Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - 2 Corinthians 11:21 - 11:21
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
2Co_11:21. In a disgraceful way (for me) I say, that we have been weak! Ironical comparison of himself with the false apostles, who, according to 2Co_11:20, had shown such energetic bravery in Corinth. For such things we, I confess it to my shame, were too weak!
κατὰ ἀτιμίαν ] is the generally current paraphrase of the adverb ( ἀτίμως ), to be explained from the notion of measure (Bernhardy, p. 241). See Matthiae, p. 1359 f.
ὡς ὅτι ] as that (see in general, Bast, ad Gregor. Cor. p. 52), introduces the contents of the shameful confession, not, however, in an absolutely objective way, but as a fact conceived of ( ὡς ). Comp. 2Th_2:2; Xen. Hist. iii. 2. 14; and the passages from Joseph, c. Rev_1:11, and Dionys. Hal. 9 ( ἐπιγνοὺς , ὡς ὅτι ἐσχάτοις εἰσὶν οἱ κατακλεισθέντες ) in Kypke, II. p. 268; also Isocr. Busir. arg. p. 362, Lang.: κατηγόρουν αὐτοῦ , ὡς ὅτι καινὰ δαιμόνια εἰσφέρει , and the causal ὡς ὅτι , 2Co_5:19. The confession acquires by ὡς ὅτι something of hesitancy, which strengthens the touch of iron.
ἡμεῖς ] is with great emphasis opposed to the men of power mentioned in 2Co_11:20.
ἠσθενήσαμεν ] namely, when we were there; hence the aorist. On the subject-matter, comp. 1Co_2:2.
There agree, on the whole, with our view of the passage Bengel, Zachariae, Storr, Flatt, Schrader, de Wette, Neander, Osiander, and others. The main point in it is, that κατʼ ἀτιμίαν denotes something shameful for the apostle, and λέγω has a prospective reference. Rückert also gives λέγω a prospective reference, but he diverges in regard to κατʼ ἀτιμίαν , and supplies μέν : “in the point, indeed, to bring disgrace upon you, I must acknowledge that I have been weak.” But in that case how unintelligibly would Paul have expressed himself! For, apart from the arbitrary supplying of μέν , the definite ἀτιμίαν would be quite unsuitable. Paul, to be understood, must have written κατὰ τὴν ἀτιμίαν ὑμῶν (as regards your disgrace), or at least, with reference to 2Co_11:20, κατὰ τὴν ἀτιμίαν (as regards the disgrace under consideration). Ewald and Hofmann take κατὰ ἀτιμ . rightly, but give λέγω a retrospective reference. In their view of ὡς ὅτι they diverge from one another, Ewald explaining it: as if I from paternal weakness could not have chastised you myself; Hofmann, on the other hand, taking ὡς ὅτι on as specifying the reason for saying such a thing (comp. 2Co_5:19). Against Ewald it may be urged that ὡς ὅτι does not mean as if, and that the five points previously mentioned are not brought under the general notion of chastisement; and against both expositors, it may be urged that if κατὰ ἀτιμίαν were in reference to what precedes to mean a dishonour of the apostle himself, ἡμῶν must of necessity (in Php_4:11, κατά is different) have been appended in order to be understood, because the previous points were a shame of the readers; consequently the fine point would have lain just in an emphatically added ἡμῶν (such as κατὰ τὴν ἡμῶν ἀτιμίαν ). In our interpretation, on the other hand, κατὰ ἀτιμίαν receives its definite reference through ὡς ὅτι ἡμεῖς (that we), and a ἡμῶν with ἀτιμίαν would have been quite superfluous. Most of the older commentators, too, though with many variations in detail, refer κατὰ ἀτιμ . λέγω to what precedes, but explain κατὰ ἀτιμ . of the shame of the readers. So Chrysostom,[334] Theophylact, Theodoret, Pelagius, Erasmus, Beza, Calvin, Hunnius, and others: to your shame I say this (2Co_11:20), as if [rather: as because] we had been weak, and could not have done the same thing, although we could do it but would not. Similarly also Billroth (followed by Olshausen): “In a disgraceful way, I maintain, you put up with that injustice from the alleged reason that we are weak” (rather: had been). But since κατὰ ἀτιμ . is not more precisely defined by a ὑμῶν , we have no right to give to it another definition than it has already received from Paul by the emphatic ἡμεῖς ἠσθενήσ . Against the retrospective reference of λέγω , see above. Finally, in that view the passage would lose its ironical character, which however still continues, as is shown at once by the following ἐν ἀφροσύνῃ λέγω .
ἐν ᾧ δʼ ἄν τις τολμᾶ κ . τ . λ .] Contrast with the ironical ἠσθενήσαμεν : wherein, however, any one is bold
I say it irrationally
I too am bold; in whatever respect (quocunque nomine) any one possesses boldness, I too have boldness. In ἐν ᾧ lies the real ground, in which the τολμᾶν has its causal basis. As to τολμᾷ , comp. on 2Co_10:2. ἄν contains the conception: should the case occur. See Fritzsche, Conject. p. 35.
ἐν ἀφροσύνῃ λέγω ] Irony; for μή τίς με δόξῃ ἄφρονα εἶναι , 2Co_11:16. But Paul knew that the τολμῶ κἀγώ would appear to the enemies to be a foolish assertion.
[334] Chrysostom observes that ὡς ὅτι κ . τ . λ . is given obscurely, in order to conceal the unpleasantness of the meaning by the obscurity.