2 Corinthians
by Moyer Hubbard
■ AUTHOR: Paul the apostle.
■ DATE: A.D. 55.
■ OCCASION: Written to reaffirm his affection for the Corinthians, to re-ignite enthusiasm for the collection, and to rebuff intruding opponents.
■ THEMES:
1. The new covenant ministry of the Spirit.
2. Strength in weakness.
3. The inner dynamic of the Christian life.
Corinth and the Corinthians
See Introduction to 1 Corinthians.
Developments Between 1 and 2 Corinthians
When Paul wrote 1 Corinthians (probably from Ephesus), he promised to send Timothy to Corinth (1 Cor. 4:17; 16:11) to guide the struggling community through some difficult issues that had arisen since his departure. These included factionalism (1 Cor. 3), immorality (1 Cor. 5), continued participation in pagan religious feasts (1 Cor. 8; 10:14–22), and questions related to theology and church practice (1 Cor. 11–15). Although what happened next is not entirely clear, it seems likely that Timothy returned with news that the situation had worsened, which forced Paul to abandon the travel plans he announced in 1 Cor. 16 and make an abrupt visit to Corinth (cf. 2 Cor. 13:1–2). This was a painful experience for Paul (2:1), who found himself personally attacked by a member of the congregation (2:5–11; 7:12). Upon returning to Ephesus, Paul wrote an emotional letter, now lost, which he conveyed through Titus (2:4, 12–13; 7:6–7).
Titus eventually brought Paul news that the Corinthians had responded favorably to that letter written “with many tears” (2:4) and had taken disciplinary action against the offender (2:5–11; 7:5–12). However, Titus also reported a new threat: flamboyant missionaries from churches in Judea had arrived in Corinth and challenged Paul’s legitimacy as an apostle (see “Paul’s Opponents” at 11:6). Paul responded by dispatching Titus from Macedonia with the letter we now call 2 Corinthians (around A.D. 55), while he made preparations for his third visit to the troubled community (13:1–2).
Unity of 2 Corinthians
The historical reconstruction sketched above assumes that the canonical form of 2 Corinthians represents a single correspondence written by Paul, addressing a complex set of circumstances in Corinth. This is hardly universally accepted, however. In particular, the dramatic change of tone in chapters 10–13 seems to many impossible to reconcile with the confident and hopeful tenor of chapters 1–9. This has led some to propose that these later chapters are a portion of the earlier tearful letter (2:4), or perhaps comprise a letter written subsequent to chapters 1–9, after Paul had been more fully appraised of the situation in Corinth. Many other partition theories have been offered, though it is beyond the scope and focus of this commentary to examine these in any detail. Recent discussions of this issue tend to favor the unity of 2 Corinthians.1 The following arguments are especially pertinent:
1. Lack of textual support. There is no evidence that 2 Corinthians ever existed in any form other than its present canonical form.
2. Unifying motifs. Certain key themes occur throughout our canonical 2 Corinthians and suggest a rhetorically unified composition: strength in weakness (2:14–16; 4:7–18; 11:30–33; 12:10; 13:3); Paul’s style and philosophy of preaching (2:17; 4:2–5; 5:11–13; 10:10–12; 11:5–6; 13:2–3); testing one’s faith (2:9; 8:8; 13:5–6); proper and improper boasting (1:12, 14; 5:12; 7:4, 14; 8:24; 9:2; 10:8–17; 11:10–30; 12:1–10); commendation (3:1–3; 4:2; 5:12; 7:11; 10:18; 12:11), and so on.
3. Chapters 1–9 preparatory to 10–13. In significant ways, chapters 10–13 presuppose the argumentation of 1–9.2 In both sections Paul is defending himself before the Corinthians, and his direct confrontation of his opponents in 10–13 is almost expected, given his allusions to their activity in 1:12–13; 2:17; 4:2–4; 5:12. It is simply not true that chapters 1–9 contain no hint of simmering problems between Paul and the Corinthians.3
4. Various contexts, various strategies. From the Corinthian correspondence we know there were those in Corinth who questioned Paul’s leadership (1 Cor. 3–4), some who were Paul’s supporters (1:11; 16:15–17), at least one person who had openly attacked Paul (2 Cor. 2:5; 7:12), others who had a change of heart over their opposition to Paul (7:9–12), not to mention intruders who wished to undermine Paul’s authority (2 Cor. 10–13). In other words, there was a variety of situations and groups to address. Thus, to evaluate the integrity of this letter on problematic notions of “restricted coherence, focused consistency, and unitary intentionality”4 is to fail to grasp the complexity of the situation on the ground in Corinth.
Problems in Corinth
According to 1 Corinthians, the fundamental problem in Corinth was the Corinthians themselves. In Paul’s view they were worldly, immature, and still not ready for the “solid food” of advanced discipleship (1 Cor. 3:1–4). Although some improvements are evident by the time of 2 Corinthians, it is clear that many of the same problems persist. Paul again has to confront those who continue to frequent pagan temples (2 Cor. 6:14–7:2; cf. 1 Cor. 8; 10:14–22), and again has to address Corinthian dissatisfaction with his oratory (2 Cor. 10:10; 11:6; cf. 1 Cor. 2:1–5). The Corinthians are also somewhat embarrassed by Paul’s insistence on plying his trade as a tentmaker rather than accepting their patronage, thus elevating his social status. When Paul speaks of “lowering himself” through pursuing his craft (2 Cor. 11:7), he certainly echoes the Corinthian perspective on his trade, and the picture that begins to emerge is one of a superficial, status-conscious community that has failed to grasp the cruciform character of the Christian life.
NIKE AND TYCHE
A relief of Nike in Ephesus along Curetes Street.
Bronze figure of the goddess Tyche (Fortuna) holding the “horn of plenty,” a symbol of wealth and fortune.
The Purpose of 2 Corinthians
Given the problems outlined above, it is not surprising that most of Paul’s theological argumentation in 2 Corinthians is aimed at correcting an inverted value system. In chapters 3–6 Paul emphasizes the transforming work of the Spirit (3:3–6, 7, 17–18; 5:4, 17), the priority of inner reality over outward display (3:1–3, 6; 4:6–7, 16, 18; 5:7, 12), and the radical newness of life in Christ: “You are a new creation” (5:17). In chapters 10–13 Paul takes this argument one step further by demonstrating that what the Corinthians regard as weakness is actually the very strength of God (12:9–10). In short, what Paul attempts in this letter is nothing less than a theological program of re-enculturation.
THE MEDITERRANEAN WORLD OF THE ROMAN ERA
There are, of course, other reasons for this lengthy letter. Paul’s ever-changing travel plans have brought charges of indecision and suspicions of waning affection, and Paul is eager to set the record straight (1:15–2:4). He also needs to reignite enthusiasm for the collection, a beneficent gift on behalf of the Gentile churches to their brothers and sisters in Judea (chs. 8–9). The Corinthians had already pledged their support (1 Cor. 16:1–4), and Paul needs to act quickly in order to capitalize on the momentum of Titus’s recent efforts on this front (2 Cor. 8:6). And then there are Paul’s opponents—recently arrived emissaries from Judea who seem determined to undermine Paul’s authority and presumptuously foist themselves on the vulnerable community (chs. 10–13). Their version of the gospel places themselves at the center, rather than Christ, and Paul exposes this anemic, truncated pseudo-gospel for the sham that it is.
If we were to summarize these disparate interests under one rubric, we might identify reconciliation as the dominant concern of Paul in 2 Corinthians. In what may be his most personal letter (cf. 6:11–13), Paul aims to regain the support of key groups in Corinth in order that the community as a whole can grow to maturity in Christ. Although Paul’s language is at times harsh and scolding, it issues from genuine parental affection: “I speak as to my children—open wide your hearts also” (6:13).