2 Corinthians 10:18

συνιστάνων (אBDFGMP 17, Orig.) rather than συνιστῶν (D3KL), from συνιστάω, a form which D3KL support in 2 Corinthians 4:2; 2 Corinthians 6:4, and which BD 17, 39 support in 2 Corinthians 3:1, where συνιστᾶν may be right, Excepting 2 Corinthians 3:1, the forms in -αω (ἱστάω, ἐξιστάω, κ.τ.λ.) may everywhere be rejected. WH. App. p. 168.

2 Corinthians 10:1 to 2 Corinthians 13:10. ANOTHER ASSERTION OF THE APOSTLE’S POSITION, AND A FINAL REBUKE AND WARNING TO HIS JUDAIZING OPPONENTS

This is the third main portion of the Epistle in the form in which it has come down to us. Reasons have been given elsewhere (Introduction § 7 and notes on 2 Corinthians 3:1; 2 Corinthians 4:2; 2 Corinthians 5:13; 2 Corinthians 7:8; 2 Corinthians 8:22; 2 Corinthians 12:20; 2 Corinthians 13:5) for adopting, as the best solution of various difficulties, the theory that these four Chapter s are part of another letter, and probably of the letter alluded to in 2 Corinthians 2:4 and 2 Corinthians 7:8. The change of subject and tone is so great and so sudden that it cannot easily be explained by a long pause in writing and a consequent complete change of mood. Nor can we adopt the hypothesis that in 1–9 the Apostle writes to the loyal many, and in 10–13 to the recalcitrant few. In both sections he is writing to the whole Corinthian Church (see notes on 2 Corinthians 10:2 and on 2 Corinthians 11:2; 2 Corinthians 11:8-9, and 2 Corinthians 12:13; 2 Corinthians 12:19). Moreover the change is in the wrong direction. Strong invective might calm down into what is conciliatory, and a man who had begun in a tone of great severity might a little later continue his letter with studied gentleness. But here, what is most conciliatory suddenly changes into strong invective. Having with great delicacy and tenderness restored happy relations between himself and the Corinthians, he abruptly launches out into reproaches and sarcasms, which must have gone far towards undoing the good results of the first nine Chapter s. And how unlike the usual tact of the Apostle to make, with diffidence and hesitation, an earnest appeal to his Corinthian flock for contributions to the Palestine fund, and then immediately to begin and lash them severely! If the reproaches and sarcasms were sent first, and then, when they had brought about submission, the conciliatory words were penned in a subsequent letter, all runs much more intelligibly. In thought and in tactics these four Chapter s come more naturally before than after the first nine Chapter s. Moreover, it is not easy to get the opening of 10 into reasonable relation to the end of 9. If we suppose that what preceded 10 has been lost, this difficulty disappears.

But, whether the form in which we have the Epistle is the original form or not, it is clear that these Chapter s have been dictated under the influence of strong feeling; and perhaps their contents are not carefully arranged. Yet there are changes of topics, and these changes should be noted. The greater part (2 Corinthians 10:1 to 2 Corinthians 12:10) is taken up with the contrast between S. Paul and his opponents, showing that he is a divinely appointed Apostle, while they are self-constituted and self-commended teachers. This again has two divisions: (i) the Apostle’s authority and extent of province (2 Corinthians 10:1-18); and (ii) the Apostle’s ‘foolish’ glorying (2 Corinthians 11:1 to 2 Corinthians 12:10), to which they have driven him (2 Corinthians 11:1-6), about working gratuitously (2 Corinthians 11:7-15), about his services and sufferings (2 Corinthians 11:16-33), about the revelation granted to him and its consequences (2 Corinthians 12:1-10). The remainder of the invective (2 Corinthians 12:11 to 2 Corinthians 13:10) is chiefly taken up with repetitions of particular points and warnings in connexion with his approaching visit. Bengel thus sums up the four Chapter s; In via sum ad vos, armatus virtute Christi. Ergo obedite.

2 Corinthians 10:1-18. THE APOSTLE’S AUTHORITY AND EXTENT OF PROVINCE

18. οὐ γὰρ ὁ ἑαυτὸν συνιστάνων, ἐκεῖνός ἐστιν δόκιμος. It is not the man who, instead of giving all glory to God, commends himself that is accepted (δέχομαι), i.e. proved, tested, and found to be genuine and solid in character (1 Corinthians 11:19; Romans 16:10; James 1:12); but whom God commends, as he had done in the case of S. Paul, in making him an Apostle. He had been driven to commend himself; and had that commendation stood alone, he would have been ἀδόκιμος (2 Corinthians 13:5; 2 Corinthians 13:7). His critics had only their own self-commendation; they had no θεία ψῆφος (Theodoret) to support it in the eyes of the world. Note the emphatic ἐκεῖνος. For the thought comp. Romans 2:29; also ὁ ἔπαινος ἡμῶν ἔστω ἐν θεῷ καὶ μὴ ἐξ αὐτῶν, αὐτεπαινετοὺς γὰρ μισεῖ ὁ θεός (Clem. Rom. Cor. xxx. 6).