OFFLIST REPLIES REQUESTED

Mark Wilson emory2002 at hotmail.com
Sat Jul 29 19:20:25 EDT 2000


OFFLIST


Could anyone shed some light on these comments:



Quotes from: The New American Commentary, David E. Garland, 1999.

-----------

After learning of major problems in Corinth, especially the 'superapostles' 
discrediting Paul's ministry, Garland writes:

“This unpleasant event forced Paul to make “a passing visit,” something he 
said he wanted to avoid (1 Cor. 16:7). Then, Paul withdrew as suddenly as he 
appeared, vexed and humiliated; and he did not return (1:23)."

"He apparently did not want to risk another rebuff and have his authority 
undermined any further. His visit to Corinth seems to have exacerbated 
rather than corrected the problem…”

After quoting 2 Cor. 12:21, Garland says, “Paul confesses that he is not 
sure how to manage the situation since this person’s posture toward him 
poisoned his relationship with the Corinthians.”

------------ END QUOTES.

Above are comments made in close proximity to each other. However, I sense, 
if these assessments are correct, that Paul was somewhat unable to invoke 
his apostolic authority in this situation, almost appearing impotent.

What I was unable to find were the passages to which Garland refers. I am 
assuming he is putting this together based on passages in Acts and 
elsewhere. Can anyone give me the various passages that Garland must be 
basing these conclusions on?

Thank you,

Mark Wilson


________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com




More information about the B-Greek mailing list