Section IV Vindication of Paul’s Authority

II Corinthians 10:1—13:14

With an abrupt change of subject Paul moves into the theme of the legitimacy of his apostleship. He seeks to answer the personal attacks of the false apostles and to counteract the ill effects of their influence in the church. A stern note of warning resounds throughout the passage. As he prepares the way for his third visit to the Corinthians, the character of a true apostolic ministry is further expounded.¹

A. PAUL ANSWERS HIS OPPONENTS, 10:1-18

The men who opposed Paul were Jews (11:22) who claimed to be apostles of Christ (11:13).² They came into the church at Corinth, worked there a short time, and proceeded to take the credit for all that had been accomplished (10:12-18). They were arrogant, tyrannical, and boastful men (10:12; 11:18, 20). The apostle faced their charges fundamentally with his assertion that “we do not war after the flesh” (3, ASV). His weapons are spiritual (1-6), his authority is consistent (7-11), and his boasting legitimate (12-18).

1. The Spirituality of Paul’s Weapons (10:1-6)

The apostle is imploring the Corinthians, asking that it not be necessary for him to assert his authority boldly when he comes. His critics had made the charge that his personal presence did not answer to the authority he had assumed in his letters. They had misinterpreted Paul’s reticence to exert his apostolic authority because they did not adequately discern the nature of apostolic warfare.

Now I Paul myself (1) fairly rings with the overtones of authority (cf. Gal. 5:2). It is related to the difference he made between himself and Timothy (1:1). He personally faces head on the challenge to his authority as an apostle: “It is the very person whose authority is in dispute who puts himself forward deliberately in this authoritative way.”³ But it is an authority affectionately exercised in the spirit of Christ, by whom Paul has been commissioned to serve. Meekness (prautetos; cf. Isa. 42: 2-3; Zech. 9:9; Matt. 5:5; 11:29; 21:5; I Cor. 4:21; Gal. 6:1) is that grace-imparted disposition by which we accept without resistance the disciplines of God (cf. Heb. 12:10), just as Jesus submitted to the disciplines of His suffering Servant ministry (cf. Heb. 5:7-9; I Pet. 2:21-23).⁴ Gentleness (epieikeias; cf. Acts 24:4; Phil. 4:5) is that consideration issuing from a position of dignity and authority which can set aside the strict letter of the law to accomplish a higher good⁵ (cf. 10:8; 2:6-7; Matt. 18:23). Paul’s severity in the exercise of his ministry, like that of his Lord, rises out of his compassion for those whom he serves (4:5).

Behind the apostle’s appeal is the accusation that he is base (lowly) “when face to face” (RSV) with the Corinthians, but bold (tharro) in his approach when absent. His enemies in usual fashion have distorted a truth (cf. I Cor. 2:1-5) into an untruth—Paul’s gentleness being interpreted as weakness.

The apostle literally “begs”⁶ (2) the Corinthians to set things in order so that he will not need to be bold (tharesai) when he comes. He had decided “to challenge decisively”⁷ (tolmesai) those who regard him as if he walked according to the flesh (cf. 1:12; 5:12). It is difficult to know whether flesh is meant in a sinister, sinful sense (Rom. 8:4-8) or in a merely human manner (5:16). In this context the two cannot be separated neatly, for the term refers to the supposed contradiction in Paul’s behavior as motivated by purely personal concerns. It is acting in dependence on human abilities according to external worldly criteria for reasons of expediency and self-seeking. To conduct one’s ministry thus would be sinful.

In answer to the charge the apostle admits that we walk in the flesh (3); that is, his life is in the world and subject to human weakness. But he and his helpers do not war⁸ after the flesh. Paul does not conduct his ministry with weapons (4) like those the world would use: “human cleverness or ingenuity, organizing ability, eloquent diatribe, or reliance on charm or forcefulness of personality.”⁹ These when relied upon become carnal (fleshly) or sinful in the context of the ministry. They are powerless “for the demolition of” (Bruce) the strong holds of the enemy in the hearts of men. The enemy cannot be defeated on his own level of warfare. Paul’s weapons (hopla, cf. Rom. 13:12, “the armour [hopla] of light”) are mighty before God; they are “divinely powerful.”¹⁰ He is armed with the “tremendous sense of what the Gospel was—the immensity of grace in it, the awfulness of judgment; and it was this which gave him his power, and lifted him above the arts, the wisdom, and the timidity of the flesh.”¹¹

Paul has sought only to declare the truth openly (4:2). He comes with weapons that are utterly dependent on the power of the Spirit rather than the power of the human (4:7; I Cor. 2:1-5). The apostle defines the strong holds when he declares that “we demolish sophistries and all that rears its proud head against the knowledge of God” (5, NEB). The defiant walls and towers of the intellect (cf. I Cor. 1:18-25; 8:1) and will of man must be torn down by the gospel. The inner loyalty of men cannot be won by fleshly or shortcut means (cf. Matt. 4:1-11). But by spiritual warfare every thought must be led into captivity … to the obedience of Christ (cf. I Cor. 2:16). The power of God is able to break down barriers in the minds and hearts of men by means of a truly gospel ministry. The capture then becomes a radical liberation in virtue of the character of the King (cf. 2:14).

A readiness to revenge (6) conveys a wrong impression to the modern reader. Still within the language of the military, Paul affirms that in consistency with the nature of his warfare he is “prepared to court-martial” (Moffatt) or “bring to justice”¹² all disobedience yet remaining in the Corinthian church. But such are his patience and his method of meeting difficulties that he will come only “to punish” (RSV) when the obedience (2:9; 7:15) of the majority is fulfilled. The apostle believed in giving the congregation time to solve its own problems before exercising his apostolic prerogatives of excommunication from the fellowship of the church (cf. 13:2; Matt. 16:19; 18:18; I Cor. 5:5).

Whether he was moved to act with bold authority or to suffer in humiliation, Paul did not hesitate to ground his ministry in the power of the gospel. It alone was able to destroy the towering walls with which men fortify themselves against obedience to Christ. To fight the Christian warfare with spiritual weapons was (1) never to rely solely on the methods the world uses to capture the minds of men, 3-5; and (2) always to act in submission to the Spirit of Christ in the defense of the right, 1-2, 6.

2. The Consistency of Paul’s Authority (10:7-11)

The apostle insists that, once the Corinthians take proper account of the spiritual quality of his authority, they will discover that he is in person what he appears to be in his letters. As an apostle of Christ there is no inconsistency between his written and spoken word, regardless of how men mistakenly judge him by their worldly criteria. In response to their charge he gives an answer and a warning.

The question, Do ye look on things after the outward appearance? (7) can correctly be translated as a simple statement, “Ye look at…” (ASV), or even as an imperative: “Look at what is before your eyes” (RSV). Though any one of the three could be correct, the last seems to satisfy best the flow of the apostle’s thought. Having pointed out to his readers the nature of his warfare, he now exhorts them to “take a look at what is obvious” about his ministry among them (cf. 12:6).

First of all, if any one of them “is confident in himself” (NASB) that he is Christ’s (cf. Mark 9:41; Rom. 8:9; I Cor. 1:12; 3:23; 15:23; Gal. 3:29), let him … think this again with¹³ himself … that, as he is Christ’s, just so is Paul.¹⁴ Perhaps those of the “Christ” party (I Cor. 1:12), or more likely some unduly influenced by Paul’s opponents, had become convinced of a superior spirituality which by their criteria would discredit even the apostle.¹⁵ But the plain fact before their face (prosopon) was that he had as much right to claim to belong to Christ as they. If personal conviction was valid for them, it was also valid for him. And was it not his ministry which first brought the gospel to them? The genuineness of their relationship to Christ in a sense then really validated his. Bengel speaks here of “the condescension of Paul, inasmuch as he merely demands an equal place with those whom he had begotten by the Gospel; for he himself must previously [have] belonged to Christ, or been a Christian, by whom another was brought to belong to Christ.”¹⁶ Of first importance with Paul in this question of the legitimacy of his apostleship is the integrity of his relationship to Christ.

The facts of his ministry among them, writes the apostle, speak for themselves. Even if he does boast “a little too much” (RSV) of his authority, he will not be ashamed (8). He will not be embarrassed “as having said more than I can make good.”¹⁷ The source and practice of his authority back up his boast. His authority has been given by the Lord¹⁸ (5:18-21), for edification, and not for … destruction. The end result of his ministry has been a building up (12:19; I Cor. 8:1; 14:26) and not a tearing down. Here is the proof which is right before their eyes. Paul, according to v. 5, attempts only to tear down¹⁹ “the conceits of men, every barrier of pride which sets itself up against the true knowledge of God”²⁰ (cf. Jer. 1:10; 24:6). His opponents, in contrast, tear up the fellowship of love which is the Church (12: 20), the body of Christ.

With the term boast (cf. 11:16; 12:6) we encounter one of the key words in cc. 10—13. But the apostle is a little uneasy about the fact that the situation has driven him to boast somewhat more than he would normally feel proper. Even so, the quality of his labors will protect him from being put to shame.

Even though he has to discuss his authority, he does not wish to terrify them by his letters (9). This reflects the charge (cf. 10-11) of a discrepancy between the tone of his letters and his actual conduct among them. Paul writes again with a touch of irony. Terrify (ekphobein, to scare them out of their wits) is a strong expression. As Hughes notes, “The picture of Paul … acting the part of a distant despot terrorizing them by his correspondence must have struck the Corinthians as altogether ridiculous.”²¹

The criticism which was being circulated against the apostle in Corinth, he now quotes: “His letters are impressive and telling, but his personal appearance is insignificant and as a speaker he amounts to nothing”²² (10). As Bruce pictures it: “He won’t say ‘Boo’to a goose when he is here himself … but when he is away he pretends to be bold and fearless and writes strong letters; if he were sure of his authority, he would show some of his letter-writing severity when he is dealing with us face to face.”²³ Whatever else this criticism was, it was a testimony to the effectiveness of Paul’s letters²⁴ to them (cf. II Pet. 3:16). They were mighty and powerful. But the charge was one of inexcusable inconsistency. In contrast to his letters his “personal presence is unimpressive” (NASB)—a reference, not to his physical appearance,²⁵ but to “the meekness and gentleness of Christ” (1), by which Paul always sought to conduct himself. This their worldly hearts had no way to comprehend. Also they considered Paul’s speech contemptible. His delivery did not come up to their standards of Greek rhetoric—he was not a polished orator (11:6)—and his message (logos) was quite beneath their dignity. The fact that Paul had come to Corinth “not with excellency of speech or of wisdom” but only with “Jesus Christ, and him crucified” (I Cor. 2:1-2) had not impressed them: “The word [logos] of the cross is folly to those who are perishing” (I Cor. 1:18, RSV).

Paul’s answer to his critics is straightforward. Let such an one think (consider) this (11). Bruce interprets it, “When I come to you I will be as resolute in action as I am resolute in the letters I write when I am away from you.” Paul’s patience and gentleness will not prevent him from bold, decisive action, if need be, when he visits them again (cf. 1; 13:2,10).

Paul’s consistency which ought to be obvious to them all can be seen (1) in his commitment to Christ, 7; (2) in his commission from the Lord to build up and not to tear down, 8; and (3) in his conduct among the Corinthians, 9-11.

3. The Legitimacy of Paul’s Boasting (10:12-18)

Because his opponents had implied that they were vastly superior to him, Paul, for the sake of the church, felt forced to resort to the somewhat dubious defense of boasting (8). But now as he does so, the boast of false apostles is sent crashing down with one neat blow. At the same time the limits of the apostle’s own boasting are carefully fixed.

With a bit of sarcasm, Paul admits to the charge that he is a coward—at least in one matter. He does not have the courage to class²⁶ himself with those who commend themselves (12)” “certain people who write their own references”²⁷ (cf. 3:1; 5:12). Paul cannot compete with the kind of boldness that rests its authority on self-commendation. Such people are completely out of his class.

Paul’s point is that their self-praise is really dispraise,²⁸ for they have refused any worthy standard of comparison. They are measuring themselves by themselves, and comparing themselves among themselves. Their own standards applied within their sectarian circle as the only criterion of measurement indicates plainly that they are “without understanding” (ASV). Such persons are impostors who are ignorant of the real character of a servant of Christ and what it means to be commissioned by Him. Thus, Hughes concludes, “the very accusation of self-commendation which … they had maliciously hurled at Paul (cf. 3:1; 5:12) recoils with crippling force upon the heads of these intruders.”²⁹ Yet the sad fact is that there are always those who fall for the arrogant, the bigoted, and the dogmatic.

The apostle, for his part, is not going to boast in regard to things without … measure (13), i.e., “things that nobody can measure”³⁰ (ta ametera). These fellows who make themselves “100 percent fit so that when they measure themselves, they always rate 100 percent,”³¹ preclude all valid measurement. Paul’s criterion, however, is valid (kanonos). It is the measure of the rule (cf. Rom. 12:3) that God has apportioned to him. Rule, from which we get our English word “canon,” refers here to “sphere of action or influence.”³² The apostle describes it in relation to the Corinthians, to reach even unto you. Like a runner in the Isthmian games, Paul stays within the lane marked out for him, in vivid contrast to his opponents, whom God “had not admitted to any lane, let alone one which led to Corinth.”³³

The rule or limits are not primarily geographical, as if these interlopers actually possessed an allotted territory for a genuine apostolic ministry. It is perhaps more the specific task and the particular grace presented to Paul (Rom. 15:15-16; Gal. 2:9) which had been demonstrated and confirmed by the fruitfulness of his missionary labors (cf. I Cor. 15:10).³⁴ He was commissioned an apostle to the Gentiles (Acts 9:15; Rom. 1:5; Gal. 2:9) and was not to build on other men’s foundations (Rom. 15:20). Within these limits he had worked as a pioneer missionary to the heathen, even at Corinth.

So, in his boast Paul says, “We are not overextending ourselves, as if we did not reach to you, for we were the first to come even as far as you in the gospel of Christ” (14, NASB). We are come (14, ephthasamen) keeps here its full meaning “to arrive first,” which is well-attested in the NT period. Instead of exaggerating in his boast, Paul may mean here that he is not overstretching his commission (NEB). The fact that he was the first to arrive at Corinth with the gospel of Christ (I Cor. 3:6) makes that evident. He had laid the foundation (I Cor. 3:10) and had become their father in the gospel (I Cor. 4:15). Thus with sharp irony Paul has pointed out that his opponents are in effect disqualified as competitors to the apostle. They were nothing but proselyters, who, like all their stripe, make it their business to invade other men’s work rather than open up new territory in which to spread their error.

So Paul will not boast of things beyond measure,³⁵ that is, in other men’s labours (15; cf. Rom. 15:20). This is a reference to those “who, while they had put forth their hand in the reaping of another man’s harvest, had the audacity at the same time to revile those, who had prepared a place for them at the expense of sweat and toil.”³⁶ The very fact that Paul’s mission had prospered in Corinth was proof that he had been within his rule (sphere; cf. 13) in his ministry among them.

The apostle has hope that, in spite of the attention given to the impostors, the church’s faith will increase to the point that he can safely trust its stability. Then he and his helpers, as Paul puts it, will be enlarged by you according to our rule abundantly. It is not praise that he is after, but by the encouragement of their full obedience to the gospel he hopes to have his pioneer ministry expanded. The ministry of the great apostle is limited by the faith of his converts. They have the power to set him free to a greater usefulness, or to keep his ministry tied up by their foolish immaturity in the gospel.

The enlarged…abundantly of v. 15 is to preach the gospel (16) “in the lands that lie beyond.”³⁷ Paul wants to evangelize those fields that he beyond Corinth. As he later indicates, he wanted to visit Rome en route to a mission to Spain (Acts 19:21; Rom. 15:22-24). Thus there would be no cause for him to boast in another man’s line³⁸ of things made ready to our hand. The words are again scornfully stinging. “Another man’s sphere of work already done by him”³⁹ was the only boast these conceited proselyters could muster. Surely what they really were was plain to the Corinthians (cf. 7a). “We should notice,” writes Alio, “that he utters no reproach against the community, to the contrary, Paul is counting on them for the unlimited extension of his apostolate.”⁴⁰ His controversy in these chapters is primarily with the intruders.

The apostle has been led into the matter of boasting against his personal wishes and now seeks to keep the emphasis properly placed: But he that glorieth (lit., boasts), let him glory (boast) in the Lord (17). Paul must have kept Jer. 9:23-24 close to the heart of his ministry, for he had used the same citation before in I Cor. 1:31. Even now, when in a sense he has to boast, he wants it understood that it is strictly in the Lord (cf. 12:2). He never took credit for the successes of his labors, but kept the words of the prophet between him and the applause of men:

Let not the wise man boast of his wisdom,

Nor the strong man boast of his strength,

Nor the rich man boast of his riches!

But if one must boast, let him boast of this,

That he understands and knows me.

          (Jer. 9:23-24, Smith-Goodspeed)

The basic principle of the apostle’s ministry was that not he who commendeth himself is approved, but whom the Lord commendeth (18; cf. 5:9; I Cor. 4:15). Strachan suggests that “it is as though he said, ‘After all, apostolic authority is not really safe in my hands. God’s recommendation is the only mark of genuineness.’Paul boasts, not that he is an apostle, but that God made him one.”⁴¹ The servant of Christ can boast only of what God has done, what He is doing, and what He has promised to do. Paul’s great desire was to have God’s approval always. The standards a man applies to himself may be faulty or even dishonest, but God can see all the way through him.

A threefold criterion is given in these verses which discredits the boast of Paul’s opponents and sets the limits to one’s legitimate boast as a servant of Christ: (1) a standard external to one’s own immediate frame of reference, 12; (2) the nature of the commission personally received from Christ, 13-16; and (3) the approval of the Lord himself, 17-18.

Paul’s answer to his opponents in 10:1-18 defines the process of victory in a ministry for Christ. Redpath comments on these verses: “Resist, counterattack, deal with the situation upon the same level that the world deals with it, and you are defeated.”⁴² A ministry to men, whether by laymen or clergy, should be in spiritual continuity with that of the apostle, an imitator of Christ (I Cor. 11:1). “Consistent Christian Service” is (1) Consistent with the principle of the Cross in its methodology and techniques,1-6; (2) Consistent with the integrity and quality of one’s calling in Christ, 7-11; and (3) Consistent in an attitude of humility which labors only in obedience and gives all credit for its successes to the Lord, 12-18.

B. PAUL BOASTS IN HIS FOOLISHNESS, 11:1—12:13

All that Paul has formerly said is just the prelude. He now begins the sharpest polemic to be found in his writings. He wields masterfully the weapon of irony here sharpened by a holy anger and, as always with Paul, tempered by the supremacy of the truth.⁴³ The apostle puts on a mask to play the role of his opponents.

The catchword “boast,” which appeared in 10:12-18, continues to dominate Paul’s approach. But his boasting is a foolishness which he asks the Corinthians to endure (11:1-6, 16-21a). His boast, however, is not an empty one (11:7-15). As an apostle of Christ he can ultimately sum up that boast (11:21b—12:10) in terms of the Christlike declaration, “When I am weak, then am I strong” (12:10; cf. 13:4). His conduct in Corinth (12:11-13) is the basis upon which he has demonstrated the authenticity of his apostleship.

In a form of self-glory—imitating his opponents—Paul really boasts in Christ, his Lord. The contradiction between the mask of his boasting and what he is really saying gives this whole passage a unique literary charm and captivating force. But more important, it reveals to us Paul’s sufferings and the personal revelations given to him. These were wrung from him in the struggle⁴⁴ with the opposition at Corinth; without that struggle we would have missed his testimony.

1. An Appeal to Bear with Paul’s Foolishness (11:1-6)

As the apostle moves into a type of defense for which he has no real appetite, he begins with an apology. He wants the Corinthians to understand that the necessity for his boasting results from his affectionate concern for them. He fears lest they should be seduced by the false apostles from their fidelity to Christ. It is the church that he is addressing as he begs them to put up with his brand of self-commendation.

With the word folly (1; nonsense⁴⁵) Paul warns his hearers (cf. 16-17, 19, 21; 12:6, 11) that he is now arguing as if “he had the same selfish motives and worldly outlook as his opponents.”⁴⁶ His boasting is just “a little foolishness” which he is hoping they will be able to see through and endure. And of this he is confident as he adds, “But indeed you are bearing with me” (NASB).⁴⁷ It is as if the apostle were expressing his thanks for what he knows they will be gracious to do. Paul believes in the Corinthians that they are already those who bear with him and who will not misinterpret his motives. Again he is giving voice to his underlying confidence in the church at Corinth (cf. 7:4, 14, 16; 8:24; 9:2).

The apostle’s “foolishness” is prompted by the fact that he is jealous (deeply concerned⁴⁸) over them with godly jealousy (2), or better, with “the jealousy of God himself” (Knox, cf. Deut. 5:9; 6:15). Bruce paraphrases this, “My jealousy is like God’s desire for His people’s single-hearted devotion.” The expression is a strong one, as the imagery of the rest of the verse indicates.

The metaphor that Paul employs to explain further his jealousy is a familiar one in Scripture—I have espoused (betrothed) you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste (pure) virgin to Christ.⁴⁹ God is pictured often in the OT as the Bridegroom of Israel (Isa. 50:1; 54:3, 6; Jer. 3:1; Hos. 2:19-20), illustrating the nature of the bond between them. The figure probably comes more directly from Jesus himself, who spoke often of the Messianic consummation in terms of a marriage feast (Matt. 22:2; 25:1; cf. Rev. 19:7-10) and of himself as the Bridegroom (Mark 2:18-20). Thus the apostle’s image of Christ as the Bridegroom, not only of the whole Church (Eph. 5:32), but also of each particular local congregation,⁵⁰ stresses both the intimacy and the inviolability of the relation between Christ and the Corinthians.

Paul thinks of himself as a father who in true Oriental manner has arranged the marriage of his daughter to the noblest of bridegrooms. As Lenski translates, he has betrothed the Corinthians “to One as husband.”⁵¹ Now it is his responsibility to guard the conduct of the promised bride until the time when he will present her as a pure virgin to the Bridegroom at the marriage.⁵² Three things are suggested here: (1) The bride does not betroth herself; (2) Betrothal is more than a modern engagement, for the formal legal vows were taken,⁵³ leaving only their consummation to the time of the marriage festivities; and (3) Paul’s point is the preservation of the chastity of the bride, which he guards with a godly jealousy.

In keeping with the figure, the consummation at which Paul is to present the Corinthians as a chaste virgin to Christ is no doubt the day of Messianic fulfillment, the Parousia.⁵⁴ The apostle’s concern here is one he often expressed: that his converts “may be pure and blameless for the day of Christ” (Phil. 1:10, RSV; cf. I Cor. 1:8; Eph. 5:27; Col. 1:22; I Thess. 5:23). The Church and the Christian are to live “in between the times” with the loyalty and the purity of an eager bride. Paul’s function is to preserve this fidelity.

Thus in line with the responsibility for them he is afraid lest they should be completely deceived (exepatesen) by Satan, as was Eve by the craftiness of the serpent (3). The serpent prefigures the false apostles (13-15), who are Satanic in their methods, doing the devil’s work. Subtilty (panourgia) is “an extreme malignity which is capable of everything.”⁵⁵ For the Corinthians to be influenced by such men would be to violate their betrothal pledge to Christ, for their minds (thoughts, noemata) would be “led astray”⁵⁶ from the simplicity (sincerity)⁵⁷ that is in Christ. Many of the earlier MSS contain after simplicity “and the purity” (kai tes hagnotetos),⁵⁸ which continues the marriage metaphor. It would then be “that single mindedness and that purity,”⁵⁹ as the Greek articles emphasize. It is this attitude which must characterize their relation to Christ that concerns Paul. The RSV translates the meaning well: “a sincere and pure devotion to Christ.”

In v. 4, Paul brings up a second reason why they should bear with his folly. For (gar) connects the thought with v. 1. When one of the boastful interlopers comes to Corinth preaching another Jesus, chides the apostle, “you manage to put up with that well enough”⁶⁰ (NEB). The unspoken thought in Paul’s mind which his readers could not miss is added by Bruce, “Why should you not put up with me then?” If they could tolerate so beautifully one who preaches another (allon) Jesus, a Messiah other than the Son of God, crucified and risen, and receive another (heteron) spirit⁶¹ and another gospel (cf. Gal. 1:6) than that which they accepted from Paul’s ministry, surely his “little foolishness” would be no burden to them. The preaching of the false apostles is probably not to be identified with that of the Judaizers in Gal. l:6-9.⁶² The false teaching was rather an interpretation of the ministry of Jesus which would discredit the ministry of the apostle as a “strength … made perfect in weakness” (12:9; cf. 11:21-30). The result would be another (different) gospel. A ministry whose methodology was not grounded in the weakness of the Crucifixion and the resultant power of the Resurrection (cf. 13:4) would not produce “good news” disciples. They would not follow Jesus with the self-denial of His cross (Mark 8:34; cf. II Cor. 4: 7-15; 6:4-5), and they would be essentially worldly in their outlook (cf. 10:3-4; I Cor. 2:12).

Hanson suggests that Paul gives us a three-word summary of Christianity—Jesus, spirit, and gospel. Christianity for him consists of “Jesus—the New Creation; Spirit—the new Life in which to live in this Creation; Gospel—the instrument for spreading this life in this Creation.”⁶³

The Corinthians “submit … readily enough” (RSV) to those who come with a presentation of Jesus that suits better the egos of the worldly-minded. The apostle therefore considers himself “not a single bit inferior to those superior apostles” (5, Williams; cf. 12:11). The very chiefest apostles (lit., super-apostles) is a sarcastic description of those whom Paul later designates “false apostles” (13). The reference is clearly not to the pillar apostles in Jerusalem (Gal. 2:9). The reasons why Paul does not think himself a whit behind “these superlative apostles” (RSV) constitute the rest of this section (11:6—12:13; cf. Acts 9:16; I Cor. 4:10-13; 15:10).

He immediately qualifies the assertion in v. 5. Though (6) he is not “a polished speechmaker” (Jerusalem; cf. 10:10; I Cor. 2:1-4), he knows what he is talking about. Rude (unskilled) in speech does not mean that Paul was a poor speaker but that he was untrained (idiotes) in Greek rhetoric, just as Peter and John were idiotai in regard to rabbinic training (Acts 4:13). Paul’s critics in Corinth had resorted to the cheap trick of calling attention to the exterior wrapping in order to divert attention from the true value of the contents.

The apostle is emphatic that he is not in any way inferior when it comes to his knowledge of Christ and the gospel. The mystery of God in Christ had been revealed to him and fully proclaimed by him (I Cor. 2:6-16; Gal. 1:11-17; Eph. 3:3-4). He knows Christ, “in whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge” (Col. 2:3). This fact Paul throughly (in every way, en panti) had made manifest⁶⁴ to them in all things. Through the faithfulness of his witness to them of the gospel of Christ (I Cor. 2:1-5) they have the evidence of the true character of his apostle-ship (cf. 12:12).

The rationale for the foolishness in which Paul felt he must indulge in view of the situation in Corinth confronts us with “A Stewardship of the Gospel.” It is (1) Cognizant of its human limitations, 6; (2) Confident in its conviction of divine truth, 5-6; and (3) Concerned for the spiritual welfare of those it has fathered in the faith, 2-3.

In vv. 2-3 the jealousy of God furnishes us with (1) the dynamic of a proper concern for others in the gospel and (2) the imperative for a pure personal loyalty to Christ.

2. The Self-support of Paul’s Mission (11:7-15)

Another matter in which Paul feels himself not in the least inferior is his refusal to be financially dependent on those whom he serves in the gospel. The self-appointed apostles who had invaded the church at Corinth took pay for their services. They did their best to use this fact to degrade Paul in the minds of his Corinthian converts (cf. 3). A clear contrast is drawn by the apostle between his motives and those of the false apostles.

He admits preaching the gospel of God (7) to the church freely, i.e., “free of charge” (Bruce, cf. I Cor. 9:18). This was his practice always in his missionary enterprises. He fully recognized that “the Lord commanded that those who proclaim the gospel should get their living by the gospel” (I Cor. 9:14, RSV; cf. Deut. 25:4). But Paul’s preaching did not incur a debt; it discharged one: “I am debtor” (Rom. 1:14). Freely he had received; freely he would give (Matt. 10:8). The gospel was a commission which had been entrusted to him: “For if I preach the gospel, that gives me no ground for boasting. For necessity is laid upon me. Woe to me if I do not preach the gospel!” (I Cor. 9:16, RSV). He did not take it up voluntarily; therefore his reward could not be in mere obedience (cf. Luke 17:10). His reward must be “just this: that in my preaching I may make the gospel free of charge, not making full use of my right in the gospel” (I Cor. 9:18, RSV; cf. vv. 15-18). For this he had been criticized in Corinth.

So he asks, Have I committed an offence (lit, a sin) in abasing myself that ye might be exalted? The fact that Paul made his living with his own hands (Acts 18:1-3; I Thess. 2:9; II Thess.3:8) laid him open in a place like Corinth to the charge of being nonprofessional (cf. 6). The Greek professional teachers of the Hellenistic period always lived by their art. It was beneath their dignity to soil their hands. To refuse pay was to admit that one’s teaching was of little value.⁶⁵ The accusation of the false teachers would be that Paul was not genuine: “His teaching is so worthless that he does not accept payment for it; a man … who so obviously declares himself to be the unskilled amateur, is unworthy the credence of intelligent people.”⁶⁶ But the apostle is only following the example of the Carpenter (Mark 6:3) and humbling himself for the exaltation of others. Paul did it for the church, lest they think he was motivated by material gain and so miss the impact of his message. His question was a forceful one, “Was this a sin to degrade myself to exalt you?”

To make the truth smart he adds, I robbed other churches … to do you service (8). He had allowed others to contribute to his support while he labored to bring the gospel to the Corinthians (Phil. 4:15). Hughes points out that the metaphor is military. The wages (army pay)⁶⁷ which were due to Paul as an apostle in Corinth he had obtained by plundering other places which he had already conquered for the gospel in the course of his missionary campaigns.

It was not a matter of extortion, for it was freely brought by brethren … from Macedonia (9; cf. Acts 18:5) as an expression of the bond between them. The implication is that the Corinthians were indebted to the Macedonians and the latter were once again an example of earnestness (8:8) to the Corinthians. While Paul was in Corinth he wanted, his “resources failed” (Weymouth), but even then he was chargeable to no man (“did not burden any of you,” Smith-Goodspeed). The idea of numbness caused by heavy pressure is fundamental to the verb.⁶⁸ That which was lacking to Paul was “fully supplied” (NASB) by the Macedonians. He is not rebuking the Corinthians for not having supported him. He would not let them do this, for he had in the past kept himself from being burdensome to them (cf. 12:14-15), and intended to do so in the future. He will not let slander alter his principle. The reception of support from Macedonia was not a violation of Paul’s stand because he was not laboring for them at the time. He was not too proud to accept help when he was in want.

Paul saw himself as a special case—an apostle by abortion (I Cor. 15:8),⁶⁹ “unfit to be called an apostle” (I Cor. 15:9, RSV). The compulsion to apply to himself such a unique stringency arose from his Damascus appearance—“necessity is laid upon me” (I Cor. 9:16).⁷⁰ Thus he declares to the Corinthians, As the truth of Christ is in me, no man shall stop me⁷¹ of this boasting in the regions of Achaia (10; i.e., Corinth; see map 1). In a former letter he had told them that he would rather die than have any man make this boast an empty one (I Cor. 9:15). Now it is linked up with the integrity of his apostleship—the truth of Christ in him (cf. I Cor. 2:6). The boasting that he will not allow to be blocked off “is in the resolution to ensure that the gospel, which he had received at no cost to himself and which he was under the obligation of debt to proclaim to others, should be ministered by him to others without cost.”⁷² Paul is not idly boasting; it is the integrity of his own calling that he will not allow to be compromised away.

No wonder that his rivals in Corinth criticized his practice, for it put them at a disadvantage and cast doubt on their motives. Was their use of the gospel mercenary? (Cf. 2:17; 4:2.) So they suggested that his independence was really unconcern. But Paul replies that the reason for his determination is that he does truly love them (11). “And why,” cries the apostle from the heart, “because I do not love you? God knows I do” (Smith-Good-speed). He leaves his vindication to God, to whom he has always been open (5:11). Human persuasion is now useless. If they do not know his love, God does. This is his assurance.

The apostle’s reason in relation to his opponents for continuing the stand that he has already taken in Corinth in regard to his support is not to give them a new “point of departure” for their mischief. He wants to cut off occasion (12), or “cut the ground from under those who would seize any chance to put their vaunted apostleship on the same level as ours” (NEB).⁷³ That is, by their insistence that it is a sign of apostolic dignity to receive support from the congregation they hope to induce the apostle to accept payment for his services. Then he would be on an equality with them and his advantage would be gone. They would no longer be hard put to explain why they took money and Paul did not. But they were too mercenary to rise to his level. Paul knew the spot he had them in and he meant to keep them there. He was not deceived by their tactics to drag him down to their level.

What Paul has been implying he now plainly states. He maintains his difference from them because they are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming (cf. Phil. 3:2) themselves into the apostles of Christ (13). They were “pseudo-apostles” (cf. 26; Mark 13:22), claiming a category which did not belong to them. Therefore the message they preached, the spirit they spread, and the gospel they offered did not ring true (4). As “sham apostles” (Weymouth) their activities in Corinth were deceitful, treacherous, and cunning. Lenski points out that the noun dolos, cognate to dolios (deceitful), originally meant “bait.”⁷⁴ They put out bait to catch victims; the idea is that of a deception that kills.⁷⁵ These men were “masquerading as” (Bruce) apostles of Christ. They were projecting the image of an apostle, but Christ had not sent (apesteilen) them. They were counterfeit.

And there is nothing incredible about this, the apostles goes on, for Satan himself “masquerades as” (Phillips) an angel of light (14). They are only like their master, as already hinted in 3. Paul had no doubt discovered through his own experience that Satan, whose realm is darkness (Eph. 6:12; Col. 1:13; cf. Acts 16:18), never comes as Satan, but always in the garb of light. How else could he get his lies across?

Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers⁷⁶ also be transformed (masquerade) as the ministers of righteousness(15).⁷⁷ It is neither “strange” (RSV) nor “surprising” (NASB) that men who are really agents of Satan’s realm should attempt to sell themselves as agents of “the righteousness of God” (Rom. 1:16) in Christ. Paul labels their self-seeking approach to the gospel just what it is—Satanic! Strong words, but true; words that deserve meditation by some of us who “live of the gospel”(I Cor. 9:14)! Of those who sell the gospel for money (cf. 2:17)the apostle can only say, their end shall be according to their works.⁷⁸ Could it be said that a man’s ministry turns out according to his motives?

Integral to Paul’s ministry was a principle of operation, a personal conviction resulting from his particular commission by Christ. From this principle he could not be separated, even by treacherous means.

To apply the matter of masquerading to the professed Christian, Barclay quotes the four tests drawn up by the Synod of the Church in Uganda by which a man may examine the reality of his own Christianity.⁷⁹

  (i)  Do you know salvation through the Cross of Christ?

 (ii)  Are you growing in the power of the Holy Spirit, in prayer, meditation, and the knowledge of God?

(iii)  Is there a great desire to spread the Kingdom of God by example, and by preaching and teaching?

(vi)  Are you bringing others to Christ by individual searching, by visiting, and by public witness?

Such criteria, honestly applied, would tear away the masks with which some of us today are deceiving ourselves.

3. Renewed Appeal to Bear with Boastings (ll:16-21a)

Paul turns again to his request of v. 1: indulgence in the foolishness of his boasting. Verses 16-21a introduce the second part of the apostle’s “senseless discourse”⁸⁰ relating to 11:21b—12:10 as 11:1-6 relates to 11:7-15.

The apostle again talks about acting the fool (16; cf. v. 1; 10:8; 12:6). The reference is the boasting to which he feels the situation compels him. He does not really want to be thought a fool, but if they insist on putting him on the same level as his opponents, he asks only for the same indulgence that the Corinthians have granted them: “Then treat me as a fool and let me do a little boasting of my own” (Jerusalem). Paul indicates his embarrassment at the whole procedure. Nevertheless, in view of the necessity to commend himself in some measure (cf. 11:2-5), he is willing to be misunderstood if need be to make the issues clear in this relation to them.

The apostle declares that when he thus boasts he is speaking not after (kata) the Lord, but after the flesh (17-18). However, since with a full awareness he labels as “foolishness” this confidence of boasting, he is not “stooping to sin.” Nevertheless he “is ethically on a lower plane than the one on which Jesus moved.”⁸¹

In his boasting, conceding that the matter really has to degenerate to this level, Paul appears to be affirming “the certainty that I have something to boast about” (Jerusalem).⁸² On the other hand, the expression could indicate the false confidence which dares such an undertaking.⁸³

The apostle views his boasting as a form of self-justification; thus it is in accord with the norm of “earthly distinctions” (NEB; cf. 5:12). This after the flesh (5:16; cf. Phil. 3:4; Gal. 6:13) norm of worldly externals is the principle followed by the many who are Paul’s opponents in Corinth. Since they glory⁸⁴ by such criteria, he will glory also (18). But he speaks of his boasting in a way that reveals its sharp contrast to that of his opponents. He characterizes it by flesh in opposition to Lord, a contrast which corresponds to his more usual opposing of “flesh” and “Spirit” (cf. Rom. 8:1-11).

But Paul has yet more pungent words to use. He is foolish (aphrona, 16) and they are wise (phronimoi, 19). Yet they who are so smart “bear with the foolish [aphronoi] gladly” (NASB). The first implication is that they should have no difficulty putting up with what Paul is about to impose upon them since in this matter he has joined the ranks of those whom they so amazingly tolerate. But with the second implication comes the sting, as Lenski expresses it, “that such smart people are bigger fools than the fools they indulge; and that, by getting such indulgence from people who think themselves so smart, these fools are smarter than the smart people on whom they impose.”⁸⁵

These sharp words are reinforced by five examples of the actual impositions of the false apostles. In this passage “all of the ‘ifs’ denote reality” and the conditional form “implies that they are ready to have it repeated again and again.”⁸⁶ First they suffer (“bear it,” RSV) if anyone brings them into bondage (20) or enslaves them \to his will. Second, they allow these men to devour (lit., eat down; cf. Matt. 12:40; Luke 20:47) their resources like parasites. Third, they take them captive as birds in a trap. ‘Further, these “super-apostles” exalt themselves; they “are presumptuous”⁸⁷ in their arrogant treatment of the Corinthians. In fact the Corinthians put up with these foolish boasters even when they slap them on the face—“a daring description of violence and contempt.”⁸⁸

Paul may be using only figurative language in the last example, but Hughes feels that he is alluding to instances of actual physical assault. In that time those in authority, even those in ecclesiastical authority (Acts 23:2; cf. I Cor. 4:11), considered themselves free to strike offenders for their insolence and impiety. Paul himself felt it necessary to declare plainly that bishops were not to be pugnacious (I Tim. 3:3; Titus 1:7). Hughes notes that “the fault of the Corinthians was that they had accepted this indignity as though coming from men of apostolic authority, without discerning how utterly incongruous it was with the true spirit of Christ and His apostles, and thereby dishonouring Paul, whom in their hearts they knew to be Christ’s genuine apostle, and the gospel which he had preached to them.”⁸⁹

With these examples Paul seems to be saying to them, You who “let other people tyrannize over you, prey upon you, take advantage of you, vaunt their power over you, browbeat you” (Knox), surely you cannot object to a little boasting from me. For I would never dream of inflicting such personal indignities upon you as you have suffered from those self-appointed apostles.

About all this, he says with the deepest thrust of his irony, I speak as concerning reproach (atimian; 21). “Disgrace”⁹⁰ (lit., dishonor) is the norm⁹¹ he is now using. Thus it is “to my shame” he says “that we have been weak” (NASB) in comparison with the abusive bullies the Corinthians had submitted to so meekly. If what his opponents have displayed is the mark of true apostolic authority, then he is indeed a weak failure. He admits the reproach (cf. 10:10, 12). Although weak, Paul is bold enough to counterattack effectively.

In the course of his embarrassing apology for his boasting which is to follow, Paul finds its legitimacy in (1) the realization of its true character—foolishness; and in (2) the recognition of the particular nature of the situation which has made it necessary.

4. The Boasting of the Apostle (11:21b—12:10)

The apostle now boldly engages in that “foolishness of boasting” in which he has been so hesitant to indulge. As he presents his credentials as an apostle (ll:21b-33) and brings to light his visions and revelations from the Lord (12:1-10), he sweeps from the field his opponents with their meager bragging.

a. The credentials of an apostle (ll:21b-33) This section reminds us of 6:4-10, but it is a richer, more comprehensive and passionate presentation. To the emphasis on the privileges of his birth and training Paul adds a full account of all the sufferings and perils he had undergone as an apostle of Christ. With a formidable list he overwhelms the Corinthians and smothers every contradiction.⁹²

Paul is now on the attack, matching boldness with boldness. I speak foolishly (21) indicates that his mood of irony continues. It reveals too that he is not indulging in behavior that merits emulation by his readers. Rather he has been forced into it for the sake of the Corinthians.

The invaders in Corinth were no doubt Aramaic-speaking Palestinian Jews. They were attempting to use their descent and heritage to put the apostle, who came from foreign soil—Tarsus in Cilicia (Acts 22:3)—in an unfavorable light. They were boasting “after the flesh” (18)—of language, religion, and race.⁹³ Now Paul will also boast, Are they Hebrews? so am I (22).In Acts 6:1, this term designated the Hebrew- or Aramaic-speaking Jews in distinction from those who could speak only Greek.⁹⁴ Paul, as well as any Jew and better than most, could read and study the Jewish Scriptures in the languages in which they were written. Moreover, he handled the Aramaic dialect with such mastery that he commanded the attention of a hostile mob in Jerusalem as he stood on the steps leading to the fortress Antonia (Acts 21:39”22:3). On that occasion he declared, “I am a Jew, born in Tarsus of Cilicia, but brought up in this city, educated under Gamaliel” (Acts 22:3, NASB). In a careful study W. C. van Unnik concludes that “although Paul was born in Tarsus, it was in Jerusalem that he received his upbringing in the parental home just as it was in Jerusalem that he received his latter schooling for the rabbinate.”⁹⁵ The tongue of Paul’s youth at home and in school may well have been Aramaic. He was indeed a “Hebrew of the Hebrews” (Phil. 3:5).

Are they Israelites? so am I. He too was a son of Jacob (Gen. 32:28), “of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin” (Phil. 3:5, RSV; cf. Rom. 11:1). Paul thrills at his involvement with those people chosen as God’s particular instrument of His purposes for all of mankind. They were “Israelites, to whom belongs the adoption as sons and the glory and the covenants and the giving of the Law and the temple service and the promises, whose are the fathers, and from whom is the Christ according to the flesh” (Rom. 9:4-5, NASB). The faith of Israel was fully his, too; for, like Nathanael, Paul was “an Israelite indeed” (John 1:47).

Are they the seed of Abraham? so am I. Paul was not only by race a member “of the seed of Abraham” (Rom. 11:1), to whom the promises were given (Gen. 12:1-2; Rom. 9:4; Gal. 3:8, 16); he was a member also by faith. The Seed of Abraham was Christ (Gal. 3:16), and in Christ the blessing of Abraham had come upon all, wrote Paul, “that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith” (Gal. 3:14). As a Christian he remained more than ever a member of Abraham’s race.

The apostle’s opponents had nothing on him. He was a Jew in the fullest sense of the term: “According to the strictest party of our religion I have lived as a Pharisee” (Acts 26:5, RSV; cf. Phil. 3:5-6). Yet he could count it all loss in view of the greater privilege of “the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord” (Phil. 3:8).

Are they ministers⁹⁶ of Christ? (23) This fourth question, although similar to the three preceding, transcends them and contains the central issue. All four designations are terms that Paul had taken from the boasts of his opponents in Corinth. Indicative of the preeminence of the final claim is Paul’s reply: not, “So am I” (kago, 22), but, I am more (hyper ego). He is more a minister of Christ than they: “I am a better one” (RSV). But to talk in this way is for him to “speak as if insane” (NASB). I speak as a fool (paraphroneo, to be beside oneself)⁹⁷ is a stronger word than aphron, which was rendered “fool” in vv. 16 and 19. The apostle’s thought, as Plumnver suggests, is that “to glory about so sacred a matter as the service of Christ is downright madness.”⁹⁸

Paul now proceeds to define his superiority as a minister of Christ. In short “they are servants of Christ far less than he himself, because they have had far fewer ‘weaknesses’“⁹⁹ (cf. 11:23—12:10; I Cor. 4:10-13). If there are apostolic credentials “after the flesh” (18), they are to be found, not in the strength of the flesh according to human criteria, but in its infirmities (12:5). By the proper measure of an apostle, Paul is “not at all inferior to these superlative apostles” (12:11, RSV). His ministry was in fulfillment of the words spoken by the Lord of him to Ananias, “I will shew him how great things he must suffer for my name’s sake” (Acts 9:16; cf. Matt. 10:24).¹⁰⁰

How utterly Paul is beyond his opponents is brought out by an advance guard of four en phrases coupled with adverbs.¹⁰¹ Lenski notes that “these four are used to indicate rhetorical completeness and are arranged in an ascending scale: “¹⁰² labours … prisons¹⁰³ … stripes…deaths. The words more abundant and more frequent translate the same adverb, the comparative perissoteros used with a superlative force. Thus it is possible that after I am more the thought of comparison is dropped.¹⁰⁴ But Lenski would make all the adverbs modify I am more, and in this way he maintains the idea of comparison throughout.¹⁰⁵ Paul would then be indicating why he is beyond them, and not detailing the particular items in which he may have surpassed them.

As a minister of Christ the apostle surpasses his opponents altogether because of the excessiveness of his labours, i.e., his numerous and arduous evangelistic campaigns; because of the excessiveness of his imprisonments; in view of his stripes above measure (cf. 6:5); and due to the fact that he had been “often in danger of death” (NASB, 1:9-10; 4:11; I Cor. 15:32). These experiences from Paul’s life as poured out for the gospel were no doubt foreign to the so-called ministry of his opponents. They probably had hardly worked, much less labored. And it is doubtful if they had ever been in prison or beaten or faced death for Christ’s sake. These pretenders to be ministers of Christ are now shown up for what they are. They might have been able to claim equality with Paul in the first three boasts (22) but here it ends: “Paul moves into a different category. Where the ministry is concerned, his is something beyond their horizen.”¹⁰⁶ The expression in deaths oft is enlarged upon in 24-25.

From the hands of the Jews (24) Paul records that five times he received 39 lashes. The Jewish law (Deut. 25:1-3) allowed a maximum of 40 stripes to be administered to a convicted man. So the Jewish practice was to stop at 39 lest a miscount should lead to infringing the law. This scourging could be brutal, and its administration took place in the synagogues. Christ had warned His disciples that they would be scourged by the Jews in their synagogues (Matt. 10:7; Mark 13:9; Luke 12:11). Paul had himself fulfilled this prophecy by his own persecution of the first Christians (Acts 22:20; 26:11). The precise occasions of the five scourgings suffered by Paul cannot be identified, but their mention reflects the persistent and bitter hostility of the Jews toward him.

Three times Paul was beaten with rods (25). One such instance was at the Roman colony of Philippi (Acts 16:22-23). Normally, as a citizen of Rome, Paul was protected from such treatment at the hands of the authorities, but occasionally as in Philippi he may have been beaten before it was discovered who he was. It is possible, too, that local Roman magistrates under pressure from an aroused populace could have disregarded Paul’s privilege as a citizen.¹⁰⁷

The one time that Paul was stoned is recorded for us in Acts 11:19-20, where he was given up for dead at Lystra. Shortly before this he had barely escaped at Iconium (Acts 11:5-6). Stoning was the normal Jewish procedure for carrying out the death penalty. Perhaps the pretext was blasphemy (cf. Acts 6:11; 7:56), for which the Mosaic law prescribed death by stoning (Lev. 24:16).

No mention is made in Acts of the three shipwrecks which the apostle suffered prior to the writing of II Corinthians. His movements by sea, however, gave ample opportunity for such to have happened.¹⁰⁸ As a result of one of these shipwrecks Paul spent a night and a day “adrift in the open sea” (Jerusalem). Verses 24-25 form “a parenthesis of particularity,”¹⁰⁹ for they are both preceded and followed by more general descriptions of the apostle’s hardships.

In journeyings often (26) introduces the dangers which Paul faced in the course of his frequent missionary travels in the Mediterranean world of the first century. These journeys were all the “more hazardous because he was subjected to the hatred of all men, to whatever region of the world he might go for Christ’s sake”¹¹⁰ (cf. Matt. 10:22). Lenski comments that the emphasis is on the fact of Paul’s travels, for journeyings (hodoiporias) depends on I am more (23) and is thus parallel to the en clauses of v. 23.¹¹¹ Every time the apostle went forth in obedience to his apostolic commission, he took his life in his hands.

He faced perils from unbridged rivers which he may have had to ford at floodtimes. Robbers often infested the uninhabited areas which he had to pass through. His life was in danger both from his own countrymen, who hated him for his acceptance of a crucified Messiah, and from the heathen when he was brought before their courts. Nowhere was he free from peril. In the city mobs were incensed against him. In the wilderness there was the savagery of man and beast. On the sea, storms could break the calm and wreck the small vessels of that day. But worst of all, in a class by itself were perils among false brethren (cf. 13). As Plummer comments, “The other dangers threatened life and limb and property, but this one imperilled, and sometimes ruined, his work.”¹¹² Under the mask of brethren these men could insinuate themselves into the Christian community and without warning undermine the ministry of the apostle. The Christian Church has never been free from treachery within. Even Christ had a Judas.

At v. 27 the characterization of the apostle’s ministerial life appears to move to his experiences in a city while founding and establishing a church. The basic description is weariness and painfulness,¹¹³ for the phrase is parallel to in journeyings often (26) and in deaths oft (23). It depends like them on I am more (23) and is qualified by the en phrases in the rest of the verse.

The first phrase, translated as “labor and hardship” (NASB; cf. I Thess. 2:9; II Thess. 3:8), refers to the manual toil by which Paul supported himself during his evangelistic endeavors. Weariness (kopo; cf. 23) is passive, indicating the fatigue resulting from prolonged exertion; while painfulness (mochtho) is active, denoting the actual struggle involved in the exertion. It was not beneath the dignity of the great apostle to work with his hands.

Paul’s labors took place in the midst of watchings often; that is, sleepless nights due most probably to his long hours of activity. He worked in hunger and thirst, due to his inability at times to obtain proper food and drink. Fastings often refers probably not to religious discipline but to going without meals in order not to interrupt his work as a minister of Christ. Like his Master, his meat was to do the will of Him who had sent him (John 4:34). The mainspring of Paul’s life was the conviction that “man shall not live by bread alone” (Matt. 4:4). Finally in the course of his ministry he had to endure cold and nakedness when adequate clothes and shelter were denied to him. One observes with awe the things which the apostle sets forth as the authenticating marks of his ministry. Is not the conclusion inescapable in our time and culture “that less self-concern and less love of present security would mean greater apostolicity?”¹¹⁴

But these were not all of the burdens Paul bore. Besides those things that are without (28) may refer to “these external things” (NEB) just enumerated,¹¹⁵ or more probably to a list of things that he has not even mentioned.¹¹⁶ The RSV translates: “Apart from other things.” The chief burden which Paul had to bear was “the daily pressure” (NASB) of his care of all the churches. The translation that which cometh upon me is based on the inferior reading (he episustasis mou) rather than the better attested (he epistasis moi), which the NEB renders “the responsibility that weighs on me.” The “responsibility” is defined by the phrase which follows—Paul’s anxious concern for the churches he has established. All his other sufferings were incidental to the weight of this concern. This his opponents could not share; in fact they contributed to its occasion (cf. Matt. 18:7; Luke 17:1; Acts 20:29-30).

According to the most frequent interpretation v. 29 presents the cause of the apostle’s intense concern. It is his identifying pastoral love for his converts (cf. 2). This compassion which Paul feels for his spiritual children has two complementary aspects.¹¹⁷ First is sympathy with the weak: Who is weak, and I am not weak? (Cf. I Cor. 9:22.) By weak, Paul may have in mind the overscrupulous (Rom. 14:1) or those oversensitive to others. But most probably he means those who are weak in relation to their spiritual responsibilities. He not only feels their weakness as his weakness, but he actually considers himself weak with them in contrast to his opponents who boast of their great strength.

Second is indignation at those who would seduce any of his converts into sin: Who is offended, and I burn not? The sense is made clear by the NEB: “If anyone is made to stumble, does my heart not blaze with indignation?” The figure is that of being caught in a trap (skandalizetai). Tasker notes that “while all Christians would agree that sympathy is of the essence of Christian love, it is not so generally recognized that without moral indignation that love is imperfect.”¹¹⁸

But there is a strong possibility that the two rhetorical questions in 29 are more synonymous than complementary.¹¹⁹ Lenski would take them both quite literally with the second forming a climax to the first. The sense of the second would then be: “Is anyone getting himself into a fatal trap, and I on my part am not doing even far worse, getting myself into the fire?”¹²⁰ The context of Paul’s two affirmations about himself would then be the work and burden of his ministry. The fire would be the fire of the suffering thus involved. Origen preserves a saying of Jesus which reads: “He that is near me is near the fire.”¹²¹

In view of the context this interpretation perhaps has the most to commend it, for it contributes to the particular presentation of his ministry to the Corinthians that Paul is making in the entire passage (11:21b—12:10). The import of the verse, then, is not the description of the identifying sympathy which gave rise to the apostle’s anxiety. The verse rather lays emphasis on the weaknesses that he has been delineating as the credentials of a true apostle.

So with the next verse the thought comes clear: If I must needs glory, I will glory of the things which concern mine infirmities (30). Paul had entered the realm of his opponents in order to counter their claims. But his boast is in that which they despise—his “weakness” (RSV). This boast they cannot and will not match. Paul’s “principle of boasting” is paradoxical. His pride is in the utter weakness of the human instrument. In his humiliations and sufferings he can indeed boast, for they become the occasion of the display of the grace and power of the God of the resurrection (cf. 1:8-10; 4:7-12; 13:4). The letter now begins to move rapidly to its climax, which comes with 12:9-10. The theme of divine power through human weakness threads itself through the entire Epistle.

All that he has said and is going to say in relation to his boast in weakness Paul solemnly affirms to be the truth: God…knoweth that I lie not (31; cf. 11 and 1:13). As always when faced with those who might doubt his veracity, Paul appeals to God, before whom he lives an utterly open life (cf. 1:23; Rom. 9:1; Gal. 1:20; I Tim. 2:7). The God to whom he appeals is the God and Father of our Lord Jesus.¹²² He is a God whom Paul knows intimately through that Man who is also the Son of God, Jesus.¹²³ Because God has “in Christ” made his way into Paul’s life, He is blessed for evermore. (cf. Mark 14:61; Rom. 1:25; 9:5).

In what seems at first a strange manner, Paul drops in at vv. 32-33 an account of his escape from Damascus. At the instigation of the Jews (Acts 9:23) the governor (ethnarch) under Aretas IV, king of the Nabataeans, A.D. 9-40,¹²⁴ “was guarding the city of the Damascenes in order to seize” (NASB)¹²⁵ the fledgling apostle. Hughes suggests, “It is not unlikely that the ethnarch was himself a Jew and that the guard appointed by him was composed entirely of men of the Jewish race.”¹²⁶ In order to get away with his life, Paul was let down by the wall. His friends lowered him through (dm) an opening in the wall and he escaped the hands of the ethnarch.

There is no doubt that this experience held a particular significance for the apostle. Its place after both the list of his sufferings in the service of Christ and the statement of principle which led to their listing appears to have been deliberate. Hughes outlines three reasons:¹²⁷ First “this persecution was,” in Calvin’s words, “Paul’s first apprenticeship,”¹²⁸ his initiation as a raw recruit into the front line of gospel warfare. Second, it emphasized for him the frailty and the humiliation that were to characterize his total apostolic ministry. The contrast between the mighty Saul of Tarsus who arrogantly approached Damascus, but who entered it weak, stricken, and blind, and the apostle who fled for his life under cover of night from that same city was never forgotten by him. Third, Paul may be presenting it “as an effective and contrasting prelude to the experience which he is now about to describe”¹²⁹ (12:2-4). The rapturous ascent into the third heaven was experienced by the same man who suffered the ignominious descent through the Damascus wall. The reference to his high spiritual experience is kept between the narration of an unpretentious escape and the mention of his humiliating “thorn in the flesh” (12:7-10). Paul intends to keep himself and his ministry in true perspective—a weak instrument utterly dependent on the transcendent power of God.

Out of necessity Paul was forced to present his credentials as an apostle of Christ, 21b-33. They can be viewed as “The Credentials of a Christian Ministry.” They consist of, (1) not primarily a privileged heritage, 22; but rather (2) in part those indignities and hardships most contrary to human exaltation, comfort, and ease, 23-27; and (3) most centrally, a burdened concern for those for whom he is responsible before God, 28. These all flow from the principle that (4) the human foundation of a true ministry of Christ is the recognition and acceptance of weakness, 29-33.

b. Paul’s revelations from the Lord (12:1-10). The second phase of Paul’s “foolishness of boasting” begins as he moves from the description of his sufferings for Christ’s sake to the mention of the heavenly experience given to him. But, as his thorn in the flesh reminds him, his boast must continue to be only in his weakness, so that his confidence may be only in the power of Christ.

The apostle continues: “I am obliged¹³⁰ to boast. It does no good;¹³¹ but I shall go on to tell of visions and revelations granted by the Lord” (NEB). Once again he calls attention to the fact that he is forced to boast (cf. 11) both by his opponents and by the church that has listened to them. Hesitatingly he speaks of his ecstatic experiences to a Greek congregation that was tempted to overplay the significance of such manifestations (cf. I Cor. 14: 1-5).¹³² The genitive of the Lord (1) is subjective, indicating that Paul’s visions and revelations originated from a divine source. They are not of the same level as his encounter with the risen Christ on the road to Damascus, but are perhaps more in continuity with his experiences recorded in I Cor. 14:18-19.

The reticence with which Paul speaks of his extraordinary religious experiences is instructive. He deliberately discounts them as an argument and describes such use of them as boasting. It is not that Paul belittles religious experience but that he attempts always to keep it in proper perspective and balance as “a sign, a consequence and, within clearly understood limits, a guarantee of what has happened to those who have been brought into redeemed relation with God.”¹³³ The yardstick of all ecstatic experiences and emotional demonstrations is, as Schweizer puts it, “whether they proclaim Jesus as Lord, or in other words, whether they build up the church.”¹³⁴

Egocentric language is carefully avoided as Paul writes, I knew (rather, “I know,” oida) a man in Christ¹³⁵ … caught up to the third heaven (2). He speaks of himself simply as a Christian, a man overwhelmed in a gracious moment by the power of Christ (cf. 10:17). By the phrase in Christ the apostle is disclaiming all credit for what happened to him. Calvin refers it to the disposition which intimates “that Paul has not here an eye for himself, but looks to Christ exclusively.”¹³⁶ There is a sense, we could perhaps call it existential, in which Paul here distinguishes two men in himself—the man in Christ and the natural, earthly man of flesh (cf. 5).¹³⁷ Only when he views himself from the standpoint of the latter will he boast; when he speaks of himself as the former, the “I” has been eclipsed by Christ. Could we not have here a pattern for personal witness?

So far from taking to himself that which God has given him, the apostle openly admits that he did not really know precisely what had happened to him: Whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell (oida): God knoweth (oiden). Further, so little did he intend to exploit it that for fourteen years he had kept it a secret, until it was forced from him. Here is “the rarest of all examples: a boastless boast.”¹³⁸ Fourteen years previous would be approximately A.D. 44, probably the year that Paul spent in Antioch (Acts 11:26). To connect this experience to his commissioning at Antioch as apostle to the Gentiles is only conjecture.¹³⁹

The nearest description that Paul gives is caught up to the hird heaven. The same verb is used of Philip in Acts 8:39 and of the Parousia in I Thess. 4:17. Although Jewish literature speaks of seven heavens,¹⁴⁰ the NT does not; so the third of seven heavens is hardly in view. Bengel suggests that Paul thinks of three heavens: one of the earth’s atmosphere, a second of outer space, and the third of the spiritual realm where God dwells.¹⁴¹ But more likely is the suggestion of Calvin that “the number three is made use of … by way of eminence, to denote what is highest and most complete.”¹⁴² Indicated would be the most sublime condition conceivable, the heavenly presence of Jesus. It would have been an experience comparable to that of Peter, James, and John on the Mount of Transfiguration. Paul, like them, would be getting a glimpse of the glory that is yet ahead at the Parousia (cf. 4:14”5:10) and by it be strengthened for the sufferings which awaited him in the course of the mission to the Gentiles: “I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us” (Rom. 8:18, RSV; cf. II Tim. 4:8). It is only the man in Christ who has this anticipation.

In a manner similar to the ancient prophets the apostle describes again in 3-4 the same revelation:¹⁴³ And I knew (lit., know) such a man, (whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell [oida]: God knoweth [oiden]. The verb is the same but now “the third heaven” is identified as paradise. In the only other NT occurrences of this word Jesus says to the thief on the Cross, “To day shalt thou be with me in paradise” (Luke 23:43), and the church of Ephesus is promised: “To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God” (Rev. 2:7). The word is used in the Septuagint of the Garden of Eden (Gen. 2:8; 13:10; Isa. 51:3) and of the abode of God (Ezek. 28:13; 31:8). Barclay illuminatingly writes of this word: “Paradise comes from a Persian word which means a walled-garden. When a Persian king wished to confer a very special honour on someone who was specially dear to him he made him a companion of the garden, and gave him the right to walk in the royal gardens with him in close and intimate companionship.”¹⁴⁴

Paul was granted for an indescribable moment intimate companionship with the Lord within the courts of heaven itself. For an instant he was “at home with the Lord” (5:8, RSV). But he did not know if he was in or out of the body, so rapturous was the event that briefly parted the mists of earthly existence and transported him into the ultimate heavenly glory of the presence of the Son of God. There is no adequate reason to distinguish between the meanings of the three NT occurrences of paradise.

The influence of this and other like experiences upon Paul’s ministry must have been incalculable, as the words which he heard were unspeakable. Could not the secret of his power he somewhat in his reticence to speak of such personal revelations?

What Paul heard in paradise was both unspeakable and not lawful for a man to utter. It was to be kept sacred between him and God. It was meant for his sake alone; “for one who had such arduous difficulties awaiting him, enough to break a thousand hearts, required to be strengthened by special means, that he might not give way, but might persevere undaunted.”¹⁴⁵ Paul communicated all that had been delivered to him to communicate. While heaven is not fully described for us, it is enough to know that we shall share the glory of Christ’s exalted presence, and that we are to be like Him now (3:18). We are “not to seek to know anything, but what the Lord has seen it good to reveal to his Church.”¹⁴⁶

In order to introduce what he has to say in v. 6, Paul again (cf. 11:30) declares that he will boast only in his weakness (5). He will not boast in the fact that he has been to paradise. Of such an one, or “on behalf of such a one” (ASV), will I glory: yet of myself I will not glory. This indicates again the distinction that Paul makes between two aspects of his existence.¹⁴⁷ Of his experience “in Christ,” an undeserved act of grace, he will boast, for the credit goes only to the Lord. Moffatt translates it: “Of an experience like that I am prepared to boast, but not of myself personally.” When his boast turns away from Christ to himself, Paul can boast only of his infirmities.¹⁴⁸ His real boast is only of “a man in Christ,” not of himself as a Christian, but of himself as a Christian.

Lest the Corinthians should wonder why the apostle seems to undervalue so legitimate a subject for boasting, he furnishes them with the motive for his discretion in regard to his revelations. If he would desire to glory (6), he would not be a fool; such boasting would be in accord with the truth. Only a fool boasts beyond the truth. But the real reason that he refrains from boasting about his. elevation to paradise is that he does not want anyone to form an estimate of him which goes beyond what he sees in Paul or hears from (ex) him. He does not want to be judged “by his report of his own spiritual experiences, but by his laborious and painful life in the service of the Gospel.”¹⁴⁹ The apostle has discovered that, no matter how highly the Lord favors and blesses him, it is the Lord’s will that he remain utterly humble; also that no man think more of him than can be gained from normal personal contact. As the Lord was lowly in His ministry among men, so the vessels dare be earthen only, if they are to transmit the gospel (4:7).¹⁵⁰ This must be the attitude of all who would seek to minister to others in Christ’s name.

Paul now mentions his thorn in the flesh (7) to enforce the point just made. The Lord wants His vessels kept earthen, “to make it clear that such an overwhelming power comes from God and not from us” (4:7, Jerusalem). We see now that the reason behind the apostle’s disclosure of his rapturous experience was that he might expose and explain his greatest disability.¹⁵¹ Hughes writes: “It is most remarkable how, by a kind of condign paradox, the explaining of his deepest humiliation requires the revealing of his highest exaltation, so that the very point where his adversaries hold him to be most contemptible is linked with an ineffable experience far outshining the tawdry tinsel of their vaunting.”¹⁵² Thus the hypocrisy of the position of Paul’s opponents is revealed to the gaze of all.

The purpose of the thorn is doubly indicated by the repetition of lest I should be exalted above measure. It was given to him as the messenger of Satan to buffet him, in order that his ministry might be exercised in deepest humility. The higher his privileges of grace and apostleship, the more necessary was his realization of utter dependence on the Lord. God would need only to withdraw His hand and Paul would be completely in Satan’s power. Paul expresses himself somewhat paradoxically: that which Satan used as a torture-instrument against him in the providence of God could serve the divine purpose in his life.¹⁵³

Although the primary and classical meaning of skolops (thorn) is “stake,” a sharpened wooden shaft, it is used mostly in the Septuagint (Num. 33:35; Ezek. 28:24; Hos. 2:6) and the papyri for thorn, splinter, or sliver.¹⁵⁴ Pillai suggests that the picture is that of a barefoot plowman who gets a thorn in his foot. Due to the lack of modern methods of sterilization, he finds it safer to leave it in than to pull it out. So he limps along for a couple of weeks until a thick layer of skin has formed around it; then he will cut it out safely with a knife.¹⁵⁵ The picture then that Paul draws is that of something sharp stuck painfully deep in the flesh which cannot be pulled out but continues to cause aggravating difficulty. The verb buffet in the present subjunctive presents the idea of the continual repetition of blows struck with a closed fist (Matt. 26:67; cf. I Cor. 4:11).

But can we specifically identify that to which Paul is referring? He calls it a thorn in the flesh. (skolops te sarki). The in is not literally expressed by an en but stems from a locative interpretation of the dative te sarki. Such a construction would denote most naturally something embedded in the flesh, a physical malady. However, if the apostle had meant this, it would seem more natural for him to have said en te sarki, as in Gal. 4:14. Therefore the expression is better interpreted as a dative of disadvantage, “for the flesh,” i.e., for its inconvenience. This neither limits it to nor excludes a physical affliction.

Many of the medieval commentators, encouraged by the rendering of the Latin Vulgate, stimulus carnis, assumed that Paul was speaking of fleshly temptations to impurity. The Reformers broadened this to spiritual temptations of all kinds designed to prick the bubble of any arrogance that may have survived in the life of the converted Pharisee.¹⁵⁶ Calvin locates the sphere of such temptations in the fleshly nature which remains active in the regenerate;¹⁵⁷ but even modern Calvinistic commentators, while they mention the possibility, do not contend for this as the meaning here.¹⁵⁸

Some present-day interpreters follow the general trend of the exegesis of the Chrysostom, supported by the Greek fathers generally and by Augustine. These interpreters felt that the reference was to “Alexander the coppersmith” (II Tim. 4:14), the party of Hymenaeus and Philetus (II Tim. 2:17), and all the adversaries of the Word who were doing Satan’s business.¹⁵⁹ Munck, for example, accepts the judgment of the Danish commentator, Koch, to the effect that “the ‘messenger of Satan’ refers to acts of violence, annoyances, and popular tumults … the apostle’s incessant persecutions, the ‘sufferings of Christ.’“¹⁶⁰ R. A. Knox renders skolops te sarki as “a sting to distress by outward nature” in line with his judgment, expressed in a footnote, that it is Paul’s persecution by the Jews which permanently irritates him by humiliating him before the Gentile world.

“When used as a figure of speech,” comments Pillai, “a thorn in the flesh always refers to irritating or bothersome people.”¹⁶¹ This is seen in Num. 33:55, where Moses warns the Israelites as they are about to enter Canaan: “But if you do not drive out the inhabitants of the land from before you, then those of them whom you let remain shall be as pricks in your eyes and thorns in your sides, and they shall trouble you in the land where you dwell (RSV; cf. Josh. 23:13; Judg. 2:3).

This interpretation would fit well with Paul’s designation of a messenger of Satan. Paul pictures Satan in other places as the adversary who interferes with the spread of the gospel. In Acts 13:10, “Elymas the sorcerer” is called “thou son of the devil” when he attempts “to turn away the deputy from the faith.” In I Thess. 2:18, Paul wrote that Satan had hindered him from coming as often as he had wanted to Thessalonica.¹⁶² And this opposition came most often from his “kinsmen according to the flesh” (Rom. 9:3). Tasker writes, when coming down on the side of Chrysostom’s interpretation, “As there is nothing which tends to elate a Christian evangelist so much as the enjoyment of spiritual experiences,” so “there is nothing so calculated to deflate the spiritual pride which may follow them as the opposition he encounters while preaching the Word.”¹⁶³

The most common conjecture as to the nature of Paul’s thorn in the flesh, however, remains that of a bodily infirmity. There are indications in his letters that his physical condition gave him difficulty at times. To the Galatians he wrote: “You know that it was because of a bodily illness [asthenia tes sarkos] that I preached the gospel to you the first time; and that which was a trial to you in my bodily condition [en te sarki mou] you did not despise or loathe, but you received me as an angel of God, as Christ Jesus Himself” (4:13-14, NASB; cf. 1:8; I Cor. 2:3). Of Paul’s attitude toward his ministry he has already written in this letter: “No wonder we do not lose heart! Though our outward humanity is in decay, yet day by day we are inwardly renewed” (4:16, NEB). The precise identification of such a physical infirmity has ranged from an earache or headache¹⁶⁴ to epilepsy¹⁶⁵ (Gal. 4:14), eye trouble (Gal. 4:15; 5:11), and a recurrent malarial fever. The last perhaps is the most plausible, for it is accompanied by a peculiar headache which has been described as “a red-hot bar thrust through the forehead,” a description similar to Paul’s thorn in the flesh.¹⁶⁶ Ramsay writes that malarial fever in some constitutions recurs “in very distressing and prostrating paroxysms, whenever one’s energies are taxed for a great effort. Such an attack is for the time absolutely incapacitating: the sufferer can only lie and feel himself a shaking and helpless weakling, when he ought to be at work. He feels a contempt and loathing for self, and believes that others feel equal contempt and loathing.”¹⁶⁷

Such is the range of the best guesses. We do not and cannot know precisely to what the apostle was referring by his thorn in the flesh. It is no doubt best that he did not speak plainly enough for us to know. As it is, all of us possess inspired guidance for our particular “thorn for the flesh.” We have a perspective from which to handle that which plagues our outward nature, whether it is a physical affliction, the actions of other people, or specific circumstances that humiliate us. Lenski insists that not only is it not known to us, but that even the Corinthians could not understand Paul’s figurative language: “Paul tells about this thorn for the flesh just as he tells about his raptus into Paradise for the first time. In both he bares intimate secrets of his personal life which were never bared to the Corinthians before and are now bared only under compulsion.”¹⁶⁸

Whatever the identity of the humbling thorn, the apostle prayed earnestly that it might depart from him (8). The Lord to whom Paul directed his prayer is Christ (9), indicating that Paul equated Christ with God as the Recipient of prayer. Like his Lord in the Garden of Gethsemane (Matt. 26:44), Paul brought his petition for release three times. Even the result is similar: “Not as I will, but as thou wilt” (Matt. 26:39). Paul knew the experience of not having his prayers answered according to his human desires.

The response is definitive. He said (eireken) is the perfect tense, indicating that the decision continues to stand: My grace is sufficient for thee: for my¹⁶⁹ strength is made perfect in weakness (9). Paul’s suffering is revealed as necessary because the divine power belongs with human weakness; it is finished (teleitai) or fulfills its purpose (telos) when man has reached the point of utter weakness. Only then is he a fit instrument for the Lord’s hands: “Power comes to its full strength in weakness” (NEB).

The grace (8-9) that is sufficient (cf. 3:5) for the apostle is not only the favor of God manifested in the life, death, and resurrection of Christ, but also the power of Christ (cf. I Cor. 15:10). Thus Paul is not merely resigned to his infirmities; he accepts God’s will as his own. He joyfully boasts in his weaknesses in order that the power of Christ may rest upon me (i.e., spread its tent, episkenose; cf. Luke 9:34). The verb may contain an allusion to the Shekinah of divine glory which rested on the ancient Tabernacle in the wilderness (cf. John 1:14).¹⁷⁰°

We are confronted now with a quite different revelation than in 12:1-4, where it was a matter of a vision of paradise and inexpressible words. Here it is the word of grace in personal encounter that gives in one word the meaning of suffering and aid for the sufferer. As the life of the apostle was bound up with the heavenly world in a special way, so was he involved in a special way with the Satanic power at work in his sufferings. This is the paradox of his existence. His ministry as a true servant of Christ necessarily partakes of that of his Lord.¹⁷¹

The pinnacle of the letter has now been reached. Paul has related the account of his thorn in the flesh in order that the basic principle of his ministry might be clearly revealed. From the perspective of the Lord’s word, “My strength finds its full scope in thy weakness” (Knox), the apostle looks out on his life and brings it all into focus—human inadequacy makes way for the adequacy of the grace and power of God in Christ. Therefore he can take pleasure in (is “well content with,” NASB) his state of weakness for Christ’s sake: for, as he says, when I am weak,then am I strong (10). His ministry is secure in the strength of Another. This is his relaxed assurance.

His infirmities, rather than hindering, actually make room for the strength of the risen Christ to be revealed in his ministry (4:7-10; 6:4-10). He describes his infirmities by the four in phrases which follow their mention: Paul has had to endure reproaches and mistreatments from his enemies; he has not been able to rise above necessities and hardships; he has had to flee from persecutions; and suffered in the distresses (tight places from which he could not escape). All of this he bears gladly for Christ’s sake! The direct opposite of the power of the world is the power of the Kingdom.

As the apostle concludes the boast that he has been forced to make, he reveals two essential principles which apply to Christian testimony, 12:1-10. The first is that we must be extremely modest when we speak of our extraordinary spiritual experiences: (1) lest we attract more attention to ourselves than to Christ, 1-5; and (2) lest we speak beyond that which can be clearly corroborated in our conduct, 6. The second is that, when we must call attention to ourselves in the course of our witness, (1) it should relate to our condition of weakness in the world, 5, 7; in order that (2) it might be clearly evident that our weakness is really our strength “in Christ,” 8-10.

As an apostle, 11:21b—12:10, (1) Paul’s credentials consist in his often humiliating sufferings endured for others in the cause of Christ, ll:21b-33; and (2) any boast he has focuses in his weaknesses, that his adequacy as a minister of the gospel might reside in the power of Christ alone, 12:1-10.

5. Paul’s Behavior in Corinth (12:11-13)

With these verses Paul’s boasting has come to an end. He wraps it up with a reiteration of its foolishness and a reemphasis on the authenticity of his ministry among the Corinthians.

In a moment of reflection, looking back over all that he has said, the apostle declares that he has been and is a fool (11; cf.11:1,16). The perfect (gegona) indicates a completed state. The phrase in glorying is omitted by the oldest MSS, but I am become a fool communicates even more forcefully without it.

While Paul does not excuse himself, he makes it plain that the Corinthians compelled him to indulge in self-vindication. For he ought to have been commended by them. After all, it was they who constituted his apostolic credentials. They were his letter of commendation (3:2; I Cor. 9:1). In contradiction to the inward witness of their transformed lives they had tragically failed their natural obligation to the apostle. He had been hurt deeply by their ungratefulness and disloyalty. In fact their commendation had gone rather to his opponents, those “super-apostles,”¹⁷² to whom in nothing was Paul inferior, even though, as he said, I am nothing. That which his opponents tried to make him out to be, nothing, he takes as his only boast (11:30; 12:9-10). It is this totally repentant appraisal of himself that is the secret of the evident manifestation of the power of the Resurrection in his ministry (cf. 4:10-12; I Cor. 2:2-5).

The fact that the signs of an apostle (12) were accomplished among the Corinthians through Paul’s ministry spells out why he was “not at all inferior to these superlative apostles” (RSV). The passive were wrought (kateirgasthe) indicates that the apostle regarded himself only as the instrument of the power of God. The signs (insignia of apostleship) refer first to all manifestations of the power of Christ through Paul’s labors, not least that of changed lives (3:2; I Cor. 9:1), including his own (1:22). Even the all patience (“constant fortitude,” NEB; 11:23—12:10) with which he conducted his ministry in the face of opposition and hardship is just as much an indication of his genuineness as the more unusual mighty deeds.

Signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds do not refer to three kinds of miracles, but to a different aspect of all miracles. First, writes Calvin, “he calls them signs, because they are hot empty shows, but are appointed for the instruction of mankind—wonders, because they ought by their novelty, to arouse men, and strike them with astonishment—and powers or mighty deeds, because they are more signal tokens of Divine power, than what we behold in the ordinary course of nature.”¹⁷³

The ability to perform such acts characterized the ministry of Jesus (Acts 2:22), and was granted by Him to His disciples (Matt. 10:1; Mark 3:15; Luke 9:1; 10:17). It was continued in the ministry of men of the Early Church (Acts 3:1-9; 5:15-16; 8:13; 9:32-34). From this list Paul was not excluded (Acts 19: 11-12), but as he wrote later to the Romans: “I will not presume to speak of anything except what Christ has accomplished through me resulting in the obedience of the Gentiles by word and deed, in the power of signs and wonders, in the power of the Spirit; so that … I have fully preached the gospel of Christ” (Rom. 15:18-19, NASB; cf. Heb. 2:4).

In the true apostle the divine power of Jesus was at work. Paul saw in these signs the mark of the authenticity of his apostleship. He viewed them, not as the miracles of a man full of supernatural power, but as proof of the power of Christ graciously manifesting itself through his weakness. Suffering and the insignia of an apostle belong together.¹⁷⁴

With a final touch of his irony Paul asks the Corinthians in 13 what more they could have wanted of him. In view of the signs that had attested the apostolicity of his ministry in their midst, in what way had he treated them as inferior to other churches? There was only one possible thing that he could think of—except it be that I myself was not burdensome¹⁷⁵ to you (cf. 11:7-10). The NEB paraphrases it: “except this, that I never sponged on you? How unfair of me!” The false apostles had asked for support, as the emphatic I myself implies. One of the most difficult things for Paul to endure was the way the Corinthians distorted his motives for taking no support from them. All he knows to say is, Forgive me this wrong! The irony is keen, but certainly affectionate, that of “a father cajoling his children into a right frame of mind.”¹⁷⁶

In vv. 11-13 we see a true minister of Christ: (1) His humble yet confident character, 11; (2) His certain yet paradoxical power, 12; and (3) His despairing yet infinite patience, 13.

Before leaving this section perhaps it would be of benefit to gather together the accusations made against Paul by his opponents in Corinth. The main charge was that he had no right to call himself an apostle (12:12; 3:2; cf. 11:5; 12:11). They criticized him from every possible angle to support their slander. Although his letters were admittedly forceful, his personal presence was pitiably weak (10:1, 9-10). He had not the eloquence or other qualities necessary for a missionary (11:5-9; 12:11). His conduct aroused suspicion, for he always had some scheme in mind (1:12-13; 3:12-14; 4:1-6; 5:11). His incessant commendation of himself only indicated his uneasy efforts to stay in the churches’ favor (3:1; 5:12; 12:19). When he refused to accept from the Corinthians the support that he received from other churches, he was revealing his lack of love for the church in Corinth (11:7-12; 12:13). His plans were often carelessly changed without regard for the promises he had made to the church (1:15-18). Some would even have called Paul dishonest in relation to his handling of the collection for Jerusalem. How much of it found its way into Paul’s own pocket to compensate him for his so-called free labor for the churches (7:2; 8:20; 12:16-18)?¹⁷⁷

It was the successful handling of such charges that here allows us to gaze so deeply into the heart of Paul.

C. PAUL PLANS FOR A THIRD VISIT, 12:14—13:10

As Paul approaches the end of this letter to the Corinthians, the apostle prepares the way for his third visit: “I am ready to come to you” (12:14). To this end he expresses the nature of his future conduct in line with the basic principles of his ministry among them (12:14-18). But he is apprehensive as to the moral and spiritual condition in which he will find them (12:19-21). They may be certain that he will be as firm in his discipline as their situation demands (13:1-10).

1. Paul’s Proposed Behavior in Corinth (12:14-18)

The question of money must have been a touchy one (as always!) in Paul’s relation to the church at Corinth. It played a significant role in cc. 11—12 and now he returns to it. Paul insists that he will not change his method of operation at this point.

This last phase of the apostle’s defense of his ministry is concerned with his approaching third visit (14). The first visit was at the time he first brought to them the gospel (Acts 18:1-18). The second was the painful visit (2:1) which followed the writing of I Corinthians.¹⁷⁸ As always, when he is with them he will not be burdensome.¹⁷⁹ Even though Paul had been misunderstood at this point before (11:7-12), his principles stand firm. The reasons are two. First, his demand of them is far greater than money: I seek not yours, but you. He continually (zeto) asks of them the best they have to give—themselves, that he might present them to Christ as “a chaste virgin” (11:2), an acceptable offering of his ministry to God (cf. Rom. 12:1; 15:16). Second, it is the normal duty of parents to provide for their children, and not children for the parents. The apostle makes use of this analogy only as an illustration of why he does not take advantage of his right as a minister in the gospel (I Cor. 9:6-12b, 14). He does not mean by this that grown children have no obligation toward their elderly parents when they are in need (cf. Mark 7:10-13).

For the Corinthians the apostle is willing to go beyond (de) mere obligation: I will very gladly spend and be spent for you (15; lit., your souls; i.e., your spiritual welfare). The I (ego) is emphatic. His time, money, and strength are freely theirs, even at the possible impoverishment of his own health and years. In keeping with the analogy of Paul’s imagery in Phil. 2:17 (“I am being poured out as a drink-offering upon the sacrifice and service of your faith,” NASB), Wendland translates, “I, however, will most willingly offer a sacrifice, indeed I will allow myself to be completely offered up as a sacrifice for you.”¹⁸⁰

The last part of the verse following the earlier MSS should read, “If I love you overmuch, am I to be loved the less?” (NEB)¹⁸¹ As Filson points out, this unhappy question answers the one in 11:11, and indicates how unnatural it would be for the Corinthians to respond with a decreasing love to the apostle’s increasing manifestation; of his affection for them.¹⁸²

The fact that he did not burden them (16), Paul assumes as conceded by them: “Very well, you will say; granted that I did not live at your expense, but that was just my cunning, so that I might trap you all the more craftily” (Bruce). The charge whispered by his opponents was that the apostle’s apparent sacrifice for them was just another trick of his fox-like nature¹⁸³ to deceive them. What he had refused in person he had pocketed through his agents whom he put in charge of the collection for Jerusalem. He had not really been out anything.

But who were the crafty ones (cf. 11:2-4, 13, 15)? As Calvin writes, “It is customary for the wicked impudently to impute to the servants of God, whatever they would themselves do, if they had it in their power.”¹⁸⁴ The self-seeking intruders at Corinth would no doubt have liked nothing better than to get their own hands on the offering. But instead they had been put in an embarrassing light by Paul’s refusal to accept personal support, so they resorted to crafty lies to undermine the confidence of the Corinthians in his apostolic authority.

These suspicions, trumped up against the apostle, he answers with a series of four questions (17-18). The basic issue, bluntly put by the NEB, is, “Who, of the men I have sent to you, was used by me to defraud you?” (17) It is supported by a second, Did Titus defraud you? (18) These first two questions are asked with the negative particle me, which implies “no” as the answer. Gain in both questions, as in 2:11, has the connotation of “take advantage of” (ASV). These questions, writes Plummer, are quite ludicrous.¹⁸⁵ The Corinthians have to admit when pressed that Titus and the brother whom Paul had sent with him had conducted themselves with an unquestionable integrity when they came to initiate the collection.¹⁸⁶

Paul next assumed complete responsibility for the collection and united his integrity with that of his emissaries. As the one sent, so is the one who sent.¹⁸⁷ Have they not acted in the same spirit?¹⁸⁸ Have they not taken the same steps? This final pair of questions use ou, which would indicate that Paul expected a “yes” answer. Both Paul and his messengers were blameless in their motives and actions. The suspicions of the Corinthians are in contradiction to what their own eyes have seen.

The apostle is able to hold to and successfully defend the basic principle of his ministry among them in relation to money because (1) his motive is simply and sincerely the sacrifice of himself for others; and (2) his handling of the delicate matter of the collection is able to pass the test of open inspection.

2. Paul’s Apprehensiveness (12:19-21)

His defense finished, Paul’s real reason for it is here stated. A series of warnings follow which understandably rise out of Paul’s anxiety concerning his coming visit. Will his third visit be as painful as his second (1:23; 2:1)? It is in their hands.

The Corinthians are not the real judges of the foregoing defense. Excuse (19) is better “defend.” Paul’s judgment is not by them, but with them before God in Christ (cf. I Cor. 4:3). In contrast to what they may have been thinking “all this time”¹⁸⁹ he is not defending himself before them out of motives of self-esteem or self-protection.¹⁹⁰ Paul’s stance, comments Hughes, “so far from being self-centered or self-sufficient, is vicariously Christocentric.”¹⁹¹ He speaks only in Christ (2:17; 12:2; cf. 5:17), “a bond that keeps him from pride, parade and crafty guile.”¹⁹² God is his only real Judge (1:18, 23; 4:2; 5:11; 7:12; 11:11, 31), and what he is in Christ is his only motivation (5:14). So the Corinthians, far from being his accusing judges, are his dearly beloved, an expression which he employs for them in the letter only here and in 7:1. All things that he speaks, “we speak in Christ… for your edifying” (ASV). It is his loving concern for their spiritual welfare (11:2) that has driven him to a procedure which they may misunderstand.

For (gar) introduces one long sentence (20-21) that explains Paul’s concern. Upbuilding is a mild way of expressing their need! But what he has to say is spoken with the affectionate restraint of a father: I fear, lest … lest … lest.¹⁹³ He does not denounce but voices his apprehension. His fear of encountering ethically deficient behavior is put two ways. First that he might find them not as he wishes. Second that he will be found by them not as they wish;¹⁹⁴ that is, as one who will have to exercise stern discipline. The reference is no doubt to only a minority in the church (2:5-6).

What Paul fears that he may find in Corinth he lists in four pairs. Lenski suggests that “four is used to designate ordinary rhetorical completeness, and the doubling of each of the four intensifies the completeness.”¹⁹⁵ Each member of a pair would then shed light on the other. Following the rendering of the NASB the pairs would be (1) “strife, jealousy,” (2) “angry tempers, disputes,” (3) “slanders, gossip,” and (4) “arrogance, disturbances.”

As the apostle continues to express his misgivings about his coming visit, he puts it in an unusual way, that my God will humble me among you (21). The opposite would be expected, that the Corinthians should suffer humiliation and disgrace. However, Paul fears he will discover that there has not been a repentance for past sins. He would then be made to mourn in sorrow over them. He will have failed to bring about their repentance, which will be for him a defeat. If so, he will accept his humiliation as from God. This mourning over their ruin is indicative of his apostolic heart. The only remedy for such unrepentance will no doubt be exclusion from the church (13:2; cf. I Cor. 5:1-5). Their immoral conduct cannot forever be tolerated.

The blatant immorality of some members in the Corinthian church is described by Paul in three overlapping words. Uncleanness (akatharsia) is a general term for impurity and intemperance of life; fornication (porneia) refers to promiscuous sexual intercourse; and lasciviousness (aselgia) indicates the willful defiance of public decency. These sins are the very ones which gave occasion to the writing of I Corinthians.¹⁹⁶ The basic moral problem in the church at Corinth may not have been solved at the time Paul was writing. Nevertheless, the attitude of the majority was such that, if the minority did not repent and turn from their brazen behavior, the apostle could deal with them sternly without precipitating another “painful visit” (2:2).

Opened to us afresh in these verses is the heartbeat of an authentically Christian ministry. From (1) the divine perspective it is (a) open to God’s judgment and (b) controlled by a transforming relationship to Christ, 19ab. From (2) the human perspective it consists of (a) a consuming concern for others (b) exercised so affectionately that humiliation and heartbreak may be its reward, 19c-21.

3. Paul’s Determination to Be Firm (13:1-10)

The apostle now gives his final warning to the Corinthians that when he comes the third time he will be as severe in his discipline as their moral and spiritual condition warrants. If that is what they want, they will have the proof that Christ is speaking in him! But he hopes that they will so correct their situation before he comes that he will not be required to employ his authority with such sternness.

With the emphasis of repetition (12:14, 20-21) Paul mentions again that he is coming to Corinth for the third time (1). Further, he is coming to execute justice in their midst. The charges will be examined and judged according to the Mosaic principle laid down in Deut. 19:15, namely, “At the mouth of two witnesses or three shall every word be established” (ASV). This procedure was approved by Christ for handling cases of discipline and disputes in the Church (cf. John 8:17; I Tim. 5:19; Heb. 10:28; I John 5:8).¹⁹⁷ The Christian Church carried on the OT principle that a man could not be condemned by the testimony of only one witness. Two at least and preferably three were necessary. Paul was going to abide by this principle, but he was going to make use of it.

The warning that the apostle had given them on his second visit is now repeated (2). The words I write make this verse as it stands in KJV difficult. A better translation would be: “I have previously said when present the second time, and though now absent I say in advance to those who have sinned in the past and to all the rest as well, that if I come again, I will not spare anyone” (NASB).¹⁹⁸ The mention again of those who have sinned (cf. 12:21) and the fact of their tolerance by the church remind us how difficult it was for Gentile Christians to break with the sexual laxity characteristic of their environment (cf. I Cor. 5:1-2; 6:12-20; I Thess. 4:3-7). The Christian standard of sexual purity came not from the Greeks, but from the OT and the Jews. Paul warns such people and all the rest of them that when he comes he will not spare those who refuse to repent (cf. 10; 10:6). He will excommunicate them from the fellowship of the church if his hand is forced.

With a final reference to the interchange of weakness and strength in the apostle of Christ,¹⁹⁹ Paul gives the reason why he will not be lenient when he comes (3). He is now ready to give his opponents and all who have listened to them the proof of Christ’s speaking in him. Possibly in view of their richness of spiritual gifts (I Corinthians 12 and 14) they have refused to perceive the power of Christ in Paul’s presence with them (cf. 10:10). So now they are going to get the decisive sign that they want, though not in the way they want. Stern discipline will be a sure sign that through Paul’s ministry Christ is not weak toward them, but rather is mighty in them (cf. Rom. 15:18). As Denney says, “In challenging Paul to come and exert his authority … in presuming on what they called his weakness, they were really challenging Christ.”²⁰⁰

What the apostle is really getting at is that the pattern of his ministry is simply that of his Lord: For though (kai gar) Christ was crucified through weakness, yet (alla) he liveth by the power of God (4). Out of (ex) His condition of incarnate weakness Christ suffered “the death of the cross” (Phil. 2:8), the ultimate of humiliation and weakness. Yet … by (ek, out of) the power of God He now lives “by the resurrection from the dead” (Rom. 1:4). In Jesus’ ministry on behalf of fallen men the extremity of His weakness became the point at which God by the resurrection of Jesus most convincingly revealed His power to lift men out of their sins (cf. Acts 2:22-36; Rom. 4:25; 5:10; I Cor. 15:16-17). Denney beautifully leads us to the point that Paul is after: “The cross does not exhaust Christ’s relation to sin; He passed from the cross to the throne, and when He comes again it is as Judge.”²⁰¹ So “when Christ comes again, He will not spare. The two things go together in Him: the infinite patience of the cross, the inexorable righteousness of the throne.”²⁰²

The same is true of Christ’s ministers: For we also (kai gar) are weak in him, but (alla)²⁰³ we shall live with him by the power of God toward you. Since the resurrection life of Christ is at work in the ministry of Paul (4:10-14), he will be able to come to them with the authority of the living Christ. Because of the full-orbed nature of this power he will not and cannot spare the unrepentant sinner. The power of God in the gospel of Christ (Rom. 1:16) cuts both ways, “to the one an aroma from death to death, to the other an aroma from life to life” (2:16, NASB). Of this power Paul, as an apostle of Christ, is an instrument. And toward the Corinthians it will be made manifest. Power, not weakness, will mark his impending visit.

Wendland observes that these verses (3-4) precisely define the foundation of all that Paul has said about his weakness and suffering.²⁰⁴ His power residing in his weakness is in the likeness of his crucified and resurrected Lord. Therefore his weakness can be his boast; therefore also Christ acts through His apostle and the life of Christ flows out from him. The “another gospel” (11:4) of his opponents is characterized by the fact that it does not include this paradox, this oppositeness of Cross and Resurrection, of suffering and the power of God, which are yet one. For that reason his opponents do not comprehend the weakness of Paul; they are fools if they suppose that they have disposed of his apostleship with the proof that he is “nothing” (12:11).

The tables are now turned. With the threat of judgment which arises out of the certainty that Christ is acting in him, the apostle exhorts the church members at Corinth to continually examine themselves to see if they are in the faith (5). They are to prove²⁰⁵ themselves. Yourselves and your own selves receive the emphasis by being placed first in the Greek. Paul hopes to get the desired behavior from them by reminding them that they are Christians: “Or do you not fully know your own selves, that Jesus Christ is in you?—unless you, indeed, are disproved!” (Lenski) If they are reprobates, they will not apply the test. Paul’s question probes them, for if they are truly believers they will not resent a real test. The form of the question (ei meti) indicates that Paul believed them sound at heart. The expressions in the faith and Jesus Christ… in you interpret each other: “Faith is the reality of the presence of Christ, it is the life of Christ in those who believe … (cf. Gal. 2:20; Eph. 3:17).”²⁰⁶ The test of the authenticity of their relationship to Christ is the ethical quality of their behavior.

On the same basis that the Corinthians are able to detect the presence of Jesus Christ in themselves, Paul hopes that they will be able to recognize that he and his associates in the ministry are not reprobates (6). I trust is literally “I hope” (elipizo). He hopes that in their own saving relationship to Christ they will find the “proof of Christ speaking” (3) in him that they desired. Perhaps then he will not have to come with severity.

In line with this hope he is praying to God that they will do nothing evil (7). He trusts that they will do the honest (kalon, morally right) thing and not side with the impenitent sinners in Corinth. Such is the motive for his prayer, not merely that he should appear approved. In fact he and his companions would be willing to appear as reprobates if only the Corinthians will do what is right. He is willing to dispense with the opportunity to demonstrate by disciplinary action the “proof” (3) that Christ is speaking in him with God’s power. Paul does not delight in the chastisement of his spiritual children.²⁰⁷

Even the apostle’s right to a clear, personal vindication must give way before the truth (8), i.e., before the progress of the gospel in Corinth. All self-interest is barred (5:14). He wants only the obedience, purity, and unity of the church. To exercise his authority for its own sake would be a prostitution of his apostleship. The proper reception of the gospel is the great aim of his life to which all else surrenders. Thus Paul, in whom is “the truth of Christ” (11:10), is able (dynametha) to do nothing against the truth.

Rather, he explains, he rejoices when he is weak and they are strong (9). He is glad to lose the opportunity for the legitimate use of his power to punish and thus to prove his strength if it can be due to their moral and spiritual strength. Paul’s wish is a prayer.²⁰⁸ This prayer is for their perfection (katartisis), the restoration of all that has been out of order in their lives as members together in the body of Christ. The basic idea in the word is that of being properly equipped and ordered for harmonious and efficient functioning. Delling writes that here katartisis “denotes inner strength, whether of the community in its organic relationship, or of the character of its members, i.e., their maturity as Christians.”²⁰⁹ The concern is similar to that in 7:1. As Wesley comments, it is perfection “in the faith that worketh by love.”²¹⁰ The prayer comprehends (1) the full acceptance of the grace and (2) the effective expression of the ethic of Christian holiness.

The apostle has written this letter to help the Corinthians (10). He concludes with his answer to the charge of being powerful in his letters but weak in his personal presence (10:10), which has been in view since 10:1. He writes as he has when absent so that when present he will not have to act with sharpness. This is not a denial of his authority, but its obedient exercise. The power which the Lord gave him was not for destruction but for edification (10:8; 12:19). His authority is “for upbuilding and not for wrecking” (Lenski). But severe he will be if they have not taken action. How he comes is their decision. He is hopeful.

The authority of the Apostle Paul as a minister of Christ (1) includes the power to discipline in the church when repentance is persistently refused, for (2) it is the power of the life of Christ, but (3) its use is always controlled by the ultimate purposes of the gospel (cf. Matt. 16:19; 18:15-18; John 20:23; Acts 5:1-6; I Cor. 5:5).

In the NT Church there is only one Source of authority, Jesus Christ. He confers His authority by His presence upon His apostles, ministers, teachers, administrators, etc., who exercise their authority in line with their various functions. Such authority is not merely officially delegated, but must authenticate itself in its exercise: “We shall live with Him because of the power of God directed toward you” (4, NASB).

In 12:14—13:10, Paul has confronted us with a ministry that is (1) Consistent in its motivating principles, 12:14-18; (2) Compassionate in its commitment to the welfare of the church, 12: 19-21; and (3) Confirmed in its authority to uphold the integrity of the body of Christ, 13:1-10.

D. PAUL CONCLUDES THE LETTER, 13:11-14

The apostle brings this difficult and costly letter spontaneously and affectionately to its close: “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ … be with you all” (14). Exhortation (11), greetings (12-13), and benediction (14) follow rapidly on one another as if they belonged together.

1. Exhortation and Greeting (13:11-13)

With his words of farewell (11)²¹¹ the apostle joins together the final admonitions which his Corinthian brethren are in need of (12:20). They consist of a rhetorical four in two pairs (cf. 11: 23). These admonitions are all present imperatives, implying continuity of action. But the first two may be either passive or middle voice. We interpret them with Lenski as permissive passives.²¹² Be perfect, then, linking up with Paul’s prayer for their “perfection” (9), would mean, “Let yourselves be steadily perfected”²¹³ in grace and ethic. Be of good comfort (cf. 1:3) probably should be translated in terms of the other meaning of parakaleisthe, “Let yourselves be exhorted.”²¹⁴ The meaning is that of the RSV: “Heed my appeal.” The Corinthians are asked to receive the admonitions that will lead them to the perfecting of their lives together as the body of Christ. Involved is the quality of their relationship to Christ and its increasing expression within the fellowship of the church.

The second pair of imperatives likewise go together. The first, Be of one mind”)keep minding the same things,” Lenski; cf. Rom. 12:16; 15:5; Phil. 2:2; 4:2), has reference to a common commitment to the love and truth of the gospel of Christ. The second, Live in peace, urges them to work out in the fellowship of believers the preceding commitment. The same two exhortations are combined beautifully by Paul when he writes later to the Philippians (2:5), “Have the same thoughts among yourselves as you have in your communion with Christ Jesus.”²¹⁵ If the preceding admonitions are constantly observed, the encouraging promise is that the God of love and peace shall be with you. The phrase the God of love is unique to this verse, but “the God of peace” occurs frequently.²¹⁶ Only by channeling the love and peace of God to others can the Corinthians continue to enjoy the blessing of the presence of the God of love and peace (cf. Acts 5:32). The continuity of the promise with the two preceding imperatives is highly suggestive. Perhaps also it could be said that the second pair of imperatives reveals the how of the first two. The verse could then be analyzed in order as presenting “Life in Christ”: (1) The call; (2) The method; (3) The results.

The brotherly love to which the apostle exhorts them is to be sealed with the holy kiss (12),²¹⁷ This external symbol is not merely a token of affection. It is holy (hagio) because it was exchanged by Christian (hagioi) worshippers as a sign of their brotherhood in Christ. The practice was adopted by the Christian Church from the synagogues, where the sexes were separated in worship. In the Christian services only men would kiss men and women would kiss women, as a security that the kiss would be kept holy. In the light of the significance of this custom in early Christianity and Judaism, the treacherous nature of Judas’ betrayal kiss is clearly evident (Mark 14:45).

All the saints (13), ²¹⁸ that is, all the Christians in Macedonia, from where Paul was writing, sent their greetings to the Corinthians. The Macedonian²¹⁹ Christians, although most of them had never met the Corinthians, belonged together with them to the body of Christ, which is the Church universal. They are united in Christ. The apostle has pointed up the behavior required of the church, not only by direct appeal, but also by mention of a Christian custom, and by a reminder of the Church as a wider fellowship.

2. The Threefold Blessing (13:14)

Finally, what the apostle desired most of all for the Corinthians, the full salvation blessing of God with all its ethical implications, is expressed in his benediction: The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all (14). Amen is added only by the later MSS. Paul’s normal benediction contains only the first phrase (I Cor. 16:24; Gal. 6:18; Phil. 4:23; I Thess. 5:28; II Thess. 3:18; Philem. 25). The inclusion of the other expression in this particular instance was due no doubt to the condition of the Corinthian church.

The three-in-one prayer of the apostle is comprehensively expressed in terms of the experience and faith of the Early Church. This explains the fact that the order—Christ, God, Spirit—is not designedly Trinitarian. The order is that of salvation experience. It is important to note that when Paul wanted to sum up his gospel those words most naturally fell into his mind which, when logically developed, form the basis of the doctrine of the Trinity.²²⁰ The fact that in a single sentence the name of Jesus, a mere 30 years after His death, is brought together with the Holy Spirit and the name of God in a prayer indicates that “the fully developed doctrine of the Trinity has its theological roots in adoration of Jesus Christ.”²²¹ Partly from this short summary Cullmann observes that “early Christian theology is in reality almost exclusively Christology.”²²² The men of the NT were primarily concerned with redemptive history, which for them was a “Christ-process.”

Theologically the three phrases form a parallel and progressing symmetry. The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ in which the love of God is revealed, Paul experienced through “participation²²³ in the Holy Spirit” (RSV, marg.). The first two genitives are subjective and the last objective.²²⁴ The balance of the gift and the Giver of the first two expressions is carried on in the third when it is recognized that the Holy Spirit is himself both the Gift and the Giver. He is the Founder of this fellowship which is constituted by a common sharing in the Holy Spirit (cf. Acts 2:42; Phil. 2:1).

This “participation in the Holy Spirit” brings to subjective reality in the experience of the Church the saving activity of God, that objective redemptive reality resident in the person of Christ in virtue of His crucifixion, resurrection, and exaltation (cf. I Cor. 1:9; I John 1:3). The identity between the two is thus a dynamic one of redemptive action, an identity rooted in the fact that the Spirit as the Life of the resurrected and exalted Lord (13:4; Rom. 1:4; 6:4; 8:11; I Cor. 6:14; 15:45) is likewise the Channel of the Lord’s life in redemptive action (3:17; I Cor. 12:3).

The emphasis of the apostle’s prayer is on the mutuality of the participation, the ethical difference it will make in the life of the church. The practical realization of the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, as the Corinthians open their lives more and more to the Holy Spirit, will bring about the perfecting (9) that Paul desires for them. Their “fellowship in the Holy Spirit” (NEB) is the common sharing in the Spirit which allows Him as both Gift and Giver to effect the unity and mutual love which must permeate the ethical life of the Church as the body of Christ. In fact it is only their common experience of the one Spirit which constitutes them the body of Christ (I Cor. 12: 12-13).

Paul gives evidence in his own attitude of that for which he is praying, for his desire is the same for all. There are no reservations, no grudges held; only a love that transcends all human barriers and longs for the best that God has for them. Their highest good expressed in a breathtaking summary of the Christian faith is (1) the grace of Christ (2) revealing the love of God (3) by their fellowship in the Holy Spirit, which is able to transform the quality of their lives together. With his spiritual hands thus spread in benediction over the Corinthians, the apostle’s voice sinks into silence.

Every facet of Paul’s closing words has revealed his apostolic heart. (1) His closing advice, (2) his attention to the formalities of Christian courtesy, and (3) his benedictory blessing are all concerned with the progress of the gospel of Christ at Corinth.

Because this gospel is authentically at work in Corinth, Paul has confident hope. He believes the complete openness of his witness to the character of his ministry will have effectively countered the resistance to his apostolic authority, 10:1—12:14. His service to Christ (1) does not depend upon the methodology of a worldly power structure, 10:1-18; but rather (2) his boast is in the power of the living Christ which finds its occasion in that which the world calls weakness, 11:1—12:13; and (3) this is the manner in which he as always will continue to make himself known to the Corinthians, 12:14—13:14.

This letter has come to us from the agonizing, refining furnace of interpersonal conflict. At stake have been the integrity and authority of Paul’s ministry among the Corinthians. An illuminating presentation of the Christian ministry is torn from his soul by the suspicions of his converts. It is a ministry (1) whose integrity is simply that of the gospel it proclaims, cc. 1—7; and (2) whose authority is only that of the presence of Christ, cc. 10”13. The focus is Christ crucified and risen—the weakness of His humiliation and the power of His resurrection.

These basic principles of Paul’s apostolic ministry must also be those of everyone who would serve in the name of Christ. Our stewardship of the gospel is in direct continuity with that of Paul and his helpers. This most crucial letter for our understanding of the Christian ministry could be profitably read, studied, or even consecutively preached through asking the question, “Precisely how are Christians to relate Christ and the gospel to the world in which we live?” Throughout this letter, in a strangely relevant way, witness is powerfully borne “to the inescapable truth that the mission of the church as the body of Christ is the self-giving, sacrificial, suffering ministry of Jesus.”²²⁵

“So death works in us, but life in you” (4:12, NASB).