Here in 2 Corinthians 8:1-5 we find an account that is very much to the point. Those Macedonian believers were very poor (“extreme poverty”). Furthermore, they were experiencing a “severe test of affliction”. Even so, they insisted on giving. From verse 4 it almost seems that Paul felt a bit embarrassed about asking them to give—they needed help themselves! But they insisted; they wanted to give. And they gave more than they properly could (“beyond their ability”). But how was that possible? They had the mentality of the Kingdom—in verse 5 we read that “first they gave themselves to the Lord”. And they must have understood the secret of God's economy, as described in 2 Corinthians 9:8. (and due to God's will, to us).
*8:5 Is obeying the commands of Christ the exclusive privilege of the rich? How about the first believers, there in Jerusalem, were they rich or poor? It would appear that the vast majority were poor; so much so that the few well-to-do were selling their property to feed the rest. (That is what gave rise to the case of Ananias and Sapphira [Acts 4:32-5:11].) They evidently did not want to leave Jerusalem, in spite of the Lord's words recorded in Luke 24:49 and Acts 1:8. So God Himself sent the persecutions to disperse them. And they scattered, preaching as they went, poor though they were. Here in 2 Corinthians 8:1-5 we find an account that is very much to the point. Those Macedonian believers were very poor (“extreme poverty”). Furthermore, they were experiencing a “severe test of affliction”. Even so, they insisted on giving. From verse 4 it almost seems that Paul felt a bit embarrassed about asking them to give—they needed help themselves! But they insisted; they wanted to give. And they gave more than they properly could (“beyond their ability”). But how was that possible? They had the mentality of the Kingdom—in verse 5 we read that “first they gave themselves to the Lord”. And they must have understood the secret of God's economy, as described in 2 Corinthians 9:8.
†8:9 Although some 60% of the Greek manuscripts, and most versions, have ‘your’ (thereby agreeing with the complement), I take it that the best line of transmission has “our”, that is more inclusive.
‡8:14 Note that I have replaced the usual ‘equality’ with ‘balance’. God is not egalitarian; He likes diversity—no two snowflakes are identical, no two drops of water, no two leaves or blades of grass, and much less two human beings. God hates laziness, so we should never do anything to encourage it (2 Thessalonians 3:10).
§8:15 See Exodus 16:18. Maybe there was some sharing involved in that picture.
*8:17 Evidently Titus was bearing this letter, and it was he who delivered it to them.
†8:21 As we say in Brazil, ‘all care is little’ when handling God's money. Carelessness, not to mention dishonesty, reflects negatively on the Gospel. The Macedonian Christians took the matter seriously.
‡8:22 There is no possessive pronoun in the Text to show whose confidence, so it could be ‘his’, but in the context it seems to me to be more likely to be ‘our’.
§8:23 An interesting concept—Paul affirms that Christ was proud of those men. Now that is a compliment that I would really like to hear: “he is a glory of Christ”.