The apostle shows that he does not need to commend himself or to be commended by the Corinthians; that God had qualified him for the work of a minister of the new, and not of the old covenant, vs. 1–11. He exercised his ministry in accordance with the peculiar character of the new dispensation, vs. 12–18.
Proof of the Apostle’s fitness for his work, and its nature. Vs. 1–11
ALTHOUGH the concluding paragraph of the preceding chapter contained a strong assertion of the integrity and fidelity of the apostle, he says, it was not written for the purpose of self-commendation. He needed no commendation from any source, v. 1. The Corinthians themselves were his commendation. Their conversion was an epistle of Christ authenticating his mission and his fidelity, which all men could read, vs. 2–3. His fitness or sufficiency for his work was due in no measure to himself, but to God, who had endowed him with the qualifications of a minister of the new covenant, vs. 4–6. This covenant and its ministry are far superior to the old covenant and the ministry of Moses, because the one was a ministry of death, the other of life; the one was of condemnation, the other of righteousness; the glory of the one was transient, the glory of the other is abiding, vs. 7–11.
- Do we begin again to commend ourselves? or need we, as some (others), epistles of commendation to you, or (letters) of commendation from you?
Many of the peculiarities of this epistle are due to the fact that at the time of writing it the apostle’s mind was filled with conflicting feelings. On the one hand, he was filled with gratitude to God and love to the Corinthians on account of their repentance and ready obedience; and on the other, with feelings of indignation at the perverse and wicked course adopted by the false teachers in Corinth. Hence even in the expression of the former class of feelings, he is interrupted or turned aside by the thought that his opponents were on the watch to turn every thing to his disadvantage. Thus although there was nothing of a spirit of self-commendation in his thanking God for causing him to triumph, or in the assertion of his sincerity, in 1:15–17, yet he knew that his enemies would put that construction on what he had said. He seems to hear them say, ‘He is commending himself again.’ It is plain from the use of the word again in this connection, that the charge of praising himself had before been made against the apostle, whether founded on his former epistle or what he said on other occasions, is uncertain and unimportant.
The authorities are divided as to whether ἠ μη or εἰ μη is the true reading in the following clause. If the former, the sense is, “Or do we need,” &c.; if the latter, “Unless we need,” &c. The latter gives an ironical turn to the passage. The apostle sets it forth as certain that his apostolic mission and authority were so authenticated, that he did not need, as certain people did, letters of commendation either to them or from them. These false teachers had no doubt gained access to Corinth on the strength of certain letters of recommendation. They were so little known and had so little character, that when they went elsewhere, they would need to be commended by the Corinthians. With Paul the case was different.
- Ye are our epistle written in our hearts, known and read of all men.
Ye are our epistle, &c., or, The epistle which we have ye are. You as Christians, your conversion is, as it were, a letter from Christ himself authenticating our mission and fidelity. Written in our hearts. The plural form, our hearts, may be explained either on the assumption that the apostle is speaking of Timothy as well as of himself; or on the ground that he says hearts instead of heart for the same reason that he says We instead of I; or that the word is used figuratively for the affections. It is not Paul’s manner to make his associates the joint authors of his letters, and in no one of his epistles does he speak more out of the fulness of his personal feelings than he does in this. It was not Timothy who was accused of self-commendation, who needed no letters of commendation, and it was not of Timothy’s mission that the conversion of the Corinthians was the authentication, and therefore it was not in Timothy’s heart that the epistle referred to was written. Paul is speaking of himself. A thing is said to be written in the heart when it is a matter of consciousness; when it is a matter of subjective, as distinguished from objective knowledge. Thus the law of God is said to be written on the heart when the knowledge of it is inward and not merely outward. Jer. 31:33; Heb. 8:10; Rom. 2:15. Any thing of which a man is certain, or of which he has a conviction founded upon his inward experience, may be said to be written on his heart. That the Corinthians were his epistle was to the apostle a matter of consciousness. It was a letter written on his heart which he could neither misunderstand nor be ignorant of. Comp. Rom. 10:8. Any thing also that is very dear to us is said to be written on the heart, or to be in the heart. So Paul says to the Corinthians, “Ye are in our hearts,” 7:3. The apostle therefore may be understood to mean either that he was perfectly certain that the conversion of the Corinthians was for him a letter of commendation; or that it was most dear to him. A letter cherished in his heart. The context is in favour of making the former idea the prominent one. This letter, however, was not only well known to the apostle, it was known and read of all men. It was a palpable evidence of his divine mission, which no one could be ignorant of, and which no one could gainsay. Men could not doubt its genuineness, nor could they question its import. He expresses the same idea when he says, “The seal of my apostleship are ye in the Lord,” 1 Cor. 9:2.