by their contents with Romans and Galatians that
the four together support one another's genuineness.

In Second Corinthians two important questions of integrity have been
much discussed. (1) 2 Cor. vi. 14-vii. 1 is a passage somewhat distinct
from its context, and introduced by a seemingly abrupt break in the
sequence of thought. It is, therefore, held by some (including G.
Heinrici) to be an interpolation by another writer, by others (as A.
Hilgenfeld) to be a part of the letter referred to in 1 Cor. v. 9. But
the arguments against Pauline authorship are not convincing; there is
after all a certain real connexion to be traced between the section and
vi. I; and the resemblance to the substance of 1 Cor. v. 9 is natural in
any case. (2) More important is the question as to 2 Cor. x.-xiii. Since
J. S. Semler (1776) it has been held by careful scholars that these
chapters are written in a tone of excited irritation which is out of
accord with the genial tone of gratified affection and confidence that
pervades chaps, i.-ix. Hence such scholars as A. Hausrath, R. A.
Lipsius, O. Pfleiderer, P. W. Schmiedel, A. C. M'Giffert have adopted
the view that these four chapters were not written as part of Second
Corinthians, but, while unquestionably from Paul's hand, were from a
separate letter (the "Vier-kapitel-Brief"), probably the same as that
supposed to be referred to in 2 Cor. ii. 3-9, vii. 8-12. This theory is,
however, probably not correct, for while, on the one hand, it is based
on an exaggeration of the differences and a neglect of certain lines of
connexion between the chaps, x.-xiii. and chaps, i.-ix., on the other
hand the identification supposed is made difficult by several facts.
Thus these chapters contain no mention whatever of the offender of 2
Cor. ii. 5-11, of whose case the intervening letter must have mainly
treated; again, x. 1, 9, 10, 11 imply a previous sharp rebuke already
administered, such as is hardly accounted for merely by First
Corinthians; and finally, xii. 18 implies that these four chapters were
not written until after Titus's visit, that is, that they were written
at just the same time as Second Corinthians.

An apocryphal correspondence of Paul and the church at Corinth,
consisting of the church's letter and Paul's reply, had canonical
authority in the Syrian church in the 4th century (Aphraates, Ephraem).
It is preserved in Armenian and Latin manuscripts, and is now known to
have been a part o