Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadCambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges - 2 Corinthians 2:5 - 2:5
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
5–11. Having vindicated himself with regard to the charge of levity (2Co 1:15 to 2Co 2:4), he now goes on to vindicate his treatment of the grievous offender. It used to be assumed that this referred to the incestuous person, whom the Apostle sentenced to excommunication (1Co 5:1-8); and this passage fits that one well in some respects. But there are difficulties which seem to be insuperable. (1) It is scarcely credible that S. Paul should speak of so heinous an offence as that of 1Co 5:1 in the gentle way in which he speaks here. This is vehemently urged by Tertullian (De Pudic. XIII.), and it is hard to find an answer. (2) If this passage refers to it, its heinousness was even greater than appears from 1Co 5:1. For 2Co 7:12 refers to the same case as this passage; and if this and 1Co 5:1 refer to the same case, then the incestuous man married his father’s wife while his father was still living. In 2Co 7:12, if τοῦ ἀδικήσαντος is the incestuous person, τοῦ ἀδικηθέντος must be the lawful husband of the woman; and the latter is spoken of as alive when S. Paul wrote. Could the Apostle write as he does here of such an offender as that? (3) Would he speak of such a sin from the point of view of injuring an individual? In 1 Corinthians 5 it is the pollution of the whole Church which appals him. For these reasons the time-honoured and attractive reference of this passage to the incestuous person must be abandoned, and both this and 2Co 7:8-12 must be interpreted of an offender about whom we know no more than is told us in this letter (see A. Robertson in Hastings’ DB. i. p. 493, and Sanday in Cheyne’s Enc. Bib. I. 902). He may have been a ringleader in the revolt against the Apostle’s authority; and in that case ὁ ἀδικηθείς may be either S. Paul himself or (less probably) Timothy. Or he may have been the one who was in the wrong in some outrageous quarrel, about which nothing is said. Everything is uncertain, except that (1) in some particulars this passage fits the incestuous person very badly, and that (2) the case is treated with the utmost gentleness and reserve. No names are mentioned, and no needless particulars are given; and hence our perplexity. S. Paul says just enough to make the Corinthians understand, and then leaves τὸ πρᾶγμα (2Co 7:11).