Tim Maas Retired Quality Assurance Specialist with the U.S. Army

My understanding is that there is no clear consensus among Bible commentators as to whom Paul was referring in this verse, since arguments can be made both for and against each person who might be suggested. However, the overall weight of evidence seems to be in favor of St. Luke. This is based on Luke being known to have preached the gospel message (such as at Antioch, Troas, and Philippi), as the individual in the verse is described as being noted for. Also, none of the other possible candidates (such as Tychicus, Trophimus, Mark, Gaius, Barnabas, Silas, or Apollos) qualify as having been with Paul at the time that 2 Corinthians was written.

July 06 2018 • 0 responses • Vote Up • Share • Report

Bill Newkirk

Paul is being uncharacteristically cryptic in his mention of "the brother praised by all the churches for his service to the gospel". This suggests that publishing the name would put this person in danger. II Corinthians was written after the riot in Ephesus that terminated Paul's amazing ministry there and there were apparently continuing ripples in the reaction against Paul and his teaching. 

Most people do not notice that I Corinthians was co-authored by Sosthenes. He apparently is the same Sosthenes who was the succeeding synagogue ruler who was beat up in the courtyard before Gallio in Acts 18. Somewhere afterwards he apparently became a believer and joined Paul in Ephesus, where I Corinthians was written. It is also probable that he ended up leaving with Paul from Ephesus. 

Because he was well know in Corinth, it would be logical to assume mentioning his name as coming with Titus might be risky. Sosthenes seems to fit the context as the "best guess" as to who was accompanying Titus back to Corinth.

July 18 2021 • 0 responses • Vote Up • Share • Report