Commentaries:
Robertson's Word Pictures (NT)
I wrote this very thing (egraya touto auto). Is this (and egraya in verses 2 Corinthians 2:4, 2 Corinthians 2:9, 2 Corinthians 2:12) the epistolary aorist referring to the present letter? In itself that is possible as the epistolary aorist does occur in the N.T. as in 2 Corinthians 8:18; 2 Corinthians 9:3 (Robertson, Grammar, p. 854f.). If not epistolary aorist as seems improbable from the context and from 2 Corinthians 7:8-12, to what Epistle does he refer? To 1Co. 5 or to a lost letter? It is possible, of course, that, when Paul decided not to come to Corinth, he sent a letter. The language that follows in verses 2 Corinthians 2:3-4; 2 Corinthians 7:8-12 can hardly apply to I Corinthians.
Should have sorrow (luphn sxw). Second aorist (ingressive) active subjunctive of exw, should get sorrow, after ina mh negative final particles.
From them of whom (af wn). Antecedent omitted, apo toutwn af wn (from those from whom).
I ought (edei me). Imperfect for unrealized present obligation as often and like English.
Having confidence (pepoiqwv). Second perfect active participle of peiqw (2 Corinthians 1:9).
Other commentary entries containing this verse:
2 Corinthians 2:3
2 Corinthians 7:8
2 Corinthians 10:9
2 Thessalonians 3:4
DISCLAIMER: Church of the Great God (CGG) provides these resources to aid the individual in studying the Bible. However, it is up to the individual to "prove all things, and hold fast to that which is good" (I Thessalonians 5:21). The content of these resources does not necessarily reflect the views of CGG. They are provided for information purposes only.
E-mail this page
