Paul’s “Foolish” Boasting (11:1–12:13)

Continuing his defense of his ministry, Paul is forced into the awkward position of adopting a practice he has just censured in his opponents: boasting. Paul calls this maneuver “foolishness” (11:1) and being “out of [his] mind” (11:23), but the effectiveness of his opponents’ libel campaign compels him to fight fire with fire. Paul refuses, however, to engage in petty Sophistic one-upmanship. Rather, he peppers his boasting with tongue-in-cheek irony in order to expose the absurdity of his opponents’ position: They arrogantly proclaim a Messiah who, in fact, exemplified meekness and humility in his earthly life!

The climax of this parody is Paul’s preposterous (to his rivals) insistence on boasting in his weakness (11:30) and his nonsensical contention that weakness is strength (12:10). But concealed in the apostle’s hand is a trump card his opponents are not expecting: the example of Jesus, crucified in weakness (13:4). Paul concentrates his boasting in three areas: his proclamation of the gospel free of charge (11:7–15), his suffering as an apostle (11:16–33), and his mystical experiences (12:1–10).

I am jealous for you with a godly jealousy. I promised you to one husband, to Christ (11:2). In order to communicate his outrage at the infatuation that some in Corinth feel toward the intruding missionaries, Paul portrays himself as a father who has pledged his daughter (the Corinthians) in marriage, only to hear rumors that she has transferred her affections. The imagery is that of a betrothal (harmozō; NIV, “I promised”). While both Roman and Jewish marriage customs included a betrothal period, Paul is probably assuming a Jewish framework, which involved a ceremony with witnesses and an exchange of gifts and could precede the actual marriage by as much as twelve months.

POSEIDON

Not all these details are relevant here, but the Jewish betrothal differs from our modern Western engagement period in that it was legally binding. As we see with Joseph and Mary, terminating the relationship constituted a divorce (Matt. 1:18–20). According to the Mishnah, the death of the betrothed male prior to the wedding rendered the virgin a widow and prohibited her from marrying a high priest.143

So that I might present you as a pure virgin to him (11:2). Following the betrothal, the bride was presented to the groom by her family and friends, which sometimes involved a joyous procession to the groom’s house (1 Macc. 9:39; Matt. 25:6–10). It was the obligation of the father of the bride to safeguard his daughter’s chastity, which was a serious matter. The sages of the Mishnah provided detailed legislation regarding the bride’s obligation to furnish proof of her purity after cohabitation and the husband’s right to sue her family if such evidence was not forthcoming.144 Purity during the betrothal period was especially revered in Jewish circles, and the mishnaic rabbis stipulated that any man violating a betrothed virgin still under the protection of her father should be stoned or strangled.145

These Jewish sources help us understand the gravity of the situation in Corinth as Paul sees it and the appropriateness of his analogy to illustrate the matter. Paul feels the outrage of a father whose daughter has been seduced by another man on the eve of her wedding. The analogy also alludes to the consummation of redemptive history, when the presentation of the bride (the church) to the groom (Christ) is made (Eph. 5:27; Rev. 19:6–9; 21:2).

As Eve was deceived by the serpent’s cunning (11:3). Jewish writers of the period describe the serpent of Genesis 3 as Satan, as his mouthpiece, or as one of the fallen angels.146 The context (esp. 2 Cor. 11:13–15) suggests that Paul may be making a similar assumption. The abundant evidence—archaeological and literary—of a pervasive Jewish presence throughout the Mediterranean leaves little doubt that the average Roman was familiar with the major stories and characters of the Jewish Scriptures, including the serpent in Eden.

A Jesus other than the Jesus we preached … a different spirit … a different gospel … “super-apostles” (11:4–5). See “Paul’s Opponents in Corinth” at 11:6 and comments on 12:11.

I may not be a trained speaker, but I do have knowledge (11:6). Once again Paul singles out his oratory as one of the central points of contention between him and his detractors. The NIV captures well the sense of the Greek expression idiōtēs tō logō (“not a trained speaker”), which indicates only that Paul has not received formal training as a rhetorician; he is an amateur. Yet we need not suppose that he is a complete bungler, rhetorically. Acts presents the apostle as a competent speaker, if not always compelling (Acts 17:18; 20:9), and we can assume that after many years of preaching in synagogues and in other public venues he developed some proficiency in his delivery. As 2 Corinthians 10:10–12 indicates, the problem is that the Corinthians, perhaps encouraged by Paul’s opponents, are comparing Paul with polished professional orators and judging him inadequate.

But Paul is not merely battling snooty Corinthians with overly sensitive rhetorical tastes. Rather, he is confronting a cultural value that judges a person’s knowledge and character on the basis of his or her oratorical prowess. From the time of Isocrates (436–338 B.C.), who reasoned that “the power to speak well is the surest index of sound understanding,” to the time of Aristides (A.D. 117–181), who contended that “the title of ‘wise’ and the ability to speak well are attributes of the same man,” wisdom and eloquence were intimately connected; this helps explain Paul’s insistence that he does in fact possess knowledge, even though his oratory may be less than brilliant.147 Stoic philosophy in particular connected oratory and knowledge, and in such way as to make eloquence a gauge of character:

• What is he [the listener] to think of their souls, when their speech is sent into the charge in utter disorder, and cannot be kept in hand?148

• They [the Stoics] say that only the wise man is a good prophet, poet, and orator.149

Aristides, quoting a widely circulated proverb, makes the connection explicit and illustrates well the difficulty Paul finds himself in: “As character is, such is the speech. The reverse is also true.”150

Was it a sin for me to lower myself in order to elevate you by preaching the gospel of God to you free of charge? (11:7–10). Paul is responding to a complaint issuing from his refusal to accept financial remuneration from the Corinthians. As the context indicates, what the Corinthians are objecting to is Paul “lowering himself” through manual labor in order not to be “a burden” on any of them (11:8).151 Paul’s insistence on plying his trade as a leather worker in order to support himself is a source of embarrassment to some in Corinth (see comments on 2 Cor. 10:10). While manual labor was more esteemed in Jewish circles, even here it had its cultured despisers (see “Reflections of a Jewish Scribe” at 10:10).

Among Greeks and Romans in Paul’s day there was a fair amount of debate concerning the appropriate means of livelihood for philosophers and ethical moralists.152 Cynics begged, Sophists charged fees, philosophers attached themselves to wealthy patrons, and Stoics might do any of the above but were also known to support themselves through manual labor.153 The exorbitant fees charged by Sophists frequently led to accusations of greed and avarice.154 Sophists were widely known as lovers of luxury who were “strangers to labor,” and Paul was certainly not willing to be confused with this lot.155

Yet cultivating a relationship with a wealthy patron as a means of financial support would involve Paul in a whole host of reciprocal obligations that would severely limit his freedom (see below). This kind of relationship was regarded by Paul’s contemporaries as virtual slavery, turning the philosopher into his patron’s yes-man.156 On this issue Paul is in agreement with his Stoic contemporary Musonius Rufus: “One should endure hardships and suffer the pains of labor with his own body, rather than depend upon another for sustenance” (Fragment 11).

Paul is willing to accept limited support from the Macedonians to make up for his lack (11:9), but the support the Corinthians offer either had patron-client strings attached or was offered merely as a way of avoiding the shameful spectacle of their founding apostle setting up shop in the market. Paul, however, is less concerned about offending patrician sensibilities than he is about modeling the servanthood of Christ (Phil. 2:6–11), who made himself poor so that others might become rich (2 Cor. 8:9).157

Why? Because I do not love you? God knows I do! (11:11–12). In justifying his refusal to accept the Corinthians’ offer of financial support, Paul inadvertently divulges their interpretation of his action: It is tantamount to rejecting their friendship.

Greco-Roman society was governed by a complex system of patronage and benefaction, in which the offer of a gift constituted an offer of friendship and obligated the recipient to respond in some tangible and proportionate fashion.158 Often gifts were proffered to a weaker party in order to create a power relationship, thus enhancing the status and honor of the benefactor. There was something of a moral obligation to accept such gifts when offered, and refusal could result in animosity on the part of the one declined. A person might refuse benefaction if the giver were deemed unworthy, if the recipient was unwilling to return the favor, or if accepting might put the recipient in a difficult situation with respect to some other party. In refusing their support, Paul has violated certain cultural conventions relating to giving and receiving gifts, and some Corinthians have taken grave offense.

False apostles, deceitful workmen, masquerading as apostles of Christ … [Satan’s] servants (11:13–15). Although many questions would be answered had Paul specifically identified the targets of his attack, his use of polemical epithets to describe his opponents is widely attested in the literature of Second Temple Judaism. In Jubilees, the oppressing Gentiles are labeled as “sons of Beliar,” “children of perdition,” “idol worshipers,” and “the hated ones,” among other things. In the Dead Sea Scrolls the chief opponent of the sect at Qumran (presumably the high priest in Jerusalem) is never actually named, but instead is referred to contemptuously as “the Scoffer,” “the Liar,” “the Spouter of Lies,” and “the Wicked Priest.” While Paul’s invective may sound harsh to our ears, the situation in Corinth demands a sharp response from him, which he renders in accordance with the polemical conventions of his day.

MASK

Flask in the form of the head of an actor wearing a female mask.

Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light (11:14). In some Jewish traditions, Satan transformed himself into an angel of light and deceived Eve a second time:

Then Satan was angry and transformed himself into the brightness of angels and went away to the Tigris River to Eve and found her weeping. And the devil himself, as if to grieve with her began to weep and said to her, “Step out of the river and cry no more … come out to the water and I will lead you to the place where your food has been prepared.”159

Since many are boasting in the way the world does, I too will boast (11:18). Although Paul does not explicitly reveal who the “many” are who are boasting “according to the flesh” (NIV, “as the world does”), we can safely assume he has one eye on the Sophists and other fashionable rhetoricians, who made boasting a regular feature of their oratorical repertoire, and another eye on his opponents, who have adopted this trendy style of declamation (see “Paul’s Opponents in Corinth” at 11:6).

Like Paul, Plutarch regarded Sophistic self-praise as “odious and offensive,” yet accepted that boasting could be legitimately employed when done in the service of a noble cause or in defense of one’s character.160 Self-praise could be rendered inoffensive if one’s own shortcomings are also mentioned, if the speaker recounts his or her hardships, or if credit is given to others or to God.161 The correspondences between Plutarch’s advice and Paul’s self-acknowledged foolish boasting (“I am out of my mind to talk like this,” 11:23) are remarkable, though the basis of their abhorrence of boasting is very different. For Plutarch, boasting was tasteless self-display. For Paul, informed by the Jewish Scriptures (Ps. 94:4–7; 103:3–4; Jer. 9:23), it represents the quintessential expression of humanity in opposition to God (Rom. 3:27; 1 Cor. 1:28–31).

You even put up with anyone who enslaves you or exploits you or takes advantage of you or pushes himself forward or slaps you in the face (11:20). Paul provides important information on the deportment of the intruding missionaries, which essentially amounts to an abusive manner, with overtones of financial exploitation. Although it may sound incredible that some in Corinth would tolerate such a demeanor, this kind of hard-hitting public persona was very much in vogue in Paul’s day. Cynic philosophers had a reputation for verbally accosting passersby, and Sophists likewise were known to be ruthless in advancing their point of view.

Dio Chrysostom describes a scene in Isthmia, some six miles from Corinth, in which “crowds of wretched sophists [stand] around Poseidon’s temple shouting and reviling one another, and their disciples too … fighting with one another.”162 Philo paints a similar picture of Sophists as “lovers of self” who, like gladiators, descend into the arena to battle men of virtue and “never cease struggling against them with every kind of weapon, till they compel them to succumb, or else utterly destroy them.”163 What Paul describes is a heavy-handed leadership style, which is the antithesis of what he has modeled for the Corinthians in his own ministry (10:1; 11:22).

Are they Hebrews … Israelites … Abraham’s descendants? So am I (11:22). “They” refers to the intruders, and it seems that one of their boasts concerned their pristine Jewish lineage (see “Paul’s Opponents in Corinth” at 11:6). The terms Paul uses here are roughly synonymous in this context and are piled up for rhetorical effect. If Paul’s opponents are Palestinian Jewish-Christians, which seems likely, it is conceivable that they drew attention to Paul’s Diaspora roots (Tarsus, Acts 21:39; 22:3) in contrast to their own origins in the Jewish heartland, so as to discredit him. This kind of comparison was a routine practice of Sophists and rhetoricians (see comments on 10:12) and is explained by Theon (late first century A.D.) in the following way:

In the comparison of people, one firstly juxtaposes their status, education, offspring, positions held, prestige and physique; if there is any other physical matter, or external merit, it should be stated beforehand in the material for the encomia.164

CAPTIVES

Coin depicting Germanic captives with the inscription “Victor.”

In the face of such carnal self-promotion, Paul counters that he is every bit as “Jewish” as they are.

I have worked much harder (11:23). Hardship catalogs, like the one that follows, were commonly employed by Stoics in order to demonstrate their superior character and fortitude. For a discussion of Paul’s hardship catalogs in relation to his Stoic contemporaries, see comments on 6:3–13.

In prison more frequently (11:23). Acts mentions only one imprisonment prior to the time of this letter (in Philippi, Acts 16:16–40), which illustrates the selective nature of Luke’s account. Imprisonment could occur for reasons other than being judged guilty (with or without a trial) of some criminal offence.165 Confinement sometimes took place to protect an individual or to hold an accused offender on remand while authorities determined if charges were appropriate. At other times imprisonment was used by magistrates to coerce a stubborn provincial to divulge information or to comply with a command.

The conditions in which prisoners were typically held would be considered inhumane by modern standards.166 Locked away in over-crowded, lice-infested, unsanitary, and lightless hovels, prisoners routinely contracted disease through incarceration and sometimes died as a result of a prolonged stay in a Roman jail. Heavy iron manacles were bound around wrists, feet, and often the neck, which grated through the flesh and caused all manner of pain and infection. Paul’s frequent mention of his “chains,” should conjure up images too distressful to contemplate.167

Five times I received from the Jews the forty lashes minus one. Three times I was beaten with rods, once I was stoned, three times I was shipwrecked (11:24–25). Paul’s words read like a parody of the famous inscription of Augustus in which he catalogs the glories of his reign, the achievements he wanted all to remember:

Twice have I had the lesser triumph … three times the [full] curule triumph; twenty-one times have I been saluted as “Imperator.” … Fifty-five times has the Senate decreed a thanksgiving unto the Immortal Gods … Nine kings, or children of kings, have been led before my chariot in my triumphs … thirteen times had I been consul.168

The original inscription was erected on bronze pillars at the emperor’s mausoleum in Rome, and copies were distributed throughout the provinces. Portions have been found in Ancyra (capital of Galatia), Apollonia (in Illyricum), and Antioch (in Pisidia). Such chronicles of glory would have been familiar to Paul and the Corinthians, rendering Paul’s “boast” all the more ironic.

Forty lashes minus one (11:24). Deuteronomy 25:2–3 prescribes flogging as a means of punishment, up to a maximum of forty strokes. Receiving one less than forty may have been to ensure that the Mosaic stipulations were not exceeded through miscount. The later mishnaic rabbis offered detailed instruction on what crimes were punishable by flogging, which included moral, cultic, and civil infractions.169 As the passage from the Mishnah indicates, this was a painful and humiliating ordeal:

How do they flog him? One ties his two hands on either side of a pillar, and the minister of the community grabs his clothing—if it is torn, it is torn, and if it is ripped to pieces, it is ripped to pieces—until he bares his chest. A stone is set down behind him, on which the minister of the community stands. And a strap of cowhide is in his hand, doubled and redoubled, with two straps that rise and fall [fastened] to it…. And he who hits him hits with one hand, with all his might.170

That Paul received this “from the Jews” indicates his continued missionary activities in the synagogues (Acts 17:1–3).

Beaten with rods (11:25). This punishment was a distinctively Roman way of dealing with a malefactor. The rods were made of wood, and the sentence would be executed by the lictor, who assisted the magistrate with the enforcement of corporal punishment. Acts records that Paul and Silas were severely beaten with rods in Philippi (Acts 16:22–23), even though it was illegal to flog a Roman citizen. Numerous examples can be found where the law was ignored by a magistrate.171 As Romans, the Corinthians would have been keenly aware of the social stigma attached to this punishment, which underscores again Paul’s determination to undermine the inverted value system of the Corinthians by boasting in the very things they would have regarded as shameful (11:30; 12:9–10).

Once I was stoned (11:25). Stoning was a common brand of punishment among Jews and was occasionally practiced by Romans.172 While it could be an officially administered form of capital punishment, it was more often the result of mob violence.173 The specific incident Paul refers to occurred in Lystra at the instigation of Jews from Antioch and Iconium (14:19).

Three times I was shipwrecked, I spent a night and a day in the open sea (11:25). Although Acts records only one shipwreck involving Paul (during his later journey to Rome), it mentions a number of other voyages on which such calamities may have occurred. Even these, however, do not comprise all of Paul seafaring journeys. Traveling by ship was especially dangerous in the first century, and countless instances of nautical misfortune are chronicled in the surviving literature and inscriptions.174

MERCHANT SHIPS

A column in Rome in honor of the emperor Marcus Aurelius (A.D. 161–180) depicting Roman merchant ships.

ST. PAUL’S BAY, MALTA

The place where Paul survived a dramatic shipwreck.

Since passenger ships were not in existence, Paul would have booked passage on a merchant ship heading to his desired destination and slept on the deck with other passengers and crew. Only the captain had a separate sleeping quarters. The causes of maritime disasters were numerous. Ancient merchant ships were considerably less sturdy than later sailing vessels and were propelled by only one mainsail, with possibly a smaller sail on the bowsprit. The ability to sail into the wind (tacking) was a later achievement, which meant that ancient mariners were largely at the mercy of prevailing winds.

In addition, these vessels were controlled by a steering oar, not a rudder, which further inhibited maneuverability. If one combines all this with the absence of (modern) detailed navigational charts, which display currents, depths, and hazards, the abundance of dedicatory epigrams like the following is not surprising:

To Glaucus, Nereus, and Melicertes, Ino’s son [mythological figures associated with the sea], to the Lord of the Depths, the son of Cronos, and to the Samothracian gods, do I, Lucillius, saved from the deep, offer these locks clipped from my head, for I have nothing else.175

Dionysius, the only one saved out of forty sailors, dedicates here the image of a cele [possibly part of the ship’s rigging], tying which close to his thighs he swam to shore. So even a cele brings luck on some occasions.176

I have been constantly on the move. I have been in danger from rivers … from bandits … from my own countrymen … from Gentiles … in danger in the city, in danger in the country (11:26). Paul recounts in short staccato salvos the occupational hazards of an itinerant evangelist. These center around travel, which has always (until recent history) been a risky undertaking. Like most, Paul would have traveled on foot and been subject to cold, heat, dust, mud, and all the vicissitudes of capricious weather.177

CENCHRAE

This was the site of the eastern port of Corinth.

For accommodation, Paul and his traveling companions (he would not have traveled alone, if at all possible) would have relied on the hospitality of local residents, inns, or sleeping in the open, if need be. Horace (65–8 B.C.) describes a journey that involved all three at various points.178 Though decent lodging could occasionally be found, inns were notorious for bed bugs, rough characters, and promiscuity.179 Bandits, too, were a perennial threat (Luke 10:30–35), and every precaution was taken to ensure safe passage:

This is the way also with the more cautious among travelers. A man has heard that the road which he is taking is infested with robbers; he does not venture to set forth alone, but he waits for company, either that of a quaestor or proconsul, and when he has attached himself to them he travels along the road in safety.180

The first-century traveler, well aware of the all the dangers involved, would have made vows to his/her patron deity for protection while traveling and looked for roadside shrines en route, as this inscription attests:

Artemis, goddess of the road, Antiphilus dedicates to thee this hat from his head, a token of his wayfaring; for thou hast hearkened to his vows, thou has blessed his paths. The gift is not great, but given in piety, and let no covetous traveler lay his hand on my offering; it is not safe to despoil a shrine or even little gifts.181

I have labored and toiled and have often gone without sleep; I have known hunger and thirst and have often gone without food; I have been cold and naked (11:27). Choosing to support himself through his trade, Paul was forced to work longer hours than other artisans and to face even worse deprivation. The observation of Jesus ben Sirach that all craftsmen could be found “toiling day and night” (Sir. 38:27) would have been even more true of a bivocational evangelist. Paul labored “night and day” (1 Thess. 2:9; 2 Thess. 3:7–10) in the cities he evangelized in order to be a model for the Christian communities he established. His policy was to “gladly spend … and expend [himself]” on behalf of his spiritual children (12:15). On Paul’s life as a tentmaker, see comments on 10:10 and 11:7–10.

I face daily the pressure of my concern for all the churches. Who is weak, and I do not feel weak? Who is led into sin, and I do not inwardly burn? (11:28–29). As a pastor, Paul identifies with his flock to the point of suffering with them through their weaknesses and temptations. As we emphasized in our comments on 6:3–13, although both Paul and his Stoic contemporaries make use of hardship catalogs to commend themselves to their followers, the underlying presuppositions of each are very different.

For the Stoics, the whole point of adversity was to render the philosopher impervious to sorrow, fear, anxiety, or distress. According to Epictetus, philosophy beckons her pupils with the words, “Men, if you heed me, wherever you may be, whatever you may be doing, you will feel no pain, no anger, no compulsion, no hindrance, but you will pass your lives in tranquility and in freedom from every disturbance.”182

Paul’s open admission of anxiety is diametrically opposed to the doctrine and ideals of popular Stoic teaching and reflects a level of transparency that many of his day would despise as weakness. According to Dio Chrysostom, Diogenes represented the model to which all should aspire:

… disclosing no weakness even though he must endure the lash or give his body to be burned … he holds [hardships] as mere trifles, and while in their very grip the perfect man is often as sportive as boys with their dice and their colored balls.183

With irony as his chief weapon, Paul is redefining for the Corinthians what true strength is. As the following verses illustrate, weakness and vulnerability play a major role in his definition.

In Damascus the governor under King Aretas had the city of the Damascenes guarded in order to arrest me. But I was lowered in a basket from a window in the wall and slipped through his hands (11:32–33). This incident is also related in Acts 9:23–25, which implicates the Jews of Damascus in the plot as well. Aretas was the ruler of the Arabic kingdom of the Nabateans to the south of the ancient city of Damascus, and it is unclear what kind of authority he exercised in Damascus at this time. The Greek word ethnarch, however, has a much broader range of meanings than the NIV’s “governor” and may indicate simply that Aretas’s consul in Roman controlled Damascus.184 If Paul’s time in Arabia (Gal. 1:17) included an unwelcomed mission among the Nabateans, this could explain the hostility on the part of Aretas.

SYRIA

The biting irony of Paul’s boast becomes clear when we understand that the highest military honor in the Roman army was the corona muralis, the “wall crown,” given to the first soldier to scale the wall and enter a besieged city. The pitiful picture of Paul being lowered in a basket contrasts dramatically with the glorious image of soldier battling his way over the wall and is offered as a scolding parody of the Corinthians’ inverted value system.

A WALL AT THE MODERN CITY OF DAMASCUS

I know a man in Christ (12:2). Paul adopts the third person to relate an experience we later discover is his own (12:6–10). This is indicative of his reticence to “boast” of such remarkable occurrences in his own life and his commitment to proclaim Christ, not himself (2 Cor. 4:5). Interestingly, the experience of Paul’s heavenly ascent has many parallels in Jewish literature, and there too the revelation is always ascribed to another, usually a hero of Israel’s past.185

Fourteen years ago (12:2). That Paul must go back a full fourteen years to this occurrence indicates it is not a regular feature of his religious experience. If 2 Corinthians was written in the mid–50s, then the event Paul narrates occurred around 40 A.D., some seven years after his conversion and at least several years before he founded the church in Corinth.

Caught up to the third heaven … to paradise (12:2–4). Jewish literature of the period refers to one, three, five, seven, and even 955 heavens.186 In each instance—and this seems to be the case here as well—the point is that the one ascending has reached the highest heavens, the very abode of God. In this passage, “third heaven” and “paradise” refer to the same locale.

He heard inexpressible things, things that man is not permitted to tell (12:4). Quite contrary to other heavenly ascent texts of Second Temple Judaism, whose whole point was to reveal the cosmological secrets of the universe or describe the ineffable mysteries of God, Paul comes back with nothing to say. Once again, the irony of Paul’s “boast” is barely concealed by the exceptional nature of the event he recounts.

A thorn in my flesh, a messenger of Satan, to torment me (12:7). In order to keep Paul humble, God allows him to be plagued by a “thorn in [his] flesh.” Many have suggested that this was some type of physical or mental ailment (poor eyesight, a speech impediment, epilepsy, depression), while others have seen in the mention of Satan an allusion to Paul’s opponents and his persecution for the gospel (cf. 11:13–15). The reference to the “flesh” makes one think of a physical impairment of some kind, though anything beyond this is conjecture. Paul must have been of reasonably sound physical constitution in order to endure the hardships he has just described (11:23–28) and to maintain his arduous travel itinerary. Whatever this ailment was, it is probably more of a chronic burden than a completely debilitating affliction.

For Christ’s sake, I delight in weaknesses … for when I am weak, then I am strong (12:10). This single, most important verse in 2 Corinthians crystallizes the argument of chapters 10–13 in a paradox of profound magnitude. In the crucible of affliction Paul has learned that the presence of the crucified Christ is mediated more perfectly through suffering and weakness than through glory and strength. This principle he has made emblematic of his ministry. Living his life in the shadow of the cross, Paul’s ministry assumes a cruciform character, which rejects the path of status, position, power, and prestige and embraces the folly and humiliation of the cross as God’s deepest wisdom (cf. 1 Cor. 1:18–2:5).

I am not in the least inferior to the “super-apostles” (12:11). “Super-apostles” represents Paul’s own cynical designation of the intruders—with their imposing manner, pretentious oratory, and eccentric claims to apostolic status. See “Paul’s Opponents in Corinth” at 11:6.

Signs, wonders and miracles (12:12). Part of Paul’s proof of his apostleship is the miraculous deeds he performs in the service of the gospel. Acts attributes to Paul various healings (14:8–10; 28:7–9), exorcisms (16:16–18), and even raising the dead (20:7–12), though none of those described in Acts occurred in Corinth.