we may ask, eminently adapted for the mission on which the “brother, whose praise is in the gospel,” was now sent? and was not the Apostle likely to choose him above all others for it? For Mark and Gaius, who have also been suggested, there is not a shadow of evidence; and as the latter was of Corinth (Rom_16:23), he was not likely to have been sent thither from Philippi. The tense, “we have sent,” is, as before, the epistolary aorist, used of the time at which the letter was being written.

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

18. And we have sent with him] Literally, we sent with him, unless the tense be what is known as the epistolary aorist (see above, ch. 2Co_2:9), in which case these messengers were also the bearers of this Epistle.

the brother, whose praise is in the gospel] Innumerable guesses have been made as to who this was. We can but briefly glance at them. First of all it is clear that it was no obscure member of any of the various communities who is here mentioned. He was thoroughly well known to the Churches. Secondly, we may remark that it was not Barnabas, as many of the early Fathers have supposed, since we never hear of Paul and Barnabas as travelling together after their misunderstanding in Acts 15, nor Silas, for he does not appear to have been with the Apostle after his departure from Corinth for Jerusalem related in Act_18:18. We learn from the next verse that the ‘brother’ here referred to was a delegate of the Churches, and deputed to accompany St Paul on his journey to Jerusalem with the proceeds of the collection. He must either have been a delegate of the Ephesian or the Macedonian Christians. If the latter, it must have been (1) St Luke, for he did travel with St Paul on this occasion, as we learn from Act_20:5. And though he did not join the Apostle till he reached Philippi from Corinth, and did not accompany him on his visit to Corinth (Act_20:1-5), this is no reason against his having accompanied Titus on his visit to Corinth. See note on 2Co_8:16. And St Luke answers in many ways better than any one else to this description. But ch. 2Co_9:4 seems to imply that the brother was not of Macedonia (though Meyer thinks that the whole context shews him to have been a Macedonian). Nor can the words ‘whose praise is in the Gospel’ be pressed (so St Chrysostom and the Collect for St Luke’s Day) as signifying the Gospel of St Luke. For the word gospel is never used in the Scripture of any of the biographies of Christ, but solely of the good tidings proclaimed by His ministers. The earliest phrase by which the Gospels are designated is ‘memoirs.’ (See Justin Martyr’s First Apology, ch. 67.) If the brother were an Ephesian delegate, he must have been either (2) Trophimus or (3) Tychicus. Both these left Greece with St Paul. The former was an Ephesian’ and accompanied him to Jerusalem. (Act_21:29.) The latter was ‘of Asia’ (Act_20:4), and probably of Ephesus, for he was twice sent thither by St Paul (Eph_6:21; 2Ti_4:12). And he evidently stood high in the estimation of the Apostle (Eph_6:21-22; Col_4:7-8) for his qualities as a minister of Christ. Both these, however, if the deputies were Ephesians, would most likely have been the messengers. See note on 2Co_8:22.

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.

And not that only, but who was also chosen of the churches,.... Not only famous for preaching the Gospel, but he was also appointed by the joint suffrages of the churches, which were made by the lifting up or stretching out of the hand, as the word here used signifies; this brother was not chosen to this service by a few private persons, or by a single church only, but by several churches; which does not refer to the churches at Jerusalem and Antioch, as if the apostles were appointed, and others were appointed by these churches to travel with them, in order to collect money for the poor saints at Jerusalem; of which no mention is any where made, only of their being sent out by them to preach the Gospel. James, Cephas, and John indeed, when they gave to Paul and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that they might go to the Heathen, desired them to "remember the poor"; Gal 2:9 but these were not the churches. The church at Antioch did collect for the brethren in Judea, at the time of the famine among them, and sent their bounty by the hands of Barnabas and Saul, which seems to be the case here. This brother was chosen by the churches who collected, and not by the churches in Judea, for whom the collections were made; for it was usual, and what was right and proper, that the churches chose whom they thought fit to carry their liberality to Jerusalem; see Co1 16:3. Now this brother had the honour to be chosen by these churches,

to travel, says the apostle,

with us, with this grace; bounty or beneficence of the churches, what they had freely and liberally contributed for the supply of the poor, from a principle of grace, and by the assistance of it;

which is administered by us; not given by the apostles, but collected by them; or what was procured by their means, in the several churches to whom they had moved it, and by proper arguments had excited them to it, with which they cheerfully complied: and this was done on a two fold account, both

to the glory of the same Lord: Jesus Christ, who is the one Lord over all; the same Lord of the apostles, and the church at Corinth; the same Lord of the Corinthians, and the Macedonian and other churches; and the same Lord of the poor saints at Jerusalem, and the rich members of the several churches that contributed to them: and also to

the declaration of your ready mind; or to stir up their ready mind to increase it and promote it in them, as well to make it manifest, and that it might appear to others, how readily and freely they came into this service; so that the apostle's concern in this administration was not from any sinister and selfish ends; no, nor so much for the relief of the poor, though this was greatly designed, as for the glory of Christ, and the honour of his churches.

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

18 And we have sent with him the brother, whose praise is in the gospel throughout all the churches;

Ver. 18. Whose praise is in the Gospel] St Luke, likely, who first wrote the Gospel, as some gather out of Luk 1:1, and whom Ambrose highly commendeth for the most clear and distinct gospel writer.

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.

And we have sent with him the brother - It has been generally supposed that this anonymous brother was Luke. Some have supposed however that it was Mark, others that it was Silas or Barnabas. It is impossible to determine with certainty who it was; nor is it material to know. Whoever it was, it was some one well known, in whom the church at Corinth could have entire confidence. It is remarkable that though Paul mentions him again 2Co 12:18, he does it also in the same manner, without specifying his name. The only circumstances that can throw any light on this are:

(1) That Luke was the companion and intimate friend of Paul, and attended him in his travels. From Act 16:10-11, where Luke uses the term “we,” it appears that he was with Paul when he first went into Macedonia, and from Act 16:15 it is clear that he went with Paul to Philippi. From Act 17:1, where Luke alters his style and uses the term “they,” it is evident that he did not accompany Paul and Silas when they went to Thessalonica, but either remained at Philippi or departed to some other place. He did not join them again until they went to Troas on the way to Jerusalem; Act 20:5. In what manner Luke spent the interval is not known. Macknight supposes that it might have been in multiplying copies of his gospel for the use of the churches. Perhaps also he might have been engaged in preaching, and in services like that in the case before us.

(2) It seems probable that Luke is the person referred to by the phrase “whose praise is in the gospel throughout all the churches.” This would be more likely to be applied to one who had written a gospel, or a life of the Redeemer that had been extensively circulated, than to any other person. Still it is by no means certain that he is the person here referred to, nor is it of material consequence.

Whose praise - Who is well known and highly esteemed.

Is in the gospel - Either for writing the gospel, or for preaching the gospel. The Greek will bear either construction. In some way he was celebrated for making known the truths of the gospel.

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

Brother, whose praise is in the gospel, through all the Churches.[2] It may either signify in writing or in preaching the gospel, so that though St. Jerome expound this of St. Luke, who wrote his gospel, (but probably not till after this time) yet St. John Chrysostom rather understands it of Barnabas, by the words that follow, who was ordained by the Churches companion of our travels. Others also guess it might be Silas or Silvanus. Who the third brother was, is also uncertain. (Witham) --- Commentators very in their opinions upon the person here mentioned. St. John Chrysostom and Theo. are of opinion, that this person is St. Luke or Barnabas; St. Jerome also thinks that it must be St. Luke the evangelist.

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

Cujus laus est in evangelio, Greek: ou o epainos en to euaggelio. See St. John Chrysostom, Greek: om. in. p. 645. Greek: othen moi dokei ton barnaban ainittesthai.

====================

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).

Who this other brother was, whether Luke, or Barnabas or Silas, or Apollos, or Mark, is not much material; it is plain, whoever he was, that he was a brother and a minister one who had a good repute for preaching the gospel.

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

18. We have sent—With this epistle and in regard to the collections.

The brother—The long debated question who this brother was, has, we think, been completely set at rest by Baynes in his “Horae Lucanae.” See notes on Luk_24:13; Act_6:9 and Act_13:1. The proofs, both negative and affirmative, all centre upon Luke. First we may exclude Barnabas, Silas, and Mark, for all the probabilities are, that none of these three were in present association with him, but that they were at a distance from Macedonia, and so could not have been sent from there. We may also exclude Trophimus, named by Alford, for,

1. Paul’s acquaintance with him commenced after this time, Act_20:4; Act_20:2. Trophimus does not appear at this time to have had any notoriety in the gospel throughout all the Churches. Positively in favour of Luke: 1. He was in all probability, as appears from our notes above quoted, here at Philippi.

2. A few months after writing this, Paul, in his epistle to Rome from Corinth, sends Lucius’ greetings; from which it is clear that Luke did go to Corinth at or shortly after the sending of this epistle. Note, Act_13:1.

3. How intimate Luke was with Paul, now and later, appears from the fact that when Paul and company departed from Corinth with the contributions in route through Macedonia to Jerusalem, Paul, even in separating from the rest of his retinue, took Luke with him. Act_20:5-6. Trophimus was in the company left.

4. The phrase in the gospel has its weight. For even if we do not insist, with Mr. Baynes, that Luke had already written his Gospel at Antioch, and if we admit that Luke’s written Gospel is not here designated, we can assuredly claim that the word gospel always has a tinge of reference to the Christ-history as the basis and true embodiment of the Christian scheme and doctrine. It is undoubtedly true that Luke’s genius was decidedly historical, and as a teacher at Antioch, (Act_13:1,) the gospel and pentecostal history were doubtless peculiarly the base of his teachings. That in this department he was famous among the Churches is probable; and certainly, taken in connexion with the fact of the subsequent actual publication of his gospel, we think the great force of this phrase must be confessed.

5. The superscription at the end of the epistle, though by no means decisive, has its weight in favour of Luke 6. In favour of Luke are Origen, Primasius, Jerome, Whitby, Wordsworth, and others.

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

The brother, whose praise is in the gospel. The phrase means, "whose worth is praised wherever the glad tidings are preached." There can be no reference to any of the four written Gospels, for they were not in the hands of Christians till a later date; nor did the word "gospel" acquire this significance till afterwards. From Act_20:5, it is somewhat precariously inferred that St. Luke is meant. Others have conjectured Barnabas, Silas (who are out of the question) Erastus, Mark, a brother of Titus, etc. St. Luke is not unlikely to have been selected as a delegate by the Church of Philippi; but further than this we can say nothing. St. Luke was not a Macedonian by birth, and any Macedonian (e.g. Aristarchus, Sopater, Secundus, Epaphroditus) seems to be excluded 2Co_9:4. Palsy notes it as curious that the object of St. Paul"s journey to Jerusalem, Which is so prominent in this group of Epistles, is only mentioned indirectly and incidentally by St. Luke (Act_24:17) in the Acts of the Apostles.

An enviable reputation.

I A GREAT CHARACTER IS BETTER THAN A GREAT NAME. The brother referred to here is unnamed; a better mark than a name is put upon him. A great name may be inherited; may be won by a merely fortunate conjunction of circumstances; may be unmerited; may have no moral excellence associated with it. A great character must be earned. A great name blesses one"s self; a great character, others.

II THE APPROBATION OF HOLY MEN IS VERY PRECIOUS. The applause of a fallen world may be reckoned at a cheap rate. Mere popularity is quite in contrast with the praise of all the Churches. That men who love Christ, and who thus have corrected tastes, can see in us what is lovely should cause us to be deeply thankful to God, who has wrought this good thing in us. When the approval is widespread and general among such, it becomes correspondingly precious. The praise of God, indeed, is what we should strive after; but this may be expressed by the lips of his children.

III REPUTATION "IN THE GOSPEL" IS MOST TO BE DESIRED. This was the reputation of the brother alluded to by Paul. It was in the sphere of the gospel that he had obtained his renown. And this is the very highest sphere. How can we make known the gospel? How can we exalt it in the estimation of men? How can we show forth its excellences in our lives? These should be supreme questions with us. Reputation in arms, art, science, what are these compared with reputation in the gospel? What can arms do for men, or art, or science, compared with the gospel? The gospel presents the most magnificent arena for human life and achievement.

IV OPINION IS TESTED BY TRUST. Here is a test of men"s words. Will those who praise us put confidence in us? It was so with the brother in question (ver. 19). The friends who praised him trusted him with money, and this is an extreme form of trust with most men. They praised him for a piety which extended to the secularities of life. His gospel ruled the money bag. We want more pounds-shillings-and-pence religion. If our piety does not make us uncorrupt in practical life, we had better cast it to the dogs, for it is only fit for them. H.

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

We - I and Timothy. The brother - The ancients generally supposed this was St. Luke. Whose praise - For faithfully dispensing the gospel, is through all the churches.

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

And we have sent together with him the brother whose praise in the gospel is spread through all the churches [Baynes, in his "Horæ Lucanæ," argues very conclusively that this was Luke. He was at Philippi about this time, and was among those who accompanied Paul from Macedonia (or perhaps Corinth) to Jerusalem ( Act_20:2-6 ). The phrase "In the gospel" can hardly be taken as indicating that at this time Luke had written his Gospel, but the Gospel which he wrote is evidently not the work of a day. No doubt at this time Luke was so versed in the gospel history as to be fittingly described by the words here used by Paul];

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.

18. We have sent with him the brother. Two brethren are sent with Titus. These are not named, and we can only conjecture who they were. As verse 19 says that he “was chosen of the churches to travel with us in this grace,” and as Acts 20:4 says that the Macedonian brethren, Sopater, Aristarchus and Secundus did travel with him to Jerusalem, one of these is probably meant. Many have held that Luke was the person, nor is this improbable.

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.

with him

"with Titus"

the brother who is praised among all of the churches

This can be stated in active form. AT: "the brother whom believers among all of the churches praise" (See: Active or Passive)

Not only this

"Not only do believers among all of the churches praise him"

he also was selected by the churches

This can be stated in active form. AT: "the churches also selected him" (See: Active or Passive)

in our carrying out this act of grace

"to carry out this act of generosity." This refers to taking the offering to Jerusalem.

for our eagerness to help

"to demonstrate our eagerness to help"

translationWords

brother

praise

church

preach

good news

honor

lord

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

18. συνεπέμψαμεν δέ. And we are sending together with him the brother whose praise in the Gospel is through all the Churches. Certainly τὸν ἀδελφόν means the fellow-Christian, not the actual brother of Titus. He was someone known to the Corinthians, but quite unknown to us. Barnabas, Silas, Mark, Trophimus, Sopater, Aristarchus, Secundus, and Luke are conjectures, of which Luke is perhaps the best. See on 2Co 9:4. Origen (Homilies on S. Luke) treats Luke as certainly meant. But ἐν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ does not mean ‘in his Gospel,’ the one which he wrote; rather, in spreading the Gospel, in mission work. Nowhere in the N.T. is there mention of a written Gospel.

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.

18-21.] Commendation of a brother sent with Titus.

18.] ὁ ἀδελφός cannot surely be, as some Commentators (Heumann, Rückert) have understood, ‘the brother of Titus:’ the delicate nature of the mission would require that there should be at least no family connexion between those sent to fulfil it. This and the other are called in ver. 23, ἀδελφοὶ ἡμῶν, and were unquestionably Christian brethren in the usual sense. Who this was, we know not. Chrys., Theodoret, Œcum., Luther, Calvin, suppose Barnabas to be meant; but there is no historical ground for this, and we can hardly suppose him put under Titus. Baronius and Estius suppose, Silas; to whom this last objection would also apply; besides that he was well known to the Corinthians, and therefore would not need this recommendation. Orig., Jerome, τινές in Chrys., Ambrose, Pelagius, Primasius, Anselm, Cajetan, Grot., Olsh., al., suppose Luke:—and of these all before Grot. (who pointed out the mistake; which however I see reproduced in Mr. Birks’s Horæ Apostolicæ, p. 242 f.) suppose οὗ ὁ ἔπαινος ἐν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ to refer to his gospel,—διὰ τὴν ἱστορίαν ἥνπερ ἔγραψε, Chrys. Hom. xviii. p. 564;—but this is altogether without proof, as is the assumption that it was Mark (Lightfoot, Storr). It may have been Trophimus, who (Act 20:4) accompanied Paul into Asia, and (21:29) to Jerusalem: so De Wette, Wieseler. If the expression whose praise in (the matter of) the Gospel is throughout all the Churches, is to be compared with any similar eulogium, that of Gaius in Rom 16:23 seems to correspond most nearly: Γάϊος ὁ ξένος μου καὶ ὅλης τῆς ἐκκλησίας: but he was resident at Corinth, see 1Co 1:14. A Gaius, a Macedonian, is mentioned Act 19:29, as one of the συνέκδημοι of Paul, as here, together with Aristarchus, which latter we know accompanied him to Jerusalem (but see below on ch. 9:4).

It must then rest in uncertainty.

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

18. συνεπέμψαμεν δὲ τὸν ἀδελφὸν μετʼ αὐτοῦ. ‘And we are sending together with him the brother, whose praise for proclaiming the Gospel rings through all the Churches’; lit. ‘whose praise in the Gospel is through all the Churches’; der das Lob hat am Evangelio durch alle Gemeinen (Luther). As in Gal 2:12, a verb compounded with συν is followed by μετά. The point of a description of the two brethren who are to accompany Titus (vv. 18-23) is that St Paul is not sending to the Corinthians persons of no repute.* Both of them are tried men who have done good service. Lietzmann thinks that in the original letter the names must have been given, and that they were afterwards omitted, possibly because these two delegates proved to be not very acceptable at Corinth. But if the two were as yet unknown at Corinth, to mention their names would be of little use; this letter was to go with them, and Titus would introduce them. It was, however, of importance that the Corinthians should know how highly the Apostle and others thought of them.

There have been many conjectures as to the first of the two brethren; Barnabas (Chrys., Thdrt.), Luke (Origen, Hom. 1. in Luc., Ephraem), and (in modern writers) Silas, Mark, Erastus, Trophimus, Aristarchus, Secundus, and Sopater of Beroea. On the whole, Luke seems to be the best guess, and it is evidently assumed in the Collect for St Luke’s Day. Bachmann and G. H. Rendall strongly support it. If Luke was left at Philippi from the time when St Paul first visited it to the time of his return to it, a period of about six years, he might have become a favourite in Macedonia and be an obvious person to select to collect alms for Jerusalem in Gentile Churches. Rendall regards it as “hardly short of demonstrable that this was none other than S. Luke” (p. 79). Renan rejects it (p. 455 n.). But of course ἐν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ cannot refer to St Luke’s Gospel, which was not yet written. Souter takes τὸν ἀδελφόν in the literal sense as meaning the brother of Titus (Exp. Times, 18 pp. 285, 325-336).

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

The brother whose praise is in the Gospel. Is should be joined with throughout all the churches; as Rev., whose praise in the Gospel is spread throughout, etc. The person referred to has been variously identified with Titus' brother, Barnabas, Mark, Luke, and Epaenetus, mentioned in Rom 16:5. The reference to Epaenetus has been urged on the ground of a supposed play upon the word praise, epainos; Epaenetus meaning praiseworthy; and the parallel is cited in the case of Onesimus profitable, of whom Paul says that he will henceforth be useful, Phl 1:11. 149

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