The Pulpit Commentary — 2 Corinthians — Section 37

Thl' vorb mcRnR, JiforRlly, "I judged," but them a visit wllioh oould only be pnin/11! on b rightly rondc>red "detem1ined," 611 in both sides, when the normal relation between I Oor. ii. 2; vii. 37. He is oontmsting hie them should be one of joy on both si<lce, ns final deci1'io.,, with his original desire, men- he has already said (eh. i. 24). 'fhe singnlar, tioned in eh. i. 15. With myself; rather, "he who is being pained by me," does not formy~cZf; as the best course.which I could refer to the offender, hut to the Oorinthin.ns take. That I would not oome again to you collectively. Who is he then, eto.? 'l'ho in heavine!B. The " again" iu the true "then" in the original is classionlly 11.nd reeding is not pleoed immediately before elegantly expressed by 1r11l, and (comp. Jas. the 'l'erb, but it seems (as Theodoret says) ii. 4). to belong to it. so that the meaning is not Ver. 8.-And I wrote this so.me unto you. "that I would not pRy you a second sad And I wrote. He meets the tncit objectiou. visit," but "that my second ,;isit to you If you shrink from causing us pain, why should not be a sad one." There have beeu then did you write to us in terms so severe? interminable discnssions, founded on this The "I wrote" may be what is co.lied the expression and on eh. xiii. 1, as to whether epistolary aorist, and will then be equivalent St. Paul had up to the time of writing this to our " I write : " " What I write to you letter Yisited Corinth tioice or only once. now he.s the very object of sparing you a There is no question tbat only one visit is painful visit." If the oorist has its more recorded in the Acts (xviii. 1-18) previous ordinary sense, it refers to the First, and to the one which be paid to this Church after not to the present Epistle; and this seems this Epistle bad been sent (Acts n::. 2, 3). the better view, for the "I wrote" in ver. 9 If be paid them a second brief, ead, and un- certainly refers to the First Epistle. This recorded 'l'isit, it can only have been during same thing; namely, exactly what I have his long stay in Ephesus (Acts xix. 8, 10). written (whether in this or in the former But the possibility of this does not seem to Epistle). The words, "this very thing," may be recognized in Acts xx.. 31, where be epeaks e.lso, iu the original, mean " for this very of his work at Ephesus "night anu. day" reason," as in 2 Pet. i. 5, and like the ,i, during this period. The assumption of -rovro in ver. 9. Unto you: These words such a nsit, as we shall see, is not necessi- should be omitted, with ~. A, B, C. When I tated by eh. xiii. I, but in any case we know came. The emphasis lies in these words. nothing whatever about the details of the He preferred that bis letter, rather than his villit, even if there was one, and the question, personal visit, should cause pain. In you being supremely unimportant, :is hardly all It is true that in the Corinthian Church -worth the time which bas been spent upon it. St. Paul ho.d bitter and unscrupulous op- If he had paid such an.sit, it would be almost ponents, but he will not believe even that unaccountable that there should be no refer- they desired his personal unhappiness. At ence to it in the First Epistle, and here in any rate, if there wore any such, he will not eh. i. 19 he refers only to one occasion on believe that they exist, since "love believeth which be bad preached Christ in Corinth. all thinga, Lopetb all things" (1 Cor. xiii. 7). Each fresh review of the circumstances con- Ver. 4.-P'or. He proceeds to assign the vinces me more strongly that the notion anguish which his First Epistle had caused of three ,isits to Corinth, of which one :is him as a proof of his, confidence that, as a llD?ecorded, is a needless and mistaken body, they lo'l"ed him as he loved them. If inference, due to unimaginative literalism in they had regarded each other with iqdiffer- interpreting one or two phrases, and en- ence, his letter would not have been written cumbered with difficulties on every side. In to them, as it were, in bis heart's blood. Out heaviness. The expression applies a£I much of muoh aflliotion and anguish of heart. The to the Corinthians as to himself. He did word for " anguish" mea.ns "contraction," not wish bis second visit to Corinth to be a "pressure," "spasm" (Luke :xxi. 25). The painful one. expression may seem far too strong to be Ver. 2.-P'or if I make yon sorry. The accounted for by the tone of the first letter. verse may be rendered, "For if I pain you, Hence some have supposed that be is refer- who then is it that gl»ddens me except he ring to some other letter now lost; and who is Leing pained by me?" The "J," others that eh. x.-xiii. of this letter, where being expressed in the original, is emphatic, the whole tone of affection and tenderness and the verse has none of the strange selfish suddenly changes into one of impassioned meaning which has been e.ssigned to it, irony and indignation, really belonged to Damely, that St. Paul thought "the grief this intermediate letter. There is no need, which he had caused to be amply compen- l10wever, for these hypotheses. In 1 Cor. sated for by the pleasure he received from v. 1-vi. 11 be had spoken of the errors of that grief." It bas tbe much simpler mean• the Church with strong reprobation, and.the ing Uu,.t lie was unwilling to pain those who anguish with which he wrote the lefter may gladdened him, and 1bcr".fore would not pay ha vo been all the more deeply felt beco.uav_ oH. 11. 1-17.J 'l'HE SECOND El'IS'l'L~ TO THE CORil-lTHlANd. 37