Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - 2 Corinthians 12:12 - 12:12
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
2Co_12:12. Proof of the previous οὐδὲν ὑστέρησα τῶν ὑπερλ . ἀποστ : The signs, indeed (yet without producing among you the due recognition), of the apostle were wrought among gou. The μέν solitarium leaves it to the reader to supply for himself the corresponding contrast, so that it may be translated by our truly indeed. See especially, Baeumlein, Partik. p. 163; Maetzner, ad Antiph. p. 153; Kühner, ad Xen. Anab. i. 2. 1. The contrast to be supplied here is put beyond doubt by the idea of the σημεῖα which is placed emphatically and significantly at the head; hence we must reject what Billroth (followed by Olshausen) supplies; but even otherwise you can make no complaint about anything.
τὰ σημεῖα τοῦ ἀποστ . is that which divinely evinces the apostle to be such, that by which one discerns the apostle. Ὁ ἀπόστολος with the article does not denote the ideal of an apostle (Billroth), which would be at variance with his humility, but the apostle in abstracto. Bengel says aptly: “ejus, qui sit apostolus.”
κατειργάσθη ἐν ὑμῖν ] namely, which I was with you. The I, however, retreats modestly behind the passive expression. The compound “perficere notat maxime rem arduam factuque difficilem,” Fritzsche, ad Rom. I. p. 107.
ἐν πάσῃ ὑπομονῇ ] the manner of the κατειργάσθη ἐν ὑμῖν , strengthening the force of the proof: in all manner of perseverance, so that amidst adverse and painful circumstances there was perseverance with all possible stedfastness in fully exhibiting these signs of an apostle. The view followed by many older expositors since Chrysostom: “primum signum nominat patientiam,” is erroneous, since the ὑπομονή is not a specifically apostolic σημεῖον .[379]
σημείοις κ . τέρασι καὶ δυνάμεσι ] whereby those signs of an apostle were accomplished, so that σημείοις is here meant in a narrower sense (miraculous signs) than the previous τὰ σημεῖα . The three words in emphatic accumulation denote the same thing under the two different relations of its miraculous significance ( σημ . κ . τέρ .) and of its nature ( δύν . deeds of power, 1Co_12:10). Comp. 2Th_2:9; Heb_2:4; Act_2:22. The notions of σημεῖα and τέρατα are equivalent. See on Rom_15:19.
Paul therefore wrought miracles also in Corinth, and wrought them as legitimations of his apostleship (Heb_2:4). Comp. Rom_15:19; Act_15:12.
On the accumulation of terms, comp. Cic. Tusc. ii. 40 26: “His ego pluribus nominibus unam rem declarari volo, sed utor, ut quam maxime significem, pluribus.” Comp. also Cic. de Fin. iii. 4. 14; Nat. D ii. 7. 18.
How at variance with our passage is the historical criticism, which lays down à priori the negation of miracles!
[379] An appeal should not have been made to 2Co_6:4, where in fact there stands the wider conception θεοῦ διάκονοι .