Threatening of punishment to impenitent offenders; exhortation to seller amination and amendment; conclusion of the epistle.
Paul’s warnings and exhortations
HAVING previously admonished and warned, he now distinctly announces his purpose to exercise his apostolic power in the punishment of offenders, vs. 1–2. As they sought evidence of his apostleship, he would show that although weak in himself, he was invested with supernatural power by Christ. As Christ appeared as weak in dying, but was none the less imbued with divine power, as was proved by his resurrection from the dead; so the apostle in one sense was weak, in another full of power, vs. 3–4. Instead of exposing themselves to this exercise of judicial authority, he exhorts them to try themselves, since Christ lived in them unless they were reprobates, v. 5. He trusted that they would acknowledge him as an apostle, as he sought their good, vs. 6–7. His power was given, and could be exercised, only for the truth. He rejoiced in his own weakness and in the prosperity of the Corinthians. The object in thus warning them was to avoid the necessity of exercising the power of judgment with which Christ had invested him, vs. 8–10. Concluding exhortation and benediction, vs. 11–13.
- This is the third (time) I am coming to you: In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.
From this it is evident that Paul had already been twice in Corinth. He was about to make his third visit. Those who do not admit that he went to Corinth during the interval between the writing the first and second epistle, say that all that is proved by this verse, is that “once he had been there; a second time he had intended to come; now the third time he was actually coming.” Others, still more unnaturally, say he refers to his presence by letter, as Beza explains it: Binas suas epistolas pro tolidem profectionibus recenset. There is no necessity for departing from the obvious meaning of the words. The Acts of the Apostles do not contain a full record of all the journeys, labours and sufferings of the apostle. He may have visited Corinth repeatedly without its coming within the design of that book to mention the fact. In the mouth of two or three witnesses, &c. It was expressly enjoined in the Old Testament that no one should be condemned unless on the testimony of two or three witnesses. Num. 35:30‚ Deut. 17:6, 19:15. In this latter passage, the very words used by the apostle are to be found: “One man shall not rise up against any man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinneth; at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established.” This principle of justice was transferred by our Lord to the New Dispensation. In his directions for dealing with offenders he says, “Take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word shall be established,” Matt. 18:16; see also John 8:17; Heb. 10:28. In 1 Tim. 5:19 the apostle applies the rule specially to the case of elders: “Against an elder receive not an accusation, but before two or three witnesses.” In the judgment of God, therefore, it is better that many offenders should go unpunished through lack of testimony, than that the security of reputation and life should be endangered by allowing a single witness to establish a charge against any man. This principle, although thus plainly and repeatedly sanctioned both in the Old and New Testaments, is not held sacred in civil courts. Even in criminal cases the testimony of one witness is often considered sufficient to establish the guilt of an accused person, no matter how pure his previous reputation may have been. Paul here announces his determination to adhere, in the administration of discipline, strictly to the rule relating to testimony laid down in the Scriptures. There are two explanations, however, given of this passage. Some suppose that Paul merely alludes to the prescription in the Law, and says that his three visits answers the spirit of the divine injunction by being equivalent to the testimony of three witnesses. Tres mei adventus trium testimoniorum loco erunt, says Calvin. This interpretation is adopted by a great many commentators, ancient and modern. But the formality with which the principle is announced, the importance of the principle itself, and his own recognition of it elsewhere, show that he intended to adhere to it in Corinth. Three visits are not the testimony of three witnesses. Every word, πᾶν ρῆμα, every accusation, a sense which, agreeably to the usage of the corresponding Hebrew word, the Greek word ρῆμα has here in virtue of the context, as in Matt. 5:11, 18:16, 27:14. Shall be established, i.e. legally and conclusively proved.