Second Corinthians is the most personal of Paul's epistles. Written after a grave crisis with Corinth, it articulates apostolic defence, the theology of suffering as participation in the cross, the ministry of the new covenant opposed to the old, and an appeal to the collection for the poor of Jerusalem. A text that combines consolation, polemic, autobiography (the thorn in the flesh, the rapture to the third heaven, the catalogue of apostolic sufferings) and major theology (2 Cor 3-5 on ministry and reconciliation).
Overview
Author
Paul, accompanied by Timothy (2 Cor 1:1). Unanimous Pauline authenticity in modern criticism.
Date of composition
C. AD 55-56, a few months after 1 Corinthians, written from Macedonia (2 Cor 2:13; 7:5) during Paul's return towards Corinth for his third visit.
Addressees
The Church of Corinth, after a grave crisis: the presence of rival preachers (the "super-apostles," 2 Cor 11:5; 12:11), accusations against Paul (weakness in presence, ambiguity in the promises of a visit, charlatanism in the collection), a difficult return to fidelity.
Place of composition
Macedonia, probably Philippi, during the Macedonian stay of the third missionary journey (Acts 20:1-2).
Occasion / context
After sending 1 Corinthians, Paul made a "painful" visit to Corinth (2 Cor 2:1; 12:14; 13:1-2), then sent a "tearful letter" (2 Cor 2:3-4; 7:8-12), and finally sent Titus, who brought back good news (7:5-16). 2 Corinthians expresses the joy of the community's return, defends Paul's apostolate, presses the collection (chaps. 8-9), prepares the third visit (chaps. 10-13).
Original language
Koine Greek, an intense emotional register, an alternation of polemical irony and mystical prose.
Place in the canon
Received universally. The coherence of the Pauline corpus is attested by Marcion (c. 140), the Muratorian Canon (c. 170), the ancient manuscripts.
Authenticity and authorship criticism
The Pauline authenticity of 2 Corinthians is uncontested. F. C. Baur ranked it among the Hauptbriefe.
Literary integrity: the major question. Unlike 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians presents important internal tensions that have led criticism to propose several partition hypotheses.
(1) The passage 6:14 – 7:1 on the incompatibility between believers and unbelievers abruptly interrupts the development and resumes at 7:2. Several critics see in it a non-Pauline fragment integrated secondarily (Fitzmyer, Furnish), a fragment of the "earlier letter" of 1 Cor 5:9 (Hurd), or a Pauline rhetorical digression (Thrall, Harris).
(2) The contrast between chaps. 1-9 and 10-13. Chapters 1-9 are conciliatory and express the joy of reconciliation; chapters 10-13 are polemical and threaten the "rod." The major theory: chapters 10-13 would be the "tearful letter" (earlier than 1-9), included secondarily (Bornkamm, Furnish, Martin, Stegemann). The alternative theory: Paul received bad news between the two sections (Hughes, Witherington, Harris).
(3) Chapters 8 and 9 on the collection overlap. Hans Dieter Betz (2 Corinthians 8 and 9, Hermeneia, 1985) proposes two distinct administrative letters. The alternative position: Paul returns to the same theme for rhetorical reasons.
The current dominant position. The hypothesis that 2 Corinthians is a compilation of several Pauline letters is very widespread but not consensual. The "unitarian" position: Maurice Carrez, Murray Harris, Margaret Thrall, Ben Witherington.
Paul's adversaries: the "super-apostles." The Pauline portrait (2 Cor 11:4-5,13-15,22: "they are Hebrews, Israelites, the seed of Abraham") suggests charismatic Jewish-Christian preachers who call into question the Pauline apostolate (weakness, lack of eloquence, absence of spectacular signs). Three hypotheses: (1) strict Jewish Christians come from Palestine (Käsemann, Lüdemann); (2) charismatic Jewish Christians of the "divine men" tradition (Georgi, Schmithals); (3) Hellenistic Judaisers (Barrett, Martin).
Literary structure
Prologue: blessing and consolation(2 Cor 1:1-11)
Salutation (1:1-2). Blessing to the God of all consolation (1:3-7): Paul is consoled in order to console others. The account of the distress in Asia (1:8-11).
Defence of the changes of plan(2 Cor 1:12 – 2:17)
Pauline sincerity (1:12-14). The promise of a visit and its modification (1:15-22): it is not fickleness but the "yes" of Christ. The visit postponed to spare Corinth (1:23 – 2:4). Forgiveness of the offender (2:5-11). Anxiety over Titus and the triumph of Christ (2:12-17).
The ministry of the new covenant(2 Cor 3:1 – 4:6)
Letters of recommendation: the community is Paul's letter (3:1-3). Capacity coming from God, letter/Spirit, old/new covenant (3:4-6). The Moses-Paul comparison (3:7-18, a midrash on Ex 34): the veil, the glory that passes, the freedom of the Spirit, transformation into the image. The ministry of the gospel (4:1-6).
Treasure in jars of clay(2 Cor 4:7 – 5:10)
A paradoxical catalogue of sufferings (4:7-15). Inner renewal and hope (4:16-18). The earthly tent and the heavenly dwelling (5:1-5). To walk by faith, to appear before the tribunal of Christ (5:6-10).
The ministry of reconciliation(2 Cor 5:11 – 6:13)
Fear and the love that presses (5:11-15): "Christ died for all." The new creation (5:17). The ministry of reconciliation (5:18-21: "Christ made sin for us so that in him we might become the righteousness of God"). Open your hearts (6:1-13).
Separation and the joy of reconciliation(2 Cor 6:14 – 7:16)
Do not be mismatched in a disparate yoke (6:14 – 7:1). Paul's place in the hearts of the Corinthians (7:2-4). Comfort through Titus (7:5-16): grief according to God and according to the world.
The collection for Jerusalem(2 Cor 8:1 – 9:15)
The example of the Macedonians (8:1-7). Christ who made himself poor (8:9). The recommendation of Titus (8:16-24). The cheerful giver (9:7).
Polemic: Paul vs the super-apostles(2 Cor 10:1 – 13:10)
Criticism of the accusers (10:1-18). Pauline "folly" (11:1-15). The fool's speech (11:16 – 12:13): the catalogue of sufferings (11:23-29), the rapture to the third heaven (12:1-4), the thorn in the flesh (12:7-10: "my grace is sufficient for you"). The announcement of a third visit (12:14 – 13:10).
Final greetings(2 Cor 13:11-13)
Final exhortations (13:11). The trinitarian blessing (13:13): "the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God, the communion of the Holy Spirit."
Principal theology
The ministry of the new covenant (2 Cor 3)
2 Cor 3 articulates the Pauline theology of the new covenant, in opposition to the old (Moses). Paul takes up Ex 34:29-35 (Moses descending from Sinai with a radiant face) to develop a typological midrash.
Letter and Spirit (3:6). "God has made us capable of being ministers of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life" (διάκονοι καινῆς διαθήκης, οὐ γράμματος ἀλλὰ πνεύματος). This contrast was over-interpreted in the tradition (notably by Augustine) as an opposition between legalistic Judaism and spiritual Christianity — a reading criticised by Krister Stendahl and the New Perspective. Paul does not devalue the Law as such (Rom 7:12) but distinguishes its regime of application: without the Spirit, the Law kills.
The veil of Moses (3:12-18). The veil that Moses wore is, according to Paul, a veil over the reading of the old Law (3:14-15), "removed in Christ" (3:14). When the heart turns to the Lord, the veil falls (3:16). "Now the Lord is the Spirit; and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom" (3:17, one of the most disputed Pauline verses on the Christ-Spirit link).
Transformation into the image (3:18). "And we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are transformed into the same image (μεταμορφούμεθα τὴν αὐτὴν εἰκόνα), from glory to glory." This anthropology of transformation nourished Eastern theōsis (Maximus the Confessor), Latin mysticism, and the Reformed doctrine of sanctification (Calvin Inst. III, 6-10).
The critique of supersessionism. The Pauline contrast between the two covenants was read for centuries as replacement: the new abolishes the old. This reading is firmly rejected since Vatican II (Nostra Aetate § 4, 1965) and the contemporary joint declarations. The Pauline "veil" is no longer read as an essential blindness of Israel but as a provisional situation within the mystery of salvation (cf. Rom 9-11).
The ministry of reconciliation (2 Cor 5:11-21)
2 Cor 5:11-21 is one of the theological summits of Paul. The section articulates soteriological christology and apostolic ministry.
The love of Christ that presses (5:14-15). "The love of Christ presses us (συνέχει ἡμᾶς), because we have judged this: one died for all, therefore all died; and he died for all so that the living might no longer live for themselves, but for him who died and rose for them."
The new creation (5:17). "If anyone is in Christ, he is a new creature (καινὴ κτίσις); the old things have passed away, behold, all things have become new." This Pauline formula (taken up in Gal 6:15) inspires the whole Christian anthropology of regeneration.
The ministry of reconciliation (5:18-19). "All this comes from God, who reconciled us (καταλλάξαντος ἡμᾶς) to himself through Christ, and gave us the ministry of reconciliation." "God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself" (5:19).
The soteriological exchange (5:21). "Him who knew no sin he made to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God" (τὸν μὴ γνόντα ἁμαρτίαν ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν ἁμαρτίαν ἐποίησεν, ἵνα ἡμεῖς γενώμεθα δικαιοσύνη θεοῦ ἐν αὐτῷ). This commercium fascinated the patristic age (Athanasius, On the Incarnation § 54: "He became man so that we might become God") and the Reformation. Luther develops it in the Freedom of a Christian (1520): through a "joyful exchange" (fröhlicher Wechsel), Christ takes our sins and gives us his righteousness.
This text is one of the most disputed on soteriology: penal substitution (Anselm, Calvin), satisfaction (Anselm), recapitulation (Irenaeus), victory (Christus Victor, Aulén), exemplarism (Abelard), non-sacrificial theories (Girard).
The theology of weakness (2 Cor 11-12)
2 Cor 11-12 is one of the most autobiographical texts of Paul. Cornered by his adversaries who assert their titles and their exploits, Paul responds with a paradoxical "folly": he boasts of his weakness.
The catalogue of sufferings (11:23-29). A unique text: prison, beatings, shipwrecks, Jewish persecution (five times forty lashes less one, 11:24 — the punishment of the makkot according to Deut 25:3), pagan persecution (three times beaten with rods), various perils, hunger, thirst, cold, nakedness, and above all "the anxiety for all the Churches" (11:28, ἡ μέριμνα πασῶν τῶν ἐκκλησιῶν).
The rapture to the third heaven (12:1-4). Paul recounts a rapture "fourteen years ago" to the third heaven and to paradise where he heard "ineffable words that it is not permitted for a man to utter" (12:4). Paul speaks of himself in the third person ("I know a man in Christ"), a rhetorical distance that underlines the mystical reticence. This text is one of the major sources of Christian apophaticism (Dionysius, Maximus, Gregory Palamas).
The thorn in the flesh (12:7-10). "So that I should not be puffed up with pride... a thorn was given me in the flesh (σκόλοψ τῇ σαρκί), an angel of Satan to buffet me." The identity of the σκόλοψ: a chronic illness (epilepsy, malaria, ophthalmia), persecution, moral temptation? Paul prayed three times: "the Lord said to me: My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness" (ἀρκεῖ σοι ἡ χάρις μου, ἡ γὰρ δύναμις ἐν ἀσθενείᾳ τελεῖται, 12:9).
A paradoxical theology. Paul opposes to the theologia gloriae of his adversaries (visible power, spectacular signs, eloquence) a theologia crucis in which the power of God is manifested in human weakness. Luther made this distinction the centre of his theologia crucis (Heidelberg Disputation, 1518). This theology marked Kierkegaard, Bonhoeffer (Letters from Prison), Jürgen Moltmann (The Crucified God, 1972).
Major theological disputes
The following disputes draw on the six great confessional voices (Catholic, Orthodox, Reformed, Lutheran, Anglican, Anabaptist), with interjections from Professor Tryphon Goldberg, the site's Jewish pedagogical persona.
Penal substitution or another soteriological logic? (2 Cor 5:21)
"Him who knew no sin he made to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God" (2 Cor 5:21). This verse states a paradoxical exchange. Penal substitution? Satisfaction? Exchange? Representation? The Christian confessions diverged on the doctrine of redemption.
Catholic
The Catholic Church traditionally receives the doctrine of Anselm (Cur Deus Homo, 1098): the satisfactio. Sin is an offence against the infinite divine majesty; it requires infinite satisfaction; only a God-man can offer it. Council of Trent (1547). CCC § 615-617. Vatican II (Gaudium et Spes § 22) accentuates the ascending aspect (Christ assumes human nature) more than the descending one (God inflicts punishment). Contemporary: Hans Urs von Balthasar (Mysterium Paschale, 1969), Ratzinger, René Girard (mimetic theory).
Orthodox
Orthodoxy rejects the Anselmian satisfactio as foreign to Greek patristics. Orthodox soteriology privileges: (1) recapitulation (Irenaeus); (2) theōsis (Athanasius, "He became man so that we might become God"); (3) cosmic victory (Christus Victor, Aulén). The sacrifice is a total and participatory gift, not a payment. Contemporary: Vladimir Lossky, John Romanides, Christos Yannaras.
Reformed
Calvin (Institutes II, 16-17) defends penal substitution: Christ bears the penalty of sin in our place, satisfying the justice of God. Second Helvetic Confession (1566), Heidelberg Catechism (1563, q. 37-39), Westminster Confession (1647, ch. VIII). Contemporary critique: Jürgen Moltmann, N. T. Wright, Joel Green-Mark Baker (Recovering the Scandal of the Cross, 2000). Vigorous defence: Steve Jeffery, John Stott.
Lutheran
Luther articulated the doctrine of the fröhlicher Wechsel (joyful exchange, Freedom of a Christian, 1520): Christ takes our sins, gives us his righteousness. This doctrine is rooted in 2 Cor 5:21 and Gal 3:13. Augsburg Confession (1530, art. IV), Formula of Concord (1577). Contemporary critique: Eberhard Jüngel, Pannenberg, Moltmann (The Crucified God, 1972). Robert Jenson, Oswald Bayer defend the Lutheran theologia crucis.
Anglican
Classical Anglicanism receives penal substitution through the Thirty-Nine Articles (art. 2, 31). Cranmer, Hooker defend it. But the Anglican tradition also integrates: recapitulation (Lancelot Andrewes), theōsis (the Oxford Movement), Christus Victor (C. S. Lewis). John Stott defends penal substitution (The Cross of Christ, 1986). N. T. Wright integrates representative substitution (Christ represents Israel). Steve Chalke (The Lost Message of Jesus, 2003) triggered controversy by speaking of penal substitution as "cosmic child abuse" — a formula rejected by the Anglican mainstream.
Anabaptist
The Anabaptist tradition generally received the Reformation soteriology (penal substitution) but articulates it with a radical ethic of following Jesus (Nachfolge Christi). For Menno Simons, the cross is objective redemption and subjective model. Yoder (The Politics of Jesus, 1972), Hauerwas accentuate Christic non-violence. A non-violent soteriology: Denny Weaver (The Nonviolent Atonement, 2001) proposes a non-violent recapitulation against penal substitution.
Synthesis
2 Cor 5:21 remains one of the key texts of soteriological christology. Penal substitution (Anselm-Calvin-Lutherans), satisfaction (Trent), recapitulation (Irenaeus-Orthodox), Christus Victor (Aulén), participation (Orthodox theōsis), non-violent soteriology (Yoder-Weaver), mimetic theory (Girard): each tradition reads the verse according to its dominant grammar. Contemporary theology often privileges a plerophoric reading integrating several dimensions. The ecumenical dialogue progresses by distinguishing the event (Christ dead and risen for our salvation) from the explanatory theories (which remain diverse).
Letter and Spirit (2 Cor 3:6): anti-Judaism or typology?
"The letter kills, but the Spirit gives life" (2 Cor 3:6). This verse was read for centuries as an opposition between the Jewish Law (the letter) and the Christian Gospel (the Spirit). A supersessionist reading that fed theological anti-Judaism. How is it to be reread after Vatican II and the rejection of supersessionism?
Catholic
The Catholic Church, since Nostra Aetate (Vatican II, 1965), rejects supersessionism: the covenant between God and Israel is not revoked (The Gifts and Calling of God Are Irrevocable, the Commission for Religious Relations with Judaism, 2015). 2 Cor 3:6 must be reread: not an opposition of Law/Gospel but an opposition of the letter alone (without the Spirit) / the Law vivified by the Spirit. Documents: Notes for a Correct Presentation of Jews and Judaism (1985), The Jewish People and Their Sacred Scriptures in the Christian Bible (PBC, 2001).
Orthodox
Orthodoxy has treated Jewish-Christian dialogue less explicitly than Rome or the Protestants. Orthodox theology often integrated a figurative typology that can slip towards supersessionism. But the contemporary theologians (Olivier Clément, Élisabeth Behr-Sigel, Metropolitan Anthony Bloom) open onto dialogue. Ecumenical Patriarchs Athenagoras, Bartholomew I. Liturgical practice: the feast of Pascha continues to use a strong typological vocabulary that must be interpreted with care.
Reformed
The Reformed and Presbyterian Churches have, since the 1960s-1970s, rejected supersessionism. The WCRC (then the World Alliance of Reformed Churches): the declaration The Church and Israel (1971). The EERV, the EERF, the EPUF have published documents. 2 Cor 3 is reread typologically, not by replacement. The theology of Karl Barth (Church Dogmatics II/2, IV/3) renewed Reformed ecclesiology: the Church does not replace Israel. Contemporary theologians: George Lindbeck, Kendall Soulen (The God of Israel and Christian Theology, 1996), Robert Jenson.
Lutheran
Lutheranism bears the historical weight of the anti-Jewish writings of the late Luther (On the Jews and Their Lies, 1543), tragically used by Nazi antisemitism. The Lutheran World Federation explicitly rejected these writings (Stockholm Declaration 1983, Declaration on the Words of Luther on the Jews, 1994) and recognised the historical responsibility. 2 Cor 3 is reread without supersessionism. Contemporary theologians: Pannenberg, Jüngel, Bayer, Markschies. Document: Christen und Juden (EKD, 1975, 1991, 2000).
Anglican
Contemporary Anglicanism rejects supersessionism. Lambeth Conference 1988, 1998, 2008. The Church of England published God's Unfailing Word: Theological and Practical Perspectives on Christian-Jewish Relations (2019). 2 Cor 3 must be reread typologically. Theologians: Walter Moberly, Markus Bockmuehl, Mark Harding. St George's College in Jerusalem is a major centre. Sarah Mullally, Archbishop of Canterbury (enthroned March 2026), carries this commitment.
Anabaptist
Contemporary Anabaptists, particularly the Mennonites, have published declarations rejecting supersessionism. The document Mennonites and the Holocaust (Mennonite Church USA, a historical inquiry 2008-2016). The theology of John Howard Yoder remains controversial: The Jewish-Christian Schism Revisited (2003, posthumous) proposes a non-supersessionist vision in which Church and synagogue derive from a contingent schism. Yoder himself was the object of a posthumous inquiry for abuse (1992-2015), which complicates his reception.
Synthesis
2 Cor 3 can no longer be read in a supersessionist sense after the rejection of supersessionism by all the great Christian traditions since Vatican II. The new reading distinguishes: (1) the Spirit who vivifies every Law (Jewish and Christian); (2) the christological typology that does not abolish Israel; (3) the recognition of the permanent covenant with Israel (Rom 11:29: "the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable"). The contemporary Jewish-Christian dialogue (Dabru Emet, 2000; Catholic, Protestant documents) progresses by articulating Christian fidelity to Christ and the recognition of the permanent election of Israel.
The Pauline supernatural (2 Cor 12): rapture, charisms, miracles
"I know a man in Christ who... was caught up to the third heaven... heard ineffable words" (2 Cor 12:1-4). Paul evokes an extraordinary mystical experience. Contemporary charismatic Christianity and Pentecostalism find in it a foundation for visionary experiences. How are these phenomena to be evaluated?
Catholic
The Catholic Church has always recognised mystical phenomena (ecstasies, visions, charisms) but with strict discernment. The Catholic mystical tradition (Bonaventure, Catherine of Siena, Teresa of Ávila, John of the Cross, Marie of the Incarnation, Thérèse of Lisieux, Padre Pio) is immensely rich. Criteria of discernment (Ignatius of Loyola; Thomas Aquinas S.Th. II-II q. 171-178): orthodoxy of doctrine, spiritual fruits, humility. The Catholic Charismatic Renewal since 1967, with the cautious welcome of the Magisterium. Iuvenescit Ecclesia (the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, 2016).
Orthodox
Orthodoxy has an exceptionally rich mystical tradition: the Desert Fathers (Anthony, Evagrius), the Cappadocians, Maximus the Confessor, hesychasm (Symeon the New Theologian, Gregory of Sinai, Gregory Palamas — Triads, 1338-1341). Theōsis implies participation in the uncreated light (Tabor, the vision of the transfigured Christ). Mount Athos. Contemporary: Seraphim of Sarov (d. 1833) with Motovilov, Silouan of Athos (d. 1938), Paisios (d. 1994). Discernment: pneumatophoros (bearer of the Spirit).
Reformed
Calvin (Institutes III, 24-25) was wary of extraordinary mystical experiences, which he often associated with the "enthusiasts" (spiritualist Anabaptists, Schwenckfeld). The Reformed tradition privileged the preached Word rather than private visions. No Reformed mysticism in the Catholic monastic sense. But a profound piety (English Puritans, Jonathan Edwards Religious Affections, 1746). Contemporary position: the Pentecostal charismatic movement touched several Reformed Churches (Toronto Blessing 1994, John Wimber). Reformed critique of charismaticism: Don Carson, John MacArthur.
Lutheran
Luther criticised the Schwärmer (enthusiasts: Müntzer, Karlstadt) who claimed private revelations. He privileged the Word and the sacraments as objective means of grace. But the Lutheran theologia crucis values the experience of God in suffering (cf. 2 Cor 12). Lutheran Pietism (Spener Pia Desideria 1675, Francke, Zinzendorf, the Moravians) reintroduced an affective piety. Contemporary: charismatic Lutherans (Larry Christenson) but a minority. The EKD is cautious about charismaticism.
Anglican
Classical Anglicanism maintained a balance between the mystical tradition (Lancelot Andrewes, the English metaphysical mystics such as George Herbert, John Donne, Thomas Traherne) and the critique of enthusiasm (Hooker, the latitudinarians). The contemporary charismatic movement strongly touched Anglicanism from the 1960s (Michael Harper). The Alpha Course (Holy Trinity Brompton, 1990) popularised a charismatic approach. N. T. Wright recognises the charisms without exclusivity. Sarah Mullally, Archbishop of Canterbury, has a pastoral background attentive to spiritual diversity.
Anabaptist
The 16th-century Anabaptists were divided: a spiritualist wing (Hans Denck, Caspar Schwenckfeld) that privileged inner revelation; a communal wing (Mennonites, Hutterites) that privileged Scripture interpreted by the community. The Quakers (George Fox, 17th c.) radicalised the spiritualist wing: the "inner light" of Christ in every man. Modern Pentecostalism (Azusa Street, 1906) has partial roots in Wesleyanism and the holiness movement, themselves in part influenced by the radical Anabaptists. John Howard Yoder remained cautious about charismaticism.
Synthesis
The Pauline supernatural (2 Cor 12) remains one of the biblical foundations of Christian mysticism. Catholics and Orthodox developed elaborate mystical traditions with strict discernment. The classical Protestants privileged the objectivity of the Word and the sacraments, while integrating pietist (Edwards, Spener) or charismatic (the contemporary movement) dimensions. Spiritualist Anabaptists and Quakers radicalised the inner light. The contemporary challenge is to discern authentic charisms without confusing them with psychological or emotional phenomena. The classical criteria (doctrinal orthodoxy, spiritual fruits, humility, submission to the Church) remain valid.
Historical reception
Patristic reception (2nd-5th c.)
Origen (Commentaries on 2 Corinthians, fragments) reads 2 Corinthians allegorically. John Chrysostom (Homilies on 2 Corinthians, 30 homilies, c. 400) is the major patristic commentary: pastoral eloquence, an emphasis on apostolic suffering and the ministry of the new covenant.
Theodoret of Cyrus comments. Ambrosiaster (Latin, 4th c.), Augustine (sermons and treatises, notably De spiritu et littera on 2 Cor 3:6), Pelagius (Commentary on the Pauline Epistles). The letter/Spirit pair (2 Cor 3:6) fed the whole Pelagian quarrel. Augustine reads 3:6 thus: the written Law without the grace of the Spirit kills; the inner grace of the Spirit gives life.
Medieval reception
Thomas Aquinas (Super Secundam Epistolam ad Corinthios, c. 1265-1268) comments on 2 Corinthians in the wake of Augustine. His doctrine of grace is rooted in 2 Cor 3:6 (letter/Spirit). For Thomas, the "new covenant" is the covenant of inner grace, against the mere external letter of the Mosaic Law. This reading nourishes the whole of medieval soteriology.
Bonaventure, Peter Lombard, Hugh of Saint-Cher comment. The Glossa ordinaria compiles. On 2 Cor 12 (the rapture), the mystical theologians (Bonaventure, Itinerarium; Hugh of Balma) read the Pauline ecstasy as the paradigm of contemplative experience.
Byzantine reception
The Byzantine exegesis of 2 Corinthians follows Chrysostom. Oecumenius (6th c.), Theophylact of Ohrid (11th c.), Euthymios Zigabenos (12th c.) comment. On 2 Cor 3:18 (transformation into the image), Gregory Palamas develops his doctrine of theōsis and of the Taboric light.
On 2 Cor 12:1-4 (the rapture), Symeon the New Theologian (d. 1022) sees in it the paradigm of Christian mystical experience. Maximus the Confessor (7th c.) reads 2 Cor 5:17 (the new creation) as cosmic fulfilment in Christ.
Reformation reception
Luther comments on 2 Corinthians in several sermons and writings; his theologia crucis (Heidelberg Disputation, 1518) finds direct support in 2 Cor 12:9-10 ("my power is made perfect in weakness"). 2 Cor 3:6 (letter/Spirit) is one of the pillar-texts of the Lutheran distinction between Law and Gospel.
Calvin publishes in 1547 his Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians: philological rigour, sobriety, pastoral reading. Calvin defends the real spiritual presence by relying on 2 Cor 5:7 ("to walk by faith, not by sight").
On the Catholic side: Cornelius a Lapide (d. 1637), Estius comment. The Council of Trent (session VI, 1547) on justification cites 2 Cor 5:17 (the new creation) as a key text.
On the radical side: the Anabaptists read 2 Cor 6:14 – 7:1 (separation from unbelievers) as the foundation of their ecclesiology of the visible community separated from the world. Conrad Grebel, Menno Simons.
Modern reception (19th-21st c.)
The modern exegesis of 2 Corinthians went through several major orientations. (1) F. C. Baur (1845) and the Tübingen school accentuated the conflictual dimension (Paul against Jewish Christianity). (2) Adolf von Harnack, Rudolf Bultmann renew the existential study.
(3) Hans Dieter Betz (2 Corinthians 8 and 9, Hermeneia, 1985; Der Apostel Paulus und die sokratische Tradition, 1972) renewed the rhetorical study of 2 Corinthians. (4) Dieter Georgi (The Opponents of Paul in Second Corinthians, 1964/1986) identified the adversaries as Hellenistic charismatic preachers. (5) Victor Furnish (II Corinthians, AB, 1984) remains a reference commentary.
(6) Margaret Thrall (The Second Epistle to the Corinthians, ICC, 2 vols., 1994-2000) offers the most exhaustive commentary. (7) Murray Harris (The Second Epistle to the Corinthians, NIGTC, 2005) defends the integrity of 2 Corinthians. (8) N. T. Wright (Paul and the Faithfulness of God, 2013) integrates 2 Corinthians into a covenantal theology.
(9) Contextual readings: feminist (Antoinette Wire), liberationist (César Padilla), postcolonial (Tat-siong Benny Liew). Additional major commentaries: Frank Matera (NTL, 2003), Paul Barnett (NICNT, 1997), Scott Hafemann (NIVAC, 2000), David Garland (NAC, 1999), Christopher Stanley.
Selected bibliography
References selected according to the conventions of the SBL Handbook of Style (2nd ed., 2014).
Barnett, Paul. The Second Epistle to the Corinthians. NICNT. Grand Rapids : Eerdmans, 1997.
Barrett, C. K. A Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians. BNTC. London : Black, 1973.
Betz, Hans Dieter. 2 Corinthians 8 and 9 : A Commentary on Two Administrative Letters. Hermeneia. Philadelphia : Fortress, 1985.
Bultmann, Rudolf. The Second Letter to the Corinthians. Translated by Roy A. Harrisville. Minneapolis : Augsburg, 1985.
Furnish, Victor Paul. II Corinthians. AB 32A. Garden City : Doubleday, 1984.
Garland, David E. 2 Corinthians. NAC 29. Nashville : Broadman & Holman, 1999.
Georgi, Dieter. The Opponents of Paul in Second Corinthians. Philadelphia : Fortress, 1986.
Hafemann, Scott J. 2 Corinthians. NIVAC. Grand Rapids : Zondervan, 2000.
Harris, Murray J. The Second Epistle to the Corinthians : A Commentary on the Greek Text. NIGTC. Grand Rapids : Eerdmans, 2005.
Käsemann, Ernst. Die Legitimität des Apostels : Eine Untersuchung zu II Korinther 10-13. Darmstadt : Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1956.