Book Review: 2 Corinthians (Anthony Thiselton)

Thiselton lists seven larger commentaries that have already come out on 2 Corinthians. Instead of adding to that list of large commentaries, he wanted to provide a quick exegetical guide to 2 Corinthians for “those who do not wish to comb through several hundred pages of more detailed studies” (xii). There are Questions for Reflection at the end of each section which ask practical questions for Christians today. These questions signify the “pastoral” in the books title.

Thiselton divides 2 Corinthians into six sections:

1. Introduction (1:1-11)
2. Defense of Paul’s conduct with regard to his travel plans and the offender (1:12-2:17)
3. The authentic ministry described and defended (3:1-7:4)
4. The arrival of Titus in Macedonia (7:5-16)
5. The collection for poor Christians in Jerusalem (8:1-9:15)
6. Paul confronts the malignant ministry of his opponents (10:1-13:13)

Thiselton writes notes that 2 Corinthians is “perhaps the most neglected of Paul’s major letters,” and that it is “often studied less than his popular shorter letters” like Ephesians and Galatians (8). What is surprising about this is that, as Beasley-Murray write, “this letter is the most moving document that Paul has left to us” (8). After surveying different views on the (dis-)unity of 2 Corinthians (3 pages), Thiselton writes that he understands 2 Corinthians to be a “single, coherent letter” (pp. 11, 109). The following four pages in his introduction look at who the opponents likely were (traveling preachers of some sort), what the “tearful letter” was (1 Corinthians), seven doctrinal themes in the letter, and Paul as a man of “intense emotion” (15).

Thiselton’s short book is helpful by getting to the point. He spends one page on 2 Cor 1:12-14. Here he looks at what words such as boast, conscience, and simplicity (or “frankness”) mean. Essentially, Paul is proud (in a good way) that his conscience doesn’t speak against how he has acted toward the Corinthians. His letters don’t contain “hidden meanings” so that Paul can say one thing but really mean the other (unless there is obvious sarcasm). This is the exegesis part of the book (see his longer comments on 1:21 and 5:21).

At the end of this section, Thiselton asks questions such as,

1. Are we so accustomed to thinking of ourselves as inadequate that we feel unable to ‘boast’ or ‘glory’ in what God does through us?
2. What role do we give our conscience? Do we allow it to be an equivalent to the voice of God, or is our problem the opposite one of repressing it or failing to heed it?
3. People all too readily suspect our motives. Are our motives always pure and disinterested with no thought of self-interest?

There are two more questions here, but I’ll stop here. These questions are good to ask, both for small groups, in classrooms, in sermons, and for your self. Throughout the book, Thiselton’s questions are incisive and thought-provoking. Instead of being general questions with obvious answers, these questions will really make you think about how to apply Paul’s letter today to yourself and to those you teach.

Thiselton’s succinctness also means that not everything you want answered will be answered. Thiselton will make a remark and note that so-and-so does or does not agree with this idea. He’ll often attach a footnote so that you can go to the original sources to see for yourself what that author writes. The downside to this is that comments like those could have easily been placed in the footnotes. This frees up space in the main text and makes it easier to find content about 2 Corinthians itself, rather than what someone does or doesn’t agree with.

For example, in 2 Cor 6:11-13, Paul refers to the Corinthians as “children,” which points back to what he wrote in 1 Cor 4:15 about himself as their spiritual “father.” Thiselton writes, “This term is not used to impose authority in an authoritarian way, contrary to what Castelli urges” (82). Other times Thiselton notes an author’s belief without elaborating on it. Concerning the use of “Belial” or “Beliar” in 2 Cor 6:15, Thiselton writes, “Thrall suggests that Paul uses an unfamiliar term for rhetorical effect” (83). But to what effect? Would it cause the Corinthians to stop and think more deeply? How were the Corinthians meant to respond?

Concerning the beginning of 2 Cor 10 and possible accusations the opponents spoke against Paul, Thiselton notes, “Thrall lists seven types of possible accusations against him” (111). This is really only helpful if you own Margaret Thrall’s two-volume set on 2 Corinthians in the ICC series (or at least her second volume).