When I therefore was thus determined, did I show fickleness? Or the things that I purpose, do I purpose according to the flesh, that with me there should be the “Yes, yes” and the “No, no?”
Parallel Translations
-
When I therefore was thus determined, did I show fickleness? Or the things that I purpose, do I purpose according to the flesh, that with me there should be the “Yes, yes” and the “No, no?”
-
When I thus wyse was mynded: dyd I vse lightnes? Or thinke I carnally those thinges which I thinke? that with me shuld be ye ye and naye naye.
-
When I therefore was thus minded, did I vse lightnesse? or minde I those thinges which I minde, according to the flesh, that with me should be, Yea, yea, and Nay, nay?
Cross-references (10)
Passages linked to 2 Corinthians 1:17 in the Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, ordered by reader-vote popularity; verse text shown in World English Bible.
- Matthew 5:37 But let your ‘Yes’ be ‘Yes’ and your ‘No’ be ‘No.’ Whatever is more than these is of the evil one.
- James 5:12 But above all things, my brothers, don’t swear— not by heaven, or by the earth, or by any other oath; but let your “yes” be “yes”, and your “no”, “no”, so that you don’t fall into hypocrisy.
- 2 Corinthians 10:2-3 Yes, I beg you that I may not, when present, show courage with the confidence with which I intend to be bold against some, who consider us to be walking according to the flesh. For though we walk in the flesh, we don’t wage war according to the flesh;
- John 8:15 You judge according to the flesh. I judge no one.
- 2 Corinthians 1:18-20 But as God is faithful, our word toward you was not “Yes and no.” For the Son of God, Jesus Christ, who was preached among you by us, by me, Silvanus, and Timothy, was not “Yes and no,” but in him is “Yes.” For however many are the promises of God, in him is the “Yes.” Therefore also through him is the “Amen”, to the glory of God through us.
- Jeremiah 23:32 Behold, I am against those who prophesy lying dreams,” says Yahweh, “who tell them, and cause my people to err by their lies, and by their vain boasting; yet I didn’t send them or command them. They don’t profit this people at all,” says Yahweh.
- Judges 9:4 They gave him seventy pieces of silver out of the house of Baal Berith, with which Abimelech hired vain and reckless fellows who followed him.
- Zephaniah 3:4 Her prophets are arrogant and treacherous people. Her priests have profaned the sanctuary. They have done violence to the law.
- 2 Corinthians 1:12 For our boasting is this: the testimony of our conscience, that in holiness and sincerity of God, not in fleshly wisdom but in the grace of God we behaved ourselves in the world, and more abundantly toward you.
- 1 Thessalonians 2:18 because we wanted to come to you—indeed, I, Paul, once and again—but Satan hindered us.
Cross-references from openbible.info (CC BY 4.0)
Explain this verse (20 sources)
Historical commentary, presented as a primary source — not an endorsement.
Private notes
Saved on this device only — never synced or sent anywhere.
John Calvin 1540 · Public Domain 17. Did I use fickleness? There are two things,…
17. Did I use fickleness? There are two things, more especially, that prevent the purposes of men from being carried into effect, or their promises from being faithfully performed. The one is that they make changes upon them almost every hour, and the other is that they are too rash in forming their plans. It is a sign of changeableness to purpose or promise what you almost immediately afterwards regret. With that fault Paul declares he had not been chargeable. “I have not,” says he, “through fickleness drawn back from the promise that I made.” He declares also that he had been on his guard against rashness and misdirected confidence; for such is the way in which I explain the expression — purpose according to the flesh For it is, as I have stated, the common practice of men, as though they were not dependent on God’s providence, and were not subject to his will, to determine rashly and presumptuously what they will do. Now God, with the view of punishing this presumption, defeats their plans, so as to prevent them from having a prosperous issue, and in many instances holds up themselves to ridicule.
The expression, it is true, according to the flesh, might be extended farther, so as to include all wicked schemes, and such as are not directed to a right end, as for example such as are dictated by ambition, avarice, or any other depraved affection. Paul, however, in my opinion, did not intend here to refer to any thing of that nature, but merely to reprove that rashness which is but too customary on the part of man, and in daily use in the forming of plans. To purpose, therefore, according to the flesh, is not owning God as our ruler, but, instead of this, being impelled by a rash presumption, which is afterwards justly derided by God, and punished. The apostle, with the view of clearing himself from these faults, proposes a question, as if in the person of his opponents. Hence it is probable, as I have already said, that some unfavorable report had been put in circulation by wicked persons.
Read full note →
That with me there should be yea, yea Some connect this statement with what goes before, and explain it thus: “As if it were in my power to perform whatever I purpose, as men determine that they will do whatever comes into their mind, and order their ways, as Solomon speaks, (Proverbs 16:1,) while they cannot so much as govern their tongue.” And, undoubtedly, the words seem to imply this much — that what has been once affirmed must remain fixed, and what has been once denied must never be done. So James in his Epistle (James 5:12) says,
Let your yea be yea, and your nay nay, lest ye fall into dissimulation.
Farther, the context would in this way suit exceedingly well as to what goes before. For to purpose according to the flesh is this — when we wish that, without any exception, our determinations shall be like oracles. This interpretation, However, does not accord with what immediately follows — God is faithful, etc., where Paul makes use of the same form of expression, when he has it in view to intimate, that he had not been unfaithful in his preaching. Now it were absurd, if almost in the same verse he reckoned it as a fault that his yea should be yea, and his nay nay, and yet at the same time laid claim to it as his highest praise. I am aware of what could be said in reply, if any one were disposed to sport himself with subtleties, but I have no relish for anything that is not solid.
I have, therefore, no doubt, that in these words Paul designed to reprove fickleness, although they may seem to be susceptible of another meaning, for the purpose of clearing himself from that calumny — that he was accustomed to promise in words what he failed to perform in deeds. Thus the reiterating of the affirmation and negation will not have the same meaning as in Matthew 5:37 and in James, but will bear this meaning — “that yea should with me be in this instance yea, and on the other hand, when it pleases me, nay, nay ” At the same time it is possible that it may have crept in through the ignorance of transcribers, as the old translation does not redouble the words, However this may be, we ought not to be very solicitous as to the words, provided we are in possession of the apostle’s intention, which, as I have said, clearly appears from what follows.
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.
Geneva Bible translators 1599 · Public Domain As men do, which will rashly promise anything, and…
As men do, which will rashly promise anything, and change their purpose at every turning of an hand.
He putteth away their slander and false report by denying it, and first of all in that divers went about to persuade the Corinthians, that in the preaching of the Gospel, Paul agreed not to himself: for this was the matter and the case.
Read full note →
That I should say and unsay a thing?
Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain 17 When I therefore was thus minded, did I…
17 When I therefore was thus minded, did I use lightness? or the things that I purpose, do I purpose according to the flesh, that with me there should be yea yea, and nay nay?
Ver. 17. Did I use lightness] So the false apostles suggested against him. Ministers must carefully clear themselves of suspicions and aspersions cast upon them, either by a verbal or real apology.
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.
Matthew Poole 1685 · Public Domain When I therefore was thus minded, did I use…
When I therefore was thus minded, did I use lightness? Though the apostle doth not in so many words tell us so, yet it is apparent from this verse, that some of the Corinthians had taken occasion from his not coming at this time to Corinth, to charge him with levity and inconstancy, as if his words were not to be regarded. It is very observable, how little things the men of the world will take advantage from, to vilify and lessen the reputation of God’s faithful ministers and people. How many others might have promised to be in such a place at such a time, and have failed, without the reproach of the men of the world! Who would have been so charitable to them, as to have excused them, by saying: They spake according to their present intentions and resolutions, but they were hindered by the providence of God; but if Paul fails, they will interpret it to be from the lightness and inconstancy of his mind: so charitable is the world to its own; so uncharitable to those who are not of the world, but by God called out of the world. From this imputation the apostle cleareth himself, denying that he used lightness, and that his not coming proceeded from any levity or inconstancy of mind; for he did fully purpose to have come.
Or the things that I purpose, do I purpose according to the flesh? Or (saith he) did I purpose after the manner of carnal men, who make no conscience of their word, who promise and deny both in a breath?
Read full note →
That with me there should be yea yea, and nay nay; should there be in me such a spirit as to speak a thing with my lips which my heart doth not agree to? This lets us know, that truth and steadiness are things which do highly commend either a minister or a Christian, but especially him who is a minister of the gospel.
Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
William Burkitt 1703 · Public Domain Here our apostle begins to make his apology and…
Here our apostle begins to make his apology and defence for himself, for changing his purpose in coming to Corinth according to promise, and to free himself from the imputation of levity, inconstancy, and falsehood, cast upon him by his back friends, the false apostles, for promising to come to Corinth, and not performing it; for they aggravated the matter so far, as if he were one that said and unsaid, one that took no care about keeping his word; and thence inferred, that no regard was to be had to anything that he delivered. "He that is not to be relied upon, say the false apostles, in his ordinary promises, how can you depend upon what he says to you in his preaching?"
Hence learn, That lightness and inconstancy is a great sin and reproach in any, but especially in the ministers of the gospel, who yet are often charged with it, when they are in no degree guilty of it.
Read full note →
Observe, 2. As our apostle frees himself from the charge of inconstancy, so from the suspicion of acting for worldly advantage: The things which I purpose, do I purpose according to the flesh? that is, for carnal ends or secular interest, that with me there should be now. Yea, Yea, and anon, Nay, Nay?
Behold here what truth and steadiness was found in and with our holy apostle; how his words and intentions, his tongue and his heart, his pen and his purpose, were one, namely, in reality to come unto them, though he was providentially hindered and obstructed.
Here let us remark and note, what little things the men of the world will rake advantage from, to vilify and lessen the reputation of God’s faithful servants, especially his ministers. How many persons might have promised to be in such a place at such a time, and have failed without being reproached for breach of promise!
The world would have been so charitable to another person, as to have excused it, by saying, "The man spake according to his present intention and resolution, but was hindered by the providence of God;" but if Paul fails in a tittle, he must be loaded presently, upbraided for his inconstancy, or which is worse, charged with playing fast and loose for sinister ends, and worldly advantages.
Lord! give thy servants, especially thy ministers, wisdom to walk with exactness and circumspection before the men of the world, who are their watchful observers, and bold censurers, that they may cut off all occasion from them that seek occasion against them.
William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
John Gill 1763 · Public Domain When I was therefore thus minded, did I use…
When I was therefore thus minded, did I use lightness?.... When I had thus determined to come to you, and had signified the same by writing, or messengers, did I use lightness in my resolutions and promises? did I act rashly, unadvisedly, and without consideration? did I promise certainly that I would come, without annexing any condition to it? did I not say, I would come to you shortly, if the Lord will? see Co1 4:19.
Or the things that I purpose, do l purpose according to the flesh? do I consult myself? my own interest and advantage? do I seek the gratification of any carnal affection, as covetousness, ambition, or vain glory? &c. what sinister end could have been obtained, if I had come as I purposed, or is answered by my not coming? or when I have purposed anything, have I resolved upon it in my own strength? have I thought it lay in my own power to effect it?
Read full note →
that with me there should be yea, yea, and nay, nay? as if I could make my "yea" continue "yea", and my "nay, nay?" when all actions are weighed by God, and all events are at his dispose; man appoints, and God disappoints; and who can help these things? or thus, has there appeared such contradictions in my words, and such inconstancy in my conduct, that my "yeas" are "nays", and my "nays yeas?" that I say one thing at one time, and another at another time, or both in the same breath? that I should say one thing, and mean another, on purpose to deceive, and change my mind and conduct without any reason?
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Wesley 1765 · Public Domain Did I use levity - Did I lightly change…
Did I use levity - Did I lightly change my purpose? Do I purpose according to the flesh - Are my purposes grounded on carnal or worldly considerations? So that there should be with me yea and nay - Sometimes one, sometimes the other; that is, variableness and inconstancy.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain Verse 17. Did I use lightness?] When I formed…
Verse 17. Did I use lightness?] When I formed this purpose, was it without due consideration? and did I abandon it through fickleness of mind?
That with me there should be yea, &c.] That I should act as carnal men, who change their purposes, and falsify their engagements, according as may seem best to their secular interest?
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Joseph Benson 1811 · Public Domain 2Co 1:17-20. When I therefore was thus minded —…
2Co 1:17-20. When I therefore was thus minded — Having, therefore, purposed this; did I use lightness — Did I lightly change my purpose? or, the things that I purpose in general; do I purpose according to the flesh — Are my purposes grounded on carnal or worldly considerations? that with me there should be yea and nay — Sometimes one, sometimes the other; that is, variableness and inconstancy in my counsels and actions, that none should know how to depend upon me for what they had to expect from me? But as God is true — I solemnly protest, that, as the God whom I serve is faithful; our word to you — On this and other occasions, and the doctrine we have preached to you; was not yea and nay — Wavering and uncertain; but that my behaviour and testimony have been always uniform, invariable, and consistent with my professions. For the Son of God, who was preached by us — That is, our preaching concerning him, was not yea and nay — Was not variable and inconsistent with itself; but in him was yea — As he is the same yesterday, to-day, and for ever, the declarations of his Word, and the engagements of his covenant, are inviolably the same. For all the promises of God — Many and precious as they are; in him are yea and amen — Are made with truth, and fulfilled with fidelity; or are surely established and accomplished in and through him. They are yea with respect to God promising; amen with respect to men believing; yea with respect to the apostles; amen with respect to their hearers. Unto the glory of God by us — As is declared by us in our ministry.
Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Albert Barnes 1834 · Public Domain When I therefore was thus minded - When I…
When I therefore was thus minded - When I formed this purpose; when I willed this, and expressed this intention.
Did I use lightness? - The word ἐλαφρια elaphria (from ἐλαφρός elaphros) means properly lightness in weight. Here it is used in reference to the mind; and in a sense similar to our word levity, as denoting lightness of temper or conduct; inconstancy, changeableness, or fickleness. This charge had been probably made that he had made the promise without any due consideration, or without any real purpose of performing, it; or that he had made it in a trifling and thoughtless manner. By the interrogative form here, he sharply denies that it was a purpose formed in a light and trifling manner.
Read full note →
Do I purpose according to the flesh - In such a manner, as may suit my own convenience and carnal interest. Do I form plans adapted only to promote my own ease and gratification, and to be abandoned when they are attended with inconvenience? The phrase “according to the flesh” here seems to mean “in such a way as to promote my own ease and gratification; in a manner such as the people of the world form; such as would be formed under the influence of earthly passions and desires, and to be forsaken when those plans would interfere with such gratifications.” Paul denies in a positive manner that he formed such plans; and they should have known enough of his manner of life to be assured that that was not the nature of the schemes which he had devised? Probably no man ever lived who formed his plans of life less for the gratification of the flesh than Paul.
That with me there should be yea, yea, and nay, nay? - There has been a great variety in the interpretation of this passage; see Bloomfield, Critical Digest in loco. The meaning seems to be, “that there should be such inconstancy and uncertainty in my counsels and actions, that no one could depend on me, or know what they had to expect from me.” Bloomfield supposes that the phrase is a proverbial one, and denotes a headstrong, self-willed spirit which will either do things, or not do them as pleases, without giving any reasons. He supposes that the repetition of the words “yea and nay” is designed to denote positiveness of assertion - such positiveness as is commonly shown by such persons, as in the phrases, “what I have written I have written,” “what I have done I have done.” It seems more probable, however, that the phrase is designed to denote the ready compliance which an inconstant and unsettled man is accustomed to make with the wishes of others; his expressing a ready assent to what they propose; falling in with their views; readily making promises; and instantly, through some whim, or caprice, or wish of others, saying “yea, nay,” to the same thing; that is, changing his mind, and altering his purpose without any good reason, or in accordance with any fixed principle or settled rule of action. Paul says that this was not his character. He did not affirm a thing at one time and deny it at another; he did not promise to do a thing one moment and refuse to do it the next.
Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary 1859 · Public Domain When, therefore, I had a mind, and purposed to…
When, therefore, I had a mind, and purposed to come to you, did I use levity? was it an effect of levity, of a fickle mind, and of a want of sincerity? or do I purpose and promise things according to the flesh, to human motives and interest, which make me say, and unsay again, so that in me is yes and no? (Witham)
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).
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset & David Brown 1871 · Public Domain use lightness--Was I guilty of levity? namely, by promising…
use lightness--Was I guilty of levity? namely, by promising more than I performed.
or . . . according to the flesh, that with me there should be yea, yea . . . nay, nay?--The "or" expresses a different alternative: Did I act with levity, or (on the other hand) do I purpose what I purpose like worldly (fleshly) men, so that my "yea" must at all costs be yea, and my "nay" nay [BENGEL, WINER, CALVIN], (Mat 14:7, Mat 14:9)? The repetition of the "yea" and "nay" hardly agrees with ALFORD'S view, "What I purpose do I purpose according to the changeable purposes of the fleshly (worldly) man, that there may be with me the yea yea, and the nay nay (that is, both affirmation and negation concerning the same thing)?" The repetition will thus stand for the single yea and nay, as in Mat 5:37; Jam 5:12. But the latter passage implies that the double "yea" here is not equivalent to the single "yea": BENGEL'S view, therefore, seems preferable.
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
Daniel D. Whedon 1874 · Public Domain 17. Lightness—Volatility, fickleness.
17. Lightness—Volatility, fickleness.
According to the flesh—From self-seeking and desire to be idolized.
Read full note →
With me—Instead of with God, my divine director.
Yea… nay—An independent, selfish claim, to decide affirmatively or negatively, as he should see fit, from worldly motives.
Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges 1878 · Public Domain 17. did I use lightness?] Literally, the lightness, i.e.…
17. did I use lightness?] Literally, the lightness, i.e. either the lightness with which St Paul had been reproached, or perhaps merely the abstract quality. The reproach of fickleness was cast upon the Apostle for his change of purpose. It is to be remarked that this is the only charge he is attempting to meet in this and the next six verses. One of the special features of this Epistle, according to Robertson, is its exhibition of “the way in which a Christian may defend himself when maligned or misrepresented … An uncontradicted slander is believed readily, and often for long, and meanwhile influence is crippled or lost. Conceive what might have ensued, had St Paul not met the slander against his character with denial at once! For few persons take the trouble to sift a charge which is not denied.”
according to the flesh] i.e. ‘Are they the decisions of my human will, which is subject to change through caprice, or are they decisions made according to the promptings of God’s Spirit, and, as such, removed out of the region of human inconstancy of purpose?’ Cf. Act_19:21. See also note on ch. 2Co_5:16, and ch. 2Co_10:2-3.
Read full note →
that with me there should be yea yea, and nay nay] Some have rendered this (1) that with me the yea should be yea and the nay nay, as though in this last member of the sentence St Paul was shewing how impossible it was for him to be obstinate and to refuse to change his purpose for a reasonable cause. But the context is against this. Chrysostom, who adopts this view, lays the stress upon the words ‘with me,’ as though St Paul’s private and individual will were contrasted with the dictates of the Spirit, which he was bound to follow, whether they laid him open to the charge of inconsistency or not. But the best way is (2) to interpret the passage in the usual manner, and to regard the Apostle as denying that he was infirm of purpose, and as reminding the Corinthians that he had but one definite end in view which he was resolutely bent upon attaining, namely, the ministering to them the Spirit of Jesus Christ To this one purpose all minor plans and resolutions must give way. See last note on 2Co_1:19.
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.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers 1878 · Public Domain (17) Did I use lightness?—This, then, was the charge…
(17) Did I use lightness?—This, then, was the charge which he is anxious to refute. The question meets us, however, When had the Corinthians heard of the plan thus detailed? It had been already abandoned, as we have seen, before the first Epistle was despatched. Had it been communicated in a lost letter (see Note on 1Co_5:9)? or was this what Timotheus, who started before the first letter was written (1Co_4:17), had been authorised to announce? Either alternative is possible, and there is no evidence to enable us to decide which is most probable.
Do I purpose according to the flesh . . .?—The construction is somewhat involved. He may mean: (1) “Do I form my purposes after the flesh” (i.e., from worldly motives), “so as to catch the praise of consistency from those who harp on the rule that ‘Yes should be yes, and No, no’?” or (2) “Am I weak and worldly in my purpose, changing my plans, and saying ‘Yes’ and ‘No’ in almost the same breath?” On the whole, (2) seems to give the better sense. It is obvious that the words on which he dwells had been used of him by others. Some teacher of the party of the circumcision had, apparently, quoted the rule of the Sermon on the Mount (Mat_5:37) and of St. James (Jas_5:12), and had asked, with a sneer, when the First Epistle came and showed that the original plan had been abandoned, whether this was the way in which St. Paul acted on it? The passage has accordingly the interest of being indirectly a reference to our Lord’s teaching, showing, like Act_20:35, that “the words of the Lord Jesus” were habitually cited as rules of life.
A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Pulpit Commentary 1880 · Public Domain When I therefore was thus minded. Without saying in…
When I therefore was thus minded. Without saying in so many words that all this plan was now given up, he proceeds to defend himself against the charges which had been evidently brought against him by his opponents. The Corinthians were aware that he no longer meant to come to them direct from Ephesus. They had certainly been informed of this by Titus, and he had indeed briefly stated it in 1Co_16:5. Their disappointment had led some of them into angry criticisms upon the "indecision" of the apostle, the more so because he had (out of kindness, as he here shows) spared them the pain of expressing his reasons. Did I use lightness? Was this change of plan a sign of "the levity" with which some of you charge me? Or the things that I purpose, do I purpose according to the flesh, etc.? Every phrase in this clause is of ambiguous meaning. For instance, the "or" may imply another charge, namely, that his purposes are carnal, and therefore capricious; or it may be the alternative view of his conduct, stated by way of self-defence namely, "Does my change of plan imply that I am frivolous? or, on the contrary, are not my plans of necessity mere human plans, and therefore liable to be overruled by God"s will?" Thus the meaning of the "or" is doubtful, and also the meaning of" according to the flesh." Generally this phrase is used in a bad sense, as in 2Co_10:2 and Rom_8:1; but it may also be used to mean "in a human way," as in 2Co_5:16. That with me there should be yea yea, and nay nay. There is probably no clause in the New Testament of which the certain sense must be left so indeterminate as this.
(1) The Authorized Version gives one way of taking the clause. The grammar equally admits of the rendering.
Read full note →
(2) That with me the yea should be yea, and the nay nay. Whichever rendering we adept, it may be explained in accordance with the view
indicated in the last note. "I was not showing the levity which my opponents speak of, but my purposes are necessarily mere human purposes, and therefore my "yes" and "no" can be only "yes" and "no" when I make a plan. My "yes" or "no" may be overruled by the Spirit (Act_16:7) or even hindered by Satan, and that more than once." (1Th_2:18) "With me," i.e. as far as I am concerned, I can only say "yes" or" no;" but lhomme propose, Dieu dispose. His intended double visit to them was prevented, not by any frivolity of his, but, as he afterwards shows, by their own unfaithfulness and his desire to spare them. There is yet a third way of taking it which involves a different meaning order that with me the "yea yea" may be also "nay nay, Am I inconsistent? or, are my purposes merely carnal purposes, in order that my "yes yes" may be, as far as I am concerned, no better than "no no like the mere shifting feebleness of an aimless man? A fourth way of taking the clause, adopted by St. Chrysostom and many others, is, "Do I plan after the flesh, i.e. with carnal obstinacy, so that my "yea" and "nay" must be carried out at all costs?" This suggestion can hardly be right; for St. Paul was charged, not with obstinacy, but with indecision. The phrases, "yea" and "nay," as mentioned in Mat_5:37 and Jam_5:12, throw no light on the passage, unless indeed some one had misquoted against St. Paul our Lord"s words as a reason for adhering inviolably to a plan once formed. Of these various methods I adopt the first, because it seems to be, on the whole, most in accordance with the context. For on that view of the passage he contents himself with the remark that it cannot be inconsistency or levity on his part to alter plans which are liable to all the chance and change of ordinary circumstances; and then tells them that there was one part of his teaching which has nothing to do with mere human weakness, but was God"s everlasting, "yes;" after which he explains to them the reason why he decided not to come to them until he had first visited Macedonia, and so to give them one visit, not two.
Vers. 17-20.
Unchangeableness.
I THE UNCHANGEABLENESS OF CHRIST. He is "the same yesterday, and today, and forever". (Heb_13:8) Paul, compelled by circumstances to alter his plans, and charged with fickleness, dreaded lest inconstancy should be associated with his Master or with the doctrines of the gospel. He passes rapidly from a defence of himself to defend that which is of so much more importance. Well would it be if we were equally jealous of the honour of Christ, equally anxious that through us no shadow should fall upon his glory. Christ is unchangeable as
(1) a Saviour,
(2) a Teacher,
(3) an Example,
(4) an Advocate,
(5) a Master,
(6) a Friend.
II THE UNCHANGEABLENESS OF GOD. Illustrated by the fulfilment of Divine promises in Christ (ver. 20). Not one jot or tittle has fallen to the ground. In Christ is the "yea the affirmation, the accomplishment of Divine promise. True believers acknowledge this; "through him is the Amen" (ver. 20, new version); they say "Amen" to the Divine faithfulness which they see so strikingly illustrated in Christ. This is "to the glory of God." The glory of his character is proclaimed. God is not inconstant. A promise made by him is, to all intents and purposes, a promise fulfilled. This unchangeableness applies to all Divine dealing. Threat will as certainly be fulfilled as promise. Many believe in the semi-unchangeableness of God. They think he will fulfil all that they wish to be fulfilled, and kindly dispense with the remainder. They make their own god, as the heathen do.
III THE UNCHANGEABLENESS OF CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE. Christian doctrine is certain, definite, abiding. It is not "yea" today and "nay" tomorrow (ver. 18). As there is no change in Christ, there is no room for change in statements respecting him. The apostle was assured that what he promulgated was the truth about the Truth. To change from that would have been to embrace error. If we change our utterances concerning the Saviour, we are justified only in so far as our prior statement was erroneous. The "old gospel" is the gospel for all new times. In Christianity the truest progress is to go back to go back to what God himself revealed. As we do that, more light will break from God"s Word." But note, it will break from Gods Word, not from the poor constellations of human wisdom. There, in the Word, we have the doctrine, which, like him in whom it centres, is" the same yesterday, and today, and forever." There is no development in Christian doctrine as the ages roll on. There may be much development in our knowledge of it. The same doctrine is to come from the lips of all preachers at all times. The doctrine preached by Paul was preached also by Silvanus and Timothy (ver. 19).
IV THE UNCHANGEABLENESS OF THE TRUE BELIEVER. This is relative, not absolute. But in proportion as we resemble Christ we shall become unchangeable unchangeable in principle, in bent of mind, in love of holiness, in life purpose, etc. We are not to be fickle, but steadfast. Men are to find us ever the same in loyalty to Christ, in devotion to his service. Paul was charged with lightness, instability of purpose (ver. 17); but it was a false charge. He altered his movements that he might not be altered himself. The same principles which led him to form his plans led him to change them. Change in them was evidence of unchangeableness in him. Inconstancy and inconsistency were grievous charges in apostolic eyes. H.
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
B. W. Johnson 1891 · Public Domain 17. When I therefore was thus minded, did I…
17. When I therefore was thus minded, did I use lightness? Some of his detractors at Corinth had urged from his change of plans that he was fickle, or that he made ambiguous promises, and was ready to break them. His original plan was probably conveyed in the letter which has not come down to us (1 Cor. 5:9). In 1 Cor. 16:5, he declared his change of plans. Do I purpose according to the flesh? In a carnal way. So that there should be a readiness to turn a yea into a nay; that is, no fixed purpose to do as promised.
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.
J. W. McGarvey 1914 · Public Domain When I therefore was thus minded [to come to…
When I therefore was thus minded [to come to you first, etc.], did I show fickleness? [in determining to come to you second, etc.] or the things that I purpose, do I purpose according to the flesh, that with me there should be the yea yea and the nay nay? [Do I form and announce my purposes like an unprincipled worldling, who holds his yes and no subservient to his policy or his pleasure; i. e., does as he pleases, without any regard to his pledges or his promises?]
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.
unfoldingWord translationNotes 2017 · CC BY-SA 4.0 was I hesitating?
was I hesitating?
Paul uses this question to emphasize he was sure about his decision to visit the Corinthians. The expected answer to the question is no. AT: "I was not hesitating." or "I was confident in my decision." (See: Rhetorical Question)
Read full note →
Do I plan things according to human standards ... at the same time?
Paul uses this question to emphasize that his plans to visit the Corinthians were sincere. AT: "I do not plan things according to human standards ... at the same time" (See: Rhetorical Question)
Do I plan things ... so that I say "Yes, yes" and "No, no" at the same time?
This means that Paul did not say both that he would visit and that he would not visit at the same time. The words "yes" and "no" are repeated for emphasis. AT: "I do not plan things ... so that I say 'Yes, I will certainly visit' and 'No, I will definitely not visit' at the same time!" (See: Assumed Knowledge and Implicit Information and Doublet)
translationWords
God
faithful
unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.
Tyndale Open Study Notes 2022 · CC BY-SA 4.0 1:17 Paul’s apparent indecisiveness and failure to keep his…
1:17 Paul’s apparent indecisiveness and failure to keep his promise were being criticized. Paul’s protest is indignant.
Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.