leads, not unnaturally, to a digression on the manner in which he waved his apostolic privileges and perform- ed his apostolic duties (ch. ix). He then reverts to and concludes the subject of the use of things offered to idols (ch. x-xi, 1), and passes onward to reprove his con- verts for their behavior in the assemblies of the church, both in respect to women prophesying and praying with uncovered heads (ch. xi, 2-16), and also their great irregularities in the celebration of the Lord's Supper (ch. xi, 17-84). Then follow full and minute instructions on the exercise of spiritual gifts (ch. xn- xiv), in which is included the noble panegyric of char- ity (ch. xiii), and further a defence of the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead, about which doubts and difficulties appear to have arisen in this unhappily di- vided church (ch. xv). The epstle closes with some directions concerning the contributions for the saints at Jerusalem (ch. xvi, 1-4), brief notices of his own intended movements (ch. xvi, 5-9), commendation to them of Timothy and others (di. xvi, 10-18), greetings from the churches (ch. xvi, 19, 20), and an autograph salutation and benediction (ch. xvi, 21-24).
4. From an expression of the apostle in ch. v, 9, it has been inferred by many that the present was not the first epbtle addressed by Paul to the Corinthians, but that it was preceded by one now lost. For this opinion, however, the words in question aflbrd a very unsatisfactory basis. They are as fbllows: typarpa vfjuv iv rg ixunoXyy k. r. X. Now these words must be rendered either '^ I have written to you in this epis- tle," or " I wrote to you in that epistle ;" and our choice between these two renderings will depend part- ly on grammatical and partly on historical grounds. As the aorist typayj/a may mean either *'I wrote" or '<! have written," nothing can be concluded from it in either way. It may be doubted, however, whether, had the apostle intended to refbr to a former epistle, he would have used the article ry simply, without add- ing irpoTipif^ " former ;" while, on the other hand, there are cases which clearly show that, had the apostle iiv tended to refer to the present epistle, it was in accord- ance with his practice to use the article in the sense of **fAw" (comp. r) kfrurroXTjy Coloss. iv, 16, r^v liriaT.
1 Thess. V, 27). In support of this conclusion it may be added, 1st, that the apostle had really in this epistle given the prohibition to which he refers, viz., in the verses immediately preceding that under notice ; and that his design in the verses which follow is so to ex- plain that prohibition as to preclude the risk of their supposing that he meant by it anything else than that m tke church they should not mingle with immoral persons ; 2d, that it is not a little strange that the apostle should, only in this cursory and incidental manner, ref^r to a cireumstance so important in its bearing upon the case of the Corinthians as his having already addressed them on their sinful practices ; and, 8d, that, had such an epistle ever existed, it may be supposed that some hint of its existence would have been found in the records of the primitive Church, which is not the case. Alford, indeed {Comment, in
2 Cor. i, 16), thinks that 1 Cor. iv, 18, contains an al- lusion likewise to the lost letter, but the information there spoken of may easily have been otherwise com- municated. On these grounds we strongly incline to the opinion that the present is the first epistle which Paul addressed to the Corinthians (Bloomfield, JRecen- sio Synopt. in loc. ; Billroth's Commemtary^ Eng. tr., i, 4, note a). The same view is taken by Lange {Apoti. ZeiiaU. i, 205) and others.— Kitto, s. v. ; Smith, s. v.
5. There is a general agreement as to the date (at least the place) of this epistle. It was written from Ephesus (chap, xvi, 8), probably about the time of Passover (chap, v, 7, 8) of the apostle's third year there (Acts xix, 10 ; xx, 81), after his first severe treat- ment (chap. XV, 82 ; Acts xix, 9) had somewhat abated (chap, xvi, 9 ; Acts xix, 17), and when he had formed the purpose of a journey through Macedonia and
CORINTHIANS
612
CORINTHIANS
Greece (chap, xvi, 5; Acts xix, 21), and before the culminating act of mobbing (which cannot in any case be referred to in chap, xv, 82, since the apostle was still in Asia, chap, xvi, 19 ; and he mentions this incident in his next letter as a special piece of news, 2 Cor. i, 8), that only served to expedite his plan (Acts zx, 1 ; comp. xix, 29). See Acts. This opinion is farther verified by the following coincidences : [chap, i, 1, ** Sosthenes" here was a CkrisUan^ and therefore different ftrom the president of the 83magogae at Cor- inth, Acts xviii, 17] chap, i, 11-16 ; ii, 1 ; iii, 1-6, Paul had left the Corinthian church in its infancy some time since, and Apollos had visited them meanwhile (Acts xviii, 18; xix, 1); chap, iv, 17, 19; xvi, 10, 11, Paul had just sent Timothy to them, and designed visit- ing them himself shortly (Acts xix, 21, 22 ; xx, 1, 2) ; chap. XV, 32, he had some time previously been violent- ly opposed (tfiaxn<'o) »* Ephesus (Acts xix, 9) ; chap, xvi, 1, he had visited Galatia not very long before (Acts xviii, 28) ; chap, xvi, 6-7, he was about to set out for Macedonia, and thence to Corinth, where he designed to spend the coming winter (Acts xx, 1-3) ; chap, xvi, 8, he still expected to stay (Ivifuvd) at Ephesus till Pentecost, which stay was prolonged till the uproar about Diana (Acts xix, 22, 23) ; chap, xvi, 3, 4, he afterwards designed to visit Jerusalem (Acts xix, 21) [chap, xvi, 12, Apollos was at this time in the vicinity of Paul, but wai not about to revisit Corinth just yet, Acts xix, 1] ; chap, xvi, 19, Paul was sur- rounded by the churches of Asia, in the capital of which Aquila and Priscilla were now settled (Acts xviii, 18, 19, 26). Finally, the gubtcripUcn (so far as of any authority) agrees with all this (comp. chap, xvi, 17), except as to Timothy, who was then on his way to Corinth (chap, iv, 17 ; xvi, 10) [for from 2 Cor. viii, 17, 18, it does not necessarily follow that Timothy (even supposing him to be there alluded to) did not visit Corinth till afterwards] ; and also except as to the date at Philippi (the best copies read Ephesus), an error of tradition apparently arising from the fact that Paul was doubtless expecting to pass through (dtkpxo- fjuu) that city (Acts xx, 6). See Timothy. (Comp. Conybeare and Howson^s Life and Epistles ofSUPcady ii, 83). The date assigned this epistle by the forego- ing particulars is the spring of A.D. 54. The bearcM were probably (according to the common subscription) Stephanas, Fortunatus, and Achaicus, who had been recently sent to the apostle, and who, in the conclusion of this epistle (chap, xvi, 17), are especially commended to the honorable regard of the church of Corinth. For oommeniaries^ see below. Of treatises on special points we may name the following (in Latin) : those of Faust on the alleged lost epistle (Argent. 1671); on the schisms of the Corinthian Church, Dorscheus (Hafh. 1722), Mosheun (Helmst. 1726), Schongaid (Hafn. 1788), Yitringa (fibs. sacr. iii, 800 sq.); on *4eading about a wife," Quistorp (Rost. 1692), Witte (Viteb. 1691); on other national allusions, Olearius (Lips. 1807), SchlsBger (Helmst. 1789), WoUe (lips. 1781). See Paul.