2. External evidence is, however, of little importance in the case of a letter which so clearly betrays its authorship as 2 Corinthians does. It is unmistakably Pauline, in the tone and character of its teaching, no less than in its style and vocabulary. No Epistle lets us see more of the working of the Apostle’s mind, or gives us a clearer view of his personality (see above, chap. i., § 1). It is distine-] tively a Jettery rather than an efistle ; that is, it was written to meet an emergency that had arisen at Corinth, and there is no trace that the writer was conscious that it would take a permanent place in literature. Herein lies at once its charm and its difficulty; and herein, too, is the explanation of the absence of systematic and con- sistent arrangement, such as might fairly be expected in a formal treatise. It reflects the varying moods of the writer; and the broken constructions and frequent anacolutha show that it was written at a time of mental agitation and excitement.
3. We count it unnecessary to produce here the proofs of the Pauline character of the style and diction of the Epistle.' They are apparent throughout, and the marginal references to the text have been specially prepared with a view of bringing out the linguistic parallels between 2 Corinthians and the other Pauline letters.* Among the words peculiar in the N.T. to this Epistle are the following: ἀβαρής, ἀγανάκτησις, ἁγνύτης, ἀγρυπνία, ἁδρότης, ἄμετρος, ἀνακαλύπτειν, ἀνεκδιήγητος, ἀπαρασκεύαστος, ἀπειπεῖν, ἀπόκριμα, ἄρρητος, αὐγάζειν, αὖθαί- ρετος, βελίαρ, δίψος, δόλιος, δυσφηµία, ἐγκρίνειν, ἐκδαπανᾶσθαι, ἐκδημεῖν, ἐκφοβεῖν, ἐλαφρία, ἐντυποῦν, ἐπενδύεσθαι, ἑτεροζυγεῖν, εὐφημία, ἱκανότης, καθαίρεσις, κάλυμμα, καπηλεύειν, καταβαρεῖν, κατάκρισις, καταναρκεῖν, κατάρτισις, κατοπτρίζεσθαι, µετοχή, μολυσμός, µωμεῖσθαι, νυχθήμερον, ὀχύρωμα, παραυτίκα, παραφρονεῖν, πεντάκις, πέρυσι, προαµαρτάνειν, προε- νάρχεσθαι, προκαταρτίζειν, προσαναπληροῦν, προσκοπή, πτωχεύειν, σαργάνη, σκῆνος, σκόλοψ, στενοχωρεῖσθαι, συγκατάθεσις, συλᾷν, συμπέμπειν, συμφώ- νησις, συναποστέλλειν, συνυπουργεῖν, συστατικός, ὑπερέκεινα, ὑπερεκτείνειν, ὑπερλίαν, φειδομένως, φωτισμός, ψευδαπόστολος, ψιθυρισμός.
4. That the Epistle falls of itself into three parts is evident to the most casual reader. (1) From i. 1 to vii. 16 the writer is
1Those who desire to learn what has been urged against the Pauline author- ship may be referred to Dr. Knowling’s Witness of the Epistles, chap. ii., ‘* Recent Attacks upon the Hauptbriefe”; see especially p. 192. But it is quite outside the plan of this commentary to take notice of every extravagance of criticism. (See also vol. ii., p. 753 above.)
* Note that in the marginal references the LXX numbering of the Psalms and of the other Ο.Τ. books has been followed; and that “ here only means that the word so designated does not occur again in the N.T.