Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - 2 Corinthians 7:11 - 7:11
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
2Co_7:11. What has just been said of the godly sorrow is now proved by experience from the instance of the readers themselves. For see, this very thing (nothing else), the having been afflicted with godly sorrow, etc. The emphatic use of the preparatory τοῦτο before infinitives is very common in classic writers. See Kühner, II. p. 330; Breitenb. ad Xen. Oec. 14. 10.
ὑμῖν ] not: among you, but: vobis.
σπουδήν ] activity, namely, to efface and make amends for the offence, as opposed to their previous negligence in regard to the incestuous perso.
ἀλλά ] yea rather, imo, corrective, and thereby advancing beyond the last idea (comp. 1Co_3:2; Joh_16:2). Paul feels that he has said too little by using σπουδήν . The co-ordinate repetition of ἀλλά before each point lays on each a special emphasis. Comp. on 1Co_6:11.
ἀπολογίαν ] πρὸς ἐμέ , Chrysostom and Theophylact rightly say; but we must at the same time observe that they have answered for themselves in the first instance to Titus, and through him to Paul (that they were not partakers in the guilt of the incestuous person). Billroth understands the de facto exculpation by the adjudging of punishment to the transgressor. An arbitrary view, and opposed to the context ( ἐκδίκησιν ). Ewald, in accordance with his assumption of a letter in reply now lost, refers it to the latte.
ἀγανάκτησιν ] displeasure, vexation, that such a disgraceful thing had been carried on in the churc.
φόβον ] “ne cum virga venirem” (Bengel), namely, in the event of the state of things not being amended (1Co_4:21), or even of new transgressions. Comp. Chrysostom and Theophylact. The explanation: fear of God’s punishments (Pelagius, Calvin, Flatt, Olshausen), is at variance with the context ( ἐπιπόθησ .).
ἐπιπόθ .] as in 2Co_7:7, longing after the apostle’s comin.
ζῆλον ] not as in 2Co_7:7, where ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ is associated with it, but, as is suggested by the following ἐκδίκησιν (punishment of the transgressor): disciplinary zeal against the incestuous person, not zeal in general for the honour of Christ, of the church, and of the apostle (Osiander). The six objects introduced by ἀλλά go logically in pairs, so that ἀπολογ . and ἀγανάκτ . relate to the disgrace of the church, φόβον and ἐπιπόθ . to the apostle, and ζῆλον and ἐκδίκησιν to the incestuous person, the latter, however, without the arbitrary distinction drawn by Bengel, that ζῆλον refers to the good of his soul, and ἐκδικ . only to his punishment for his transgression. ζῆλος is the zeal for bot.
ἐν παντὶ συνεστήσατε κ . τ . λ .] a judgment on the whole matter added asyndetically, and so with the more weight (Dissen, ad Pind. Exc. II. p. 278): in every respect you have proved that you yourselves are innocent as regards the matter in question. By this the Corinthians are acquitted from positive participation in the offence; they could not be acquitted (comp. 1Co_5:6) of a negative participation (through toleration and connivance), but this is not further touched on in accordance with his purpose, which is here throughout conciliator.
ἑαυτούς ] you for your own person, as opposed to the evil-doer.
On συνίστημι , with the accusative and infinitive, comp. Diod. Sic. i. 96, xiv. 45. Without εἶναι (comp. Gal_2:18) the attribute would appear as purely objective, as the proved fact; with εἶναι the expression is subjective, denoting the relation from the standpoint of the readers. Comp. in general, Krüger, § 65, 1. 4.
The dative τῷ πράγματι is that of ethical reference, expressing the matter with respect to which what is affirmed takes place. See Matthiae, p. 876; Bernhardy, p. 84. Comp. ἐλεύθεροι … τῇ δικαιοσύνῃ , Rom_6:20; Mat_5:8. This, at the same time, in opposition to Rückert’s assertion that ἐν (see the critical remarks) cannot be dispensed with. On the term itself, Bengel rightly remarks: “indefinite loquitur de re odiosa.” Comp. 2Co_2:5 ff.