The Acts is a rather reliable historical account. But there are limitations. Sheep hide was limited in supply. Luke could not include all the details. He had to select and condense. For example, the Synoptic evangelists describe only Jesus' last visit to Jerusalem nearly the end of his ministry. Everything was condensed into one narrative. Therefore, Jesus entered Jerusalem triumphantly, riding on a colt. He cleansed the Temple, debated with the Jewish authority etc. in one go. However, the gospel of John told us that Jesus visited Jerusalem for at least three times during his public ministry. On the very first visit, he antagonized the Jewish authority with his cleansing of the Temple.
Return to the Acts. Luke described the conversion of Saul on the road to Damascus. After recovering his sight, Saul stayed in Damascus to bear witness to Jesus before his life was threatened by the Jews in Damascus. He returned to Jerusalem directly to try to join the Christians there but was not successful. Barnabas appeared and introduced him to the apostles (Acts 9:1-28). This turns out to be a simplified version. In Paul's own words,
But when he who had set me apart before I was born, and had called me through his grace,
was pleased to reveal his Son to me, in order that I might preach him among the Gentiles, I did not confer with flesh and blood,
nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me, but I went away into Arabia; and again I returned to Damascus.
Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas, and remained with him fifteen days (Galatians 1:15-18).
So, after his conversion, Saul went away into Arabia before he returned to Damascus. He spent three years in Damascus and some other places before he went up to Jerusalem to meet Peter. Here, I don't mean to discredit Luke. I just want to point out that Luke was unable to put down all the details in the limited supply of sheep hide with which he wrote the Acts. Luke had no choice but to select and condense. Therefore, we cannot reconstruct the full picture reliably with only the Acts.
In trying to date the Second Epistle to the Corinthians, I reviewed the itinerary of Paul and his companions, especially Timothy, in the Acts and narrowed down the time frame to his return journey to Jerusalem. Here, I have found a clue in the epistle to confirm this.
I wanted to visit you on my way to Macedonia, and to come back to you from Macedonia and have you send me on my way to Judea (2 Corinthians 1:16).
Instead, Paul had taken a different route, going down to Troas, Mitylene and back to Jerusalem. Therefore, this epistle was written when Paul was on his way from Troas to Jerusalem. Notice that he bypassed Ephesus on his way. Therefore, this epistle would not be written in Ephesus.
What about the state of Paul's relationship with the Corinthians when he wrote this epistle?
When Paul wrote the First Epistle to the Corinthians, he was writing in the authority of an apostle, a teacher instructing them of practical problems such as factionalism, sexual immorality, law suits against brethren, eating food offered to idols and marriages etc. The tone is authoritative. Of course, the tone in the Second Epistle was different because the situation had changed. Some painful events involving Paul personally had happened but Paul was able to see these afflictions in a positive light.
Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies and God of all comfort,
who comforts us in all our affliction, so that we may be able to comfort those who are in any affliction, with the comfort with which we ourselves are comforted by God.
For as we share abundantly in Christ's sufferings, so through Christ we share abundantly in comfort too.
If we are afflicted, it is for your comfort and salvation; and if we are comforted, it is for your comfort, which you experience when you patiently endure the same sufferings that we suffer.
Our hope for you is unshaken; for we know that as you share in our sufferings, you will also share in our comfort. (2 Corinthians 1:3-7).
God will comfort us in our sufferings so that we may comfort others in their sufferings. This is where our faith shines off to brighten up the lives of the other people. Moreover, Paul saw his own sufferings as a price to pay for the salvation of the Corinthians. He remained confident that the Corinthians were able to endure their sufferings so that in the end, they would all share the comfort from God. The true picture might not be so rosy. But it is better to remain optimistic. Otherwise, life will be unbearable.
Paul must have visited Corinth more than once. Luke simply condensed them. Here is what Paul had to say.
For I made up my mind not to make you another painful visit (2 Corinthians 2:1).
Therefore, Paul had made several visits to Corinth and the last one was a painful experience. That is why Paul said he did not want to make them another painful visit. Paul's pain probably came from a single man in Corinth.
But if any one has caused pain, he has caused it not to me, but in some measure --not to put it too severely -- to you all.
For such a one this punishment by the majority is enough;
so you should rather turn to forgive and comfort him, or he may be overwhelmed by excessive sorrow.
So I beg you to reaffirm your love for him.
For this is why I wrote, that I might test you and know whether you are obedient in everything.
Any one whom you forgive, I also forgive. What I have forgiven, if I have forgiven anything, has been for your sake in the presence of Christ,
to keep Satan from gaining the advantage over us; for we are not ignorant of his designs (2 Corinthians 2:5-11).
Paul did not bluntly command the Corinthians with apostolic authority to forgive this particular man. Instead, he diplomatically begged them to forgive this man. Had Paul's authority in Corinth been eroded?
He further reminded them that it is extremely important for the Corinthians to forgive their brethren for the sake of Christ, for the wellbeing of the Corinthian Church. Otherwise, Satan would gain a toehold in the community and destroy the whole Church.
Obviously, Paul no longer enjoyed the apostolic authority he once had. But this statement is correct only when the First epistle was written before the Second. It was possible that Paul was struggling to establish his apostolic authority in the previous visits before he wrote this Second epistle. After he had successfully secured his authority, he wrote the First. For the time being, nothing is yet conclusive. I will be back.
Dear Lord, in our times of affliction, comfort us. Comfort the family members of John Tang and us. With an aglow heart, may we comfort those around us. Amen.
No comments:
Post a Comment