The Epistle is a letter of many moods, but all under strong control. ' Joy and hea^nness, anxiety and hope, trust and resentment, anger and love, follow one another, the one as intense as the other. Yet there is no touch of changeablecess, nor any cuntradiction. The circumstances dictate and justify it all, and he is master of it all, the same throughout, and always his whole self. An extra- ordinary susceptibility of feeling and impression, such as only an extraordinary character can hold in control ' (Weizsacker, Apost. Ztlter, p. 328 ; cf. the whole section).
In the discussions (art. 1 CORINTHIANS, § 4) raised by the Dutch hypercritical school, and by Steck, on the genuineness of the ' Haupt-briefe,' our Epistle has played a somewhat subordinate part (see Knowling, ubi supra, pp. 192, 174). We may therefore dispense with any discussion on the subject, and postpone the question of Integrity until we have dealt witii the difficulties connected with the historical situation.
4. As we have seen above (on 1 COR. § 7), the complete elucidation of the circumstances of 1 Co depends on the recovery of the thread of events connected with and ascertainable from the second Epistle. Here we enter upon what the most accurate of explorers has compared to a 'track- less forest.' The problem is especially tantalizing, because the abundance of material at once stimul- ates and mocks the attempt at a complete com- bination.
The broad question. How does the historical situation in 2 Co differ from that in 1 Co? how many letters, how many visits, of St. Paul to Corinth, how many estrangements and recon- ciliations, are to be traced or assumed? depends for its solution on our success or failure in un- ravelling several distinct threads. Such are the movements of Timothy, the movements of Titus, the history of the \ayia (1 Co 16^ at Corinth, the sequel of the case of the ofl'ender of 1 Co S'"', the progress of party spirit and of opposition to St. PaiU at Connth, and, la.stly, St. Paul's references to his plans of travel, and to letters and visits of his own.
We will briefly sketch the position of each of these questions, and then consider the possibilities of a satisfactory reconstruction of the history.
(a) As to Timothy, the case is comparatively simple. We have seen (on 1 CoR. § 7) that Timolliy left St. Paul at Ephesus for Macedonia, probably not long before the dispatch of 1 Co. He was to reach Corinth eventually (1 Co 4"), though St. Paul implies some doubt {iav f\6ri, 16'") as to the prospect of his doing so. St. Paul expected him to return to Ephesus with the bearers of 1 Co (16") by Pentecost (16'^). His return from Corinth would in that case be by sea direct. The expression of Luke (Ac 19^ els rijv JIait. onlj') is, however, easily understood if he failed to reach Corinth. Liglitfoot (Bibl. Ess. 275 ff.), who maintained that he probably did not do so, suggested that Titus might have overtaken him on the way to Corinth, or, if he went thither by sea, have met Timothy on the way back. Cfertainty on this point is not possible ; we have to weigh the total silence of St. Paul in 2 Co (in the face of 1 Co 4") as to any result of Timothy's mission to Cor., against the absence from 2 Co of any explanation (in face, again, of 1 Co 4") of the non-arrival of a messenger so impressively announced. The latter argument seems to the present writer to be slightly outweighed by the former. 'It is patent th.at the mission had in some way miscarried' (Waite) ; but that Timothy had failed painfully at Corinth is hardly to be assumed (as by Jiilicher, Einl. p. 61) without more proof than we possess. Anyhow, Timothy was with St. Paul wTien he wrote 2 Co. They may have met either at Ephesus or in Macedonia.
(6) Of Titus (Gal 2^) we do not hear by name in 1 Co. From 2 Co we learn that he was the bearer of our letter (8°- '^■-■'), accompanied by two unnamed brethren, one of whom, ' whose praise is in the Gospel,' may or may not have been Luke.
From 2 Co 12'* we see that Titus had been to Corinth before, as we should also gather from 8' Koflus irpoevripiaTO. This also follows independently from 7"-'* 2'^ Titus, then, paid at any rate two visits to Corinth ; and on one of them, previous to 2 Co, he had been accompanied by a (single, unnamed) brother (2 Co 12'"*).
We will come back to Titus after briefly con sidering the history of the Xoyio at Corinth. The directions given 1 Co 16'"* were possibly in answer to some inquiry on the part of the Corinthians (supra, 1 Cor. § 7). They had offered (2 Co 9» Trpo- (irriYY(\lj.itir]>') to contribute, and, ace. to 8", Titus had assisted in the preliminary organization of their efforts (8'°, cf. v.' irpoer^pfaro). To this reference appears to be made 2 Co 12" (cf. iirXe- oviKT-qafv with 9°). Why not, then, identify (as Lighlfoot, Bibl. Ess. 281) Titus and ' the brother' with ' the brethren ' who carried 1 Co ? (supra,
1 Cor. § 7). This combination seems free from any objection, and the note of time, avb -nipmi (8'" 9"), pushes back this \dsit of Titus to a date in any case very near 1 Co (see 1 CoR. § 6). Titus visited Corinth, then, in connexion u-ith the \oyia on two occasions j on the second occasion he was one of the bearers of 2 Co ; on the first, not improbably he was one of the bearers of 1 Co.