Corpus-Paul

[Richard Fellows <rfellows AT intergate.bc.ca>]

Mark Matson wrote:

>  The thrust of Welborn's  article is to show that 
>in conciliatory literature, the details of a previous breach are 
>rarely specfically revisited. In other words, the disjuncture between 
>chapter 10-13 and the references to the painful letter elsewhere is 
>precisely what one would expect from ancient rhetorical patterns.

I too found Welborn's article to be valuable, as is the work of Watson, on
which he built. (Francis Watson, 2 Cor. X-XIII and Paul's painful letter to
the Corinthians, J.Th.S 35, 1984, 324-346).  Welborn declares, 'Herewith is
removed the final objection to the hypothesis which identifies 2 Cor
10:1-13:10 with the letter of tears.', but there is one important objection
about which he and Watson are strangely silent.  I am referring to the
problem that 10-13 announce an imminent visit by Paul, whereas the tearful
letter, it is always assumed, was written in place of a visit (2 Cor
1:13-2:3).  The visit anticipated in 10-13 seems too imminent to fit the
tearful letter, and we would expect a reference in 10-13 to the
cancellation of the planned visit.

But the standard interpretation of 2 Cor 1:23-2:3 relies on the unwarranted
assumption that Titus took the sea route to Corinth.  It is always assumed
that the time when Paul's (cancelled) visit had been scheduled was before
the writing of the tearful letter, but we only require that it was before
the ARRIVAL of the tearful letter. It is also assumed that Titus was
delayed in Corinth (2 Cor 2:13).  But if Titus took the land route and was
delayed in Macedonia (or Troas) on his way to Corinth, then all is
explained.  Paul cancelled his visit because if it had gone ahead, it would
have been before rather than after the arrival of the tearful letter.  He
had written to make a happy visit possible, and if he had arrived before
the letter he would have needed to have been severe.

Questions:
Are there any problems with this explanation? 
Are there any other explanations available to those who identify 10-13 as
the tearful letter?

The route by which Titus went to Corinth is not an irrelevent historical
detail. Upon this question hinges the order of the letters, and ultimately
the identification of the opponents and very much more besides.

Richard Fellows
Vancouver
rfellows AT intergate.bc.ca