Skip to main content

2 Corinthians 2:1-13

You can read the text here.

Paul continues to explain his deviation from his originally communicated travel plans. He did not want to visit and have to offer a rebuke for a lingering problem within the community, thereby causing them pain. He wanted his next visit to be a joyful meeting, rather than a painful one, as causing them pain would be painful for him. Likewise seeing him joyful would bring them joy which was the goal of his intended visit. He wrote the painful letter to challenge them for this reason, out of love, since their personal meetings were rare, the loving thing to do was to deal with the problem via letter so that their in person meeting could be as sweet as they both desired.[1] It was also written to test their character, to see if they would be obedient.[2]

While Paul did write to challenge them to deal with an issue related to a member within the congregation, it wasn't he who was affected by the problem, it was rather the Corinthian body itself. Paul was glad to see that they responded well on the whole, as the majority decided to punish him appropriately.[3] The punishment had the necessary effect so Paul now urges them that the time to forgive and reiterate their love had arrived. The purpose for which Paul wrote has been accomplished. Not only was the sin dealt with, but the Corinthians proved their obedience. Now, again is the time for forgiveness, because unforgiveness is Satan's weapon.[4]

Paul's love for the Corinthians is displayed as he concludes talking about his travel plans.[5] God opened doors for effective ministry while he was in Troas, but he was eager to hear Titus' report, so not finding him there he pushed on to Macedonia.

---------------------------------------
[1] Anyone who has a close friend who is long distance friend understands this point well.

[2] So Matera.

[3] Thrall emphasizes the majority (not universal) agreement on the punishment. As she notes, we don't know if those who dissented wanted harsher or looser penalties.

[4] Again a point made by Matera.

[5] As noted by Thrall.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

More Calvinist than Calvin?

I'm working on a paper on the topic of divine sovereignty and human freedom. Occasionally on this topic (or the subtopic of election) you will hear people through out the barb at strong Calvinists that they're 'being more Calvinist than Calvin.' After having read Calvin carefully on the issue I don't think that there's any validity to that charge. I don't see a material difference here between Calvin and say John Piper. Here are several quotes from the Institutes to prove my point. 'All events are governed by God's secret plan.' I.xvi.2 'Governing heaven and earth by his providence, he also so regulates all things that nothing takes place without his deliberation.' I.xvi.3 'Nothing happens except what is knowingly and willingly decreed by him.' I.xvi.3 Calvin explicitly rejects a limited providence, 'one that by a general motion revolves and drives the system of the universe, with its several parts, but which does not specifc

Galatians 2:11-14: The circumcision group

11 When Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. 12 For before certain people came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group. 13 The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy, so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray. 14 When I saw that they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in front of them all, "You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs? (TNIV) There's an important issue that we need to wrestle with in this passage, and it's the question of whether or not the people from James and the circumcision group are the same group. I am not inclined to think that they are. The ensuing discussion is drawn from Longenecker's commentary pp 73-5

Dating Galatians and Harmonization with Acts

We've gotten to the point where how we date Galatians and where we fit it into the narrative of Acts will affect our interpretation in a significant manner. The first question that we have to address is, which visit to Jerusalem is Paul recounting in Galatians 2:1-10 ? Is it the famine relief visit of Acts 11:27-30 or the Jerusalem council of Acts 15 ? First, I think it's worthwhile to point out that it's not all that obvious. Scholars are divided on this issue (even Evangelical scholars). In favor of the theory of Galatians 2:1-10 referring to the Acts 11 visit are the following: This visit clearly is prompted by a revelation by the Holy Spirit. The Acts 15 gathering seems to be a public gathering, where the one described in Galatians is private. Paul never alludes to a letter sent to the diaspora churches which could have definitively won the case for him. The issue of food laws was already decided by James. Why would men coming from him in Galatians 2:11-14 be advocat