Study

14. Be not yoked As if regaining his authority, he now reproves them more freely, because they associated with unbelievers, as partakers with them in outward idolatry. For he has exhorted them to show themselves docile to him as to a father: he now, in accordance with the rights that belong to him, ⁶⁰⁸⁶⁰⁸     “Parlant comme en puissance et authorite de pere;” — “Speaking as with the power and authority of a father.” reproves the fault into which they had fallen. Now we mentioned in the former epistle ⁶⁰⁹⁶⁰⁹     See vol. 1, p. 282. what this fault was; for, as they imagined that there was nothing that was unlawful for them in outward things, they defiled themselves with wicked superstitions without any reserve. For in frequenting the banquets of unbelievers, they participated along with them in profane and impure rites, and while they sinned grievously, they nevertheless thought themselves innocent. On this account Paul inveighs here against outward idolatry, and exhorts Christians to stand aloof from it, and have no connection with it. He begins, however, with a general statement, with the view of coming down from that to a particular instance, for to be yoked with unbelievers means nothing less than to

have fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness,
(Ephesians 5:11,)

and to hold out the hand to them ⁶¹⁰⁶¹⁰     “Aux infideles;” — “To unbelievers.” in token of agreement.

Many are of opinion that he speaks of marriage, but the context clearly shows that they are mistaken. The word that Paul makes use of means — to be connected together in drawing the same yoke. It is a metaphor taken from oxen or horses, which require to walk at the same pace, and to act together in the same work, when fastened under one yoke. ⁶¹¹⁶¹¹     “Joachim Camerarius, in his Commentary on the New Testament, (Cambridge 1642,) suggests, that ἐτεροζυγοῦντες, may have a reference to a balance, and that Paul — would not have the Corinthians unequally balanced with unbelievers. The verb ζυγοστατειν, as he observes, is employed to denote the adjusting of scales in balance. It seems more natural, however, to understand the word, as Calvin and most other interpreters do, as derived from ἓτερος, (Another,) and ζυγὸς, as meaning a yoke, and as employed by Paul to mean, drawing on the other side of a yoke with another; or, as Beza explains it, “Qui cum sint divers’ conditionis, tamen in eodem opere mutuam operam pr’stant;” — “Those who, while in a different condition from each other, do nevertheless take their corresponding part in the same work.” — Ed. When, therefore, he prohibits us from having partnership with unbelievers in drawing the same yoke, he means simply this, that we should have no fellowship with them in their pollutions. For one sun shines upon us, we eat of the same bread, we breathe the same air, and we cannot altogether refrain from intercourse with them; but Paul speaks of the yoke of impiety, that is, of participation in works, in which Christians cannot lawfully have fellowship. On this principle marriage will also be prohibited, inasmuch as it is a snare, by which both men and women are entangled into an agreement with impiety; but what I mean is simply this, that Paul’s doctrine is of too general a nature to be restricted to marriage exclusively, for he is discoursing here as to the shunning of idolatry, on which account, also, we are prohibited from contracting marriages with the wicked.

For what fellowship He confirms his exhortation on the ground of its being an absurd, and, as it were, monstrous connecting together of things in themselves much at variance; for these things can no more coalesce than fire and water. In short it comes to this, that unless they would have everything thrown into confusion, they must refrain from the pollutions of the wicked. Hence, too, we infer, that even those that do not in their hearts approve of superstitions are, nevertheless, polluted by dissimulation if they do not openly and ingenuously stand aloof from them.

15. What concord has Christ with Belial? As to the etymology of the word Belial, even the Hebrews themselves are not agreed ⁶¹²⁶¹²     Beza, when mentioning the different views which have been taken of the etymology of the term Belial, remarks, that some derive it from בלי יעל beli jahal, (not profitable,) or from בלי מועיל beli mohil, (worthless,) and that the term, viewed as having this derivation, is peculiarly appropriate to Satan, as being diametrically opposed to Christ, the Greatest and Best; while Jerome derives it from בלי beli, (not) and עיל hol, (a yoke,) as though you should say — without a yoke, not subject to the yoke. Beza gives the preference to the former etymology, while he observes that the latter is also most appropriate to Satan as an apostate spirit. — The original term Belial is rendered in various instances in the Septuagint παράνομος, lawless. — There is here a slight variation in reading. The Edit. Princ. and the Textus Receptus have Βελίαλ. The Erasmian, Stephanic, and other early editions have Βελίαρ, which has been restored by Bengelius, Matthias, Griesbach, and Tittmann; and justly, for both external and internal evidence are in its favor; it being found in the majority of the MSS., in many early ecclesiastical writers, and Greek Fathers.” — Bloomfield. — Ed The meaning, however, is not doubtful. ⁶¹³⁶¹³     “Et assez notoire;” — “And is sufficiently well known.” For Moses takes a word or thought of Belial ⁶¹⁴⁶¹⁴     Thus in Deuteronomy 15:9, “Beware that there be not a thouqht in thy wicked heart.” The expression made use of is פך-יחיה דבר עם-לבבך בליעל “Lest there be in thine heart a thing of Belial.” The same expression occurs in Psalm 41:9, where David’s enemies represent him as suffering the punishment of detestable wickedness,דבר בליעל a thing of Belial.” — See Calvin on the Psalms, vol. 2, p. 120. — Ed. to mean a wicked and base thought, ⁶¹⁵⁶¹⁵     “Vne meschante et abominable parolle ou pensee;” — “A wicked and abominable word or thought.” and in various instances ⁶¹⁶⁶¹⁶     “Souvent en l’Escriture;” — “Frequently in Scripture.” those who are wicked and abandoned to iniquity, are called men, or sons of Belial. (Deuteronomy 13:13; Judges 19:22; 1 Samuel 2:12.) Hence it is, that Paul has employed the word here to mean the devil, the head of all wicked persons. For from what holds good as to the two heads, he comes down without delay to the members: “As there is an irreconcilable variance between Christ and Satan, so we also must keep aloof from partnership with the wicked.” When, however, Paul says that a Christian has no participation with an unbeliever, he does not mean as to food, clothing, estates, the sun, the air, as I have mentioned above, but as to those things that are peculiar to unbelievers, from which the Lord has separated us.

16. What agreement hath the temple of God with idols? Hitherto he has in general terms prohibited believers from associating with the wicked. He now lets them know what was the chief reason, why he had prohibited them from such an association — because they had ceased to reckon the profession of idolatry to be a sin. He had censured that liberty, and had exposed it at great length in the former Epistle. It is probable, however, that all had not yet been gained over, so as to receive the counsel which he had given. Hence it was that he complained of their being straitened in their own bowels — the only thing that hindered their proficiency. ⁶¹⁷⁶¹⁷     “Ce qui seul empeschoit que son enseignement ne proufitast enuers eux;” — “What alone hindered his teaching from being of advantage to them.” He does not, however, resume that subject anew, but contents himself with a short admonition, as we are accustomed to do, when we treat of things that are well known. At the same time his brevity does not prevent his giving sharp cuts. For how much emphasis there is in that single word, where he teaches that there is no agreement between the temple of God and idols! “It is a sacrilegious profanation, ⁶¹⁸⁶¹⁸     “C’est vn profanation horrible, et vn sacrilege detestable;” — “It is a horrible profanation, and a detestable sacrilege.” when an idol or any idolatrous service is introduced into the temple of God Now we are the true temples of God. Hence it is sacrilege to defile ourselves with any contamination of idols. This one consideration, I say, should be to you as good as a thousand. If you are a Christian, what have you to do with idols, (Hosea 14:8,) for you are the temple of God?” Paul, however, as I have already in part noticed, contends rather by way of exhortation than of doctrine, inasmuch as it would have been superfluous to be still treating of it, as if it were a thing doubtful or obscure.

As God saith, I will walk. He proves that we are the temples of God from this, that God of old promised to the people of Israel that he would dwell in the midst of them. In the first place, God cannot dwell among us, without dwelling in each one of us, for he promises this as a singular privilege — I will dwell in the midst of you Nor does this dwelling or presence consist merely in earthly blessings, but must be understood chiefly of spiritual grace. Hence it does not mean simply that God is near us, as though he were in the air, flying round about us, but it means rather that he has his abode in our hearts. If, then, any one objects, that the particle in simply means among, I grant it; but I affirm that, from the circumstance that God promises that he will dwell among us, we may infer that he also remains in us. ⁶¹⁹⁶¹⁹     “I will dwell in them. The words are very significant in the original, ἐνοικήσω ἐν αὐτοῖς, ‘I will indwell in them,’ so the words are. There are two ins in the original, as if God could have never enough communion with them.” — Leigh’s Annotatiots. — Ed. And such was the type of the ark, of which mention is made by Moses in that passage, from which Paul appears to have borrowed this quotation. (Leviticus 26:12.) If, however, any one thinks that Paul had rather in his eye Ezekiel 37:27, the argument will be the same. For the Prophet, when describing the restoration of the Church, mentions as the chief good, the presence of God, which he had himself in the beginning promised by Moses. Now what was prefigured by the ark, was manifested to us more fully in Christ, when he became to us Immanuel ⁶²⁰⁶²⁰     “C’est dire Dieu auce nous;” — “That is to say, God with us.” (Matthew 1:23.) On this account, I am of opinion that it is Ezekiel, rather than Moses, that is here quoted, because Ezekiel alludes at the same time to the type of the ark, and declares that it will have its fulfillment under the reign of Christ. Now the Apostle takes it for granted, that God dwells nowhere but in a sacred place. If we say of a man, “he dwells here,” that will not make the place a temple; but as to God there is this peculiarity, that whatever place he honors with his presence, he at the same time sanctifies.