Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - 2 Corinthians 12
Verse Commentaries:
Chapter Level Commentary:
οὐ συμφέρει μοι , ἐλεύσομαι γάρ ] Lachm. and Rück. read οὐ συμφέρον μὲν , ἐλεύσομεν δέ (Lachm.: δὲ καί , after B), supported by B F G à , and in part by some min. vss. and Fathers. But μὲν … δέ betrays itself as a correction by way of gloss of the difficult γάρ , in which μοί was supplanted by μέν , and γάρ by δέ . The question whether συμφέρον is original instead of συμφέρει , is decided by the circumstance that, according to the codd., the reading συμφέρον is connected with the reading μὲν … δέ , and hence falls with it.—2Co_12:3. ἐκτός ] B D* E* à , Method. in Epiph. have χωρίς . So Lachm. Tisch. and Rück. Rightly; ἐκτός is from 2Co_12:2. The subsequent οὐκ οἶδα is deleted by Lachm., but only on the authority of B, Method.—2Co_12:6. τί ] is doubtless wanting in B D*** E** F G à * 37, 67** Arm. Boern. Tol. Harl.** codd. Lat. Or., and is deleted by Lachm. and Rück. But how easily it was left out, being regarded as utterly superfluous, and even as confusing!—2Co_12:7. Before the first ἵνα Lachm. has διό , following A B F G à 17, Boern. An insertion for the sake of connection, occasioned by the not recognising the inverted order of the words, so that καὶ τῇ ὑπερβ . τῶν ἀποκαλ . was attached in some way to what goes before (with some such meaning as this: in order that no one may get a higher opinion of me … even through the abundance of the revelations).
The second ἵνα μὴ ὑπεραίρωμαι is wanting in A D E F G à * 17, and several vss. and Fathers (bracketed by Lachm.); but the emphasis of the repetition being overlooked, the words have been passed over as having been used already.—2Co_12:9. δύναμίς μου ] μου is wanting in A* B D* F G à *, and several vss. and Fathers. Deleted by Bengel, Lachm. Tisch. Considering, however, the no small weight of the testimonies for μου (A** D*** E K L à ** and almost all min. vss. Or. Chrys. Theodoret), and seeing that the syllable μου might easily be passed over after the syllable μις , the Recepta is to be preserved, its sense also being necessary according to the whole contex.
τελειοῦται ] A B D* F G à * have τελεῖται . So Lachm. Tisch. and Rück. Rightly; the former is an interpretation.—2Co_12:11. After ἄφρων Elz. has καυχώμενος , against decisive evidence. An exegetical addition.—2Co_12:12. ἐν σημείοις ] ἐν is wanting in A B D* à 17, 39, 71, al. Vulg. ms. Clar. Germ. Tol. and Fathers; while F G, Boern. Syr. Chrys. Ambrosiast. have καί . ἐν is mechanically repeated from what precedes, and with Lachm. Tisch. and Rück. is to be deleted.—2Co_12:13. ἡττήθητε ] B D* à * 17 have ἡσσώθητε (so Lachm.), which is nothing but a copyist’s error, and in D and à is rightly corrected; F G have ἐλαττώθητε , which is a gloss.—2Co_12:14. After τρίτον Griesb. Scholz, Lachm. Rück. Tisch. read τοῦτο , following doubtless a preponderance of authorities, among which, however, D E 93, Copt. Syr.? put it before τρίτον . An addition from 2Co_13:1.
ὑμῶν ] is wanting after καταναρκ . in A B à 17, 71, al. Aeth. Damasc., while D* F G have ὑμᾶς . Both have been supplied, and are rightly deleted by Lachm. Tisch.—2Co_12:15. εἰ καί ] καί is wanting in A B F G à * Copt. Sahid. Deleted by Lachm. An addition from misunderstanding; see the exegetical remarks.—2Co_12:19. πάλιν ] Lachm. Tisch. and Rück. read πάλαι on preponderating evidence. Rightly; the πάλαι not understood was erroneously glossed.
In what follows κατέναντι is to be adopted instead of κατενώπιον , with Lachm. and Rück., on preponderating evidence. Comp. 2Co_2:17.—2Co_12:20. Instead of ἔρεις , Lachm. and Rück. read ἔρις , but against preponderating evidence. The latter might easily originate through itacism. Instead of ζῆλοι , Lachm. Tisch. and Rück. read ζῆλος , following A B D* F G, Goth. Syr. Arm. Dam. Rightly; the plural crept in from the surrounding forms.—2Co_12:21. ἐλθόντα με ] Lachm. Rück. and Tisch. read ἐλθόντος μου , following A B F G à * 39, 93. Rightly; the Recepta is a grammatical emendation, which brought with it the omission of the subsequent με .
ταπεινώσῃ ] Lachm. and Tisch. read ταπεινώσει , following B D E F G L, min. Oec. The subjunctive is a mechanical alteration in accordance with the preceding and usual form.
CONTENTS.
Breaking off from what precedes, Paul passes over to the revelations which he has had, narrates one of them, and says: Of this he would boast, not of himself, except only of his weaknesses; for he will perpetrate no folly by self-glorying, but abstains from it, in order not to awaken too high an opinion of himself (2Co_12:1-6). And in order that he might not plume himself over those revelations, there was given to him a painful affliction, on account of which after a thrice-repeated invocation he had been referred by Christ to His grace; hence he preferred to glory in his weaknesses, in order that he might experience the power of Christ, for which reason he had pleasure in his weaknesses (2Co_12:7-10).
He had become a fool, compelled thereto by them; for he ought to have been commended by them, since in no respect did he stand behind the fancied apostles, but, on the contrary, had wrought amongst them the proofs of his apostolic dignity (2Co_12:11-12). This leads him, amidst bitter irony, again to his gratuitous working, which he will continue also on his third arrival (2Co_12:13-15). But not only had he not by himself and immediately taken advantage of them, but not even through others mediately (2Co_12:16-18). Now begins the conclusion of the whole section: Not before them, but before God, does he vindicate himself, yet for their edification. For he fears that he may find them not in the frame of mind which he wishes, and that he may be found by them in a fashion not wished for (2Co_12:19-21).