tematically, although at many other points in the practical
discussions we can detect the theoretical basis cf the errors combated
and the theological foundations of Paul's own judgments. Questions about
the resurrection, however, had appeared, of a rationalistic nature and
evincing an Hellenic failure to understand the Jewish view. In his reply
Paul shows that he too recognizes the significance of the Greek's
difficulties and he presents a conception which, fortunately for the
later Church, does some measure of justice to the superior scientific
insight of their attitude.

_Second Epistle._--After the despatch of First Corinthians there took
place, it would appear, the riot in the theatre at Ephesus (Acts xix. 23
ff.), to which 2 Cor. i. 8 seems to refer. On leaving Ephesus Paul went
to Troas (2 Cor. ii. 12), then to Macedonia, and from Macedonia (2 Cor.
vii. 5, viii. 1, ix. 2) he wrote Second Corinthians. This must have been
in the autumn of one of the years A.D. 54-58, nearly or quite a year
after First Corinthians was written (cf, "a year ago," 2 Cor. viii. 10,
ix. 2 and 1 Cor. xvi. 1-4). In the meantime there had been exciting
developments in Paul's relations with Corinth, the course of which we
can partly trace by the aid of the second epistle. These events explain
the great difference in tone between the second epistle and the first.

Several allusions in Second Corinthians show that Paul had already twice
visited Corinth (2 Cor. ii. 1, xii. 14, xii. 21, xiii. 2). The second of
these visits is not mentioned in Acts; it is referred to by Paul as
having a painful character. The most natural hypothesis is that, in
consequence of a growing spirit of insubordination on the part of the
Corinthians, Paul found it necessary to go to Corinth from Ephesus
(probably by sea direct) at some time after First Corinthians was
written. Of what happened on this visit, which the writer of Acts has
naturally enough thought it unnecessary to mention, we seem to learn
further from certain passages in the letter (2 Cor. ii. 5-11, vii. 9)
which refer to some sort of an insult to Paul for which there has now
been repentance and which the apostle heartily forgives. For the
offender he entreats also the pardon of the church. It may well be that
the sad affair had to do with the gross offender of the "case of incest"
(1 Cor. v. 1-8), who with the support of his fellow Christians may have
refused to conform to Paul's imperative commands. We