Let us begin by trying the combination suggested in art. Corinth, which is in substance that of Bishop Lightfoot {Bibl. Essays, p. 282 ff.). The order of events suggested is — 1. Paul at Corinth (A.D. 51?). 2. Apollos at Corinth (52-53!). S.Paul at Ephesus (53-56). [Here Lightfoot inserts the second visit of Paul to Corinth.] 4. Lost letter of
1 Co 5' ['announcing the plan of 2 Co 1",' Light- foot]. 8. ('Possible, but not proved') Second visit of Paul to Cor. 6. Stephanas, etc., to Ephesus (1 Co 16"- '»). (Letter of the Corinthians.) 8. Dispatch by Titus of I Co [' with the brother,
2 Co 12'»,' Lightf.] ; or 9. Titus sent close after
1 Co. 10. Titus returns to Macedonia (2 Co 7"). n. Titus and the brother (2 Co 12'« or 8'*?) sent back, with 2 Co, to Corinth.
The schemes of Waite (in Speaker's Comm.) and of Weiss (most recently in die Paul. Brief e, 1896, pp. 9, 10) are in substantial agreement with the above, but Waite inserts the painful letter after 8. The arguments against the view taken below are best put by Holtzmann, Einl.^ p. 254 f.
To begin with, we must insert here, before 6, the arrival at Ephesus of ol XXA?;? (1 Co l'"). But more important is the need for further links be- tween 8 and 10. It seems, indeed, needless to distinguish 9 from 8. But between the mission of Titus (possibly as one of the bearers of 1 Co) to begin tne organization (2 Co S*- '") of the \oyla, and bis mission (v.*) to complete it, i.e. the dispatch of
2 Co, many events, as we have seen, demand room. The iilKT]iwL of 2 Co 2° 7", almost certainly ; a visit of Titus in connexion therewith (2 Co 7'), quite cer- tainly ; and a letter, not corresponding in its char- acter («m/). %i,g) with 1 Co, probably carried by Titus on the same occasion. Titus, then, had returned to Ephesus before that ; and since St. Paul, though he eventually carried out the plan of travel announced 1 Co 16°, yet has to defena himself from the charge of fickleness with respect to his plans, we must find room for his adoption of the plan of two visits to Corinth, for the announcement of this, and for its abaniionment. If the latter coin- cides, as we have shown to be probable, with the painful letter, we have to insert the first change of plan between 8 and the return of Titus to Ephesus.
(6) liesullant scheme. — We therefore revise the scheme as follows: 1-8 (as above). 9 or 10. St. Paul determines to pay a double visit to Corinth (Seinipa Xap<j, 2 Co 1"). U. Painful news from Corinth (possibly brought back by Titus) changes this plan ; tne iti/Wpa x"^ given up, the visit — now painful in prospect— abandoned ; and 12. A painfully severe letter sent. 13. Titus at Corinth (2 Co 7''''), with happy results. 14. Titus meets St. Paul in Mace- donia ; and 15. Returns to Corinth with 2 Co.
6. The above seems to be the simplest scheme that permits the insertion of all the events implied in 2 (Jo. (For a comparison of the views of dilFerent critics, see SchmiedeVs Table in Hand- Kommentar, pp. xii, xiii). It remains to consider the interval of tune required between the letters 1 and 2 Co.
We have to provide time for Titua mftklnfr one double Journey between Kphesus and Corinlh, a iecond Journey to Corinth, and a return Journey aa far as, nay, Philippi. And, OMiuniing the eorrertnesfl of the view takon above (6 i.b) aa to the connexion of the first journey with tiu- A«yKe, we have BO to place the journeys that, In diHpat^'hitif; Titus for the third time (3 6 : 16), Paul could BDoak of bis first visit (I 6 : 8, 0) as having talcon place
Mast year ' (i»« Ti/it/«^,., 2 Co S«- 1" 9^. This latter condition is elastic ; it only implies in strictness that the be^^ning of a new year had intervened ; and the interval between the two letters 18 80 far left open within somewhat wuie limits. The move- ments of Titus, however, require a considerable minimum of time. As 1 Co was likely to reach Corinth before Timothy, who was on his way tlirou^jh Macedonia, it was probably dispatched (8) by sea direct. This was possible at any time after .Mar. 6, when the mar« c/atwi/m properly ended. 'The voya;;e was often accom- plished in three or four days' (Con. and" llowson, ch. xii. p. 449 n. ; for full details see 'Schmiedel in UK xvi. 3a) ; let us allow seven. Titus may, but need not, have returned (11) by Macedonia. This route would require, with rapid travelling, about a month ; let us allow six weeks. Another week will then be claimed by the second journey (r2) to Corinth, and four weeks, let us suppose, for Titus at last to meet St. Paul in Macedonia (14). We thus require almost 12 weeks for the actual jcurne>8 of Titus ; and for hia two visits (8, 13) to Corinth, in default of any statement as to their duration, we should allow about four weeks in all as a miniumm. Accordingly we require 10 weeks for tlie movements of Titus, allowing lum but little repose.