Commentary
The Salutation and the Supplication
(2 Corinthians 1:1-14)
A Paraphrase
Paul an Apostle of Jesus Christ, by the will of God, and Timothy the brother, to the Church of God which is in Corinth with all the saints that are in the whole (throughout) Achaia, grace be to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.
Blessed is God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the compassionate Father (the Father who bestows mercies) of all comfort, He that comforts us in all our tribulation to the end that we may be able to comfort you who are involved in every tribulation and the comfort wherewith we are comforted ourselves of God; for as the sufferings of Christ befall us abundantly, so through Christ’s agency does our consolation also abound. So on the one hand whether we undergo tribulation it is for your comfort and salvation who works in your patient enduring the same sufferings which we also suffer (and our hope of you that will so steadfastly endure, is unshaken) or whether on the other hand we are consoled here again it is for your comfort and salvation, for you know that as you share our sufferings with us, so you will also share our comfort. I speak of our sufferings for we would not have you ignorant, neither about the tribulation which befell us in Asia, how that beyond measure and beyond our powers (of endurance) we were oppressed, so that we utterly despaired even of life, but (this was not without a good purpose for) we have had the answer of death in ourselves (in our own hearts) that we may not place our confidence in ourselves, but in God who raises the dead; who delivered us from so great a death and is delivering us (ῥύσεται) on whom we have rested our hopes that he will still deliver us, while you too deliver your joint aid on our behalf in your supplication that so for the gift bestowed on us by the intercession of many, thanks may be given by many persons on our behalf.
For our boasting is thus, the testimony of our conscience that in godly singleness (of heart) and sincerity, not in fleshly wisdom but in the grace of God, we walked (in our conversation) in the world, and especially in our dealings with you.
For we write none other things, but only those which you read, or even acknowledge without their being written, and I hope you will acknowledge them to the end, as also you did acknowledge us in part, how that we are your boast, even as you also are ours, in the day of our Lord Jesus.
Textual Issues
The Title—is πρός Κορίνθιας Β with A, B, C [?], K, l.
Vs. 6—the Textus Receptus has no authority. It differs from the correct reading (B, D, E, F, K etc) by placing ἡ ἐλπὶς ἡμῶν βεβαία ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν after the second παρακλήσεως καὶ σωτηρίας. It ought to come after πάσχομεν. A third reading (supported by A, C, syr. Eth. etc.) leaves out καὶ σωτηρίας in the second clause, and transfers the whole clause τῆς ἐνεργουμένης ἐν ὑπομονῇ τῶν αὐτῶν παθημάτων thither.
Vs. 8—ὑπέρ, so Tischendorf, B, K, Theoph. etc. Lachmann
περί—with A, C, D, E, F, etc.
Omit ἡμῖν—A, B, C, D, F, Jerome. Tischendorf previously retained it.
ὑπὲρ δύναμιν after ἐβαρήθημεν with Tischendorf rather than before it as Lachmann.
Vs. 10—καὶ ῥύεται—D, S, K, l, syr. Peshit.
καὶ ῥύσεται—B, C, G, arm, cop, etc.
Omit—A, D*, d, e.
Order of renderings as ranked above. The second reading was corrupted by the following ῥύσεται, though it is the more difficult reading. The omission happened to simplify the text. I believe on the whole that Meyer is right in retaining ῥύεται for the reason which he gives, ῥύσεται would naturally be written by a careless scribe, after ἐρρύσατο ἡμᾶς without regard to what follows.
Vs. 12—ἁπλότητι—D, E, F, G, L vulgate, so Tischendorf.
ἁγιότητι—A, B, C, K, cop, arm, Clem., Or., Lact. In favor of this last rendering is that it is found nowhere else in St. Paul. ἁπλότητι is found at Eph 6:5; Col 3:22. ἁπλότητι seems not to have satisfied the copyists who substituted ἁγιότητι.
Vs. 16—Lachmann’s reading ἁπελθεῖν seems plausible, though not so well supported.
Commentary
Vs. 1—Achaia—the church at Cenchreae (Rom 16). At an early date there were large and flourishing churches in Greece as may be inferred from Melito, cf. Denys, Cor. p. 118.
Vs. 8—ὑπὲρ τῆς θλίψεως . . . τῆς γενομένης ἐν τῇ Ἀσίᾳ. This is not sufficiently explained by the tumult in Ephesus (Acts 19). It is quite possible indeed that St. Paul may have incurred some personal danger, though this does not appear in the narrative. But this will not account for the language here. Besides the plural ἡμᾶς would include Timothy, and Timothy was absent at the time of the outbreak. It cannot refer, as some think, to a severe illness, for that would scarcely come under the category of τὰ παθήματα τοῦ Χριστοῦ. In the absence of any direct evidence the historian can only approximate a solution.
The language here seems to refer not to some momentary danger, as that at Ephesus must have been, if there was any danger at all. We are not led to believe by St. Luke’s narrative that St. Paul was in any personal danger, though with a sudden outbreak of popular feeling this is possible. Rather this seems to refer to some continuing suffering whether from external persecution, from bodily sickness, or from mental suffering. Consider the language here—θλίψεως, ὑπὲρ δύναμιν ἐβαρήθημεν, ἐξαπορηθῆναι. Meyer’s remark is very pertinent—namely that it must come under the category of τὰ παθήματα τοῦ Χριστοῦ, else it would not be a case in point, and therefore cannot be a severe illness as some think.
Compare 1 Cor 16:9—καὶ ἀντικείμενοι πολλοί, and again 1 Cor 15:32—εἰ κατὰ ἄνθρωπον ἐθηριομάχησα ἐν Ἐφέσῳ. He seems therefore to have been exposed to some steady, continuous persecution. And the persecution had not ceased, as we can infer from 2 Cor 1:10. The solution offered in vs. 10 seems probable and if so it is strengthened by Acts 20:3 where we read that on the occasion of the visit to Corinth which he was now projecting, he had to alter the plan of departure, owing to a conspiracy of the Jews.
ὑπὲρ δύναμιν—beyond our (unassisted) power (of endurance).
ἐξαπορηθῆναι—‘we were utterly at a loss.’
Vs. 9—ἀλλὰ—Meyer translates ‘im.’ It is rather ‘but it was all working for our good, for . . .’
ἐσχήκαμεν—‘we have had’ and so the effect remains. This circumstance has taught us where to place our confidence.
ἀπόκριμα—is a hapax in the New Testament and the LXX. The reading can never have been κατακριμα which is ‘the answer’ i.e. ‘When we inquired of ourselves what was the fate which awaited us, our hearts gave answer that we should die.’
τῷ ἐγείροντι τοὺς νεκρούς—‘Denn der Todtenerwecker muss auch der Retter sein können aus Todesgefahr’—Meyer. One who can raise the dead can a fortiori deliver from the fear of death.
Vs. 10—ἐκ τηλικούτου θανάτου—‘so fearful a death.’ The death here would not be death actually, but a long course of suffering. 1 Cor 15:31—καθ’ ἡμέραν ἀποθνῄσκω. 2 Cor 4:10—πάντοτε τὴν νέκρωσιν τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματι περιφέροντες.
ῥύεται—ῥύσεται—This seems to show that the danger was still threatening. Perhaps from the words ἐν τῇ Ἀσίᾳ (note it is not ‘in Ephesus’), we may conclude that it was not confined to one place; and from this passage it seems to have followed St. Paul into Macedonia. We are reminded by this of a persecution from his own countrymen, the Jews, who drove him from town to town on a former occasions (Acts 13–14). It is not unlikely that this θλίψις may have been of a similar kind.
ἠλπίκαμεν—perfect tense, ‘have rested our hopes,’ ‘on whom our hopes are set.’
Vs. 11—συνυπουργούντων—i.e. with the other churches. Meyer—‘Daher καὶ ὑμῶν, auch ihn.’ Perhaps ‘aiding me.’
ἵνα ἐκ πολλῶν προσώπων τὸ εἰς ἡμᾶς χάρισμα διὰ πολλῶν εὐχαριστηθῇ ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν. I have no doubt that Meyer’s order is right, taking διὰ πολλῶν with ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τοῦ Κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ (2 Cor 1:14) and comparing Thucy. i.18. διὰ πολλῶν = τὸ διὰ πολλῶν, the article being often omitted in St. Paul’s letters. Cf. notes on 1 Thess 1:1, p. 4.
εὐχαριστηθῇ—See notes on 1 Thess 1:2 (p. 6) for the meaning.
προσώπων—‘persons,’ not as Stanley has it. On what Προσώπα cannot mean ‘Anthtze’ (countenance)—Munch, Black, Misener. On Προσώπων see Meyer, Wettstein.
Observe the antithetical character of the sentence—
ἐκ πολλῶν προσώπων answered by διὰ πολλῶν
εἰς ἡμᾶς answered by ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν
χάρισμα answered by εὐχαριστηθῇ.
δεήσις (supplication—especial) προσευχή (prayer—general).
Vs. 12—γὰρ. The Apostle goes on to justify it. So Meyer (rejected in his second edition?).
καύχησις—(not καύχησα). ‘Our boasting’ (noting the subject of our boasting). The boasting is nothing more or less than the witness of our conscience. Contrast the καύχησις here with the καύχησα below. ‘For our boasting, our confidence, is this. Our assurance, and so our vaunt, that you will aid us, arises from a consciousness that we acted in all sincerity towards you’ (συνειδήσεως).
ἁγιότητι only occurs elsewhere at Heb 12:10. See notes on 1 Thess 3:13 (p. 56).
σαρκικῇ—i.e. human wisdom. On σαρκικῇ/σαρκινος see notes on 1 Cor 3:1 p. 48.
ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ opposed to πρὸς ὑμᾶς.
εἰλικρινείᾳ τοῦ Θεοῦ—sincerity which comes from God.
Vs. 13—οὐ γὰρ ἄλλα . . . ἀλλ’ ἢ. ἀλλ’ ἢ only elsewhere in the New Testament in Luke 12:51, and 1 Cor 3:5 (and in the latter passage it is possibly not genuine, though grammatically quite legitimate). After ἄλλα, it is very unusual cf. Pl. Phod. P. 97 and Self [?] ii. par. 773,5.
οὐ γὰρ ἄλλα γράφομεν ὑμῖν ἀλλ’ ἢ ἃ ἀναγινώσκετε—‘What I wrote is not equivocal.’ I write nothing else besides what the obvious sense of the words convey to you on reading it.
ἢ καὶ ἐπιγινώσκετε—or even recognize (as true), even without their being stated in writing.
On the sort of play on words ἀναγινώσκετε . . . ἐπιγινώσκετε see Giesler.
ἐπιγινώσις in St. Paul has a special sense, but this does not apply to this present passage.
Vs. 14—It is better to connect ὅτι καύχημα ὑμῶν etc. (vs. 14) with καθὼς καὶ ἐπέγνωτε etc. rather than with Meyer, who takes the latter clause as parenthetical.
ὅτι—‘that’ not ‘for.’ With Lette [?] and others.
ἀπὸ μέρους—There seems to be no reference here to the Apostle’s opponents. The rebuke is out of place. You have recognized it partially, but not as hereafter you will recognize it. Like the ἐκ μέρους in 1 Cor 13:9.
ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τοῦ Κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ. In the expression ἕως τέλους and to some extent with ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τοῦ Κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ we see the Apostle’s anticipation of the near approach of the Lord’s Day, yet the anticipation is vague and undefined. ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τοῦ Κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ refers to both clauses equally in vs. 14 and ἐσμεν does not militate against this. It is anticipatory i.e. in the day when all things are revealed in their true light.
Vs. 15—πρότερον ἐλθεῖν πρὸς ὑμᾶς (the correct word order) and πρότερον to be taken with this clause, not with ἐβουλόμην, ‘before (visiting Macedonia, the now impending visit), that you might receive the benefit of a second visit (a visit on my return as well).’
πρότερον is explained by the δευτέραν.
χάρις—i.e. the conferring of spiritual gifts (χάρισματα) by the presence of the Apostle (cf. Rom 1:11). χάρις is not to be taken as χαρὰν, a mistake that is charged unjustly to Chrysostom. What Chrysostom says is that the benefit here mentioned is the joy that his presence would afford.
Vs. 16—δι’ ὑμῶν διελθεῖν v.l. άπελθεῖν. On the former verb used—Rom 15:28, on the latter 1 Cor 16:5.
ὑφ’ ὑμῶν προπεμφθῆναι εἰς τὴν Ἰουδαίαν is the latter part of the intention. He was frustrated by a plot of the Jews (cf. Acts 20:2) so that ultimately Macedonia got the double visit instead of Corinth.
Vs. 17—μήτι ἄρα—μή looks for a negative answer, ἄρα expresses a degree of uncertainty in the speaker as to the answer he will receive.
κατὰ σάρκα—‘from mere human motives,’ like κατὰ ἄνθρωπον in 1 Cor 15:32.
ἵνα ᾖ παρ’ ἐμοὶ . . . that strong affirmation and strong negation should have place with me i.e. that I shall strongly affirm a thing and then afterwards as strongly deny it, so that there be no fixity in my plans. The context seems imperatively to demand this sense. Otherwise we should be disposed (if only on account of the repetition of the article τό) to accede to the interpretation of the Greek commentators adopted by Winer and others ‘that my yes should be yes, and that my no should be no’ i.e. ‘That I should stick to what I said through thick and thin’ (cf. James 5:12). This literal interpretation however is certainly more in accordance with the Greek and is adopted by all the Greek commentators.
For the doubling of the ναὶ see Mt 5:37 and Wettstein and Midrash Tehillim viii.3 (and cf. the nickname of Richard I—oui et non).
τῇ ἐλαφρίᾳ—the lightness with which I am charged. The sense ‘Leichtsinn as solcher überhaupt, in abstracto’ (Winer, Meyer) can have no place here, where he is speaking of a concrete act. Cf 1 Cor 16:1.
Vs. 18—‘But God is true, for . . .’ ‘Getreu erweist sich Gott dadurch dass etc.’—Meyer. It is often taken as an adjuration (so E.V.) and Rom 14:11 is compared. But the use of πιστὸς ὁ Θεὸς in the other passages in 1 Cor 1:9; 5:13; 1 Thess 5:24 is against this interpretation. Cf. a similar expression in 2 Cor 11:10—ἔστιν ἀλήθεια Χριστοῦ ἐν ἐμοὶ (cf. Rom 4:1). This does not seem to be the correct way of stating the argument. The truthfulness of God is confirmed in the trustworthiness of our preaching to you: 1) the truthfulness of God is concerned in this matter, for (2 Cor 1:21-22) we are under the guidance of God’s Spirit; and 2) this truthfulness is established (2 Cor 1:18) for we preached Jesus Christ, and He is the confirmation of all God’s promises and therefore he established the truth of all of them. Therefore, our preaching is true. The whole stress of the argument here depends on the assumed connection between the life of the preacher, and the subject of his preaching. The doctrine which he taught must mold his character. If there is fickleness in the one, there is fickleness in the other.
Vss. 19-22—Meyer who takes ὁ λόγος (2 Cor 1:18) not of ‘our preaching’ but of ‘our professions’ and promises. He consequently states the syllogism thus: 1) Seeing that God has bound us fast with Christ and consecrated us and given us the Spirit, God would stand in contradiction to Himself, if we did not also bear the character of Christ (vss. 21-22); 2) but the character of Christ is not uncertainty, but certainty has been found in Him (vs. 19, 20); 3) Therefore, that which is affirmed (in 2 Cor 1:18) cannot be questioned.
Vs. 19—ὁ τοῦ Θεοῦ γὰρ Υἱὸς Χριστὸς Ἰησοῦς—τοῦ Θεοῦ is very emphatic.
δι’ ἐμοῦ καὶ Σιλουανοῦ καὶ Τιμοθέου—to mark the first preaching of the Gospel at Corinth. Meyer therefore does not mention the others, who are mentioned to avoid any appearance of self-assertion.
Σιλουανοῦ—This form of the name always in St. Paul and St. Peter (1 Pet 5:12). Silas is a connection link between the two apostles. He appears to have parted with St. Paul at the end of the second missionary tour, perhaps at Jerusalem and then to have joined St. Peter. See notes on 1 Thess 1:1 p. 2.
Σιλουανοῦ καὶ Τιμοθέου—Silas mentioned before Timothy as in the Thessalonian Epistles as being associated with Paul in his work before Timothy (cf. Acts 15).
οὐκ ἐγένετο Ναί καὶ Οὔ—was not found to be involved in uncertainty. Ναί must be taken to be the nominative with γέγονεν. For to say nothing of the harshness of the construction Χριστὸς γέγονεν Ναί ἐν αὐτῷ, (i.e. ἐν Χριστῷ for ἐν αὐτῷ), the following verse requires it—ἐν αὐτῷ τὸ Ναί.
ἀλλὰ Ναί ἐν αὐτῷ γέγονεν—‘but verification has been found in Him’ fulfillment of all that was foretold. Observe the changes in tense from ἐγένετο to γέγονεν.
Vs. 20—In the previous verse we had ναί without the article. Here it is added. There it was confirmation ‘indefinitely.’ Here it is ‘the confirmation of the special promises’ ὅσαι γὰρ ἐπαγγελίαι. The verification (i.e. fulfillment of all the promises).
διὸ καὶ δι’ αὐτοῦ—The correct reading. Meyer has an admirable note on τὸ Ναί and τὸ Ἀμήν. τὸ Ναί is the objective truthfulness. τὸ Ἀμὴν is the subjective confidence. [A long quotation from Meyer follows here; it is now too difficult to decipher.] Cf. 1 Cor 14:16.
τῷ Θεῷ πρὸς δόξαν—‘to the glory of God’
δι’ ἡμῶν—through our preaching.
Vs. 21—ὁ δὲ βεβαιῶν ἡμᾶς ‘who makes us steadfast,’ ‘confirms,’ ‘holds us fast’ with accusative of a person as in 1 Cor 1:8; Col 2:17; Heb 13:9
ἡμᾶς σὺν ὑμῖν—‘us and you alike’
εἰς Χριστὸν—towards Christ.
Χριστὸν, χρίσας. Of the latter term, cf. 1 John 2:20, χρῖσμα, where it is said that the χρῖσμα τῆς ἀληθείς ἔστι, by which unction the Christian is made prophet and king and priest.
Vs. 22—ὁ καὶ σφραγισάμενος—σφραγισάμενος is a middle, ‘to set one’s own seal on,’ cf. Eph 1:13 where the sealing and the earnest are once again joined together (also Eph 4:30). cf. 2 Cor 3:2-3.
τὸν ἀρραβῶνα τοῦ Πνεύματος—‘Der Genit. 1st G. Apposition. wie 1. Kor. 5,8: das Angeld, welches in dem Geiste besteht.’
Meyer. And this seems to be correct, cf. Eph 1:13 (though Meyer afterwards explains it incorrectly). Otherwise we might compare Rom 8:23—τὴν ἀπαρχὴν τοῦ Πνεύματος.
ἀρραβῶνα shortened into ἀρραβα Plautus nc[?] 3.20; cf. Aulus Gellius xvii.2.21—arrabo and especially arrba are condemned by Gellius. Stanley blunders. See Trench, Study of Words, p. 125.