the necessary opposition between Simon and Peter, from our Lord's prophecy in Matt. xxiv. 11. 14. 15. and from the account of Simon's universal reception in Acts viii. 10. But, when taken in conjunction with the designation of "the enemy" in Ep. Pet. ad Jac. 2. it seems impossible to doubt that the whole passage contains allusions, sometimes even verbally exact, to such charges against St. Paul as are implied in 2 Cor. vi. 8. 9.; Acts xxi. 28. or to the general success of his mission in parts where the Jewish Apostles had not yet penetrated, as implied especially in Rom. xvi. 19. 20.; 2 Cor. x. 13.-16.; 1 Cor. i. 13. 15.; Gal. iv. 14.-16. All doubt, however, is removed by the more precise language of another passage in a later part of the work. In an argument between Simon and Peter, in which the former insists on the superiority of visions as evidence to our Lord's discourses, the latter on that of actual intercourse, Peter concludes as follows: "If then, Jesus our Lord (¿ 'Inroûs quær) was seen in a vision, and was known by thee and conversed with thee, it was in anger with thee as an adversary that He spoke to thee through visions and dreams, and even through outward revelations. But can any one be made wise to teach through a vision ? If thou sayest that he can, why then did our Master abide and converse with His disciples, not sleeping but awake, for a whole year? And how shall we believe the very fact that He was seen of thee? And how could He have been seen of thee, when thou teachest things contrary to His teaching? And if by having been seen and made a disciple by Him an Apostle, then expound what He has taught, love His Apostles, fight not with me who was His companion. For against me, the firm rock, the foundation of the Church, even me thou didst 'withstand' openly (ávféσтxas). If thou hadst not been an adversary, thou for one hour, thou becamest wouldst not have calumniated me, and reviled my preaching, to deprive me of credit when I spoke what I had heard myself in intercourse with the Lord; as if I were to be blamed, I whose character is so great. Or if thou sayest that I was to be blamed (xaтeywoμévov), thou accusest God who revealed Christ to me, and attackest Him who blessed me because of that revelation. But since thou wishest truly to work with the truth, now learn first from us what we learned from Him; and when thou hast become a disciple of the truth, then become a fellow-worker with us." (Hom. xvii. 19.) The objections here made to St. Paul's Divine mission, are the very same which might have been inferred to exist from his own expressions in Gal. i. 1. 12. 15, 16-20.; 1 Cor. ix. 1.; 2 Cor. x. 16., xi. 1-5. And in the indisputable reference to St. Paul's own words in the account of the feud at Antioch, dvTÉσTηy, xαTEɣvwoμévov (Gal. ii. 11.), there is hardly an attempt to draw over the true object of the passage even the thin veil of the character of Simon, which serves to darken only, not conceal it. SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥΣ Β. (I.) THE TIDINGS BROUGHT BY TITUS. (1.) Introduction. I. 1-11. I. 1 ΠΑΥΛΟΣ ἀπόστολος Ἰησοῦ χριστοῦ διὰ θελήματος Θεοῦ, καὶ Τιμόθεος ὁ ἀδελφός, τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ τοῦ θεοῦ τῇ οὔσῃ ἐν Κορίνθῳ σὺν τοῖς ἁγίοις πᾶσιν τοῖς οὖσιν ἐν ὅλῃ τῇ ̓Αχαΐα. 2 χάρις ὑμῖν καὶ εἰρήνη ἀπὸ θεοῦ πατρὸς ἡμῶν καὶ κυρίου Ιησοῦ χριστοῦ. 3 Εὐλογητὸς ὁ θεὸς καὶ πατὴρ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ 1. For the general language of the salutation, see on 1 Cor. i. 1. The peculiarities of this are: (1.) The introduction of Timotheus in the place of Sosthenes, which is naturally explained by his absence at the time of the writing of the First Epistle, on the journey described in 1 Cor. iv. 17., xvi. 10.; Acts xix. 22., and his return before the writing of the Second. (2.) The mention of the Christians of Achaia generally, as included in the address to Corinth, for which see 1 Cor. 1.2. ὁ ἀδελφὸς " our brother,” i.e. "our fellow Christian," as in 1 Cor. i. 1., where it is similarly applied to Sosthenes. 3. The thanksgiving which follows, stands in the same relation to the Second Epistle, as the analogous opening of the First, and furnishes, as it were, the key-note to the ensuing six chapters. Two feelings rise in his mind, the moment that he begins to address the Corinthians, and cross each other in almost equal proportions in this passage. The first is an overwhelming sense of gratitude for his deliverance from his distress, whether it were the actual dangers to which he had been exposed at Ephesus, or the inward trouble which he suffered from his anxiety for the Corinthian Church, or more probably from both χριστοῦ, ὁ πατὴρ τῶν οἰκτιρμῶν καὶ θεὸς πάσης παρακλήσεως, 4 ὁ παρακαλῶν ἡμᾶς ἐπὶ πάσῃ τῇ θλίψει ἡμῶν, εἰς τὸ δύνασθαι ἡμᾶς παρακαλεῖν τοὺς ἐν πάσῃ θλίψει διὰ τῆς together. The second is the keen sense which breathes through both the Epistles to Corinth, but especially through the Second, of his entire unity of heart and soul with his Corinthian converts, so that not only did he naturally pour out his deepest feelings to them, but felt also that they were actually one with him in his sorrows and in his joys; that his comfort and deliverance would be shared by them, as it had been the result of their prayers. These two thoughts combined are sufficient to account for the abruptness and prominence of the subject in the opening of the Epistle. It is possible, however, that he may have also been influenced partly by the desire to begin from that serene atmosphere of thankfulness and love, which he felt would soon be disturbed in the course of the Epistle by the harsher topics on which he should be obliged to dwell, and partly by the anxiety, here as in his other Epistles, to exhibit his relations to his converts in the most friendly aspect, and to dispel at once by his own frankness and cordiality the cloud of suspicion which, as we see from many subsequent passages intervened between him and them. These secondary considerations may have re moved all check to his indulgence of the two master-feelings described, but it is out of keeping with the irregular and impassioned tone of this Epistle to suppose that they were put prominently forward as the groundwork of a formal and deliberate plan. εὐλογητὸς ὁ θεός. This phrase, which occurs in Eph. i. 3., is parellel to the more usual form of the Apostle's thanksgiving. εὐχαριστῶ τῷ θεῷ, and it is therefore indifferent whether the verb supplied be σT or EσTW, probably the latter. In the fulness of this thankfulness, he at once proceeds to invest the names of "God" and "the Father," which in these thanksgivings are usually left without more direct application, with the attributes of which he was now himself most conscious. The two clauses refer to the words in the first part of the verse. "Blessed be God, i. e. the God of comfort, and the Father, i. e. the Father of mercies," the inversion being occasioned partly by the convenience of the construction, which required that παρακλήσεως should be con tinued into the next sentence, partly by the fact that the first of the two expressions ("the Father of mercies") is the most natural and obvious of the two. It was possibly suggested 5 παρακλήσεως ἧς παρακαλούμεθα αὐτοὶ ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ, ὁ ὅτι καθὼς περισσεύει τὰ παθήματα τοῦ χριστοῦ εἰς ἡμᾶς, οὕτως διὰ τοῦ χριστοῦ περισσεύει καὶ ἡ παράκλησις ἡμῶν. 6 εἴτε But it is article in the first phrase is only אבינו אב הרחמן evidently used here in a more personal and emphatic sense: and as in the Jewish formula just given, the idea is expressed, not through a substantive genitive, but an adjective, so it is most natural in the present case not to resolve the genitive Tv oikтipμav merely into a Hebraism, but to combine in it the two ideas that God's essence consists in showing mercies, and also that He is the Father and source of mercies. Compare "the Father of glory," Eph. i. 17.; "the Father of spirits," Heb. xii. 9.; "the Father of lights," James, i. 17. In the same way the next phrase expresses that God is the Author of comfort. Compare the phrase "the God of hope," Rom. xv. 13. The words, παράκλησις, παρ pakaλov, are remarkable here, as being the earliest passage in the New Testament where they are applied to God; and as illustrating the more precise sense in which they are applied in St. John's writings, not, as here, to God generally, but to the Son and the Spirit. 4. nuâs, " us." It is characteristic of this Epistle that the Apostle speaks of himself in the plural number more usually than elsewhere. v Táon T used in consequence of the more particular application of it, defined by the genitive nuv. 5. τὰ παθήματα τοῦ χριστοῦ are the sufferings undergone by Christ in His own person. περισσεύει εἰς ἡμᾶς. "overflow to us," with the double meaning that the sufferings of Christ pass "from Him to us," and that they are to be found "in in a superabundant measure. See Rom. v. 15. us οὕτως διὰ χριστοῦ περισσεύει Kaì ʼn Taρáкλησis ýμôv. "So also through Him in whom we all suffer together, the comfort which we possess ourselves from God, passes over abundantly to you.' This is the meaning of the particular words. The general sense of the whole passage is based on the idea, that he was one with Christ, and through Christ with all Christians. "It is of the very nature of spiritual things that they cannot be confined within themselves. Freely we have received, freely we give.. The comfort which we feel ourselves communicates itself to you. Because Christ suffered, therefore we suffer; because He comforts us, therefore we are able to comfort |