Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - 2 Corinthians 6:12 - 6:12
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
2Co_6:12. A negative confirmation of the ἡ καρδία ἡμ . πεπλάτ . just said, and opposite state of matters on the part of the Corinthians.
Not straitened are ye in us, but straitened in your innermost part ( σπλ ., the seat of love, like καρδία , 2Co_6:11, to which the expression stands related under the increasing emotion by way of climax). The meaning of it is: “valde vos amo, non item vos me.” It is impossible, on account of the οὐ , to take it as an imperative (Aretius, Luther, Heumann, Morus, Schleusner).
οὐ στενοχ . ἐν ἡμῖν ] non angusto spatio premimini in animis nostris: in this Paul retains the figure of the previous ἡ καρδ . ἡμ . πεπλάτ . Chrysostom aptly says: ὁ γὰρ φιλούμενος μετὰ πολλῆς ἔνδον ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ τοῦ φιλοῦντος βαδίζει τῆς ἀδείας . Comp. 2Co_7:3; Php_1:7. The negative expression is an affectionate, pathetic litotes, to be followed by an equally affectionate paternal reproof. This is explanation enough, and dispenses with the hypothesis that Paul is referring to the opinion of the church, that it had too narrow a space—a smaller place than it wished—in his heart (Hofmann). Those who interpret πλατ ., 2Co_6:11, as to cheer, take the meaning to be: not through us do ye become troubled, but through yourselves (Kypke, Flatt; comp. Elsner, Estius, Wolf, Zachariae, Schrader; comp. also Luther),—a thought, however, which is foreign to the whole connection; hence Flatt also assumes that Paul has 2Co_7:2 ff. already in his thoughts; and Schrader explains 2Co_6:14 to 2Co_7:1 as an interpolation.[249]
στενοχ . δὲ ἐν τ . σπλ . ὑμ .] so that there is in them no right place for us (comp. 1Jn_3:17). Chrysostom: οὐκ εἶπεν · οὐ φιλεῖτε ἡμᾶς , ἀλλʼ · οὐ μετὰ τοῦ αὐτοῦ μέτρου . Paul did not write στενοχωρούμεθα δὲ ἡμεῖς ἐν τοῖς σπλ . ἡμ ., because by this the contrast would have passed from the thing to the persons (for he had not, in fact, written οὐχ ὑμεῖς στενοχωρ . ἐν ἡμῖν ), and so the passage would have lost in fitting concert and sharp force. Rückert thinks that Paul refers in 2Co_6:12 to an utterance of the Corinthians, who had said: στενωχορούμεθα ἐν αὐτῷ ! meaning, we are perplexed at him, and that now he explains to them how the matter stood with this στενοχωρεῖσθαι , but takes the word in another sense than they themselves had done. A strangely arbitrary view, since the use of the στενοχωρεῖσθαι in our passage was occasioned very naturally and completely by the previous πεπλάτ . Comp. Chrysostom, Theodoret.
[249] Emmerling explains this section 2Co_6:14 to 2Co_7:1 to be, not an interpolation, but a disturbing addition, only inserted by Paul on reading over the Epistle again, “sententiis subito in animo exortis.” And recently Ewald has explained it as an inserted fragment from another Epistle, proceeding probably only from some apostolic man, to a Gentile Christian church. But (1) the apparent want of fitting in to the connection, even if it did exist (but see on ver. 14), would least of all warrant this view in the case of an Epistle written under so lively emotion. (2) The contents are quite Pauline, and sufficiently ingenious. (3) The name βελίαρ , which does not occur elsewhere in Scripture, is not evidence against Paul, since in his Epistles (the Pastoral ones excepted) even the name διάβολος , so current elsewhere, occurs only at two passages of the Epistle to the Ephesians. Besides, the συμφών . Χριστῷ πρὸς βελίαρ may be an echo of some apocryphal utterance known to the readers (comp. Eph_5:14). (4) The expressions μετοχή (comp. μετέχειν , 1Co_9:10, al.), μερές (comp. Col_1:12), συμφώνησις (comp. σύμφωνος , 1Co_7:5), καθαρίζα (comp. Eph_5:26), cannot, any more than συγκατάθεσις which he does not use elsewhere, excite well-grounded suspicion in the case of one so rich in handling the language. (5) The critical evidence gives not the slightest trace of ground for assuming that the section did not originally stand in all the manuscripts. How different it is with passages really interpolated, such as Mar_16:9 ff.; Joh_7:33 ff.! Yet Holsten has also, zur Evang. d. Paul. u. Petr. p. 387, assented to the condemnation of the section.