SECOND EPISTLE. Not long after the trans mission of the first epistle, the Apostle left Ephe sus in consequence of the uproar excited against him by Demetrius the silversmith, and betook himself to Troas (Acts xix. 23, sq.) Here he ex pected to meet Titus with intelligence from Corinth of the state of things in that church. According to the common opinion Titus had been sent by Paul to Corinth, partly to collect money in aid of the distressed Christians in Palestine, partly to ob serve the effect of the Apostle's first epistle on the Corinthians ; but Billroth, Riickert, and others, rather suppose him to have been sent before the writing of the first epistle solely for the former of these purposes, and that he remained in Corinth till after the reception by the church there of that epistle, while Bleek (Studien nod Kritikett, Jahrg. 1830, s. 625 ; comp. Neander's Hist. of the Apos tolic Age, vol. i. p. 266, E. T.) suggests that Titus may have been despatched with an epistle now lost, and written between the first and second of those still extant. This hypothesis of a lost epistle' seems to be the convenient resource of the German critics for the removal of all difficulties, but in the absence of any direct evidence in its support, it cannot, in this case, be admitted to be worthy of consideration. Billroth's hypothesis rests also upon a very unstable basis, as Neander shews, by whom the common opinion is espoused and de fended (vol. i. 1. c.) In this expectation of meet ing Titus at Troas, Paul was disappointed. He accordingly went into Macedonia, where, at length; his desire was gratified, and the wished-for infor mation obtained (2 Cor. n. 13 ; vii. 15, sq.) The intelligence brought by Titus concerning the church at Corinth was on the whole favourable. The censures of the former epistle had produced in their minds a godly sorrow, had awakened in them a regard to the proper discipline of the church, and had led to the exclusion from their fellowship of the incestuous person. This had so wrought on the mind of the latter that he had repented of his evil courses, and shewed such con trition that the Apostle now pities him, and exhorts the church to restore him to their communion (2 Cor. ii, 6-1 t ; vii. 8, sq.) A cordial response had also been given to the appeal that had been made on behalf of the saints in Palestine (ix. 2). But with all these pleasing symptoms there were some of a painful kind. The anti-Pauline influence in
the church had increased, or at least had become more active ; and those who were actuated by it had been seeking by all means to overturn the authority of the Apostle, and discredit his claims as an ambassador of Christ.
This intelligence led the Apostle to compose his second epistle, in which the language of com mendation and love is mingled with that of cen sure, and even of threatening. This epistle may be divided into three sections. In the first (i the Apostle chiefly dwells on the effects produced by his first epistle and the matters therewith con nected. In the second (iv. -ix.) he discourses on the substance and effects of the religion which he proclaimed, and turns from this to an appeal on behalf of the claims of the poor saints on their liberality. And in the third (x.-xiii.) he vindicates his own dignity and authority as an apostle against the parties by whom these were opposed. The divided state of feeling in the Apostle's mind will account sufficiently for the difference of tone per ceptible between the earlier and later parts of this epistle, without our having recourse to the arbi trary and capricious hypothesis of Semler (Dissert. de duplice appendice Ep. ad Rom. Hal. 1767) and Weber de numero epp. ad Cor. rectius con stituendo, Vitem. 1798) whom Paulus follows, that this epistle has been extensively interpolated.
Commentaries.—On both epistles : Wolf. Mus culus (Bas. 1559, fol.) ; Aretius (Morg. 1583, fol.) ; Bullinger (Tig. 1534-35, 2 vols. Svo) ; Mo sheim (vol. i., Flensb. 1741 ; vol. ii., 1762, Baumgarten (Halle, 1761, 4to) ; Moms (Leipz. 8vo) ; Flatt (Tub. 1827, Svo) ; Billroth (Leipz. 1833, Svo ; E. T., 2 vols. 12M0, Edin. 1837-38) ; Rtickert (Leipz. 1836-37, 2 vols. Svo); Osiander (Stuttg. ; Stanley (Lond. 1838, 2 vols. Svo) ; Kling (Vielef. 1861). On the first epistle : Schmid (Hamb. 1704, 4to) ; Krause (Francf. 1790, Svo) ; Heydenreich (Marb. 1823-2S, vols. Svo) ; Pott (in Nov. Test. Koppian., vol. v. par. 1., Gott. 1826, Svo) ; Peile (Lond. 184S, Svo). On the second epistle : Emmerling (Lips. 1823, Svo); Fritzsche (Lips. 1824, Svo) ; Schar ling (Kopenh. 1840, Svo). The various questions of a critico -historical character touching these epistles are very fully discussed by Davidson in his Introduction to the N. T., i. 208-285.—AV . L. A.