IL C0KINTHIAN8
II. CORINTHIANS
497
a partial hold over them, headlong from the field. The Corinthians are already won 'in part' (I"),
but a leaven of dialoyalty exists among them, and the success reported "by Titus must be followed up to be lasting, and the disloyal leaven ellectually stamped out. Add to this that the identilication of these chapters with the Painful Letter (§ 4, g) would seem to demand that they should refer to the {ex hypothesi) still unsettled case of the Offender (chs. 2. 7). But no such reference can be traced ; the argument for separating 10-13 from the rest of the Epistle thus loses a very strong positive factor. On the whole, then, as regards internal evidence, we may say that the case for separation is not proved ; but it would be going too far to say that it is absolutely disproved. Whether this is so or not must depend on the weight to be attached to the entire lack of external evidence. Can we suppose that interpolations *o serious as to amount (if we accept all the three hypotheses discussed above) to the formation of an entire Epistle out of heterogeneous fragments — or even the interpolation of any one of the passages in question — can have taken place without leaving so much as a ripple upon the stream of textual tradition ? Certainly, there exist • primitive corruptions ' of the NT text, i.e. changes which occurred so early that the original text has left no documentary traces of itself. But these are small in number and in scale. ' We cannot too strongly express our disbelief in the existence of undetected interpolations of any moment ' (Westcott and Hort). The strongest internal evidence might conceivably modify this in an exceptional case ; only our witnesses to the text push its history back BO very early as to leave very scanty room for the occurrence of such interpolations. But the literary relations of the sjmoptic Gospels furnish an analogy which warns us against too summary a rejection of any such hypothesis in this case. The ijuestion is whether the Second Epistle to the Corinthians pas.sed into general circulation as soon as the first. The latter, formally appealed to within forty years of its origin, was circulated too early to permit us to a.ssumo interpolations in it on any large scale nnreflected in the textual tradition. But Clement appears to know nothing of 2 Co, and ita com- paratively late appearance in the stream of attesta- tion (see above, § 1) b perhaps compatible with some process of editing on the part of the Cor- inthian Church before it was copied for public reading and imparted to other Cliurches. This would De easier to suppose, if the autographs were written on leaves or tablets rather than on rolls. (See Sir E. M. Thompson, Handbook of Paleo- graphy, pp. 20 ff., 54-61.) We do not therefore regard the absence of textual evidence in this particular case as absolutely fatal in limine to the nypotheses we have been considering ; but it must be allowed to weigh heavily against them ; and we believe that a patient and circumspect exegesis will gradually dissolve the arguments, at first sight very tempting, for the segregation of chs. 10-13, and even perhaps of 6"-7'.
9. Contmtt of the BpiitU.—Tbt nature of the Lett«r (i| S, 7) mokes it far U-.-iM readilj divisible into well-marked sections than the flrst Epistle. The onler of Ideo^ is emotional rather than lo^cal ; a subject U not taken up, dealt with, and disposed of, but, like some strain In a piece of inipajisioned music, occurs, is lost )q a maze of crowding harmonies, and recurs attain and again. This is es]>eciaily the cose in chs. 10-13. But certain broad lines of division may he reco(;:nii'.ed, and we snail exhibit these, with- out piirauinK the analysis into it« subtler mibdivisions. 4. Anhwbe to To! wbu'omb TintNos or Trrus <l-7).
1. Kputotary Introduction (1' i').
S. Bbtiew op ebcknt Rrlationb wrru rm CoaiNrniAKB
Twith ref^rtJ to his promised 1 WS^f.v^ndi«,,ioni ^ili'''^^ to th. c. of W"-*^
[ the Offender }
(*) Ttu trrat Digrfiuim (2'*-7''). •. Apoatleshlp(^>t-<i<°) vol.. I. — 32
MM. The oHlce of an apostle (21M»). (St. Paul's self-vin(lio.ation (21*-3<).
The ».>LD MiNIBTRV A.VD THK NKW (3ft-18).
StU-vindicatiou completed (4* 6).] fi$. The Buflerinj.'S of an apostle (4'-5'l').
(In relation to the work of an apostle (4'-I»). In relation to the Hora op KBaifRRECTlON (41*-68), In relation to life, death, and jud^^ment (6^10X1 rf. The life Of an ai<o«tle (Wi-eiH). (Its motive (6" »).
Its basis in tub RBDKiKm and Ha Wobi (61<-8>X Its credentials (63-10).) 0^ Appeal of the reconciled apostle to his readers (6^1-7*). [Interjected appeal airainst heathenish defllements (Bli-71).l (c) Tht Tfconciliation cmnpleted (7*-l«). «. Arrival of Titus f"»6). /8. The Offender and the Painful Latt«p(7-U). y. The joy of Titus (Is-H).
B. ThB COLIBCTIO.N POB TUB SaINTS (8. »).
(a) The example of Macedonia (»! I).
(6) The example of Christ, and th« oaw mlBBlon of Titos ud
the brethren (S**-!)^). (c) Exhortation to liberality (9«-i»).
C. ThB ORBAT l:fTECTIVB (101-13"').
1. St. Paul and hit opponents (10^-1219). (a) Self.vindication of St. Paul as an apostle (lO^-U), {b) St. Paul and the area of his mission (lO^^l^ (c) Reply to opponent* (10l*-12l8). «. The question of personal loyalty (ll*-*), /S. The question of maintenance (ll'ls)*. ». The apostolic ««i;xi«-i( (n'*-12'»). I. Completion ot the kirtkryjcL (12'iH). £. Wamingt in view of hit coming visit (121>-181'X