2 Corinthians 1:17-22 – The Promises Are Yes In Christ

Translation & Sermon by Nate Wilson for Christ The Redeemer Church, Manhattan, KS, 17 August 2025
Underlined words in Scripture quotes indicate words that are in common with the Greek text of the sermon passage. Otherwise, underlining indicates words to emphasize when reading this transcript out loud.
Omitting greyed-out text should reduce read-aloud time to just over 40 minutes.

Introduction

vs. 18-19 The Certainty of the Apostolic Message is Based on the Trustworthiness of God Himself

v. 20 The Certainty of the Gospel is Also Based on Jesus’ Desire For Us To Bring Glory To God

vs. 21-22 The Certainty of Your Salvation is Based On The Work Of The Holy Spirit

  1. The first participle tells us that God is “the One who confirms/establishes/makes us stand firm ...in Christ.”

  1. The second participle in verse 21 (describing what God does to give us confidence in His saving work in our lives) is that God is “the One who anointed us.”

  1. The third participle describing what God does to provide certainty for our faith is in verse 22: He is “the one who seals us.”

  1. The fourth participle describing God’s work in providing certainty for our faith: He is the one who “gave us the down-payment/pledge/earnest/deposit/guarantee of the Spirit.”

    1. God sends His Spirit to help every Christian.

    1. The Holy Spirit interacts, as a general rule, with the incorporeal part of us – that is, “in our hearts,” at the core of our personality.

    1. The Spirit’s work in us increases our confidence in God’s salvation of us, promising more of God’s grace yet to come!

CONCLUSION

2 Corinthians 1:17-24 – Comparison of Textual Traditions & VersionsA

ByzantineB

NAW

KJVC

RheimsD

MurdockE

15 Καὶ ταύτῃ τῇ πεποιθήσει ἐβουλόμην πρὸς ὑμᾶς Fπρότερον ἐλθεῖν, ἵνα δευτέραν χάριν Gἔχητε,

15 Now, it was under this impression that I was wanting to come to y’all first (in order that y’all might have a double grace),

15 And in this confidence I was minded to come unto you before, that ye might have a second benefit;

15 And in this confidence I had a mind to come to you before, that you might have a second grace:

15 And in this confidence, I was before disposed to come to you, that ye might receive the grace doubly;

16 καιH̀ δι᾿ ὑμῶν διελθεῖν εἰς Μακε­δονίαν, καὶ πάλιν ἀπὸ Μακεδονίας ἐλθεῖν πρὸς ὑμᾶς καὶ ὑφ᾿ ὑμῶν προ­πεμφθῆναιI εἰς τὴν ᾿Ιουδαίαν.

16 that is, to pass through y’all into Macedonia, then to come again from Macedonia to y’all, and then to be sent forth by y’all into Judea.

16 And to pass by you into Macedonia, and to come again out of Macedonia unto you, and of you to be brought [on my way] toward Judaea.

16 And to pass by you into Macedonia: and again from Macedonia to come to you, and by you to be brought [on my way] towards Judea.

16 and to pass by you into Macedonia, and again to come to you from Macedonia, and so X ye would accompany [me] to Judaea.

17 τοῦτο οὖν βουλJόμενος μήτι ἄρα τῇ ἐλαφρίᾳ K ἐχρησάμην; ἢ ἃ βουλεύομαι, κατὰ σάρκα βουλεύομαι, ἵναL ᾖ παρ᾿ ἐμοὶ τὸ ναὶ ναὶ καὶ τὸ οὒ οὔM;

17 So, when I was wanting that, was I using dis­honor? Or is it according to the flesh that I want what I want, such that [saying] “Yes, yes!” AND “No, no!” might be the case with me?

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?

17 Whereas then I was thus minded, did I use light­ness? Or, the things that I pur­pose, do I purpose according to the flesh, that there should be with me, It is X X, and It is not X X?

17 When therefore I thus pur­posed, did I purpose X as one incon­siderate? Or, were the things I pur­posed, [things] of the flesh; so that there should be in them NYes, yes, and No, no?

18 πιστὸςO δὲ ὁ Θεὸς ὅτι ὁ λόγος ἡμῶν ὁ πρὸς ὑμᾶς οὐκ ἐγένετοP ναὶ καὶ οὔ.

18 But God is trustworthy, so our message to y’all was not “Yes” AND “No,”

18 But as God is true, X our word toward you was not yea and nay.

18 But God is faithful: for our preaching which was to you, was not, It is, and It is not.

18 God is the witness, that our word to you was not Yes and No.

19 ὁ γὰρQ τοῦ Θεοῦ υἱὸς ᾿Ιησοῦς Χριστὸς ὁ ἐν ὑμῖν δι᾿ ἡμῶν κηρυχθείς, δι᾿ ἐμοῦ καὶ Σιλουανοῦ καὶ Τιμοθέου, οὐκ ἐγένετο ναὶ καὶ οὔ, ἀλλὰ ναὶ ἐν αὐτῷ γέγονενR.

19 but rather has been “Yes” in Him, because the Son of God, Jesus the Anointed One (the One who was proclaimed among y’all by us – by Silas and Timothy and myself), was not “Yes and No,”

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.

19 For the Son of God, Jesus Christ, who was preached among you by us, by me and Sylvanus and Timothy, was not: It is and It is not. But, It is, was in him.

19 For the Son of God, Jesus the Messiah, who was preached to you by us, namely, by me, by Sylvanus, and by Timotheus, was not Yes and No; but it was Yes in him.

20 ὅσαιS γὰρ ἐπαγγελίαι Θεοῦ, ἐν αὐτῷ τὸ ναί Tκαὶ ἐν αὐτῷU τὸ ἀμήνV, τῷ Θεῷ πρὸς δόξαν δι᾿ ἡμῶν.

20 because, however many promises there are from God, in Him is the Yes, and in Him is the Amen, in order that glory might be to God through us.

20 For all the promises of God in him are yea, and in him Amen, unto the glory of God by us.

20 For all the promises of God are in him, It is. Therefore also by him, amen to God, unto our glory.

20 For all the promises of God in him, [the Messiah,] are Yes; for which cause, we through him [give] our Amen, to [the] glory of God.

21 ὁ δὲ βεβαιῶνW ἡμᾶςX σὺν ὑμῖν εἰς Χριστὸν καὶ χρίσας ἡμᾶς Θεός,

21 Now, the One who con­firms us together with y’all into the Anointed One – and the One who anointed us – is God.

21 Now he which stablisheth us with you in Christ, and hath anointed us, is God;

21 Now he that confirm­eth us with you in Christ and that hath anointed us, is God:

21 Now it is God who establisheth us, with you, in the Messiah, and hath anointed us,

22 ὁ καὶ σφραγισάμενοςY ἡμᾶς καὶ δοὺς τὸνZ ἀρραβῶνα τοῦAA Πνεύματος ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις ἡμῶν.

22 He is also also the One who sealed us and the One who gave the down­payment of the Spirit into our hearts.

22 Who hath also sealed us, and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts.

22 Who also hath sealed us and given the pledge of the Spirit in our hearts.

22 and hath sealed us, and hath given the earnest of [his] Spirit in our hearts.



1This is a quote from Chrysostom’s homily on v.18.

2The Septuagint was the only known translation of the Hebrew Old Testament into Greek available to the first-century apostles. Brenton translated the Greek Septuagint into English in the 19th century. Underlining matches the exact Greek words found in our sermon passage in 2 Corinthians. Since this phrase is found nowhere else in the Greek Bible except Deuteronomy and 1 & 2 Corinthians, it is believed that Paul was quoting Deuteronomy.

3Regarding the phrase “Son of God” see Psalm 2:7 (“You are my son”), Matt. 3:17 & 17:5 (“This is my beloved Son”), 14:33 (disciples in the boat confess), 16:16 (Peter’s confession), 27:54 (centurion’s confession), Hebrews 4:4, 5:5, 2 Pet. 1:17, 1 John 1:3-7, 2:22, 3:23, 5:5-9, 5:20, and 2 John 1:3&9.

4Calvin suggested that maybe Apollos was not mentioned because he had not been calumniated to the extent that the others had.

5The New Testament does record Him saying the word a couple of times, but in neither case is he saying it TO someone. In Matt. 5:37, He tells His disciples to mean it when they say No, and in Matt. 13:29, He is telling a parable and quoting someone else who had said “No.”

6The other four instances are Matt. 11:9-10 || Luke 7:26-27 (“... Yes! I tell you, he is even more than a prophet…”), Matt. 11:25-26 || Luke 10:21 (“... Yes, Father, because this way happened to be pleasing in your sight”), Matt. 21:15-16 (“Yes. And haven't you ever read…”), and Luke 11:51 (“...Yes, I say to you, it shall be required of this generation.”) ~NAW

7“Hence, too, his confidence in denouncing a curse upon angels, if they dared to bring another gospel, one that was at variance with his. (Galatians 1:8.) Who would dare to make the angels of heaven subject to his doctrine, if he had not God as his authority and defense?” ~J. Calvin, 1546 AD

8“The meaning is that how many soever are God's promises, in Christ is the incarnate answer, ‘yea!’ to the question, ‘Will they be fulfilled?’ ... Wherefore also through Him is the Amen. In giving this answer in His person and life, Christ puts the emphatic confirmation upon God's promises…” ~M. Vincent, 1886 AD
“Christ is the fulfiller and fulfilment of all the promises of God because he is the sum and substance of them. From Genesis to Malachi – from the protoevangelium, the first promise of a Redeemer, to prophecy’s last witness to his coming – each and every promise finds its affirmation and accomplishment in him…” ~Geoffrey Wilson, 1979 AD

9Psalm 145:11, Matthew 15:31, 1 Peter 4:11, cf. Hebrews 13:15.

10This Greek word (βεβαιόω) is also used in Rom. 15:8 & Heb. 2:2-4 to describe God’s promises being testified-to or fulfilled, thus “confirming” God’s word, but here in 2 Cor. 1:22, the object is “us,” not God’s “word,” so it is a differ­ent concept. On the other hand, there is another Greek word στηρίξαι which is a synonym for the kind of “confirma­tion” under discussion in 2 Cor. 1:21. That synonym is found in 1 Pet. 5:10, 1 Thess. 3:13, and Rom. 16:25, and those passages could also be studied profitably.

11Chrysostom preached at length in his homily on how this makes us Prophets, Priests, and Kings with Abraham.

12“For as upon soldiers a seal, so is also the Spirit put upon the faithful. And if thou desert, thou art manifest [by it] to all. For the Jews had circumcision for a seal, but we, the earnest of the Spirit.” ~Chrysostom, c. 400 AD

13Cf. Rom. 8:23 “the firstfruits of the Spirit”
P. Hughes explored the possibility of the the “anointing,” “sealing,” and “earnest” being sacramental action (such as baptism), but concluded that “such an identification does not seem to have been proposed.”

14Cf. Strong’s: “part of the purchase money or property given in advance as security for the rest” and Thayer’s: “money which in purchases is given as a pledge or downpayment that the full amount will subsequently be paid.”

15According to Pringle, it is a Hebrew word [ערבון] which was borrowed by Greek and Latin speakers.

AWhen a translation adds words not in the Greek text, but does not indicate it has done so by the use of italics or greyed-out text, I put the added words in [square brackets]. When one version chooses a wording which is different from all the other translations, I underline it. When a version chooses a translation which, in my opinion, either departs too far from the root meaning of the Greek word or departs too far from the grammar form of the original text, I use strikeout. And when a version omits a word which is in the original text, I insert an X. I also place an X at the end of a word if the original word is plural but the English translation is singular. I occasionally use colors to help the reader see correlations between the various editions and versions when there are more than two different translations of a given word. NAW is my translation. My original chart includes annotated copies of the NKJV, NASB, NIV, and ESV, but I erase them from the online edition so as not to infringe on their copyrights.

BThis Greek New Testament is the 1904 "Patriarchal" edition of the Greek Orthodox Church. As published by E-Sword in 2016. The Robinson-Pierpont Byzantine majority text of the GNT and the Textus Receptus are very similar. The Westcott-Hort, Nestle-Aland, and UBS editions, however, are a slightly-different family of GNTs developed in the modern era, focusing on the few manuscripts which are older than the Byzantine manuscripts. Even so, the practical differences in the text between these two editing philosophies are minimal.

C1769 King James Version of the Holy Bible; public domain. As published by E-Sword in 2019.

DRheims New Testament first published by the English College at Rheims, A.D. 1582, Revised and Diligently Compared with the Latin Vulgate by Bishop Richard Challoner, Published in 1582, 1609, 1752. As published on E-Sword in 2016.

EJames Murdock, A Literal Translation from the Syriac Peshito Version, 1851, Robert Carter & Brothers, New York. Scanned and transcribed by Gary Cernava and published electronically by Janet Magierra at www.lightofword.org, and published on E-Sword in 2023.

FThis is not the reading of any Greek manuscript, but it is the reading of the Greek Orthodox and Textus Receptus editions. The Byzantine majority of manuscripts (the oldest of which is dated at the 9th century) insert a definite article here (το) which makes the word “first” more of a substantive adjective (“the first time”). The rest of the words in this verse are in all the manuscripts, but in various orders, but this word (“first”) is put next to (“to come”) in 19 manuscripts (including the 6 oldest-known ones) and thus in the critical editions of the GNT, calling for it to be interpreted more as an adverb. Vincent argued that it should be translated “come to you first,” but his protegé Robertson argued that it should be translated “before,” as in, it “was his former plan.”

GThis is the reading of the majority of Greek manuscripts (the oldest of which is the 6th century Bezae) and the Greek Orthodox and Textus Receptus editions. 14 Greek manuscripts (including the 4 oldest-known) and the critical editions of the GNT spell this word with a different first letter σ-, which changes the tense from Present to Aorist, making no substantial difference in meaning except perhaps that the Aorist focuses on the possession at that particular point in time, whereas the Present would focus on the continuing possession of the thing, but neither meaning excludes the other, and the KJV translation (which follows the Textus Receptus) is identical to the ESV (which follows the UBS critical text) with “you might have.”
Chrysostom (and, according to Pringle, “the ancient Commentators” and “Wold and Shleus” and the English versions of Tyndale and Cranmer – and he mistakenly added Geneva, so I shall remove it from his list and add A.T. Robertson and Westcott instead) translated xarin as “joy/pleasure/gratification,” and Calvin said he wouldn’t “much object” to that.

HLit. “and” (KJV). The NKJV, NIV, and ESV interpreted it as L&N semantic domain #91.1 (“markers of a new sentence, but often best left untranslated”). But I like the NASB’s interpretation that it is an explanatory parenthesis: “that is to say” (which is L&N#89.106a in Smith’s Supplement to the L&N Greek-English Lexicon Index).

ICf. Rom. 15:24 - “for the same service by the Roman Christians on his proposed trip to Spain.” ~ATR
“[H]e means that they were to provide companions to escort him on his way, which was then a common practice among friends (cf. 1 Cor. 16:6, 11; Acts 15:3; 20:38; 21:5; Rom. 15:24; Tit. 3:13; 3 John 6).” ~Hughes

JThis is the reading of 18 manuscripts (including the five oldest-known) and of the Greek Orthodox and contemporary critical editions of the GNT. The majority of Byzantine manuscripts (the oldest of which is the 6th century Bezae) and the Robinson-Pierpont and Textus Receptus editions of the GNT insert ευ here, changing the middle voice to passive, although, with a deponent verb like this, it doesn’t necessarily change the meaning at all – it could just be that spelling conventions changed over the centuries and were edited into the manuscript.
Either way, this participle is temporally connected in the present tense to the main verb in the Aorist “I used.”

KHapex Legomenon. “Lightness” is the general consensus of meaning. Here it is figurative – not enough weight put on the decision, thus made with levity, flippantly, inconsiderately. NASB & ESV render “vacillating,” following Arndt & Gingrich’s Lexicon, which lists “light” as the first meaning of the word, but found this word used for “fickleness” in Polybius and Homer (who also used it to mean “impetuous”). Those meanings are not listed in any other lexicon I consulted (including Pershbacher, Strong, Thayer, Friberg, Danker, Liddel-Scott, and Louw & Nida. L&N came closest with 88.99 “caprice and instability.”)

LHanna noted comments about this hina clause from E. D. Burton, Moods and Tenses of New Testament Greek (“expresses the concerned result of an action”) and J. H. Moulton, A Grammar of New Testament Greek (“...final; Paul is disclaiming the mundane virtue of unsettled convictions, which aims at saying yes and no in one breath”), then offered his opinion that “result and purpose are not to be distinguished, which may be the case here (cf. Rom. 5:20).”

MThe Vulgate, following P46 (the oldest-known manuscript) and one 10th century manuscript, removed the reduplication and just rendered it “yea and nay.” Cf. Calvin: “[T]he 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’” and Hughes: “It is not an emphatic yes which may be expected to turn into an equally emphatic no (this is the force of the repetition in the expression...)”

NThe Peshitta uses a 3rd plural suffix, but in Greek it is a 1st singular pronoun.

OAGNT tagged this word with Louw & Nida semantic domain #31.87 (“trustworthy”). Poetically, it is the Greek word for the Hebrew word “Amen” which occurs in v. 20. Most English versions added the comparative “As” out of thin air and interpreted it as an oath, but Vincent rightly commented, “Not to be taken as a formula of swearing...”

PThis Aorist-tense verb is the reading of the Majority of Greek manuscripts (although the oldest manuscript containing this reading in the original handwriting is from the 9th century). It is the reading of the Textus Receptus and Greek Orthodox editions and of the Vulgate, Peshitta, Geneva, and KJV. (ESV renders it in Perfect tense for no apparent reason.) However, a dozen Greek manuscripts (including the 6 oldest-known which date earlier than the 8th century) read with a different verb-of-being in the Present tense (although two of them were corrected to the verb-of-being found in the majority of manuscripts), thus estin is the reading of the contemporary critical editions, and therefore the verb-of-being is present tense (“is”) in the NASB, NIV, NET, and NLT. Since verbs-of-being are synonymous, there is no difference in meaning beyond “is” vs. “was,” despite this variant.

QThis is the reading of the majority of Greek manuscripts (including the 3nd century P46 and the 6th century Bezae), and therefore of the Textus Receptus and the Greek Orthodox editions, but, based on the reading of 10 manuscripts (including Vaticanus, Sinaiticus, Ephremei, and Alexandrinus from the 4th and 5th centuries), the contemporary critical editions of the GNT place this conjunction (“for”) two words later in the Greek sentence. However, it makes no difference in the meaning.

RThe tense switches from Aorist (“it was not Yes and No”) to Perfect (“it has been Yes”). KJV did not translate the distinction, making both verbs “was.” NASB and ESV made it a distinction between past and present tense (“was … is”), since the Greek Perfect indicates a continuing present effect from a past event. The NIV made an even more accurate translation, despite the fact that they added the word “always” (“was not… but... has [always] been”).

SStrangely, the Geneva and KJV followed the Peshitta instead of the Greek and Latin manuscripts here with “all” (which Vincent commented was “wrong”). Less-surprisingly, the NET and ESV and NLT rendered “all” as well. The word in Greek and Latin is actually a correlative pronoun (“as many as”), so the NASB and NIV translations are good here (although it was gratuitous for the NIV to add “no matter”).

TThe majority of Greek manuscripts read this way (καὶ ἐν αὐτῷ “and in him”), with support from a third of the oldest-known manuscripts (dated before the 9th century), so this reading is reflected in the Textus Receptus and Greek Orthodox editions of the GNT. But, based on about 16 manuscripts (including 2/3 of the pre-9th century ones) and the Vulgate, the contemporary critical GNT editions read διὸ καὶ δι᾽ αὐτοῦ (“thus also through him”). The meaning is not essentially different, although perhaps the majority saw value in two different prepositions to distinguish the different kinds of work between Christ (“Amen in him”) and us (“glory through us”). Curiously, the contemporary English versions which insisted on both phrases having the same preposition δι[α] still used two different English prepositions to maintain the same sort of semantic distinction which they removed by editing the traditional Greek text, rendering it “through him… by us.”

UThe Peshitta felt the need to insert “Christ” to define who “him” is, and the NIV followed suit, but it is not in any Greek manuscript. The Peshitta also felt the need to insert “we give our” before “the Amen,” even though that is not in any Greek or Latin manuscript, and, surprisingly the NASB, NIV, ESV, and NLT (and J. Calvin, P. Hughes, and G. Wilson) followed the Peshitta instead of the Greek or Latin. The NET, on the other hand, stuck with the Greek “He is the one who gave,” as did Chrysostom (“In Him is the yea and the Amen… For in Him, not in man, the promises have their being and fulfilment”), Matthew Henry, and Vincent. Pringle, who was Calvin’s English editor, also quoted “Penn.” in the footnotes in contradiction to Calvin, to wit, “through Him who is the AMEN”). We might also note that Jesus is called “The Amen” in Rev. 3:14.

VThis is a transliteration of a Hebrew word using Greek letters. The Hebrew word אמן is usually translated into Greek as πιστὸς, which is the first word in v.18 - “faithful, true, trustworthy, sure.” Even so, this word is frequent in the Greek New Testament, occurring in every book except for Acts, James, and 3 John.

W“The present participle with εἰς (into) indicates the work as it is in progress toward a final identification of the believers with Christ.” ~Vincent

XHughes noted that in the argument, “us” meant Paul and Timothy; in other words, if Paul and Timothy had been “confirmed,” “anointed,” and “sealed” with the Holy Spirit, then their message could be trusted. However, all of these actions can be found in scripture applied to ALL believers, not just to the Apostles.

YAGNT labeled this word with Louw & Nida’s semantic domain # 33.484 “...to put a mark on something, primarily to indicate ownership but possibly also to mark group identity...” and the NIV added several words to expound that first meaning. This, however, is the third definition in the Greek lexicons of Thayer and of Arndt & Gingrich (the first being to secureThayer/put a wax seal onA&G, the second being to “conceal,” the third being to indicate ownershipThayer/identityA&G and the fourth being to “confirm/authenticateThayer/certifyA&G). Like the “anointing,” the “sealing” was also done first to Jesus (John 6:27 "...God the Father has set His seal on Him [the Son of Man].") and then to His people (Eph. 1:13; 4:30; Rev. 7:3-8). Hughes’ assertion that it meant God repairing “the image of God” in man after it had been “defaced by the fall” goes beyond what the text actually says.

ZBefore the year 1946, all the English Bibles that I can find (Wycliffe, Geneva, KJV, ERV, ASV) translated this phrase as “gave the earnest of the Spirit.” This accurately translates the reading of all the Greek manuscripts with the object of the verb “given” being “the earnest” (with the definite article “the”), followed by the word for “Spirit” in the genitive case (“of the Spirit”). But beginning in 1946, all the English Bibles I could find (with one exception), switched the words for “Spirit” and for “earnest,” making “Spirit” the object that was “given” and also replacing the “the” from in front of “earnest” with an invented preposition “as,” even though none of these abberations are to be found in any Greek manu­script. The one exception I found was that the NLT at least kept the “the,” indicating that the Holy Spirit is not just “a guarantee/pledge” – potentially interchangeable with any number of alternatives (RSV, NKJV, NET, NASB, NIV, ESV), but rather “the first-installment” (NLT – It appears that they got the translation “first-installment” from Arndt & Gingrich’s Lexicon). I suspect that this change may have come about in order to avoid the interpretation possible in the older English translations that only part of the Holy Spirit would be given to believers upon conversion (and that more of the Spirit would be given to them later), which would seem to contradict with John 3:34 “...God does not give the Spirit by measure,” although it might comport with 1 John 4:13 (“He has given us of His Spirit”).

AASee above. Commentators I read were divided pretty equally on the question of whether this meant receiving only a portion of the Holy Spirit or the totality. Chrysostom favored the portional view, “Wherefore He said not simply ‘the Spirit,’ but named ‘earnest,’ that from this thou mightest have a good hope of the whole as well. For did He not purpose to give the whole, He would never have chosen to give ‘the earnest’ and to waste it without object or result.” Calvin took the opposite position that “the Spirit… is our security… and is called the earnest,” and Vincent followed in his steps (“Not the foretaste or pledge of the Spirit, but the Spirit Himself in pledge of the fulfillment of the promises. By a common Greek usage the words are in apposition: the earnest which is the Spirit.”) But it is not true that an accusative phrase followed by a genitive phrase in Greek commonly denotes apposition. Hughes approvingly quoted Lightfoot, “the present gift of the Spirit is only a small fraction of the future endowment.”

2