Test Yourself (2 Cor 13:1-14)

Threatening strong action on his 3rd visit (13:1-10 ), for when Paul comes again, he'll not spare offenders. If they want proof that Christ is speaking through him, they'll get it! Just as Christ was crucified in weakness but now lives by the power of God, so too he (Paul), though sharing the weakness and suffering of Christ, will act with the power of God when he deals with them. As they demand proof, Paul responds by challenging them to prove themselves to see whether they are holding to the faith. He assures them he could never act contrary to the truth.13

"This will be my third visit to you" (2 Cor 13:1a).

1. 1st visit--Paul's pioneer evangelism in Corinth (ad 50-51).
2. 2nd--the 'painful visit' (ad 55) after writing of 1 Cor.
3. 3rd visit (ad 56-57) has been foreshadowed several times (2 Cor 10:2; 12:14, 20-21, where Paul is prepared for a showdown.

"Every matter must be established by the testimony of 2 or 3 witnesses" (2 Cor 13:1b). Paul slightly abbreviates Dt 19:15 (lxx). Accusations supported by at least 2 witnesses was stressed in 1st-century Judaism. Jesus re: church discipline (Mt 18:16), and elsewhere (Jn 8:17; 1 Tim 5:19; Heb 10:28; 1 Jn 5:8). Paul assures them that he'll take disciplinary action when he arrives according to Jesus' instructions and the judicial procedures accepted by the churches, supported by several witnesses from within their church. Paul could also be challenging them that if they bring charges/accusations against him, they must provide evidence from 2 or 3 witnesses. Thus, it's not only they who are under scrutiny (by Paul), but also Paul himself (by them) (13:5-10).

"I already gave you a warning when I was with you the 2nd time. I now repeat it while absent" (2 Cor 13:2a). Paul repeats his warning and pinpoints the time when he first issued it--his 2nd visit--the 'painful visit,' when he was attacked by the offender (2 Cor 2:5; 7:12). Before concluding his 2nd visit, Paul uttered dire warnings to those who were still unrepentant about their previous sins.

"On my return I will not spare those who sinned earlier or any of the others" (2 Cor 13:12b)--referring to the unrepentant sexual offenders (2 Cor 12:21; 1 Cor 6:12-20), and possibly also to those who condoned the sexual offences (1 Cor 5:2, 6), or other members of the church. Paul warns, "on my return I will not spare them." Paul had threatened that on his 2nd visit he'd take disciplinary action (1 Cor 4:18-21), but he withdrew without doing so, preferring rather to write a 'severe letter.' But now, ready to make his 3rd visit, he warns them that he'll not spare them this time. What's the nature of the disciplinary action? It's not specified, but could include excommunicating the offenders or some supernatural affliction (1 Cor 5:3-5; Acts 13:8-11).

A reason for the threat that 'I will not spare those who sinned' (2 Cor 12:2b): "since you are demanding proof that Christ is speaking through me" (2 Cor 13:3a). They wanted proof that Paul functions as Christ's 'mouthpiece.' Influenced by his opponents, they adopted various criteria for testing the validity of apostolic claims. One was that through a true apostle the word of Christ should be heard, and there should be evidence to prove that this was so--such as an impressive presence and powerful speaking ability (2 Cor 10:10), and the performance of signs and wonders (2 Cor 12:11-13). Paul would not have objected to the view that through true apostles Christ speaks, but would have taken strong exception to the proofs of this demanded by his opponents and them. He learnt that the power of Christ is on the weak, and that Christ spoke through his servants when they proclaim the gospel, NOT because of their impressive personal presence, high-sounding words, or even accompanying supernatural signs.

In response to the demand for proofs, Paul threatens to provide evidence of Christ's speaking through him, but it will be evidence that his audience will not find to their liking. He will not spare them. He will be severe in his use of apostolic authority (2 Cor 13:10). In this regard he warns them: "He [Christ] is not weak in dealing with you, but is powerful among you" (2 Cor 13:3b). Christ had worked powerfully by the Spirit among them when Paul performed the signs of an apostle in Corinth (2 Cor 12:12; Rom 15:18-19). But in the present context the power of Christ is in disciplinary action against those who persist in their sins. What does Paul have in mind? 'That is why many among you are weak and ill, and a number of you have fallen asleep. But if we were more discerning with regard to ourselves, we would not come under such judgment' (1 Cor 11:30-31).

"For to be sure, he was crucified in weakness, yet he lives by God's power" (2 Cor 13:4a). Christ who now lives by the power of God was once crucified in weakness, taking on himself the weakness of mortal human flesh in the incarnation. This is a paradigm of the paradox of Paul's own apostolic ministry: "Likewise, we are weak in him, yet by God's power we will live with him in our dealing with you" (2 Cor 13:4b). Paul's many weaknesses (2 Cor 1:3-11; 4:7-12; 11:23- 29) shouldn't blind them to the fact that Christ's power is manifest through him. While acknowledging his weakness in Christ, Paul threatens to use the disciplinary power of Christ when dealing with them.

• "The parallels established between Christ and Paul in 13:4 show how Christ's power is made perfect in Paul's ministry (2 Cor 12:9). His primary purpose as an apostle is to mediate through his suffering in Christ the knowledge of God and the transforming power of the life-giving Spirit (2:14-3:18; 4:1-15). This is the way in which Paul usually mediates the power of Christ's resurrection. But toward those who reject the cross and the power of Christ as embodied in his suffering and endurance, the resurrection power of Christ will be made known through his acts of judgment within the church. If Paul is an agent of God's redemption, he must also be an agent of God's judgment (2 Cor 2:15-16a; 4:4; 6:1-2)." [Hafemann.]

Not a true believer? "Examine yourselves to see whether you are in the faith; test yourselves" (2 Cor 13:5a). Paul emphasizes that they should be examining themselves rather than him. "In the faith" is to hold to the truth of the gospel, or living as true believers. Urging them to examine themselves imply that they might find they were not true believers. But what he says next reveals this wasn't so, as does the way he addresses them throughout the letter. Paul expects from their self-examination that they were in the faith, and his urging them to do so was that they'd conclude that the one who led them to faith in Christ must be a true apostle.

"Do you not realise that Christ Jesus is in you - unless, of course, you fail the test?" (2 Cor 13:5b). In 1 Cor Paul stressed the presence of the Holy Spirit in the church and the individual believer, and its moral implications (1 Cor 3:16; 6:19-20). Now, where moral failure on their part has raised Paul's concern (2 Cor 12:21), the ethical implications of the presence of Christ by the Spirit is implicitly invoked by Paul's question: "Do you not realise that Christ Jesus is in you?" They appear confident that Christ was in them, so Paul's question should reawaken in them the moral implications of that great fact.

"And I trust that you will discover that we have not failed the test" (2 Cor 13:6). Just as Paul emphasized that they test themselves to ensure that they're holding to the faith, so he stresses here, by the emphatic pronoun we, his hope that he and his colleagues will be found not to have failed the test. This is a surprise, for the context leads us to expect that Paul's hope would be that they'd be the ones found not to have failed the test. But by testing themselves and concluding that they do hold to the faith and therefore Christ is in them, they'll at the same time acknowledge that Paul and his colleagues have not failed the test. For if they hold the true faith and are indwelt by Christ, that is so because of what they received through the ministry of Paul and his fellow workers, and that in turn proves that Paul is a true apostle, one who has not failed the test. Paul assumes that they'll give themselves a "pass" on their self-audit and hopes that they'll clearly perceive the indissoluble link between their "pass" and his "pass."

"Now we pray to God that you will not do anything wrong" (2 Cor 13:7a). This reveals his concern for them, but is also an exhortation to them. The wrong he prays they'll avoid is failure to hold to the faith (2 Cor 13:5) and falling back into immorality (2 Cor 12:21).

Paul's reason for praying is "not so that people will see that we have stood the test but so that you will do what is right even though we may seem to have failed" (2 Cor 13:7b). Though Paul hopes they'll find out that he hasn't failed the test (2 Cor 13:6), this isn't his main concern. He wants them to avoid wrongdoing, not because his reputation would suffer, but because he wants them to be found doing what is right. Calvin paraphrases Paul: '"I have no anxiety", he says, "for myself or for my reputation; my only fear is that you should offend God, and I am ready to be as a reprobate myself, if only you are free from all blame" - a reprobate, that is, in the judgment of men, who very often reject those who are worthy of the highest honour.'

Those who deem Paul to have failed the test probably do so on the grounds that he failed to provide proofs that Christ spoke through him--he lacked an impressive presence, his speech was of no account (10:10), and there was little evidence, as they thought, of spiritual power in his ministry [visionary experiences and the performance of signs and wonders; (2 Cor 12:1, 11-13)]. In his 'fool's speech' Paul provided such evidence as they demanded, even though he gave it his own special twist. As far as he was concerned, legitimization of his apostleship belongs not with such displays of power, but is seen in the changed lives of his converts. When they pass the test of holding the faith, and that finds expression in moral renewal in their lives, then the genuineness of Paul's apostolate will be confirmed (2 Cor 3:1-3).

Lest his statement 'though we may seem to have failed' (2 Cor 13:7b) should be misconstrued as an admission that he has acted wrongly, Paul adds, "For we cannot do anything against the truth, but only for the truth" (2 Cor 13:8), i.e. the gospel. What Paul asserts is that he could never act in a way that is contrary to the gospel or its implications.

"We are glad whenever we are weak but you are strong" (2 Cor 13:9a). This reinforces 2 Cor 13:7, for Paul is prepared to appear to have failed as long as they do what is right. Now, he says that he is prepared, even glad, to be weak if that means strength for his converts. In his ministry, Paul discovered that weakness in himself was the concomitant of God's power at work in others (2 Cor 4:11-12; 12:7-10), a fact God uses the weak things of this world to achieve his purposes (1 Cor 1:26-29). The sort of strength Paul looked for in his converts was commitment to the gospel and the outworking of that commitment in moral renewal.

Not self-justification. "And our prayer is that you may be fully restored" (2 Cor 13:9b). A mark of the Paul's Christian maturity and commitment to the purposes of God is that in the face of the defection of his converts, and their calling into question of his apostleship, his overriding concern is not self-justification, but their restoration, that their moral failures should be put right.

Paul sums up the purpose of his letter: "This is why I write these things when I am absent, that when I come I may not have to be harsh in my use of authority" (2 Cor 13:10). This fits well with the content of ch. 10-13 where Paul repeatedly threatens a severe use of authority (2 Cor 10:5-6, 11; 12:20; 13:1-4). Despite repeated threats, Paul hopes all along that it'd not be necessary to carry them out (2 Cor 10:2; 12:19-21). The purpose of ch. 10-13 was to recall them to their senses so that they'd reject the false gospel and false claims of Paul's opponents and also live out in their lives the moral implications of the gospel and so forestall a severe use of authority by Paul.

Paul describes his authority as "the authority the Lord gave me for building you up, not for tearing you down" (2 Cor 13:10b). Elsewhere Paul speaks of an exercise of authority which could be seen as a tearing down [handing people over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, (1 Cor 5:3-5; 1 Tim 1:20)], nevertheless the primary function of that authority was for building up Christ's church. This is stressed again and again in this letter (2 Cor 10:8; 12:19).

Theology. Paul defended his integrity in financial matters in the light of accusations that his refusal to accept support was a smokescreen behind which he was exploiting them through the collection. Though his policy was not to accept support from those among whom he was presently ministering, he defended the right of others to do so. This underlines 2 things:

1. gospel ministers deserve support, but may waive the right if they wish; 
2. financial integrity is vitally important to prevent one's ministry being ill spoken of.

To correct false impressions in this matter is not merely a matter of self-defence, but is necessary to ensure that one's efforts to strengthen the church are not rejected.

They wanted proof that Christ spoke through Paul. For them it seemed that his sufferings, persecutions and weaknesses militated against his claim to be an apostle, the mouthpiece of Christ. Paul emphasized that weakness did not invalidate his claim, but was in fact the concomitant of the power of Christ at work through him. This is both

1. a warning against a triumphalist approach to ministry and 
2. an encouragement to remember that God's power is made perfect in human weakness.

The authority of the minister is for the building up not the tearing down of God's people. Calvin's apposite comment: 'Since the Gospel is by its own nature "the power of God unto salvation" (Rom 1.16) and "the savor of life unto life" (2 Cor 2.15, 16) and is only contingently "a savor of death," the authority conferred upon ministers of the Gospel ought to be used for the salvation of those who hear them, for if it turns out to their destruction, that is against its nature.'

Final exhortations and encouragement (13:11-14). Ancient letters typically conclude with final words of exhortation and encouragement, followed by a benediction invoking God's blessing on them. "Finally, brothers and sisters, rejoice!" (2 Cor 13:11a). Rejoice could also be translated 'farewell' [nrsv]. "Strive for full restoration, encourage one another" (2 Cor 13:11b). Paul wanted them to

• reject the different gospel of his opponents (11:1-6),
• recognize his rightful claims to be their apostle (10:13-18; 11:21-23; 12:11-13), and
• make sure no immoral practices were allowed in their midst (12:20-21).
• He's already appealed to them to examine themselves and amend their ways so that when he comes he will not have to be harsh in the use of his authority (12:5-10 ).

"Be of one mind, live in peace" (2 Cor 13:11c). Disharmony had marred the church (1 Cor 1:10-12; 3:1-4), and was still a source of trouble in the church (2 Cor 12:20). "And the God of love and peace will be with you" (2 Cor 13:11d). This promise isn't a reward for obeying Paul's exhortation, but an encouragement to those who obey, indicating the source of power which enables them to do so.

"Greet one another with a holy kiss" (2 Cor 13:12; Rom 16:16; 1 Cor 16:20; 1 Th 5:26, 1 Pet 5:14)--a sign of greeting and respect. Jesus reproached Simon the Pharisee because he gave him no kiss when he entered his house (Lk 7:45). It's also a symbol of gratitude, as the woman who, being forgiven much, kissed Jesus' feet repeatedly (Lk 7:38, 45). It's an expression of love when the father of the prodigal embraced and kissed his wayward son when he returned home (Lk 15:20). [The kiss was a greeting, a sign of peace and Christian agape with no erotic overtones. In post-NT times the holy kiss is found in early Christian liturgies, especially the Eucharist. But quite early there were objections voiced against the practice because of the suspicions of non-Christians and because of the danger of erotic perversion.]

"All God's people here send their greetings" (2 Cor 13:13). All God's people, whose greetings Paul conveys, are to be understood as either all the Christians of Macedonia, or those Christians in the particular Macedonian city from which he wrote this letter.

Benediction (2 Cor 13:14). The closing invocation of God's blessing is especially significant because of its triadic formulation. It is the only place in the NT where God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are explicitly mentioned together in such a benediction.

1. "May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ." Paul wrote, 'For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though he was rich, yet for your sake he became poor, so that you through his poverty might become rich' (2 Cor 8:9). This is the nature of the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ which Paul invokes upon them, a grace completely undeserved, yet overwhelmingly generous and astonishingly committed to the well-being of sinful human beings.
2. "And the love of God." The love of God is a major theme in Paul's theology. It was demonstrated supremely when God provided, and was involved in, the great reconciliation effected by Christ so that human beings might live at peace with God (2 Cor 5:18-21; Rom 5:6-8). This is the nature of the love of God which Paul invokes upon them. Again, what is involved is completely undeserved and astonishingly generous.
3. "And the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all." Koinonia is 'participation'. This means either participation in the Holy Spirit where the Holy Spirit is understood as the one in whom Christians share (objective genitive construction). Or a fellowship created by the Holy Spirit (subjective genitive construction). Both are true (1 Cor 12:13 where Christians are said to have been both baptized by one Spirit [en pneumati ] into one body, and made to drink of one Spirit). Christians can share 'objectively' in the Spirit only if the Holy Spirit himself as subject makes that participation possible.

Theology. Paul's appeal for 'full restoration' calls upon them to:

1. recognize his role as their apostle, and 
2. be done with immoral practices. 

The former involves acceptance of the truth of the gospel he preaches, and the latter entails the abandonment of sinful practices. Both of these things are crucial in the restoration of truly harmonious relationships in the church.

The unique trinitarian benediction is Paul invoking the blessing of God upon them, highlighting the immense privileges of believers:

1. they are recipients of the grace of the Lord Jesus who became 'poor' so that they might become 'rich';
2. they are the objects of the love of God who gave up his only Son, making him 'to be sin for us,' so that in him we might be 'made right with God'; and 
3. they share in the fellowship of the Holy Spirit.

Reference:

1. Charles Hodge. 1 & 2 Corinthians. A Geneva Series Commentary. The Banner of Truth Trust. 1857, 1859.
2. Colin Kruse. 2 Corinthians. Tyndale NT Commentaries. 1987, 2005.
3. Geoffrey Grogan. 2 Corinthians. The Glories & Responsibilities of Christian Service. 2007.
4. David Garland. 2 Corinthians. The New American Commentary. 1999.
5. Paul Barnett. The Message of 2 Corinthians. 1988.

2 Cor 10-13:

• (10:1-6) An earnest appeal. Their criticism: Paul's weapons are worldly. Christian consistency (10:1-11).
• (10:7-11) Responding to criticism. Paul's apostolic authority.
• (10:12-18) Boasting within proper limits. Missionary comparisons. God sets limits to Paul's work.
• (10:12) Comparisons are odious.
• (10:13-15a) Limits set.
• (10:15b-16) Evangelization expanded.
• (10:17-18) Commendation by God.
• (11:1-6) Their gullibility. Paul the 'jealous father.' I promise you to Christ (11:1-4). The super-apostles (11:5-6).
• (11:7-15) The matter of financial remuneration. Your money (11:7-11). False apostles masquerade as Satan (11:12-15).
• (11:16-13:14) The weak fool. The fool's speech (11:16-12:13).
• (11:16-33) Christ's fool. Paul's constant sufferings.
• (11:16-21a) Accept me as a fool.     
• (11:21b-33) Paul's Jewish ancestry and apostolic trials/sufferings. His weakness (11:30-33).
• (12:1-10) Visions and revelations. Paul's thorn. Really an apostle? (12:1-13).
• (12:1-6) A special experience.
• (12:7-10) A sore trial.
• (12:11-19) It's for you.
• (12:11-13) Signs of an apostle. Outward signs and inward character.
• (12:14-18) Paul refuses to burden them. His fatherly love for them.
• (12:20-13:10) The final visit: test yourselves.
• (12:19-21) The real purpose of Paul's fool's speech. Moral deterioration. Paul's concern for their holiness.
• (13:1-10) Paul threatens strong action on his 3rd visit.
• Power in weakness (13:1-4). 
• Test yourselves (13:5-10).
• (13:11-14) A wonderful conclusion.
• (13:11-13) Final exhortations and greeting
• (13:14) The benediction. Final prayer.

It's For You and Not For Me (2 Cor 12:11-21)

Signs of an apostle (12:11-13). Paul's 'fool's speech' is foolish, but he felt forced by the church's failure to speak up on his behalf. They should've commended him, rather than he having to foolishly boast of himself, for he was in no way inferior to the 'super-apostles' (2 Cor 12:11). They were favored by their apostolic signs (2 Cor 12:12); the only thing they had missed out on was being burdened financially by Paul. He concludes ironically by asking their forgiveness for this wrong! (2 Cor 12:13).

"I have made a fool of myself" (2 Cor 12:11a). Paul knows that his boasting is an exercise in foolishness. But in a sense they are to blame: "but you drove me to it. I ought to have been commended by you " (2 Cor 12:11b). Emphasizing "you/me, I/you"  he in effect says, 'You Corinthians forced me to indulge in self-commendation, when in fact I ought to have been commended by you.' If, instead of accepting the criticisms of Paul by his opponents, they had spoken up on his behalf, testifying that it was through his preaching that they had been converted (1 Cor 9:1b-2), that God had confirmed his preaching with signs and wonders (2 Cor 12:12), and that his behavior among them had been exemplary, then Paul wouldn't have had to boast on his own behalf. People don't need to commend themselves--an unpleasant act--when their friends, or those to whom they have ministered, defends their integrity.

"For I am not in the least inferior to the 'super-apostles,' even though I am nothing" (2 Cor 12:11c). Paul sarcastically refers to his opponents as super-apostles, and insists that he's in no way inferior to them. "Even though I am nothing" refers to what his opponents say about him, or expressing his own sense of unworthiness to be entrusted with an apostolic commission (1 Cor 15:9-10), or both.

"I persevered in demonstrating among you the marks of a true apostle" (2 Cor 12:12a). "True" in the niv is not in the Gk. Its inclusion is unwarranted, yet Paul shows that he's a true apostle, even according to his opponents' criteria. Thus, he's in no way inferior to them in respect to the marks of a true apostle, which Paul itemizes as "signs, wonders and miracles" (2 Cor 12:12b). Paul's 1st visit to Corinth in Acts 18 records no miracles, but obviously had been carried out. In Romans (written shortly after these chapters) he speaks of his ministry in terms of 'what Christ has accomplished through me in leading the Gentiles to obey God by what I have said and done - by the power of signs and wonders, through the power of the Spirit of God' (Rom 15:17-19). Such marks of a true apostle were a normal accompaniment to Paul's ministry, including at Corinth.

Exploited? "How were you inferior to the other churches, except that I was never a burden to you?" (2 Cor 12:13a). On what grounds they might have felt themselves to have been disadvantaged in comparison to other churches is not specified. Paul's ministry among them was accompanied by 'signs, wonders and miracles,' the 'marks of a true apostle' (2 Cor 12:12). But they felt offended that Paul refused support from them while accepting it from other churches. So Paul says ironically, "Forgive me this wrong!" (2 Cor 12:13b) for they object to not being burdened/exploited by him, while accepting being exploited by his opponents (2 Cor 11:20).

Paul felt forced to boast about his apostolic credentials in the 'fool's speech,' because they were deceived by his opponents criticizing his ministry. His boasting was against his better judgment - he was 'not talking as the Lord would, but as a fool' (2 Cor 11:17), because they accepted his opponent's criticism. So Paul felt he needed to show his credentials. There's a time to speak up when one's ministry is under attack and to defend its authenticity, even at the risk of being accused of self-commendation.

A better Christian cf. his opponents. Paul emphasized, not his eloquence or his successful mission, but beatings, imprisonments, dangers exposed to and privations - showing his weakness rather than strength. This wouldn't commend him to his opponents or the church, but they were the badges of a true servant of Christ. Jesus said, 'Remember what I told you: "A servant is not greater than his master." If they persecuted me, they will persecute you also... They will treat you this way because of my name' (John 15:20-21). For Paul, sufferings legitimized that he was a true servant of Christ (Gal 6:17).

God's power in weakness. Because Paul defended the authenticity of his ministry citing "signs, wonders and miracles," he chose not to capitalize on them. Instead, he drew attention to his thorn in the flesh--further evidence of his weakness--to emphasize the sufficiency of God's grace, whose strength is made perfect in human weakness. This is the experience of Christians through the centuries who learnt, as Paul did, that 'this all-surpassing power is from God and not from us' (2 Cor 4:7).

Defend our fellow Christians when they're unjustly criticized, so that they won't have to defend themselves. Paul's preaching in Corinth was accompanied by 'signs, wonders and miracles,' but they didn't say so, and was criticized by his opponents as lacking in this respect. Thus, Paul had to defend the validity of his ministry himself.

Paul's planned 3rd visit (12:14-13:10). Paul felt forced to 'boast' about his apostolic credentials in the 'fool's speech' to show them that he was not inferior to the false apostles. This section addresses other matters.

1. Financial integrity. Paul assures them that he'll spend his resources and to be spent himself for their benefit, and neither he nor those whom he sent would exploit them (12:14-18).
2. Set the record straight. Paul, in defending himself, has his audience's well-being in mind, because he fears that on his upcoming 3rd visit he might find them to be not as he'd wish, and so they would find him to be not as they'd wish (12:19-21).
3. Some in Corinth still suspect him of malpractice. So, any charges must be supported by 2 or 3 witnesses. If they demand proof that Christ speaks through him, apparently because his weaknesses seemed to nullify such a claim, he assures them that though he is 'weak' in Christ, he will act with the power of God when he deals with them (13:1-4).
4. Examine yourselves. Paul is glad to be weak if they prove to be strong. He writes in the hope that it will produce improvement in them, so that when he comes he won't have to be harsh in his dealings with them, as he has threatened (13:5-10).

Paul refuses to burden them (12:14-18). "Now I am ready to visit you for the 3rd time" (2 Cor 12:14a). This likely means that he's now ready to make his 3rd visit (2 Cor 13:1)--the 2 previous ones: the pioneer missionary visit and the 'painful visit.' Paul was ready for a showdown, though he still hoped it wouldn't come to that (2 Cor 10:2; 12:20-21; 13:1, 10).

"And I will not be a burden to you, because what I want is not your possessions but you" (2 Cor 12:14b). Paul's policy is to not accept their support. His purpose is to win them back. Calvin's paraphrase: 'I seek larger wages than you think, for I am not content with your riches but I seek the whole of you in order to present you to the Lord as a sacrifice from the fruits of my ministry.' This contrasts his motives and those of his opponents, who can't claim likewise (2 Cor 11:12).

"After all, children should not have to save up for their parents, but parents for their children" (2 Cor 12:14c). The general principle is that parents provide for their children, not vice-versa [there's a time when adult children should provide for elderly parents; (Mk 7:8-12; 1 Tim 5:4)]. Paul applies this principle as a spiritual father to them (1 Cor 4:15) in deciding not to burden them financially [though he defends the right of ministers of the gospel to be supported financially (1 Cor 9:4-14)].

"To save up" is found also in his advice concerning the collection: 'On the first day of every week, each one of you should set aside a sum of money in keeping with your income, saving it up, so that when I come no collections will have to be made' (1 Cor 16:2). Paul's opponents falsely construe that he wanted his spiritual children to lay up money for him. Paul denies this accusations by saying that it is parents who should lay up for their children and not vice versa.

Give and sacrifice all. "So I will very gladly spend for you everything I have and expend myself as well" (2 Cor 12:15a). Dapanao (To spend) ekdapanao (To expend'). Dapanao usually refers to spending money (Mk 5:26, the woman with the haemorrhage spent all she had on doctors; Lk 15:14, the prodigal spent all his inheritance on riotous living; Acts 21:24, Paul spent money to pay for the sacrifices offered by Jewish Christians). So Paul employs the word to express his willingness to spend his resources for them, including meeting the cost of his support while laboring among and for them. Ekdapanao--found only here--means 'to spend' or 'to expend,' means to expend oneself/sacrifice of one's life. Such is Paul's commitment to his converts that he's prepared not only to spend his resources, but even to sacrifice his own life for their sakes. Such a statement of extreme commitment to the well-being of others is not an isolated one in Paul's writings. He felt the same way about his Jewish compatriots (Rom 9:3) and the Philippian church (Phil 2:17).

"If I love you more, will you love me less?" (2 Cor 12:15b). Paul is prepared to exhaust his own earnings to not burden them, and even to sacrifice his life for them if necessary. He asks whether, in response to his abundant love, they're going love him less. Paul knows why his greater love for them means less love for him from them. It's because an expression of his love (refusing to be a burden to them) was misconstrued by his opponents. So he confronts them with the charge levelled against him: "Be that as it may, I have not been a burden to you. Yet, crafty fellow that I am, I caught you by trickery!" (2 Cor 12:16). This charge of craftiness and trickery originated with Paul's opponents, and entertained by his converts. They accused Paul of using the collection for the poor Judean Christians as an opportunity to benefit himself substantially (2 Cor 12:17-18).

Paul confronts them again: "Did I exploit you through any of the men I sent to you?" I urged Titus to go to you and I sent our brother with him (2 Cor 12:17-18a)--the 'earnest' brother (2 Cor 8:16-17, 22). 2nd question: "Titus did not exploit you, did he?" (2 Cor 12:18b). These questions demand a negative answer. Paul concludes his defence against this allegation by asking, "Did we not walk in the same footsteps by the same Spirit?" (2 Cor 12:18c). This question requires a + answer. Both Paul and those whom he sent for the collection had acted in the same way, with complete integrity. Paul expects them to acknowledge that fact.

"By the same Spirit" [auto pneumati] means either that which identifies pneuma as the Holy Spirit [niv], thus to walk in the Spirit (Gal 5:16), or identifies pneuma as the human spirit and translates the whole as: 'Did we not conduct ourselves with the same spirit?' [nrsv]. Both make good sense. 2nd is preferable in context--Paul's and his emissaries' conduct towards them that's defended.

The real purpose of Paul's fool's speech (12:19-21). Paul clarifies the real underlying motive of his boasting. He felt forced into it because they're influenced adversely by the his opponent's boasting, and he needed to show that he was in no way inferior to them. His ultimate aim was to strengthen them (2 Cor 12:19), because he was afraid that when he came on his 3rd visit, both he and they would find in one another not what they would desire. Paul would have to act with bold authority against them, and he might find that many of them were still caught up in the sins of the past (2 Cor 12:20- 21).

For you. "Have you been thinking all along that we have been defending ourselves to you?" (2 Cor 12:19) can be a question [niv, nrsv], or statement: 'You have been thinking all along that we have been defending ourselves to you.' Paul's point is to correct a view that his boasting is to defend himself. But Paul, by defending himself, wasn't seeking their approval but strengthening their faith (2 Cor 12:19c). Since God is making his appeal through Paul (2 Cor 5:20b), fighting for his legitimacy as an apostle is for their faith.

"We have been speaking in the sight of God as those in Christ" (2 Cor 12:19b). As a Christian, all Paul says (and does) is in the sight of God. "...and everything we do, dear friends, is for your strengthening" (2 Cor 12:19c)--all he's said, done, written--this letter which they might mistakenly construe as mere self-defence. But his purpose of ministry is always to strengthen/build up the church (2 Cor 10:8; 13:10). People are strengthened and built up in their faith by both encouragement and admonishment.

Paul's true feelings [after the strong words and irony of ch. 10-12]: "dear friends" [agapetoi, lit. 'beloved' (2 Cor 11:11; 12:15)]. Paul loved them as much as he's dismayed, because a false gospel was entertained by them. Thus, the strength of his attack against his opponents and the extent of his boasting. Paul labors to strengthen them out of love.

"For I am afraid that when I come I may not find you as I want you to be" (2 Cor 12:20a). He's ready for his 3rd visit (2 Cor 12:14) and doesn't want to be disappointed when he arrives. If so, he warns, "...and you may not find me as you want me to be" (2 Cor 12:20b). If there's no improvement, then Paul must act with boldness and authority against the church (1 Cor 4:21), as he has threatened to act against his opponents (2 Cor 10:2, 6; 13:1-4). What does Paul fear he might find when he arrives?

"I fear that there may be discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, slander, gossip, arrogance and disorder" (2 Cor 12:20c). Cf. a traditional lists of vices (Rom 1:29; 13:13; Gal 5:19-21; Col 3:8-9). 1st 2 items, "discord, jealousy" i.e. the party spirit Paul dealt with (1 Cor 1:11; 3:3). And the last item, "disorder" was a problem in relation to women's behavior and the celebration of the Lord's Supper, and the use of spiritual gifts, all in the context of worship in the church (1 Cor 11:2-34). Paul was by no means convinced that the problems he addressed in 1 Corinthians were now things of the past, confirmed in v. 21.

"I am afraid that when I come again my God will humble me before you" (2 Cor 12:21a). Paul spoke of the humiliation he'd feel if, when he came to Corinth with the Macedonians, they proved to be unprepared to make their contribution to the collection (2 Cor 9:3-4). But here he faces the possibility of a far greater humiliation--seeing his labors marred by serious moral breakdown. He envisages being "grieved over many who have sinned earlier and have not repented of the impurity, sexual sin and debauchery in which they have indulged" (2 Cor 12:21b). 'Paul reveals to us the mind of a true and sincere pastor when he says that he will look on the sins of others with grief. It is right that every pastor should bear the concerns of the Church on his heart, should feel its ills as if they were his own, sympathize with its sorrows and grieve for its sins' [Calvin].

In 1 Cor 5-6 Paul dealt at length with their arrogance and immoral practices: Incest (a man living with his stepmother); visiting prostitutes--even justified by appeal to the slogan: "I have the right to do anything" (1 Cor 6:12). Paul called for disciplinary action against the incestuous man (1 Cor 5:3-5), for sexual immorality is incompatible with the Christian's status as the dwelling-place of the Spirit (1 Cor 6:18-20).

The incestuous man is likely the one who questioned Paul's authority and led the personal attack against him during the 'painful visit.' He was eventually disciplined severely, so much so that Paul urged them to forgive him (2 Cor 2:6-8). Thus, it's unlikely that he is included among those who "sinned earlier and have not repented" (2 Cor 12:21). Likely Paul refers to those who formerly practised immorality and who may have desisted (his appeal in 1 Cor 5-6) without truly repenting. But in the new crisis situation where Paul's authority was called into question again, this time by his Jewish Christian opponents, he fears some of the Corinthians may be engaging in immoral and licentious practices once more.

• (12:11-19) It's for you.
• (12:11-13) Signs of an apostle. Outward signs and inward character.
• (12:14-18) Paul refuses to burden them. His fatherly love for them.
• (12:20-13:10) The final visit: test yourselves.
• (12:19-21) The real purpose of Paul's fool's speech. Moral deterioration. Paul's concern for their holiness.

Reference:

1. Charles Hodge. 1 & 2 Corinthians. A Geneva Series Commentary. The Banner of Truth Trust. 1857, 1859.
2. Colin Kruse. 2 Corinthians. Tyndale NT Commentaries. 1987, 2005.
3. Geoffrey Grogan. 2 Corinthians. The Glories & Responsibilities of Christian Service. 2007.
4. David Garland. 2 Corinthians. The New American Commentary. 1999.
5. Paul Barnett. The Message of 2 Corinthians. 1988.

A Thorn in the Flesh (2 Cor 12:1-10)

Visions and revelations (12:1-10) after boasting about his trials. In the 3rd person, he recounts being caught up to the 3rd heaven--paradise--where he heard things which he wasn't permitted to speak (2 Cor 12:4). Instead he tells of:

• a thorn in the flesh given to torment him and to keep him from becoming conceited,
• how he sought God repeatedly for its removal, but that 
• God's grace was sufficient (2 Cor 12:7-9), through which he learnt the simultaneity of weakness and power, which Paul emphasizes to undermine triumphalist ideas of power and authority held by his opponents, and 
• to support his apostolic authority, despite imprisonments, rejections, insults, hardships, persecutions, difficulties (2 Cor 12:10), which may seem inconsistent.

"I must go on boasting" (2 Cor 12:1a). Though there's nothing to be gained by boasting, yet there was much to be lost if Paul did not. His opponents drew an agenda, adopted by his converts, and he must now respond. "Although there is nothing to be gained, I will go on to visions and revelations from the Lord" (2 Cor 12:1b), as with stories of God's dealings with people in the OT, and also with God's dealings with Christians in the NT.

• Zechariah received a vision while serving in the temple, and was told his prayer had been heard and that his wife Elizabeth would bear a son whose name would be John (the Baptist) (Lk 1:8-23).
• Jesus' transfiguration is a vision given to Peter, James and John (Mt 17:9).
• The women who went to Jesus' tomb saw a vision of angels who said that Jesus was alive (Lk 24:22-24).
• Stephen, just before his death, saw a vision of The Son of Man standing at the right hand of God (Acts 7:55-56).
• The Lord spoke to Ananias in a vision when he instructed him to seek out Saul of Tarsus after the latter had been struck blind on the Damascus road (Acts 9:10).
• Peter was made ready to visit Cornelius' household by a threefold vision of unclean animals descending from heaven in a sheet (Acts 10:17, 19; 11:5). On another occasion when he was released from prison by an angel, Peter thought he was seeing a vision (Acts 12:9).
• The book of Revelation is the description of revelations made to the author on the Isle of Patmos (Rev 1:1).

Paul experienced many visions and revelations of the Lord.

• The first and most important was the revelation of Christ on the Damascus road (Acts 22:6-11; 26:12-20; Gal 1:15-16).
• He then saw a vision of a man from Macedonia calling him to come over and help (Acts 16:9-10).
• During pioneer evangelism in Corinth, he received encouragement from the Lord through a vision (Acts 18:9-11).
• By revelations from God, he received his gospel (Gal 1:12), his insights into the mystery of the gospel (Eph 3:3-5), his access to true wisdom (1 Cor 2:9-10), and his understanding of particular eschatological truths (1 Th 4:15).

"I know a man in Christ who 14 years ago was caught up to the 3rd heaven" (2 Cor 12:2a). Of Paul's many visions and revelations, he singles out 1 from 14 yrs ago. His dating of it underlines its historical reality. 'Paul's "14 years ago" must be calculated (by internal reckoning) from the time of writing this letter (ad 55), suggesting that this vision/revelation occurred ad 42, at which time Paul would have been in his native Syria-Cilicia (Gal 1:18, 21; 2:1; Acts 9:29-30; 11:25).' [Barnett]--several years after his conversion, and not the revelation on the Damascus road. Paul hadn't spoken of this, probably, 'so that no one may think better of me than what is seen in me or heard from me, even considering the exceptional character of the revelations' (2 Cor 12:6-7, nrsv).

3rd person (I know a man) is its sacred character, or to maintain a distinction between Paul who was granted this superlative experience and Paul whose behavior and words people see and hear (2 Cor 12:6). Was Paul relating another person's experience, or his own? The thrust of 2 Cor 12:1, 5, 7 confirms that it's his own. A man in Christ is simply that Paul is a Christian.

"Caught up to the 3rd heaven" (2 Cor 12:2); "caught up to paradise" (2 Cor 12:4)--same verb 'to catch up' when speaking of Christians who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord who will then be 'caught up' to meet the Lord in the air (1 Th 4:17). [3rd heaven /Paradise parallel in the Apocalypse of Moses 37:5--God hands Adam over to the archangel Michael and says, 'Lift him up to Paradise/ 3rd heaven, and leave him there until that fearful day of my reckoning, which I will make in the world.'] [Differing cosmologies were in vogue, variously portraying 3, 5 or 7 heavens, which were spoken of as a series of hemispherical strata above the earth. It has been suggested that the reference to 'the heavens, even the highest heaven' (lit. 'heaven and the heaven of heavens') in Solomon's dedication prayer (1 Kings 8:27) gave rise, among the Jews, to the heavens in 3 strata, which is probably no more than a Hebrew superlative. In the pseudepigraphical writings (e.g. T. Levi 3) there's several heavens, and 7 heavens in rabbinic writings.] [In Jewish (1 Enoch 39:3f.) and Gentile (Plato, Rep. 10:614-621) literature there're similar accounts to Paul's experience: Babylonian Talmud (Hag. 14b)--a story of 4 rabbis temporarily taken up into Paradise, awesome experience, only 1, Rabbi Akiba, returned unharmed. It post-dates Paul (R. Akiba died ad 135). Such accounts were circulating in the 1st and 2nd centuries of the Christian era.] All these literary parallels in terminology, concepts or experience of being caught up, show 3 things.

1. what Paul spoke of was understandable to his contemporaries.
2. the experience of being caught up into Paradise was awe-inspiring, which explains in part Paul's great reticence in describing it.
3. the experience of being caught up to the 3rd heaven places Paul on a level with the great heroes of faith, which completely outflanks his opponents.

It's all the more remarkable that he didn't maximize it, but instead, having disclosed the bare fact, he quickly directs attention away from his experience and to his weakness as the only safe ground for boasting.

"Whether it was in the body or out of the body I do not know - God knows" (2 Cor 12:2b). If Paul doesn't know the exact mechanism of his rapture, so can't we. But In the body or out of the body has in the OT Enoch (Gen 5:24) and Elijah (2 Kgs 2:9-12) were transported bodily to heaven permanently not temporarily. Elijah was also carried off bodily from one place to another by the Spirit of the Lord (1 Kgs 18:12). In the NT, Jesus was taken by the devil to the pinnacle of the temple and to a high mountain (Mt 4:5, 8), but the mechanism (whether bodily or visionary) isn't specified. In Revelation John was carried away 'in the Spirit' to a wilderness (Rev 17:3), and to a great high mountain (Rev 21:10). Whether 'in the Spirit' is out of the body or a visionary experience isn't clear.

"And I know that this man - whether in the body or apart from the body I do not know, but God knows - was caught up to paradise and heard inexpressible things, things that no one is permitted to tell" (2 Cor 12:3-4). Inexpressible things--only here in the NT. Common in ancient inscriptions it was associated with mystery religions and too sacred to be divulged. This was a common among devotees of the mystery religions of Paul's day, but unusual in Christian circles. With the 'mystery' of the gospel, it was something which, though previously hidden, had now been made known to Paul and prophets through the Spirit for the express purpose that they should proclaim it to all people (1 Cor 2:1; Eph 3:1-9; 6:19- 20; Col 1:25-27; 4:3). Only here does Paul speak of something revealed to him that he could not speak about, presumably because it was so sacred and intended for him alone. Paul's account of his rapture differs markedly from other such accounts from the ancient world, both in brevity and absence of what he saw. Paul speaks only to what he heard.

"I will boast about a man like that" (2 Cor 12:5a). Paul continues to speak in the 3rd person. He was forced to boast of the Paul who 14 years ago experienced such a revelation, but refuses to make that the ground of present boasting: "but I will not boast about myself, except about my weaknesses" (2 Cor 12:5b). Having felt forced into the futile exercise of boasting about spiritual experience, Paul returns to the one safe ground of boasting - his personal weakness (2 Cor 11:30; 12:7-10). Before doing so, he insists, "Even if I should choose to boast, I would not be a fool, because I would be speaking the truth" (2 Cor 12:6a). In his boast about that experience, he would not, in one sense, be acting foolishly, because it is true.

"But I refrain, so no one will think more of me than is warranted by what I do or say, or because of these surpassingly great revelations" (2 Cor 12:6b-7a). Paul's reason for making less of his past experience is that he wants people's evaluation of him to be based on "what I do or say" (lit. 'what he sees [in] me or hears from me'). 'Seeing and hearing encompass the 2 primary ways of evaluating a person - observe conduct and listen to what is said. In Paul's case it'd be to all his behavior as a person and as a missionary-pastor, and to all his preaching and teaching' [Harris]. Paul doesn't want people's evaluation of him as an apostle to be based on his past revelatory and visionary experiences.

"Therefore, in order to keep me from becoming conceited, I was given a thorn in my flesh" (2 Cor 12:7b). Instead of maxing his rapture, as his opponents did of their spiritual experiences, Paul immediately explains how he was kept from becoming conceited. Thorn (skolops), only here in NT, is anything pointed (a stake, the pointed end of a fish-hook, a splinter, a thorn). ['But if you do not drive out the inhabitants of the land, those you allow to remain will become barbs [ skolopes ] in your eyes and thorns in your sides' (Num 33:55, lxx). 'No longer will the people of Israel have malicious neighbors who are painful briers [skolops] and sharp thorns' (Eze 28:24). 'Therefore I will block her path with thornbushes [ skolopsin]; I will wall her in so that she cannot find her way' (Hos 2:8).] In each case, skolops frustrates and causes trouble in the lives of those afflicted. That Paul's thorn was a trouble and frustration to him is evident from his thrice-repeated prayer for its removal (2 Cor 12:8).

The thorn is "a messenger of Satan, to torment me" (2 Cor 12:7b). Satan is allowed to harass Job--a great hero of faith and endurance--only within the limits set by God (Job 1-2). Paul longed to revisit them after he was forced to leave Thessalonica (Acts 17:1-10), but could not because Satan blocked his way (1 Th 2:17-18). In both OT and NT Satan has no power other than that allowed him by God. In the Gospels Jesus has complete power over all the forces of darkness. Satan has no power over him (Jn 14:30-31), and demons must obey his will (Mk 1:21-28; 5:1-13). This power Christ gave to his disciples (Mk 6:7). Yet with Paul Satan was allowed to block his way and torment him with a thorn in the flesh. Satan's actions, bad in themselves, are made to serve God's purposes: Former led to the gospel coming to Berea, Athens, Corinth; torment kept Paul spiritually well-balanced, preventing conceit.

The nature of Paul's 'thorn in the flesh' [Insufficient to decide]:

1. some form of spiritual harassment, limitations of a nature corrupted by sin, torments of temptation, oppression by a demon;
2. persecution, for eg., instigated by Jewish opposition or by Paul's Christian opponents;
3. some physical or mental ailment: eye trouble, malarial fever, stammering speech, epilepsy, headaches, neurological disturbance;
4. the Corinthian church's rejection of his apostleship.

Modern interpreters -- some sort of physical ailment. Paul calls it a thorn in the flesh. Gal 4:15 -- an eye problem.

"3 times I pleaded with the Lord to take it away from me" (2 Cor 12:8). No essential similarity between Paul and Jesus in Gethsemane, though both prayed 3 times that something be removed, and the removal requested was not granted. Just as Jesus was strengthened for his dreadful ordeal, similarly to Paul: "But he said to me, 'My grace is sufficient for you' " (2 Cor 12:9a). The thorn won't be removed, but his grace would enable him to cope: "for my power is made perfect in weakness" (2 Cor 12:9b). Paul pointed out that by God's deliberate choice not many of his converts were wise according to worldly standards, nor influential, nor of noble birth. Why? 'God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong ... so that no one may boast before him' (1 Cor 1:26-31). God reminds Paul that his power is manifested in the weak. It also justifies Paul's rejection of the boasting by his opponents, and for his own practice of boasting in weakness.

"Therefore I will boast all the more gladly about my weaknesses, so that Christ's power may rest on me" (2 Cor 12:9c). It doesn't mean he enjoys weaknesses; what he delights in is Christ's power that rests on him in these weaknesses. It's experiencing Christ's power in his weakness that enables Paul to boast. ['To rest on' (episkenod) is found only here in the NT, and not in the lxx or the papyri. Before Paul, its only known use is by Polybius the Greek historian (c. 201-120 bc) who used it twice of the billeting of soldiers. It may be better to translate as 'dwell in' or 'reside' rather than 'rest on.']

Power through weakness. "That is why, for Christ's sake, I delight in weaknesses, in insults, in hardships, in persecutions, in difficulties. For when I am weak, then I am strong" (2 Cor 12:10). Delight (verb-eudokeo)--'be content with' (nrsv) is not a masochist, enjoying his sufferings. Paul delights in his sufferings only because he knew that Christ's power would rest on him in the midst of them. Paul's opponents criticized his apostleship for his weakness (2 Cor 10:10), and likely regarded his many persecutions and insults as inconsistent with being an apostle of the exalted Christ. By expounding the principle of divine power through human weakness, Paul defends his claim to apostleship and cut the ground from under their claims.

Reference:

1. Charles Hodge. 1 & 2 Corinthians. A Geneva Series Commentary. The Banner of Truth Trust. 1857, 1859.
2. Colin Kruse. 2 Corinthians. Tyndale NT Commentaries. 1987, 2005.
3. Geoffrey Grogan. 2 Corinthians. The Glories & Responsibilities of Christian Service. 2007.
4. David Garland. 2 Corinthians. The New American Commentary. 1999.
5. Paul Barnett. The Message of 2 Corinthians. 1988.

I Suffered More (2 Cor 11:16-33)

Paul pens the 'fool's speech' (11:16-12:13) because of his concern for his converts being deceived by his opponents, whose true nature are 'servants of Satan' (2 Cor 11:13-15). Additionally, and against his better judgment, he demonstrates that, even using his opponents' criteria, he's a better servant of Christ than they are (11:16-12:13). So, in the 'fool's speech,' he boasts of his

• credentials (2 Cor 11:22), 
• apostolic trials (2 Cor 11:23-33), 
• visionary experiences (2 Cor 12:1-10) and 
• the mighty works he performed (2 Cor 12:11-13). 

He knows such worldly boasting is foolish, but because his converts were swayed by the boasting of others, he feels compelled to boast a little himself. But he turns this boasting match on its head and boasts not of his strengths but of his weaknesses, for God's strength is made perfect in human weakness (2 Cor 12:9-10).

Accept me as a fool (2 Cor 11:16-21a) opens the 'fool's speech.' Paul asks--with biting irony--to bear with him as they readily bore with other fools, being so wise themselves! (2 Cor 11:19). What he says is as a fool and not as Jesus would (2 Cor 11:17). Others have acted most high-handedly and pretentiously, but Paul says ironically, 'we were too weak for that!' (2 Cor 11:21).

"I repeat" (2 Cor 11:16a) repeats Paul already asking them to 'put up with me in a little foolishness' (2 Cor 11:1). He repeats his request differently: "let no one take me for a fool. But if you do, then tolerate me just as you would a fool, so that I may do a little boasting" (2 Cor 11:16b). Boasting is foolish, so Paul doesn't want to be regarded as foolish for doing so, for it's only their gullibility to the false apostles' claim that forces him to boast (2 Cor 12:11). But even if they regard his boasting as the act of a fool, let them accept him as such, and listen to his boasting as they listened to the boasting of the other fools (his opponents).

"In this self-confident boasting I am not talking as the Lord would, but as a fool" (2 Cor 11:17). Such boasting is not something Jesus would do. 'God does not approve of boasting, so this mode of speaking does not come from him. But the content of what he is saying is still true' (Ambrosiaster). Why does Paul do this?

"Since many are boasting in the way the world does, I too will boast" (2 Cor 11:18). Lit. 'boast according to [the] flesh'--of human achievement, power, prestige, even of spiritual experiences--which isn't pleasing to God. Paul's opponents boast in this way, and his converts were won over by such boasting, so Paul feels forced to indulge in it too for their sakes, even though he's painfully aware that such boasting is pure folly.

"You gladly put up with fools since you are so wise!" (2 Cor 11:19). The fools they "gladly put up with" are Paul's opponents. So, Paul asks that, even if they regard him as a fool, to put up with him as well. "Since you are so wise!" is a cutting allusion to their tendency to pride themselves on their own wisdom (1 Cor 3:18-20; 4:10; 6:5; 8:1-7; 13:2).

"In fact, you even put up with anyone who enslaves you" (2 Cor 11:20a). Paul worked with them for their joy, not lording it over them (2 Cor 1:24). But the intruders brought those they influenced under their 'lordship.' Paul exposes their despicable authoritarianism and their misplaced forbearance, with 4 expressions depicting their enslavement. "...you even put up with anyone who enslaves you or exploits you or takes advantage of you or puts on airs or slaps you in the face" (2 Cor 11:20). Exploits (lit. 'consumes') probably is  their greedy demands for remuneration. Takes advantage of (lit. 'takes') as in: 'Be that as it may, I have not been a burden to you. Yet, crafty fellow that I am, I caught [elabon] you by trickery!' (2 Cor 12:16). They were 'taken in' or 'fleeced' by Paul's opponents. Puts on airs is a presumptuous lifting up of one's self--also in 'every pretension that sets itself up [lit. 'every high thing lifted up'] against the knowledge of God' (2 Cor 10:5). Slaps you in the face humiliates a person. The false apostles were so authoritarian that they actually slapped the faces of those who questioned their authority, or used metaphorically to mean his opponents acted in ways that dishonoured them. 'He said this, not meaning that they were stricken on the face, but that they spat upon and dishonored them.' [Chrysostom] [Paul may be depicting his opponents as 'pretentious parasites,' a figure well known and ridiculed in Greco-Roman comedies, to contrast their behavior with his own modest behavior, and as a reproach to those 'taken in' by such people.]

Scathing sarcasm: "To my shame I admit that we were too weak for that!" (2 Cor 11:21a). They entertained the criticisms of Paul's opponents that he was weak (2 Cor 10:10). Paul throws that back at them, saying in effect, 'Yes, I admit, we were too weak to make such a despicable display of overbearing authoritarianism as that practised by those intruders!'

Paul's Jewish ancestry (2 Cor 11:21b-22) cf. his opponents' claims to impeccable Jewish ancestry, asserting that his own Jewish credentials are just as good. "Whatever anyone else dares to boast about--I am speaking as a fool--I also dare to boast about" (2 Cor 11:21b). Paul mentions things of which his opponents boast [2 Cor 11:21b, 23a; 11:30; 12:1, 11 shows how uneasy Paul is about boasting -- "I am speaking as a fool." ]:

• their Jewish pedigree and their being servants of Christ (2 Cor 11:22-23), 
• visions and revelations experienced (2 Cor 12:1), 
• the performance of signs and wonders (2 Cor 12:12), 
• indulging in a little boasting of his own to show that he is in no way inferior in any of these areas.

"Are they Hebrews? So am I" (2 Cor 11:22a). (i) Denotes ethnic purity--'a Hebrew of Hebrews' (Phil 3:5)--distinguishing Jews by birth from proselytes; OR (ii) distinguish Hebrew and Aramaic-speaking Jews who generally lived in Palestine (Hebrews) from Greek-speaking Jews generally of the dispersion [Hellenists] (Ac 6:1). But even Jews of the dispersion regard themselves as 'Hebrews.' Paul has the same pure Jewish ancestry as that of his opponents, whether Palestinian or Hellenistic Jews is not known.

"Are they Israelites? So am I" (2 Cor 11:22b) possibly distinguished from Hebrews in that Gentile proselytes could be incorporated into Israel, but could never claim to be Hebrews (born of Hebrews). 'Israelite' should denote the religious and social rather than ethnic characteristics of being a Jew.

"Are they Abraham's descendants? So am I" (2 Cor 11:22c). Paul says, 'I am an Israelite myself, a descendant of Abraham' (Rom 11:1), using the terms synonymously. How are we to distinguish Abraham's descendants from Israelites? Hebrews is understood ethnically, Israelites religiously and socially, Abraham's descendants theologically related to God's call and promises to Abraham's offspring. There are difficulties in discerning the precise nuances of these 3 terms. But Paul's main thrust is clear. Whatever boasting his opponents indulge in as far as their Jewish pedigree is concerned, Paul can boast of the same.

A better servant of Christ (11:23-33). Paul concedes for the sake of argument that his opponents are servants of Christ, but claims that he is more so (11:21b-23a) by providing a list of his apostolic trials (11:23b-29):

1. imprisonments, beatings and being near death, including a detailed explanation of what these involved (2 Cor 11:23b-25);
2. frequent journeys, with a description of the dangers of travel (2 Cor 11:26);
3. toil and hardship of the privations involved (2 Cor 11:27);
4. anxiety for all the churches, with an example of what caused it (2 Cor 11:28-29);
5. his ignominious flight from Damascus as a further illustration of his 'weakness' as an apostle (2 Cor 11:30-33).

"Are they servants of Christ? (I am out of my mind to talk like this.) I am more" (2 Cor 11:23a). Regarding Jewish ancestry, Paul simply claims to be their equal, to their claim to be servants of Christ Paul says that he is more than their equal. For the sake of argument, Paul concede what he elsewhere denies (2 Cor 11:13-15)--i.e. that they are servants of Christ--because he shows that he is more than their equal anyhow because he has worked much harder and suffered much more in his service of Christ.

"I am out of my mind to talk like this" shows again his reluctance to be responding as such. He'd already warned them against comparing one with another (1 Cor 1:11-16; 3:4-9, 21-22; 4:1), but now through dire new circumstances he engages in it himself.

How is Paul a better servant of Christ than his opponents? Paul's list of hardships and sufferings open with:

• "I have worked much harder, been in prison more frequently, been flogged more severely, and been exposed to death again and again" (2 Cor 11:23b). Strenuous exertions, far greater than his critics, and even of other apostles (1 Cor 15:10). Acts records only 1 imprisonment before this was written - the overnight stay in the prison at Philippi (Acts 16:19- 40). So he had many more imprisonments than Acts records. We know not the full details of his entire missionary career.
• Severe flogging, exposed to death again and again explained (11:24-25). "Five times I received from the Jews the 40 lashes minus 1" (2 Cor 11:24). Beating must not exceed 40 lashes (Dt 25:1-3). So and the Jews limited the number to 40 minus 1, lest an error in counting occurs and the law broken by an impetuous executioner, and the offender disgraced. Jesus warned his disciples that they'd be flogged in synagogues (Mt 10:17; Mk 13:9). Pre-conversion, Paul instigated such floggings (Acts 22:20; 26:11). After conversion, by the time he wrote 2 Cor, he received judicial floggings 5x in synagogues. Despite much opposition, Paul didn't give up his connection with Judaism or the synagogue and lose himself in the Gentile world.
• "3 times I was beaten with rods" (2 Cor 11:25a). 1 took place in Philippi (Acts 16:22-23). Likely Paul wrote shortly after this of having 'suffered and been treated outrageously in Philippi' (1 Th 2:2). The scars on Paul's body from his beatings (Gal. 6:17) weren't like the battle wounds of soldiers, regarded as badges of honour, but were marks of humiliation and submission.' Paul's boast about the beatings would be seen as a sign of weakness, not valor, which is what he intended.
• "Once I was pelted with stones" (2 Cor 11:25b). Stoning is a Jewish judicial execution (Lev 24:14, 16) or from mob violence, as in Lystra where Paul was stoned and left for dead (Acts 14:19).
• "3 times I was shipwrecked, I spent a night and a day in the open sea" (2 Cor 11:25c). Acts records 1 shipwreck after 2 Cor was written, while recording 9 sea voyages prior to this, and there were almost certainly others, with plenty of chances for shipwreck. Spending a night and a day in the open sea was to be face to face with death, as had his stoning at Lystra.
• "I have been constantly on the move" (2 Cor 11:26a) sheds light on the dangers of his travels: "I have been in danger from rivers, in danger from bandits, in danger from my fellow Jews, in danger from Gentiles; in danger in the city, in danger in the country, in danger at sea; and in danger from false believers" (2 Cor 11:26b)--are self-explanatory. 'Danger from rivers,' occurred 'in winter, when there was constant rain and rivers often overflowed their banks' (Ambrosiaster). Danger from false believers were from those who opposed Paul and his gospel (Gal 2:4), such as those who opposed him in Corinth.
• "I have labored and toiled" (2 Cor 11:27a)--a general description followed by examples. "And have often gone without sleep" (2 Cor 11:27b), probably not because of anxiety, as with the pressure of his concern over the churches (2 Cor 11:28). Labor, toil, and sleepless nights were from preaching and teaching into the early hours (Acts 20:7-12, 31) for when day workers would be free, or when he had to work at night to support himself when he used the day for missionary activity (2 Th 3:7-8). "I have known hunger and thirst and have often gone without food; I have been cold and naked" (2 Cor 11:27c). Despite income from manual work and gifts from Macedonia, Paul suffered from a lack of food, drink and adequate clothing (Phil 4:10-13; Rom 8:35; 1 Cor 4:11; 2 Tim 4:13).
• Subjective rather than objective trials: "Besides everything else, I face daily the pressure of my concern for all the churches" (2 Cor 11:28). This isn't the unwarranted anxiety (Mt 6:25-34), but a healthy concern for the welfare of others which Jesus experienced (Lk 13:34). 1,2 Cor abundantly expresses pressure from Paul's pastoral heart: "Who is weak, and I do not feel weak? Who is led into sin, and I do not inwardly burn?" (2 Cor 11:29)--for the weak in faith, caused to stumble and fall from those who pride themselves on being strong in faith (Rom 14:1-23; 1 Cor 8:1-13). Paul felt their vulnerability, and seeing them made to fall, he burned with indignation against those who caused it. 'What wonderful affection in a pastor! Others' falls accentuate his grief, others' obstacles inflame the fire of his suffering' (Chrysostom).
• Ignominious flight. Paul narrates an incident from the earliest days of his experience as a Christian (30-33), supplementing the list of trials of which he has boasted, but also parodies the whole business of boasting. "If I must boast, I will boast of the things that show my weakness" (2 Cor 11:30), again showing his distaste for boasting, and foreshadows the fact that he is about to turn the whole thing on its head. 11:23b-29 might be construed as triumphalist (i.e. 'all these difficulties I overcame to fulfil my commission'), but his flight from Damascus contains little of which to be proud.

"The God and Father of the Lord Jesus, who is to be praised for ever, knows that I am not lying" (2 Cor 11:21) is Paul appeal to God as his witness that he's speaking the truth. "In Damascus the governor under King Aretas had the city of the Damascenes guarded in order to arrest me" (2 Cor 11:32). King Aretas IV (9 bc - ad 40) — was ruler of the Nabateans, whose capital was at Petra. The governor is a royal official charged [by Aretas] with oversight of the Nabatean commercial colony at Damascus. Paul says that following his conversion, 'I did not go up to Jerusalem to see those who were apostles before I was, but I went into Arabia. Later I returned to Damascus' (Gal 1:17). It's likely that Paul began preaching the gospel in Arabia and aroused the antagonism of Aretas, who then ordered his governor in Damascus to arrest him. According to the account of Paul's escape (Acts 9:23-25), hostile Jews who reacted against his preaching of Jesus as Messiah plotted to kill him and were watching the gates of Damascus so as to seize him when he tried to leave. As Paul's own testimony identifies the governor as the one who guarded the city, it appears that the Jewish and Nabatean communities acted in concert to seize Paul. On later occasions, Jews in other cities brought charges against Paul (Acts 18:12; 25:7, 15).

Humiliation. "But I was lowered in a basket from a window in the wall and slipped through his hands" (2 Cor 11:33). Thiss departure from Damascus was very different from his earlier approach as persecutor. He was a zealous Jewish crusader 'breathing out murderous threats against the Lord's disciples,' and carrying letters Jewish synagogue leaders in Damascus authorizing him to bring bound to Jerusalem any who 'belonged to the Way' (Acts 9:1-2). But now he's hunted down by his fellow Jews because he preached Jesus as Messiah. Thus he was forced to flee Damascus, escaping by being lowered down over the wall in a basket like a bundle of merchandise. This may be Paul's 1st taste of the ignominy of persecution, which left an indelible imprint on him. It was humiliating, and its inclusion here constitutes a parody of the whole purpose of boasting.

• (11:16-13:14) The weak fool. The fool's speech (11:16-12:13).
• (11:16-33) Christ's fool. Paul's constant sufferings.
• (11:16-21a) Accept me as a fool.
• (11:21b-33) Paul's Jewish ancestry and apostolic trials/sufferings. His weakness (11:30-33).

Reference:

1. Charles Hodge. 1 & 2 Corinthians. A Geneva Series Commentary. The Banner of Truth Trust. 1857, 1859.
2. Colin Kruse. 2 Corinthians. Tyndale NT Commentaries. 1987, 2005.
3. Geoffrey Grogan. 2 Corinthians. The Glories & Responsibilities of Christian Service. 2007.
4. David Garland. 2 Corinthians. The New American Commentary. 1999.
5. Paul Barnett. The Message of 2 Corinthians. 1988.

Don't Pay Me (2 Cor 11:7-15)

• Would you ever tell their boss not to pay you for the work you do (2 Cor 11:7ff)?
• If other Christians are getting paid, wouldn't you also want to get paid?
• Would you call out a false deceitful Christian leader as Satan (2 Cor 11:13)? Why did Paul do so (2 Cor 11:4; Gal 1:8-9)?

A sin to refuse payment? (11:7-15). "Was it a sin for me to lower myself in order to elevate you by preaching the gospel of God to you free of charge? (2 Cor 11:7). Paul worked as a tentmaker/leatherworker to provide for his needs during his first stay in Corinth (Ac 18:3). Thus, he 'lowered' himself, for the Greeks regarded it as degrading for philosophers or itinerant teachers to engage in manual work to supply their needs. No doubt aware of this, Paul asks with ironic exaggeration whether he committed a sin by so abasing himself when he preached God's gospel free of charge. Some suggest it was a sin for contravening the dominical teaching that those who preach the gospel should receive their living from the gospel (1 Cor 9:14). Or that Paul preaching free of charge was a sin for refusing their offer of financial support, for in the ancient world it was a rejection of friendship, and an insult to those who offered it. Each has merit, but the first best fits the context. The expected answer to Paul's question is, of course, a resounding 'No'.

"Lower myself in order to elevate you." When he preached the gospel free of charge and they responded with faith, they were 'elevated' to become members of God's people, inheritors of the promises of God.

"I robbed other churches by receiving support from them so as to serve you" (2 Cor 11:8). 'To rob' (sylao) is a strong word, meaning 'to pillage,' used predominantly in a military context meaning 'to strip' (a dead soldier of his armor). Why did Paul chose such a strong word? Perhaps to bring home to them the lengths to which he went to make the gospel available to them free of charge, even to the extent of 'robbing' other churches by accepting support from them while working in Corinth, work from which the donors receive no benefits.

What was involved in 'robbing' other churches? "And when I was with you and needed something, I was not a burden to anyone, for the brothers who came from Macedonia supplied what I needed" (2 Cor 11:9a). Supplied means 'to fill up' or 'to fill up by adding.' Paul's own manual work would have provided most of his needs, so, 'to fill up by adding' expresses gifts brought from Macedonia, most likely those at Philippi who were the main contributors to his needs. They repeatedly shared in Paul's ministry by assisting him financially from the time they were converted up until and including his imprisonment when he wrote Philippians (Phil 1:5; 4:10, 14-18). This could be an affront to them for when Paul was with them he'd been in need and accepted help from others while refusing it from them.

"I have kept myself from being a burden to you in any way, and will continue to do so" (2 Cor 11:9b). Since Paul's needs were met by his own manual labour or by gifts from the Macedonians, he refrained from burdening them, and will continue to do so in the future. So he makes it plain that by informing them of his being in need he was not implying request for help.

"As surely as the truth of Christ is in me, nobody in the regions of Achaia will stop this boasting of mine" (2 Cor 11:10)--where Corinth was the major city and administrative centre. Paul affirms with an oath, his boast of ministering free of charge will not be silenced. Paul's opponents would like his boasting silenced by him relenting and accepting financial help, but he was determined otherwise (2 Cor 5:12).

Why did Paul refuse their assistance?

1. his general ambition to preach the gospel free of charge. To preach was mandatory for him; to preach it free of charge was his own choice (1 Cor 9:15-18).
2. his desire not to burden those among whom he ministered, and 
3. not lose his independence by becoming financially obliged to anyone. Accepting a benefaction often meant becoming a 'client' of the benefactor, which sacrifices some independence.

So why then did Paul accept assistance from the Macedonians? Perhaps he felt free to accept gifts from churches who wished to participate in his ministry in other places. Then his ambition to offer the gospel free of charge wouldn't be compromised, and there'd be little chance that his benefactors would regard him as their client.

Because Paul's opponents could not silence his boasting, they tried to undermine his relationship with the Corinthians by suggesting that his refusal to accept their assistance was proof that he didn't really love them. Aware of their strategy, Paul asks rhetorically: "Why? Because I do not love you?" (2 Cor 11:11a). Not bothering with a reasoned reply, he simply affirms his love for them, calling God as his witness: "God knows I do!" (2 Cor 11:11b).

They're not equal with Paul. "And I will keep on doing what I am doing" (2 Cor 11:12a) [i.e. he will not place any financial burdens on them]. Why? "in order to cut the ground from under those who want an opportunity to be considered equal with us in the things they boast about" (2 Cor 11:12b). To consolidate their position, his opponents say that they carried out their mission on the same terms as Paul as to be considered equal with him with 1 crucial difference: financial support from them. If they were true apostles, they wouldn't be concerned about this, since most other apostles accepted remuneration (1 Cor. 9:3-7), which Paul defended at length the right of Christian workers to do (1 Cor 9:7-14). Paul's opponents likelynot only accepted remuneration, but greedily extracted it (2 Cor 2:17; 4:2; 11:20). They would've been pleased if Paul discontinued his practice in this matter, but he was for that very reason determined not to do so, and in this way he undermined their claims to work on the same terms as he did.

The true character of his opponents. "For such people are false apostles, deceitful workers, masquerading as apostles of Christ" (2 Cor 11:13). They're deceivers, passing themselves off as apostles of Christ when they're not. They deserved the title false apostles, who preach 'a different gospel.'

Recognize Satan's devices (2 Cor 2:11). "And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light" (2 Cor 11:14)--like the serpent's deceitfulness who 'enlightened' Eve. Also Jewish pseudepigraphical works shows the devil or Satan appearing as an angel to deceive Eve [Life of Adam and Eve 9:1-3; Apocalypse of Moses 17:1].

"It is not surprising, then, if his servants also masquerade as servants of righteousness" (2 Cor 11:15a). They're instruments of Satan. How do they masquerade as servants of righteousness? They're likely unlike the Judaizers in Galatia demanding obedience to the law and submission to circumcision. But as Jews they likely advocate some law observance. Thus, Paul contrasts the glory of ministry under the old and new covenants (3:7-18). Satan's attacks on the church are often subversive and seldom frontal. They're carried out by those within the church who serve Satan's ends. It is this that Paul fears may happen in the church (2 Cor 11:3-4).

Scary. "Their end will be what their actions deserve" (2 Cor 11:15b). Paul said that 'we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each of us may receive what is due to us for the things done while in the body, whether good or bad' (2 Cor 5:10). All who oppose the truth of God or attack his messengers will face God's judgment (Rom 3:8; 1 Cor 3:17; Phil 3:19; 2 Tim 4:14).

Theology. Foreshadowing his 'fool's speech' (11:16 - 12:13), Paul explains that what motivates his 'folly' is the godly jealousy he feels for his converts (11:1-6). Like a father who betroths his daughter to her future husband and desires to see her presented as a pure virgin to him, Paul seeks to ensure that the devotion of those who, as a result of his preaching, have given their allegiance to Christ are not subverted by those who preach another Jesus/another gospel with a different spirit. Christian ministry is a life commitment to enhance people's devotion to Christ while protecting them from false teachers who would deceive them.

Comparing his ministry with his opponents [surprisingly]. But there's a time, as with Paul, when genuine Christian leaders need to respond to criticisms of their ministry, not as self-justification, but for the sake of the ministry itself. Paul highlights keeping the knowledge of gospel truth and faithfulness before people are more important than showy rhetorical style (2 Cor 11:6).

Next, not accepting financial support from those among whom he is presently ministering so as to make the gospel available free of charge (11:7-15). It involved lowering himself in people's eyes (2 Cor 11:7) by engaging in manual labour. Refusing their benefaction was not a sign that he didn't love them (2 Cor 11:12). He was determined to continue this practice to distance himself from his opponents who were greedy for financial gain. Christians must please God and be a blessing to his people and not be motivated by financial gain.

Expose false teachers/leaders. Calling out false apostles, deceitful workers and servants of Satan (2 Cor 11:13) seems harsh to modern readers. But they were preaching 'another Jesus' and 'another gospel.' Their heretical message needed to be exposed. Christian ministers today need likewise to expose false teachers in order to protect God's 'flock' from 'wolves' that would devour them.

Reference:

1. Charles Hodge. 1 & 2 Corinthians. A Geneva Series Commentary. The Banner of Truth Trust. 1857, 1859.
2. Colin Kruse. 2 Corinthians. Tyndale NT Commentaries. 1987, 2005.
3. Geoffrey Grogan. 2 Corinthians. The Glories & Responsibilities of Christian Service. 2007.
4. David Garland. 2 Corinthians. The New American Commentary. 1999.
5. Paul Barnett. The Message of 2 Corinthians. 1988.

Not the Jesus of the Bible (2 Cor 11:1-6)

Different Jesus, different Spirit, different Gospel (11:1-15). Paul's plea for tolerance and condemnation of his opponents.

• Paul's great concern about their gullibility forces him to make the 'fool's speech,' lest their minds be led astray from Christ by those who question his credentials and proclaim a different gospel (2 Cor 11:1-4).
• He responds to criticisms of him not asking for or accepting their financial support. He is criticised on two counts.
1. They felt affronted for his refusal to accept assistance, especially when he was forced to do menial work to support himself, which they regarded as degrading for an apostle (2 Cor 11:7).
2. This refusal was misconstrued as evidence that Paul didn't really love them. If he would not accept their money, surely that meant he had no real affection for them (2 Cor 11:11).
• Despite these criticisms, Paul informs them that he has no intention of changing his practice, in order to undercut his opponent's claims of being equal to him (2 Cor 11:12).
• There follows a strong verbal attack in which Paul dispenses with irony and reveals clearly his opinion of his opponents (2 Cor 11:13-15).

Their gullibility (11:1-6). "I hope you will put up with me in a little foolishness" (2 Cor 11:1a). To Paul, parading his credentials in the 'fool's speech' (11:16-12:13) is foolishness, because, 'it is not the one who commends himself who is approved, but the one whom the Lord commends' (2 Cor 10:18). Yet he felt forced to itemize his credentials, but not according to his opponents' criteria which was accepted by his converts. Paul 'answers the fool according to his folly.' When he says, "Yes, please put up with me!" (2 Cor 11:1b), it's his own embarrassment, rather than a concern that they'd see it as inappropriate.

Paul's deep concern leads him to indulge in the folly of self-commendation. "I am jealous for you with a godly jealousy" [lit., 'I am jealous over you with [the] jealousy of God'] (2 Cor 11:2a). Paul deeply shares the jealousy of God for his people (Exo 20:5; 34:14; Dt 4:24; 5:9; 6:15; Josh 24:19). 'For God is said to be jealous, not in a human way but so that everyone may know that he claims sovereign rights over those whom he loves and does what he does for their exclusive benefit. Human jealousy is basically selfish, but divine jealousy is both intense and pure' (Chrysostom).

A betrothal metaphor to express his concern: "I promised you to one husband, to Christ, so that I might present you as a pure virgin to him" (2 Cor 11:2b). There were 2 separate marriage ceremonies, the betrothal and the nuptial ceremony which consummated the marriage--usually a year between the 2, but during that time the woman was regarded legally as the man's wife, while socially she remains a virgin. The betrothal contract was binding, and could be broken only by death or a formal written divorce document. Unfaithfulness or violation of a betrothed woman was regarded as adultery and punishable as such. These marriage customs are at the same time recalling the OT where Israel is the betrothed of God (Hos 2:19-20).

Paul--God's agent through whom his converts were betrothed to Christ [the 'father' of the bride], and felt under obligation to ensure that they would be presented as a pure virgin to her one husband at the nuptial ceremony when the marriage will be consummated at the parousia (Eph 5:27; Col 1:22). It's not the physical, but 'spiritual virginity' of those sanctified by grace through faith in Christ.

Satan targets the minds of Christians. "But I am afraid that just as Eve was deceived by the serpent's cunning, your minds may somehow be led astray from your sincere and pure devotion to Christ" (2 Cor 11:3). Paul compares their danger with the deception of Eve in the garden ['the serpent deceived me, and I ate' (Gen 3:13)]. The serpent's 'seduction' of Eve was not sexual, but the beguiling of her mind by denying the truth of what God said (Gen 3:1-7), aptly depicting the danger they faced (their minds will be led astray). [Minds (noemata) 6x in the NT, all in Paul, and 5 of 6 in 2 Cor; 'schemes' of Satan (2 Cor 2:11), hardening or blinding of the 'mind' (2 Cor 3:14; 4:4), taking captive of every 'thought' to obey Christ (2 Cor 10:5), and the 'mind' that is kept by the peace of God, which passes understanding (Phil 4:7).] Paul is concerned with their minds being beguiled [not the compromise of the morals] by others (2 Cor 11:4). Christians' minds are prime targets for the devil (2 Cor 11:14) to lead them astray from their devotion to Christ.

Another Jesus. "For if someone comes to you and preaches a Jesus other than the Jesus we preached" (2 Cor 11:4a). As Eve was deceived by the serpent twisting God's word, so their minds were led astray by those who preached another Jesus. Their criteria for apostleship were triumphalist with no room for weakness or suffering. Likely their preaching stressed the power and glory of Christ to the virtual exclusion of Jesus' weakness, humiliation, persecution, suffering and death, cf. Paul who preached Christ crucified as Lord.

"Or if you receive a different spirit from the Spirit you received" (2 Cor 11:4b)). The spirit received from the false apostles is not the Holy Spirit, and very different from the Spirit they received when they responded to the gospel proclaimed by Paul (1 Cor 2:12; 3:16; 6:19). Paul's opponents spirit is different from Paul's [authoritarian, overbearing (2 Cor 11:20), cf. gentle caring Paul (2 Cor 10:1; 1 Cor 4:21)]. They were willing to accept an authoritarian and overbearing spirit. Also, Paul's opponents different spirit was their attitude of living before the congregation that betrays Paul's spirit of strength-as-weakness teaching and practice.

Jesus-Spirit-gospel is an apt summary of Christianity. Paul's kerygma is centred on:

• Christ crucified and risen,
• the gift of the Spirit of God or of Christ as the fulfilment of promise and the pledge of inheritance, and 
• the good news [gospel] of forgiveness and reconciliation in Christ as the instrument of God's saving power.

To Paul, these 3 elements stood or fell together, for 'another Jesus' would mean both a 'different Spirit,' since the Spirit is the Spirit of Christ (Rom 8:9; Phil 1:19), and a 'different gospel,' since the gospel is about Christ (2 Cor 2:12; 9:13; 10:14). His opponents apparently used the same 3 terms, but their content was so different that the message they were proclaiming amounted to a perversion of the gospel, indeed a false gospel, no gospel at all.

"Or a different gospel from the one you accepted" (2 Cor 11:4c). Paul used "a different gospel" describing the teaching the Judaizers brought to his churches in Galatia (Gal 1:6-9). A gospel stressing the need for Gentiles not only to believe in Christ, but also to take upon themselves the yoke of the law and submit to circumcision if they wanted to be the true people of God. Is it the same in Corinth? Paul's opponents in Corinth were Jewish (2 Cor 11:22), but unlikely for in 2 Cor 10-13, for:

1. there's no mention of keeping the law (food laws, Sabbath, special day observances) or to undergo circumcision.
2. the emphases is on skill in speaking and knowledge (2 Cor 11:6), displays of authority (2 Cor 11:20), visions and revelations (2 Cor 12:1) and the performance of apostolic signs (2 Cor 12:12-13), not found in Galatians.

'A different gospel' is thus as in 'another Jesus,' i.e., 'a different gospel' which stresses the power and glory of Christ with little place for Christ crucified as Lord.

"You put up with it easily enough" [lit. 'you bear with it well'] (2 Cor 11:4d)--same word as 'I hope you will put up with me' (2 Cor 11:1). He could ask them to put up with him knowing they were easily putting up with those who preached a different gospel.

"I do not think I am in the least inferior to those 'super-apostles' " (2 Cor 4:5a). Paul turns to personal defense. The super-apostles preach a different gospel (2 Cor 11:4) and whom Paul calls false apostles and servants of Satan (2 Cor 11:14-15). Not in the least inferior to them, is not Paul conceding that they are his equals (he's superior (2 Cor 11:21-33). He's just responding to their claims.

"I may indeed be untrained as a speaker, but I do have knowledge" (2 Cor 11:6a). Conceding that his rhetorical skills in public speaking is inferior to his opponents, he knows (and expects his converts to know) that he's not inferior to them. Paul's purpose, while conceding inferiority in the less important area of rhetorical skills, is to claim superiority in the far more important area of knowledge. Paul didn't mean that he didn't know how to speak but that commendation didn't depend on mere eloquence.

Make the truth clear in every way. "Knowledge" means insight into the mystery of the gospel (Eph 1:9; 3:1-6; Col 1:26-27) which his opponents lack. Paul says, "We have made this perfectly clear to you in every way" (2 Cor 11:6b), undoubtedly during the 18 months he spent teaching the word of God in Corinth during his first visit to the city (Ac 18:11), as well as by his letters.

• (11:1-6) Their gullibility. Paul the 'jealous father.' I promise you to Christ (11:1-4). The super-apostles (11:5-6).
• (11:7-15) The matter of financial remuneration. Your money (11:7-11). False apostles masquerade as Satan (11:12-15).

Reference:

1. Charles Hodge. 1 & 2 Corinthians. A Geneva Series Commentary. The Banner of Truth Trust. 1857, 1859.
2. Colin Kruse. 2 Corinthians. Tyndale NT Commentaries. 1987, 2005.
3. Geoffrey Grogan. 2 Corinthians. The Glories & Responsibilities of Christian Service. 2007.
4. David Garland. 2 Corinthians. The New American Commentary. 1999.