V. CORINTHIANS: PREPARE FOR PAUL’S THIRD VISIT (10:1–13:14)

Many scholars believe chapters 1–9 (so-called Letter “D”) and chapters 10–13 (so-called Letter “E”) originated as separate letters. In brief, there are two main reasons for this opinion. First, the change of tone from the joy of the previous chapters (see especially 7:13, 16) to the admonitory, often bitter, character of chapters 10–13 is regarded as otherwise inexplicable in the one letter. Second, in these latter chapters Paul appears to be commenting on Titus’s return visit to Corinth as an accomplished fact (12:18), whereas in the earlier chapters that visit is still in prospect (8:18, 22, 24; cf. 8:6).

The view taken in this commentary, however, is that our canonical 2 Corinthians did not originate as two separate letters that were subsequently joined as the one we have today. The letter as we have it is the letter as written by Paul in the first place.1

Arguments in favor of the unity of 2 Corinthians have been set forth at greater length in the Introduction, some of which, however, are briefly re-stated because of the almost universal belief that a new letter now begins. In our opinion a new letter does not now commence, for the following reasons.

First, in chapter 10 we immediately encounter words or combinations of words rarely used outside this letter but which occurred earlier within the letter. The combination “I appeal … I beg”2 (vv. 1, 2) matches closely his exhortation in 5:20, although not found elsewhere in Paul’s writings. Likewise, the word “confidence”3 (RSV), which occurs in v. 2, is found earlier in the letter (1:15; 3:4; 8:22) but not in any letter earlier than 2 Corinthians (but see Eph 3:12; Phil 3:4). The immediate appearance of this combination and this word is a ground for believing that what now follows is in continuation of chapters 1–9 of the letter rather than the beginning of an entirely separate letter.

Second, the joy and confidence Paul expressed at the end of chapter 7 needs to be understood in terms of his pastoral method.4 His positive expressions about the Corinthians are not absolute but relative, circumscribed by (1) his thankfulness that the “Severe Letter” has been effective in achieving its major objective, their expression of loyalty to Paul in disciplining the wrongdoer (7:12), and (2) his preparation of the Corinthians’ minds for his appeal that the Corinthians complete the collection by the hand of Titus, whom Paul is sending back to them for that very purpose (8:6; cf. 7:13b-16).

Third, Paul’s pastoral method is to organize the material in the letter so as to make important theological comments within the various discrete sections (see on 12:19). He treats issues under discussion as opportunities to teach his readers important principles of theology.5 We propose that chapters 10–13 of 2 Corinthians, with their teachings about apostolic power-in-weakness as opposed to the triumphalism of the “superlative” apostles, follow naturally from the immediately preceding section in which he urged that the collection be completed before his arrival and in which the theme of divine grace is dominant.6 (1) Having cleared the ground of the issue of their loyalty to Paul as opposed to the wrongdoer (7:7–12), and (2) having appealed for the restoration of the collection by the hand of Titus, Paul is able to make his final impassioned plea to the church to resolve their other difficulties before his final visit (13:10).

Fourth, it appears that, as the letter draws to its conclusion, Paul’s appeal to the Corinthians becomes more intense emotionally. Like many an orator (and preacher!), he has kept the most urgent and controversial matters until the end and dealt with them passionately so that his last words make their greatest impact on the Corinthians. In this regard, Paul may be observing an existing rhetorical convention in (written) speeches from the Hellenistic era that conclude with a powerful peroration calculated to stir the hearers to appropriate attitudinal and behavioral change.7

Nonetheless, it is not often noted—as it deserves to be—that chapters 10–13 do not maintain a passionate intensity throughout. Paul begins to moderate his tone at 12:19, where he corrects a possible misapprehension that he has been merely offering a personal apologia. Indeed, from 13:5 to the conclusion of the letter Paul adopts more confident and encouraging tones, so that the latter part of the letter is little different in intensity from the preceding chapters 7–9. If this is true, the argument for a separate letter, on grounds that it is so emotionally different from what precedes it, is weakened.

Fifth, it is far from clear that the early Christians would have felt free to eliminate the ending of one apostolic letter (letter “D”) and the beginning of another (letter “E”) so as to unite into one two originally separate letters. For a scribe to emend an obscure or embarrassing word in an apostolic text is one thing, but for a church to excise whole sections from two letters is another.8 Critical to exegesis is the question of the identity of persons or groups who are addressed or referred to in these chapters. To this end it is helpful to analyze the apostle’s use of pronouns. It emerges from such a study that these chapters are dominated by “I/we … you” references. Apart from the “Fool’s Speech” proper (11:21b–12:10), where only the first person “I/me” is found, chapters 10–13 are characterized by Paul’s direct address to the Corinthians globally (“you”). By this means the apostle appears to be rebuilding the bridges between him and them, perhaps the more so in light of his prospective final visit with them.

At the same time there are fewer, though possibly equally significant, occurrences of third person pronouns and other third person references.9 It appears from a close study of these third person references that Paul, while addressing the Corinthians directly and referring to others indirectly, is either speaking to the Corinthians about these persons or speaking obliquely to them. It would appear that these persons referred to indirectly have an importance beyond the number or nature of references to them. Who are these persons referred to in this indirect way?

The contexts in which such references occur go some way toward answering that question. In 10:1–11 and 12:20–13:2, the conjunction of “you … some” (10:2), “you … anyone” (10:7), “you … many of those” (12:21), and “you … those who” (13:2) suggests that “some … anyone … many … those who” are insiders, existing members of the Corinthian fellowship. Nonetheless, the two passages do not refer to the same insiders.

In the former passage Paul is pointing to insiders who regard him as “walking according to the flesh”10 (10:2), who, while confident that they are “of Christ,”11 appear to doubt that Paul is “of Christ,” based apparently on his bodily weakness and contemptible speech12 exhibited during the second visit (10:10). Here Paul appears to be addressing a lofty and superspiritual attitude among the Corinthians toward him that was already painfully evident at the time of writing the First Letter.13

In the latter passage the insiders are “those who have sinned earlier and have not repented” (12:21; cf. 13:2). In our view Paul has in mind those Gentile Corinthians who remain enmeshed in the web of sexual immorality of the local cults and whom he had admonished earlier in the letter (6:14–7:1). Paul is calling on them to break with their sins once and for all.

Thus the insiders who belong to the whole body and who are being addressed indirectly throughout these chapters are (1) those who regard Paul as unspiritual and fleshly, and (2) the persistently immoral. It is not possible to say how these related to each other or to the faith community as a whole, only that their respective attitudes and behaviors were of concern to the apostle. It does seem likely, however, that the former were critical of Paul’s efforts in dealing with the moral problems associated with the latter during the Second Visit.

Outsiders may also be detected within these chapters. The flow of the passage 10:12–12:13 makes it clear that Paul is referring to newcomers, the “superlative” apostles who have “come” to Corinth (11:5, 4; cf. 12:11), whom he addresses later as “false apostles” (11:13). Whereas he is prepared to show boldness toward insiders who deprecate his spirituality (10:2), he declares—with the heaviest of irony—that he would not be so bold14 as to “classify or compare” himself with the outsiders who “commend” themselves and who “boast” of their ministry (10:12–13). By these ironic statements Paul is introducing the signature themes that will soon be developed in the “Fool’s Speech” (11:1–12:13), reaching its plaintive climax, “I ought to have been commended by you (Corinthians)” (12:11). Paul is here addressing the Corinthians—in particular those (Jewish members?) who have received (given hospitality to?) the newly arrived emissaries. But he has in mind the newcomers, too.

However, we do not meet these attitudes and persons for the first time in these climactic final chapters. Criticism of Paul’s spirituality may be detected earlier (1:12–14, 17). The judaizing opponents are introduced in 2:17–3:1 (5:11–13?) and the unrepentant sinners—probably but not certainly—in 6:14–7:1. Moreover, in addressing the Corinthians in general over his failure to accept their financial patronage and answering their suspicions of his motives for doing so (11:7–12; 12:13–18), he is expanding on matters that had been hinted at earlier in the letter (4:2; 7:2; cf. 6:3). Thus this latter part of the letter focuses on important issues between him and them, so that the problems they have with him, and, indeed, the problems he has with them, will be set right by the time of his arrival (13:10; cf. 12:19).

The dominant passage in these final chapters is 11:1–12:13, the so-called “Fool’s Speech.” In this rhetorically striking passage the apostle develops further the apologetic theme that was so prominent in the early chapters, in particular (1) his rebuttal of triumphalism in ministry (2:14–16), (2) his response to the charge that he is “insufficient” for the task of ministry (2:16; 3:5, 6), and (3) his reply to those who felt that he “commended” himself (3:1; 5:12). These criticisms appear to have arisen from the lofty attitudes of the Corinthians toward Paul, as intensified by the arrival of the “superlative apostles.”

What, then, are we able to say about the triangular relationship between Paul, the outsiders, and the Corinthians? To be sure, the newcomers appear to be comparing Paul disadvantageously with themselves. Clearly they present themselves as “superior”15 (see, e.g., 10:12–16; 11:5–6, 23; 12:1, 11). Reintroduced in 10:12–18, they become the counterpoint to his sustained comparison in the “Fool’s Speech” that follows. But what did the Corinthians think of these newcomers? For several reasons it seems likely that the Corinthian church was impressed with these outsiders: (1) The extent and rhetorical power of the “Fool’s Speech” were made necessary by their presence in Corinth. (2) The frequency of the “you” references within the “Speech,” beginning with “I am jealous for you” and concluding with the heart-rending “I ought to have been commended by you … How were you inferior to other churches?” (11:1; 12:11, 13), points to the seriousness of the threat posed by them.

With chapter 10, therefore, a critical point in the letter is reached. From now on it is dominated by references to Paul’s pending return to them, in light of which he begins to exhort them to rectify the problems in the church beforehand.

In 10:1–11 he admonishes those Corinthians who, based on the perceived problems of the recent visit and their resentment of the “Severe Letter,” discount Paul as ineffectual when present, and only powerful when absent, by letter.

He turns, then, to the outsiders, who commend themselves by “classifying and comparing” themselves with Paul, into whose field of missionary labor assigned to him by God they have trespassed (10:12–18).

Now follows the beginning of the “Fool’s Speech.” Paul expresses grave fears for them (11:1–2). Father-like, he has betrothed them to Christ, but they are flirting with “another Jesus,” as preached by the “superlative” apostles who have come to Corinth (11:3–4). Paul will concede no inferiority to them in knowledge, though he does in speech (11:5–6).

To be sure, he “lowered” himself in manual labor to preach the gospel to them “free of charge,” even receiving support from the Macedonians (11:7–9). But this was an expression of love and of service to them (11:10–11). To accept payment for ministry, as the Corinthians desire to provide and, indeed, the newcomers seek, will only reduce Paul to their level and thereby authenticate their claim to an apostleship equal with his (11:12).

But these men are false apostles, who come disguised as true apostles of Christ (11:13). Since Satan disguises himself as an angel of light, it should come as no surprise if his ministers disguise themselves as ministers of righteousness (11:14–15).

In 11:16–21a Paul reintroduces the theme of “foolishness” from 11:1. Though he is not a “fool,” let them receive him as a “fool,” so that he, like “many” (the false apostles), may also “boast.” The real “fools,” however, are the Corinthians themselves (who think they are “wise”), since they put up with the abuse and exploitation of the “false apostles.”

So Paul begins the “Fool’s Speech” proper (11:21b–12:10). “Fool”-like, he, too, will “boast,” which he will do by “classifying and comparing” himself with the “false apostles” (cf. 10:12). After insisting on his equality with them as a Hebrew, a son of Abraham, and an Israelite, he proceeds, through a catalogue of sufferings climaxing with the “thorn in the flesh,” to point to his “weaknesses” by which he claims “superiority” over them as a “minister of Christ.” Paul’s integrity as a true minister of Christ as opposed to their falsity is to be seen in his “weaknesses,” which replicate those of the one whose minister he is.

In the epilogue to the “Fool’s Speech” (12:11–13), Paul exclaims that they have forced him to speak as a “fool,” whereas he should have been “commended” by them. In no way is he “inferior” to the “super apostles,” and in no way are they “inferior” to other churches through his ministry, except that he has not burdened them financially.

The “Fool’s Speech” concluded, the apostle proceeds to lay to rest the accusation that his refusal to accept payment is inspired by guile. He does not accept recompense; but his coworkers do (12:13–19)!

Then, after admonishing the sexually wayward among them (12:20–13:4), the apostle expresses confidence that because they pass the test that Christ is “in” them, they may be confident that Paul, too, passes the test; they are the “proof” of his labors (13:5–7). Nonetheless, there is the need for their congregational “mending,” something that Paul prays for and admonishes (13:8–14).

A. PAUL’S PLEA NOT TO HAVE TO BE BOLD WHEN HE COMES (10:1–11)

1. Paul Defends His Discipline (10:1–6)

1By the meekness and gentleness of Christ, I appeal to you—I, Paul, who am “timid” when face to face with you, but “bold” when away! 2I beg you that when I come I may not have to be as bold as I expect to be toward some people who think that we live by the standards of this world. 3For though we live in the world, we do not wage war as the world does. 4The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds. 5We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ. 6And we will be ready to punish every act of disobedience, once your obedience is complete.

The opening verses of this passage are similar in tone and vocabulary to 5:20–6:2 (“I appeal … I beg”). We stand on the threshold of a significant exhortation (see on 13:11).

Paul seeks to correct their misconception of his ministry, past and future. In their view he is “timid” when face to face with them (i.e., during his second visit), and only “bold” when absent (i.e., in his “Severe Letter”). But they mistake timidity for what it really is, “the meekness and gentleness of Christ,” through which he now exhorts them, that is, by letter (v. 1)! He pleads with them that when present among them (in the forthcoming visit) he may not have to be “bold,” as he counts on being toward those who think that he merely lives “according to the flesh” (v. 2). While he lives “in the flesh” he does not conduct his warfare “according to the flesh” (v. 3). Under the metaphor of a siege, Paul declares that his weapons are empowered by God, for (1) throwing down the strongholds of human reason raised up against the knowledge of God, and (2) taking captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ (vv. 4–5). He is ready to punish every disobedience when he comes, once their obedience is complete (v. 6).

1 This extraordinarily emphatic opening to a new section of the letter is consistent with the view expressed above, namely, that with it Paul is now beginning the final, heightened, climactic part of his letter. It commences with the emphatic “myself,”1 followed by the rare “I Paul,”2 who expresses himself by the confident verb “appeal”3 (also in the first person singular4), an appeal that is made through no less than Christ5 himself, his “meekness and gentleness.”

These striking terms, “meekness and gentleness,” are clearly related to the loaded phrases “ ‘timid’ when face to face … ‘bold’ when away,”6 each of which stands in symmetrical counterbalance to the other.7 The face-to-face “timidity” with which he is charged is as unacceptable to his accusers as the “boldness” when absent with which he is also charged. As these categories are developed and illustrated within the passage (vv. 1–11), it emerges that Paul is answering a current criticism that he is only “bold” when absent, that is, by letter,8 but that in his physical presence he is “timid” (v. 1) and “unimpressive” (v. 10). Paul is responding to criticisms of (1) his preceding visit, when he was perceived to be “timid,” and (2) his followup letter, (now lost) when he was perceived to be “bold.”

Thus in v. 2, using their word—though ironically—he pleads that he should not have to be “bold” when he comes,9 while in v. 11 he specifically warns a (presumed?) critic that in his impending presence he will be no less “bold” than he is perceived to be when absent as a letter writer. Despite their perceptions of “boldness,” however, Paul the letter writer appeals to them “through the meekness and gentleness of Christ.”

Significantly, “timid” (better, “humble”) is a word both Paul and his critics use of him, though with different nuances.10 Its importance in the argument that follows (vv. 1–11) is demonstrated by its appearance at this early stage. Paul characterizes himself this way in various contexts within 2 Corinthians—as “downcast” in his sufferings as an apostle (7:6), as a manual laborer “lowering” himself in self-support to “elevate” the Corinthians in salvation (11:7), and—as applicable in this setting—as one who is “humbled” as he “mourns” for unrepentant sinners in the congregation (see on 12:21). But in this criticism by the Corinthians,11 accustomed as they doubtless were to ruthless methods of discipline in the Greco-Roman cities,12 Paul’s “humbleness” when present is seen as “feeble”13 (10:10).

By the phrase he uses in the first half of the verse—“through the meekness and gentleness of Christ”—Paul both anticipates and answers his critics’ interpretation of him as “timid.” However the Corinthians may perceive him, let them know that he presents himself to them in ministry as the model14 of “Christ” himself.15

The members of the word cluster used here—“meekness … gentleness … humble” (RSV)16—are echoed in many places in the exhortations to Christian living set forth in the letters of Paul and other writers (Phil 2:8; 4:8, 12; Col 3:12; Tit 3:2; Jas 3:13, 17; 1 Pet 2:18; 3:4, 15; 5:5–6). In all probability these streams of thought emanate from Christ himself, who, by his own words, revealed himself to be “gentle and humble of heart” (Matt 11:29)17 and who pronounced the blessing of God on “the meek” (Matt 5:5) and the promise of exaltation to the humble (Luke 18:14; cf. Matt 18:4).18 Jesus’ words were abundantly embodied in his meek servanthood as recorded in various incidents in the Gospels (Mark 9:33 pars.; John 13:14–17), in particular the accounts of his demeanor in the face of hostility and death, so extensively recorded in the passion narratives.19 These, too, have left their mark in hortatory passages in the early letters (cf. 1 Pet 2:23; Heb 2:9–11; 5:7–10).20 Christ’s character, apparently, was the subject of instruction by Paul in the churches when he had been present with them so that—as on this occasion—he merely has to point to it without any elaboration.21

This important phrase—“through the meekness and gentleness of Christ”—must also be considered next to other statements by Paul about Christ—notably his incarnation and death—as used elsewhere in 2 Corinthians. Although Paul proclaimed Jesus to be “Lord” (4:5), from whose “face” the “glory of God” is reflected into the heart (4:6), this glory crowned One who had, for the sake of others, forsaken “riches” and embraced “poverty” in humble birth (8:9) and sacrificial death (5:21). Sustaining much suffering in the course of his work as an apostle (6:3–10), Paul says that he carries in his body “the death of Jesus” (4:10). By such a ministry, which is the reverse of any notion of triumphalism (see on 2:14)—physical or spiritual—Paul exemplifies in a concrete and visible way a lifestyle that was both heard from and seen in Christ himself, and by it he now appeals to the Corinthians.

2 This verse carries forward the “bold when absent” accusation implicit in the previous verse. Now, however, he turns it back on the Corinthians. He “begs” them not to have to be “bold when present.” His words “I beg” spell out the content of his “I appeal”22 of v. 1.

When “present” may he not have to be “bold” as they claim he is toward them when “absent,” as in the writing of the “Severe Letter” (10:9–10; cf. 7:8).23 That is, given what he has just said about the “meekness and gentleness of Christ,” it is clear that “boldness” is not what he prefers. Nonetheless, given the nature of the opposition, he fears that he may have to step out of character in resolving the problems in Corinth. He “reckons” on being bold toward those who “reckon”24 that he walks according to the flesh. Significantly, however, he immediately softens that “boldness” with “by the confidence …”25 This perhaps indicates his preference to be seen as relating to them in pastorally more positive ways than by their portrayal of him as “bold” (or “arrogant”).

This verse is particularly important in the overall structure of 2 Corinthians, for two reasons. First, Paul now begins strongly to establish in the minds of the Corinthians that he is in fact coming back to them and that they must prepare for his coming. It is true that he referred earlier to his coming (9:4–6; cf. 2:1, 3), but this is now stated in strong terms that he will repeat many times before the letter reaches its end (10:6; 12:14, 20, 21; 13:1, 2, 10).

Second, Paul now refers to “certain”26 detractors among the Corinthians,27 whose charges against him are implicit in vv. 1–2 and that become explicit in vv. 9–10, namely, that in person Paul is “feeble” and in speech “beneath contempt,” and that only from a distance, “by word, not deed” (v. 11)—that is, by a letter that “frightens” (v. 9)—is he anything. These critics appear to be contrasting the ineffectual discipline attempted by Paul during the second (“painful”) visit with the success of the “Severe Letter” written afterward in place of the expected return visit. Thus, they see him as “… at once a coward and a bully.”28

In v. 2 Paul gives the probable clue to his critics’ basis of opposition to him. Judging his attempted discipline of moral offenders in Corinth to have been ineffectual, they “reckon” that Paul must be a man who “walks according to the flesh.”29 Here we see a connection with 1:12–24, where he defends himself against charges that he acted by “fleshly wisdom … made his plans according to the flesh”30 in not returning to Corinth but writing to them instead. The earlier criticisms (1:12, 17), which otherwise might have been regarded as general within the Corinthian community (cf. 1 Cor 4:8–13; 14:36), appear to be associated with a group within the church (compare “you” in v. 1 with “certain people”31 in v. 2) who think that “[Paul] walks according to the flesh.”32 By claiming this, his detractors may be saying, in effect, that he lacks the empowering Spirit in his ministry.33

Typical of his pastoral method, Paul has kept this issue and the critics in question separate within the letter (vv. 1–2) in order that he may reflect theologically upon it for the sake of his readers; this he now proceeds to do (vv. 3–6).

3 Paul has appealed to the Corinthians that he may not have to display “boldness” when he comes, but that he will against “certain” who diminish him. Paul digresses in vv. 3–6 to give the Corinthians a truer interpretation of his ministry than they (or his detractors among them) appear to hold. The specific ministry that he hopes not to exercise (“boldness”—v. 2) most likely relates to his capacity to discipline the morally wayward, a capacity that his critics are questioning (cf. 12:21–13:3). Nonetheless, Paul’s language in these verses suggests that he is taking the opportunity to defend his ministry in rather broader terms, not confining his ministry to moral discipline.

The explanatory connective “For”34 introduces the first half of the sentence (“For though we walk in the flesh”35), with which the second is contrasted (“we do not wage war according to the flesh”36). In the first part Paul concedes their criticism, effectively making the point that he (and, by implication, all believers) is “in the flesh,” that is, in this nonpejorative sense. But he does not conduct his ministry “according to the flesh,” as “some” appear to be saying.

In conceding that he “walks in the flesh” but asserting that he does not wage war “according to the flesh,” Paul establishes two important and related truths about his ministry. On the one hand, he disclaims any special powers that might imply that he is in himself the instrument of God; quite to the contrary, he is “in the flesh.” On the other hand, he denies any personal ineffectiveness in ministry, but implies effectiveness in that ministry.

Here once more is an expression of the power-in-weakness paradox of apostolic ministry. Like all other people who “live in the flesh,” Paul is a mere “jar of clay” (4:7), who “outwardly” is “wasting away” (4:16), a “thorn”-afflicted man (12:7). Yet he is in the midst of such weakness an effective bearer of the word of God (2:17; 3:2–3; 4:1–6; 5:11–12; 11:2; 12:19; 13:3–4). But because he is “in the flesh,” it can only be the gospel-word, the “treasure” itself (4:7), not its frail, ever debilitating, human bearer, that is powerful in achieving God’s purposes. Paul’s catalogues of personal suffering in obedience to apostolic ministry (4:7–10; 6:4–10; 11:23–12:10) mark him out as one who “walks in the flesh,” in implicit denial that the triumph of God could ever be attributable to him in himself. His power, that is, Christ’s power, for both living and serving, is perfected in weakness (12:9).

The general martial allusion “wages war” will lead into the imagery of the ministry as siege warfare that he expresses elaborately in vv. 4–6.37 The metaphor develops logically in line with military process from beginning to end. Paul “wages war” (v. 3) and has “weapons of warfare” by which he “demolishes fortresses” (v. 4), whereupon he takes “captives” and “punishes” any unyielding defenders (v. 5).38 Within this siege and captivity picture in vv. 4–6, Paul uses language in a rhetorically deliberate manner. His words “wages war” are repeated as “warfare,”39 his “pulled down” as “pulling down” that which is “lifted up.”40 Their “disobedience” is made “obedient to Christ.”41 Moreover, running through these verses, though not obvious in translation, is a sustained alliteration.42

4 Paul has declared that he does not “wage war according to the flesh” (v. 3). The initial “For”43 introduces his explanation that the “weapons of his warfare”44 are “not fleshly,”45 but, on the contrary, have “divine power”46 for (1) “the casting down of strongholds,”47 and (2) the capturing of minds in obedience to Christ (v. 5). In this verse he mentions “reckonings,” and in the next “every high pretension raised up against the knowledge of God.”

But what are these “weapons” about which Paul seems defensive (cf. 10:7; 13:3)? We infer from the context (vv. 1–2) that Paul is referring to his disciplinary ministry to them at the time of the second visit and through the “Severe Letter,” in regard to whose effectiveness, however, he and his detractors have different opinions. What Paul considers as “being humbled” in that he “mourned”48 for the unrepentant during the second visit (12:21), they regard as his “timidity” since his efforts seemed to them so relatively ineffective (10:1, 10). Paul also appears to be thinking of his followup action, the “Severe Letter,” which he regarded as achieving a “godly sorrow … repentance that leads to salvation” (7:10), but which his detractors dismiss as “arrogant toward them, but only from a distance”49 (v. 1; cf. v. 10), which was also partly obscure (1:13–14), “hurtful” (7:8), and written so as to “frighten” them (v. 9). On this view he and they have differing appreciations of his recent ministry among them.

Twice in this verse he states that his weapons “demolish,” a compound verb meaning “pull down,”50 which he also uses in v. 5 in regard to things that are “lifted up.”51 The “strongholds” Paul “pulls down” are “reckonings”52 that he appears to apply to “those who reckon53 that he walks according to the flesh” (v. 2). These “reckonings” that need to be “pulled down” are expanded upon in broad terms in vv. 5–6. His immediate application in this verse, however, may be to his detractors among the Corinthians.

5 Continuing the siege metaphor, Paul adds54 that the “reckonings” that he is divinely empowered to “pull down” include every “high thing” that is “lifted up against the knowledge of God.”55 As a second consequence of the divine empowerment of v. 4 he points to his “capture of every mind obedient to Christ.”

Perhaps Paul has in mind here both (1) the self-elevated Corinthian critics in the immediate past and (2) a more generalized reflection about his ministry. In regard to the former it is quite likely that he is thinking of the effectiveness of the “Severe Letter” in “pulling down” both the wrongdoer (2:6; 7:12) and the greater majority of the congregation who had failed actively to support him against the wrongdoer during the second visit (7:12), but who have now fallen into line (2:5–9).

But it seems likely that Paul is also commenting in general on the “high bulwarks against his gospel”56 thrown up by learned scribes in the synagogues (cf. 1 Cor 1:20) and Gentile intellectuals such as those he addressed in the Agora and Areopagus in Athens prior to his first visit to Corinth (Acts 17:17–34). In his mind may be the preaching of Christ crucified, which “pulled down” Jews for whom that message was a “stumbling block” and Gentiles for whom it was “foolishness” (1 Cor 1:23). From such ministry to Jews and Gentiles, however, have issued the very tangible messianic assemblies in the major cities of the Greco-Roman world, not least at Corinth (3:2–3).

Following through with the siege metaphor, the conqueror having “pulled down” the high rampart of the fortress, he proceeds to take prisoners into captivity.57 With this image Paul the victor takes “every thought” captive and brings it in obedience to Christ. The “capture” of “every thought” appears to be closely related to the “reckonings” (of his local detractors?) that he “pulls down.”58

This captive-taking stage of the siege metaphor is a striking image for the apostle-minister as a military general who takes fortified rebels captive and brings them into submissive obedience to59 Christ. This is a highly figurative way of saying, “We … preach Jesus Christ as Lord” (4:5) as well as—and with no contradiction—“We preach Christ crucified” (1 Cor 1:23), the other side of the paradox of Christ. In v. 1 Christ is “meek … gentle … [humble]”; here Christ is a conquering king to whom prisoners are brought.

Although this is capable of application to his ministry in general, Paul probably has in mind his prospective relationships with the Corinthians in particular. This emerges from the next verse, where the image of obedience is pursued but in a context referring to Paul’s planned return to Corinth and the discipline that he hopes he will not have to exercise (v. 2; cf. 12:20–21).

6 This final clause, which concludes a line of thought begun in v. 2, also serves as commentary on that verse. In v. 2 Paul pleaded that he would not have to be “bold” when “present” with the Corinthians by the application of discipline at the impending third visit. It is now made clear that the “boldness” in question would be displayed in “punish[ing] every act of disobedience.” He will hint at the unusual nature of his discipline later (see on 12:21). The present verse is also the climax and conclusion of the siege metaphor, begun in v. 3. The ramparts of the fortress having been pulled down and prisoners captured, vengeance is now wrought on those defenders who have finally surrendered. Hence, “we are ready to punish every disobedience when your60 obedience is complete.”

Once again rhetorical expression plays a significant role in this final clause, as with the passage as a whole, though again this tends to be lost in translation. First of all, there is a severity conveyed by (1) the repetition “every” continued from v. 5 (where it occurs twice), (2) some complex alliterations based on the Greek letters e and p,61 and (3), aurally, the inversion of “disobedience” (parakoē) and “obedience” (hypakoē). Powerful rhetoric and the strong military imagery combine to make vv. 3–6 among the more memorable passages in 2 Corinthians, and indeed within the Pauline writings.

But what situation is Paul addressing in this verse? Who are those whom he is “ready”62 “to punish”63? What is their offense? Three possibilities are (1) those Corinthians who “reckon” that Paul “walks according to the flesh” (v. 2), (2) those unrepentant of sexual misdemeanors to whom he will refer later (12:21; 13:2), or (3) the “superlative” apostles/false apostles64 who are corrupting the Corinthians’ understanding of and loyalty toward Christ (11:4–5, 13).

We may eliminate (3) on the grounds that those Paul has in mind appear to be insiders, not newcomers.65 On balance, we prefer option (1). In the context of this passage he has been referring to “some” who regard him as “walking according to the flesh” (v. 2), that is, in regard to Paul’s perceived ineffectiveness regarding the sexually unrepentant. Paul reserves his comments about these until considerably later in the letter (12:21; 13:2).

The theological teaching on ministry in vv. 3–6 is a good example of Paul’s pastoral method. Arising from a mundane situation—and one that is impossible for us to reconstruct at this distance—Paul gives his readers an important teaching that does not ultimately depend on whatever historical context existed, but stands—even today—in its own right. This is not the only occasion within 2 Corinthians when the attitudes of the Corinthians have forced him to offer an apologia for the worth of his ministry in general (3:4–6; 4:1–6; 5:11–13). Beyond that, Paul’s account of the effectiveness of his ministry is applicable to all who speak the word of God, past and present. Paul’s stirring words in vv. 3–6 serve to encourage ministers of the gospel to remain faithful to that gospel, and to believe their ministry to be powerfully effective, even though there are detractors—as there were with Paul—who find little to encourage them that a work of the Spirit is occurring.

2. Paul’s Rebuke of His Critics (10:7–11)

7You are looking only on the surface of things. If anyone is confident that he belongs to Christ,1 he should consider again2 that we belong to Christ just as much as he. 8For even if3 I boast somewhat freely about the authority the Lord gave us for building you up rather than pulling you down, I will not be ashamed of it. 9I do not want to seem to be trying to frighten you with my letters. 10For some say,4 “His letters are weighty and forceful, but in person he is unimpressive and his speaking amounts to nothing.” 11Such people should realize that what we are in our letters when we are absent, we will be in our actions when we are present.

After his important theological statement about his divinely empowered ministry (vv. 3–6), Paul resumes his interaction with his local detractors. In vv. 2–3 he pointed to “some5 who “reckon” that [Paul] walks according to the flesh” (my translation), that is, who reckon him to be an unempowered man. In this new passage he begins by addressing the Corinthian believers collectively (“you look …”), but immediately refers to an individual (“if anyone … let him”).6 The oscillation between Paul’s address to the church and to an individual continues through to the end of the passage (vv. 9, 11).7 While it is possible that a particular individual is in mind (the spokesman of a group critical of Paul?), it appears more likely that the individual references are only notional and that he is addressing the Corinthians as a whole, or a group within the church.

In particular Paul urges his critic(s) to look at what is before them, that is, at the church that owes its existence to Paul’s powerful ministry (v. 7; cf. vv. 3–6). Here is evidence that Paul is “Christ’s” (see on 3:2–3), and that his actions arise from the Lord’s authorization of his ministry, which, however, is not primarily to “pull down” (i.e., by harsh discipline) but to “build … up” the church (v. 8). Despite their views to the contrary, he had not written the “Severe Letter” to frighten them (v. 9). For they are saying that only his letters are powerful; in person he is weak and his speech contemptible (v. 10). When he returns he will be no less powerful in person than they judge him to be when absent by letter (v. 11), though, to be sure, he appeals to them to change their attitudes and ways so that this will not be necessary (v. 2).

7 This verse consists of two sentences that repeat vocabulary8 from earlier in the passage. The first sentence, which has only four words, is capable of several interpretations depending chiefly whether the verb, “look,”9 is taken (1) as an indicative (“you look”—so the ASV, TEV, and NIV), or (2) as an imperative (“look”—so the RSV, NEB, and JB).10 Moreover, the object11 could be understood as (1) “what is before your eyes” (RSV), that is, evident, or (2) as “on the surface of things” (NIV), that is, superficially. If the verb is an imperative, it follows that the object cannot be option (2). Paul would scarcely command them to be superficial!

The interpretation adopted here is that the verb is an imperative,12 based on Paul’s usage elsewhere. Once the meaning “look” is established, the object can only be option (1), “[at] what is before your eyes.”13 But, again, there is ambiguity. Does he mean, “look at” (a) the fact of the church in Corinth, or (b) the problems of the church and those who cause them? Because Paul goes on to assert defensively that he is “of Christ,” option (a) is preferable. On this basis Paul is pointing to the fact of the church to support his claims that his ministry is “of Christ.” Earlier he had stated that the Corinthian church is “a letter from Christ, ministered by [Paul]” (3:2–3; cf. 10:18; 12:12).

In the second sentence “a certain one,”14 real or more probably notional,15 is exhorted to “reckon again”16 what he had previously been “confident” about, suggesting that his former perception had been incorrect. Since Paul now mentions himself, it appears that he is calling on the Corinthian church, or, more probably, a group within it (as in v. 2—“some”), to reconsider him.

Their question was whether Paul was “of Christ.”17 In our view,18 this means that they doubted that he was a Spirit-empowered minister.19 This opinion is based on Paul’s rebuttal of their judgment (1) that he “walked according to the flesh” (v. 2), (2) that he employed “weapons … of flesh” (v. 4), and (3) that he must assert that his “weapons” have “divine power” (v. 4) and are effective in ministry (vv. 3–6).20

What is the basis for their negative judgment of him? Their conclusion has been arrived at, apparently, on account of what they regarded as his ineffectual attempt at church discipline when “present” during the second visit, followed by his “bold” (arrogant?) “Severe Letter” when “absent.”21

But Paul has a different understanding of “of Christ,” which is, simply, one who belongs to Christ, a Christian (1 Cor 3:23; 15:23; Gal 3:29; 5:24). Paul exhorts the (notional) individual “again” to “reckon”—the detractors’ word by which they reached negative conclusions about him?22—“within himself.” Is he “of Christ”? Then so, too, is Paul. If this “one” is confident that he is “of Christ”—a Christian—then Paul does not raise doubts about his spiritual standing. But let the same recognition be extended to Paul!

But there is a barb in Paul’s challenge. If this “certain one” is a Christian, then let Paul’s role in that be recognized, both for the inner life of the individual and for the objective reality of the congregation. The “one” needs to look both (1) “within himself,” to the reality of the Spirit’s presence,23 and (2) without, at “what is before your eyes,” the fact of the congregation (cf. 3:2). Not only is Paul like this “certain one,” “of Christ,” a fellow Christian, but he is, as an apostle, a “divinely empowered” minister (v. 4) who does not “walk according to the flesh” (vv. 2–4). His ministry is powerfully effective; the evidence is to be found both within their lives and in the existence of a Christ-confessing congregation.

8 The flow of Paul’s argument in vv. 1–11 is continued by the repetition from v. 4 of the word “pulled down.” In v. 4 he answered his detractors’ complaint of inadequacy in disciplining offenders by asserting that by “divine power” he “pulled down” all that was “raised up” against the knowledge of God. Now he urges that “the authority the Lord gave [him]” was not for “pulling you24 down.” The Lord did not commission Paul to be a demolisher (i.e., engaged in disciplining offenders in churches) but to be a builder of congregations.25 He is asking them, “Why do you criticize me for failing to do what the Lord has not called me to do?”

Rather, let these detractors understand that “the Lord gave [Paul] authority for building … up.” Paul’s comments here are of considerable importance. Although they are, in effect, Jeremiah’s words echoing Yahweh’s long-term relationship with Israel,26 Paul uses the prophet’s vocabulary to refer to the “authority” the Lord uniquely “gave” him on the road to Damascus.27 The Damascus event underlies much of Paul’s teaching throughout 2 Corinthians,28 though at no point does he refer directly to it.

Moreover, it is significant that it is the “Lord”—the ascended, glorious One (cf. 4:5–6)29—that Paul speaks of, not, for example, “Christ,” although that is the term used elsewhere in vv. 1–11. Paul’s manner of reference to the person—Christ, Son of God, Lord, Jesus—often implies something about his function. It is appropriate that, in respect to his Damascus call, Paul should say, “the authority the Lord gave …” This is not an absolute, but a derived “authority” from the Lord that is exercised “over” (cf. 1:24) the churches, by one who saw himself not as a “Lord” but as a “slave” (4:5).

Furthermore, in regard to the “authority”30 given to Paul we should note the use of this word in the Gospels. “Authority” is something God delegates to the Son of Man to execute eschatological actions on his behalf—to dominate the unclean spirits (Mark 1:27 pars.), to forgive sins (Mark 2:10), to lay down and take up his own life (John 10:18), and to pass the final judgment on humankind (John 5:27). In turn Jesus delegated his “authority” to the Twelve “to have authority over unclean spirits” during their mission to the towns of Galilee (Mark 3:15; 6:7). In Paul’s use of the word in letters prior to 2 Corinthians we note in particular a concentration of references in 1 Corinthians 9, where Paul is writing about his “authority” as an apostle that gave him the right to be supported as he preached the gospel (1 Cor 9:1, 4, 5, 6, 12, 18). These references from the First Letter form the immediate linguistic, historical, and theological background for Paul’s dual references to “authority” in the Second Letter (i.e., 10:8 and 13:10). Implicit throughout 2 Corinthians is Paul’s assumption that he is their apostle, whose authority is to be acknowledged by them.31

That Paul “boast[s]”—takes pride in32—“somewhat freely”33 or abundantly of this “authority” is something of which, he says, “I will not be ashamed.”34 This is probably an eschatological allusion. When he is revealed before the judgment seat of Christ (5:10), he will not be ashamed to have claimed the “authority” of an apostle of Christ in whose name he has come (cf. 1:14).

The Lord gave his authority to the apostle “for upbuilding.”35 This is a common term used by Paul for strengthening in faith and Christian conduct within congregations (12:19; 1 Cor 3:9; 14:3, 5, 12, 26; cf. 1 Cor 3:10, 12, 14; Rom 15:20), in particular, love (1 Thess 5:11; 1 Cor 8:1; Rom 14:19; 15:2). Paul’s reference here, however, appears to include his apostolic “building” of the churches, as at Corinth (1:18–22; 12:12).

By this deliberately understated pride in his exercise of the Lord’s “authority” Paul seeks to achieve two results. First, he seeks to reinforce the Corinthians’ understanding of his apostolic rule at this critical final stage in the letter that is preparing them for his coming (see 13:10). The Corinthians must rectify the problems he now addresses in this letter so that he will not have to do so when he comes, with attendant “grief” and “humility” (see the comments on 2:1; 10:1; 12:21). Second, he wants them to understand that church discipline (“pulling down”)—wherein his detractors deem him to have “walked according to the flesh”—is not primary to the Lord’s call. The Lord has commissioned him to be a builder, not a demolisher (cf. 12:19). In their criticisms they have made the secondary primary.

9 Paul now36 pauses to reassure the Corinthians of his motives in exercising the “authority” given him by the Lord (v. 8). The Lord’s “authority” was granted for “building up” and not for “pulling [them] down” (i.e., by discipline), he has just told them. Thus under no circumstances, he now adds, was he commissioned to “frighten” them, though that is precisely what he is accused37 of having done, by “his letters.”

By “letters” he is referring, in particular, to the “Severe Letter” of the recent past.38 To be sure, the “Severe Letter” appears to have been, in effect, an ultimatum that the Corinthians declare actively—not merely passively—their loyalty to him (2:8; 7:12). This they had effectively done by their discipline of the man who had wronged Paul (2:6, 7; 7:11–13a). Nonetheless, the Corinthians (“you”), now in view, remain critical of that letter, asserting that it was intimidatory, sent to “frighten39 them.”

Unstated here, but implied, is his concern that his letters be seen to “build up,” not “pull down,” the congregation. He will pointedly comment later that the present letter is for their “upbuilding” (12:19). If Paul’s letters are to have an ongoing authority with the Corinthians—and with the churches subsequently—it is important that they are seen to have the positive intention to “build up” the churches. Paul’s letters, written in his absence from the churches, should be seen as as much a part of his exercise of the “authority” the Lord gave him for their upbuilding as his ministry when physically present with them. These detractors seek to drive a wedge between Paul as absent and Paul as present, asserting that he is useless in both situations, as he reports in the verse following. Paul, however, does not ultimately distinguish between his letters and his person (v. 11).

10 Paul now amplifies the meaning of the previous verse. “I do not want to seem to be frightening you with my letters because …”40 Remarkably, the explicit and scathing criticism of Paul by his detractors (among them) is now set before us, almost certainly in their own terms.41 With his quotation of their words the whole passage vv. 1–11 reaches its climax and is made coherent. Now we are explicitly told why they regarded him (“they say”42) as “walking according to the flesh” (v. 2) and why he felt they needed to “look at what is before them” (v. 7). One may presume that their criticisms were brought to Paul in Macedonia by Titus (cf. 7:5–7).

Their sentence as quoted by Paul is in two parts,43 which correspond to the “absent” (letter writer) versus “present” (visitor) pattern so evident within vv. 1–11, as well as in related passages.44 As “absent,” they say, “his letters are weighty and forceful.” By itself this might serve as a compliment, but when read against the balancing second half of the sentence it is a damning sarcasm. When “present”—that is, “in person”45—they say, “he is unimpressive, and his speaking amounts to nothing.” What he should be when present—“weighty and forceful”46—he is only when absent; what he should be when “absent”—“[physically] unimpressive47 and with speech [of no account]”—which by definition, as it were, a letter is—he is when present. At both points he is the opposite of what they expect him to be. In their eyes he is a total failure, a man of “flesh” (see on v. 2).

While their negative views of his “person” and “speech,” broadly speaking, probably have overtones of disappointment in his lack of expertise in rhetorical skills48 and lack of physical “presence,”49 the context of vv. 1–11 makes it probable that their primary criticisms were directed at his unimpressive attempts to discipline the morally wayward during the recent visit (cf. 13:2; 12:21; 10:1–2), and the dispatch, instead, of a letter when they were expecting a return visit (1:15–2:3).

11 Using earlier vocabulary—“absent … present [vv. 1–2] … reckon [vv. 2 (twice), 4, 7] … letters” (v. 10)—Paul now rounds off vv. 1–1150 by addressing his detractors in the persona of a notional individual.51 Paul directly contradicts the devastating complaint reported in v. 10. “Let such a one ‘reckon’ ”—Paul advises his detractor—“that what we are when ‘absent’ by word (logō) through our letters we are also by work (work) when present.”52

Here Paul may be reiterating his own complaint, made earlier (v. 7), that in judging Paul these persons have “not looked at what is before their eyes,” that is, the undeniable fact of the Corinthian church. We can only speculate what Paul is referring to in speaking of his effectiveness when present with them. Perhaps he is saying that, despite their criticism that his recent visit accomplished little, it should not be forgotten that he managed to retain the loyalty of the greater majority of the church, even though they needed to be more demonstrative in their support (2:6; 6:11–13; 7:12). But Paul is not only defending himself against the widely held view of his ineffectiveness in the recent past. More particularly he is preparing the way for the third visit. If they hold a healthy opinion of him only, and ironically, as a letter writer, let them understand that Paul will be no less powerful in person, as he plans to come to them soon, prepared to discipline those who persist in sexual immorality (10:2; 12:20; 13:2).53

Paul is here defending his effectiveness when “present,” not merely his effectiveness when “absent,” as a letter writer. Nonetheless, it should be noted that Paul does not disclaim, but tacitly endorses, the effectiveness of his letters, undergirding their importance to this church and to other churches.54 Such letters, which, in the nature of things, come to churches in his absence, are no less an expression of “the authority the Lord gave” for “building up” (v. 8) believers and churches than his own immediate physical presence (cf. 1 Thess 5:27; 2 Thess 2:15; 3:14). In the physical absence of the apostle then—as well as now—his letters express the Lord’s “authority” to his apostle in absentia.

In the previous passage (vv. 1–11) Paul began in earnest to confront the Corinthians with the reality of his impending final visit. Against their misconception of his ineffectiveness in person—as opposed to his perceived, sarcastically affirmed strength as an absent writer of “frightening” letters (vv. 9–11)—Paul assures them of a firmness of approach when he comes, though he hopes a change of heart about him will make that unnecessary (vv. 2, 11).

The passage reflects Paul’s sense of being adjudged spiritually unempowered by (some of?) them, a man of “flesh” (v. 2). But let them look at what is before their eyes (the church) as well as what is within (the Spirit). If they are “of Christ,” Christians, then so, too, is he, and, indeed, more. He is an apostle; what is before their eyes, as well as within them, should tell them that (v. 7). Let them understand that his ministry is modeled on Christ—his “meekness and gentleness” (v. 1)—as authorized by the Lord to build up his church (v. 8). Despite their low view of his effectiveness, his ministry is divinely empowered to humble proud rebels against God in obedience to Christ (vv. 3–6).

Throughout 2 Corinthians Paul portrays the conversion of believers in general in terms of his own specific and unique experience.55 It is also likely that in describing his unique ministry as an apostle he is describing pastoral and evangelistic ministry in general.

Several implications may be drawn from Paul’s pastoral method in the writing of this letter. First, those engaged in Christian ministry should, like Paul, model themselves on Christ—his “meekness and gentleness”—using the weapons of the Spirit, not the flesh, confident that God will achieve his purposes through such a ministry. Second, let those who are tempted to be dismissive of the ministry of others take heed lest they pass judgment by outward and secular criteria such as the numerical growth of a congregation. The Lord judges his ministers (1 Cor 4:4–5; cf. 2 Cor 5:10).

B. “SUPERLATIVE” APOSTLES (10:12–12:13)

1. Intruders (10:12–18)

12We do not dare to classify or compare ourselves with some who commend themselves. When they measure themselves by themselves and compare themselves with themselves, they are not wise. 13We,1 however, will not boast beyond proper limits, but will confine our boasting to the field God has assigned to us, a field that reaches even to you. 14We are not going too far in our boasting, as would be the case if we had not come to you, for we did get as far as you with the gospel of Christ. 15Neither do we go beyond our limits by boasting of work done by others. Our hope is that, as your faith continues to grow, our area of activity among you will greatly expand, 16so that we can preach the gospel in the regions beyond you. For we do not want to boast about work already done in another man’s territory. 17But, “Let him who boasts boast in the Lord.” 18For it is not the one who commends himself who is approved, but the one whom the Lord commends.

Chapters 10–13 are Paul’s emotionally charged admonition to the Corinthians to set certain matters right so as to relieve Paul of that task when he will make his final visit to them. In these chapters various groups—those who regard him as spiritually powerless (10:1–11), the “superlative” apostles (10:12–12:13), and the morally wayward (12:20–13:3)—come more clearly into view, though he had made reference to them briefly in earlier parts of the letter. Thus, in the previous eleven verses he had admonished his detractors, who are indigenous to Corinth. Now, although he continues to address the Corinthians, he is really directing his attention—obliquely—to his major opponents, the outsiders, the “superlative” apostles, whom he is contrasting with himself. He had already briefly referred to their arrival (2:17–3:12; cf. 5:11–13); now he deals with them at considerable length, devoting the greater part of chapters 10–12 to their damaging influence in Corinth (10:12–12:13).

In this passage he declares—with heavy irony—that he will not dare compare himself with those who commend themselves. Because Paul is outside their circle and cannot be compared with them, their comparison of him reveals a lack of understanding (v. 12). Referring to the respective spheres of missionary labor allocated to the newcomers and to him, he does take pride (“boasts”) in the “field” God has assigned to him, and he has come as far as Corinth (v. 13). But he does not “boast” in what is “off limits” to him. For—unlike the newcomers—he has not overreached himself; indeed, he has reached even to them with the gospel of Christ (v. 14). So—again unlike the newcomers—he does not take pride in what is “off limits,” that is, in the “labors of others.” But he hopes that, as the faith of the Corinthians grows, his ministry among them will increase and overflow so that he is able to evangelize in regions beyond them, not in another person’s field, taking pride in work already done (vv. 15–16). It is only in the Lord that one can take pride; for it is not the one who commends himself who is “proven,” but the one whom the Lord commends (vv. 17–18).

This passage, while appearing to be about Paul, is also about those who “classify or compare” themselves with him, with those who, thereby, “commend” themselves. Only once does he refer to them, and then only in an impersonal manner (“some who commend themselves … they”3—v. 12). It should be noted that he does not address them directly nor exhort them even indirectly. They are simply there, offstage—as it were—not dignified by direct reference. Their method is to “commend” themselves (vv. 12, 18), as they rhetorically “classify” and “compare” themselves with him (v. 124), thus seeking to undermine Paul’s position in Corinth. Paul’s repeated use of the negative in this passage5 reveals the extent to which he must reply to their polemic against him.

Critical to this passage is Paul’s denial that he has evangelized “in the field of another man”6 (v. 16). Who is this “other man” who had “already” ministered in Corinth? One possible answer is Cephas, who had visited Corinth between the time Paul founded the church and his writing of the First Letter (i.e., between c. A.D. 52 and 55).7 On this hypothesis the newcomers may be arguing that by his coming to Corinth Cephas had staked the claim for the present (Jewish) mission, which they are now exploiting in a way Cephas may not have foreseen or intended. Quite possibly they argued that Paul was the interloper in a field of mission that was properly theirs on account of Cephas,8 to the exclusion of Paul (see the comments on vv. 13, 14, 15, and 16). From Paul’s position, given the place of Cephas in early Christianity, this would be an extremely sensitive matter, perhaps explaining the obliqueness of the passage. This reconstruction, while possible, remains conjectural. It is equally possible, and perhaps simpler, to say that this “another” is a notional self-reference to Paul himself, as if to say, “these men have come into my field.”

Paul’s is a two-edged approach. In addition to defending himself against this assault, he is able to make his own criticism of the newcomers, who are guilty of trespassing into Paul’s “field” of labor. The pattern of negatives in this passage serves both purposes. The succession of negative statements, by stating what is not true of him, serves—indirectly—to accuse them.

12 The initial explanatory “For,”9 followed by the verb “dare,”10 sets up a contrast with v. 2, and with vv. 1–11 overall, where Paul “dares” those Corinthians who “reckon” that he “walks according to the flesh.” With outsiders now in view, he states, ironically, that he does not “dare” to “classify or compare” (enkrinai … synkrinai11) himself with those who “commend themselves.” Indeed,12 such persons are “without understanding” because they “measure themselves by themselves and compare13 themselves with themselves.”

“Commend,”14 which appears again at v. 18 (thus framing the paragraph), occurred earlier in the letter (3:1) when Paul’s newly arrived opponents (2:17–3:1) first appear. In all probability the reappearance here of “commend” signals that these “peddlers” are now reintroduced. Here is a brief recall of that sentence. In 3:1 Paul denies that he is commending himself, but especially contrasts himself to these interlopers who need letters of commendation to give them access to the churches. Paul needs no such thing. Now, and with not-too-subtle irony, Paul declares that “commend[ing]” is something he would not “dare” to do. Only the Lord can commend his servants; they cannot commend themselves (10:18; cf. 3:2–3). Paul is the apostle of Christ, not of men (Gal 1:1), and he is commended by Christ, not men.15

In any case, their self-commendation is futile. Unlike Paul, to whom the Lord gave his authority (v. 8), their commendation issues from within their own circle, from no one higher than themselves. Through his apostolic call, however, Paul is unique, not able to be “classified” or “compared” with them (see also on 11:12). He is outside such comparisons, in a class by himself.

For the reason that he will give at the end of the paragraph—that not the self-commended but only those the Lord commends are “proven”—Paul in this opening verse is dismissive of those who “classify” or “compare” themselves so as to seek “commendation” or legitimacy for their ministry. Such comparing and contrasting is, he says, “without understanding” (RSV).16 The creation in Corinth of a new covenant community directed to Christ and Spirit-anointed (1:21–22; 3:2–3; 11:3–4) was the “proof,” the Lord’s own commendation of Paul’s ministry (v. 18). Those who seek accreditation from earthbound others do not begin to understand the Lord’s ways.

The point of their “classification and comparison” of themselves with him, which emerges as 10:12–12:13 unfolds, was to establish their superiority to Paul in ministry,17 in two areas in particular—in rhetoric (11:5–6) and in “visions and revelations” (12:1; cf. 5:12–13). Although Paul says he will not “classify and compare [himself],” he does precisely that, but in a radically different and surprising manner (11:21–12:13). He points to his superiority in ministry through a display of weaknesses.

We do not know how many persons were involved or what the complete range of comparison might have been. What does emerge from this verse and from the paragraph as a whole is that a significant mission existed, as we infer from the sixfold repetition of “themselves” within the verse. This impression is reinforced from 3:1, where we learn that these newcomers arrived with “letters of recommendation” from another place or places and that they sought letters from the Corinthians to other places to secure a “field” of ministry elsewhere (cf. v. 15). It is almost certainly a Jewish network—a Jewish Christian network (see on 11:23)—extending from Jerusalem (?) and other places (?), and which—to Paul’s chagrin—is now establishing itself in Corinth.

13 Paul’s opening words, “But we,”18 establish an immediate contrast between himself and those who “commend” their ministry to the Corinthians as they “classify”/“compare”/“measure” themselves with him (v. 12). Unlike them, he does not19 “boast” in regions that are “beyond proper limits,”20 but only according to the “measure of the field” (kanōn21) that God has “allocated” to him as “his measure.”22 In keeping with this “measure” he has reached “even”23 as far as the Corinthians. In other words, Paul asserts that in having come to Corinth he is operating within the “field” God has demarcated to him; but, by implication, the outsiders, in coming there, have trespassed into a sphere established by God for Paul.

We will	not	boast beyond limits,
	but
[we will		boast]
			according to the	measure of the field
			that God has allocated to us
			as our	measure
					to reach even as far as you.

The meaning of this verse, although not clear in itself nor from its immediate or broader contexts, must—by the confident manner he expresses it—have been obvious to the Corinthians. We, however, are forced to look elsewhere to make sense of it. Most probably the apostle is alluding to the missionary concordat in Jerusalem in c. A.D. 47 between the “pillars” of the mother church and the delegates from the church of Antioch (Gal 2:7–10).24 It was then agreed that, since Paul had been entrusted with “the gospel to the uncircumcised … [a mission] for the Gentiles,” he should “go” to them,25 on the understanding that he would “remember the poor,” that is, the “poor among the saints in Jerusalem” (Rom 15:26, RSV; cf. 1 Cor 16:4; 2 Cor 8:4; 9:1, 12).

This missionary agreement, however, was dependent upon God’s anterior commission to Paul on the Damascus Road that he “preach his [Son] among the Gentiles” (Gal 1:16), a commission that owed nothing to human intermediaries (Gal 1:1, 10–12). Paul’s present reference to “the field God … assigned to [him]” probably has in mind both the divine commission and its endorsement by the missionary accord in Jerusalem in c. A.D. 47.26 Deliberate missionary work among the Gentiles followed, including that within major cities of the Aegean provinces. In accordance with God’s commission and the missionary accord, Paul had “reach[ed]27 even to [them]” in Achaia.

Thus Paul does “not boast beyond proper limits,” unlike his opponents who have trespassed into his missionary “field,” the Gentiles. To be sure, there was a synagogue in Corinth, and Jews were among the believers in the church of Corinth (Acts 18:8). The newly arrived Jewish missionaries probably had been received into their homes, as Cephas had doubtless also been (the same houses?). Nonetheless, it was essentially a Gentile church in a Gentile region. Not least, Paul had arrived first (see on v. 14). Paul is pointing out that Corinth is his rightful sphere of missionary labor and that the “superlative” apostles have intruded into it “beyond proper limits.” Corinth is a “field” assigned to him by God.28

In this verse Paul introduces to the paragraph the “boasting”29 vocabulary that will reappear significantly toward its end (in vv. 15–17), as well as in later paragraphs in 10:12–12:13 and that relates to the claims of the newcomers. Paul’s opponents use the vocabulary to make capital in their competition with him; for him “boasting” means, in the good sense, “taking pride in”30 something.

We infer from Paul’s reference to “boasting” that his opponents “boasted.” But in what? As we reconstruct it, their “boast” consists in those ministry-related matters in which, after classifying, comparing, and measuring themselves with Paul, they declare themselves to be “superior” (see on 11:5, 23). In the present case the newcomers may have “boasted” of coming as far as they have—even to Corinth—perhaps a distance greater than Paul had traveled to come to them.31 Be that as it may, they have certainly intruded into a field that does not belong to them. As the passage develops, Paul will, in fact, “boast”—he has been forced to (“I must boast”—11:30; 12:1) by his opponents’ “boasting” (11:16–18)—but it will be “boasting” that is “foolish” because it will be “boasting in weakness” (11:30; 12:5, 9). The “measuring” of themselves with him and their “boasting” of “superiority” over him will compel him to “boast—but of weaknesses”—and “force” him “to become a fool” (12:11).

14 Having stated32 in the previous verse that he reached even as far as Corinth, Paul repeats that assertion, adding “for33 … we are not over-extending ourselves,” obliquely inferring that the newcomers have overreached themselves. He repeats his “for,” explaining, “we reached even as far as you with the gospel of Christ.”

For we	are not34 overextending ourselves
as [we	should be doing35] if
we	did not	reach	even to you.
For we		reached	even as far as you
with the gospel of Christ.

Paul’s opponents appear to be claiming that Corinth was their rightful “field,” though we can only guess at the basis for their claim.36 Whatever it was, for Paul they were the ones who had “overreached” in coming to Corinth.

The sentence is dominated by vocabulary of distance and space, consistent with the theme of measurement of the previous verse.37 Specifically, Paul has not “overreached”38 himself in “reaching even to you”39 (Corinthians) with the gospel of Christ. This would be true had Paul not ventured beyond his base, Antioch. It is no less true because Paul has come as far even as to them. Gentile Corinth is as much part of the gospel “field” demarcated by God to Paul as Gentile Antioch.

But what is Paul implying about the movements of the intruders?40 In reaching Corinth they have “overextended” themselves. The “field” of mission God has assigned to them is either in Judaea or with the Jews of the Diaspora living among the Gentiles. We may conjecture that had they come to Corinth and confined their ministry to the synagogue (as Cephas had?), there would have been no problem. The difficulty appears to be that these newcomers are not content with that; they wish to move into Paul’s God-assigned “field” of ministry, the Gentiles.

Paul loses no opportunity to remind the Corinthians—and other readers as well—that the “gospel of Christ/of God” was the prime reason for the distance traveled. Paul is reflecting here on the two dovetailing realities: the Lord’s commission to be his apostle to the Gentiles, and the missionary concordat of Jerusalem of c. A.D. 47 that recognized that commission, agreeing that Paul should “go” to the Gentiles (see on v. 13). Thus understood, it was for “the gospel”41—the mission to the Gentiles—that Paul came originally to Corinth (11:7; cf. 1:19; 2:17; 4:5; 5:11, 20), as it had been also to Troas (2:12). His complaint against the newcomers was not only that they had intruded into a “field” of mission divinely assigned to him, but also that the message they brought was “heterodox” (11:4; cf. 3:7–11).

15–16 As Paul’s sentence proceeds, he returns to the theme of boasting (v. 13), but now in terms of having reached even Corinth in proclaiming the gospel about Christ. He now sets out to explain what “boasting within proper limits” means. Repeating that phrase, he now adds—in light of v. 14—“in work done by others.” Rather,42 he hopes that, as their faith grows, his ministry among them within his “field”43 may be increased and overflow so as to evangelize regions beyond them, so as not to boast in work already in another’s field (as the intruders are doing).

The text is complex and the verse divisions unhelpful. The conclusion of the previous verse (“For we reached even as far as you with the gospel of Christ”) carries over to the first part of this verse (“not44 boasting beyond limits”45). The second part of v. 15 (“we hope46 that as your faith grows,47 our ministry among you within our field might be increased to overflowing”48) continues into the first part of v. 16 (“to evangelize in regions beyond you”).

Verse 15a repeats in almost identical terms the phrase from v. 13,49 except that now, by the phrase he adds, he amplifies its meaning. Thus, his words “in the labors50 of others” explain the meaning of “beyond limits” from v. 13. The territory that is “beyond limits” is one in which “the labors of others” occur.

As in vv. 13 and 14, Paul is here obliquely accusing the newcomers of encroaching into the “labors of others,” that is, into his missionary and pastoral labors in Corinth. He will not evangelize “in the field of another man,” nor should they. These are Paul’s own missionary labors—his measured mission “field,” his pride—in which, however, the newcomers now boast.

Once again the Damascus Road commission/the missionary concordat of Jerusalem (see on v. 13) appear to be in mind. Working within the limits set—that he should go to the Gentiles/the uncircumcised—Paul has come to Achaia and established a ministry there. Thus Corinth is part of the “field” God assigned to him. But these newcomers, in setting up ministry in Corinth, are actually “boasting” of work done where they have no right to be. The Gentiles of Corinth are “out of bounds” to them; they have trespassed into his sphere of labor.

In v. 15b Paul sets forth positively his aspirations for ministry in Corinth. He appears to be alluding to his forthcoming visit to Corinth and the gospel ministry he wishes to enjoy when he comes. In direct denial of a space for ministry to the intruders, Paul “hopes” that, “as the faith [of the Corinthians]51 grows”—in response to the gospel52 that, we infer, he will preach once more when he comes (cf. v. 14)—his ministry53 will be greatly “increased” among them. The repetition of the critical word “field” (kanōn) from v. 13, but set within the phrase “according to our field,” pointedly reminds the Corinthians that what Paul does “among [the Corinthians]” is within the limits set by God, but “off limits” for the newly arrived ministers.

In passing, it is important to note the confidence and hope expressed in v. 15b. A majority of exegetes portray chapters 10–13 as defensive, ironic, and embittered and therefore necessarily a letter separate from chapters 1–9. This opinion, however, needs to be qualified by the optimism of this verse as well as the rather genial final part of the letter (13:5–14).

Verse 16a gives the reason Paul hoped for an enlarged influence in Corinth, namely, “that we can preach the gospel54 in regions beyond55 you.” The brevity of this part of the verse is such—five words in the original—that Paul’s rationale is not altogether clear. Most probably he means that an expanded ministry in Gentile Corinth will give him greater confidence as he moves on to other places of ministry, in particular to Spain56 and the western extremities of the empire (Rom 15:24, 28–29). From Paul’s viewpoint it would be helpful if he left behind a strong center of faith in the Achaian capital. The bonds of fellowship and the support in prayer would be of great benefit as he moved out of that region toward the west.

But just as Paul looked “beyond” Corinth for further mission work, so, too, the newcomers looked “beyond” Corinth, as indicated by “letters of recommendation … from you” (3:1). We may discern two mission groups with competing aims, the one associated with Paul, the other with his opponents, each seeking to spring from a secure base of ministry to other places. The one was concerned with proclaiming Christ and winning allegiance to him, whereas the other was concerned with judaizing Gentiles who had already been evangelized.

Having declared his hope that the gospel should be proclaimed in “regions beyond” them, he immediately returns in v. 16b to his defense of himself as an oblique attack on the opponents. This second half of v. 16 is, in effect, a new sentence that significantly also commences with a negative (see vv. 12, 14, 15; cf. v. 13). That Paul will not take pride in “another man’s field” is a restatement—now in the singular—of v. 15, where he would not take pride in the labors of other men. Paul will not—as they should not—“boast in the field of another,” that is, “in regions already57 evangelized” by him.

From these verses emerges a principle of missionary demarcation among the apostles. God had assigned to Paul a “field” (vv. 13, 14)58—the Gentiles—into which the Jewish mission may not intrude. He would not intrude into a “field” in which another apostle was already working. This appears to be confirmed by his attitude toward ministry in Rome, where the foundation had been laid by someone else (Cephas?) and upon which he would not build, even though Rome was the capital of the Gentile world (Rom 15:20).59 It is a credit to Paul’s breadth of vision that he can uphold the missionary rights of another apostle in circumstances where unacceptable representatives of the other mission were in the process of destroying his work in Corinth.

This apostolic principle should serve to caution missionaries and ministers beyond the apostolic age. It is no light thing to set up ministry when an acceptable and effective gospel ministry to the same people group is already in place.

17 Paul’s introductory particle60 (untranslated) serves to stop the flow of thought of the previous few verses and to introduce the biblical citation. With this verse—adapted from LXX Jer 9:2461 (see also 1 Cor 1:31)—Paul prepares to conclude the paragraph, which he does in the verse following. The theme of “boasting,” introduced in v. 13, has been very important, being repeated in vv. 15 and 16. Pointedly referring to the newcomers, Paul declares that he will not boast where he should not—“beyond proper limits” (v. 13), “in the work done by others” (v. 15), in “another’s field,” in “regions already evangelized” (v. 16). Unlike them, Paul will not boast where he should not.

Nonetheless, the implication from vv. 13, 15, and 16 is that Paul does boast, by which he means something rather different, namely, “takes pride in,”62 or even “puts confidence in.”63 His opponents have given him no option but to defend and explain himself, which he has done in the previous verses of this passage. But now Paul makes it quite clear that anything that has been achieved has been only through the Lord, not by Paul his servant.64 This is no mere passing sentiment, but a clear reference to a concrete reality, the church of Corinth, as the next verse shows.

18 With his initial explanatory “For,”65 Paul now concludes this important paragraph begun at v. 12, clinching his arguments by referring again to the notion of “commending” with which it began.66 In a proverblike “not … but” saying, the apostle declares that it is not the one who commends himself who is “proven,” but the one whom the Lord commends.

As with the other sentences of the paragraph (except v. 17), a negative67 again appears at the beginning. By this device Paul is able both to defend himself and to point to his opponents without referring directly to them. Unlike him—casting the group in the persona of an individual—these opponents commend themselves. Let them understand that it is “the one whom the Lord [Jesus68] commends” who is “approved.” How does the Lord Jesus commend his servants? Clearly, by the concrete reality of a new covenant church, a group of people focused on Christ (eis Christon69), where the Spirit of God is concretely present to change the hearts of the people (1:21–22; 3:3; 5:5; 6:16). For all its shortcomings the assembly at Corinth is such a church, and by that church the Lord Jesus commends Paul. That church is a “letter of recommendation … from Christ,” ministered by Paul (3:2–3), “proof”70 of his claim to have been called by Christ to be his apostle.

Near the end of the long passage dealing with the newcomers (10:12–12:13) Paul sadly comments, “I ought to have been commended by you” (12:11). The Lord’s commendation of his minister on account of effective church planting (1:18–20; 11:2–3; 12:12) ought to be echoed by the members of the church so established. Poignantly, in the case of the Corinthians, it was not.

The references to “commendation” in vv. 12 and 18 clearly tie this passage to 2:17–3:3, where Paul writes of those who bring “letters of commendation.” This paragraph—linked as it is with that earlier one—lays a foundation for the strong words that follow and that are directed to those who have “received” the intruders (11:1–11) and, though expressed obliquely, to the intruders themselves (11:12–23a). These passages will form part of the “Fool’s Speech,” which becomes rhetorically more intense thereafter (11:23b–12:13). The passage just completed leads into the emotional climax of the letter.

The import of this passage is threefold.71 First, Paul establishes that the spreading of the gospel is the priority of Christian ministry. In Paul’s case this meant the mission to the Gentiles to which he was called by God on the road to Damascus, as recognized by the missionary concordat of Jerusalem c. A.D. 47. Second, because the existence of another mission—that to the Jews—brought its own complications and tensions, accepted principles of cooperation were needed, as they continue to be in comparable situations. Third, self-commendation in Christian ministry is excluded. The Lord commends his servants for ministry by the fruits of their ministry.

2. The Fool’s Speech (11:1–12:13)

The “Fool’s Speech”—as it is called1—that follows (11:1–12:13) may be analyzed as (1) Introduction (11:1–21a), (2) the “Fool’s Speech” proper (11:21b–12:10), and (3) Epilogue (12:11–13).

But who is the “Fool” and to whom is the “Speech” directed? The “Fool” who speaks is Paul (11:1, 16 [twice], 17, 19, 23; 12:6, 11), though he suggests that both the Corinthians and the opponents are also “fools” (11:16; 19–20). It is significant that, although he mostly uses the first person pronoun in 2 Corinthians, within the “Fool’s Speech”—with the exception of 11:4, 6, 21—he employs the first person singular, “I.”2 The hearers of the “Speech” are the Corinthians, whom he often addressed directly as “you” (11:4, 7, 8, 9, 11, 19, 20; 12:11, 13). Nonetheless, the unnamed opponents are being addressed indirectly as well (11:4–5, 12–15, 19–23a, 26, 28?); indeed, the “Speech” is necessitated by their behavior in Corinth. That Paul’s only references to them are indirect may be calculated; direct reference might serve to dignify them.

While the “Fool’s Speech” appears to be a discrete literary unit, it cannot be divorced from the previous passage (10:12–18), with which it is in continuity both in style and content.3 In style, the “Speech” is an elaborate, if ironic, “comparison” between Paul and the “superlative” apostles (cf. 11:5). This “comparison” (synkrisis) springs from 10:12, where, to be sure, Paul declines to “classify or compare” himself with others. Nonetheless, within the “Fool’s Speech” proper (11:21b–12:10) Paul proceeds to do precisely this, though it will be an utterly surprising form of “comparison”—boasting of weaknesses—which appears to be without literary precedent.4 In content, Paul will refer to those who have “come” to Corinth (11:4). This, too, is implicit in the immediately preceding passage (cf. 10:13) as well as, of course, in 2:17–3:1, where the newcomers are first referred to in the letter.

a. The “Fool’s Speech”: Introduction (11:1–21a)

(1) The Corinthians “Bear with” Deceivers (11:1–4)

1I hope1 you will put up with a little of my foolishness;2 but you are already doing that. 2I am jealous for you with a godly jealousy. I promised you to one husband, to Christ, so that I might present you as a pure virgin to him. 3But I am afraid that just as Eve was deceived by the serpent’s cunning, your minds may somehow be led astray from your sincere and pure3 devotion to Christ. 4For if someone comes to you and preaches a Jesus4 other than the Jesus we preached, or if you receive a different spirit from the one you received, or a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put up with5 it easily enough.

Since we have alluded to the arrival of the newcomers in the preceding passage (10:12–18), their mission now comes into even clearer view, especially in v. 4.

Structurally this passage is framed by “bear with” (v. 1 [twice], v. 4), used in an ironic sense. The constituent parts of the closely connected passage are joined by “for … for … but … for …”

If only they will “bear with” him in a little “foolishness.” Do let them “bear with” him (v. 1). For he has “the jealousy of God” for them. For he “betrothed” them to “one husband,” to “present” them as a “pure virgin,” to Christ (v. 2). But he is afraid that as the serpent in his “cunning” deceived Eve their “minds” may be “corrupted” from the “single-mindedness” and “purity” appropriately directed to Christ (v. 3). For if, indeed, someone “comes” proclaiming “another Jesus,” or if they receive a “different Spirit,” or if they accept a “different gospel,” they “bear well with” him (v. 4).

The irony is clear. He must urge them to “bear with” him, the one who has joined them to their one true husband, Christ, but they “bear well with” one who proclaims “another Jesus,” an alien. They have positively welcomed those6 who are intent on destroying Paul’s authority with the Corinthians. They are “bearing with” newcomers who are diverting them away from their one true husband, to whom the apostle has joined them.

These verses, therefore, along with 10:12–18, serve to contrast these “ministers” with Paul. Although he said that he would not “classify or compare” himself with them, this is what he now proceeds to do in the “Fool’s Speech” as it unfolds.

1 Having dismissed his opponents’ attempts to “commend” themselves (10:12–18), Paul now sets forth their folly by joining in their exercise. A note of irony is immediately introduced by Paul’s initial word, “if only,”7 which points to a wish that is impossible to fulfill, namely, that the Corinthians would “bear with” him8 in “a little foolishness.” The second sentence—“but,”9 followed by the indicative, “you do bear with me” (NIV, “you are already doing that”)—intensifies the irony.

Because two words that are continually repeated in what follows—“foolishness”10 and “bear with”11 (RSV)—are now introduced, this verse serves as a heading for the “Fool’s Speech” (although the “Speech” proper does not begin until v. 21b).

Paul had earlier characterized his speech as “right-minded” (5:13), the very opposite of the “foolishness” of which he now speaks.12 But speak “as a fool” he must, to avoid the charge of self-commendation and “boasting,” which he had just repudiated in others (10:12, 17, 18). It appears likely that it is being bandied about in Corinth that Paul is a “fool” whom the Corinthians must “bear with,” that is, “humor” or “tolerate.”

The next sentence may be understood as (1) “You are already [bearing with me]” (indicative; cf. NIV, “you are already doing that”), or (2) “Do bear with me” (imperative—RSV).13 While we prefer (1), either way Paul expresses his pain that a church that he has established and for whom he had suffered so much feels it must “bear with” him, and that “as a fool.” It is quite likely that by these words Paul is throwing back at them a line being spread either by his local detractors or by the newly arrived “superlative” apostles (11:5). But—as he will now remind them—it was he, Paul, who first joined them to Christ, and it is his calling to present them, uncorrupted, to Christ.

2 The word “For”14 (untranslated by the NIV) is dominant in v. 2, appearing in both of its unequal sentences, providing the link between Paul’s three ideas in vv. 1b-2: “You do bear with … me. For I am jealous for you … for I betrothed15 you … to Christ.”16 These ideas are given in reverse order of ministry sequence of his relationship with them. First, he joined them to Christ; second, therefore, he cares about their fidelity to Christ; third, they do, ironically speaking, “bear with”—barely tolerate—him.

Critical to this verse and the next is the apostle’s portrayal of his ministry by the metaphor of betrothal,17 a practice alien to modern Western culture.18 It is, in all probability, a paternal image19 whereby a father pledges a daughter in marriage to a prospective husband, taking responsibility for her virginal fidelity to her betrothed in the period between the betrothal and the marriage. The apostle’s pride in his people “on the day of the Lord Jesus” (1:14) is consistent with the marriage imagery used here whereby a father would finally present his betrothed daughter with pride to her husband on the long-awaited wedding day.

By this elaborate metaphor Paul neatly describes the eschatological nature of apostolic evangelism. As the result of evangelism (1:19) a church (“a betrothed”) comes into being, related by “faith” (cf. 5:7) to her physically absent “husband”-to-be, whom she will not see until his appearing, when the marriage is consummated. In the meantime the father-betrother is responsible for the virginal purity of the betrothed until he “presents”20 her “as a pure virgin”21 to her “one husband.”22 How outrageous, therefore, that outsiders should come to Corinth and sully their purity, preaching “another Jesus” (v. 4).

Contrary to the practice of much evangelism where the greater effort tends to be concentrated on and limited to proclamation-response,23 Paul as an apostle operates within a distinct eschatological framework, regarding himself as responsible for the fidelity of the church to her Lord in the period between proclamation and consummation. The ongoing fidelity of the church in prospect of the end time is his concern. But what of the congregation already founded? It is to be inferred from this verse that the pastor of a congregation evangelized beforehand by others enters into the eschatological sweep of the “ministry” (diakonia) of the new covenant, confirming and constantly repeating the gospel by which the church was created, as well as exhorting the believers to remain focused on Christ, as Paul does here with the Corinthians (see, e.g., Col 2:6–7).

Appropriate to this view of his diakonia, Paul declares at the outset, “I am jealous for you with a godly [RSV, “divine”] jealousy.” This sentiment should not be confused with the petty possessiveness that mars human relationships. His words—which could also be rendered “I am zealous for you with God’s own zeal”24—reflect an important theme in the (LXX) OT. Yahweh, Israel’s covenantal God, in zeal for his holy name, binds his people to him in a relationship that excludes the worship of other gods (LXX Exod 20:5; 34:14; Deut 4:24; 6:15). The theme of “zeal” also reflects God’s covenantal care for his people (LXX Isa 9:6; 37:32; 63:15–16). The inter-testamental tradition25 looked back on individuals like Phinehas and Elijah, who took violent action against idolatry and apostasy, as having acted in zeal for their God. Inspired by zeal for Yahweh, the pre-Christian Saul of Tarsus, as a persecutor of the church, stood in the same tradition (Gal 1:13–14; Phil 3:6; Acts 22:3–4).26 The Christian Paul’s zeal, however, is a converted zeal, free of the violence that characterized his pre-converted days and zealots before him, a zeal now driven by love (see on 5:14).

The Corinthians are not yet in outright apostasy, though there are dangerous possibilities in that regard (see v. 4). Since he is the initiator of the betrothal, it is his responsibility to safeguard the rights of the divine husband, Christ.27 The apostle bears the responsibility to ensure that the betrothed is kept faithful to the One she will marry, not diverted nor seduced by an interloper to “another” husband. Let the Corinthians and the would-be seducers understand that the apostle has “betrothed” this bride-to-be to “one husband,” to “present” the Corinthians “as a pure28 virgin” to Christ. The one Christ, as preached by the apostle, was, and is to remain, the focus of ministry and of faith.

3 In v. 2 Paul stated his formal relationship as the betrother of the church to Christ, emphasizing their purity, which he now takes up. Signaling contrast,29 the apostle states his deep concern lest the Corinthians be turned aside from the relationship with Christ into which he had established them. He “fears lest somehow” their “minds” should be “corrupted away” from a “single-minded”30 and “pure”31 focus toward Christ. Implicit here is the possibility that the purity of the Corinthians is capable of being sullied. This is an important verse in the “Fool’s Speech” as well as within the entire letter. The very future of the Corinthians as an apostolic church is in jeopardy.

The metaphor from v. 2, that betrothal is for the purity of the betrothed woman for her husband, is now transmuted in the first half of the verse into the biblical story32 about the circumstances that overtook another woman, Eve,33 who had been deceived34 by the serpent (Gen 3:1–7). Under the symbolism of this allegory, Eve represents the church at Corinth and the serpent those “ministers of Satan,”35 the “superlative” apostles (v. 5), who have come preaching “another Jesus,” to divert the Corinthians from the Christ to whom Paul had joined them.

The sole characteristic of the serpent mentioned by Paul is “cunning”36 (cf. Gen 3:1—“The serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the LORD God had made”). But how was that “cunning” brought to bear on Eve? It was by his words that the serpent deceived her in the Genesis account, a point Paul probably implies in that it is by what the interlopers preach that the Corinthians are led astray (v. 4). It may also be for that reason that he is content to be regarded as “not a trained speaker” (v. 6). This viewpoint is supported in a closely parallel passage where Paul writes of “those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned … By smooth talk and flattery they deceive the minds of naive people … The God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet” (Rom 16:17–18, 20). The references in 2 Cor 11:3 and Rom 16:18, 20 to (1) “the serpent” (i.e., Satan—v. 14), (2) “crush Satan,” and (3) “deceive” tie both passages back to Genesis 2–3 and to each other. Paul sees words—erroneous in content but smooth of delivery—as Satan’s instrument to seduce the church from her loyalty to Christ.

In the second half of the verse the apostle directly expresses his “fear” for the Corinthians. It is that “[their] minds”37—the receptors of the word of God, but corruptible by deceptive words—“may somehow be led astray.”38 But from what did Paul fear their minds might be led astray? In this part of v. 3 we are very close to the heart of Christianity as understood and proclaimed by the apostle Paul. The minds of the Corinthians—and all believers—are to be directed to Christ, minds that in their focus on him—as with the betrothed woman in her time of waiting for her marriage—are to be “sincere” (i.e., undivided—see Eph 6:5; Col 3:22) and “pure.”39

This teaching about “the minds directed toward Christ,”40 followed as it is by references to “preaching Jesus”—even though in a negative context—is closely parallel with 1:19–22. In that earlier passage—as with this—the preaching of the Son of God is matched by “God anointed [lit. “christed”] us toward Christ.”41 It is by the apostolic word about Christ that God sets the minds of believers—together in the messianic assembly as well as individually—“toward” Christ.

But who is the Christ toward whom the Corinthians are to be directed? Is he Paul’s Christ, a messianic figure of his making? In the first letter Paul quotes the faith-formula—centered on the “that-ness” of the death, the burial, the resurrection, and the appearances of the risen Christ—that had been the foundation on which the church of Corinth had been established (1 Cor 15:3–7). But, Paul insists, this was not a message created by him; rather, it was “received” by him from those who stood between him and the historical Jesus (1 Cor 15:3). Moreover, it was the message of “the apostles,” not just Paul. Writing of the apostles collectively, he declares, “so we preach, and so you [Corinthians] believed” (1 Cor 15:11, RSV; cf. 15:9). In other words, the Christ to whose minds Paul kept directing the Corinthians was not a Pauline Christ, but the apostolic Christ. It is from this Christ that the Corinthians are in danger of being diverted.

4 In vv. 1–3 Paul has (1) declared, ironically, that the Corinthians “bear with” him (v. 1), and (2) expressed his fear lest their minds be led astray from a single-minded and pure loyalty to Christ (v. 3). The opening words, “For if indeed,”42 point to the statement that follows, where his fear for them is currently being realized; the Corinthians are “bearing well”43 with one who preaches “another Jesus.”

For the third time vv. 1–4 Paul employs the explanatory “for” (cf. v. 2 [twice]),44 reflecting the connectedness of the argument within those verses, which, with due abbreviation, we may paraphrase as:

If only you would
		bear with me …
You do bear with me,
for	I have God’s jealousy toward		you,
for	I betrothed		you	to	Christ.
	I am afraid that you will be led astray			from	Christ,
for	if someone preaches			another	Jesus, …
you		bear it easily.

This closely argued passage is (1) framed by “bear with,” used ironically,45 and (2) the threefold “for” serves to link the points of the argument.

The verse commences with “if” and is followed by “or” twice repeated, thus giving a hypothetical tripartite situation: “If someone comes … or you receive … or you accept …”46 Nonetheless, these words are directed to a painfully real situation now existing in Corinth.47

For if indeed
	one comes preaching	another Jesus,
		whom we48 did not preach,

or if	you are     receiving
	a different49 Spirit
	that    you did not receive,
or if	a different gospel
	that    you did not accept,
	you bear50 it [him51] easily.

Apart from the heterodoxy52 of the anonymous “one who comes”—almost certainly a group of newcomers53—this verse stands as an impressive description of the preliminary stages of Paul’s own gospel penetration, which could not fail to have reminded the initial converts in Corinth what had happened a few years earlier when he arrived. First, there was his coming (“he who comes”). It was followed, second, by the proclaiming (“he preached … Jesus”). That, in turn, was marked, third, by the receiving of the Spirit (“you received … the Spirit”54). The threefold aorists “preached … received … accepted”55 point to the moment when Paul established the church at Corinth.

This initial proclamation in Corinth, and the church’s experience at that time, may also be inferred at a number of other points within this letter. Paul reminds the Corinthians that he and his associates proclaimed “the Son of God, Jesus Christ, among [them],” in fulfillment of “the promises of God” (1:19–20). It is “Jesus Christ” as “Lord” whom he “proclaim[s]” (4:5); in response, the Corinthians, typical of others, have “turn[ed] to the Lord [Jesus]” (see on 3:16; cf. 8:5). For his part, God set the Corinthians Christward (eis Christon), having anointed (“christed”) them, sealed them, and given them the down payment of the Holy Spirit (1:21–22), thus confirming them to be a congregation of the new covenant (3:3–5). The entire process—his proclamation of Christ and their reception of the Spirit—is summarized by the word gospel (“you received the gospel”). Moreover, it was by Paul’s coming to Corinth, when he proclaimed Christ and they received the Spirit, that he betrothed them as brides-to-be to Christ (v. 2), in prospect of the consummation at the Parousia.

But what is meant by “another Jesus … a different Spirit … a different gospel”? Who is this “[an]other Jesus” whom Paul “did not preach”56? That Paul calls him “Jesus,” having twice referred to him in the previous two verses as “Christ,” may be significant. In our view, it points to a preaching of Jesus the Nazarene, whose historic Jewish persona was being emphasized at the expense of his risen Lordship by the newly arrived “Hebrew” missioners in Corinth (11:13, 22–23a). Such a “Jesus” may have been proclaimed as circumscribed within the continuing Mosaic covenant (3:3–6). This would explain why Paul, as a minister of the new covenant of the Spirit and righteousness (3:6, 8–9), which had overtaken and made obsolete the old covenant, would refer to the current preaching of a “gospel” as “different” from that which the Corinthians “received” from the apostle.

How, then, are we to understand “a different Spirit, which you did not receive [as a result of my preaching]”? The words are probably to be taken as ironic. To be sure, the newcomers may have proclaimed “Jesus … a gospel.” But if they were advocating a ministry based on “tablets of stone … letter” (3:3, 6) that is, some kind of Torah observance, the Corinthians cannot have received the Spirit thereby. The Spirit was not given in response to Torah-keeping (3:15–18; Gal 3:1–5), but in response to the preaching of Jesus Christ as the Son of God (1:18–22), in whom the covenant people are dedicated, forgiven by God (5:19–21).57 So powerfully solemn is the description of Paul’s own gospel ministry in this verse that he is unlikely to attribute the reception of the Spirit58 directly to the deceivers who have come to Corinth, turning the believers away from their “pure” relationship to Christ (cf. v. 3). It is more likely that he is parodying their ministry. By saying they “preached another Jesus” and that “you receive a different spirit … a different gospel,” he may be pointing up the very absurdity of the idea (cf. Gal 1:6–7).59

Who “received”—“bore well with”—these newcomers, the whole church, or only a section of the church? In an assembly apparently based on households it is probable that the hospitality afforded to the newcomers was limited to a section of the congregation. Since the newcomers were “Hebrews … Israelites … Abraham’s descendants” (11:22), it is almost certain that their hosts were Jews,60 in all probability those who had given hospitality to Cephas a few years earlier (1 Cor 1:12; 3:22; 9:5). Gentile households within the Corinthian assembly are not likely to have welcomed them because of traditional dietary and cultic differences. Those who had not broken with sexual immorality (12:20–13:2) nor temple worship (6:14–7:1), in all probability being Gentiles, are quite unlikely to have welcomed ministers whose route to righteousness was via the Law of Moses (11:15; cf. 3:6) with its uncompromising prohibition of immorality and idolatry.

(2) Paul and the “Superlative” Apostles (11:5–6)

5But I do not think I am in the least inferior to those “super-apostles.” 6I may not be a trained speaker, but I do have knowledge. We have made this perfectly clear to you in every way.

In this short passage of two verses, which follows logically on the previous verse, Paul begins to respond to the comparisons of the newcomers by which he is said to be “inferior.” These newcomers he calls by the ironic title “superlative” apostles. While he denies any inferiority to them (v. 5), he immediately concedes that he is “nonprofessional” in speech (v. 6a). This may be a calculated concession, since it was by “preaching” that the newcomers were deceiving the Corinthians, corrupting their relationship with Christ. By contrast, in “knowledge,” that is, of Christ and the gospel, Paul is thoroughly equipped.

5 Once again Paul uses the word “For”1 (see comment on v. 4), in this case to tie his thinking back through v. 4 to v. 2 and ultimately to v. 1. The Corinthians should “bear with” Paul, for he is not inferior to those who have now come, the “superlative” apostles.2

His “reckon[ing]”3 that he is not inferior—the one point of this brief verse—implies that it is in this light that his opponents both regard him and portray him. “Inferior”4 was apparently their word of comparison (12:11; cf. 10:12): he was inferior, they superior. This is confirmed by his ironic reference to them as “superlative”5 (lit. “over,” “very much”—cf. 12:11) apostles. But in what did they classify him as inferior to them? From his replies scattered throughout the extended passage relating to them (10:12–12:13), we may discern in particular two claims to superiority over Paul—superiority as a trained speaker (11:5–6), and superiority in “visions and revelations” (12:1; cf. 5:13).6

His designation of them as “superlative” apostles is both ironic and factual. It is probably factual, in part at least, because of their claim to be “apostles … ministers … workmen” (11:15) who were “superior” to Paul in important areas of ministry. It is also ironic because he designates them “very superior.” Throughout the “Fool’s Speech” where he catalogues his sufferings and privations in ministry, he exposes and parodies their boastfulness. They attempt to legitimate their ministry at the expense of his by marks of superiority (see above). For his part, Paul seeks recognition of his ministry as authentically “of Christ” by demonstrating that the “sufferings of Christ” do “flow over” into his life (1:5). The catalogues of privation (4:7–8; 6:3–10; 11:23–12:10), not unconnected from sufferings arising from offering the gospel “free of charge” (see on vv. 7–11), indicate that the message of the crucified Messiah—the center of his message (5:14–21)—was incarnated in his life and ministry. It is here, rather than in marks of “superiority” through power, that Paul sought recognition of the legitimacy of his ministry.

6 Having denied any inferiority to the “superlative” apostles (v. 5), Paul makes an immediate qualification, “even though I am …”7 In response to an apparent jibe Paul concedes that he is “not a trained speaker” (more precisely, “unskilled in speaking”—RSV8). But, emphatically, he is not inferior in “knowledge,” as he has demonstrated to them in everything.

By the structure of v. 6 Paul sets himself in a double comparison with them9—in “speech” and in “knowledge.” In the first of the two sentences of the verse, the first clause is concessive (“even if I am a layman in speech”) while the second is strongly adversative (“but [I am] not in knowledge”10). This adversative is carried into the second sentence by the repetition of “but”11 (“but in all things and in every way we have made this clear to you”). By his grammatical structure Paul declares what was truly important in ministry, namely, knowledge.

Inadequacy in speech was a long-standing, perceived weakness in Paul, one to which he displayed sensitivity in the First Letter (1 Cor 2:1–4). It is likely that the arrival in Corinth after Paul of the rhetorically gifted Apollos (Acts 18:24–28) led the Corinthians to reflect negatively about the apostle’s capacities as a public speaker. Rhetoric was a long-established, highly esteemed profession in the Greco-Roman cities. Paul realistically declared immediately that in this he was “unskilled” (idiōtēs—lit. “a layman,” “non-professional”12).

This was obvious to the Corinthians, and it would have been foolish for Paul to pretend otherwise. But he is comparing himself specifically with the newcomers who were fellow Jews in this regard. Since Paul was a Hellenistic Jew, for whom Greek would have been his primary and Aramaic his secondary language, we may reasonably assume this to have been true of the newcomers also. Paul’s fluency in Greek would have been formed as a child in Hellenistic Tarsus13 and developed as a young rabbi in the Hellenistic synagogues of Jerusalem.14 These newcomers—whoever they were—must have excelled Paul in the public speaking of Greek. Such a concession is consistent with a criticism echoed by him earlier that “in person he is unimpressive and his speaking amounts to nothing,” even though this detraction applied specifically to Paul’s perceived weaknesses in imposing discipline during his second visit (see on 10:10).

Nonetheless, it ought not be concluded that Paul was a poor speaker. That he was inferior to them (and Apollos?) does not logically require that he was without gifts in that respect. Paul’s dialectic in this verse should not lead us to draw wrong conclusions. It is to be noted that the statement “Eve was deceived by the serpent’s cunning” (v. 3) is followed immediately by “if one comes preaching another Jesus” (v. 4). The newcomers’ deception and cunning were expressed in preaching, an area in which Paul is said to be inferior. He is happy to infer that the newcomers are strong in speech because by it the Corinthians were “corrupted … from Christ” (v. 3; cf. Rom 16:17–20). Thus, in the context of Hellenistic rhetoric, it quite suits Paul to confess to being “inferior” to the newcomers, a mere “layman.” But it does not necessarily follow that Paul was an ill-equipped or ineffective preacher. Few places he visited did not appear to lack a messianic assembly as a result of his ministry. His verbal skills must have been, at the very least, adequate, and, quite possibly, considerable, even though he lacked the high professionalism of the trained rhetorician.

In the second area of comparison—“knowledge”—Paul will not concede to being “nonprofessional” and therefore to inferiority to his opponents. “Speech” and “knowledge”15 may have been the two focal points of a synagogue teacher’s competence, which, presumably, were true also of a teacher in the Christian assemblies. In the subtleties of his interaction with these outsiders, Paul will agree to “nonprofessionalism” in “speech,” but, by comparison, assert his expertise in the realm of “knowledge.” What is this “knowledge”? While the immediate context suggests that “knowledge” is closely associated with “Jesus” and “the gospel” (v. 4), the broader context points to that “knowledge of God” which Paul defends against pretentious opposition to it (see on 10:5). Judging from other references in this letter, we conclude that “knowledge”16 is that correct understanding of the gospel which directs the minds to Christ, something that Paul claims to have done when, by preaching the true Jesus in the true gospel, he betrothed the Corinthians to Christ (vv. 2, 4; cf. 1:19, 21).

In regard to his competence in “knowledge” the apostle has “made this perfectly clear17 to [them] in every way.”18 There may be a touch of irony here; mere “layman in speech” though he is, he has, nonetheless, made everything quite clear. His associations with the Corinthians now go back six or seven years to the foundation of the church, when he “betrothed” them to Christ (vv. 2–3). He has visited them once since then, and he proposes to do so once more in the near future. This is now the fourth letter he has written to them. Truly Paul has repeatedly demonstrated the adequacy of his “knowledge” of the gospel, which he has “made clear” to them during this period.

(3) Undercutting His Opponents’ Claims (11:7–12)

7Was it a sin for me to lower myself in order to elevate you by preaching the gospel of God to you free of charge? 8I robbed other churches by receiving support from them so as to serve you. 9And when I was with you and needed something, I was not a burden to anyone, for the brothers who came from Macedonia supplied what I needed. I have kept myself from being a burden to you in any way, and will continue to do so. 10As surely as the truth of Christ is in me, nobody in the regions of Achaia will stop this boasting of mine. 11Why? Because I do not love you? God knows I do! 12And I will keep on doing what I am doing in order to cut the ground from under those who want an opportunity to be considered equal with us in the things they boast about.

Once again Paul raises matters related to money (see on 2:17; 4:2; 7:2–4), a subject he will also pick up later (see 12:13–18). Here he is defending himself from the criticism that he supported himself so as to preach the gospel to the Corinthians at no cost to them, not wishing to “burden” them. The Corinthians think that he does not love them. The newcomers, who do accept payment, would like Paul to do so also, since this would put them on the same footing as him. Nonetheless, although under pressure to reverse this policy, Paul will not do so.

Paul begins by asking the rhetorical question, “Did I ‘sin’ in bringing the gospel to the Corinthians ‘free of charge’ ”? He even “robbed” other churches to minister to them! When in need he did not burden them; brothers from Macedonian provided for him. As a fundamental part of his apostolicity, Paul’s of evangelism “free of charge” will not be silenced in Achaia. Contrary to their view, this is not because he does not love them; emphatically he does. Indeed, he will continue this policy of nonpayment when he returns to undercut those new ministers who want to stand on the same ground of apostleship as Paul.

At first sight this passage appears to interrupt the flow of the apostle’s argument. He has referred to the “superlative” apostles (vv. 5–6), and he will refer next to the “false apostles” (vv. 13–15). Why, then, does he digress (vv. 7–12) to answer the Corinthians’ complaint that he has declined to receive their financial support?

Did his opponents argue that failure to accept money was a de facto admission that he was no true apostle. Surely a true apostle would accept payment; failure to do so could only represent a fatal admission of nonapostolicity. Since they present themselves as “apostles” (v. 13) while at the same time seeking to be regarded as “equal with [him]” (v. 12), it does not appear that they were disputing his apostolicity per se. It would appear that it is his inferiority to them in apostolicity (see on v. 5), not his nonapostolicity, that sets his ministry at a lower level than theirs.

Paul locates this passage as part of his attack on the “superlative” apostles (vv. 5–6), who are the “false apostles” (vv. 13–15). His studied financial independence from the Corinthians had been a sore point since he first came to Corinth (1 Cor 9:12–18), and it may have called for further comment anyway. But since these newcomers evidently sought or at least accepted financial support in Corinth (v. 20), Paul seizes the opportunity both to reply to the Corinthians’ criticism (vv. 7–9) and to undermine his opponents’ claims to authentic ministry (vv. 10–12).

Moreover, these verses reflect Paul’s deep sense of hurt that the Corinthians prefer these heterodox outsiders to him. Although it was he who had “betrothed” them to Christ by preaching the gospel to them, in their eyes he is just a “fool” to be “put up with” (11:1–3). But those who preach “another Jesus” are “put up with … easily enough” (11:4). In the passage under review he cannot forbear reminding them what it cost him to preach the gospel “free of charge” to the Corinthians. He “lower[ed himself]” in arduous self-support, though in need at the time, to serve them (vv. 7–8). But they have gladly welcomed these new ministers even though they prey on them and violate them (v. 20). Thus, although on the face of it Paul is reflecting on his own relationships with the Corinthians, the context in which the passage is set reveals the sadness he feels in being rejected by the Corinthians in favor of such men.

This passage should be seen as belonging to a broader context of “boasting” begun in the previous chapter (10:12–18). His opponents appear to have “boasted” that Paul’s “field” of ministry in the “regions of Achaia” is rightfully theirs, a claim that Paul emphatically rejects (see on 10:15–16; vv. 10, 12). Unlike that of the newcomers (see v. 20), Paul’s ministry in his divinely allocated “field” was offered “free of charge,” a policy he is again under pressure to abandon. But when he comes again to Corinth he will continue his ministry without charge, precisely because by so doing he will undercut the claims of these intruders.

7 Paul asks1 a rhetorical and ironic question, “Did I commit a sin2 … because I preached the gospel of God to you free of charge?” In evangelizing them without cost, Paul “lowered” himself so as to3 “elevate [them].”4 Paul’s “sin” was that he did not accept financial support from the Corinthians while preaching the gospel of God to them.

To be sure, from their viewpoint Paul had painfully breached social conventions in rejecting their patronage of money, gifts, and hospitality, which were at that time conventionally given to those who taught and lectured.5 Perhaps Paul gave the impression of pride.6 It is probable, however, that “sin” is Paul’s word rather than theirs, reflecting his deep pain in response to their criticism.

Did	I7 commit a sin8
	myself	lowering
that	you might be	elevated
because	I preached the gospel of God9
to	you	free of charge?

Although in two parts of unequal length, the verse is kept symmetrical by the antonyms “lower” and “elevate”10 found in the first and second parts respectively. Not to be missed is the painful interaction between “myself” and “you” (twice). Lowering himself he elevated them, evangelizing them, free of charge.

The meaning of “lowering” himself is expanded upon in v. 9, where he reminds them that he did not burden them in providing for his needs at the time he established the church a few years earlier. Significantly, “lowering” is a present participle, in contrast to the aorists “elevate” and “preaching.” Thus “lowering” is a process that began when he first came to Corinth supporting himself by exhausting manual labor11—“preaching the gospel to [them] … free of charge”12 (cf. 1 Cor 9:1813)—but that continued through the humiliation he suffered at their hands during the second visit and through their attitudes to him since.14

How, then, did Paul “elevate” the Corinthians? The second half of the verse declares that it was by preaching the gospel (cf. v. 4) to them that he joined them—as it were, by “betrothal” (v. 2)—to Christ (v. 3; cf. 1:21), in prospect of their “elevation” in a heavenly marriage with their “one husband” (v. 2) at his eschatological coming. Through Paul’s ministry the “day of salvation” had come; they were a messianic congregation, sanctified to God, participating in the new covenant of righteousness and the Spirit (3:3–9, 16–18). But the Corinthians did not enjoy these benefits independently of the one who had been and was still their “minister” (diakonos), Paul. It was because he “lowered” himself that they had been and would be “elevated.”15

In another metaphor of reversal, they owed their eschatological “riches” to Christ’s “poverty” (8:9). In other words, their “enrichment,” their “elevation,” was the direct result, first of the “poverty” of Christ and then of the “lowering” of his minister, Paul. Paul’s self-“lowering” in the sufferings of ministry for the Corinthians was the continuation of the “poverty” of Christ in his incarnation and death. Along with Christ, through whom God reconciled the world to himself, God also “gave” the “ministry” (diakonia) and the “word” (logos) of reconciliation (5:18–19) in this the promised “day of salvation” (6:2).

Suffering for others motivated by love for them lies at the heart of God’s work of reconciliation. Although Christ’s sufferings are unique in their redemptive quality, the sufferings for others by his ministers and missionaries extends the same vicarious principle into the “day of salvation” (1:6; 4:12, 15).

8 Continuing his defense of his affection for them—which they are questioning (v. 11)—the apostle declares that, in addition to his own sacrifices for them (v. 7), he “robbed16 other churches.” Paul amplifies this vivid image in the words “by receiving support from [these churches].” The purpose17 of this action was “so as to serve you [Corinthians].”

Paul’s ironic and exaggerated language—such as, “was it a sin?” (v. 7; cf. 12:13)—reflects back to the Corinthians their sense of affront that he would not receive what was appropriate from them as their teacher but that he would receive what was inappropriate from other churches (thus “he robbed” those churches).

This “support18 from [other churches]” is further expanded upon in the next verse, namely, that brothers from Macedonia brought him relief in Corinth. Paul was determined that the Corinthians should contribute nothing toward the ministry they received. On the one hand he “lowered” himself (by self-support) to preach the gospel “free of charge” to them (v. 7), and on the other he received support from the Macedonian19 churches.20

His purpose in this is given as “so as to serve you” (NIV) or, more literally, “for the ministry to you.”21 The single word “ministry” (diakonia) of this verse sums up the phrase “the gospel of God I preached to you” of the previous verse.22 From this is clear that apostolic “ministry” is “gospel” ministry. Let the Corinthians be reminded—however painful it might have been for them—that it was Paul who preached the gospel to them, or brought the ministry to them, and that he did so “free of charge.” His reason for his continuing policy in this will be given in vv. 10–12.

9 Continuing his review of his initial period of ministry in Corinth, Paul explains that when he had been in need he did not burden them; the brothers from Macedonia supplied that need. As he had kept himself from being a burden to them, so he would continue to do so.

This verse is in three parts, the first two explaining the previous two verses. Thus v. 9a elaborates on what it meant for Paul to “lower” himself (v. 7). When he was “present23 with them” and “needed24 something”—he does not say what those needs may have been—he did not “burden”25 anyone. In this regard, it is curious that Paul makes no mention of his specific labors as a tentmaker, though he does mention “labors” in the “Fool’s Speech” proper (vv. 23, 27). Perhaps he knew how offended they had always been that when ministering to them he supported himself by such menial—and, indeed, unclean—physical work as tentmaking (Acts 18:3; cf. Acts 20:34–35; 1 Thess 2:9; 2 Thess 3:8; 1 Cor 4:12; 9:18; 2 Cor 6:5; 11:23, 27). Tents were made of leather.

In v. 9b Paul repeats “I needed … something” as “what I needed,” expanding on the stark reference of v. 8 that he “robbed other churches” to make possible his “ministry” (diakonia) to the Corinthians. That “robbery” occurred as “the brothers … came from Macedonia,”26 who, having heard of his circumstances, “supplied”27 whatever the bereft apostle lacked. This reference points to one such visit from Macedonia, not many.28 Was Paul inconsistent in receiving assistance from the Macedonian churches but not from the Corinthians? Against that possibility it appears that Paul did not receive ongoing support from the Macedonian churches while he was present ministering in them, but only once he had moved on and special circumstances were applied.

In v. 9c Paul summarizes his determination that “in all things”29 (NIV, “in any way”)—by whatever means, whether by his own labors or by help from Macedonia—he will be financially independent of the Corinthians. So far he has “kept”30 (lit. “guarded”) himself from being a “burden,” and he will continue to do so (cf. 12:13, 14). Paul’s careful use of the future “will continue to do so” points again to his forthcoming visit to Corinth (see on 10:2). There will be no change in his policy, as he will explain in v. 12. Doubtless, this statement was a bitter pill for the Corinthians to swallow,31 and Paul must have had substantial reasons for it.32

While Paul insists that the local and permanent teacher in the church be paid,33 it may be that his apostolic ministry, “free of charge,” provides a useful paradigm for pioneer missionaries in subsequent generations. The minister engaged in groundbreaking evangelism, who expects remuneration from those he evangelizes, runs the risk of portraying his ministry as venal.

10 Having reminded the Corinthians of his basic policy—past and continuing—in conducting his ministry to them “free of charge” (vv. 7–9), Paul now reaffirms his determination to continue in the same vein (vv. 10–12). This he immediately does by what is in effect a Christian oath.34 First he declares the oath (“as the truth of Christ is in me”); then he gives its content35 (“this boast of mine will not be silenced36 in the regions of Achaia”37).

The oath appears to be a reference to Christ’s encounter with him on the road to Damascus, when he was “called” to be an apostle38 in consequence of which “Christ’s truth”39 was “in” (en) Paul. Later he will assert that “Christ is speaking in (in) me” (13:3), just as he had stated earlier that “God [is] making his appeal through (through) us” (5:20). This oath is an affirmation of apostolicity and of apostolic authority (see also 10:8; 13:10).

What, then, is “this boast”40 which, he adjures, will not be muted in the regions of Achaia41? Clearly, it is that he has “preached the gospel of God” to the Corinthians “free of charge” (v. 7; cf. 12:13; see also 1 Cor 9:12–18). These “regions” are part of the “field” allocated to him by God as apostle to the Gentiles (see on 10:15–16; cf. v. 12). Paul’s “boast” is the divinely given sphere of ministry among the Gentiles, which he exercises freely, without payment from them.

Paul’s sufferings are inextricably connected with his “labor” in support of himself (see vv. 23–27). Such labor in self-support, by which he “lowered” himself (v. 7), was a sign legitimating his unique apostolicity. God had called him, and to this specific “field” of ministry (10:15–16); since it was a matter of obedience, he could not be paid. He will neither concede to his opponents their right to be in his “field” nor resile from his determination that his proclamation of the gospel will be at no cost to the hearers. For so doing he would have conceded that his ministry was on the same basis as theirs (see v. 12).

This oath expresses the depth of Paul’s commitment to his apostolic ministry, free of charge, and to the concomitant necessity that he “labor” in self-support. Significantly, this truth-oath is later echoed by a lying-denial oath (v. 31), asserting the reality of “weaknesses,” which, as we have argued, in a measure flow from his determination to “labor and toil” so as to offer the gospel without payment.

11 Paul now interjects the rhetorical question: “Why? Because I do not love you?” This, in all probability, was their complaint against him. “He received support from Macedonia; therefore he loved them. He declined support from us in Corinth; he does not love us.”42 Fundamental to vv. 7–10 is Paul’s desire to reassure the Corinthians that he did, in fact, love them.

Paul’s assurance, supported by yet another oath, “God knows, I do,”43 probably has a a hidden depth to it. On the surface—as he will explain in the next verse—his actions do not in any way arise from favoritism to others or lack of love for them. More profoundly—though with a sense of pain—he gives emphatic if ironic expression to a depth of love, patience, and sacrifice that the Corinthians’ willful fickleness has demanded over a long period and will continue to demand. If the truth be known, the one thing the Corinthians should never question is Paul’s love to them (cf. 2:4; 5:14; 6:6; 8:7; 12:15).

It is remarkable that the Corinthians should complain that the apostle did not love them. In neither of the two extant letters is Paul able unambiguously to acknowledge (1) their love for him (see on 8:7), or (2) for congregations beyond their own (cf. 8:8, 24), or even (3) their love for one another. It was on account of their signal lovelessness44 that Paul must write his famous words about love to admonish them (1 Cor 12:31b–14:1; cf. 16:14).45

12 At this the conclusion46 of the paragraph vv. 7–12, the apostle at last makes explicit his reason for continuing his policy not to accept financial support from the Corinthians. Evidently he felt he might be put under pressure to accept the Corinthians’ payment when he next came to Corinth.

The sentence47 is in three parts: (1) his statement (“What I do I will also do”), followed by (2) an expression of purpose (“that I might undercut the ground from those who seek a basis”48), followed by (3) a phrase that expands49 upon its predecessor (namely, “that in what they boast about, they may be found even as we [are”]). What is meant by this difficult sentence? Apparently Paul is asserting that he will continue to decline payment in order to cut the ground under those (intruders) who seek to stand as equals with him in ministry.

He will continue to reject the Corinthians’ financial assistance because by so doing he will remove the claim of those who now seek to preach in Corinth, that they do so on the same basis as Paul.50 It appears that these persons received support from the Corinthians, thus creating pressure on Paul to do likewise when he comes. But his determination to offer the gospel “free of charge” was fundamental to his ministry in the “field” God assigned to him, as apostle to the Gentiles (cf. v. 10; 10:15–16).

Who are these people, and what is the basis of ministry that, they claim, is the same as Paul’s but whose claim he rejects?51 These questions are answered in the verses immediately following. So far from being ministers on the same basis as Paul, these men are “false apostles” (see on v. 13) who seek to be recognized in Corinth as “apostles of Christ,” “workmen,” and “ministers” (vv. 14–15), that is, on the same terms Paul applied to himself. But they have been given financial support (v. 20), at the very least hospitality (by Jewish members of the church?). Such support is probably implied also by his earlier reference to “pedd[ling] the word of God” (2:17; cf. 4:2), which implies payment.

Paul, however, has not received and will not receive payment from churches where he ministers the gospel. On the Damascus road God called Paul to become his apostle to the Gentiles (Gal 1:15–16; Rom 1:5; 15:14–16; Acts 26:16–18). That Paul proclaimed the word of God “free of charge” (v. 7; cf. 1 Cor 9:18) was his badge of apostleship together with the sufferings arising from his nonpayment and self-support (see especially vv. 23, 27). To have received payment for his ministry—apart from unsolicited supplementation from the Macedonians once he had left them (see on vv. 8–9)—would have compromised his obedience to God’s call. His payment was to receive no payment. By not deviating from this policy Paul continued to wear the badge inscribed “apostle to the Gentiles,” which his opponents—because they received payment—could not wear. Thus Paul will “cut the ground from under”52 his opponents, who claim, mistakenly, to have the same basis of ministry as his, namely, that of apostleship, which they “boast” of having.

(4) The “False Apostles” (11:13–15)

13For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, masquerading as apostles of Christ. 14And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. 15It is not surprising, then, if his servants masquerade as servants of righteousness. Their end will be what their actions deserve.

Paul has previously referred to the intruders as “peddlers” (2:17–3:1) and as “superlative” apostles (11:5; cf. 12:11). Now he directs his guns at them with a barrage that calls their very relationship to Christ into question. They are now styled “false apostles … deceitful workmen,” who fashion themselves into “apostles of Christ.” Since Satan fashions himself into an angel of light, it is no surprise that Satan’s ministers fashion themselves as “ministers of righteousness.” Their end will be according to their works. The “false apostles” are “false” (pseudo) because they claim to be—what Paul (by inference) is, but which they are not—“true workmen, apostles of Christ, ministers of righteousness.” To the contrary, they merely “masquerade” as such.

There is a major disagreement about their identity. Many scholars argue that the “false apostles” are to be distinguished from those whom Paul earlier calls “superlative” apostles (11:5), the former being identified with the newly arrived emissaries, the latter with “high officials”1 in the Jerusalem church from whom they have come.

But this distinction is artificial. The two groups are found in the one continuous passage (10:12–12:13), beginning with the paragraph that refers to those who have come to Corinth as having trespassed into Paul’s “field.” As the passage continues, these trespassers are called “superlative” apostles (11:5) and spoken of as those who “want an opportunity to be considered equal with [Paul]” (11:12). But in the next verse (11:13) they are immediately called “false apostles” because they claim to be “apostles of Christ.” Thus, rather than distinguish “superlative” apostles from “false apostles,” it is preferable to regard them as the same group referred to by different terms; they are at once “superlative” apostles and “false apostles.”

Moreover, the “false apostles” are lodged within the one prolonged passage (10:12–12:13) where Paul is rejecting the claim that he is “inferior” to these newcomers. It is significant that within this extended passage where the “false apostles” are mentioned, words prefixed with “hyper”2 are common (see comment on 10:12). The use of numerous hyper-words in the passage that surrounds the mention of “false apostles” makes it probable that the hyperlian apostles are to be identified with the pseud[o]-apostles. It is, therefore, unlikely that Paul is referring to two separate groups.

Structurally speaking, vv. 13–15 are united by the appearance in each verse of the verb “fashion,” or “transform.”3

v. 13	“such men” fashion themselves as apostles of Christ.
v. 14	“Satan” fashions himself into an angel of light.
v. 15	“[Satan’s] ministers” fashion themselves as ministers of righteousness.

The connectives “for” and “therefore”4 are important in the flow of the argument:

	Such men	fashion themselves	as apostles of Christ,
for	Satan	fashions himself	as an angel of light;
therefore it is no surprise that
	Satan’s ministers	fashion themselves	as ministers of righteousness.

The transformation of “Satan’s ministers” into “ministers of righteousness” springs from, and is analogous to, Satan’s transformation “as an angel of light.” It appears that Paul would have us understand that “such men,” that is, the “false apostles,” are “Satan’s ministers” who transform themselves into “apostles of Christ,” that is, as “ministers of righteousness.”

13 The explanatory “For” and the demonstrative pronoun “such men”5 point back to those of the previous verse who wish to be considered equal with Paul in ministry. In reality, however, they are “false apostles” and “deceitful workmen,” who fashion themselves into, so as to pass themselves off as, “apostles of Christ.”

Paul now begins to speak in his frankest terms about the newcomers in Corinth (see 2:17–3:1; 5:12–13; 10:12ff.). The pointedness of his invective reflects the grave and scandalous nature of their challenge to Paul’s position as an apostle to the Corinthians. These men “seek an opportunity to be considered equal with [Paul]” in ministry in Corinth. But the truth is quite otherwise. Dramatically and emotionally he now exposes them as, first, “false apostles”6 and, second, as “deceitful workmen.”7 When he adds immediately, “fashioning themselves as apostles of Christ,” it is clear that their falsity and their deceitfulness lie in the deviant gospel they preached (see on 11:4) and their pretense in the measures they took to present themselves as “apostles of Christ,” that is, in the same terms Paul had applied to himself (v. 12). In contrast to Paul, who is commended by the Lord, these men are self-commended, self-advertised (see on 10:18). His oath a few verses earlier, “As … the truth of Christ is in me” (v. 10), serves as a foil to their pretense and deception.

Although Paul does not say how these men sought to gain acceptance in Corinth as “apostles of Christ,” they appear to have adopted two related strategies. First, that they clothed themselves in works of ministry in which, after negatively “classify[ing] and compar[ing]” Paul with themselves (10:12), they emerged as “superior” to Paul (cf. v. 23—hyper, “better”)—in speaking ability (11:5–6) and in “visions and revelations” (12:1; cf. on 5:13). If these expressions of ministry, contrived to gain acceptance in Corinth, were the various parts of their disguise, we have some understanding of the intensity of Paul’s speech in these verses.

A further strategy may be revealed in the two verses following, where Paul states that Satan’s ministers “fashion” themselves as “ministers of righteousness,” suggesting that—as Paul saw it—“righteousness” was a mask worn by these men to win recognition in Corinth as “apostles of Christ.” As we shall argue, such “righteousness” was not only “righteous” behavior but more particularly an ideology of “righteousness” that they promoted. Their manner and message of “righteousness” were a garment in which they masqueraded as “apostles of Christ,” and their claims to superiority over Paul, mentioned above, were the accessories of that clothing.

14 Beginning with an exclamation (“And no wonder!”), Paul continues this assault on the intruders with an explanation that ties their ministry to Satan, not Christ (“for8 Satan himself fashions himself as an angel of light”).

This verse is structurally central to the passage (vv. 13–15). The appearance of “for” in the second sentence flows out of the preceding exclamation, which in turn springs from “such men … fashioning themselves as apostles of Christ” in the previous verse; the “therefore” in the next verse points back to it as its basis also. The linked phrases from vv. 14 and 15—“And no wonder … it is not surprising, then”9—further serves to clamp the passage together around v. 14.

Paul’s argument is that, if Satan himself—the very archetype of evil—is capable of habitually “fashioning himself into10 an angel of light,” then it is no matter for surprise if “these men” are able to transform themselves into “apostles of Christ,” that is, that “Satan’s ministers” are able to transform themselves into “ministers of righteousness” (v. 15).11 We conclude from this verse that “ministers of righteousness” is a term closely related to “apostles of Christ.”

There is a connection between “Satan fashioning himself into an angel12 of light”13 and “Eve … deceived by the serpent’s cunning” earlier in the chapter (v. 3).14 Common to both references is (1) the activity of deception, and (2) the object of deception, the church. Verses 3 and 14 are to be read together. The serpent’s (Satan’s) deception of Eve (the church [of Corinth]) is achieved by these men who “preach another Jesus” (“fashioning themselves” into something they are not, namely, “apostles of Christ”), so as to lead the people astray from their loyalty to Christ (v. 4).

What, then, is the “light” of this “angel” into which Satan has disguised himself in coming to Corinth? The next verse provides the answer, namely, the “light” of the “righteousness” that these “ministers” both attempt to embody and proclaim.

15 Paul’s introductory “therefore”15 leads into the climax of this short passage (vv. 13–15), which is the most devastating comment of all. Thus he begins with an understatement, “It is no great surprise16 if …” Although given in conditional terms (“if”17), this apocalyptic statement is not hypothetical but actual: “If indeed [Satan’s] ministers fashion themselves as ministers of righteousness …” Paul concludes with a dire warning, “whose end will be according to their works.”

Set up by v. 14, Paul now dismisses these “superlative” apostles as no apostles at all; rather, they are “ministers [of Satan].” True, by an outward change of form, they present themselves as “ministers of righteousness,” but that is by deception. The term “ministers of righteousness” must now be added to the earlier ones, “workmen … apostles of Christ” (v. 13). Herein lies their pretense and deception. Paul was a “workman … an apostle of Christ” and, though he does not apply the exact term to himself here, a “minister of righteousness” (but see 3:9; 5:20–21). These men, however, in fashioning themselves in the guise of “workmen, apostles, ministers of righteousness,” are, in effect—though probably not in intention—“ministers of Satan.”

Along with the Spirit, “righteousness” is one of the signs of the new covenant of which Paul was a “minister” (3:6, 8, 9). The apostolic appeal to “be reconciled to God,” based on the “righteousness of God” arising from Christ’s sacrificial death (5:21), is a “ministry” that God gave Paul as an apostle (5:18). Paul as an apostle of Christ was, indeed, a “minister of righteousness.”

The use of “righteousness” in this context suggests that “righteousness” was also fundamental to their “ministry” and therefore to their message.18 But “righteousness” is most likely expressive of the Law of Moses, or at least an attempt to predicate “righteousness” in Torah observance, for two reasons: (1) Those who purport to be “ministers of righteousness” were “Hebrews, Israelites, descendants of Abraham” (v. 22), and (2), as those “peddlers” who “need[ed] letters of recommendation” to legitimate their coming to Corinth, they were “ministers” of a now overtaken “old covenant,” which was “[written] on tablets of stone” (see on 3:3, 14, 3, 6). “Righteousness” associated with such men appears to have been Mosaic and Torah-based.19 Since they proclaimed “another Jesus … a different gospel,” it seems likely that they advocated a different “righteousness,” a “righteousness” arising out of the Mosaic law20 rather than from Messiah Jesus’ reconciliatory death. As “ministers of righteousness”—so defined—they are effectively, even if unintentionally, “ministers of Satan.”21

In parallel with the ancient serpent who first compromised the word of God (Gen 3:1, 4), before alienating Adam and Eve from the Lord (Gen 3:7–8), these “ministers of Satan,” by their corruption of the apostolic word of God (2:17; cf. 4:2), effectively divert the Corinthians away from their “sincere and pure devotion to Christ” (v. 3). As agents of Satan—even if unintended on their part—these newcomers were as capable of causing believers at Corinth to fall away from God as the serpent who caused Adam and Eve to fall away from God in the garden. The word of God, when heeded, unites the hearers to God, but when corrupted, it cuts men and women off from God.

So serious is their pretense and dangerous their alternative message that Paul declares, solemnly, that “their end will correspond to their works.”22 Elsewhere Paul calls the Judaizers “enemies of the cross,” whose “end is perdition” (Phil 3:18–1923). So too, here, those who mask the true righteousness of God in the crucified One (5:21), peddling instead a Torah-righteousness that brings only condemnation (2:17; 3:9), face the same dreadful “end.” Perhaps Paul implies a pointedly deeper meaning here.24 As “ministers of righteousness,” they have preached “the law” and, therefore, “its works” (cf. Gal 3:10–14); their end—perdition—issues from their “works,” that is, their “works”-righteousness.

Here, then, Paul sets forth a clear warning to those engaged in ministry, especially missionaries and church pastors. The righteousness of God is located only in the vicarious death of Christ and not in the works of the Law. Those who preach and teach must direct their hearers to the message of the cross so that no one is in doubt as to the means of divine acceptance. Let those who preach otherwise take note of the consequences set forth here by the apostle.

(5) A Fool Boasts (11:16–21a)

16I repeat: Let no one take me for a fool. But if you do, then receive me just as you would a fool, so that I may do a little boasting. 17In this self-confident boasting I am not talking as the Lord would, but as a fool. 18Since many are boasting in the way the world does, I too will boast. 19You gladly put up with fools since you are so wise! 20In fact, 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. 21To my shame I admit that we were too weak for that!

Having directed such strong attention to the “false apostles” (vv. 13–15), Paul now moves to the subtle triangular interplay between them (“anyone”—vv. 16, 20; “many”—v. 18; “fools”—v. 19), the Corinthians (“you”—vv. 16, 19, 20), and himself (“me”—v. 16; “I”—vv. 17, 18, 21a; “we”—v. 21a). He does so by picking up the “fool” theme from v. 1. Paul tells the Corinthians not to take him for a “fool.” Nonetheless, if they prefer to do so, let them receive him just as they would any “fool,” so that he, too, can “boast” (v. 16), a reference back to the “false apostles” (vv. 13–15) who are characterized by “boasting” (10:12–13).

What proceeds now is full of biting irony. Since “boasting” is what “fools” do, we are meant to infer that Paul is imitating and parodying these men as “fools.” Yet—let the Corinthians understand—he is not speaking “according to the Lord,” but “as in foolishness,” in this mode of “boasting” (i.e., as the “false apostles” are doing—v. 17; cf. 10:12–13, 17–18). Since they are “boasting according to the flesh,” so, “too,” Paul will “boast” (v. 18).

Having asked them to “receive” him “as a fool” (v. 16), Paul comments ironically that the Corinthians, being so “wise,” gladly “bear with fools”—that is, himself, but also the “false apostles” (see v. 20). Again, ironically, he notes that the Corinthians “bear with” those who exploit and abuse them (v. 20). The Corinthians, too, must be “fools” to put up with that! He rounds off the passage with an expression of irony tinged with pain, “to my shame, we were too weak for that” (i.e., to exploit and abuse others—v. 21).

This is, indeed, the language of pain. If he speaks as “a fool” or as “weak,” it is because, in all probability, some at Corinth—probably the newcomers (“anyone”—v. 16; cf. “anyone”—v. 20)—have spoken of him in those ways. If he “boasts,” it is because others—almost certainly the newcomers—are “boasting” of their achievements, while comparing Paul disadvantageously with themselves (see on 10:12–13). But Paul’s irony is biting; the Corinthians, too, will feel pain at his words.

Here we see, even at this distance in time, the suffering of a minister of the gospel, the founder of a church, whom that church is perilously close to rejecting in favor of other teachers who claimed to be superior but whose doctrines are capable of corrupting the church. Although the rhetorical terms in which Paul expresses himself are strange to us today, they would have provoked considerable comment in his day. The “Fool’s Speech,” as it will develop, is, in fact, a daring countercultural exercise. At that time one boasted of achievements, not of weaknesses.

16 Paul now picks up again the threads of his “Fool’s Speech” introduced in v. 1 (“I repeat: Let no one take me for a fool”; cf. v. 1—“my foolishness”), a “speech” that will itself begin in v. 21b.

The words “fool” (vv. 17, 18, 21; 12:6, 11) and “madman” (v. 23—RSV),1 are very important in the extended passage 11:16–12:13. But who is calling Paul a “fool”? His injunction, “Let not anyone regard me as a fool,” points to the “false apostles” as his accusers; in v. 20 the fivefold “anyone” is in clear reference to them.

But this leads on to something else. In the first half of a second sentence he adds, ironically, “Otherwise, if you must”2—that is, you Corinthians—take me for a “fool,” then “receive me as you would any ‘fool.’ ” The Corinthians have “borne with” those who have preached “another Jesus” (v. 4); let them “receive” (and “bear with”—v. 1) the “fool,” Paul. This is for the purpose stated in the second part of that sentence, namely, “that”3 he, “too,”4 can “do a little boasting.”5

If there are others who “boast”—who likewise must be “fools”—then Paul, too, will “boast.” By accepting their tag “fool” in the way he has, Paul has at the same time pinned it on those who call him “fool.” By boasting—though of an inverted, mocking kind—he will show who is really foolish. In the speech following he will boast like other fools to show how foolish those who call him foolish are.

17 He hastens to correct any possible misunderstanding. Let them not think he is “speaking according to the Lord.”6 No, this is another way of speaking—not an apostle’s way, but a “fool’s” way. If they call him a fool, let them hear what a fool has to say.

Nor is it merely “boasting”; it is “boasting” in a “self-confident”7 way, which, as v. 18 goes on to say, is “boasting according to the flesh.”