2 Corinthians 5:16

εἰ καί (אBD, Arm.) rather than καὶ εἰ (FG, Latt.) or εἰ δὲ καί (א3C2D2D3LP).

16. Against all external evidence this verse has been suspected of being a subsequent insertion, made either by the Apostle or by a copyist, because (it is said) it breaks the argument. No doubt the passage would read quite smoothly if we omitted 2 Corinthians 5:16 : but that does not prove that 2 Corinthians 5:16 is not original. Its connexion with what precedes and with what follows is very intelligible. Seeing that all men are intended to live, not to self, but to Christ and to others in Him, it follows that our knowledge of others must not be κατὰ σάρκα: it must not be based upon their bodily appearance or material circumstances, such as race, wealth, position, and the like. It is the inner man, the spirit, the new creation, which counts; and this is the same in Jew and Gentile, rich and poor, teacher and taught. Comp. 2 Corinthians 11:18; Philippians 3:4; John 8:15.

Ὥστε ἡμεῖς�. There is a strong emphasis on ἡμεῖς, and a secondary emphasis on ἀπὸ τοῦ νῦν, a phrase which, with this exception [and John 8:11], is peculiar in the N.T. to S. Luke (Luke 1:48; Luke 5:10; Luke 12:52; Luke 22:18; Luke 22:69; Acts 18:6). Wherefore we henceforth know no man after the flesh. He intimates that there are people, his Judaizing opponents, whose knowledge is limited to externals, and that there was a time when he himself did so. But when once a man has recognized that in Christ he and all died and rose again, he makes that mistake no longer.

οἱ καὶ ἐγνώκαμεν. See critical note. Even though (2 Corinthians 4:3; 2 Corinthians 4:16) we have known Christ after the flesh. He admits as a fact that he once knew Christ only according to outward appearance, as a renegade Jew and revolutionary Rabbi, who had been rightly put to death.

ἀλλὰ νῦν οὐκέτι γινώσκομεν. Yet now we come to know (Him in that way) no more. S. Paul had got rid not only of his original hostility to Christ, but also of his early narrowness of view respecting Him. In connexion with Him “all mere local, and family, and national distinctions” were out of place. The change from οἴδαμεν to ἑγνώκαμεν is made, simply because οἴδαμεν is present, and a perfect is wanted: when the present is again wanted, the change is naturally from ἑγνώκαμεν to γινώσκω, instead of back to οἴδαμεν. But the difference between οἵδαμεν and γινώσκω is worth marking in translation.