Paul returned to the subject of his meeting Titus in Macedonia (2:13), which he had left to expound new covenant ministry (2:14-6:10) and to urge acceptance of his ministry (6:11-7:4).
7:5 When he had arrived in Macedonia Paul could not find Titus. Consequently he was continuing to experience affliction from conflicts with unbelievers and from his concern for Titus and the Corinthians' response to his "severe letter"(cf. 2:12-13). His reference to "flesh"emphasizes "the weakness of human nature which is so much influenced by external circumstances and internal moods."213
7:6-7 Paul had felt disheartened (Gr. tapeinos, not clinically depressed) by this syndrome of circumstances. However, he felt greatly encouraged when Titus found him and reported that the Corinthians had responded to his severe letter properly (cf. 2:3-4). Paul evidently wrote that letter between 1 and 2 Corinthians.214Three things turned his spirits around: the arrival of Titus after some delay, Titus' report of his positive experience at Corinth, and the Corinthians' positive attitude toward Paul. The Christians felt affection for Paul and wanted to see him again, and they were very sorry that they had been disloyal to him. Moreover they strongly supported Paul against his critics and sought to obey him. The more Titus told Paul, the more the apostle's spirits revived.
7:8-9 Paul admitted that he had regretted sending the severe letter after he had done so. He had thought that it was too harsh. Fortunately his readers responded to it as he had hoped they would, though it had caused them some pain at first. Fortunately it had not led the church into excessive discouragement but genuine repentance. The Christians had changed their thinking and their behavior. Evidently the church decided to defend Paul against a vocal critic of his (v. 12). The church's failure to take this stand would have resulted in loss at the judgment seat of Christ if not immediately. Therefore Paul presently did not regret sending the severe letter.
7:10 Paul then added a somewhat philosophical reflection on two possible responses to criticism and their consequences. The proper response, God's will, results in a change of mind (repentance) that leads to deliverance from the bad situation (salvation in the temporal sense here) without later regret. The improper response, the world's typical superficial response, does not result in a change of mind (repentance) but leads to resentment and bitterness (ultimately death in the temporal sense). Suffering in itself does not necessarily benefit us. It proves to be a good thing for us only as we respond properly to it (cf. James 1:2-4).
7:11 Paul identified several good things that had come to his Corinthian readers because they had responded properly to his recent rebuke. Their response had yielded earnestness (seriousness of purpose), the desire to prove themselves worthy, and righteous indignation at the affront to Paul. It had further resulted in concern over their behavior and its effects, a longing to see Paul again, a determination to make things right, and a correction of their error.
The church had now put itself in the right having been in the wrong.
"He [Paul] acquits them of all responsibility for the offense which was committed. At first they had been to blame. By not protesting against the outrage they had seemed to acquiesce in it, but all this had been put right by their reception of Titus and submission to Paul's letter."215
Another interpretation is that by their response the Corinthians showed that they had always been guiltless in the matter. This seems unlikely since the church had mourned (Gr. odyrmos, indicating deep sorrow, v. 7).
7:12-13a The value of Paul's letter turned out to be primarily the good effects it produced in the Corinthians as a whole. This outcome had been Paul's hope when he had originally written the severe letter. It did not just produce a change in the offender (probably Paul's critic) or even in the Corinthians' response to the offended (Paul himself). Paul had wanted them to realize before God how devoted they were to him as their spiritual father (cf. 2:9). That loyalty would fortify them against future tests to depart from his teaching. Paul rejoiced that this is what had happened and that they had not responded improperly.
"Many opinions have been expressed as to the identity of the wrongdoer and the nature of his act of injustice toward Paul. Most likely, in our view, is the suggestion that this event should be linked with a public disturbance during the second visit (12:20) when Paul confronted those who had not relinquished their former sexual practices (12:21-13:2), connected as these probably were with ongoing temple attendance (6:14-7:1). The most consistent reconstruction of Paul's scattered remarks on the subject throughout 2 Corinthians is that this man publicly opposed, and to some degree thwarted, Paul's attempt at discipline during that fateful visit."216
