2 Corinthians (Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary) 1573125385, 9781573125383

Citation preview

2 Corinthians

Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary: 2 Corinthians Publication Staff President & CEO Cecil P. Staton Publisher & Executive Vice President Lex Horton Vice President, Production Keith Gammons Book Editor Leslie Andres Graphic Designers Amy Davis Dave Jones Assistant Editors Rachel Stancil Kelley F. Land

Smyth & Helwys Publishing, Inc. 6316 Peake Road Macon, Georgia 31210-3960 1-800-747-3016 © 2009 by Smyth & Helwys Publishing All rights reserved. ISBN 978-1-57312-806-3

SMYTH & HELWYS BIBLE COMMENTARY

2 Corinthians Mitzi L. Minor

PROJECT EDITOR R. SCOTT NASH Mercer University Macon, Georgia

OLD TESTAMENT GENERAL EDITOR SAMUEL E. BALENTINE Union Theological Seminary and Presbyterian School of Christian Education

NEW TESTAMENT GENERAL EDITOR R. ALAN CULPEPPER McAfee School of Theology Mercer University Atlanta, Georgia

Richmond, Virginia AREA OLD TESTAMENT EDITORS MARK E. BIDDLE Baptist Theological Seminary at Richmond, Virginia

AREA NEW TESTAMENT EDITORS

KANDY QUEEN-SUTHERLAND Stetson University Deland, Florida

RICHARD B. VINSON Salem College Winston-Salem, North Carolina

PAUL REDDITT Georgetown College Georgetown, Kentucky Baptist Seminary of Kentucky Lexington, Kentucky

R. SCOTT NASH Mercer University Macon, Georgia

Dedication

For Dee Minor Cooke and Jill Minor Brown Sisters and Friends for Life And in memory of our Dad Larry Minor 1937–2006 What a joy it is to have been his daughters!




Contents ix

ABBREVIATIONS

xiii

AUTHOR’S PREFACE

xv

SERIES PREFACE

xix

HOW TO USE THIS COMMENTARY

1

INTRODUCTION

1

Greeting and Prayer: The Fourth Letter Begins

2

The Body of the Letter Begins: The Issues Surface 2 Cor 1:12–2:13

PAUL’S DEFENSE OF HIS MINISTRY AND HIMSELF

2 Cor 1:1-11

23 33

2 Cor 2:14–7:4

53

3

The One Who Is Led Captive

2 Cor 2:14–3:6

55

4

Slave of the Glorious Ministry of the Spirit

2 Cor 3:7–4:6

69

5

The Clay Jar

2 Cor 4:7–5:10

87

6

Ambassadors of the Ministry of Reconciliation

2 Cor 5:11–6:10

107

7

Therefore . . .

2 Cor 6:11–7:4

129

2 Cor 7:5-16

139

2 Cor 7:5-16

141

2 Cor 8:1–9:15

149

2 Cor 8:1-5

151

10 The Delegation to Work on the Collection

2 Cor 8:16-24

165

11 Grace and Partnership (Not Patronage) through the Jerusalem Collection

2 Cor 9:1-15

171

2 Cor 10:1–13:14

183

2 Cor 10–13

185

SO, THE ISSUES ARE SETTLED?

8

Titus Brings Consolation

THE ISSUES ARE NOT SETTLED

9

Grace and the Jerusalem Collection

THINGS GET WORSE: A NEW LETTER AND A SHOWDOWN VISIT

12 Introduction to Chapters 10–13

13 The Third Visit: Bold Authority for Building Up 2 Cor 10:1-11

191

14 Standard of Measure

2 Cor 10:12-18

199

15 Refusing Patronage

2 Cor 11:1-15

205

16 Boasting in Weakness

2 Cor 11:16–12:13

217

17 The Third Visit: Proving Themselves

2 Cor 12:14–13:10

237

18 Farewell, and Our Concluding Thoughts

2 Cor 13:11-14

253

BIBLIOGRAPHY

259

INDEX OF MODERN AUTHORS

263

INDEX OF SIDEBARS AND ILLUSTRATIONS

265

INDEX OF SCRIPTURES

269

INDEX OF TOPICS

273

ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THIS COMMENTARY Books of the Old Testament, Apocrypha, and New Testament are generally abbreviated in the Sidebars, parenthetical references, and notes according to the following system. The Old Testament Genesis Exodus Leviticus Numbers Deuteronomy Joshua Judges Ruth 1–2 Samuel 1–2 Kings 1–2 Chronicles Ezra Nehemiah Esther Job Psalm (Psalms) Proverbs Ecclesiastes or Qoheleth Song of Solomon or Song of Songs or Canticles Isaiah Jeremiah Lamentations Ezekiel Daniel Hosea Joel Amos Obadiah Jonah Micah

Gen Exod Lev Num Deut Josh Judg Ruth 1–2 Sam 1–2 Kgs 1–2 Chr Ezra Neh Esth Job Ps (Pss) Prov Eccl Qoh Song Song Cant Isa Jer Lam Ezek Dan Hos Joel Amos Obad Jonah Mic

x

Abbreviations Nahum Habakkuk Zephaniah Haggai Zechariah Malachi

Nah Hab Zeph Hag Zech Mal

The Apocrypha 1–2 Esdras Tobit Judith Additions to Esther Wisdom of Solomon Ecclesiasticus or the Wisdom of Jesus Son of Sirach Baruch Epistle (or Letter) of Jeremiah Prayer of Azariah and the Song of the Three Daniel and Susanna Daniel, Bel, and the Dragon Prayer of Manasseh 1–4 Maccabees

1–2 Esdr Tob Jdt Add Esth Wis Sir Bar Ep Jer Pr Azar Sus Bel Pr Man 1–4 Macc

The New Testament Matthew Mark Luke John Acts Romans 1–2 Corinthians Galatians Ephesians Philippians Colossians 1–2 Thessalonians 1–2 Timothy Titus Philemon Hebrews James 1–2 Peter 1–2–3 John Jude Revelation

Matt Mark Luke John Acts Rom 1–2 Cor Gal Eph Phil Col 1–2 Thess 1–2 Tim Titus Phlm Heb Jas 1–2 Pet 1–2–3 John Jude Rev

Abbreviations Other commonly used abbreviations include: AD

BC

C. c. cf. ch. chs. d. ed. eds. e.g. et al. f./ff. gen. ed. ibid. i.e. LCL lit. n.d. rev. and exp. ed. sg. trans. vol(s). v. vv.

Anno Domini (“in the year of the Lord”) (also commonly referred to as CE = the Common Era) Before Christ (also commonly referred to as BCE = Before the Common Era) century circa (around “that time”) confer (compare) chapter chapters died edition or edited by or editor editors exempli gratia (for example) et alii (and others) and the following one(s) general editor ibidem (in the same place) id est (that is) Loeb Classical Library literally no date revised and expanded edition singular translated by or translator(s) volume(s) verse verses

Selected additional written works cited by abbreviations include the following. A complete listing of abbreviations can be referenced in The SBL Handbook of Style (Peabody MA: Hendrickson, 1999): AB ABD ACCS ANF ANTC BA BAR CBQ HTR HUCA ICC

Anchor Bible Anchor Bible Dictionary Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture Ante-Nicene Fathers Abingdon New Testament Commentaries Biblical Archaeologist Biblical Archaeology Review Catholic Biblical Quarterly Harvard Theological Review Hebrew Union College Annual International Critical Commentary

xi

xii

Abbreviations IDB JBL JSJ JSNT JSOT KJV LXX MDB MT NASB NEB NICNT NIV NovT NRSV NTS OGIS OTL PRSt RevExp RSV SBLSP SP TDNT TEV WBC

Interpreters Dictionary of the Bible Journal of Biblical Literature Journal for the Study of Judaism in the Persian, Hellenistic, and Roman Periods Journal for the Study of the New Testament Journal for the Study of the Old Testament King James Version Septuagint = Greek Translation of Hebrew Bible Mercer Dictionary of the Bible Masoretic Text New American Standard Bible New English Bible New International Commentary on the New Testament New International Version Novum Testamentum New Revised Standard Version New Testament Studies Orientis graeci inscriptiones selectae Old Testament Library Perspectives in Religious Studies Review and Expositor Revised Standard Version Society of Biblical Literature Seminar Papers Sacra pagina Theological Dictionary of the New Testament Today’s English Version Word Biblical Commentary

Author’s Preface I always said I had no interest in writing a commentary. But Dr. Alan Culpepper, who steered me in right directions through grad school, invited me to write one on 2 Corinthians for Smyth & Helwys. My good friend and colleague on the faculty at Memphis Theological Seminary, Dr. Mary Lin Hudson, told me I should accept. I have learned over the years to trust the wisdom of these two people, and they were right once again. Writing this commentary has been a meaningful experience for me. I owe them yet another debt of gratitude. Before saying thanks to other people who helped me along this journey, I need to attend to some “business.” All translations of texts from 2 Corinthians are my own unless otherwise noted. All other biblical translations are taken from the NRSV unless otherwise noted. The poem by Denise Levertov is used by permission from New Direction books. Now to the fun part—saying thanks to some wonderful people. I am grateful to the library staff at Memphis Theological Seminary for their gracious help in locating books and articles. I am blessed to be part of a collegial and supportive faculty at MTS. I am sure they got tired of hearing me whine about the commentary, but they were unfailingly encouraging. I thank them for that. Mary Lin Hudson is a special colleague who allows me to think out loud in her presence, plays devil’s advocate at times, honestly tells me when an argument won’t hold, and has been amazingly patient through nearly three years of work on this commentary. My friend Dr. Chris Church, who wrote the volume on James for Smyth & Helwys, helped me understand the details of this particular commentary series. My close friend Rev. Lora Jean Gowan occasionally donned a research assistant’s hat and saved me a few weeks of work and more than a few headaches. When I was not sure I wanted to spend three years of my life with Paul, a wonderful group of women ministers who call themselves “Sweetcakes” (from the poem “God Says Yes to Me” by Kaylin Haught) told me they needed a woman scholar to work on Paul and help them preach better from his letters. Then, having told me to take on the work, they supported me through it. To Eyleen Farmer, Sharon Gazaway, Lora Jean Gowan, Robin Hatzenbuehler, Ellen Klyce, Nancy McSpadden, and Judith Reese, I say “thank you” with a huge smile on my face.

xiv

Author’s Preface

I am always and forever grateful that Georgia Curry Minor is my mother. The years during which I worked on this commentary were not easy ones for our family, but she has held us together. I am grateful for my sisters, Dee Minor Cooke and Jill Minor Brown, and a lifetime of things shared. I am grateful for their children, my nieces and nephews, and all the joy they have brought me. As a Christian feminist and a woman in ministry, I have always had a rather testy relationship with Paul. After hanging out with him for the better part of three years, I still get testy with him. Sometimes he is so incredibly profound. Then there are times when I want to join the Corinthians in slugging him. But as often happens, my life experience more than my scholarship has shaped my feelings toward Paul as I end the work on this commentary. Two years into this writing, I lost my beloved father. Six weeks later, when I was able to get back to work, I found that I had left off with 2 Corinthians 5:1—“For we know that if our earthly house of a tent is destroyed, we have a building from God, a house not made with hands eternal in the heavens.” I laughed and cried at the same time. Paul was certainly a clay jar, but what treasure he often held in that jar! And what hope his treasure-in-a-clay-jar offers the rest of us! I am so grateful for such hope. Mitzi L. Minor June 2009 Memphis, Tennessee

SERIES PREFACE The Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary is a visually stimulating and user-friendly series that is as close to multimedia in print as possible. Written by accomplished scholars with all students of Scripture in mind, the primary goal of the Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary is to make available serious, credible biblical scholarship in an accessible and less intimidating format. Far too many Bible commentaries fall short of bridging the gap between the insights of biblical scholars and the needs of students of God’s written word. In an unprecedented way, the Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary brings insightful commentary to bear on the lives of contemporary Christians. Using a multimedia format, the volumes employ a stunning array of art, photographs, maps, and drawings to illustrate the truths of the Bible for a visual generation of believers. The Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary is built upon the idea that meaningful Bible study can occur when the insights of contemporary biblical scholars blend with sensitivity to the needs of lifelong students of Scripture. Some persons within local faith communities, however, struggle with potentially informative biblical scholarship for several reasons. Oftentimes, such scholarship is cast in technical language easily grasped by other scholars, but not by the general reader. For example, lengthy, technical discussions on every detail of a particular scriptural text can hinder the quest for a clear grasp of the whole. Also, the format for presenting scholarly insights has often been confusing to the general reader, rendering the work less than helpful. Unfortunately, responses to the hurdles of reading extensive commentaries have led some publishers to produce works for a general readership that merely skim the surface of the rich resources of biblical scholarship. This commentary series incorporates works of fine art in an accurate and scholarly manner, yet the format remains “user-friendly.” An important facet is the presentation and explanation of images of art, which interpret the biblical material or illustrate how the biblical material has been understood and interpreted in the past. A visual generation of believers deserves a commentary series that contains not only the all-important textual commentary on Scripture, but images, photographs, maps, works of fine art, and drawings that bring the text to life.

xvi

Series Preface

The Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary makes serious, credible biblical scholarship more accessible to a wider audience. Writers and editors alike present information in ways that encourage readers to gain a better understanding of the Bible. The editorial board has worked to develop a format that is useful and usable, informative and pleasing to the eye. Our writers are reputable scholars who participate in the community of faith and sense a calling to communicate the results of their scholarship to their faith community. The Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary addresses Christians and the larger church. While both respect for and sensitivity to the needs and contributions of other faith communities are reflected in the work of the series authors, the authors speak primarily to Christians. Thus the reader can note a confessional tone throughout the volumes. No particular “confession of faith” guides the authors, and diverse perspectives are observed in the various volumes. Each writer, though, brings to the biblical text the best scholarly tools available and expresses the results of their studies in commentary and visuals that assist readers seeking a word from the Lord for the church. To accomplish this goal, writers in this series have drawn from numerous streams in the rich tradition of biblical interpretation. The basic focus is the biblical text itself, and considerable attention is given to the wording and structure of texts. Each particular text, however, is also considered in the light of the entire canon of Christian Scriptures. Beyond this, attention is given to the cultural context of the biblical writings. Information from archaeology, ancient history, geography, comparative literature, history of religions, politics, sociology, and even economics is used to illuminate the culture of the people who produced the Bible. In addition, the writers have drawn from the history of interpretation, not only as it is found in traditional commentary on the Bible but also in literature, theater, church history, and the visual arts. Finally, the Commentary on Scripture is joined with Connections to the world of the contemporary church. Here again, the writers draw on scholarship in many fields as well as relevant issues in the popular culture. This wealth of information might easily overwhelm a reader if not presented in a “user-friendly” format. Thus the heavier discussions of detail and the treatments of other helpful topics are presented in special-interest boxes, or Sidebars, clearly connected to the passages under discussion so as not to interrupt the flow of the basic interpretation. The result is a commentary on Scripture that

Series Preface

focuses on the theological significance of a text while also offering the reader a rich array of additional information related to the text and its interpretation. An accompanying CD-ROM offers powerful searching and research tools. The commentary text, Sidebars, and visuals are all reproduced on a CD that is fully indexed and searchable. Pairing a text version with a digital resource is a distinctive feature of the Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary. Combining credible biblical scholarship, user-friendly study features, and sensitivity to the needs of a visually oriented generation of believers creates a unique and unprecedented type of commentary series. With insight from many of today’s finest biblical scholars and a stunning visual format, it is our hope that the Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary will be a welcome addition to the personal libraries of all students of Scripture. The Editors

xvii

HOW TO USE THIS COMMENTARY The Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary is written by accomplished biblical scholars with a wide array of readers in mind. Whether engaged in the study of Scripture in a church setting or in a college or seminary classroom, all students of the Bible will find a number of useful features throughout the commentary that are helpful for interpreting the Bible. Basic Design of the Volumes

Each volume features an Introduction to a particular book of the Bible, providing a brief guide to information that is necessary for reading and interpreting the text: the historical setting, literary design, and theological significance. Each Introduction also includes a comprehensive outline of the particular book under study. Each chapter of the commentary investigates the text according to logical divisions in a particular book of the Bible. Sometimes these divisions follow the traditional chapter segmentation, while at other times the textual units consist of sections of chapters or portions of more than one chapter. The divisions reflect the literary structure of a book and offer a guide for selecting passages that are useful in preaching and teaching. An accompanying CD-ROM offers powerful searching and research tools. The commentary text, Sidebars, and visuals are all reproduced on a CD that is fully indexed and searchable. Pairing a text version with a digital resource also allows unprecedented flexibility and freedom for the reader. Carry the text version to locations you most enjoy doing research while knowing that the CD offers a portable alternative for travel from the office, church, classroom, and your home. Commentary and Connections

As each chapter explores a textual unit, the discussion centers around two basic sections: Commentary and Connections. The analysis of a passage, including the details of its language, the history reflected in the text, and the literary forms found in the text, are the main focus

xx

How to Use This Commentary

of the Commentary section. The primary concern of the Commentary section is to explore the theological issues presented by the Scripture passage. Connections presents potential applications of the insights provided in the Commentary section. The Connections portion of each chapter considers what issues are relevant for teaching and suggests useful methods and resources. Connections also identifies themes suitable for sermon planning and suggests helpful approaches for preaching on the Scripture text. Sidebars

The Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary provides a unique hyperlink format that quickly guides the reader to additional insights. Since other more technical or supplementary information is vital for understanding a text and its implications, the volumes feature distinctive Sidebars, or special-interest boxes, that provide a wealth of information on such matters as: • Historical information (such as chronological charts, lists of kings or rulers, maps, descriptions of monetary systems, descriptions of special groups, descriptions of archaeological sites or geographical settings). • Graphic outlines of literary structure (including such items as poetry, chiasm, repetition, epistolary form). • Definition or brief discussions of technical or theological terms and issues. • Insightful quotations that are not integrated into the running text but are relevant to the passage under discussion. • Notes on the history of interpretation (Augustine on the Good Samaritan, Luther on James, Stendahl on Romans, etc.). • Line drawings, photographs, and other illustrations relevant for understanding the historical context or interpretive significance of the text. • Presentation and discussion of works of fine art that have interpreted a Scripture passage.

How to Use This Commentary

Each Sidebar is printed in color and is referenced at the appropriate place in the Commentary or Connections section with a color-coded title that directs the reader to the relevant Sidebar. In addition, helpful icons appear in the Sidebars, which provide the reader with visual cues to the type of material that is explained in each Sidebar. Throughout the commentary, these four distinct hyperlinks provide useful links in an easily recognizable design.

Alpha & Omega Language

This icon identifies the information as a language-based tool that offers further exploration of the Scripture selection. This could include syntactical information, word studies, popular or additional uses of the word(s) in question, additional contexts in which the term appears, and the history of the term’s translation. All nonEnglish terms are transliterated into the appropriate English characters.

Culture/Context

This icon introduces further comment on contextual or cultural details that shed light on the Scripture selection. Describing the place and time to which a Scripture passage refers is often vital to the task of biblical interpretation. Sidebar items introduced with this icon could include geographical, historical, political, social, topographical, or economic information. Here, the reader may find an excerpt of an ancient text or inscription that sheds light on the text. Or one may find a description of some element of ancient religion such as Baalism in Canaan or the Hero cult in the Mystery Religions of the Greco-Roman world.

Interpretation

Sidebars that appear under this icon serve a general interpretive function in terms of both historical and contemporary renderings. Under this heading, the reader might find a selection from classic or contemporary literature that illuminates the Scripture text or a significant quotation from a famous sermon that addresses the passage. Insights are drawn from various sources, including literature, worship, theater, church history, and sociology.

xxi

xxii

How to Use This Commentary

Additional Resources Study

Here, the reader finds a convenient list of useful resources for further investigation of the selected Scripture text, including books, journals, websites, special collections, organizations, and societies. Specialized discussions of works not often associated with biblical studies may also appear here. Additional Features

Each volume also includes a basic Bibliography on the biblical book under study. Other bibliographies on selected issues are often included that point the reader to other helpful resources. Notes at the end of each chapter provide full documentation of sources used and contain additional discussions of related matters. Abbreviations used in each volume are explained in a list of abbreviations found after the Table of Contents. Readers of the Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary can regularly visit the Internet support site for news, information, updates, and enhancements to the series at www.helwys.com/commentary. Several thorough indexes enable the reader to locate information quickly. These indexes include: • An Index of Sidebars groups content from the special-interest boxes by category (maps, fine art, photographs, drawings, etc.). • An Index of Scriptures lists citations to particular biblical texts. • An Index of Topics lists alphabetically the major subjects, names, topics, and locations referenced or discussed in the volume. • An Index of Modern Authors organizes contemporary authors whose works are cited in the volume.

Introduction Sometimes in newspaper reviews or on the liner notes of a book, literary critics warn us that a play or novel begins in medias res, “in the middle of things.” Events or circumstances have already happened to the characters that will figure prominently in the story we are about to read or watch. Following the lead of literary critics, I am alerting (or perhaps reminding) readers of 2 Corinthians that this letter begins in medias res. So to read, study, or preach from 2 Corinthians is to step into the “middle” of things. But that’s not all. We’re also stepping into the middle of a mess! Early in the letter Paul writes of a great sense of having been consoled/comforted (from what?). A bit further along he hopes the Corinthians will understand him, insists he is not fickle, mentions a painful visit and a letter he wrote from “anguish of heart,” and says the punishment they have handed out is enough. That is just the beginning of II Corinthians the letter. Further reading indicates that people were choosing sides, emotions were charged, accusations and suspicions had been flying about. We should little wonder, then, that in this letter Paul is alternately vulnerable and hostile, profound and sarcastic, bold and begging. He is as emotional in 2 Corinthians as we see him in his writings. A well-crafted play or novel eventually tells readers, via characters’ comments, reminiscences, flashbacks, etc., about previous happenings that affect the story. But Paul writes a letter to insiders who are well acquainted with the story thus far. He has no need to recount their recent history. Outsiders (we who read this letter in the twentyChristoph Weigel. II Corinthians. Biblia ectypa: Bildnussen auss Heiliger Schrifft Alt und Neuen Testaments. (Credit: Courtesy of first century are obviously outsiders) the Pitts Theology Library, Candler School of Theology, Emory wanting to understand 2 Corinthians, University) however, need to understand what has A rendering of Paul’s second epistle to the brought Paul and the Corinthian Corinthians.

2

Introduction

believers to such a time as this. There is a story here but few clues to its plot lines in the letter itself. We begin, therefore, with some detective work to help us appreciate the letter’s context. The more we understand about the Corinthian struggles, the better our chances of not creating our own messes with the letter’s contents. The Story Thus Far

Many Christians are familiar with early parts of Paul’s story, how he persecuted the Jesus followers until he had an encounter with the risen Christ (on the road to Damascus, according to Acts). Many Christians may also be aware that Paul wound up among the saints in Antioch of Syria where initially he was a close associate of Barnabas. The church in Antioch would become one of the significant centers of faith in the early years of the Jesus movement. The writer of Acts suggests the seeds of this significance were planted early, noting that the term “Christian” was first used in Antioch (11:26), and that the community heeded the call of the Spirit to send Paul and Barnabas on a preaching mission into Asia Minor (13:1-3). [Acts 13:1-3] There God “opened a door of faith to the Gentiles” (14:27). We pick up our story here.

Syrian Antioch in relation to Jerusalem, Corinth This map shows Antioch of Syria, the place from which Paul began his missionary work, in relation to Jerusalem (the birthplace of the church), Corinth (the primary geographical concern of this commentary), and the rest of the Roman Empire.

Introduction Acts 13:1-3 The writer of Acts tells the story of Paul (initially called Saul in the book) being sent on his first missionary journey. At 13:1-3 we learn, “Now in the church at Antioch there were prophets and teachers: Barnabas, Simeon who was called Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen a member of the court of Herod the ruler, and Saul. While

3

they were worshiping the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, ‘Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them.’ Then after fasting and praying they laid their hands on them and sent them off.” According to Acts, this worship experience launched Paul’s traveling mission work.

To Be Circumcised or Not

The inclusion of Gentiles in the Jesus movement The Nations Shall Stream to Zion without their conversion to Judaism was a conThe prophets who gave us the book of tentious issue for early disciples. For Paul, Isaiah spoke of the “days to come” when the divisions among people will end: however, the issue was non-negotiable. Like other readers of Paul, I understand him to have 2:2-3a. In days to come the mountain of the been an apocalyptic Jew who believed the Lord’s house shall be established as the highest Messianic Age had broken into his world. His of the mountains, and shall be raised above the experience of the resurrected Christ (see 1 Cor hills; all the nations shall stream to it. Many 15:3-8) was likely the first sign for him of the peoples shall come and say, “Come, let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the house of the presence of God’s new age. The inclusion of the God of Jacob; that [God] may teach us [God’s] Gentiles may have been another such sign, for ways and that we may walk in [God’s] paths.” the prophets said the nations would stream to 60:2b-3. But the Lord will rise upon you, and Zion in the “days to come.” [The Nations Shall Stream [God’s] glory will appear over you. Nations shall to Zion] But the mission to the Gentiles was also come to your light, and kings to the brightness of Paul’s vocation. He understood himself to be your dawn. 66:18. For I know their works and their thoughts, called as an “apostle to the Gentiles” to proclaim and I am coming to gather all nations and to them that God is re-creating and renewing tongues; and they shall come and see my glory. the world through Jesus the Messiah. [Paul’s Vocation in Galatians 1:15-16] Because God is Paul’s Vocation in Galatians 1:15-16 pouring out such grace on the world, both In Gal 1:15-16, Paul, in the context of defending Jews and Gentiles are free from enslavehis apostolate, describes his vocation thusly: “But ment to the power of sin and death. Both when God, who had set me apart before I was born and Jews and Gentiles are free to live as chilcalled me through [God’s] grace, was pleased to reveal [God’s] Son to me, so that I might proclaim him among dren of God in the power of the Spirit. the Gentiles, I did not confer with any human being . . . .” On various issues Paul cannot always be charged with consistency, but in his writings he does not waver from his belief that the God of the Jews is also the God of the Gentiles. [God of Jews and Gentiles in Romans 3] Some Jesus followers, however, were persuaded otherwise and believed strongly in Israel’s chosenness. They advocated the observation of the commandments of the Torah, including circumcision and the ceremonial rituals that made a Jew a Jew. The controversy was such that Paul and Barnabas, along with Titus, went to Jerusalem to meet with James (Jesus’ brother) and Peter in what has

4

Introduction

been dubbed the “Jerusalem Council.” The writer of Acts and Paul concur that the council resulted in the sides agreeing to a “peaceful coexistence” of sorts between them. According to Acts, James said they should “not harass” the Gentiles who turned to God (Acts 15:1-21). Paul wrote that the “pillars” of the church saw that he’d been entrusted with the “gospel of uncircumcision” just as Peter was entrusted with the “gospel of circumcision” and so offered them the “right hand of fellowship,” asking only that they remember the poor (Gal 2:1-10). The writer of Acts indicates the matter was settled. Paul clearly believed it should have been. Apparently, however, it was not. In Galatians 2:11-14 [The Story in Galatians 2] Paul The Story in Galatians 2 tells of a time, after the Jerusalem Council, when Paul describes the “Antioch incident” Peter came to Antioch and shared table fellowship in Gal 2:11-14. Verses 11-12 tell us with Gentile believers until “some people from what prompted the confrontation: “But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his James came.” At that point Peter separated himself face, because he stood self-condemned; for from the Gentiles, as did Barnabas and the “rest of until certain people came from James, he the Jews.” Paul says he opposed Peter “to his face” used to eat with the Gentiles. But after they and in public, calling him (essentially) a hypocrite. came, he drew back and kept himself sepaSurely calling Peter a hypocrite before other Jesus rate for fear of the circumcision faction.” followers was no small thing for Paul. This, then, When Barnabas and other Jews also joined Peter in “this hypocrisy” (2:13), Paul was no small controversy. Lovers of good stories responded, “But when I saw that they were might well be thinking, “This is getting interesting! not acting consistently with the truth of the So what happened next?” Unfortunately, we don’t gospel, I said to Cephas before them all, ‘If know. But there are reasons to believe that the you, though a Jew, live like a Gentile and not outcome did not favor Paul. Paul’s not telling what like a Jew, how can you compel the Gentiles happened next may itself be significant. If Peter had to live like Jews?’” (2:14) come around to Paul’s view, Paul would likely have said so, because it would have helped the argument he was making in the Galatian letter. Two other pieces of evidence also suggest the Antioch controversy did not go Paul’s way. Acts reports a split between Barnabas and Paul shortly after the Jerusalem Council (15:36-41). Luke claims that they split over taking John Mark with them (after he failed them on their first trip), but since he writes as if the Jerusalem Council had settled the Gentile question when clearly it had not, we might wonder if there’s more to this story, too. Also according to Acts, after the split Paul took Silas (and then Timothy) with him on a preaching mission through Asia Minor, then into Macedonia, and finally to Achaia where he settled in Corinth for a while (in AD 49–50). There he met Prisca and Aquila, God of Jews and Gentiles in Romans 3 Paul is adamant that the One God is the God of both Jews and Gentiles. His writing on Rom 3 illustrates this point. In 3:22b-23 Paul says, “For there is no distinction, since all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (emphasis mine). Then in 3:29-30 he asks (and answers), “Or is God the God of Jews only? Is [God] not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, since God is one; and [God] will justify the circumcised on the ground of faith and the uncircumcised through that same faith.”

Introduction

5

Paul’s Second Missionary Journey After the Jerusalem Council, the “Antioch incident,” and the split with Barnabas, Paul took Silas and embarked on his so-called “Second Missionary Journey” that took him through Asia Minor, into Macedonia in northern Greece, and finally to the city of Corinth in the Southern Greek province of Achaia.

who became lifelong friends and partners in ministry and with whom he went to work as a tentmaker (18:1-3). A number of scholars wonder if Paul’s silence about the outcome in Antioch, the split with Barnabas, and his manual labor in Corinth reveal that the fragile “peaceful coexistence” between advocates of the “gospel of circumcision” and the “gospel of uncircumcision” had come undone after the Antioch conflict. Perhaps, then, Paul lost out not only in Jerusalem but also in Antioch. If so, then he probably set out on this preaching mission with Silas without support from any established church and thus had to work to support himself. Meanwhile, advocates of the “gospel of circumcision” also went on preaching missions, sometimes in the same areas as Paul, making further conflict inevitable. Which brings us finally to Corinth. Before turning to Corinth, however, a caveat is in order. Neither the book of Acts nor Paul’s writings gives the whole history of the early Jesus movement. Prisca and Aquila, for example, came to Corinth from Rome and were likely Jesus followers when Paul met them, which reminds us there was already an established church in Rome in AD 50, though we do not know the story of its founding or early years. Meanwhile, the community that will give us the Gospel of John and the Johannine letters is somewhere developing

6

Introduction

its traditions and understanding of Jesus. Like other feminist scholars, I am convinced that Mary Magdalene was an important figure among Jesus’ disciples. Certainly she was somewhere continuing Jesus’ work, though, again, we don’t know her story. We focus here on Paul, his associates, and his opponents as one part—a significant part, but only one part—of early Christian history. Roman Corinth in AD 50

The Romans conquered and torched the great Greek city of Corinth in 146 BC,1 showing the rest of Greece the price of opposing Rome’s interests. Julius Caesar refounded the city in 44 BC as the Roman colony of Laus Julia Corinthiensis. Sitting astride the narrow isthmus between the sea lanes leading to Italy on one side and Asia on the other, the city’s commercial, political, and military advantages virtually demanded its reestablishment. Rome hastily recruited recently freed persons, perhaps with some displaced peasants and unemployed military veterans thrown in, to repopulate the city. Scholars have referred to these new Corinthians as a “chaotic mélange of dislocated, deracinated individuals, the most successful of whom had good reason to cast off unpleasant reminders of their former low status and ethnic identities.”2 The

Corinth’s Prime Location in the Empire Located on a narrow isthmus near the southern end of Greece with a harbor at Lechaeum opening to the Adriatic Sea and the one at Cenchreae opening to the Aegean Sea, Corinth was strategically located for economic, political, and military advantage.

Introduction

7

Pictures from the Corinthian Agora seaports brought much commerce to the city as well as settlers from around the Mediterranean world eager to participate in a booming economy. This commerce, in turn, created a prosperous banking system so that great personal wealth was generated for a “local ruling class of self-made women and men.”3 Such opportunities were not available to most non-aristocrats in the empire, so these newly The Bema, or judge’s seat, in the Forum of Corinth. rich Corinthians “owed Rome.” Furthermore, by St. Paul preached here. Roman. Corinth, Greece. (Credit: means of public buildings, shrines, and temples conJim Pitts) structed in the city, plus public inscriptions, imperial favors, and the imperial cult, Rome made sure they Image Not Available did not forget whom they owed. Corinth was now due to lack of digital rights. Roman Corinth. The empire was the air the Please view the published Corinthians breathed. To understand Paul in this commentary or perform an city and the people with whom he did ministry Internet search using the credit there, we need to sample this air. below. Rome loved to laud the glories of the Pax Agora and Temple of Apollo. Corinth, Greece. (Credit: Romana, i.e., the cessation of “hot” wars of expanVanni/Art Resource, NY) sion and competition among military rivals, which it brought to the peoples of the empire. Though celebrated as a new golden age and the gift of the gods (even the “gospel” of Caesar their “savior”), this peace was won through military conquest and the displacement of local populations, and was brutally enforced when necessary. What is surprising is how often force was not necessary.4 Rome ruled most areas with neither a large military presence nor a Temple of Apollo in Corinth. 6th C. BC. Corinth, Greece. (Credit: Jim Pitts) large bureaucracy. Instead, the constant propaganda about the glories of the Pax Romana was a key The Corinthian forum, in the geographical ingredient in the glue that held the empire together. center of the city, was also the center of the There appear to have been two other such ingredicity’s activity. Public buildings, shops, theents. aters, temples, monuments, statues, and fountains filled it. Some ruins still survive as One of these was emperor worship through the these pictures indicate. The first shows the imperial ruler cult. By Paul’s time the cult was visible remains of the Bema, or judge’s seat. The everywhere, its altars and temples a constant visual second shows a building with the remains of reminder of the power of the emperor. Americans the Temple of Apollo in the background, and are accustomed to a “separation of church and the third is a closer picture of the remains of state,” but no such concept existed in Paul’s world. that temple. In addition, we are likely to think of religion primarily as faith and devotion, but scholars tell us religion in the Roman Empire was a response to power, one of the ways of relating to the powers that determined peoples’ lives. So, while the ruler cult enlarged the sense of the emperor’s power, it also offered people

8

Introduction

direct communication with the emperor, producing a greater sense of belonging to the empire. Thus new construction to accommodate and place imperial temples made sure the emperor was the center of attention in the empire’s cities. In Corinth the imperial presence dominated public space. As Corinthians went about their lives, they were continually reminded of the emperor’s power.5 A third ingredient in the empire’s glue was the system of patronage. The Corinth (Credit: Jim Pitts) emperor was the “patron” of the empire, bestowing favors in the form of offices, The ruins of the Temple of Octavia still stand in Corinth honors, wealth, etc., on “clients” who today. We get an idea of what an imperial temple would have looked like and the impression it would have made on owed him gratitude, loyalty, and fidelity citizens in ancient Corinth. in return. Because they had attracted the favor of the emperor, these clients attracted clients of their own (a practice the emperor encouraged), becoming patrons themselves and bestowing favors on others who now owed them gratitude, loyalty, and fidelity. These clients then attracted clients of their own, and so it went, creating a hierarchical, interlocking network of relationships that permeated the empire. As a result, these patrons/clients depended, for their political and economic well-being, on the success and goodwill of the emperor. A byproduct of this system was intense competition among higher ranking individuals to show who was the most loyal to and most favored by the emperor. They built monuments extolling the emperor’s greatness, paid for temples for the imperial ruler cult, etc. They donated public buildings for their cities so that the citizens “owed” them. They sponsored festivals that honored the emperor and fed the masses as part of the party, thus killing the proverbial “two birds with one stone.” In Roman Corinth, a city where “old money aristocrats” were noticeably absent, newly amassed wealth was the entry to participation in Roman politics. For example, in other cities “freedpersons” were barred from local councils and high-powered city offices, but not in Corinth, not if they had enough money. The competition there appears to have been keen and widespread. Thus patronage was one significant way by which Corinthian society was organized. But what of those too poor to participate genuinely in such a system? It’s hard to know about them since the literature on the Imperial Temple

Introduction

9

subject was written by those with elite status for those with elite status. Some of the poor likely became clients of a wealthy patron by forming crowds at his door for the morning salutation (shouts of his greatness) or by accompanying him on his rounds of public business during the day or applauding his speeches in court. In return, they could expect handouts of food or small sums of money. Sometimes there might even be invitations to dinner, but they gained no political power for determining their own lives. Those unable to participate at all were likely considered bad citizens, bad people.6 What kind of pressure, then, to participate somehow? Meanwhile, the emperors remained suspicious of lower-class or “plebian” organizations as seedbeds of undercover political activity. Thus an imperial rule prohibited meetings of these associations more than once a month. Imperial Prohibition of Plebian Meetings As an example of the emperors’ suspi[Imperial Prohibition of Plebian Meetings] Also, imperial cions of plebian organizations and officials worried about riots and protests by the meetings, we can note the following. Pliny, masses,7 which is a curiosity. If the Pax Romana Emperor Trajan’s special envoy in Bithunia/Pontus, and the beneficence of the emperor were so had sympathized with a request from the people wonderful for everyone as the propaganda of Nicomedia for a fire brigade. But he was told by insisted, why this concern about riots or underTrajan, “. . . this province and especially these cities have been troubled by cliques of this type. cover political activity among the poor? Paul and the Corinthian Christians: Their Stories Thus Far

Whatever name we may give for whatever reason to those who come together for a common purpose, political clubs emerge quickly from them.” Quoted in Peter Garnsey and Richard Saller, “Patronal Power

Relations,” in Paul and Empire: Religion and Power in Roman So, into this terribly Roman city full of new Imperial Society (ed. Richard A. Horsley; Harrisburg PA: Trinity things, Paul brought a New Thing sometime Press, 1997) 102. during the years AD 49–50: the grace and peace of the gospel of Jesus, the Jewish Messiah, whom Paul called Lord and Savior. With help from Prisca and Aquila (Jews who, according to Acts 18:2, were Christ believers in exile from Rome and who became Paul’s lifelong friends), Paul founded a network of house churches in Corinth that they called an ekkl∑sia. As the cliché goes, the plot now thickens. This community of Jesus followers apparently was made up of both Jews and Gentiles, the greatest number being Gentiles. Women appear to have played a prominent role in the community’s life. Paul addresses slaves in 1 Corinthians 7:21ff. Whether or not any members were from Corinth’s elite citizenry is debated. What seems most probable is that the majority of Corinthian Christians were from the lower socioeconomic strata of the city, which means their meetings could arouse Roman suspicions. Some

10

Introduction

may have been from higher strata (some wealth and status), but none were likely from the highest stratum of the population.8 There is significant diversity among these believers, who may have been unaccustomed to relating in a close way to those who once were considered “the others.” But now they are all members of the ekkl∑sia of God (1 Cor 1:2). We tend to translate ekkl∑sia as “church” and move on, but an ekkl∑sia in the days of Greek democracy had been an assembly of free citizens who determined the direction of their own lives. Of course this democracy was not widely democratic—only elite propertied males were eligible to be free citizens in the Greek ekkl∑sia. But Rome had stripped any democracy from it and turned it into a body that functioned to vote additional honors to Caesar or “elect” local elites to offices they had already bought through patronage. In just such a context Paul calls the Christian community of slaves, poor folk, women, and upwardly mobile ones, both Jew and Gentile, the ekkl∑sia of God, making it a subversive alternative to the empire-supporting Corinthian ekkl∑sia. Perhaps he is also calling forth the original democratic ideals of the ekkl∑sia, for he will tell the Christians that where the Spirit of God is, there is freedom (2 Cor 3:17). According to Acts, Paul stayed in the city about eighteen months on this visit to call the Corinthian ekkl∑sia of God into being. Meanwhile, we should recall that as Paul was on his preaching mission and settling in Corinth for a time, advocates of “the gospel of circumcision” were also on preaching missions. At some point, perhaps while in Corinth,9 Paul got word that some of them had arrived in Galatia. They were discrediting Paul and persuading Jesus followers there to turn to their understanding of the gospel, i.e., the need to be circumcised (Gal 6:12-13) and observe the ceremonial laws of Torah (Gal 4:10). Paul wrote the Galatian letter to sway the believers there back to his view of the gospel. His effort may not have succeeded, however (consider Gal 4:11). The Galatian situation reminds us that the inclusion of Gentiles was still unsettled in the wider Jesus movement. Here is a good place to note Paul’s plan, mentioned in several letters, for his faith communities to take up a collection as a “ministry to the saints” in Jerusalem (e.g., Rom 15:25). Though any agreement between advocates of “the gospel of circumcision” and those who shared Paul’s beliefs had come undone, Paul apparently continued with his resolve to “remember the poor” (Gal 2:10). In agreement with other readers of Paul, I suspect he hoped such a collection would bring some reconciliation between the groups.

Introduction

11

Galatia in relation to Corinth There is much debate among scholars as to which “Galatia” Paul visited and founded churches in—the territory in the north of Asia Minor where the ethnic Galatians settled, or the Roman province of Galatia that included this territory but extended southward to include such cities as Antioch of Pisidia, Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe. Both areas are visible on this map, which also shows this area in relation to Corinth.

Some Pauline scholars believe Paul considered the collection the “crown jewel” of his ministry. Before it has a chance to become an opportunity for reconciliation, however, we will watch it become a source of contention in Corinth. For reasons clarified neither by Paul nor the writer of Acts, Paul left Corinth after eighteen months, taking Prisca and Aquila with him. Acts tells us he left his friends in Ephesus while he traveled to Jerusalem and “greeted the church,” and then went on to Antioch, which is all we know of that trip (18:18-22). During this time, again according to Acts, Apollos met Prisca and Aquila in Ephesus, and they taught him the way of Jesus “more accurately” (18:26), whatever that means. Then Apollos went to Corinth to teach for a while (18:27-28). Paul, meanwhile, finished his stay in Antioch and traveled through Galatia and Phrygia (18:23), perhaps trying to diminish the influence of the “gospel of circumcision.” Then he rejoined Prisca and Aquila in Ephesus where he would stay for some time (Acts 19:1ff ). While in Ephesus, news came to Paul that “issues” had arisen among Corinthian believers including factions and infighting, lawsuits among members, sexual concerns, problems in worship,

12

Introduction

Ephesus in relation to Corinth Ephesus and Corinth were important cities in the Roman Empire and to Paul; the Christian communities there were likely important to one another. They shared connections not only to Paul but also to Prisca, Aquila, and Apollos, and Paul wrote 1 Corinthians from Ephesus. They were located across the Aegean Sea from each other.

questions regarding the resurrection of the dead, questions about Paul not taking money from them, etc. Some of these issues were no doubt due to the challenges of relating to one another (e.g., slaves and non-slaves, men and women, etc., were unaccustomed to relating together publicly). Others were the result of cultural differences (e.g., Greco-Roman folk struggling with Jewish apocalyptic thinking), and others simply of being so new at following Jesus. Ethical and theological debates were bound to occur in such a setting, but Paul seems to have perceived that there was one issue lying beneath many (though perhaps not all) of the problems surfacing in the Corinthian ekkl∑sia. The letter of 1 Corinthians shows his concern that some Corinthian believers considered themselves wise, spiritual, and superior to others in the community (see, e.g., 1 Cor 3:18; 4:6-8). Scholars have long tried to identify the source of these Corinthians’ views. As early as 1831, F. C. Baur argued that Jewish Christians linked with Peter had arrived in Corinth, bringing the tensions over Gentiles being circumcised and keeping the ceremonial laws of Torah into this community, a perspective recently re-argued by Michael D. Goulder in Paul and the Competing Mission in Corinth (published 2001).10 For a long while other

Introduction

13

scholars believed that problems in Corinth came not from Torahobserving Jews but from “spiritual libertines” who were much like second-century Gnostics (sometimes referred to as “protoGnostic”). Recent studies, though, have questioned whether we should consider Gnosticism as anything like a unified movement even in the second century,11 which renders the presence of a “proto-Gnostic” theology in first-century Corinth unlikely. Still other scholars wonder if Hellenistic Judaism provides the background for the Corinthian tensions. Richard A. Horsley, for example, argues that Apollos brought a devotion to Sophia (i.e., personified Wisdom) from the Hellenistic Judaism of his native Alexandria that he assimilated with stories of Jesus to offer the Corinthians knowledge of the one true God, freedom and triumph in earthly behavior, and ecstatic spiritual experiences.12 What are “ordinary Christians” to think when scholars have such conflicting views of the situation? Obviously we don’t have enough data to determine definitively the source of these Corinthian views. But that reality need not interrupt our interpretive process, for some things are clear enough. Paul was frustrated with Corinthian believers themselves rather than outsiders. Regardless of their sources, Paul understood some of them to be holding a triumphalistic view of the gospel that led them to be Corinthian “Triumphalism” impressed with their own spirituality and to The theology and mindset of some treat other believers as “less than” themselves. Corinthians that so troubled Paul may be labeled “triumphalistic” because its adherents [Corinthian “Triumphalism”] Such a status-seeking spirclaimed to be filled with the Spirit (reading 1 Cor ituality would have been at home in the culture 2:12-15 as their words), possessing all they want, of Corinth, but Paul sharply opposed this view. and living like kings; they were rich (1 Cor 4:8), In response to all he heard from Corinth, he wise, strong, and honored (1 Cor 4:10). wrote his second letter to them (the first is menConsequently, “all things were lawful” for them tioned in 1 Cor 5:9 and is lost), the one we call (1 Cor 6:12), and they possessed knowledge (1 Cor 8:1). Perhaps they gave little or no thought 1 Corinthians, in which he insisted that the cruto the implications of Jesus’ crucifixion (hence cified Christ is the wisdom of God, the spiritual 1 Cor 1:18-25). They considered those who saw gifts they should desire are those that build up things differently to be unspiritual (1 Cor 2:14). everyone, and while faith, hope, and love are all They understood their religion to enable them “to that remain, “the greatest of these is love.” come out on top” or be triumphant over people Given the self-confidence that Paul’s and circumstances. Thus, as we will see, they disdained Paul’s suffering for the gospel. letters often exhibit, we might assume that he expected his letter to resolve the issues in the Corinthian ekkl∑sia. So, at the end of the letter, he urged them to complete their part of the collection for the Jerusalem saints (probably via Timothy whom they were to put at ease) and told them he would visit them after passing through Macedonia, perhaps even staying the winter with them (1 Cor

14

Introduction

Quotations from 1 Corinthians 16:1-11 As Paul concludes 1 Corinthians, he writes in ch. 16, “Now concerning the collection for the saints: you should follow the directions I gave to the churches of Galatia” (v. 1). Then he tells them, “I will visit you after passing through Macedonia . . . and perhaps I will stay with you or even spend the winter. . . . I do not want to see you now just in passing, for I hope to spend some time with you, if the Lord permits” (vv. 5-7). With regard to Timothy’s work among them, he says, “If Timothy comes, see that he has nothing to fear among you, for he is doing the work of the Lord just as I am; therefore, let no one despise him. Send him on his way in peace, so that he may come to me; for I am expecting him with the brothers.”

16:1-11). [Quotes from 1 Corinthians 16:1-11] The letter may not, however, have had the desired effect. Apparently Paul changed plans and made a hasty visit to Corinth (without passing through Macedonia) not long after they would have received 1 Corinthians. Apparently that visit did not go well (see 2 Cor 2:1). From Paul’s perspective, the situation was approaching a crisis. And So, Second Corinthians

Whatever the exact reason for this visit to Corinth—perhaps Paul heard that his letter had exacerbated problems in Corinth rather than solved them, or maybe the Jerusalem collection was going badly, or maybe there was another reason—he soon decided his presence made matters worse. Emotions were apparently running hot. Rather than stay and argue his case, Paul returned to Ephesus and wrote the Corinthians another letter “out of affliction, anguish of heart, and through many tears” (2 Cor 2:4), which he likely sent by Titus. Then he waited with great anxiety to hear their response (2 Cor 7:5-7). When finally he met up with Titus again, he heard much (though perhaps not all) of what he hoped to hear—the majority of Corinthians had repented (2 Cor 7:9-11). In response, Paul wrote yet another letter to them full of the comfort/consolation he felt by their desire to reconcile with him. What of these two letters, the third and fourth ones at least, Paul wrote to the Corinthians? We have come finally to our canonical 2 Corinthians. At least as early as 1776 a German scholar proposed that 2 Corinthians 10–13 is so different in tone and content from chapters 1–9 that it must be a separate letter. In the late 1800s some scholars went a step further and argued that 2 Corinthians 10–13 is part of the emotional letter Paul wrote after his painful visit, while 2 Corinthians 1–9 is the letter reflecting the reconciliation between Paul and the Corinthians. So, they argued, we actually possess these two letters Paul wrote to the Corinthians. Now, with the idea on the table that 2 Corinthians is a composite letter, further study of chapters 1–9 brought awareness of other breaks in the flow of Paul’s thought. Are there more than even two letters making up our 2 Corinthians? [Outline of the Letter] Paul’s recitation of his travel to Macedonia to meet Titus and hear news from Corinth is interrupted at 2:14 and resumes at 7:5,

Introduction

15

Outline of the Letter so some have wondered if 1:1–2:13 and 7:5-16 I. Greeting and Prayer, 1:1-11 were originally one letter, the letter of reconciliation. That would make 2:14–7:4 yet another II. The Body of the Letter Begins: The Issues letter dealing with Paul’s understanding of the Surface, 1:12–2:13 gospel compared to others, probably those of III. Paul’s Defense of His Ministry and Himself, the “gospel of circumcision.” Well, except for 2:14–7:4 6:14–7:1, which seems so odd and out of place A. The One Who Is Led Captive, 2:14–3:6 that it might be a separate letter, or maybe Paul B. Slave of the Glorious Ministry of the Spirit, didn’t write this section at all. Then chapters 3:7–4:6 8–9 are solely about the collection for the C. The Clay Jar, 4:7–5:10 Jerusalem saints, so maybe they make up still D. Ambassador of the Ministry of Reconciliation, 5:11–6:10 another letter (or two) Paul wrote to the E. Therefore . . . , 6:11–7:4 Corinthians. Then, to return to chapters 10–13, many scholars continue to believe this material IV. So, the Issues Are Settled? 7:5-16 belongs to a separate letter, but do they comA. Titus Brings Consolation prise the emotional letter that preceded the reconciliation letter or another letter that folV. The Issues are Not Settled, 8:1–9:15 A. Grace and the Jerusalem Collection, 8:1-15 lowed the reconciliation letter when relations B. The Delegation to Work on the Collection, between Paul and the Corinthians had soured 8:16-24 yet again? Finally, some scholars maintain that C. Grace and Partnership (Not Patronage) 2 Corinthians is only one letter after all. Through the Collection, 9:1-15 Is that confusing enough? What are we to make of all this as we read, learn, and preach VI. Things Get Worse: A New Letter and a Showdown Visit, 10:1–13:14 from 2 Corinthians? Since certainty regarding A. The Third Visit: Bold Authority for Building the make-up of 2 Corinthians has proven Up, 10:1-11 elusive, I propose that we aim for simplicity. B. Standard of Measure, 10:12-18 The simpler the route taken, the fewer the C. Refusing Patronage, 11:1-15 opportunities for wrong turns. Here, then, is D. Boasting in Weakness, 11:16–12:13 my proposal. E. The Third Visit: Proving Themselves, 12:14–13:10 First, 2 Corinthians 10–13 is indeed so difF. Final Exhortations; Concluding Thoughts, ferent in both tone and content from chapters 13:11-14 1–9 that it looks like a separate letter. Also, we can imagine a scenario in which someone editing Paul’s letters would decide to copy a smaller letter onto the end of another one (e.g., writing materials were expensive and hard to obtain, one wouldn’t want to waste space, etc.). Thus, in the commentary I will treat these chapters as a separate letter (fragment) from chapters 1–9. Further, I am persuaded that this fragment is not from the emotional letter Paul wrote prior to 2 Corinthians 1–9 but is from another letter written after chapters 1–9 when Paul’s relations with the Corinthians had taken another downturn. Accordingly, I will relate the “next chapter” in the story of Paul and the Corinthians that leads to this fifth letter when we get to chapter 10 in the commentary.

16

Introduction

Second, I will treat 2 Corinthians 1–9 as one letter. While it is true that 2 Corinthians 7:5 would follow 2:13 rather neatly, I cannot imagine the scenario in which an editor would decide to copy one of Paul’s letters into the middle of another one. In addition, it is possible to interpret these sections as fitting together reasonably well. While it is true that chapters 8–9 treat a topic not mentioned in chapters 1–7 (i.e., the Jerusalem collection) in a different rhetorical style than those chapters, these points do not require us to view this section as a separate letter. The Corinthian Letters in this Furthermore, it is possible to interpret these chapters Commentary as following 1–7 rather well. Second Corinthians In this commentary the 6:14–7:4, though, may be the exception to the “one Corinthian correspondence will letter” approach. The words there are so odd that I be viewed as occurring the following wonder if Paul wrote them at all. We’ll talk about order: those issues when we come to that point in the com(1) An earlier letter that we do not have (1 Cor 5:9) mentary. (2) 1 Corinthians Third, while I view chapters 1–9 as a whole letter, (3) The emotional letter referred to in along the way in the commentary I will reference 2 Cor 2:3-4, which we also do not scholars who hold different views. Thus interested have students of Paul who want to consider these issues (4) 2 Cor 1–9 (with 6:14–7:1 as a posfor themselves will have the resources to do so. sible insertion that does not belong) (5) 2 Cor 10–13

[The Corinthian Letters in this Commentary]

Finally, Hermeneutics

The final part of our preparation to read 2 Corinthians well is to clarify the approach to be used to interpret this letter with as much integrity as possible. All that I’ve written thus far should indicate that I believe in the importance of situating the letter in its socio-historical context. Second Corinthians was written by a real human being to real human beings in a particular place in a particular moment in history. The more we know about them, their world, their lives, and their issues, the more clearly we can understand this communication between them. Here we can note that careful study of Paul’s socio-historical context has challenged some interpretations of his thought that date to the Protestant Reformation. For example, we no longer read him as being anti-Judaism or as proclaiming the faith and grace of Christianity in opposition to the self-righteous legalism of Judaism. In fact, the “self-righteous legalism of Judaism” is a Christian stereotype, not a true portrayal of first-century Judaism. Paul likely considered himself a faithful Jew who believed the Jewish Messiah

Introduction

had come and inaugurated the Messianic Age. Also, we no longer read him as solely engaged in theological thinking and debate. Rather, we know now that politics and economics could not be separated from religion in the Roman Empire. So, Paul is both influenced by and seeks to influence all these arenas of life. Having situated the letter in its socio-historical context, we turn to the text itself. There are key factors to keep in mind if we would read it well. First is the role of letters in Paul’s culture. In a world without high-speed communications or travel and in which travel was expensive and often dangerous, letters took on great importance. Letters were considered to “stand in” for the presence of the letter-writer. Teachers wrote handbooks to guide good letter writing. We will attend to Paul’s choice to write letters to his churches. Second, Paul wrote letters for specific reasons. Something was going on with him or the church or both that caused him to write, and he wrote to address what was going on. The letters do not contain general, abstract theological reflections but pastoral words addressing the occasion that prompted the writing. We must be careful, therefore, reticent even, about drawing abstract theological conclusions from Paul’s letters.13 Third, we must attend to Paul’s rhetoric. Paul was not concerned to report information objectively or toss out an opinion for what it was worth or some other such effort. He wanted to persuade the Corinthians to see a situation as he did and to act as he believed they should. Rhetoric is the disciplined art of persuasion14 and was highly valued in the ancient world. Paul’s letters are highly rhetorical. If we pay attention to the rhetorical strategies and devices Paul uses to argue his case and bring the Corinthians to his side, we can understand more clearly the case he wished to argue. Fourth, we can practice what Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza calls “a hermeneutics of ekkl∑sia.” That is, we should understand Paul’s letter as one voice, though certainly a significant one, in the theological debates within the newly formed Christian ekkl∑sia (remembering what an ekkl∑sia is). These first Christians were figuring out how to live as God’s alternative community in the midst of the patriarchal structures and imperialist values of the Roman Empire without a New Testament or long-standing Christian traditions to guide them. Debate was inevitable. Those with different perspectives from Paul and from one another were not necessarily “bad guys.” Rather, they were part of a legitimate and necessary struggle to understand how to be faithful to Christ in their time.15 In many ways the Corinthian letters are as much the Corinthians’ story as Paul’s. Too often we caricature and stereotype those who

17

18

Introduction

disagreed with Paul rather than appreciating their role in this new movement. Too often we caricature and stereotype those with whom we disagree in our own churches. Perhaps learning to practice such a hermeneutics as we read Paul can be a step toward learning to practice it in our faith communities also. When we have taken all these matters into consideration, then we will work to read the text closely, carefully, clearly. I tell my students that our goal is to “let the text say what it says,” not what we think it says or want it to say or have always been taught it says. We are not to make it say something we want it to say but to let it speak for itself. This is not always easy to do because we have been taught that texts say certain things, which is how we read them. Or we hold beliefs that we want the text to affirm. Or we read through our experience as twenty-first-century Americans, forgetting how different the first-century Mediterranean world was from our own. Or certain experiences in our lives cause us to read some texts differently from what we would have without those experiences. In other words, we are not objective, dispassionate readers of this letter any more than Paul was an objective, dispassionate writer of it. But this reality does not mean we are doomed to be poor readers of Paul. Instead, we can be self-aware readers. If we know and acknowledge to ourselves and others what we bring to our reading and respect that others bring who they are and what they’ve experienced to their reading, then we have an opportunity to broaden and deepen our learning. When someone’s life experience causes her to see things in a text that others missed and she shares what she sees, others’ reading is enhanced. By the same token, if her experience is distorting her reading, others can point that out to her (gently, one hopes). Our Bible reading is deepened (and perhaps less distorted) when we are self-aware readers and are part of a community of selfaware readers. With that said, let me acknowledge who I am as a reader of Paul and writer of this commentary. I am a white, female, educated, North American, feminist Christian minister. I practice my vocation by teaching New Testament at an ecumenical seminary in the southern part of the United States that is frequently referred to as the Bible belt of the country. I have loved the New Testament for a long time and love teaching it, but I believe that sometimes faithfulness compels me to argue with it. Similarly, I am both inspired by Paul and infuriated by him at different times. But I appreciate how he struggled to understand what being faithful to God required of him. I struggle as well. That makes Paul’s voice a good

Introduction Famous Portraits of Paul

Image Not Available due to lack of digital rights. Please view the published commentary or perform an Internet search using the credit below.

Michelangelo Buonarroti (1475–1564). Saint Paul, from the Piccolomini Altar. Duomo, Siena, Italy. (Credit: Wikimedia Commons, CC-PD-Mark)

Saint Paul. Detail from Saint Paul handing over the letters to Timothy and Silo. Byzantine mosaic. Duomo, Monreale, Italy. (Credit: Scala/Art Resource, NY)

El Greco (1541–1614). Saint Paul, the Apostle. [Credit: Remiel / Wikimedia Commons, PD-Art (PD-old)]

Many great artists have presented their impressions of Paul. Here are three. The first one is Michelangelo’s great sculpture from the Piccolomini Altar in Siena, Italy. Second is a Byzantine mosaic of Paul handing over letters to Timothy and Silvanus. Third is the famous portrait of Paul by El Greco, which is now housed in Toledo, Spain.

one to engage as I ponder my own questions of faith. Readers of this commentary are invited to acknowledge who they are and to join in this conversation with Paul, the Corinthians, and me about matters of faith.

CONNECTIONS 1. We may benefit in our time from observing the impact of the diversity within the Corinthian ekkl∑sia on its communal life. Not that most American churches have been diverse. The global church certainly is, but individual churches, at least in the U.S., tend to be composed of people of the same race, socioeconomic status, cultural affinities, and beliefs. We now live in a time, however, when our neighborhoods, schools, workplaces, and recreation places are becoming increasingly diverse. Many churches find themselves confronted by diversity issues whether or not they planned on such. The likelihood is that most churches will encounter these issues sooner or later. Meanwhile, the global church is already

19

20

Introduction

struggling with them. For example, how should American church bodies that ordain women relate to African church bodies in the same theological tradition that reflect the defiant patriarchy of their culture? As an American feminist who is sensitive to our past as colonizers, I wrestle with such a question. Perhaps attention to the diversity of our Corinthian forebears in faith will yield some insight for our struggle. We may learn not only what we might do in response to our growing diversity, but also what we should not do. 2. Somewhat similarly, attention to the conflict in the Corinthian ekkl∑sia may benefit us. Students in my seminary classes, friends who are serving churches as pastors, friends who are lay leaders in churches, and literature on the current state of the church all sing the recurring refrain that conflict is a major concern—perhaps the major concern—among church people. Whether the issue is whom to ordain (women? gays and lesbians?), what kind of music to have in worship (traditional hymns? praise songs?), whether or not to change worship (become more contemporary?), how to respond to changes in the neighborhood (move or stay?), which ministries to share (do we want homeless people to come here?), differing views of the Bible, old-fashioned personality clashes, or a myriad of other concerns, conflict seems to abound in churches. In such a time as this, our Corinthian forebears in faith may be able to help us. The first lesson they offer is this: when diverse people come together around their faith in Jesus as the Christ, conflict is inevitable. Sometimes we might think that the earliest Christians had an easier time than we since they were closer to the events of Jesus’ life when the fire of the Spirit burned brighter. The Corinthian story reveals how romanticized such a view is! From the earliest days of the Christian movement, we see that a shared faith in Jesus did not prevent real human differences from erupting into conflict. The same is true today. The question for Christians, therefore, is not, “Will there be conflict?” but rather, “How will we respond to conflict?” The Corinthian letters, and 2 Corinthians in particular, tell the story of conflict among Corinthian believers and also between Paul and some Corinthian congregants. We can watch and learn from them.

Notes 1. P. A. Brunt, “Laus Imperii,” in Paul and Empire: Religion and Power in Roman Imperial Society (ed. Richard A. Horsley; Harrisburg PA: Trinity Press, 1997), claimed that “. . . Cicero held that Roman practice conformed to the Panaetian laws of war;

Introduction especially when wars were fought for glory, the conquered were to be treated with mercy. Only the destruction of Corinth had perhaps marred Rome’s record” (28). 2. Richard A. Horsley and Neil Asher Silberman, The Message and the Kingdom: How Jesus and Paul Ignited a Revolution and Transformed the Ancient World (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1997) 164. 3. This descriptive phrase is from Horsley and Silberman, The Message and the Kingdom, 163. 4. Significantly for the story of early Christianity, Judea was an exception. Frequent popular uprisings there prompted frequent violent responses from Rome. See Richard A. Horsley, Jesus and Empire: The Kingdom of God and the New World Disorder (Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 2003) chs. 1 and 2. 5. See S. R. F. Price, “Rituals and Power,” 47–71; Paul Zanker, “The Power of Images,” 72–86; and Richard A. Horsley, “The Gospel of Imperial Salvation: Introduction,” 10–24, all in Horsley, ed., Paul and Empire, for discussions of the imperial ruler cult. 6. Peter Garnsey and Richard Saller, “Patronal Power Relations,” in Paul and Empire, 99, note that Tacitus, in his division of the ordinary people of the city of Rome into the good and the bad, characterizes the former by their participation in the patronage system. 7. Garnsey and Saller, “Patronal Power Relations,” 102. 8. Those interested in reading about this debate among scholars can check Bengt Holmberg, “The Methods of Historical Reconstruction in the Scholarly ‘Recovery’ of Corinthian Christianity,” in Christianity at Corinth: The Quest for the Pauline Church (ed. Edward Adams and David G. Horrell; Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2004) 255–71; or a series of articles in JSNT 84 (2001): 51–94. 9. Galatians is notoriously difficult to date. Scholars locate it anywhere from the time of Paul’s first stay in Corinth to near the end of his active career as an apostle. 10. Michael D. Goulder, Paul and the Competing Mission in Corinth (Peabody MA: Hendrickson, 2001). 11. See Michael A. Williams, Rethinking “Gnosticism”: An Argument for Dismantling a Dubious Category (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996). 12. Richard A. Horsley, 1 Corinthians (ANTC; Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1998). He has also written several articles on this subject. 13. Jouette M. Bassler, “Paul’s Theology: Whence and Whither” in 1 & 2 Corinthians (ed. David M. Hay; vol. 2 of Pauline Theology, ed. Jouette M. Bassler, David M. Hay, E. Elizabeth Johnson; Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 1993) 5–13, reminds us that Paul was not a systematic theologian; that all of Paul’s words are “words on target” addressed to and shaped for particular communities in particular situations so that we must be careful even comparing points in different letters; that sometimes Paul exaggerated to make a point; and that he never wrote a complete theology and some things he wrote have been lost, which means there may be much we don’t know about his theology, all of which calls us to be cautious in drawing broad conclusions from specific texts in Paul’s letters. 14. Charles B. Cousar, The Letters of Paul (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1996) 36. 15. Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza, “Paul and the Politics of Interpretation,” in Paul and Politics (ed. Richard A. Horsley; Harrisburg PA: Trinity Press International, 2000) 40–57.

21

Greeting and Prayer: The Fourth Letter Begins 2 Corinthians 1:1-11

COMMENTARY The next chapter in the story of Paul and the Corinthian believers is the letter itself, 2 Cor 1–9, the fourth one (as far as we know) Paul wrote to these Jesus followers (see [The Corinthian Letters in this Commentary]). As we begin to read, we mustn’t ignore that Paul wrote a letter—not a sermon, a narrative (like the Gospels), or a theological treatise, but a letter. Letter writing was a common form of communication in the Greco-Roman world and became a characteristic literary form in early Christianity.1 Archaeological discoveries have shown that ancient letters could be private, informal communications between friends or artistic creations meant to be published and read by the wider public. Paul’s letters are not exactly private since they were written to whole churches (to be read The Structure of an Ancient Letter aloud in those settings since most The superscription identifies the letter’s people couldn’t read), but neither were author(s) and addressees, and a greeting they intended for the wider public. is offered to the addressees. In our case, it They contain carefully constructed appears in 2 Cor 1:1-2. arguments rather than material hastily A prayer, usually of thanksgiving, connects the composed during a busy day. Even so, superscription with the body of the letter. 2 Cor 1:3-11 is the prayer section of our letter, though it they are not artistic creations intended 2 is not strictly a prayer of thanksgiving. for a wide audience. They fall someThe body of the letter addresses the occawhere between ancient categories. sion(s) that prompted the letter, the reason for Three other points about Paul’s letter writing. As I understand the make-up of 2 writing are notable. First, ancient letters Corinthians, 2 Cor 1:12–9:19 makes up the body had a recognizable pattern (as do our of the fourth letter Paul wrote to the Corinthians, while 10:1–13:10 is the body of the fifth letter. letters today). Paul followed the pattern The farewell concludes the letter, usually with fairly closely as we will see. [The Structure of final exhortations and concluding words of an Ancient Letter] Second, in the Grecogreeting. The farewell section of the fourth letter Roman world letters “stood in” for a was edited out so as to attach chapters 10–13 to visit, which is true for Paul. As Charles chapters 1–9. Thus 13:11-14 form the farewell Cousar has noted, even in Paul’s section of our canonical 2 Corinthians.

24

2 Corinthians 1:1-11

absence, “his presence as apostle is kept before the readers . . . through the letter.”3 Finally, Paul would have had no idea that any letter he was writing would become Holy Scripture for Christians. We might wonder if he would have said some things differently had he known! Ancient letters typically opened with a Paul’s Use of the Term “Apostle” Paul would likely have bristled at any refgreeting from sender to recipients followed by a erence to “the Twelve Apostles” if he prayer. Paul begins this letter in 1:1a by identithought the phrase meant there were only fying himself and Timothy as the senders of the twelve. He understood God to have “appointed in letter. He describes himself as “an apostle of the church first apostles” (1 Cor 12:28; emphasis Christ Jesus by the will of God.” An apostle is mine), probably meaning of first importance. He one who is sent with a message. Luke, in the noted that the risen Christ appeared to Peter, the Twelve, more than 500 believers, James, and book of Acts, restricts the term “apostle” to “the then “to all the apostles” (1 Cor 15:5-7; emphasis Twelve,” and the church has largely adopted his mine). He described Andronicus and Junia (a usage (except for applying it to Paul), but Paul woman) as “eminent among the apostles” (Rom did not use the term that way (e.g., see Rom 16:7) and defended his own apostleship vigor16:7; 1 Cor 15:7). [Paul’s Use of the Term “Apostle”] ously (see Gal 1:1). He even used the term for his This letter will reveal much about what Paul rivals in Corinth, though not without some sarcasm (see 2 Cor 11:5). Being an apostle—litunderstood about being an apostle. In both erally, “one sent with a message”—required a 1 and 2 Corinthians, letters addressed to situadistinct call from God, but Paul was certain God tions in which his apostolate is questioned in had called far more than twelve and that the call some manner, Paul begins by identifying himself had come to him. as an apostle “through the will of God.” If we read him sympathetically, we can understand him as claiming to follow God’s call even when doing so makes him unpopular among some Corinthian believers. If we read Paul from the perspective of those who disagreed with him, however, these words may feel heavy-handed, even authoritarian, as in “do you dare question someone called by the will of God?” Timothy is identified Timothy simply as “the brother.” Luke writes about Timothy in Acts 16:1-3 (which tells of He was Paul’s coworker his meeting and joining with Paul); and close associate and 17:14-15; 18:5 (which relates his was with Paul in Corinth arrival in Corinth with Silas from when the church was Macedonia); 19:22; and 20:4. Paul founded (Acts 18:5; refers to him in his letters to the 2 Cor 1:19). [Timothy] Thessalonians (1:1; 3:2, 6), Philippians (1:1; 2:19-23; in 2:20 Paul He had visited Corinth says Timothy is “the same soul” as since then, perhaps he), Corinthians (1 Cor 4:17; 16:10; carrying the letter of and 2 Cor 1:1, 19), and Romans 1 Corinthians to them (16:21) and also in his letter to (see 1 Cor 16:10). Thus Philemon (1:1). All indications are that Saint Timothy he was known by the Timothy was a key player among the Orthodox icon. [Credit: Wikimedia Commons, group that worked with Paul.

PD-Art (PD-old)]

2 Corinthians 1:1-11 Scholars’ Views of Timothy as Co-author There are widely varying scholarly speculations regarding Timothy being named in the superscription of the letter. Here are some examples: Paul Sampley: Paul associates himself with Timothy as co-author because Timothy had good relations with the Corinthians. Paul hopes to “co-opt for himself the goodwill Timothy has garnered with the Corinthians over the years.” Ralph Martin: Earlier, Paul had sent Timothy to Corinth to report on the Corinthian crisis (see 1 Cor 4:17). Since 2 Corinthians does not mention this visit, it may have gone badly. If so, then “Timothy’s name in the address will be Paul’s attempt to rehabilitate his colleague, who had been insulted and rejected as his emissary.”

25

David Garland: Paul may mention Timothy as a second witness to Paul’s directing and exhorting the community (Deut 17:6; 19:15; 2 Cor 13:1). By citing his colleagues as co-senders, he makes it clear he does not stand alone on these issues. Sampley, The Second Letter to the Corinthians (NIB 11; Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2000) 38. Martin, 2 Corinthians (WBC 40; Waco: Word Books, 1986) 2. Garland, 2 Corinthians (NAC; Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999) 50.

folks there and likely was well acquainted with the whole situation. There has been much speculation as to why Paul names Timothy as co-author here, but the text does not say. [Scholars’ Views of Timothy as Co-author] Perhaps knowing the situation as he did, Timothy helped Paul think through what he wanted to say in this letter. Verse 1b identifies the letter’s recipients as “the ekkl∑sia of God which is in Corinth together with all the saints who are in the whole of Achaia.” We noted in the introduction that an ekkl∑sia in Greek democracy was the assembly of free citizens making decisions about the course of their lives. Rome, however, had stripped it of real power and turned it into a “rubber-stamping body” in service to the empire. Thus, for Paul and other Jesus followers to call their communities the “ekkl∑sia of God” was to be more than a little subversive. They claimed the euangelion (good news) came from God, not Caesar; Achaia they lived under the basileia There was likely a network of house churches within the city of Corinth but (dominion or kingdom) of also beyond in the cities and villages of Achaia. We know, e.g., that Phoebe God, not Caesar; and they was the minister of the church in Cenchreae (Rom 16:1). This map shows the major cities and towns of Achaia. would decide the course of

26

2 Corinthians 1:1-11

their own lives in the ekkl∑sia of God rather than adhere to the proclamations of the Corinthian ekkl∑sia. These statements were certainly religious and theological, but they also made significant political claims in the first-century Roman Empire. They show the Jesus followers to understand themselves as an alternative society to the one dictated by Rome. Their alternativeness also fits with Paul’s use of the term “saints” for the believers. The Greek word hagios has its roots in a Hebrew word meaning “to (Credit: Todd Bolen/BiblePlaces.com) separate.” Saints in Corinth were those Cenchreae was the port for Corinth on the eastern side of the isthmus and remains of the ancient harbor are who separated themselves4 from the life of visible in the water today. Paul had his hair cut here the empire (the imperial cult, the patronage because of a vow and then set sail from the harbor, system, its definition of peace, its savior, its concluding his 18-month stay in Corinth (on his second ranking of citizens, etc.) because they lived journey; Acts 18:18). according to the gospel of Christ. To these saints, Paul offers, as in all his letters, grace and peace from God and from Christ (1:2). Grace is unearned favor born of God’s love and generosity. It is pure gift, not the kind of quid pro quo gift giving we often do in our time. [Receivers of Gifts] One’s inclusion and participation in the ekkl∑sia of God happens because God has given a gift to which the only authentic responses are receptivity and thankfulness. Paul also wishes for them peace from God. Surely the shalom of Paul’s Jewish heritage is in his mind. This is the peace of welcome, Receivers of Gifts forgiveness, love, and comUnited Methodist Bishop William Willimon observes that most of passion, the peace that us have probably had the experience of receiving a nice gift from happens when all are reconsomeone we don’t know well. What, he asks, is the first thing we do in ciled to God and in harmony response? “Right. We try to come up with a gift to give in response—not with one another. In such a out of gratitude . . . or out of friendship . . . , but because we don’t want to feel guilty.” It may be more blessed to give than receive, but, he says, it is peace there is no hatred or harder to receive. “We prefer to see ourselves as givers—powerful, comfear of violence from one’s petent, self-sufficient, capable people whose goodness motivates us to neighbors. How different is employ some of our power, competence and gifts to benefit the less fortuthe peace from God comnate.” It is hard to be “on the receiving end of love, God’s or anyone else’s. pared to the Pax Romana, It requires that we see our lives not as our possessions, but as gifts. which was “peace by violence ‘Nothing is more repugnant to capable, reasonable people than grace,’ wrote John Wesley long ago.” But the gospel calls us to “see ourselves as and conquest.” But, as the we are—empty-handed recipients of a gracious God….” Corinthian letters make clear, “The God We Never Knew,” in Watch for the Light: Readings for Advent and Christmas God’s peace is easier talked (Farmington PA: Plough Publishing House, 2001), for Dec. 14 (pages not numbered). about than practiced. Cenchreae, the Port of Corinth

2 Corinthians 1:1-11

27

Paul’s Use of “Father” for God At v. 3 Paul, in the fashion of Greco-Roman Paul understands God as the source of all letters, offers a prayer. Most often Paul utters a mercy and consolation, so he speaks prayer of thanksgiving in his letters, but here he metaphorically here of God as the father of all prays a Jewish-like blessing on God. Paul blesses mercies. The metaphorical language in this God because God is the father of oiktirmos instance should be obvious to us: clearly God did not “beget” mercy in the same way a human (mercy or compassion) and the God of all father “begats” a child. Let us, then, have a parakl∑sis. [Paul’s Use of “Father” for God] Parakl∑sis is a reminder that all human language for God is an wonderful Greek word that can be translated approximation, an effort to communicate someinto English as comfort, consolation, encourthing that is ultimately beyond human language. agement, or advocacy, among other things. This We turn to metaphor and poetry, to story and word, or its verb form (parakalein), appears ten even song in hopes of evoking for others the possibilities of God. We are supposed to wonder, times in vv. 3-7 and fourteen times in the rest of “How is God the father of mercies? What does the letter. If we transliterate these two words in that imply for me?” Too often, however, in our 1:4, the verse tells us about God “who scientific and technological culture we have parakalein us upon our every affliction with the forgotten the power of evocative language. result that we are able to parakalein others in Consequently, some will argue that God is a every affliction through the parakl∑sis with father and that the stories must be historically factual or they are untrue. Then, to our detriment, which we ourselves are being parakalein by God. we no longer wonder or ponder what is possible For just as the sufferings of Christ abound in us, with God. Those who had painful relationships so also through Christ our parakl∑sis abounds.” with their fathers are not the only ones hurt by litClearly comfort/consolation is a significant eralizing the father language for God. We all lose. theme of this letter. This verse and the ones that follow, vv. 5-7, introduce us to another key idea of the letter, that of affliction (thlipsis). We should be clear that Paul is speaking of affliction that is the result of his work for Christ in the world (not as a result of tsunamis or illness or because he’s been a jerk, etc.). Also clear is that Paul regards such suffering as inevitable. Whenever he and his coworkers enable people to leave the kingdom of Caesar behind and give their loyalty to the kingdom of God, the kingdom of Caesar fights back. Rather than a “haven’t got time for the pain” mentality or seeing his suffering as a signal that something is amiss, Paul believes it is a sign that he is fulfilling his call. But we should be clear that this inevitable suffering is not a call to a sick martyrdom (i.e., people who want to suffer because it makes them look heroic). Nor does it justify the encouragement of passive suffering on the part of those who are being oppressed and exploited. “Suffering is inevitable” texts such as this one have been used throughout our history to tell women and other minority groups to “accept their lot” quietly, trusting God to make things better in “the great hereafter.” But Paul’s words here cannot be used legitimately for such a purpose because he is not passive! He is suffering precisely because, as a

28

2 Corinthians 1:1-11

member of a minority group, he is actively resisting Rome’s power to determine people’s lives. This resistance gets him into trouble. Furthermore, Paul’s affliction is not the whole story. His experience in the midst of such suffering is that God has consoled/comforted (parakalein) him, that God is the God of all consolation/comfort (parakl∑sis). Indeed, when his suffering for the work of Christ intensified, the parakl∑sis from God also abounded. Because such has been his experience, he can share parakl∑sis with others who are resisting Rome’s power on behalf of the gospel. He can say to them, “God has been with me, encouraging me, comforting me, holding me up. I believe God is with you too. So keep on with your gospel work.” Paul first emphasized power revealed in suffering and weakness (as humans define it) to these saints in 1 Corinthians 1–4. It will be a key theme in this letter also. So Paul can say that whether his affliction or his parakl∑sis abounded, both are for the parakl∑sis and salvation of the Corinthians (v. 6). If he spreads Christ’s gospel (even while suffering for doing so), that is good news for them. If they see God’s parakl∑sis abound in him in the midst of afflicPaul’s Rhetorical Strategy tion, they find the encouragement to risk the Part of Paul’s rhetorical strategy was to same work on behalf of Christ’s gospel, and that build a basis for mutuality by sharing new is good news. They are partners/sharers information at the outset of a letter. Paul often employed this strategy in his letters. Here are (koinønos), then, in the suffering and in the examples: parakl∑sis (v. 7b). Thus, Paul says, his hope for them is unshaken (v. 7a, which may be a bit Rom 1:13. “I want you to know, brothers and overstated, as we shall see). sisters, that I have often intended to come to you Verse 8 then begins, “For we do not wish you (but thus far have been prevented), in order that I to be ignorant, brothers and sisters, about our may reap some harvest among you . . . .” Gal 1:11. “For I want you to know, brothers and affliction (thlipsis) which happened in Asia.” sisters, that the gospel that was proclaimed by Rhetorically speaking, sharing new information me is not of human origin . . . .” at the outset of a letter serves “to create a basis of Phil 1:12. “I want you to know, beloved, that what mutuality from which the argument can go has happened to me has actually helped to forward.”5 Such strategy is typical of Paul (see spread the gospel . . . .” Rom 1:13; Gal 1:11; Phil 1:12). [Paul’s Rhetorical Strategy] So he shares here that something happened to him in Asia, the Roman province that includes most of the western coast of Asia Minor (not the continent that we know as Asia today), which nearly killed him. He never specifies what happened. Perhaps he understood that the Corinthians already knew the particulars of the story. Instead, what Paul wants to communicate is how suffocating the experience was for him: “to an extraordinary degree beyond power” (their power to cope?) they were weighed down/burdened/crushed so that they “despaired even of living,” believing they had been given a death sentence (vv. 8b-9a). Out of options

2 Corinthians 1:1-11

29

The Province of Asia (in proximity to Corinth) The Roman province of Asia was across the Aegean Sea from Corinth, encompassing the eastern portion of the area that today we call Asia Minor. It included the city of Ephesus, which is most likely the place where Paul encountered the difficulty that, he says, nearly killed him.

and hope, they could only trust themselves to “God who raises the dead” (v. 9b). Paul knew God as the “One who raises the dead” (see 1 Thess 1:10; Gal 1:1; 1 Cor 15:15; Rom 4:17; 8:11). As a good Pharisee he would have believed in resurrection generally, but he came to believe more strongly because of his faith that God had already raised Jesus from the dead. Thus the Messianic Age had been inaugurated, and God’s power to give life is at work in Paul’s present world.6 With the possibility of death looming in the situation in Asia, Paul could only trust himself and those with him to such a God. And God rescued them (v. 10). There is no discussion of specifics here either, so again we don’t know how they came to be rescued. But Paul attributes their deliverance to God. Because God rescued them, showing again that God is the God of all parakl∑sis, Paul has deepened hope for what may lie before him. But, then, in v. 11, he suggests the Corinthians also played a role in Paul’s deliverance because they, along with many, “join in helping” by praying for Paul and those with him. Now their prayers should be filled with thanks to God for this gracious gift (i.e., Paul’s deliverance). We noted that Paul’s prayer in this letter is a blessing of God. At the end of it, however, he has wound his way to his usual sense of

30

2 Corinthians 1:1-11

thanksgiving to God but with a twist. Rather than thanking God for the community to which he is writing (see Rom 1:8; Phil 1:3; 1 Thess 1:2; Phlm 4; even 1 Cor 1:4), he asks this community to thank God on his behalf. We may wonder what this inversion of the expected thanksgiving formula might foreshadow.7 Such writing as Paul has employed at the beginning of this letter is doubtlessly intended to elicit sympathy and support, build mutuality and reciprocity between him and the Corinthians. As the end of the prayer now slides into the body of the letter, we are on the verge of information that will help us understand Paul’s desire to pursue such a rhetorical strategy in the letter’s opening.

CONNECTIONS 1. “Separation of church and state” is a pillar concept of American democracy, one result of which is that Americans may get uncomfortable if a religious leader should be deemed “too political.” Indeed, the often unsavory relationship between Christian churches and various political entities in medieval and later Europe eventually led to the first amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Thus, many of us have been taught that religion and politics should not mix. Yet we note here that Paul and the early Christians’ use of ekkl∑sia for their faith communities was a counterimperial and subversive political statement. Perhaps that makes us uncomfortable. If so, then let us consider that the first amendment’s declaration that Congress shall neither establish a state religion nor prohibit anyone’s free exercise of her or his faith is itself a political position, and a rather bold one at the time of its writing. Let us consider that the abolition of slavery, women’s suffrage, and the civil rights’ struggles of the late twentieth century were political movements driven by the theological convictions of many of their strongest supporters. The truth is, religion and politics often mix. Whether or not they mix well is up to us. I think it is fair to say of Paul that he strove to have his theology drive his politics, not the other way around, and that he often succeeded. Perhaps we should ask ourselves if the same could be said of us. Are we Americans who are Christian? Or are we Christians who happen to be American? 2. Paul’s near-death experience in the Roman province of Asia reminds us of his minority status in his world. As a Jew, he was a member of an ethnic minority group (often a despised minority) within the Roman Empire. As a Jesus follower, he was a member of a minority religious group within the empire. Sometimes he even

2 Corinthians 1:1-11

held minority views within the Jesus movement. His minority status makes him quite different from many of us reading (or the one writing) a book like this one. Curiously, I live in a time when “winning”—in church controversies, political elections, even the Super Bowl—is proclaimed as evidence that God is “on our side.” Such proclamations are hard to reconcile with Paul’s experience, or, for that matter, with the experience of the prophets who came before Paul, or abolitionists, or suffragettes, or any number of other minority voices who were, we now affirm, speaking the word of God. I suggest that the stories of these forebears of ours challenge us to consider our treatment of those who are in the minority and make a space within our communities where their dissenting voices may be heard seriously. Otherwise we may find ourselves bearing an uncanny resemblance to the temple authorities who caused Jesus’ death, the Romans who persecuted Paul, or the slaveholders who despised the abolitionists. 3. Most us reading (or the one writing) a book like this one will never face death for our faith convictions as Paul did. There are, however, other “dark nights of the soul” we may encounter. Difficult external circumstances may prompt such experiences, and faithful spiritual journeying will, sooner or later, lead us into the “wilderness.” The great spiritual teachers of our tradition tell us there is no avoiding the dark night, and there are no quick fixes. We must go through them. The only succor we are offered is the testimony of those who have gone before us, who tell us that God led them even when they were most afraid that God was absent. Let us hear Paul’s testimony in 2 Corinthians 1:8-11 from the “other side” of an experience that nearly killed him. The experience was such that he despaired of living. But afterward his testimony was this: God is the “father of all mercy/compassion and the God of all comfort/consolation.” Here is a witness to hold on to when we find ourselves in the midst of our dark nights.

Notes 1. Charles B. Cousar, The Letters of Paul (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1996) 24. 2. Ibid., 25. 3. Ibid., 30–31. 4. Ralph P. Martin, 2 Corinthians (WBC 40; Waco: Word Books, 1986) 3. 5. Cousar, The Letters of Paul, 30.

31

32

2 Corinthians 1:1-11 6. N. T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2003) 301. 7. I am indebted to Shelly Matthews, “2 Corinthians” (vol. 2 of Searching the Scriptures: A Feminist Commentary; ed. Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza; New York: Crossroad, 1994) 203, for this insight into the inverted thanksgiving formula.

The Body of the Letter Begins: The Issues Surface 2 Corinthians 1:12–2:13

COMMENTARY With v. 12 the body of the letter, i.e., the reason(s) for writing, begins. The words of this verse set the tone for what follows. Paul opens with a boast (kauch∑sis). In our time boasting tends to be frowned upon, so Paul’s boasting may Paul on Boasting make us squirm. We had best get used In the earlier letter to the Corinthians, to it. The verb kauchaomai (to boast) Paul counsels against boasting in oneself occurs twenty times in 2 Corinthians, or one’s group: the noun kauch∑sis six times. We may 1 Cor 3:21-22. So let no one boast about human squirm less if we know that Paul disleaders. For all things are yours, whether Paul or dains boasting in one’s own achievement Apollos or Cephas or the world or life or death or (see 1 Cor 3:21; 4:7; 5:6). He will, the present or the future—all belong to you and though, boast of his work on behalf of you belong to Christ, and Christ belongs to God. the gospel (see Rom 15:17; Phil 2:16). 1 Cor 4:7. For who sees anything different in you? What do you have that you did not receive? And if [Paul on Boasting] Paul Sampley claims the you received it, why do you boast as if it were not latter boasting was considered accepta gift? able by Paul because it “does not simply and unequivocally point to one’s own But in other letters Paul boasts on behalf of his power and accomplishment, but rather work for the gospel: places one’s own work in the larger Rom 15:17. In Christ Jesus, then, I have reason to picture of God’s work.”1 Furthermore, boast of my work for God. this boasting is part of Paul’s self-comPhil 2:16. It is by your holding fast to the word of mendation. Rhetorically speaking, life that I can boast on the day of Christ that I did self-commendation is used when one not run in vain or labor in vain. wants to restore good relations between a speaker (or writer) and an audience.2 As we are about to see, and as the prayer just hinted, good relations needed restoring in the Corinthian ekkl∑sia. Here, then, is Paul’s boast: the witness of his conscience is that he had conducted himself before the Corinthians “in haplot∑s3 [frankness, single-hearted devotion] and eilikrineia [sincerity] of God, not

34

2 Corinthians 1:12–2:13

by sophia sarkik∑ [fleshly wisdom] but by the grace of God” (v. 12). Paul uses the adjective “fleshly” (sarkik∑ ) metaphorically to evoke that which is opposed to spirit. In this context, standing opposite “frankness and sincerity,” “fleshly wisdom” might Denise Levertov’s “The Avowal” bring to mind the ethos of Corinth—e.g., the competiThis poem captures beautifully a sense of God’s grace: tiveness and patronage that encouraged bribery, boasting in self, putting others in “their place,” etc.—and the way As swimmers dare such an ethos taught people to conduct their lives. This to lie face to the sky kind of “wisdom” is directly contrasted with living by and water bears them, God’s grace, which is unearned, unbought, and not as hawks rest upon air manipulatable. [Denise Levertov’s “The Avowal”] Thus Paul’s and air sustains them, so would I learn to attain claim in v. 12 is that he believes himself to have been confreefall, and float sistent, frank, and trustworthy by the grace of God as he into Creator Spirit’s deep embrace, related to the world and especially to the Corinthians. knowing no effort earns Consistency and trustworthiness are necessary for good that all-surrounding grace. relations. Furthermore, in the conventions of first-century Hellenistic culture, sincere, open, or “frank speech” was the kind shared among friends. To speak frankly but effectively with friends requires the speaker to have an established ethos of sincerity and purity of motive. According to Sampley, Paul’s choice of words expresses his understanding of his relationship with the Corinthians as one of friendship in which Paul, the friend in question, assures his friends that they have been able to count on him as a dependable, consistent associate whose probity of motive and practiced frankness are indispensable indices of friendship.4 “Fathers” in the Roman Empire Paul had previously declared to the Corinthians, “I am not writing this to make you ashamed, but to admonish you as my beloved children. For though you might have ten thousand guardians in Christ, you do not have many fathers. Indeed, in Christ Jesus I became your father through the gospel” (1 Cor 4:14-15). Contemporary commentators have often understood Paul to be showing the affection, paternal concern, love, and oversight that we hope fathers in our time demonstrate. But understanding Paul well requires us to read him within the context of the first-century Roman Empire wherein fathers possessed total authority over their children. In the Roman context, fathers were viewed as ontologically superior to their children, and children were obligated to obey and even to imitate their fathers. The Roman Empire itself was organized and administered like a household with the Caesar as the “father” of the state. The people of the empire were to be “obedient children.” Consequently, Paul’s claim to be the “father” of the Corinthian community is not only, or even primarily, about affection. Issues of authority and obedience surround Paul’s claim.

But questions surface at this point. Paul may use the language of friendship, as well as the terms “brothers and sisters,” frequently in this letter (e.g., already in 1:8), but he had also claimed authority over the Corinthian believers as their “father” in Christ Jesus (see 1 Cor 4:14-21; see also 2 Cor 6:13), given them orders (see 1 Cor 5:3-5), and tried to shame them (see 1 Cor 11:4-6). How consistent is it to act as a friend/sibling sometimes but an authoritarian father at others? [“Fathers”

in

the

Roman

Empire]

Moreover, why would someone

2 Corinthians 1:12–2:13

need to insist on her or his trustworthiness and consistency? A number of scholars read Paul’s words as descriptive of his apostolic integrity (as in, “this is the kind of man and apostle he was”5). But if the Corinthians knew Paul to be such a man, would he need to tell them? Though this letter began with Paul’s claims of being consoled (parakalein), we find a hint here that there are yet “issues” between Paul and the Corinthians. One of which perhaps surfaces immediately. In v. 13 Paul claims that he6 writes nothing other than what they can read and know (or understand). Is he talking about this letter, saying he intends it to be clear? Or have some people accused him of being deliberately vague or difficult to understand in past letters, or even of using “doublespeak” (i.e., saying one thing but meaning something else; saying one thing one time, something else another time, etc.)? In other words, have there been questions about Paul’s frankness and sincerity in regard to his past letters? The likely answer is yes, though without direct communication from the Corinthians, we are hard-pressed to be sure. What is clear is that Paul insists he has not been duplicitous in his writings, and he wants them to know him fully just as they have known him partially (vv. 13-14a).7 That is, he wants them to understand him more than they do (since some apparently think him insincere) because “we are your boast just as you also are ours in the day of the Lord Jesus” (v. 14b). So we have returned to boasting. Remembering Paul’s perspective on acceptable boasting, we can understand him as meaning he and the Corinthian believers should trust and appreciate one another as those who have stood together and shared God’s gospel work in the world. Do we sense here a plea from Paul that the Corinthians boast about him? Interestingly, the issue of them not boasting over Paul will surface explicitly later (in 12:11-13). There is no question that, with vv. 15-17, one of the points of contention between Paul and the Corinthians surfaces. Verses 15-16 read innocently enough: in the confidence of being each other’s boast, Paul says, he had intended to visit the Corinthians on his way to Macedonia and then to come back through Corinth after leaving Macedonia to be sent by them on to Judea, thus giving them a “second grace,” (i.e., Paul’s two visits would both be a means of grace, though how this is so is not clear).8 But v. 17 follows and crackles with controversy. Having made such plans, perhaps Paul acted “with elaphria,” an evocative Greek word that can mean vacillation, thoughtless or irresponsible behavior, lightmindedness, or fickleness. The article with it leads many scholars to understand it to mean “the fickleness of which you accuse me.” The

35

36

2 Corinthians 1:12–2:13

Macedonia in relation to Corinth Paul evidently had planned to arrive in Greece at Corinth, then go north from Corinth to visit his churches in the province of Macedonia (in Philippi, Thessalonica, and perhaps Berea), and return to Corinth to get passage to Judea. Given the geography, the plans made sense. But he did not follow through with these plans, much to the displeasure of some Corinthians.

verse then continues: perhaps Paul decides the things he decides “according to the flesh [kata sarka]” (v. 17b). Here again is the idea of acting in ways that are opposite spirit. When kata sarka is linked with elaphria, the charge against Paul grows rather ominous: some Corinthian believers apparently “suspected Paul of calculation with a view to what was personally expedient.”9 Paul’s Travel Plans Here and in 1 Corinthians 16 Given such a charge, must Paul say “yes, yes As Paul concluded the letter of 1 Corinthians, and no, no” (v. 17c), perhaps meaning he he told the Corinthian believers that he must take an oath before anyone can trust would stay in Ephesus until Pentecost, then visit what he says.10 Macedonia before coming to Corinth for an extended This verse suggests that Paul had not folvisit, perhaps staying the winter with them, for he did not wish to see them “in passing” (1 Cor 16:5-8). lowed through with his travel plans, which In 2 Cor 1:16 he indicates he had changed his 2:1 will confirm. [Paul’s Travel Plans Here and in mind and told the Corinthians of a different plan: he 1 Corinthians 16] His change of plans had led would visit them on the way to Macedonia, then some to call him fickle (at best) or calculating come back to Corinth after leaving Macedonia, to be (at worst), and certainly to view him as sent on to Judea by the Corinthians. untrustworthy. All is indeed not well between Apparently Paul followed through with neither plan, perhaps returning to Ephesus after a hasty and Paul and the Corinthian believers. disastrous “interim” visit to Corinth that he mentions At v. 18 Paul begins his defense of himself in 2 Cor 2:1. Paul’s change in travel plans did not help in a way we might not expect. He calls on with charges that he was insincere and untrustGod’s faithfulness: “As God is faithful, our worthy.

2 Corinthians 1:12–2:13 Scholars’ Descriptions of Paul’s Apocalyptic Vision First, here are two descriptions of Jewish apocalyptic hopes: N.T. Wright: Apocalyptic Jews hoped for the restoration of Israel and the newly embodied life of all God’s people in a renewed creation. Resurrection was the “great event” by which God would accomplish these things “at the very end of ‘the present age’, the event which would constitute ‘the age to come’ . . . .” Paula Frederickson: Apocalyptic Jews looked for Gentiles at the End to “turn from idolatry (and the sin associated with it) and turn to the living God.” But moral conversion is not conversion to Judaism. Non-idolatrous Gentiles are Gentiles nonetheless. When God establishes God’s kingdom, “these two groups will together constitute ‘his people’: Israel, redeemed from exile, and the Gentiles, redeemed from idolatry.”

37

Against this background, Neil Elliot describes Paul thusly: he heard in the proclamation of the crucified Messiah an apocalyptic announcement. If one crucified by Rome had been vindicated by God by being raised from the dead already, then “the time of the ‘kingdom of the saints of the Most High’ was at hand.” Paul shared the hope “that Isaiah’s prophecy of the last days, in which Gentiles would look to Israel and be converted morally, was being fulfilled.” Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2003) 205. Frederickson, “Judaism, the Circumcision of the Gentiles, and Apocalyptic Hope: Another Look at Galatians 1 and 2,” JTS 42 (1991): 547. Elliot, Liberating Paul: The Justice of God and the Politics of the Apostle (Maryknoll NY: Orbis Books, 1994) 170, 172, 175.

word to you is not yes and no” (i.e., inconsistent). Following this statement, he elaborates on God’s faithfulness: Jesus Christ, God’s Son, was not yes and no, but in him the yes “has happened” (v. 19), for however many promises of God there are, in Christ they are “yes!” (v. 20a). For Paul the apocalyptic Jew, the Messiah has come, and the Messianic Age is underway with the resurrection of Jesus the Messiah. Thus the vindication, reconciliation, and peace of God for which Paul’s people have longed are breaking forth. The promised renewal of creation has begun. [Scholars’ Descriptions of Paul’s Apocalyptic Vision] The coming of Christ, and particularly Christ’s resurrection, has shown how faithful God is. So in Christ all the promises of God are “Yes!” and Paul cries out “Amen!” to the glory of God. How did the Corinthians know about God’s faithfulness? Because Paul, Timothy, and Silvanus had preached Christ to them (v. 19). [Silvanus] Now, Paul claims, this faithful God is the one who strengthens Paul and the Corinthians, who anointed them, sealed them, and gave the Spirit in their hearts as a guarantee (vv. 21-22). These are significant actions that Paul claims for God. The first one, strengthens or confirms (bebaioø), is a present tense verb, indicating a lasting, ongoing effect. The other three verbs denote events already accomplished. In the Hebrew Bible, anointed ones were those set apart, commissioned, and empowered for service to God. Paul claims he and the Corinthians have been anointed. They have also been sealed, which is to claim something (or, in this case, someone) for its rightful owner.11 Indeed, the form of this Greek participle (middle voice) allows for a translation of “sealed us for/with God’s own self.” Then God gave the Spirit in their hearts

38

2 Corinthians 1:12–2:13

as a guarantee (arrabøn), also meaning a pledge, first installment, or “down payment” that the Messianic Age, which has begun, will be fulfilled. So, Paul declares, God has not only launched the renewal of creation in Christ. God has also made it possible for believers to share in that renewal. These claims are significant theological affirmations of God’s faithfulness, but do they “work” as a defense of Paul’s integrity? As Frank Matera says, “Paul forges a chain of faithfulness that extends from God [Credit: Wikimedia Commons, PD-Art (PD-old)] to Christ, from Christ to Paul, and from Paul to the Christian commu12 nity.” But would the Corinthians who had problems with Paul have found the argument persuasive? Might they have responded, “We don’t doubt God’s faithfulness; we doubt yours”? It may be that Paul hoped to capitalize on just such a sentiment. If they do not doubt God’s faithfulness, then good! Because Paul calls on God as a witness over, or even against, his very being (v. 23a). Scholars have noted that this is a form of oath-taking (though mild, perhaps).13 Paul is willing to have God (whom the Corinthians have experienced as being faithful) testify to his integrity. Such willingness suggests his conscience was indeed clear (see 1:12). Having offered this defense of his integrity, Paul is now ready to explain his change in travel plans. He was not being fickle (or calculating). Rather he made a deliberate decision (“I judged this for myself,” 2:1) to spare them (1:23b) and not to come again to them “in grief ” (2:1). The use of “again” is the clue that Paul had made a so-called “intermediate visit” (between the founding visit and the one he had promised) to Corinth, presumably recently.14 That visit did not go well (see introduction above) and resulted in lyp∑, a Greek word denoting grief, sorrow, or pain of mind or spirit. Since he and the Corinthians already knew what happened, he does not revisit the events here. We learn only a bit more in 2:5 (see below). Consequently, we mainly know that the visit was painful, filled with sorrow. Paul mentions it here only as a reason for his carefully considered change in travel plans—he wanted no repeats of that visit.

Silvanus Paul refers to his coworker Silvanus in 1 Thess 1:1, where he is named as a co-sender of the letter along with Paul and Timothy. These three are also named as co-senders of 2 Thessalonians, though Pauline authorship of that letter is disputed. A Silvanus is named as the amanuensis for the writer of 1 Peter (5:12). In addition, the book of Acts, in chs. 15–18, names Silas, likely the same person, as a significant coworker of Paul. In Acts 18:5 we are told that Silas and Timothy arrived in Corinth from Macedonia as Paul’s ministry was getting underway there, which corresponds to Paul’s claim in 2 Cor 1:19 that the three of them first preached the gospel to the Corinthians. Apostle Silas

2 Corinthians 1:12–2:13

Sandwiched between his reasons for not visiting (i.e., to spare them in 1:23b and not to come again in grief in 2:1) is Paul’s declaration that “we do not lord over your faith but are coworkers of your joy” (1:24). Since he has indicated that he has a clear conscience, I assume that Paul’s sincere intent was to be a coworker of the Corinthians’ joy. He reiterates the point in 2:2, asking who will make him glad if he grieves them, indicating in this verse also the interrelatedness of his joy and theirs. Indeed, Paul clearly found huge joy in the gospel and loved sharing it (see Rom 14:17; Phil 4:1; 1 Thess 2:19-20). But the first part of his statement seems rather audacious. We might well wonder if, when “we do not lord over your faith” was read aloud in the community (as it would have been since most people in that world could not read), a number of Corinthians responded with disbelief or even outrage (something akin to “the heck you don’t!”). We already noted Paul’s insistence in 1 Corinthians 4:15 that he was their father “in Christ Jesus.” He went on to say that he was sending Timothy to remind them “of my ways in Christ” (4:17), but that he himself would come soon to find out what was going on (4:19). Did they want him to come with a stick or with love (4:21)? I suspect the Corinthians would have heard such words as “lording over.” Interestingly, Paul Sampley uses Paul’s challenge in 1 Corinthians 4:21 to think on our passage in 2 Corinthians. He understands Paul, in the earlier text, to have told the Corinthians that he was ready to come to them and they could have either the harsh Paul or the gentle Paul, depending on whether they continued as they were or changed their ways. The current situation [in 2 Corinthians] is similar because Paul, had he come when he had planned, would have been the harsh Paul; there would have been no escaping it, and neither would there have been any joy. It is different because now Paul has decided that he would not go to Corinth because he knew he would find them as he would not like them.15

Sampley understands that choosing to spare them by not coming when he knew he would have to bring his stick (there was no escaping it!) was Paul’s way of not “lording over their faith.” Similarly Sze-kar Wan understands that Paul, by stating that he does not lord over their faith, was “dropping a not-so-subtle hint that he could lord it over them, that as their superior and father he could discipline them or exact punishment from the offending party—even though he chooses not to on the stated ground of egalitarianism.”16

39

40

2 Corinthians 1:12–2:13

I suspect these two fine scholars have understood Paul well. But neither of them seems to see a fundamental contradiction in Paul’s position. Assuming the right to act as superior and father, assuming the right to wield a stick whether one uses it or not (and especially if there is a hint dropped that one could ), is precisely to “lord over” others. Paul’s insistence in 2 Corinthians 1:24 that he does not lord over their faith is not consistent with his claim to “fatherhood” over the community and how he treats the Corinthian believers when they disagree with him. Interestingly, Cynthia Briggs Kittridge finds a similar dynamic at work in the letter to the Philippians. Recent study of this letter places its language in the context of the conventions of Greek friendship. But, as she points out, the behavior Paul wants from the Philippians is obedience: “The ambiguity of [Phil] 2:12, which allows the interpretation of Paul as the object of congregational obedience, appears to contradict the ideal of friendship between partners that is expressed elsewhere in the letter.”17 Paul apparently saw neither the contradiction nor his inconsistency. We may wonder if his blindness along with the inconsistency itself were sources of the trouble swirling among the Corinthian Christians. Consider: was a change in travel plans enough to prompt charges that Paul was calculating and untrustworthy? Perhaps not by itself. But if some Corinthians claimed it was one more instance (among others) in which Paul said one thing but did another, then it might have become a proverbial last straw. Whether or not such an inconsistency was a source of their trouble, trouble there certainly was. Verses 3-4 tell of a letter Paul wrote them out of “much affliction and anguish of heart, through many tears.” These verses suggest that, rather than stay once the intermediate visit had gone awry, Paul left Corinth and wrote them an emotional letter giving his perspective on the situation. Such developments indicate the visit had gone badly indeed. This one is the third known letter that Paul wrote to the Corinthian believers. While some scholars believe a fragment of this letter can be found in 2 Corinthians 10–13 [An Argument for Identifying Chapters 10–13 as the Third Letter], I am persuaded that it is lost to us (see the introduction for discussion of this letter). Based on Paul’s comments about the letter, Sampley considers it an exercise in what the ancients called “frank speech,” the kind only friends can share, the kind of “get your act together” language that is difficult to say and painful to hear, but is sometimes necessary for a friend’s well-being.18 Paul says he wrote such a letter not to cause grief, but so that when he returned he “might not have grief from those who ought

2 Corinthians 1:12–2:13

41

to make me rejoice” (v. 3a) and that they An Argument for Identifying Chapters 10–13 as the would know the love he has especially for Third Letter Charles H. Talbert is an example of a recent them (v. 4). [Paul’s Contacts with the Corinthians] scholar who understands 2 Cor 10–13 to be the Of course he was also probably mad as emotional letter Paul mentions in 2:3-4. His argument is anything, but there’s no denying that it as follows: “Certain things in 2 Cor 10–13 seem to takes a lot of love to say something that is precede 1 Cor 1–9: for example, 12:11 precedes 3:1 and considered necessary but also difficult, to 5:12; 13:2 precedes 1:23; 13:10 precedes 2:3; 2:4; 2:9; risk a negative response that could end a 10:6 precedes 2:9; 7:15; also 11:3 is strange if written relationship. Paul took the risk. He says he after the satisfaction expressed in chapters 1–7.” In addiwas confident of the Corinthians and the tion, he understands the visits of Titus mentioned in chs. mutual joy they shared (v. 3b), but he also 8 and 12 not to be the same visit. Finally, he believes the objection that the offense done to Paul that prompted the fretted over the letter as v. 4 (and later emotional letter is not mentioned in chs. 10–13 “will not verses) tell us. Paul may not have been as hold.” The offense may have been done by an individual, consistent in his conduct toward the but it also involved ”sympathizers from the church at Corinthian believers as he believed himself large (7:7-9, 12). 2 Cor 10-13 does respond to this to be, but these verses suggest his love for matter, especially in 10:1-11 and 11:2-11.” Talbert, Reading Corinthians: A Literary and Theological Commentary them was deep and sure. (Macon GA: Smyth & Helwys, 2002) 7. The reasons I am not persuaded With v. 5 we catch hints about what by such views are given in my introduction above and in the commentary happened during the painful visit. Paul at the beginning of 2 Cor 10. mentions one who grieved not only him but the whole community (though he wishes Paul’s Contacts with the Corinthians not to exaggerate the hurt). From these few Here are the direct contacts scholars words we surmise there was an individual, a man believe Paul has had with the Corinthians to this point: who was probably a key player within the community, who had directly and publicly caused 1. The visit to establish the community (see Acts Paul grief, which was the first cause of this visit 18:1-18a) going badly. We can unpack how we came to 2. A letter referred to in 1 Cor 5:9 (lost to us) these conclusions. 3. The letter of 1 Corinthians Though Paul begins by insisting the man had 4. A hastily planned “intermediate visit” that went badly grieved “not me” but the whole community 5. The emotional letter in response to the bad (v. 5), the text indicates the “grief ” was aimed visit, referred to in 2:3-4 directly at Paul. The first person pronoun in v. 10 (“what I have forgiven . . .”) certainly implies that Paul was the wronged party who had something to forgive. More than that, he would not have had to insist that the wrong was done to the whole community if it had been obviously directed at the group. The individual who caused the grief appears to have been an “insider,” i.e., a member of the Corinthian community, rather than a traveling preacher who had come to Corinth. Would the community have been able to discipline an outsider? Wouldn’t they rather have sent him away?19 Furthermore, he was able to mount considerable opposition to Paul and create significant grief for him,

42

2 Corinthians 1:12–2:13

indicating he had influence within the community. Paul’s emotional letter and a fair amount of space in this letter (here and also 7:11-12) deal with the difficulties this person had wrought. These circumstances suggest he was someone to whom other Corinthians would listen and, Ambrosiaster: In the first letter [Paul] condemned the man’s crime, in the hope that thus, a significant member of the community. everyone would loathe him for it, but now he There was a time (prior to the twentieth wants him to be received back and prays that they century) when interpreters identified this man will no longer show any anger toward him. with the one in 1 Corinthians 5:1-5 who had (Commentary on Paul’s Epistles) become sexually involved with his stepmother. Chrysostom: Paul’s anger and indignation at the [Ancient Commentators on the Offender] Careful examiman who had committed fornication [named in 1 Cor 5:1-5] was shared by all the Corinthians . . . . nation of the texts in question indicates almost Paul asks the Corinthians not only to lift the certainly this is not so.20 All we can say is that censure but also to restore the man to his former he appears to have been a significant member of status, for to punish the man without healing him the community. means nothing. (Hom. 1 Cor.) That the “grief ” this individual caused was Theodoret of Cyr: Paul reveals the zeal of the public rather than private and personal is clear Corinthians, for they had all turned against this man, just as he had ordered them to [in 1 Cor from Paul writing to the community without 5:1-5]. (Commentary on the Second Epistle to the describing what was done. Apparently the Corinthians) Corinthians knew what happened. Given the public nature of this “grief,” it must have been Quotations found in ACCS NT 7 (ed. Gerald Bray; Chicago: Fitzroy something along the lines of a challenge to Dearborn Publishers, 1999) 206–207. Paul’s teaching or to his place in the community, or perhaps an insult to his integrity since he has been at pains to defend his integrity here. Finally, the “grief ” apparently happened during the intermediate visit since Paul says that he wrote his emotional letter in response to this circumstance. Whatever the “grief ” was, it was bad enough to contribute to driving Paul away from the city. Indications are that the emotional letter worked, at least to some extent: Paul mentions in v. 6 the punishment of the individual that had been imposed by “the majority.” Two implications immediately present themselves. First, the reference to “the majority” implies the presence of a minority that did not agree to the punishment. Thus the emotional letter did not persuade everyone. Hence the defensiveness we have seen and will see from Paul in this letter. Second, the majority’s (quick?) willingness to punish, and even to punish severely, could indicate that most Corinthian believers had not agreed with nor were fully persuaded by the individual who affronted Paul. But neither had they rallied around Paul when he was attacked (had they done so, he would not have needed to leave). We are familiar today with the idea of “the silent majority,” i.e., people who say nothing when a passionate and loud minority Ancient Commentators on the Offender Early interpreters of Paul often considered the offender of 2 Cor 2:5 to be the same person judged in 1 Cor 5:1-5. Here are samples of their comments:

2 Corinthians 1:12–2:13

challenges their views. Perhaps they think the issue or the challenge is unimportant. Perhaps they don’t want to get involved or enter the fray. Whatever the reason for their silence, they may inadvertently create a climate in which a minority view carries the day, as seems to have happened during Paul’s intermediate visit. A number of scholars note that Paul appears to have been bothered as much by the Corinthians’ lack of support for him as by the individual’s challenge. Their lack of support was likely the second contributing factor in Paul’s decision to abandon the visit. Let us now sound a note of caution: we should not automatically assume that the person who attacked Paul was a “bad guy.” We have already noted inconsistencies in Paul’s thought in this letter— perhaps the man was raising just such an issue, maybe even speaking frankly to Paul (should frank speech flow both ways if people are genuinely friends?). Or maybe he took seriously the nature of the ekkl∑sia as a place for open debate about the course of their lives and offered an alternative perspective to Paul. Since these believers were all new at following Jesus, disagreements and debates were inevitable. Nor should we assume that the majority siding with Paul indicates that Paul was “right.” We all know of minority views that turned out to be the truer position. On the other hand, maybe the man was theologically dangerous and a real jerk. The point is, we don’t know and should not automatically demonize someone who was, after all, a fellow believer. Whatever this man was about, Paul was grieved by the situation, left Corinth, and wrote the emotional letter that had galvanized the majority into action. They finally rallied round Paul and punished his attacker, though we have no idea what form the punishment took. In fact, Paul now feared they would go too far. The punishment was sufficient and should stop lest the man be “drowned by excessive grief ” (v. 7b). Instead, Paul wants them to forgive and console (parakalein) him (v. 7a) and to reaffirm their love for him (v. 8). Paul continues this thought in v. 10, saying that anyone the Corinthians forgive, he forgives also. Indeed, what he has forgiven, “if ” he has “forgiven anything”—this insertion is likely a rhetorical effort to shift the focus from himself and place it squarely on the community—is for the sake of the Corinthian believers “before the face of Christ” so that they will not be outwitted by Satan. [“Satan” in Paul’s Letters] Some scholars21 believe Paul is concerned that the man who caused the grief will now be so distressed by the punishment that he will give up on his faith, thus serving the purposes of Satan. Perhaps so. But Paul may have had something else in mind.

43

44

2 Corinthians 1:12–2:13

“Satan” in Paul’s Letters In 2 Corinthians Paul refers to Satan as one who cheats or takes advantage (2:11), as disguising himself as an angel of light (11:14), and as responsible for the “thorn in the flesh” that torments him (12:7). Paul also refers in 4:4 to the “god of this age” who blinds the minds of unbelievers. In his other letters Paul writes of Satan “tempting” believers because of lack of sexual control (1 Cor 7:5), blocking his attempts to return to the believers in Thessalonica (1 Thess 2:18), and declares that God will overcome Satan (Rom 16:20). Readers of this commentary will likely have varying degrees of comfort with the concept of a “personal devil,” but we can all note that Paul describes the power of evil as deceptive, an idea affirmed in other parts of the New Testament (see, e.g., Rev 12:9), and as hindering God’s work in the world, which is hardly a surprise. Also like other biblical writers, Paul believed that the power of God’s love and grace will ultimately triumph over evil. Satan Tempting Eve Rembrandt Harmensz van Rijn (1606–1669). Adam and Eve. 1638. [Credit: Wikimedia Commons, PD-Art (PD-old-100)]

Throughout this text, Paul’s sense of the ekkl∑sia as the body of Christ is evident. Paul claims the man hurt all of them, echoing his insistence in 1 Corinthians that when one part of the body hurts, the whole body is in pain (1 Cor 12:26). In an earlier part of this letter he claimed that his suffering for the gospel as well as his parakl∑sis from God affected their parakl∑sis and salvation. He has just insisted that his joy and theirs are interrelated (2:2-3); here he describes their grief as also interrelated. Now he focuses on forgiving the man—not forgiving his sin (as Sampley points out22), but forgiving him. Scholars who study first-century Mediterranean culture tell us that ancient people were not likely to think of sin as moral failures producing guilt within an individual as we usually think within our culture. Paul’s culture was an honor-shame culture, which requires some explanation. Honor was tied to birth status (whether one was born Jew or Gentile, male or female, into a priestly or slave family, etc.), which established one’s “place” in that world. Then the ruling classes demanded that people conduct themselves according to their “place.” Men who did so were deemed honorable. Women who did so showed appropriate shame and avoided dishonoring their fathers or husbands. Further, in an honor-shame society, sin is a breach of interpersonal relations. In the Gospels the closest analogy to the forgiveness of sins is the forgiveness of debts (Matt. 6:12; Luke 11:4), an analogy drawn from pervasive peasant experience. Debt threatened loss of land, livelihood, family. It made persons poor, that is, unable to defend their

2 Corinthians 1:12–2:13 social position. Forgiveness would thus have had the character of restoration, a return to both self-sufficiency and one’s place in the community. . . . Thus public accusation had the power to destroy, whereas forgiveness had the power to restore.23

So Paul encouraged the Corinthian believers to forgive the man and, thus, restore him to the community. Indeed, Paul had forgiven him “for your sake,” i.e., for the sake of the Corinthian Christians, “before the face of Christ” (v. 10b). The last phrase, translated literally here, calls to mind the presence of Christ who taught, according to the Gospels, that we must forgive one another as God has forgiven us. As Paul brings the presence of Christ into this divided Corinthian context, we may be drawn to two of Christ’s Gospel teachings on forgiveness. In Mark’s Gospel, following Jesus’ judgment on the Jerusalem temple for being a “den of robbers” rather than the “house of prayer for all nations” it was intended to be (11:17), Jesus assures his followers that there is still a “place” of prayer—the community that has faith in God (11:22-24). Then he tells them that whenever they stand praying, they must forgive each other so that God may forgive them (11:25). Remembering the character of forgiveness as restoration to the community, we can understand from v. 25 that this new place of prayer, this community of faith, will come undone if they do not practice forgiveness among themselves.24 A similar idea is conveyed in John 20:23. The Risen Christ has just commissioned his followers to continue the mission that God had sent him to do (“as the Father sent me, so I send you,” 20:21). To borrow Paul’s language, they are to go and be the body of Christ in the world. Jesus breathes the Holy Spirit on them, bringing the “body” to life (as in Gen 2:7) and empowering them to live as he had lived (20:22). Then Jesus says, “If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained” (20:23). As Wes Howard-Brook has noted, In contrast with the commission in verse 21, verse 23 does not convey authority or transfer responsibility but reminds them of what life together is about. If they hold on to the sins of each other . . . then they will indeed remain focused on sin. But if they are able to let go . . . then they will be able to move together as Jesus has encouraged them to do.25

In Jesus’ teachings, forgiveness brings healing to a breach in interpersonal relations, restores outcasts, and reconciles members to one another. These two Gospel texts emphasize the forgiveness that

45

46

2 Corinthians 1:12–2:13

enables a community of faith to hold together and thus be a community in the richest sense of the word. And a community makes possible a different way of living. An individual would have a hard time standing against the corrupt temple state of Jesus’ day. But a community that welcomes, shares, prays, serves, forgives, and heals in the power of the Spirit can stand together for the way of living that Christ envisioned. Jesus’ teachings may form the backdrop against which we should read Paul’s encouragement to the Corinthians to forgive this man. Against the backdrop of Jesus’ teaching we also hear Paul’s claim that he has already forgiven the man for the sake of Marge Piercy’s “The Low Road” the Corinthians so that they “may not be outwitted This poem captures the power that by Satan.” An unwillingness to forgive would tear resides in a genuine community, the community apart, which would serve those who which Paul is trying to nurture in Corinth by encouraging them to forgive. do evil by oppressing and exploiting others. An individual would have a hard time standing against the What can they do ethos of Roman Corinth. But a community of faith to you? Whatever they want. fulfilling Jesus’ mission could do such a thing [Marge . . . Alone, you can fight, Piercy’s “The Low Road”]. you can refuse . . . Paul’s mission was not only about saving individbut they will roll over you. But two people fighting uals. He believed the gospel of Christ made the back to back can cut through peace and justice of God present for Jews and a mob . . . . Gentiles in God’s renewed creation, ushering in a Two people can keep each other new way of living that sets people free from the sane, can give support, conviction, power of the temple state, the ethos of Corinth, or .... whatever has them in bondage. But Rome’s power is Three people are a delegation, a committee, a wedge. With four ever present in Corinth. The Corinthian believers you can play bridge and start need one another if they would be the ekkl∑sia of an organization. With six God in the midst of this city. So, Paul says, forgive you can rent a whole house the man. Reaffirm love for him. As children of the .... God of all comfort (parakl∑sis), offer him comfort A dozen make a demonstration. (parakl∑sis). A hundred fill a hall. .... But in the middle of Paul’s encouragement to It starts when you care them to forgive and thus be a community, is the to act, . . . vexing v. 9: “for this reason also I wrote, so that I it starts when you say We. . . . might know your character, if you are obedient in everything.” Some scholars have claimed that Paul wanted to know if the Corinthians were “aligned” with him. But the Greek word hypekoos indicates obedience or submission in the context of relationships of subordination (like children to a father), not aligning with someone.26 Other scholars have interpreted obedience in Paul’s letters as calling for “radical obedience” or “free obedience” offered to God. Others have claimed that obedience for

2 Corinthians 1:12–2:13

Paul is equivalent to love. Given the Corinthian situation in which Paul was challenged and not supported and to which he wrote a letter in response, the most natural reading here is that Paul wants to know if the Corinthians were obedient to him. Again, Kittridge’s analysis of Philippians may be enlightening. She claims that, in response to a challenge he perceived to his relationship with the church at Philippi, “Paul writes a letter that both affirms the value of partnership and emphasizes that the partnership is defined in a particular way—as being of the same mind, as obeying and imitating him.”27 A similar dynamic appears to be at work in 2 Corinthians. In a setting in which he has been challenged and also in which he emphasizes the necessity of forgiveness and the significance of the community (the body of Christ), we find Paul calling for obedience to him “in everything.” Thus, in Paul’s rhetoric, the unity of the community, by which it will hold together and not be outwitted by Satan, is wrapped around its obedience to Paul. Apparently, Paul did not conceive of a community wherein disagreements do not threaten its unity. For a community to be a community, it must “be of the same mind” (to borrow language from Philippians). Some people will read Paul and respond, “Well, of course. Someone must ultimately be in charge and accountable.” But others will ask, “What do we do when there is genuine disagreement, as there will be?” How do we respond as followers of Christ when there is a faction that sees an issue differently from the majority and/or from the leadership? Can the conformity and obedience of the faction be coerced? Should it be? What does it mean, in such a situation, to be brothers and sisters (or friends), to be the body of Christ? Will we take seriously the nature of an ekkl∑sia or treat it as Rome did, keeping the name but treating it as a body to serve the purposes of those who claim authority? If the minority refuses to obey Paul (or other pastoral leaders), must they choose to leave or be forced out? What have surfaced in these verses are fundamental questions regarding the nature of a Christian community and the exercise of leadership in such a community. Clearly these were contentious questions in Paul’s day and were causing grief among Paul and Corinthian Christians. As many of us know, they are no less contentious, and no more easily answered, in our own time. Meanwhile, the story of Paul and the Corinthian believers continues to unfold. At v. 12 Paul returns to the episode involving the emotional letter. He tells the Corinthians he traveled to Troas, a city on the northwest coast of Asia Minor, where “a door in the Lord was opened” to him. Even so, Paul says, “I had no rest in my

47

48

2 Corinthians 1:12–2:13

Troas in relation to Corinth Paul had traveled north from Ephesus to Troas to do gospel work and wait on Titus. When Titus did not come in a timely manner, Paul took the short voyage from Troas to Macedonia, likely to Neapolis, to meet Titus as he traveled through that province.

spirit because I could not find Titus my brother” (v. 13a). Many scholars assume that Titus took the emotional letter to Corinth. Paul’s anxiety about the letter’s reception was so great that, when Titus did not show up in Troas, Paul could not stay and preach even in a promising setting (as he describes it). Any of us who have felt compelled to say difficult things to someone we care about can likely sympathize with his unease as he waited for their response. In his anxiety, Paul took the short sea voyage to Macedonia (v. 13b) in order to meet Titus “halfway” as Titus traveled north from Corinth. We will learn that when they are finally reunited, Titus brings Paul positive news from Corinth. But we won’t learn about that news until 7:6. Before getting there we will work our way through a long “digression” that reveals much about Paul’s understanding of his apostolate.

CONNECTIONS 1. Paul insisted that he had been frank, sincere, and trustworthy in all his dealings but especially in relating to the Corinthian believers. He understood the importance of integrity for those in positions of

2 Corinthians 1:12–2:13

leadership. If people doubt your integrity, then they might wonder what you really meant when you wrote something in a letter, or if a change in travel plans is one more indication that you say one thing but then do another and, thus, cannot be trusted. Clearly, frankness, sincerity, and trustworthiness are important for anyone in a position of ministerial leadership. The problem for Paul at this point is that some Corinthians, fairly or unfairly, had questions regarding his integrity. His response was to insist steadfastly on his integrity. As we watch events unfold, we will find that this insistence did not persuade all Corinthian believers. Certainly Paul’s willingness to call God as a witness against him shows that he intended always to conduct himself with integrity. Despite his intent and insistence, the questions persisted. The reality is that Paul, like many human beings, was capable of a response in the heat of one moment that did not “square” with his response in the heat of another moment (like threatening, as their “father,” to bring a stick in 1 Cor 4:14-21, and claiming in 2 Cor 1:24 that he did not “lord over” their faith). From Paul’s situation we can learn that the best of intentions is sometimes not enough to guarantee integrity in action. Therefore, when questions about our integrity arise, we may need to do more than insist on our trustworthiness. We may need to hear, however painful it may be to do so, how our actions have not been consistent despite our good intentions. Then we may need to make amends to others, or make changes within our own hearts, or both. 2. Paul calls the Corinthian believers to forgive his offender so that they do not let Satan take advantage. In our time, South African Bishop Desmond Tutu has offered a powerful witness to the truth of Paul’s words. In his book No Future without Forgiveness he teaches the rest of us what he learned through his participation in the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission. [Bishop Tutu’s Sermon in Rwanda] There is, he says, “a movement at the heart of things to reverse the awful centrifugal force of alienation, brokenness, division, hostility, and disharmony. God has set in motion a centripetal force, a moving toward the center,” toward reconciliation among us all that begins with forgiveness. What each of us does hinders or advances this process. Forgiveness isn’t pretending that things are other than they are. It requires exposing the awfulness, abuse, pain, degradation, the truth. In forgiving, people are not required to forget. Instead, “it is important to remember, so that we should not let such atrocities happen again.” Nor is forgiveness being sentimental. It means “abandoning your right to pay back the perpetrator in his own coin, but it is a loss that liberates

49

50

2 Corinthians 1:12–2:13

Bishop Tutu’s Sermon in Rwanda Sometime after Bishop Desmond Tutu’s work on the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa and after the genocide in Rwanda in 1994, he was invited to preach at a rally in that suffering country. He began by expressing the condolences of all Rwanda’s sisters and brothers throughout Africa at the carnage and destruction they had suffered. He noted that Rwanda’s history was so typical of places that had a “top dog” and an “underdog” so that they kept attacking each other. I reminded the Tutsi that they had waited for thirty years to get their own back for what they perceived to be the injustices that had been heaped on them. I said that extremists among the Hutu were also quite capable of waiting thirty years or more for one day when they could topple the new government. . . . I told them that the cycle of reprisal and counterreprisal that had characterized their national history had to be broken and that the only way to do this was to go beyond retributive justice to restorative justice, to move on to forgiveness, because without it there was no future. No Future without Forgiveness (New York: Doubleday, 1999) 259–60.

Archbishop Desmond Tutu (Credit: Wikimedia Commons, PD other reasons)

the victim.” Forgiveness is, he says, “a risky undertaking but in the end it is worthwhile, because in the end dealing with the real situation helps to bring healing. Spurious reconciliation can only bring spurious healing.”28 And then, Paul says, Satan has the advantage over us. 3. Paul believed deeply in the importance of unity among the followers of Jesus, likely because he believed that the “days to come” had come when all the nations shall stream to Zion to learn the ways of God and so to “beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks” and learn war no more (Isa 2:2-4). When diverse people form communities of faith that experience God’s peace in the power of the Spirit, then they bear witness to the “Yes!” of God’s promises. So Paul urged his communities to “be of the same mind,” apparently fearing that disagreement would threaten their unity and peace. Unfortunately, we have justified Paul’s fears. Christian history is discolored by stories of disagreements that ripped communities apart, spewing hurt, anger, mistrust, and even hatred all around. Paul’s solution to disagreement within his communities was to demand obedience to and imitation of himself. I suggest that in this regard history has not proven Paul right. Via threats, shaming, shunning, excommunication, inquisitions, and, finally, executions, church leaders throughout Christian history have tried to coerce doctrinal and/or

2 Corinthians 1:12–2:13

ethical conformity. The result? More hurt, anger, mistrust, and hatred. It is past time that we find a different response to disagreement. Clearly we are going to disagree. We must learn to do so without tearing ourselves apart. Perhaps Paul offers us a place to start. In the opening part of this letter he has pointed to the power of the Spirit and the gracious work of God in making us who we are (see 1:9, 21-22), to forgiveness (2:5-10), and to thanksgiving (1:11). If we focus on God’s grace, the work of the Spirit, forgiveness, and thanksgiving, maybe we can find a way to disagree without creating more division and pain.

Notes 1. J. Paul Sampley, The Second Letter to the Corinthians (NIB 11; Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2000) 45. 2. Ibid. 3. The NIV uses the textual variant hagiotes and thus has “holiness” in its translation. Like the NRSV and many scholars, I am persuaded that haplot∑s is the more likely reading. 4. Sampley, The Second Letter to the Corinthians, 46. 5. See, e.g., Frank J. Matera, II Corinthians (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2003) 48–50. 6. Paul actually uses “we” and “us” through here rather than “I” and “me.” No doubt he also wants the Corinthians to think well of his colleagues, but the focus seems clearly to be on Paul himself. 7. The phrase understood here as “fully” is literally “unto the end.” Some scholars, thus, understand it as referring to the end time, so that Paul is saying they will finally understand him in the Day of the Lord. Along with many others, I prefer to read it as “fully.” 8. Scholars debate the specific meaning of “second grace.” Does Paul indicate he would share the grace of the gospel with them twice? Was he offering the Corinthians two opportunities to be gracious to him after treating him badly? Whatever the specifics, Paul seems to have understood his visits to be a means of grace somehow. 9. L. L. Welborn, Politics & Rhetoric in the Corinthian Epistles (Macon GA: Mercer University Press, 1997) 145. 10. Ibid. 11. Ralph P. Martin, 2 Corinthians (WBC 40; Waco: Word Books, 1986) 27–28. 12. Matera, II Corinthians, 55. 13. See, e.g., Martin, 2 Corinthians, 34. 14. Some scholars do not believe this phrase indicates an “intermediate” visit, i.e., one between the founding visit and the one Paul has promised to make. See Margaret E. Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians (ICC 1; London: T & T Clark International, 1994) 49–57, for discussion of the issues of

51

52

2 Corinthians 1:12–2:13 an intermediate visit. I agree with the majority of scholars that the most natural reading of the phrase is that there was indeed an intermediate visit. 15. Sampley, The Second Letter to the Corinthians, 50; emphasis mine. 16. Sze-Kar Wan, Power in Weakness: Conflict and Rhetoric in Paul’s Second Letter to the Corinthians (Harrisburg PA: Trinity Press International, 2000) 47–48. Sampley and Wan are only two of a number of scholars who read Paul thusly. 17. Cynthia Briggs Kittridge, Community and Authority: The Rhetoric of Obedience in the Pauline Tradition (Harrisburg PA: Trinity Press International, 1998) 98. 18. Sampley, The Second Letter to the Corinthians, 50. 19. Some few scholars, though, believe he was an outsider who wanted to displace Paul as the community’s apostle. See, e.g., Martin, 2 Corinthians, 38. 20. The primary reason the offender is not likely the same man as in 1 Cor 5:1-5 is that this offense appears to have been directed at Paul. See Victor Paul Furnish, II Corinthians (AB; Garden City NY: Doubleday & Co., Inc., 1984) 164–66, for a detailed comparison of 1 Cor 5:1-5 and 2 Cor 2:5-8 and reasons they likely speak of different individuals. 21. See, e.g., Matera, II Corinthians, 62; Sampley, The Second Letter to the Corinthians, 54. 22. Sampley, The Second Letter to the Corinthians, 54. 23. Bruce J. Malina and Richard L. Rohrbach, Social-Science Commentary on the Synoptic Gospels (Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 1992) 188. 24. For a full examination of this text as offering a “new place of prayer,” see Mitzi Minor, The Spirituality of Mark: Responding to God (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1996) 90–92. 25. Wes Howard-Brook, Becoming Children of God: John’s Gospel and Radical Discipleship (Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1993) 458. 26. Kittridge, Community and Authority, 37–51. 27. Ibid., 109. 28. Desmond Tutu, No Future without Forgiveness (New York: Doubleday, 1999) 265–72.

Paul’s Defense of His Ministry and Himself 2 Corinthians 2:14–7:4

The One Who Is Led Captive 2 Corinthians 2:14–3:6

COMMENTARY At 2:14 Paul abruptly puts aside his story of searching for Titus and news of the emotional letter’s reception in Corinth to launch into a long theological reflection on the nature of his ministry. At 7:5, however, he returns to the story of finding Titus. The disruption is so jarring that some scholars contend that 2:14–7:4 must be a fragment of a separate letter that was embedded into the letter of reconciliation by someone editing the collection of Paul’s writings. These scholars find the disjointedness too great to conceive of this section of 2 Corinthians as a continuous composition. [Recent Scholars Who Consider 2:14–7:4 to Be a Separate Letter]

Though the disruption is indeed jarring, there are two main reasons I disagree with these scholars. First, I find it difficult to Recent Scholars Who Consider 2:14–7:4 to Be a Separate Letter Sze-kar Wan: The travel report that begins in 2:12-13 is “unceremoniously resumed in 7:5, as if the intervening elaborate discourse on authentic ministry had never been written. The earlier plea on behalf of the wrongdoer in chapter 2 reappears (7:12). But what is truly surprising is that it makes no allusion whatsoever to the theme of reconciliation which he has so laboriously established just a few chapters earlier.” The “conclusion seems inescapable” that 2 Corinthians is made up of different letters, so that 2:14–7:4 represents “a separate letter altogether.” Bruce J. Malina and John J. Pilch: “Most scholars consider 2 Corinthians to be a collection of fragments of perhaps five of Paul’s letters to the Corinthians dealing in one way or another with a situation of dispute.” Among the fragments that make up our canonical 2 Corinthians is the first letter

(chronologically speaking), which is 2:14–6:13 and 7:2-4, written before the dispute. Eung Chun Park: “. . . 6:13 connects far better with 7:2 than with 6:14, especially through the use of the ‘heart’ imagery that runs from 6:11 to 6:13 and 7:2. . . . Likewise, 2 Corinthians 2:12-13 connects better with 7:5 than with 2:14, because of the mention of Macedonia.” Thus we deduce that sometime after 1 Corinthians was written, opponents of Paul “launched a systematic attack on Paul’s apostleship and gospel.” When Paul heard of it, “he immediately wrote to the believers a letter of apologia (2 Cor 2:14–6:13; 7:2-4).” Wan, Power in Weakness: The Second Letter of Paul to the Corinthians (Harrisburg PA: Trinity Press International, 2000) 4–5. Malina and Pilch, Social-Science Commentary on the Letters of Paul (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2006) 134. Park, Either Jew or Gentile: Paul’s Unfolding Theology of Inclusivity (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2003) 57–58.

56

2 Corinthians 2:14–3:6

understand why an editor would embed a letter fragment into another letter in this way. As C. K. Barrett so colorfully said, “It may be that no limit should be set to the stupidity of editors, and one cannot expect always to understand their motives; but it cannot be said that any good explanation of the process that led to the composition of 2 Corinthians out of disordered fragments has yet been given.”1 Second, given the first reason, I find it easier to believe that Paul himself broke off his narrative to offer theological reflection on his ministry and then returned to his narrative than to believe an editor created such a disruption where none had existed before. Why Paul would do this himself is another matter and a question that cannot be answered definitively. Several scholars note that Paul often communicates in a chiastic or ring pattern wherein he begins a topic, shifts to another topic, and then returns to the first one (forming an a b a’ pattern).2 Usually, though, the b section is shorter than it is understood to be here (2:14–7:4) so that the pattern and the reason for it is more easily discerned (see, e.g., 1 Cor 12–14; ch. 12 is a, 13 is b, 14 is a’ ). Still, it is easier to believe that Paul thought he was making perfect sense than to assume no limit to the stupidity of editors. Thus I understand this long section of the letter (from 2:14–7:4) to present Paul’s understanding of his work for the gospel, the primary goal of which is to smooth more completely his relations with the Corinthian believers. They have responded to his emotional letter and disciplined the one who attacked Paul (2:5), but he believes they have yet to understand him fully (1:13). He will try now to help them do so, so that he will be their boast as he claims they are his (1:14). A number of commentators call this section the “heart and soul” of the letter. We will see if we agree. At v. 14a, instead of hearing what happened when Paul went to Macedonia to find Titus (2:13), we find Paul breaking into thanksgiving to God “who always leads us in triumph [thriambeuø] in Christ . . . .” The abrupt change of subject is not the only exegetical challenge here. What does Paul hope to convey with this image of being led in triumph? The rarely employed verb thriambeuø (only here and in Col 2:15 in the New Testament), when used with a direct object as here, usually means to lead someone in a triumphant procession as a captive.3 Any number of commentators point to the likelihood that the Roman practice of staging triumphant processions to celebrate military victories forms the backdrop of Paul’s thinking. During such processions the victorious generals were hailed as heroes while defeated leaders were paraded in shame, perhaps to be executed at

2 Corinthians 2:14–3:6

57

Plaque of a Roman Procession the end of the procession. Since Corinthian citizens were likely familiar with these processions, Paul appears to draw on them to illustrate God’s power and Paul’s own place in the display of that power. Image Not Available Some scholars wonder if due to lack of digital rights. Paul hoped to evoke other Please view the published possibilities with thriambeuø. commentary or perform an Internet For example, Paul Duff and search using the credit below. others point out that a triumphant procession can be an epiphany procession for a god or goddess as easily as a military parade. Thus God is the Terracotta “Campana” plaque with a scene of a triumphal procession. Roman, early 2d C. triumphant deity, and the love British Museum, London, Great Britain. (Credit: © The Trustees of The British Museum/Art Resource, NY) of Christ leads Paul captive (not the desire to humiliate a This terracotta “Campana” plaque from the early 2d century shows a tridefeated prisoner).4 Or James umphal Roman procession marking a military victory. Two captives, their M. Scott believes Paul uses the necks and ankles chained, are led in an open cart through the streets of idea of the Roman triumphal Rome. procession to convey another set of associations from Jewish mystical thought: God rides a throne-chariot or merkabah and leads the apostle captive. That is, Paul has had a revelatory (i.e., mystical) encounter with God that he must now share with the world.5 Whether or not Paul hoped this image would evoke any or all of these possibilities, what seems most certain is that he wanted to portray God as the triumphant one and himself as God’s captive.6 He will soon call explicitly on the work of Jeremiah to describe his gospel work (in 3:6). Perhaps he is doing so implicitly here—this ministry to which he is called is diffiJeremiah 20:7-13 cult, but he cannot avoid it because Since Paul soon will refer explicitly to Jeremiah’s words he is God’s captive (see Jer 20:7-13, to describe his ministry (see 3:3, 6), he may already esp. v. 9). [Jeremiah 20:7-13] have Jeremiah in mind as he writes about being God’s captive in 2:14. Jeremiah relates in 20:7-13 how difficult his prophetic Meanwhile, as Paul and those with work is, but also how he cannot not do it. Verse 9 reads, “If I say him are led captive, “the fragrance ‘I will not mention [God], or speak any more in [God’s] name,’ [osm∑] of the knowledge of God” is then within me there is something like a burning fire shut up in spread everywhere through them, for my bones; I am weary with holding it in, and I cannot.” they are the “aroma [euødia] of Christ Jeremiah goes on to acknowledge that God is with him in this to God” (vv. 14-15). Again, the difficult calling (v. 11a) and brings about the fulfillment of God’s word (v. 13b). Thus, he praises God even in such straits (v. 13a). Roman processional may be in Paul’s

58

2 Corinthians 2:14–3:6

Scriptural Allusions in This Section The first chapter of Leviticus gives instructions for burnt offerings. Vv. 9, 13, and 17 end similarly with words like these from v. 17: “Then the priest shall turn it into smoke on the altar, on the wood that is on the fire; it is a burnt offering, an offering by fire of pleasing odor to the Lord.” Sophia, or Lady Wisdom, appears in many Jewish wisdom traditions including these from Prov 8: “Does not wisdom [Sophia] call, and does not understanding raise her voice? . . . The Lord created me at the beginning of [God’s] work, the first of [God’s] acts of long ago. . . . When [God] marked out the foundations of the earth, then I was beside [God], like a master worker . . .” (vv. 1, 22, 29b-30a). There are hints that some early Christians related the Jewish Sophia traditions to Jesus, such as this note in Matt 11:18-19: “For John came neither eating nor drinking, and they say, ‘He has a demon’; the Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, ‘Look, a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!’ Yet wisdom is vindicated by her deeds.”

mind—he may be thinking of the incense burned as part of the processional. Or he may be evoking the smoke and smell of the Jewish sacrificial ritual (see, e.g., Lev 1:9, 13, 17). Or perhaps he has in mind the call of Lady Wisdom, Sophia. She was the personification of God’s Wisdom in Jewish tradition who came forth as the first act of creation (Prov 8:22-31) and participated in the creation (Prov 8:30). In the Wisdom book of Ben Sirach, Wisdom calls out, “Listen to me my faithful children, and blossom like a rose growing by a stream of water. Send out aromatic fragrance like incense, and put forth blossoms like a lily. Scatter the fragrance, and sing a hymn of praise; bless the Lord for all [God’s] works” (39:13-14). There are indications that early Christians related Divine Wisdom to Jesus (see e.g., Matt 11:19). If this image is in Paul’s mind, then he sees himself responding to the call of Divine Wisdom (Jesus, for him), scattering the fragrance and thanking God for God’s work in the world.7 [Scriptural Allusions in This Section]

Paul’s images, then, are fluid, evoking a variety of possible pictures and experiences. We may be struck, though, by his focus on smell. One can shut doors and windows, douse lights, refuse to eat or drink, stick one’s hands in one’s pockets, and thus fairly effectively shut out sights, sounds, taste, and touch. But a fragrance will seep in anyway, around and under closed doors or windows, regardless of light, no matter what one does with one’s mouth or hands. Smells permeate a space. So God, the triumphant one, sends out the fragrance of the knowledge of God Sophia through Paul and others, who are captives of Located in Celsus Library in Ephesus, Turkey. (Credit: Radomil Binek/ this work God is doing. This fragrance perWikimedia Commons, CC-BY-SA-3.0-migrated) meates the world. Furthermore, this fragrance is not a neutral smell. To “the ones who are perishing” (v. 15) it is a fragrance “from death to death” (v. 16). To ”the ones being saved” (v. 15) it is a fragrance “from life

2 Corinthians 2:14–3:6

59

to life” (v. 16). Some scholars worry over the precise meaning of these phrases, particularly the preposition ek, meaning “from” (what does it mean to say “from death to death”?). Perhaps Paul’s goal was simpler. He is perhaps describing poetJesus within This Prophetic Tradition ically the responses to the fragrance of the Isa 6:9-10 reads, knowledge of God (itself a poetic phrase). For some, the smell is undesirable, and they turn And [God] said, “Go and say to this people: ‘Keep listening, but do not comprehend; away. Others, though, smell life in this frakeep looking, but do not understand.’ grance. Make the mind of this people dull, The Jewish prophetic tradition portrays the and stop their ears responses to a word from God similarly and as and shut their eyes, so that they may not look with their eyes, having ever been thus (see Isa 6:9-10). God and listen with their ears, sends a prophetic word through someone who and comprehend with their minds, is a vessel for that word. The way people and turn and be healed.” respond to that word reveals whether they trust The writer of Mark’s Gospel places Jesus God to lead them to life or have chosen to squarely in this tradition when he records Jesus ignore God’s way in favor of “fleshly wisdom” telling his disciples, “to you the mystery of the that leads, in this tradition, to death. Life and kingdom of God has been given, but to those death here can refer to physical life and death outside everything is in parables” (4:11). In Mark’s but need not be limited to such. Many of us Gospel, whether one “gets” Jesus’ parables indiknow people who are walking around, hearts cates whether one is an insider or outsider to God’s kingdom. Then, in the following verse (4:12), beating and brains functioning, but who are Jesus quotes from Isa 6:9-10 to indicate that the nonetheless lifeless. word he “sows” will cause some not to turn and The Gospel writers understood Jesus to stand be healed. When the word from God challenges in this prophetic tradition. [Jesus within This us, some will not hear. Prophetic Tradition] Paul places himself there as well. Somewhat similarly, the writer of John’s Gospel He is a captive through whom an aromatic frarefers to Jesus as the Word who was with God from the beginning, who brought life into being, grance, which is the knowledge of God, is who came into the world he created but was not offered to the world. It will smell like life to known; who came to his own but was not some but death to others depending on their received. But “to all who received him he gave willingness to receive a word from God. “Who power to become children of God” (John 1:1-12). is sufficient [fit, competent] for these things?” Throughout John’s Gospel readers encounter those he then questions (v. 16b). The task of who receive the word Jesus offers and those who do not. spreading the knowledge of God is a daunting one, an almost eerie responsibility bringing life and death. Who among us mortals is competent to fulfill such a call? In the next few verses Paul will, in a roundabout way, give his answer to this question. As he does so, we get our first hint that other itinerant apostles may have come to Corinth. Scholars who read this section of 2 Corinthians as a separate letter fragment focus on these apostles as the central reason for this letter. Sze-kar Wan, for example, believes we must “read this central portion

60

2 Corinthians 2:14–3:6

of 2 Corinthians with an eye on Paul’s preoccupation with his opponents.”8 Scholars who read this section of 2 Corinthians as part of one letter encompassing chapters 1–9 (as in this commentary) read the presence of such apostles differently. Mentioned only here in this long letter (i.e., longer than any of the hypothesized fragments), these apostles are present but are not yet treated as the threat they will become by the time of chapters 10–13. As Paul Sampley notes, “Paul’s epistolary efforts are focused on the Corinthians and their relationship to him, and not on any intruders.”9 The Roman Patronage System Indeed, Paul appears to mention these people John K. Chow has done extensive work primarily to draw a contrast with himself and on patronage in the Roman Empire generthus to describe himself further to the ally and Corinth specifically. As he describes this Corinthians. system, he says, “The network of relationships in He begins by declaring that he and those with Corinth can roughly be seen as a hierarchy made up of the emperor, Roman officials, local notables, him are “not like the many, huckstering the and the populace.” The roles of an official named word of God” (v. 17a). There are bigger issues at Sparticus present a picture of this patronal hierwork here than “love offerings” collected by a archy. In relation to the emperor, “he would look community. We should remember the patronnot unlike a friend or a client. As a procurator of client climate of the Roman Empire generally Caesar in his province, however, he would and of Corinth specifically. Given that climate, assume the role of a broker or mediator, representing the interests of his superior in a locality. it would have been natural for some of the But at a local level, because he had access to the higher status Corinthian believers, especially emperor, was apportioned a certain amount of those who hosted house churches, to want to power, and possessed enormous wealth, he probbecome patrons of Paul and other traveling ably would have become an authority to be apostles. Apparently some apostles accepted honored and respected. No wonder he was their patronage. Participants likely viewed the named as the patron of a tribe in Corinth.” Considering that patronage played such an imporarrangement as beneficial to both—an apostle’s tant role in the lives of Corinthians, it would be mission work could continue and spread, while “most unrealistic to expect the Christians there to the status and prestige of the patron was be wholly untouched by its influence and to enhanced. It likely seemed quite “ordinary” to behave in a completely new way immediately Corinthians, as the way things were done in that after their conversion. On the contrary, it is most world. [The Roman Patronage System] likely that patronage would become the background for understanding the relational ties in the Paul, however, had not accepted money— church and some of the problems Paul dislikely meaning patronage—from Corinthian cussed.” believers. Instead he worked to support himself. “Patronage in Roman Corinth,” in Paul and Empire: Religion and As Richard Horsley has said, Paul surely refused Power in Roman Imperial Society (ed. Richard A. Horsley; Harrisburg PA: Trinity Press International, 1997) 105, 110, 125. patronage in order not to become someone’s “house apostle.” But also, he envisioned the Christian ekkl∑sia as an alternative to the calculating, competitive, ladder-climbing, jealousy-driven way of the Roman world. Thus he “was not like the many,” and would not play the “patronage game.”10 Paul’s refusal of patronage from the Corinthians had been

2 Corinthians 2:14–3:6

61

Paul on Being Paid in 1 Corinthians 9 an issue before and will be again Whether or not Paul should be “be paid” to do his gospel (see 1 Cor 9:3-7, 15-18; 2 Cor work (i.e., receive patronage) had already been an issue 11:7-11 and the commentary between himself and some Corinthians. In an earlier letter he had there). [Paul on Being Paid in defended his decision not to accept money in this way: 1 Corinthians 9] In this context, This is my defense to those who would examine me. Do we not have the though, he points to his refusal to right to our food and drink? . . . Or is it only Barnabas and I who have no “huckster” or peddle the word of right to refrain from working for a living? . . . But I have made no use of God, perhaps by seeking the any of these rights. . . . Indeed, I would rather die than that—no one will highest-bidding patron, as a way deprive me of my ground for boasting! . . . What then is my reward? Just this: that in my proclamation I may make the gospel free of charge, so as of claiming that he speaks out of not to make full use of my rights in the gospel. (1 Cor 9:3, 6, 15, 18) sincerity (eilikrineia; see 1:12) as from God, before God, in Christ (v. 17b). These three qualifying phrases insist on his purity of motive, which, we remember, has been an issue before in this letter. Following such emphatic assertions, Paul then asks, as well he might, “Are we beginning to commend ourselves again? Or do we need, as some do, letters of recommendation to you or from you?” (3:1). Communication was hardly quick or easy in the Roman world. Thus letters of introduction and/or recommendation gave communities in faraway places ways to create networks of social and commercial relations. When travelers to a new city or community bore letters of recommendation, they came with the endorsement of someone of standing whose recommendation the recipients would likely honor.11 Early Christian itinerant preachers apparently made use of such letters. Indeed, Paul used them (see his commendation of Phoebe, Rom 16:1-2). His reference here to “some” who need them suggests, as noted, that other traveling apostles had come to Corinth. They apparently brought letters with them, whereas Paul had not. Such a circumstance may have become an issue, for Paul’s question is structured so that it should be read, “surely I don’t need such letters, do I?” Furthermore, he questions whether or not he needs letters from them. Perhaps some Corinthians wanted to write letters for him, to become his patrons in this manner. Paul responds by insisting that he needs no such letters because “You [emphatic pronoun] are our letter” (v. 2a). He goes on to describe the Corinthian believers as “a letter of Christ . . . having been written not by ink but by the Spirit of the living God, not on stone tablets but on fleshy heart tablets” (v. 3). In addition, the letter that they are has been written on Paul’s heart (“our hearts,” v. 2), has been ministered to (diakoneø) by Paul and those with him (v. 3), and is known and read by all people (v. 2). While some commentators work hard to explain exactly what Paul meant by “a

62

2 Corinthians 2:14–3:6

letter written on our [or maybe “your” as some manuscripts read] hearts,” or by the phrase “fleshy heart tablets,” we may read these words as his poetic defense of why he neither wants letters from them nor needs letters to them. The existence of the Corinthian ekkl∑sia of God living in the power of the Spirit recommends him as an authentic apostle of Christ. He was the one through whom the “fragrance of the knowledge of God” reached them, who preached the word that called their community of faith into being. What other “letter” does he need? We should note the contrast Paul makes between letters written in ink versus those written by the Spirit, those written on tablets of stone versus those written on tablets of fleshy hearts, images and ideas that likely come from the prophetic traditions of Ezekiel and Jeremiah. [The Traditions of Ezekiel and Jeremiah] The Traditions of Ezekiel and Jeremiah Because of this contrast Paul says, “We have As we read Paul in ch. 3, we should consuch confidence through Christ before God” sider these words from Ezekiel: “A new (v. 4), i.e., the confidence that the Corinthian heart I will give you, and a new spirit I will put within you; and I will remove from your body the ekkl∑sia is a letter of Christ that recommends heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. I will him as an apostle of Christ. But then he adds, put my spirit within you, and make you follow my “Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to claim statutes and be careful to observe my ordianything as from ourselves, but our sufficiency is nances” (36:26-27). from God” (v. 5). Finally Paul has arrived at a Then, there are these words from Jeremiah: direct answer to the question, “who is suffi“But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I cient?” (2:16). Not those who are recommended will put my law within them, and I will write it on by important patrons, but those who are made their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall sufficient (competent, fit) by God. be my people” (31:33). Further, God has made Paul sufficient to be a These images and ideas significantly shape minister (diakonos) of “a new covenant, not of what Paul is about to say in his letter. letter but of spirit, for the letter kills but the Spirit makes alive” (v. 6). The echoes from Jeremiah ring particularly clear this time: “The days are surely coming, says the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah” (Jer 31:31). Taken together, we find Ezekiel and Jeremiah looking for a time “after those days” when God would give the people a new spirit, a new heart, and a new covenant. Reading all across his letters shows that, for Paul, the apocalyptic Jew, “those days” had come with Christ, Christ’s resurrection, and the pouring out of the Spirit on all flesh so that Gentiles were also part of the people of God. Paul also says that this new covenant is of spirit, not letter, because “the letter kills, but the Spirit makes alive.” This short phrase is without elaboration, which leads Jan Lambrecht to claim that to understand “what Paul really means by this brief labeling

2 Corinthians 2:14–3:6

one has to go to his lengthy treatments in Galatians and Romans.”12 Obviously a detailed look at either of those letters is not possible here, and we must keep in mind that those letters arose in different contexts than 2 Corinthians. But with such caveats in mind, a look at some important texts from those letters will help our understanding. First we can note that the earlier reference to tablets of stone along with the use of “the letter” suggest that Paul has the Law in mind (and he will talk more about the Law in the verses that follow). In Romans 7:12 Paul writes that the Law is “holy, just, and good.” But he also says that the Law’s accomplishment was to show us that we are in bondage to sin (7:14), for, while the Law teaches what is good, and we can wish to do those good things, we cannot do them because we are in bondage to sin (7:16-18). So Paul utters his famous cry, “Wretched man that I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death?” (7:24). By “body of death” I understand Paul to mean our actual bodily living “out there in the world” where sin, this great evil force in the universe (see Rom 5:12), holds us captive. It had created a world where such realities as Roman oppression and violence, the patronage system, divisions among people according to birth status (which determined people’s class, ethnicity, gender, slave or free status), etc., ordered much of life and brought much death. Paul knew whereof he spoke. He had once participated in efforts to defend the boundaries that set his people apart from Gentiles to the point of persecuting followers of Jesus, perhaps bringing some to their deaths. He seems to have been haunted by the memory of his participation in such death (see 1 Cor 15:8-9; Phil 3:4-6). But Paul believed that God, who raised Jesus from the dead, had launched the Messianic Age, pouring out the life-giving Spirit on all flesh and offering a new covenant written on our hearts, not on our bodies (be they Jew or Gentile). When he rails against the Law in Galatians and Romans, he is critical of the ritual aspects of the Law that separated Jews and Gentiles, creating enmity, violence, and death (see Gal 2:11-16; Rom 3:27-31). Perhaps this divisive aspect of the Law is what he means by “the letter kills.” But we are free from that “letter” now, for the Spirit has been poured out and is available to anyone who has faith, making us all children of God: “Neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is anything, but a new creation is everything” (Gal 6:15; Paul will speak explicitly of the “new creation” in 2 Cor 5). Thus we are finally free to love our neighbors (Gal 5:13) and fulfill the just requirements of the Law (Rom 3:31; 8:3-4), finally free to do the good that we desire to do (Rom 7:15, 19, 22), to live fully.

63

64

2 Corinthians 2:14–3:6

Paul has gone from bondage to sin to being a captive of God and found life in the Spirit along the way. We might wish he had not chosen slavery or humiliated prisoners of war as vehicles for conveying his experience of transformation, but transformed was what he believed himself to be. He had been made sufficient to serve as a minister of God’s new covenant in the power of the life-giving Spirit—“thanks be to God” (2:14). One last thought: Paul’s words about letter and Spirit must not be used to justify anti-Semitism! He is not denigrating his heritage and would likely not have seen the transformation he experienced as making him a convert to a religion different from that of his forebears. Rather, as an apocalyptic Jew, he understood that the promises for which his people had longed were being fulfilled in the new covenant in the power of the Spirit (the promises are “yes!” in Christ, 1:20).

CONNECTIONS 1. The prophetic word that Paul speaks (i.e., the “fragrance of the knowledge of God”) is life to some, death to others. A review of the civil rights movement in the latter half of the twentieth century in the United States illustrates what he meant. The majority of Americans would now agree that Opposition to Civil Rights justice was served when legal segregation was dismantled during those years. Many American Christians would say that Martin Luther King, Jr., and other advocates of racial civil rights were speaking a prophetic word from God to the nation and to the churches about “all God’s children” being “free at last.” That word was life-giving to African Americans who finally had their “place at the table” recognized by the courts, the Congress, and (oh so slowly) the wider society. But when we look at pictures of the white crowds This famous photo of Elizabeth Eckford, one of that opposed racial civil rights, particularly in the the “Little Rock Nine,” as she helps to desegre1950s and 1960s, we see something else. The gate Central High School in Little Rock in 1957 reveals the responses of life and death to God’s faces of those people were contorted with fear, call for justice. Look at the faces of those in the hatred, and rage. We understand, even if we don’t crowd behind her. So much rage and hatred all know the story, that violence and death were not because some kids want to be part of a just far off. We look back now and see that the society that educated all people well. prophetic word from God did not cause people to September 6, 1957. Little Rock AR. (Credit: © Bettmann/CORBIS) respond as they did. Rather, when it came, it

2 Corinthians 2:14–3:6

65

revealed what was in the hearts of people. When God’s word calls for justice and freedom for all God’s people, some respond with joy and affirm life, but others respond with hatred, violence, and death. The Jewish prophetic tradition in which Paul stood tells us we should have expected as much. 2. For a long time in American church history, churches justified paying their ministers poverty wages because ministers weren’t supposed to be “in it for the money.” As if ministers did not have healthcare costs, kids to care for and educate, a need for Sabbath time. Whenever those days pass from a church’s practice, then good riddance to them! In what I’m about to say, I am not advocating any sort of return to such poverty wages. Still, we should not ignore that the great spiritual teachers in our tradition all counsel us that money is a spiritual trap. [Spiritual Teachings on Wealth] It is painfully easy for wealth and possessions, or the desire for these, to own us rather than the other way Spiritual Teachings on Wealth around. Against the backWhen the bishop of Assisi once spoke to Saint Francis about his lack of drop of such spiritual possessions, he was told, “My lord, if we wanted to have possessions guidance, we should take we would also need to have arms for our defense. But that is where the quarrels note of Paul’s refusal to and fights come from that so often impede love for God and neighbor. That is why we do not want to possess temporal things in this world.” receive patronage. We One of the great wisdom stories that has been told by spiritual teachers in will find later that his many traditions goes like this: rejection of patronage resulted in hardships for A fisherman once sat in the midday sun, gazing out to sea, thinking to himself how him (see the commentary good it was to sit in the sun with no worries, watch the waves breaking and enjoy God’s creation. But his reverie was interrupted by a businessman who asked him on 11:27). A patron’s why he wasn’t fishing. The fisherman replied that he was finished for the day. The money would have eased businessman demanded to know why he didn’t go out and fish some more. many of these difficulties. “Why would I want to do that?” asked the fisherman. But it would also have “Then you would make twice as much money.” “Why would I want to do that?” left him less free to do the “Then you could buy a bigger, better boat and catch even more fish. . . . My ministry to which God word, you could own a whole fleet of fishing boats if you weren’t so lazy.” called him. Suppose he “Why would I want to do that?” “Then you could have as much money as you could ever dream of.” took money from a “Why would I want to do that?” patron who then took “Then you could spend the rest of your life doing whatever you wanted to do, a church member to sitting in the sun, relaxing, no worries . . . .” court to collect a debt, went to banquets given Assisi quoted in Dorothee Soelle, The Silent Cry: Mysticism and Resistance (trans. Barbara and Martin Rumscheidt; Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2001) 233. by wealthy colleagues that Margaret Silf, ed., 100 Wisdom Stories from around the World (Cleveland: Pilgrim Press, 2003) 78–79. were dedicated to the gods, or hosted a dinner for wealthier church members before the poorer members arrived for worship and Eucharist. In such a situation, might Paul have been tempted not to write 1 Corinthians 6, 8, or 11? As far as we

66

2 Corinthians 2:14–3:6

know, this temptation is one Paul did not face because he avoided the traps set by a patron’s money. In our capitalist, consumer culture where some church decisions are made for financial rather spiritual reasons, we have much to learn from Paul’s financial practices. 3. “The letter kills, but the Spirit makes alive.” Many of us have been involved in conversations as to whether a rule or law must be followed exactly (i.e., “to the letter”), or if the “spirit” of the rule actually requires us not to keep it fully. These conversations are often difficult. The fact that the question has arisen tells us that the rule or law is not adequate for a new situation being faced. But what to do now? If Gentiles are allowed into the community of the people of God without the men being circumcised and everyone keeping kosher, if we accept that God is opposed to slavery, if we believe that this woman has a call from God to preach—well, what are the implications? What will change? Precisely because a rule or law is no longer adequate for a new situation in which we find ourselves, we need to be open to the spirit (or Spirit) of the law. Precisely because the implications of noncompliance to the law are far-reaching and will bring change, the Spirit is often resisted. Resistance to the Spirit, then, is about fear of change. According to the great teacher Edward Thornton, when fear prevails in decisionmaking, we are seeing the face of evil.13 Therefore, even as a new situation arises that challenges our rules, even as we are afraid of where a change may take us, let us not fall back on arguments about “the letter of the law” that quenches the newness offered by the Spirit and brings death of some kind. Let us instead trust ourselves to the guidance of the Spirit who makes alive.

Notes 1. C. K. Barrett, A Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1973) 25. 2. See, e.g., Jan Lambrecht, Second Corinthians (SP 8; Collegeville MN: Liturgical Press, 1999) 9; Frank J. Matera, II Corinthians (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2003) 67. 3. Matera, II Corinthians, 72. 4. Paul B. Duff, “Metaphor, Motif, and Meaning: The Rhetorical Strategy Behind the Image ‘Led in Triumph’ in 2 Corinthians 2:14,” CBQ 53 (1991): 83, 87. 5. James M. Scott, 2 Corinthians (NIBCNT; Peabody MA: Hendrickson, 1998) 60–64. 6. See Margaret E. Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians (ICC 1; London: T & T Clark International, 1994) 191–99, for a full discussion of all the possibilities for interpreting 2:14.

2 Corinthians 2:14–3:6 7. I am indebted to the work of Sze-kar Wan, Power in Weakness: The Second Letter of Paul to the Corinthians (Harrisburg PA: Trinity Press International, 2000) 59–60, for this possibility that the call of Divine Wisdom was in Paul’s mind as he wrote his words in 2 Cor 2:14-15. 8. Ibid., 57. 9. J. Paul Sampley, The Second Letter to the Corinthians (NIB 11; Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2000) 10. 10. Richard A. Horsley, “1 Corinthians: A Case Study of Paul’s Assembly as an Alternative Society” in Paul and Empire: Religion and Power in Roman Imperial Society (ed. Richard A. Horsley; Harrisburg PA: Trinity Press International, 1997) 250. 11. Sampley, The Second Letter to the Corinthians, 62; Wan, Power in Weakness, 63. 12. Lambrecht, Second Corinthians, 47. 13. Edward E. Thornton, Being Transformed: An Inner Way of Spiritual Growth (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1984) 103–104.

67

Slave of the Glorious Ministry of the Spirit 2 Corinthians 3:7–4:6

COMMENTARY As we turn to 3:7 we find Paul employing a rather free association of ideas that moves from a letter “written [engegrammen∑] not in ink but by the Spirit of the living God” (3:3) to a new covenant “not of letter [grammatos] but of Spirit, for the letter [gramma] kills” (3:6) and now to “the ministry of death carved in letters [grammasin] on stones” (3:7). Joseph Fitzmyer observed that this association of ideas is caused by catchword bonding, in which one sense of a term suggests another, and so the argument proceeds.1 Along the way Paul’s subject matter shifts from his ministry on behalf of the new covenant (3:1-6) to a comparison of the “ministry of death” with the “ministry of Spirit” (3:7-11). We need to consider reasons for the shift, the content of his argument, and the rhetorical strategy for making his argument. We’ll take these in reverse order. Paul makes use in vv. 7-11 of a common ancient rhetorical strategy of arguing “from the lesser to the greater.” That is, if something is true of the lesser of something, it is more true of the greater. In this section Paul will compare the glory of the “ministry [diakonia] of death” with the glory of the “ministry [diakonia] of Spirit.” In so doing he offers an extensive and creative commentary on Exodus 34:29-35. Jan Lambrecht described Paul as giving the impression that he went looking for illustrative material he could use to explain his own ideas. At times his ideas are different from, perhaps even contrary to, the literal sense of Exodus, which seems not to bother him in the least. Rather, his argument makes use of “a challenging, daring, and uncommonly free reinterpretation of Exodus 34.”2 As we turn to the content of this argument, we find that the “letter” that kills in v. 6 is further defined as “the ministry of death carved in letters on stone” in v. 7. Now we are sure, as we suspected earlier, that Paul means the Jewish Law. Though he has given it the negative moniker “ministry of death,” he says that the Law “came in

70

2 Corinthians 3:7–4:6

The Glory of the Lord on Moses’ Face, Exodus 34:29-30 The OT story upon which Paul relies in this portion of the letter begins in this way: “Moses came down from Mount Sinai. As he came down from the mountain with the two tablets of the covenant in his hand, Moses did not know that the skin of his face shone because he had been talking with God. When Aaron and all the Israelites saw Moses, the skin of his face was shining, and they were afraid to come near him.”

glory,” so much so that the Israelites could not look into Moses’ face because of the glory (v. 7). [The Glory of the Lord on Moses’ Face, Exodus 34:29-30]

“Glory” is a key idea in this section of the letter, appearing fourteen times in 3:1–4:6, but the word is notoriously difficult to define. Simply put, it is the manifestation of God’s presence, but what does that denote? The Exodus story Paul is using helps us. When Moses came down from Mount Sinai, “the skin of his face shone because he had been talking with God” (Exod 34:29), suggesting there is a great radiance about the presence of God that actually does something transformational to this human being. But the experience is also awe-full, because the Israelites were afraid to come near Moses when his face shone (Exod 34:30). This transforming, awe-inspiring, even frightening sense Other Biblical Texts on God’s Glory of God’s presence is what we call “glory.” [Other Many texts in the Bible speak of God’s glory. Here are examples: Biblical Texts on God’s Glory] Paul’s declaration that the Law came in glory suggests, therefore, that it Ps 19:1. The heavens are telling the glory of God; derived from God’s presence or brought a sense and the firmament declares [God’s] handiwork. of God’s presence or both.3 Isa 60:1-2. Arise, shine; for your light has come, Yet Paul calls the Law the “ministry of death.” and the glory of the Lord has risen upon you. For What an odd confluence of words: the ministry darkness shall cover the earth, and thick darkness the peoples; but the Lord will rise upon you, and of death came in glory. Two of the words (min[God’s] glory will appear over you. istry, glory) are wonderfully positive, but Luke 2:8-9. In that region there were shepherds between them is the word “death.” Clearly Paul living in the fields, keeping watch over their flock loved his Jewish heritage, which he believed had by night. Then an angel of the Lord stood before been given to his people in glory. [Romans 3:1-2; them, and the glory of the Lord shone around 9:2-5 Give Thoughts on Paul’s Jewish Heritage] But if the them, and they were terrified. Rev 21:22-23. I saw no temple in the [New commentary on 3:6 (see above) is near to being Jerusalem], for its temple is the Lord God the on target, he had also come to see the death that Almighty and the Lamb. And the city has no need resulted from the Law as it showed us how to of sun or moon to shine on it, for the glory of God live but did not free us from bondage to sin, and is its light, and its lamp is the Lamb. as it created divisions and enmity among people. Consequently, he finishes the thought of v. 7 by describing the Law’s glory with a participle formed from the Greek verb katargeø. This verb also appears in vv. 11, 13, and 14, so we need to understand it well. According to Paul Sampley, its semantic range includes “make ineffective or powerless,” “nullify,” “wipe out or abolish,” or “set aside.” In the passive, as here, it may mean “cease” or “pass away” (3:7, 14), and in the substantive (3:11, 13), “what is transitory.”4 The glory, then, of the “ministry of death” is ceasing, is not eternal. Its glory, according to Paul, could not stand over time,

2 Corinthians 3:7–4:6

71

perhaps because it brought death. Romans 3:1-2; 9:2-5 Give Thoughts on Paul’s Jewish Heritage Still, this ministry came in glory, In the letter to the Romans Paul has occasion to describe specifically his appreciation of his Jewish heritage. 3:1-2 and, since it did, how much more reads, “Then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the value of will the “greater” ministry of circumcision? Much, in every way. For in the first place the Jews Spirit that gives life (v. 6) be in were entrusted with the oracles of God.” glory (v. 8)? Then, in 9:2-5, Paul says, “I have great sorrow and unceasing In v. 9, the ministry of death is anguish in my heart. For I could wish that I myself were accursed further defined as the “ministry of and cut off from Christ for the sake of my own people, my kindred condemnation [katakrisis].” This according to the flesh. They are Israelites, and to them belong the Greek word denotes judgment. adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the But even as he uses this termi- worship, and the promises; to them belong the patriarchs, and from them, according to the flesh, comes the Messiah, who is over all, nology, Paul continues to claim God blessed forever. Amen.” that glory was in this ministry. Since that is so, how much more is the “ministry of justice [dikaiosyn∑ ]” Understanding God’s Dikaiosyn∑ abounding in glory? The Greek term “Righteousness” is a key concept in the Bible dikaiosyn∑ is usually translated as “righteousbut is often understood in the context of our individualistic culture as “personal rightness” before ness,” but too often this English word God. That understanding is inadequate for this grand evokes only personal “rightness” before concept that is rooted in the character of the God of God. There is more to the Greek word. the Bible. Katherine Grieb has presented a helpful Dikaiosyn∑ is characteristic of God and has description that can deepen our appreciation of God’s to do with the faithfulness and “rightness” righteousness. with which God acts. [Understanding God’s God’s Righteousness as God’s Covenant Faithfulness Dikaiosyn∑] When it prevails in creation, then to Israel: Primarily, to say that God is righteous is to say people are in harmony with God and also that God is trustworthy. When God makes a promise, with one another so that grace and peace God keeps it. God keeps God’s word. God’s Righteousness as the Justice of God, the characterize their living. Thus we may favor 5 Righteous Judge: In the ancient world the ruling classes the translation “justice” for this Greek controlled the courts so that the rulings went their way term. The phrase “ministry of justice,” then, to justify their practices, no matter how oppressive. elaborates on the “ministry of Spirit.” The When God is judge, however, the oppressed ones have a fair hearing and are vindicated when they have been Spirit has been poured out on all flesh, treated badly because God is just. Moreover, God’s just breaking human bondage to sin, bringing judgments restore the alienated parties to right relationjustice, erasing the lines that human beings ship with each other (if they will receive it). draw between themselves, ending the diviGod’s Righteousness as God’s Power to Put Things Right in the End Time: Hostile powers, especially Sin and sions and violence and death among them, Death, have entered the world and now oppress human making all people children of God, enabling beings and all of creation. But God will act to vindicate us to live in harmony with God and one the enslaved creation, bringing peace and justice in all the world. God will ultimately “put things right.” another, without fear of judgment. Indeed, the glory of this ministry of Spirit is so “over God’s righteousness, then, is about faithfulness, the top” that it makes the old ministry justice, and right relationships so that there is peace appear to have had no glory at all (v. 10) throughout creation. even though Paul has been quite insistent that it did.6 Grieb, The Story of Romans: A Narrative Defense of God’s Righteousness (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2002) 21–24.

72

2 Corinthians 3:7–4:6

Then Paul offers one last comparison between the two ministries: “if that which is transitory comes through glory, how much more does that which abides?” (v. 11). The ministry of Spirit and of justice is also “that which abides.” That is, it is eternal. This ministry is, for Paul, the apocalyptic fulfillment of the hopes of his people. “The days are surely coming,” Jeremiah had said, when God “will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah” (Jer 31:31). Paul understood the “day of the new covenant” to have come in the power of the Spirit. The fulfillment for which his people had longed is unfolding. So the glory of this ministry surpasses the glory of the Mosaic covenant because it fulfills it (not because it supercedes it!). Again, we must not read Paul as being anti-Jewish. Instead, for Paul the ministry of Spirit is the indicator that all the promises of God made to Paul’s people are “yes!” in Christ. Verse 12 then begins, “Therefore, having such a hope”—i.e., the hope that comes from God fulfilling the promises, from the ministry of Spirit that gives life and comes in eternal glory. Because Paul has such hope, he “acts with great frankness.” Now he is back to talking about his own ministry, and we are in position to understand the sudden shift in his argument that occurred in v. 7. The flow of his thought seems to be thus: since God has made him competent to be a minister of the new covenant (3:4-6), which is the ministry of Spirit that comes in eternal glory (3:7-11), Paul conducts his ministry as he does (3:12-18). Perhaps the other apostles who apparently had come to Corinth (3:1) were advocates of the gospel of circumcision (if they are the same ones as in chapters 10–13, then the likelihood increases). If so, then their discussion of the Mosaic covenant provided Paul with an opportunity to highlight the eternal glory of the ministry of the Spirit by comparing it to the transitory glory of the ministry that preceded it (in Paul’s thinking). Having done so, he can now paint himself more clearly for the Corinthians as one made competent to be a minister of this hugely glorious new covenant. Because he has such hope, Paul claims, he “acts with great frankness” (v. 12). We have noted before that Paul spoke frankly (openly, boldly) to the Corinthians (see comments on 2:3-4). Positively, we can understand him as believing the ministry of Spirit to be so glorious that the Corinthians must not miss the implications for their lives or misconstrue what God is doing in their midst. Consequently, he has been frank, bold with them. But we can also hear him implicitly responding to criticism that he has been less than open with his readers (1:13, 17), that his gospel message

2 Corinthians 3:7–4:6

73

Moses’ Veil in Exodus 34:31-33 appears obscure to some people (4:3), and that The next part of the exodus story that 7 his ultimate motivation is questionable (4:2). Paul is relying upon in our text reads, “But Not true, he insists. He has been frank/open Moses called to them, and Aaron and all the with the Corinthians, not like Moses “who put a leaders of the congregation returned to him, and veil upon his face so that the children of Israel Moses spoke with them. Afterward all the Israelites came near, and he gave them in comcould not see into the telos [end or purpose] of mandment all that the Lord had spoken to him on that which was transitory” (v. 13). [Moses’ Veil in Mount Sinai. When Moses had finished speaking Exodus 34:31-33] Moses’ veiling of himself indicated with them, he put a veil on his face . . . .” to Paul Moses’ lack of openness, which is precisely how Paul insists he does not behave. There is no difficulty understanding the connection of these words with v. 12. Had Paul stopped his sentence once he noted that Moses veiled his face, the verse would be clear. But he didn’t, and so several issues demand our attention. Moses’ Shining Face First, there is Paul’s use of Moses’ story. The Exodus account shows that the glory of God was so awe-full that the Israelites were (appropriately) afraid and implies that Moses veiled his face to temper their fear so that they would come near him (see Exod 34:30). It says nothing, as Paul does, about Moses hiding the end or purpose of anything behind his veil. Image Not Available Many scholars describe Paul as doing due to lack of digital rights. what other Jewish interpreters of Please view the published commentary or perform an Internet Scripture in his time often did, i.e., search using the credit below. relating to the text freely by highlighting some parts, ignoring others, changing some details, and adding others in order to convey his own message. As Margaret Thrall has noted, the Moses veil motif may have suggested to Paul the idea of concealment, which is a charge he wished to repudiate, so he freely used the story Malcah Zeldis (b.1931). Moses and the Ten Commandments. Private Collection. to do so.8 We may be less comfort© 2009 Artists Rights Society (ARS), New York. (Credit: Malcah Zeldis/Art Resource, NY) able now with such a use of a biblical text, but we acknowledge that Paul In this painting by American folk artist Malcah Zeldis titled was doing as was commonly done in Moses and the Ten Commandments, the bright light of the his time. glory of God is clearly shining on Moses, who not only outshines but also dwarfs all other people and creatures in the painting. Second, “that which is transitory” Thus the artist illustrates the awesomeness of God’s glory and (which Moses’ veiling prevented the indicates why people would have feared it.

74

2 Corinthians 3:7–4:6

Israelites from seeing) is not glory, which is clear in the Greek (v. 13b) but less so in English. The participle katargoumenou is grammatically neuter, not feminine as it would be if it referred to “glory.” Commentators generally understand that Paul means all the things he has talked about thus far, which could be gathered under the heading “Mosaic Covenant.” These are transitory (i.e., letters written on stone tablets, the ministry of death/judgment, as well as its glory). For Paul this covenant is transitory because its fulfillment has come in the new covenant. Third, there are questions surrounding the meaning of the Greek word telos in the phrase “the telos of that which is transitory” (v. 13b). It can mean either “end” as in the completion of something, or “purpose” in the sense of the goal of something. Given that Paul has freely adapted the Moses story for his own needs, did he intend to say that Moses veiled himself so the Israelites could not see the end of the Mosaic covenant or the purpose of the Mosaic covenant? Scholars are divided between these possibilities. Among those who choose “the end” is Frank Matera, who points out that Paul has already contrasted Moses’ ministry and his own in terms of what was passing away and what remains (in v. 11).9 Richard Hays, arguing that the “normal meaning” of telos is purpose, that Paul uses it in this way in Romans 10:4, and that patristic writers understood Paul thusly, insists that telos here can only mean “purpose” or “true aim.”10 Because I understand Paul to have been an apocalyptic Jew who believed the fulfillment of God’s promises offered in the Mosaic covenant had happened in Jesus the Messiah, I lean toward interpreting telos as “purpose.” But the ambiguity of the term remains. Finally, whether we understand telos as end or purpose, we still have the vexing problem of Moses hiding such a thing from the Israelites by veiling his face. In Paul’s retelling of the story, Moses is depicted as duplicitous. If Paul referred to the end of the Mosaic covenant, then Moses is made to hide the temporary-ness of it from his people. If Paul referred to the purpose of the Mosaic covenant, then we really have a puzzle. For what positive reason would Moses hide such a purpose? Among scholars who have tried to make sense of Paul’s storytelling, Matera argues that, in Paul’s understanding, “Moses seeks to prevent the Israelites from gazing on the ‘end’ . . . of what is being abolished. Otherwise they will gaze on veiled glory (as the Israel of Paul’s day is doing) rather than on the unveiled glory of the gospel.”11 Hays offers a different assessment of Paul’s use of Moses’ story:

2 Corinthians 3:7–4:6

75

Paul says nothing about Moses’ motives for concealing the telos of the old covenant, and it probably did not occur to him to raise the question. The biblical story is a given, and he sees in it a glowing opportunity to coin a metaphor that will reflect the difference between his ministry and that of his opponents . . . . The only thing that interests Paul about the story is its compelling image of a masked Moses whose veil is removed when he enters the presence of the Lord. That image becomes for Paul the center and substance of an imaginative interpretation that is . . . mystical and eschatological.12

Even if Hays can accurately guess what Paul was thinking, we are still left with a text that has Moses hiding something from his people. As Thrall admitted, we really cannot fix the impression that Moses was deceitful.13 Maybe the rather uncomfortable reality is that Paul meant to portray Moses as duplicitous. We remember that earlier Paul claimed to be “not like” others who huckster the gospel (2:17) or need letters of recommendation (3:1) to vouch for their ministry. We also remember the possibility that Moses was a hero to these others. So now Paul insists that he was frank/bold/open with the Corinthians, “not like Moses” who hid something important from his people. It appears that the presence of these other apostles in Corinth and their “take” on the gospel provided Paul with a rhetorical device with which to clarify himself to the Corinthians. By claiming he is Early Interpreters on the Veil not like those hucksters who need Early commentators in the church offered interesting letters of recommendation and not interpretations of Paul’s reading of Moses’ veil: like Moses (their hero) who was deceitful, Paul highlights his belief Chrysostom: Paul is saying that there is no need for us to cover that God made him competent to be ourselves as Moses did, for we are able to look at the glory with a minister of a super-glorious minwhich we are encircled, even though it is far brighter than the other one. (Hom. 1 Cor.) istry of Spirit that enables, or perhaps Augustine: It is not the Old Testament that is done away with in requires, him to be frank/bold/open Christ but the concealing veil, so that it may be understood with the Corinthians. [Early Interpreters on the Veil]

Before going on with Paul’s words, we should acknowledge that this analysis of these verses raises some cautions that we, as readers of this letter, should heed. The claim here is that Paul has constructed a rhetorical argument to make a point in a particular context about himself and his ministry. He has not offered a theological assessment of Moses, Moses’

through Christ. . . . It is not the case . . . that by the grace of the Lord that which was covered has been abolished as useless; rather the covering has been removed which concealed useful truth. This is what happens to those who earnestly and piously, not proudly and wickedly, seek the sense of the Scriptures. Ambrosiaster: Paul is saying that we have a hope of seeing glory, not the kind which was on the face of Moses but the kind which the three apostles saw on the mountain when the Lord revealed himself. Therefore we ought to repay the love of God as far as we can by being more fervent in our love for him . . . . (Commentary on Paul’s Epistles) These quotes may be found in ACCS NT 7 (ed. Gerald Bray; Chicago: Fitzroy Dearborn Publishers, 1999) 221–22.

76

2 Corinthians 3:7–4:6

service before God, or his own Jewish heritage. As already noted, Paul clearly loved his Jewish heritage and believed the promises God made to the world through Judaism were being fulfilled. Moreover, I suspect Moses was also a hero for him. Therefore, it is important that we not confuse rhetoric with theology if we would do justice to Paul. He constructed a rhetorical argument for a letter to a specific group of people in a specific moment in their history together. We read Paul best when we attend to this context. After all this work on v. 13, we turn to what’s next and find that Paul is still not through with Moses, so neither are we. But a significant change happens. As Fitzmyer warns, the associations now “tumble fast, one upon the other.”14 “Moses” now becomes the name given to the written Torah that Moses the man passed on to his people, and the veil over his face becomes the veil over the reading of the old covenant. “But their minds were blinded,” Paul says (v. 14a). Presumably “they” are the people whom Moses deceived in his day, and presumably the veil is the cause of their blindness. But Paul moves quickly to his own time and shifts to metaphor as he declares that “to this very day the same veil remains on the reading of the old covenant, not being unveiled because in Christ it is being nullified” (v. 14bc). Some commentators assume Paul has in mind his Jewish contemporaries who did not believe that the Messiah had come. But what would be the point of talking about Jews to Corinthian Christians in a moment when the primary issue was Paul’s integrity in their midst? It makes more sense for Paul to have in mind those visiting apostles, especially if they were advocates of the gospel of circumcision (see my introduction for a description of the gospel of circumcision) and critics of Paul. These believers do not share Paul’s perspective that the old covenant was fulfilled in Christ and, thus, is “nullified.” So, he considers them to be veiled. Paul shifts metaphors yet again but continues his thought: “whenever Moses is read, a veil lies upon their hearts” (v. 15). Thus, over the course of these verses Paul says that their minds were blinded, their hearts veiled, and they could not read “Moses” clearly because the text is veiled also. These other apostles, or whoever Paul has in mind, could not read “Moses” as Paul believed they should. If their hearts and minds were not veiled, they would grasp the turn of the ages brought about by God’s transforming work in Christ. Then they would have new eyes to read Moses and see the purpose (telos) there that Paul saw.15 But they are veiled, Paul says. Thus they are the perfect contrasts for what is otherwise possible for human beings, which he begins to describe in v. 16 by

2 Corinthians 3:7–4:6

77

Removing the Veil in Exodus 34:33-35 means of a rather epic reversal of what has gone The final portion of the exodus story that before. Hays observes that we should expect figures in this part of Paul’s letter tells us: the sequel to vv. 14-15 “to be a blistering con“When Moses had finished speaking with them, he demnation of Moses’ cowardice and duplicity,” put a veil on his face, but whenever Moses went in accompanied by a call to renounce the whole before the Lord to speak with him, he would take the veil off, until he came out; and when he came Torah religion. Instead, the story turns to out, and told the Israelites what he had been combecome a “parable of grace.”16 For, Paul says, manded, the Israelites would see the face of “whenever anyone”—i.e., Jew, Gentile, the Moses, that the skin of his face was shining, and Corinthians, the other apostles, Paul, Moses would put the veil on his face again, until he anyone—“turns to the Lord, the veil is taken went in to speak with [the Lord].” away” (v. 16). According to Exodus 34:34, whenever Moses went before the Lord, he would take the veil off. [Removing the Veil in Exodus 34:33-35] Earlier Paul insisted he was “not like Moses,” but here he wants believers to be very like Moses and turn to the Lord so that the veil can be removed. Lots of commentators’ ink has been spilt discussing whom Paul means by “the Lord” in this verse. God? Christ? The simplest solution is to understand Paul as nearly quoting Exodus 34:34 and letting the language of that verse be as it is.17 But the question takes on added significance when Paul says, in his next phrase, “Now the Lord is the Spirit” (v. 17a). This abrupt identification of Lord and Spirit is notoriously unsettling for interpreters who wish to reconcile it with Trinitarian dogma.18 Thrall has identified eight main ways the phrase has been interpreted, several of which focus on Trinitarian or other dogmatic concerns.19 Sampley reminds us, though, that Paul had no “clearly formulated Trinitarian view of matters divine.”20 Indeed, the church took a few centuries and councils to put together its doctrine of the Trinity and has continued to discuss it ever since. Sampley suggests it is “our post-Chalcedonian longing for neatness that drives us to distinguish and compartmentalize what obviously for Paul was a more fluid mix.”21 If we can let our Trinitarian anxieties go, we are free to appreciate that Paul likely has his Jewish background still in mind. Pneuma kyriou (Spirit of the Lord) occurs frequently in the Septuagint as the Greek rendering of the Hebrew ruah yhwh (the Spirit of Yahweh).22 The Spirit of Yahweh is the breath of life in the Hebrew Bible (see, e.g., Ps 104:29-30), and the Spirit for Paul is the transforming power at work in bringing the new covenant community to life (3:6). As Sampley notes, it is impossible to overstate the importance for Paul of the Spirit for the life of faith.23 In this verse the Spirit is identified with the Lord of the Exodus (v. 17a). There is no surprise that Paul then declares that where the Spirit of the

78

2 Corinthians 3:7–4:6

An Ancient Story of Freedom Great spiritual teachers often use stories to help us see. This story is a good one about the freedom of the Spirit: A king had two servants to whom he gave questionable orders. The first one obeyed, was promoted, and rewarded. The second one refused and was thrown out of the king’s court. The first servant went on to live very well. When he later had an opportunity to check on the second servant, he found him living in a hovel eating gruel. The first servant said, “If only you would learn to do the king’s bidding, you would live in luxury as I do.” The second servant replied, “If only you would learn to love the taste of gruel, you’d live in freedom from the king as I do.” Various versions of this story exist, including one in John Shea, The Legend of the Bells and Other Tales (Chicago: ACTA Publications, 1996) 105–106.

Lord is, there is freedom (v. 17b). This prompts the question, what freedom is offered to the Corinthians? Freedom from what? Or to do what? Our context might lead us to think of freedom from veils, hardness of heart, blindness of mind, and so the freedom to grasp what God is doing in the world. Freedom from death, and so the freedom to be fully alive. Freedom for Gentiles to become children of God. Freedom from a need to hide or be deceitful. Freedom from the patronage system and needing letters of recommendation or anything else to prove oneself. Indeed, freedom from slavery to any aspect of Roman oppression just as the children of the exodus were free from Pharaoh. And, of course, freedom to conduct one’s ministry with frankness, boldness, and openness before others as Paul claims to have done. Paul could have any of these freedoms in mind. Or all of them. Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. [An Ancient Story of Freedom] But living in the freedom of the Spirit brings its own challenges. The reality is that freedom is never absolute. How many American school kids learn that the freedom to swing their arms is limited at the point where their fist makes contact with another person’s body? Just so, as the Corinthians expressed their freedom in the Spirit, they found themselves “coming into contact” with others’ views and practices as even a cursory reading of 1 Corinthians shows: some of them were eating meat sacrificed to idols regardless of the impact on other members of the ekkl∑sia (8:1-13); women took off their hair coverings, apparently scandalizing others (11:2-16); some members were disrupting worship with their tongues speaking (14:1-33); etc. We should not be surprised at these struggles. Whenever people form a community, they must wrestle with both honoring and limiting individual members’ freedom. How can such honoring and limiting be practiced justly? Perhaps v. 18 offers an important reminder and some good news for those struggling to balance the honoring and limiting of freedom (or any balance). “But we all, having unveiled faces”— Paul begins by stressing the community (“we all”) that has turned to the Lord and been unveiled (v. 14). This unveiled community is “contemplating the glory of the Lord” (v. 18a). The verb katoptrizø can mean “to contemplate” or “to behold or reflect as in a mirror.” When the latter meaning is assumed, then the mirror may be

2 Corinthians 3:7–4:6

79

Christ who reflects the glory of God, which is precisely how Christians encounter such glory.24 The former meaning, though, seems to fit the context well since Paul has been contrasting those who could not see the glory of God because of veils (vv. 13-15) with those who now are able to see or contemplate that glory because they are unveiled.25 Those who so contemplate the Lord’s glory “are being transformed, from glory into glory, into the same image, as from the Lord who is the Spirit” (v. 18bc). The contemplation of God’s glory transforms (or “metamorphosizes” since the Greek verb is metamorphoø) us into “the same image,” which is an unexpected introduction of an idea not previously mentioned in this letter. What image (eikøn)? Perhaps Paul had shared this idea with the Corinthians before, so that they would know Believers as Works in Progress: Romans 8:29; 12:1-2; Philippians 1:25 what he meant. Or perhaps they, like we, are Paul often exhorts believers to grow in unsure until we get to 4:4 and read that “Christ faith, which indicates that we are “works is the image [eikøn] of God.” Thus the contemin progress.” Here are examples: plation of God’s glory transforms believers into Christlikeness, but it does so “from glory to Rom 8:29. “For those whom [God] foreknew he glory,” or, as the phrase is usually translated, also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son . . . .” “from one degree of glory to another” (NRSV). Rom 12:1-2. “I appeal to you, therefore, brothers That is, by the power of “the Lord who is the and sisters, by the mercies of God, to present Spirit,” believers are growing into this metamoryour bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptphosis. They are, as Sampley puts it, works in able to God, which is your spiritual worship. Do progress, which is a conviction Paul expresses not be conformed to this world, but be transthroughout his letters.26 [Believers as Works in formed by the renewing of your minds, so that you may discern what is the will of God—what is Progress: Romans 8:29; 12:1-2; Philippians 1:25] Since good and acceptable and perfect.” believers are such works in progress, we should Phil 1:25. “Since I am convinced of this, I know not be surprised that freedom in the Spirit and that I will remain and continue with all of you for captivity to God are often imperfectly balanced. your progress and joy in faith.” But the verse also argues against despair over the imbalance. By contemplating the Lord’s glory and by the power of the Spirit, believers can grow into the balance for which we long. Even the Corinthians could do so. Even Paul could. Chapter 4 begins rather emphatically with “because of this” (v. 1, often translated “therefore”). It points back to what Paul has just been saying about the glorious ministry of Spirit in which he shares. The phrase also indicates that he is ready to bring this portion of the letter to a conclusion. As he does so, he returns to specific claims about the conduct of his ministry, confirming again that he has been primarily concerned about his relations with the Corinthian believers. As Sampley observes, the language of this section is charged. Strong words provide emphasis to Paul’s

80

2 Corinthians 3:7–4:6

claims.27 Once again, he is “frank” in his efforts to enable the Corinthian Christians to know him more fully (see 1:13). Therefore, “having this ministry just as we have been shown mercy, we do not lose heart” (4:1), Paul says. Had he not just described the glory of the ministry of Spirit in which he participates, we might wonder at his claim that he has this ministry as he has been shown mercy. He has already mentioned nearly dying in Asia (1:8-11), presumably because of Roman opposition to the Jesus movement. The letter makes clear that his relations with some folks inside the movement have also been stormy. Even so, he participates in this ministry because of God’s mercy, because this ministry is about life in the Spirit, about glory and freedom, even when it is difficult. And so, he says, he does not “lose heart.” Nor does he practice the “hidden things of shame” (4:2a). Rather, he renounced such things. Nor does he practice cunning or falsify the word of God (4:2b), which may be a return reference to those who huckster the gospel (2:17). Paul insists again that he is not like them. Instead, “in the openness of truth we commend ourselves to the conscience of all people before Paul’s Claims to Sincerity in 2 Corinthians God” (4:2c). The conscience (syneid∑sis) is the Thus Far Paul has claimed several times already human capacity for moral reasoning.28 Paul that he has been open and sincere with claims that if “all people” evaluate him according the Corinthians. Here is a review of those texts: to their moral reasoning “before God,” they will surely judge him positively. We should see by 1:12. For this is our boast, the witness of our connow how intent Paul has been to describe science, that in the frankness and sincerity of himself to the Corinthians as open, sincere, God, not in fleshly wisdom but by the grace of God, we have conducted ourselves in the world, frank, transparent (see 1:12; 2:17; 3:12-13). and especially before you. [Paul’s Claims to Sincerity in 2 Corinthians Thus Far] We can 2:17. For we are not peddling the word of God as also observe that such intensity is necessary only are many, but as from pure motive, as from God if his openness and sincerity had been seriously we are speaking in Christ before God. questioned. 3:12-13. Therefore, having such a hope, we act He follows this description of himself with a with much boldness/openness and not as Moses who was laying a veil upon his face . . . . description of those who had questioned him (4:3): even if Paul’s gospel is “veiled” (the verb kekalymmenon is a play on the veil, the kalymma, of Moses), it is veiled “among those who are perishing” (a clear reference to those who do not receive the word from God in 2:15). The reason these people are veiled is that the “god of this age has blinded the minds of the unbelievers so that they do not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ who is the image of God” (4:4). Several points raised by this verse require attention. First, the glory this time is that of Christ, but this is so because he is “the image of God.” If, as was possible before (see commentary

2 Corinthians 3:7–4:6

on 2:14-25), Paul related Divine Wisdom to Christ, then he may be drawing on the Wisdom traditions again. For example, Wisdom of Solomon 7:26 reads, “For she [Divine Wisdom] is a reflection of eternal light, a spotless mirror of the working of God, and an image of [God’s] goodness.” Second, there are questions about whom Paul has in mind. Some scholars believe Paul refers to unbelieving Jews as being veiled. But, as before, the point of talking about a group outside the community when Paul’s concern is his relations within the community is not clear. Still, we have to consider that he refers to these people as “unbelievers.” Would he refer to any members of the community, or even those “other apostles,” that way? Perhaps he would if his goal was rhetorical forcefulness, as it is in 11:13-15, 23 (see the commentary there). Many of us have engaged in hyperbole to make a point. Sometimes the more charged the situation is, the greater the hyperbole, and, as noted, the situation in Corinth was quite charged. Our best guess is that Paul is speaking about those other apostles and/or Corinthian believers who claim that Paul has been less than open, that his gospel is veiled. Finally, we must consider Paul’s rhetoric. On the one hand, Paul is so sure he has been open and sincere with the Corinthian believers that he cannot believe anyone evaluating him according to their moral reasoning before God could possibly judge him otherwise. He gives no credence to others’ questions about him or their perspectives regarding him. Perhaps he is right not to do so. Perhaps the Corinthian situation has become so polarized that others are being hugely unfair in their judgment of him. In addition, the gods of any age indeed blind people to the gospel. In our time, for example, a culture of consumption and our cultural definitions of success and power often blind people (including Christians) to what makes life meaningful and joyous. We have seen indications that Paul believed the pervasiveness of the Roman patronage system had blinded people to the evils of owing others as well as to the evils of being owed (see also Rom 13:8). In both Paul’s day and in our own, people within the community of faith are not immune to such blindness. So perhaps Paul justly referred to some community members as veiled and blinded. On the other hand, we have seen reasons for some Corinthians to question Paul’s sincerity. There was, for example, his insistence that he did not lord over their faith (1:24) when he had, in fact, done so (1 Cor 4:14-21). Indeed, he’s going to wade into these turbulent waters again in the next verse when he calls himself their “slave for Jesus’ sake.” Such a claim sounds less than sincere when he has also

81

82

2 Corinthians 3:7–4:6

declared himself their father in faith, expects their obedience, and assumes the right to punish any disobedience. Many of us know from experience the frustration of trying to convey to someone, especially someone in a leadership role, that there are concerns needing attention, only to have that person respond with accusations that we are “veiled and blind.” We might wonder if Paul’s rhetoric helped or hindered his efforts to heal the breach between himself and some Corinthians. As we return to the text, we find the Greek word gar (“for”) at the beginning of v. 5, which suggests Paul will now explain why his gospel should not be veiled to anyone: “for we preach not ourselves but Jesus Christ as Lord.” We can only wonder why he felt the need for such a clarification. Had his insistence that he was their father in faith, or his calls to imitate him (e.g., 1 Cor 4:16), or some other claim along these lines led some Corinthians to complain that Paul talked about himself too much (note 10:8)? Whatever the reason, Paul says he and his coworkers do not elevate themselves. Instead, they are the Corinthians’ “slaves for Jesus’ sake” (v. 5b), a claim that, as noted, could sound insincere from the man who also called himself their father in faith. Paul, though, may have been focused on the rhetorical effect of the contrast he creates between the Lord and the slaves: Jesus Christ is Lord; human beings, including the one who founded their community, are slaves for Jesus’ sake. And Christ is Lord “because God . . . shined in our hearts the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ” (v. 6).29 This God is the Creator of Genesis 1 who said, “Let light shine out of darkness.” Rather than blinding us like the god of this age, the Creator God enables us to see God’s glory by revealing it in the face of Christ. The propaganda of the Roman Empire proclaimed that the gods had chosen the Romans to bring the people of the earth together, that the gods had favored the emperor and made him the Lord. The Christian proclamation was that the One True God, the Creator of all that exists, had made Jesus Christ Lord. Christians were his slaves, owed their allegiance to him, and formed an alternative community living under his rule. So Paul has circled back to where he began. At 2:14 he described God as the one who led him in triumph and himself as God’s captive and the aroma of Christ through whom the knowledge of God was spread everywhere. Paul ends this section describing God as the One who reveals the light of the knowledge of God’s glory in the face of Christ and himself as a slave for Jesus’ sake. Whether captive or slave, however, Paul is competent to be a minister of

2 Corinthians 3:7–4:6

God’s glorious new covenant that brings life and freedom in the Spirit because God made him thus. And because God made him competent to be a minister of such a covenant, he claims to have been open and frank with the Corinthians. He wants them to know him as thus, but it has been a struggle for both him and them.

CONNECTIONS 1. “Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom.” But, as noted in the commentary, freedom is never absolute. How can we both honor our freedom and limit it justly? The early Christians, Paul among them, offer a compelling model for answering this question. They called their community an ekkl∑sia, which, as noted, was an assembly of free citizens making decisions about the course of their own lives. The Christian ekkl∑sia is made alive by the power of the Spirit, which underscores that members’ lives belong to God. We can observe that Paul begins this section of the letter describing himself as God’s captive (2:14), and goes on to speak of the freedom that comes from the Spirit (3:17). For Paul, Christians are both captives of God and free in the Spirit. Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza calls this type of community a pneumatic democracy,30 a “place” where individuals’ freedom in the Spirit and their “captivity” to God are both maintained. The challenge for a community is to hold these elements in genuine balance. 2. Often in the history of the church a balance between freedom in the Spirit and captivity to God has not been well maintained. Much that is in 1 Corinthians suggests Paul believed the Corinthians leaned too far to the side of freedom (e.g., men visiting prostitutes in 6:12-20; the women taking off their veils in 11:2-16). I suspect the Corinthians thought Paul erred on the side of captivity. These same tensions have been replayed many times as community members wish to express their freedom in Christ while leaders insist they submit to the will of God (as the leaders understand it). Actually, as we know from the physical world, tension is required for balance to be maintained. But we human beings may not always be comfortable with tension, which can lead us to “come down” on one side or the other. Consider how often we speak in “either-or” language—there is law or grace; we will have high ethical standards or be compassionate; we will be a community of the righteous or an inclusive community; etc. Clearly, however, Paul is claiming both his freedom in the Spirit and his

83

84

2 Corinthians 3:7–4:6

captivity to God in this text. Indeed, a case can be made that the gospel is most often about “both-and.” Note Jesus’ tender affirmation of the woman caught in adultery and his admonition to “go and sin no more” (John 7:53–8:11). We who would follow in the footsteps of Jesus and Paul must learn to live in the tensions in order to find true balance in our lives and communities. 3. We took note of Paul’s charged rhetoric, particularly in 4:2-4 (those who disagree with him are “veiled,” “blinded,” and even “unbelievers”). I would suggest that we have often followed Paul’s practice of speaking derogatorily about those with whom we disagree. Given the splits and schisms we’ve endured, I would also argue that such practice has not served us well. Is there another option? Perhaps a good beginning toward finding an alternative is to remember that a rhetorical situation has prompted Paul’s response here. This story is not only Paul’s. It is also the Corinthians’ story. Both apostle and community were trying to figure out how to live faithfully in their world. The questions they faced were new for all of them. Debate and struggle between and among them were bound to happen. We can, therefore, understand Paul’s charged rhetoric as the result of an important and difficult struggle within the Corinthian ekkl∑sia. And we can note that their struggle prompted this letter that has become Holy Scripture for us. As poet Mary Oliver has said, “How shall there be redemption and resurrection unless there has been a great sorrow? And isn’t struggle and rising the real work of our lives?”31 Their struggle is not a bad thing. Ours need not be either. Struggles give us opportunities for rising. Even so, we need not adopt Paul’s rhetoric in the midst of our struggles. I doubt that declaring that those with whom we disagree are “blinded by the god of this age” has ever moved Christians closer to resolution of their conflicts. We will find hints that Paul’s rhetoric did not help him much either.

Notes 1. Joseph A. Fitzmyer, “Glory Reflected in the Face of Christ (2 Cor 3:7-4:6),” in According to Paul: Studies in the Theology of the Apostle (repr., 1981; New York: Paulist Press, 1993) 68. Fitzmyer laments that this “free association” isn’t noted often enough. 2. Jan Lambrecht, Second Corinthians (SP 8; Collegeville MN: Liturgical Press, 1999) 59, 61. 3. That Paul could speak of the Law as coming in glory without arguing for it reminds us that the community likely included Jews and that the Septuagint was the Bible of the early church, which are additional reasons not to read Paul’s words as anti-Jewish in any way.

2 Corinthians 3:7–4:6 4. J. Paul Sampley, The Second Letter to the Corinthians (NIB 11; Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2000) 68. See also Frank J. Matera, II Corinthians (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2003) 87–88 for more extensive analysis of the use of this word in the NT and by Paul. 5. See N. Katherine Grieb, The Story of Romans: A Narrative Defense of God’s Righteousness (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2002) 20–25. 6. The Greek at the beginning of v. 10 reads “for that which has been glorified has not been glorified . . . ,” which has led to lots of scholarly discussion. After wading through these discussions, Thrall concludes, “the absoluteness of his statement is a rhetorical device to give emphasis” (Margaret E. Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians [ICC 1; London: T & T Clark International, 1994) 252. 7. Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, ICC 1, 255. 8. Ibid., 256. 9. Matera, II Corinthians, 92. Others in this “camp” include C. K. Barrett, A Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1973) 120; Lambrecht, Second Corinthians, 52; Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, ICC 1, 256. 10. Richard B. Hays, Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989) 137–38. Thrall concurs (A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, ICC 1, 257). 11. Matera, II Corinthians, 96. 12. Hays, Echoes of Scripture, 140. 13. Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, ICC 1, 261. She even notes that it is not Paul’s intention wholly to exculpate Moses (258). 14. Fitzmyer, “Glory Reflected,” 72. 15. Richard B. Hays, “Apocalyptic Hermeneutics: Habakkuk Proclaims ‘The Righteous One,’” in The Conversion of the Imagination: Paul as Interpreter of Israel’s Scripture (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2005), says that Paul’s “apocalyptic hermeneutics” means that “because all things have been . . . transformed by God’s redemptive action in Christ, Scripture must be read with new eyes. The reader who stands at the turn of the ages can no longer believe that Scripture merely authorizes religion-as-usual for Israel; instead, it must promise the new creation” (119–20). 16. Hays, Echoes of Scripture, 147. 17. See Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, ICC 1, 274; Hays, Echoes of Scripture, 143. 18. I am borrowing language from Hays, Echoes of Scripture, 143, to express the concern this verse raises for some interpreters. 19. See A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, ICC 1, 278–82. 20. Sampley, The Second Letter to the Corinthians, 71. 21. Ibid. 22. Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, ICC 1, 274. 23. Sampley, The Second Letter to the Corinthians, 73. 24. Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, ICC 1, 284; Lambrecht, Second Corinthians, 55–56, understands the verb thusly but has a different take on the phrase.

85

86

2 Corinthians 3:7–4:6 25. Matera, II Corinthians, 96–97. 26. Sampley, Second Letter to the Corinthians, 70–71. 27. Ibid., 73. 28. Ibid., 74. Thrall defines this conscience as “an inward faculty of judgment which assesses conduct in accordance with given norms” (A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, ICC 1, 301). 29. The aorist verbs in v. 2 (“renounced”) and v. 6 (“shined”) cause some scholars to understand Paul to be talking specifically about his moment of conversion. See, e.g., Lambrecht, Second Corinthians, 66–70. In the absence of any other vocabulary pointing to that moment, however, I find that view to be a heavy weight to rest on the tense of verbs. 30. Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza, “Paul and the Politics of Interpretation,” in Paul and Politics (ed. Richard A. Horsley; Harrisburg PA: Trinity Press, 2000) 56. 31. Mary Oliver, Winter Hours: Prose, Prose Poems, and Poems (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1999) 106.

The Clay Jar 2 Corinthians 4:7–5:10

COMMENTARY Paul continues his theological reflection on his work for the gospel, but there is a change at 4:7. Having just expounded on the glory of the ministry of the new covenant, Paul now turns abruptly to the hardships of such a ministry. This section of 2 Corinthians may be another place where remembering that we are “in the middle of things” between Paul and the Corinthians is helpful. Many scholars believe a significant cause of conflict within the community was a kind of triumphalistic theology espoused by some Corinthian believers. Not only did Paul disagree theologically (e.g., see the “foolishness of the cross” in 1 Cor 1:18-31; the sarcasm of 1 Cor 4:7-8; his emphasis on God as the triumphant one and himself as God’s captive, 2 Cor 2:14-17), he may also have faced criticism by adherents that he was not successful or triumphant enough for a minister of Christ (note 1:8-9). [Review of Corinthian “Triumphalism”] Perhaps these Corinthians considered his suffering to be weak and shameful. Might his discussion of the glory of the minReview of Corinthian “Triumphalism” istry of Spirit, therefore, be subverted by Here is a repeat of the description of Corinthian “triumphalism” that was given adherents of such triumphalism into an in my introduction: the theology and mindset of endorsement of their views that they some Corinthians that so troubled Paul may be could turn against him (e.g., “if the labeled “triumphalistic” because its adherents gospel is so glorious, why do you look claimed to be filled with the Spirit (reading 1 Cor so inglorious?”)? In the following verses 2:12-15 as their words), possessing all they Paul works to make any such claim difwanted, living like kings, rich (1 Cor 4:8), wise, strong, and honored (1 Cor 4:10). Consequently, ficult to sustain. “all things were lawful” for them (1 Cor 6:12), and Verse 7 presents a fine summary of they possessed knowledge (1 Cor 8:1). Perhaps what is coming. It begins, “But we have they gave little or no thought to the implications this treasure in clay jars.” The treasure is of Jesus’ crucifixion (hence 1 Cor 1:18-25). They surely God’s gift of the glorious minconsidered those who saw things differently to be istry of Spirit about which Paul has unspiritual (1 Cor 2:14). They understood their religion to enable them “to come out on top” or been speaking, but the stress falls on its be triumphant over people and circumstances. being held in clay jars. A clay jar (or

88

2 Corinthians 4:7–5:10

earthen vessel as some interpreters prefer) is fragile, easily broken, disposable. How, then, does it hold such glory? Indeed, why does it? “So that,” Paul says, “it is evident that the extraordinariness of the power is from God and not from us” (v. 7b). Paul will spend the next part of the letter expounding on this key thought. In vv. 8-9 Paul presents a “catalogue of hardships” that are structured in an “A, not B” form. Such lists were common rhetorical devices in the Greco-Roman world. Paul includes them also in 6:4-10; 11:23-27; and 12:10. Ancient sages used them to insist that external circumstances did not govern their lives.1 Paul uses this Levantine. Jar and Cover for Manuscript Rolls. Walters Art one similarly, but he also says more with it. Museum, Baltimore, United “In everything” Paul says he is afflicted States. (Credit: Wikimedia Commons, CC-BY-SA-3.0) (the same verb, thlibø, as in 1:6), but not left without an avenue of escape, at a loss but not totally at a loss, persecuted but not abandoned, struck down but not destroyed (vv. 8-9).2 Some scholars wonder if v. 8b (“at a loss but not totally at a loss”) contradicts 1:8 wherein Paul said he “despaired even of living.” Some scholars wish to specify the “meaning” of the second part of each antithesis. For example, some insist the latter terms must indicate that God intervened to change Paul’s actual circumstances, while Early Interpretations of the Clay Jar and the Hardships others believe that only Paul’s Biblical interpreters have always loved Paul’s image of the attitude toward his hardships clay jar that isn’t broken by hardships. Here are comments by early writers and preachers: changed.3 I wonder if such concerns miss the point by ignoring Abrosiaster. The reference to earthen vessels is an allusion to the the rhetorical effect of Paul’s weakness of human nature, which can do nothing unless empowered argument, especially in a possible by God. (Commentary on Paul’s Epistles) context of Corinthian triChrysostom. Paul used the term earthen in allusion to the frailty of our umphalism. Paul is a preacher mortal nature and to declare the weakness of our flesh. For it is no better than earthenware, which is soon damaged and destroyed by “on a roll” here, insisting in these death, disease and even variations of temperature. The power of God “A not B” ways that despite the is most conspicuous when it performs mighty works by using vile and hardships faced, and despite its lowly things. (Hom. 1 Cor.) fragility, the clay jar did not Theodoret of Cyr. If none of these things ever happened [i.e., the break. [Early Interpretations of the Clay things on the hardship list], the greatness of God’s power would never Clay Jar Pictured here is a clay jar found at Qumran rather than Corinth. But perhaps it gives us an idea of the type of clay jar Paul had in mind when he declared “we hold this treasure in clay jars”— simple, unadorned, functional, not valuable. They were also considered fragile, but we can note that these vessels survived thousands of years, which serves to underscore Paul’s point in 4:8-9.

be revealed. (Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians) These quotes may be found in ACCS NT 7 (ed. Gerald Bray; Chicago: Fitzroy Dearborn Publishers, 1999) 231–32.

Jar and the Hardships]

This preacher is not finished with his “roll.” In vv. 10-11 he

2 Corinthians 4:7–5:10

interprets these hardships and his survival in the midst of them. He claims that his suffering is “the death of Jesus in his body” that he is always bearing “so that the life of Jesus also may be revealed in our body” (v. 10). Then he reiterates, “For continually we who are living are being handed over into death because of Jesus so that the life of Jesus also may be revealed in our mortal flesh” (v. 11). There are clearly several issues calling for attention. First, the term for “death” in v. 10, nekrøsis, is unusual and unexpected (Paul normally used thanatos for death, as in v. 11). Nekrøsis can mean either “putting to death” as a process, or “deadness” as a state, and scholars have interpreted it both ways.4 As Paul Sampley notes, Paul likely uses it here for dramatic effect, to emphasize the difficulties he had faced for the gospel.5 Second, the phrase “life of Jesus” refers, in this context, to Jesus’ resurrected life rather than to his time on earth. Jesus’ resurrection life is going to be a key thought throughout this section. Third, and most important, is Paul’s language of bearing the death and life of Jesus in his own body. Scholars have interpreted Paul’s words in different ways. Sze-kar Wan, e.g., writes of Paul’s “deep identification with Christ’s death” so that he is “profoundly convinced that the sufferings and death of Christ are somehow replicated in his own bodily afflictions.”6 Jan Lambrecht believes Paul had an “intimate knowledge of his union with Christ.” Lambrecht claims that, in accordance with other places in Paul’s writings, we have to interpret Paul’s carrying in his body the putting to death of Jesus and the twofold mention of Jesus’ life manifested in the apostle in terms of participation, the natural result or effect of his union with Christ. However difficult it may be to specify that union, a kind of ontological oneness with Christ is postulated by Paul and referred to frequently in his writings.7

Given the difficulty of specifying what kind of union (or identification) Paul may have meant, we may more fruitfully ponder the impact Paul hoped his words would have on Corinthian believers. The thoughts of biblical scholar Steven Kraftchick and theologian James Allison are particularly helpful in this regard. We begin with the reminder that, as an apocalyptic Jew, Paul would have readily acknowledged the existence of evil in the world. Indeed Rome made it easy to believe in such with its peace by conquest, taxation, patronage, impoverishment of the masses, and violent responses to any challenges to its sovereignty. Further, Rome glorified its wealth

89

90

2 Corinthians 4:7–5:10

and power as signs of the gods’ favor. We should remember Rome’s heavy presence in the city of Corinth (see my introduction). Rome (with the cooperation of its puppets in Judea, the religious leaders in the temple) crucified Jesus for proclaiming a different gospel (euangelion) than that of the Pax Romana, for declaring that the kingdom (basileia) belonged to God not Caesar, for announcing the dawning of the age to come. Following Jesus had, in turn, meant suffering for Paul. Kraftchick argues that Paul’s understanding of his suffering and its relationship to his life were “shaped by the relationship of death and life found in the paradigm of the Christ-event.”8 That is, Paul’s belief in Jesus’ death and resurrection functioned to interpret his own experiences of (near) death and life.9 Thus his suffering for the gospel (i.e., “because of Jesus,” v. 11) was, in his mind, neither shameful nor meaningless. It was bearing the death of Christ in his own body (vv. 10a, 11a). As a sharer in Christ’s death, Paul further understood himself as a recipient of God’s life, but not for himself alone.10 The dawning of the new age is not just in his heart but in all of creation. Allison’s words offer a framework for reading Paul here. Allison refers to human ordering of the world as “the dominion of death,” for, he claims, the “fatal secret” at the heart of human ways of being is “our need to kill, to persecute, to purify and cleanse in order to maintain security and order.”11 Thus Rome’s practices. By contrast, God is “completely and entirely alive, living without any reference to death. There is no death in God.”12 Jesus, imbued with belief in God’s complete aliveness, lived “as if death were not”—he ignored purity rules, welcomed those who had been cast out, called disciples to love those who persecuted them rather than respond in kind, and did not respond violently when violence was done to him. Then God raised him from the dead, showing the power of God’s life. Whenever anyone sees Jesus living as if death were not and sees the power of God to raise him to life, then it becomes “infinitely and creatively possible” for that person to “be possessed by the same dynamic that was at work in Jesus, and so do the same as he.”13 In so doing, the follower shows others the possibility of living in the power of God’s life even in a world marked by the “dominion of death.” Or, to use apocalyptic language, such a person lives in the age to come even now. Paul certainly would not have used the same words as Allison, but a similar perspective appears to have guided his thinking as he declared that he bore the death of Jesus in his body “so that the life of Jesus may be revealed in our body” (vv. 10b, 11b). He is, in the words of N. T. Wright, “a

2 Corinthians 4:7–5:10

91

walking visual aid of the gospel of Jesus.”14 The conclusion Paul draws, then, is in v. 12: “death is working in us, but life in you.” Thus, in a city shaped by Roman imperial presence, where wealth, power, and triumph were proclaimed as evidence of the gods’ favor, Paul offers a radically different criterion for judging the “success” of his ministry: life in the midst of death.15 In effect, he called the Corinthian believers to see their world, and his ministry in particular, through the lens of Christ’s death and resurrection rather than through the lens of imperial power. When, through such a lens, they see the “clay jar” being persecuted, imprisoned, and beaten, and still not cracking, they can realize the power of God’s life and how it was at work in his ministry. Then they may open themselves to its work in their own lives. An important caveat should be offered here: nothing in these verses calls us to seek or glorify suffering. To borrow Kraftchick’s language, there is no Christo-masochism here.16 Nor is this suffering to be considered redemptive. Rather, Paul’s suffering was a result, not a goal, of his work on behalf of the gospel. The amazing point he highlights is that God’s life was at work even as he suffered. Initially v. 13 seems to offer an abrupt shift in Paul’s thinking, but the shift is not as great as contemporary readers first experience it. Paul claims the “same spirit of faith” as the psalmist who wrote, “I believed, therefore I spoke” (from Ps 116:10),17 God as the One Who Raised Jesus from and then declares “we also believe, therefore we the Dead speak . . . .” The specific belief he has in mind is One of Paul’s favorite ways to refer given in v. 14, the first part of which reads, to God is as the One who raised “knowing that the one who raised the Lord Jesus Jesus from the dead, which points to the will also raise us with Jesus.” If, as seems likely, impact of this belief on Paul’s beliefs and ministry. Here are some examples: Paul’s “speaking” refers to his proclamation of the gospel, then he is asserting that, like his Jewish fore1 Thess 1:9-10. For the people of those bears who believed in God through difficult times regions report . . . how you turned to God (the psalm celebrates God who delivered the from idols, to serve a living and true God, and psalmist from death), his faith in the One who to wait for [God’s] Son from heaven, whom raised Jesus from the dead enabled him to preach [God] raised from the dead . . . . 1 Cor 15:14-15. And if Christ has not been the power of God’s life even in the midst of sufraised, then our proclamation has been in fering. [God as the One Who Raised Jesus from the Dead] vain . . . . We are even found to be misrepreThere’s more to v. 14. Following the claim that senting God, because we testified of God God will raise “them” (Paul and his coworkers) with that [God] raised Christ. Jesus, the last part of the verse adds “and will bring Rom 8:11. If the Spirit of [God] who raised us together with you.” As Wright is fond of saying, Jesus from the dead dwells in you, [God] who raised Christ from the dead will give life Paul believed he lived “between resurrections,” to your mortal bodies also through [God’s] i.e., between Jesus’ resurrection that had already Spirit that dwells in you.

92

2 Corinthians 4:7–5:10

happened and inaugurated the new age, and the future resurrection of all God’s people when the new age comes in its fullness.18 Then, that which is perishable will put on imperishability, mortality will put on immortality, and God will be all in all. [Note Paul’s Poetry from 1 Corinthians 15] Participating in this moment will be the “crowning evidence” not only of the authenticity of the Corinthians’ faith but also of the authenticity of those by whom they have come to faith.19 That is, this resurrection moment when all are gathered before God will, in Paul’s thinking, be vindication for the Corinthians and also for him. We readers are reminded again that Paul is defending and defining himself throughout this section of the letter. “All things are for your sake,” Paul then says (v. 15a), which is probably another way of saying “death is working in us but life in you” (v. 12). It is an odd beginning to the thought he is about to express, but then v. 15 is odd altogether. The grammar is so choppy and unclear that, as Victor Paul Furnish says, “The construction here must remain problematic.”20 The gist of the thought, though, seems to be that as grace increases within the Corinthian church so that more members respond to it genuinely, the more they will experience grace, which causes it to increase even more. Then, as they have this experience, their sense of thanksgiving will abound with the result that God is glorified.21 “All things” for the “Corinthians’ sake” could lead to an ancient version of egocentricity if they do not grasp that all the things Paul has discussed show God’s grace poured out on them. But if they “get” God’s grace, then they will be thankful and glorify God rather than themselves. Verse 16 begins with Paul repeating, “Therefore, we do not lose heart” (see 4:1), which signals that he is about to draw his current thought to a conclusion. By the time we arrive at v. 18, however, we encounter references to things seen and unseen (v. 18), which anticipate Paul’s next discussion (see 5:7). Verses 16-18, then, are transitional, finishing and introducing thoughts at the same time. Paul declares again that he does not lose heart. On the contrary,22 “although our outer self [or person; the Greek is anthrøpos] is wasting away, our inner self is being renewed day by day” (v. 16). These ideas of “inner and outer” selves are unusual for Paul,

Note Paul’s Poetry from 1 Corinthians 15 In 1 Cor 15 Paul argues passionately for the “bodily” resurrection of believers. With poetic language he describes our time of resurrection: “For as all die in Adam, so all will be made alive in Christ. But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ. Then comes the end, when he hands over the kingdom to God . . . so that God may be all in all.” (15:22-24a, 28c) Later in the chapter he adds these thoughts: “For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. For this perishable body must put on imperishability, and this mortal body must put on immortality. When this perishable body puts on imperishability, and this mortal body puts on immortality, then the saying that is written will be fulfilled: ‘Death has been swallowed up in victory.’” (15:52b-54)

2 Corinthians 4:7–5:10

introduced rather suddenly here. Lots of scholars’ ink has been spilled exploring possible origins for the concepts (e.g., Plato? Philo?), how Paul may have come upon them (e.g., was there ever a direct connection between Paul and Philo?), why he used them here (e.g., did the Corinthians use them?), and what he meant by them. Since we only have Paul’s words,23 we lack the necessary information to find definitive answers to such questions. Fortunately, we can still make good sense of Paul’s thought by keeping the following in mind. First, whatever else Paul intended to convey by these terms, it is unlikely that he had any Greek separation of body and soul in mind. Traditionally, Jewish thinkers did not share this dualism with Greek thinkers, and we have noted several times in this commentary how deeply rooted Paul was in his Jewish heritage. As Hans Dieter Betz has shown, the Christian’s self, for Paul, was tied to the søma (body), which is why the body is not cast off at death but is transformed into a “spiritual body” (1 Cor 15:44-46).24 Second, our context actually offers a good indication of what Paul meant by “outer self.” It surely corresponds to the clay jars, the body, and the mortal flesh of vv. 7, 10, and 11. It is the outward part of Paul, the part the Corinthians could visibly see (and which some of them apparently judged as unimpressive). Thus the “wasting away” of “the outer self ” likely points back to the hardships depicted in vv. 8-9 and the toll they would take on one’s body. Third, what he meant by “inner person” is not so easily specified. Ancient thinkers used such terms as mind (nous), soul (psych∑ ), or spirit (pneuma) to denote the “highest” and truest part of a human being (the body being the lowest part for some Greek thinkers). But Paul had no such dualistic thinking, did not denigrate the body, and did not use these terms here. Though unable to specify what he meant, we can still say that Paul is clearly acknowledging what many of us would affirm from our own experience, that there is an “inmost self ” for each of us that is invisible but very real, that is not identical with the body but also not separate from it, that we might call the essence of who we are. At this deepest level of himself, Paul says, he is not wasting away but rather is being renewed day by day. The resurrection life of Jesus flows through his body. This renewal is significant enough for Paul to call his present afflictions “momentary” and “lightweight” (v. 17a)25 even though he has described how difficult they actually were (1:8-9; 4:8-9). His focus here, though, is not on his suffering but on the impact of his

93

94

2 Corinthians 4:7–5:10

afflictions: they are “producing out of all proportion [lit., “from hyperbol∑ to hyperbol∑,” i.e., “from excess to excess”] an eternal weight of glory for us” (v. 17b). We should take seriously that these are words from a man who said at one point he was so beaten down he despaired of living (1:8). Even so, he calls his afflictions ephemeral and lightweight compared to the eternal heavy weight of glory that he “sees” as he “keeps his eyes not on the things which are seen but on the things which are not seen” (v. 18a). If scholars have read the Corinthian situation correctly wherein some Corinthians considered Paul’s presence in the world to be weak and even shameful, then Paul reminds them that outward impressiveness (or unimpressiveness) is temporary. Glitz and glamour fade. But the “things which are not seen,” including the inner self he has just mentioned and one’s place with God that he is about to discuss, “are eternal” (v. 18b). Having introduced some new thoughts, Paul continues his reflection on them as the “for” in 5:1 indicates: “For we know that if our earthly tent-like house [oikia] is destroyed . . .” (v. 1a). We note that he has shifted metaphors from clay jars to “an earthly tent-like house,” but he is clearly still speaking of the fragile physical body that not only wastes away but can be destroyed. Many New Testament readers have observed that in 1 Thessalonians 4:17 Paul sees himself being alive when the end-time moment arrives. But in the next verses he seems to consider the real possibility that he could die before then. It is not hard to imagine that his suffering since writing 1 Thessalonians, including the near-death experience recounted in 2 Corinthians 1:8, had caused him to contemplate his own death more seriously. He knew now it could happen. But even if an early death should happen for Paul (or any believer), “we have a building [oikodom∑n] from God, an eternal house [oikia] not made by hands in the heavens” (v. 1b). Paul believes that death does not render us “shelter-less,” as the repeated use of oik-nouns in these verses indicates. The earthly tent-like oikia is replaced by an oikodom∑n from God that is an eternal oikia in the heavens (not made by hands since nothing humans make is ever eternal). Verse 2 will add oiket∑rion (dwelling) to the list. Perhaps this repetition of oik-words indicates Paul’s sense of the continuity in our bodiliness even as it undergoes radical transformation at death (see 1 Cor 15:37-42). We remain ourselves, even as we are transformed. But unlike the earthly tent-like oikia, the oikodom∑n from God is eternal—it does not waste away, cannot be destroyed.

2 Corinthians 4:7–5:10

95

Given the eternal-ness of the house from God, and given Paul’s suffering, he “groans” in his earthly tent-like house because he “longs to put on over ourselves our dwelling [oiket∑rion] from heaven” (v. 2). The verb ependysasthai is a double compound and carries the idea of putting on something additional, thus to “overclothe” or even “superclothe.” This thought leads us directly to v. 3, which is challenging for several reasons. Lambrecht considers v. 3 to be an “afterthought,”26 yet Frank Matera reads it as the central verse in an ABA’ pattern (chiasm): in vv. 2 and 4 Paul groans to be overclothed; centered between them is v. 3 with its words about “not being found naked.”27 A further issue is a text critical one. Ancient manuscripts have different participles in the verse. Some have ekdysamenoi, which can be translated, “if we are unclothed.” The Compare NRSV and TNIV Translations of 5:2-3 NRSV follows this reading. Other manuThe NRSV believes the participle ekdysamenoi scripts, however, have endysamenoi, which belongs in v. 3 and translates the sentence can be translated, “if we are clothed.” The (vv. 2-3) this way: “For in this tent we groan, longing to TNIV follows this reading. [Compare NRSV and be clothed with our heavenly dwelling—if indeed, when TNIV Translations of 5:2-3] A number of recent we have taken it off, we will not be found naked.” The TNIV opts for the participle endysamenoi as the scholars choose the latter option as the best reading and translates this way: “Meanwhile, we likely correct reading and understand the groan, longing to be clothed with our heavenly dwelling, verse to say, “if indeed we are clothed, we because when we are clothed, we will not be found 28 will not be found naked.” naked.” A lack of scholarly consensus on either of The text-critical decision here is difficult since the these issues may not be a significant barrier manuscript evidence is solid for either participle. Those who agree with the NRSV argue that Paul is likely being to understanding Paul’s words since the paradoxical (i.e., we, though unclothed, will not be emphasis in the verse seems to fall on being found naked) and that “when we are clothed, we will “found not naked.” Some scholars have not be found naked” is redundant. Those agreeing with understood “naked” in a moral sense as the TNIV say the redundancy makes this reading the being without the righteousness one would more difficult one and that a scribe would not likely have want to have when facing judgment created it. (coming in v. 10). Others consider it to mean conquered by death. But perhaps a majority of interpreters have understood it to indicate a disembodied state of being at death. In the Greco-Roman world nakedness could refer to the soul when divested of the body, which some thinkers believed happened at death. First Corinthians 15 suggests some Corinthian believers held such a view. Paul opposes it forcefully in that chapter and does so here by declaring that even as he has suffered in his body, and even as he knows his body is wasting away and can be destroyed, he does not long for a bodiless state (i.e., to be found naked). He groans in his body to be sure. He says so in v. 2 and repeats himself in v. 4 (this time calling the body a vessel, sk∑nei ), adding that his

96

2 Corinthians 4:7–5:10

groaning is the result of being burdened, weighed down. This verb, bareø, is the same one Paul used in 1:8 to say he was “weighed down” in Asia beyond his power to cope. So he suffers (in his body) and groans, but still he does not want to be found “naked.” The next phrase in v. 4 has caused considerable discussion among scholars. The left-to-right order of the words in Greek is “because not we desire to unclothe ourselves but to overclothe ourselves.” The interpretive issues begin with the first words in the phrase. Some scholars translate it, “because we do not desire to unclothe ourselves but to overclothe ourselves.” They understand Paul to want to put the eternal dwelling over the earthly one without first having to take off the earthly garment, i.e., without dying first29. Paul may have recognized that he could die before the end-time arrives, but he does not want to. I am among those scholars, however, who translate the phrase, “not because we desire to unclothe ourselves but to overclothe ourselves.”30 Given both the socio-historical context (the belief in a disembodied state among some Corinthians) and the literary context (Paul has just said he does not want to be found naked), I am persuaded that Paul says he groans, not because he wants to be unclothed/naked/bodiless as some Corinthian believers apparently did.31 Rather, he desires “to overclothe” himself, i.e., to put on the transformed body, “so that what is mortal may be swallowed up by life” (v. 4). Paul longs for life as he believes it will be in the age to come when the creation is renewed, injustice and oppression are no more, and suffering is ended. In addition, we should not fail to notice that he ties the coming of this life to being “overclothed”: Paul desires to be overclothed so that what is mortal may be swallowed up by life. N. T. Wright has written extensively about the hope of apocalyptic Jews for the renewal of creation and the restoration of life to God’s people in the age to come. Since YHWH is the Creator of all that exists and the Giver of Life, and since YHWH is just, faithful, and abounding in steadfast love, such an apocalyptic hope was justified, even demanded. Furthermore, it was unthinkable that death should keep God’s faithful ones from sharing in such a renewal—how then would God be just or faithful or loving? But since this restoration of life takes place in the midst of a renewed creation, it is necessarily bodily life.32 Just so, Paul longs not for a bodiless state but for a transformed body that is immortal and imperishable (see 1 Cor 15:35-57) and can share fully in the life of God (2 Cor 5:4). Verse 5a then gives Paul’s reason for such a hope: “the One who created us for this very thing [i.e., mortality being swallowed up by

2 Corinthians 4:7–5:10

life] is God.” For Paul life is God’s plan for creation. But God not only designed the plan. Paul declares for the second time that God also “gave to us the Spirit as a guarantee/down payment” (v. 5b; see 1:22). From Paul’s perspective, the Spirit accomplished Jesus’ resurrection, would accomplish the resurrection of all God’s people, and is even now at work to anticipate and guarantee that final event by infusing us with the divine life (see Rom 8:11).33 From just this perspective, Paul can declare that his inner person is renewed day by day even as his body wastes away. “Therefore, we are always confident,” Paul declares (v. 6a). Given what he has just said, this comment is hardly a surprise. But his following words might be unexpected: “and we know that while we are at home (endemeø) in the body, we are away (ekdemeø) from the Lord” (v. 6b). Considering how Paul spoke of the presence of the Spirit in his living or of Christ being in him (see e.g., Rom 8:9-10), it seems clear that he would not describe his life in the body as marked by the absence of God. Rather, his life in the “earthly tentlike house” wherein he suffers and wastes away is not the fulfillment of God’s life in the new age for which he has already expressed a longing (v. 4) and in which he expects to experience the presence of the Risen Christ (4:14; 5:10). As long as he is in this body, he is not a full participant in that life. He has, rather, the down payment for it. Even so, he is always confident—he says so at the beginning of v. 6, and he will repeat himself at the beginning of v. 8. Between these two assertions he clarifies that he is confident because he “walks by faith, not by sight” (v. 7), which may be one of the more famous phrases in Paul’s writings. In my experience, the phrase has often been used to advocate a “blind faith” that does not question a doctrine, a teaching, a church plan, etc. I am confident, however, that Paul was not an advocate for such a blind faith. Instead, he called his people to consider (see Gal 3:1-2), to judge for themselves (1 Cor 10:15; 11:13), to “see the things in front of your face!” (2 Cor 10:7). Paul wanted people, for example, to see Jesus as the Kyrios, not Caesar. Rome had great economic, political, and military glory and might, so the empire could easily crucify the Nazarene. But the result of Rome’s “power” in this instance was the spread of Jesus’ movement throughout the empire when his followers believed God had raised Jesus from the dead. Rome then caused the suffering of Jesus’ apostles, including Paul, making him appear weak and shameful to some. But he continued with his proclamation even in the face of death. Outsiders to the movement might look at Paul’s suffering and consider him a fool. Suffering for

97

98

2 Corinthians 4:7–5:10

a crucified Nazarene who was proclaimed the Kyrios when Rome was still in power was surely idiotic. But Paul believed that through the apostles’ work the experience of grace had increased to the glory of God (4:15). Just so, he believed in God’s promise of Life even when Rome’s power to bring death was all around him. He walked by faith, not by sight. Paul is always confident, though he would prefer to “leave from the body (ekdemeø ) and to be at home (endemeø ) with the Lord” (v. 8). Paul Sampley believes Paul is using a common ancient rhetorical practice that dealt with “indifferent matters” (the Greek term is adiaphora). It involved sorting out what matters from what is nonessential. Among nonessential matters, one may have preferences, but the preferences carry little weight because, in the end, the matter is nonessential.34 So Paul wishes to be with the Lord, sharing in the full life in God, but this wish turns out to be only a preference in a nonessential matter. What is essential instead is pleasing the Lord “whether being at home (endemeø) or leaving (ekdemeø)” (v. 9). Then Paul offers one reason that pleasing God in all circumstances is essential: we all must “be revealed” (phan∑roø; i.e., we will be seen for who we are35) before “the tribunal of Christ” so that we each receive reward “for the things done through the body, whether good or evil” (v. 10). As we unpack this verse, we should note first that Paul’s language about who judges, God or Christ, is fluid (see e.g., Rom 2:16; 14:10). We need not worry about specifying who Paul believes will do what at judgment since he did not. Second, this whole section has focused on the body as a metaphor of sorts for life in this present age. Obviously, then, we should read “the things done through the body” as referring to the way we have lived our lives. Still, Paul’s specific mention of the body again is perhaps noteworthy. Against those in Corinth who may have considered the body to be a hindrance to the soul or even evil, he declares that we are held accountable for things done “through the body, whether good or evil.” The body itself is not evil. The question is what we do through it. Third, there are issues about judgment raised in this verse that require attention. For many Protestants who were steadfastly taught that justification before God is by faith alone, Paul’s words that we are judged for “what we do in the body” are unsettling. Other zealously evangelistic Christians have spoken so gleefully of the “hellfire and brimstone” that awaits anyone believing differently from them that they have made the concept of God’s judgment repugnant for some. Still others have experienced God’s grace and mercy reaching out to them when they felt unworthy of God so

2 Corinthians 4:7–5:10

99

that they find it uncomfortable and difficult to picture God as wrathful. A close look at these issues shows that they arise from the experiences or beliefs of readers of Paul. Good exegesis requires us, however, not to read ourselves into Paul’s words but first to read Paul’s words in the context of his world. I’ve mentioned my understanding of Paul as an apocalyptic Jew. A key theme in the Jewish apocalyptic thought of Paul’s day was, in N. T. Wright’s words, a “fierce longing” for God’s judgment on the enemies of Israel and vindication for the righteous ones. Indeed, from their perspective, judgment must fall because the wicked ones had been getting away with violence and oppression against the poorer, weaker, righteous ones for far too long.36 Paul would have been among the poor and weak in his world. He was a member of a minority group (the Jews). Indeed, in some locales the Jews were a despised minority group. He was also a member of the working class (an exploited group) and a follower of one whom the Romans had executed as an enemy of the empire (a suspicious group). He Paul on Judgment had witnessed Rome’s violence and oppression Paul speaks of judgment several times in and experienced it personally. Thus Paul anticihis letters, often referring to the “day” pates God’s judgment for what each one does when it will happen. Here are some examples: “through the body.” He has no squeamishness Rom 2:15-16. [The Gentiles] show that what the about God’s judgment as we sometimes do in law requires is written on their hearts, to which our modern, middle-class, Western contexts their own conscience also bears witness; and wherein we fit reasonably comfortably into the their conflicting thoughts will accuse or perhaps political, economic, and religious mainstream excuse them on the day when, according to my (as do most readers of a book like this one). [Paul gospel, God, through Jesus Christ, will judge the on Judgment]

secret thoughts of all. Rom 14:10. Why do you pass judgment on your brother or sister? Or you, why do you despise your brother or sister? For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God. 1 Cor 3:13-15. The work of each builder will become visible, for the Day will disclose it . . . . If what has been built on the foundation survives, the builder will receive a reward. If the work is burned up, the builder will suffer loss; the builder will be saved, but only as through fire. Phil 1:6. I am confident of this, that the one who began a good work among you will bring it to completion by the day of Jesus Christ.

In fact, Croatian theologian Miroslav Volf, who endured the horrors of war in the Balkans, declares that contemporary Western discomfort with judgment bears “a bit too much of the sweet aroma of a suburban ideology” that has not had to deal with terror in its own living rooms. Further, Christians who enjoy speaking of judgment against those who do not affirm their specific belief statements trivialize God’s justice in the face of great suffering caused by those who force their will on others. The reality faced by Paul in his day and oppressed peoples in our time is that those who do evil have inverted creation and dominated the world through deception and injustice. The cross, Volf says, is God’s love setting the world aright. But some human

100

2 Corinthians 4:7–5:10

beings refuse to be set aright. They continue to exploit and torture, to rape and terrorize. Here is where God’s wrath enters the fray. For thinkers like Volf, and apparently like Paul, both God’s love and God’s wrath are necessary if our hopes for justice Jesus and Paul on Believing and Doing and peace are to be genuine.37 Jesus’ teachings on the importance of This apocalyptic context is also the backdrop believing and doing include the following against which we must read Paul’s words that we text: will be judged for what we do through the body. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad Protestant insistence since the days of Martin tree bear good fruit…. Thus you will know them Luther that we cannot do enough good works to by their fruits. Not everyone who says to me, earn God’s grace is surely true. But that issue “Lord, Lord,” will enter the kingdom of heaven, was just as surely not a concern of Paul’s.38 For but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven. On that day many will say to me, “Lord, Paul the resurrection of the Messiah meant the Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast Messianic Age and the fulfillment of God’s out demons in your name, and do many deeds of promises is underway. The Spirit is poured out power in your name?” Then I will declare to them, on Gentiles as well as Jews, offering a new “I never knew you; go away from me, you evildoers.” (Matt 7:18, 20-23) covenant of life and freedom, forming alternative communities that resist evil (specifically for In addition to this text from 2 Corinthians, Paul Paul, resisting the oppressive way of life fostered also wrote the following with regard to the imporby the Roman Empire) and participate with tance of how we live our lives of faith: God in setting the world aright. To be faithful, Rom 2:6. For [God] will repay according to each therefore, was to recognize the Messiah had one’s deeds . . . . come, receive God’s Spirit, choose life and 1 Cor 3:13. . . . the work of each builder will freedom, join the ekkl∑sia of God, resist the become visible, for the Day will disclose it, empire, and share in God’s renewal of creation. because it will be revealed with fire, and the fire Matthew records Jesus as saying that we will will test what sort of work each has done. know people by their fruits and that “not every All of these verses have contexts that need to one who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the be understood so as to appreciate these specific kingdom of heaven but the one who does the teachings, but even a quick glance at them shows will of my father in heaven” (Matt 7:20-21). that mental assent to propositional statements of Paul concurred, saying we will be judged for faith would impress neither Jesus nor Paul. what we do through the body. For Paul, as well as for Jesus, believing and doing simply cannot be separated. [Jesus and Paul on Believing and Doing]

CONNECTIONS 1. We have observed the possibility that some Corinthians had a “triumphalistic” view of the gospel (see [Review of Corinthian “Triumphalism”]). Before being too critical of them, however, we might consider the popularity of such a mindset in our time. As I write these words, the term “bling bling” has become a popular descrip-

2 Corinthians 4:7–5:10

tion in our culture of all things “flashy.” Originally, it indicated eye-popping jewelry but soon was used for anything attention grabbing, shiny, flashy, and trendy (cars, clothes, shoes, overall appearance, etc.). I suggest the term caught on in our culture because flashy sells. A question for us is whether our churches are ever influenced to have more “bling.” Some churches have PowerPoint presentations in worship, jazzed up music, contemporary décor, a portrayal of a God who wants us all to be healthy and wealthy, etc. We might ask which of these church choices were made after significant theological and spiritual reflection, and which were intended to make the church “sell” better in our culture. We might wonder if Paul’s “clay jar” and hardship catalogue would be any more welcome in some of our congregations than it was among some Corinthians. 2. Paul claims to carry the death of Jesus in his own body so that the life of Jesus may also be revealed in his body. He claims that death is working in him so that life may be present among the Corinthians. He presents a catalogue of hardships he had endured to support his claims. How do Paul’s claims “play” in our culture? I suspect that many people would consider Paul a fool for doing something so hard. Much of what is valued in our culture swirls around products and processes that are deemed faster, easier, more efficient, and more convenient. We “haven’t got time for the pain.” Theologian Dorothee Soelle observed that while past Christian teachers in horrible ways urged faithful ones (like slaves or abused women) to bear their suffering patiently and gladly, today Christians are more likely to be told that they need not suffer, that “perpetual happiness is readily available.” But, she adds, only when the real sorrow of people’s lives “is suppressed and hidden can this kind of affirmation be maintained.”39 We can enlarge on her thought. Only when our connections with others are shallow will we be untouched by their pain or their deaths. Only when we do not care about the world in which our children are growing up will we not be angry and frightened by global warming and other ecological disasters. Only when we have no sense of community will we be unmoved by the plight of children in violent neighborhoods going to substandard schools who are unable to imagine a hopeful future. We could go on, but perhaps the point is made—our lives will be easier, more convenient, and without suffering only when they are shallow and unconnected. We Christians affirm, however, that God is deeply connected with us, that God entered our world via the Incarnation and suffered with us and for us. According to Paul, we do not reveal God’s presence by being perpetually happy

101

102

2 Corinthians 4:7–5:10

Believers as Thinkers The great spiritual teacher Joan Chittister has written about her rejection of “blind faith” or what she calls “mind-bending denominationalism,” which teaches us that faithfulness is being intellectually submissive and unquestioning about church teachings and traditions. Because of affirmations of “blind faith,” when a question surfaced for her, she pushed it back down. “It could not be spoken out loud. Its answer was not to be quibbled with.” But she also knew that “the question stayed with me all my life.” Then there came a time when she could no longer pretend it—and others—weren’t present for her. She found herself asking: Is openness to other ideas infidelity, or is it the beginning of spiritual maturity? What is it that can possibly take us so far

afield from the initial believing self? How do we explain to ourselves the journey of getting from there to here, from unquestioning adherence to institutional answers, to the point of asking faithful questions? It took years before I realized that maybe it is belief itself, if it is real, that carries us there. Maybe if we really believe about God what we say we believe, there comes a time when we have to go beyond the parochialisms of law.

She concludes, “When we develop a spiritual life that is beyond some kind of simple, unthinking attachment to an inherited canon of behaviors, the soul goes beyond adherence to a system to the growth of the soul.” Called to Question: A Spiritual Memoir (Chicago: Sheed & Ward, 2004) 12, 13, 19.

and triumphant. Rather, we do so when we live God’s life in the midst of death, when the clay jar is beaten, persecuted, and oppressed but does not break. To those who would call Paul a fool for suffering for the gospel, I think he would say, “Yes I am. Thanks be to God!” 3. Paul’s words, “We walk by faith, not by sight,” appear in a context in which he describes himself as suffering for the gospel but being renewed in his inward person while trusting in his eternal dwelling with God. He could “see” his suffering with his physical eyes. He could not see (with his physical eyes) the renewal of his inward person or his eternal dwelling with God. But his faith in what he could not see enabled him to continue his gospel work even as he “saw” the price of doing so. In our context, where most of us do not suffer for our gospel work and, thus, do not need the same encouragement to persist, Paul’s words have too often been trivialized and used to justify an anti-intellectual, non-reflective, uncritical, and “blind” faith. This is a travesty! Paul wants the Corinthian believers to think. For example, he wants them to reflect deeply and weigh the implications of the apparent charge against him that he is outwardly unimpressive and inglorious and thus God must not be with him. As he makes his various appeals throughout the Corinthian letters, he quotes from the Hebrew Bible and from philosophers. He constructs sophisticated rhetorical arguments to make his points. Paul clearly wants believers also to be thinkers. [Believers as Thinkers] He believes, in fact, that the more they think, the better it will be for him. I wonder if a thoughtful consideration of those who advocate “blind faith” in our time

2 Corinthians 4:7–5:10

would show them to be fearful that their beliefs and conduct cannot bear sharp scrutiny.

Notes 1. J. Paul Sampley, The Second Letter to the Corinthians (NIB 11; Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2000) 81. 2. I am using the translations of these verbs offered by Margaret E. Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians (ICC 1; London: T & T Clark International, 1994) 327–28. 3. See Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, ICC 1, 329–31, for a discussion of these scholarly views. 4. Ibid., 331. 5. Sampley, The Second Letter to the Corinthians, 81. 6. Sze-kar Wan, Power in Weakness: The Second Letter of Paul to the Corinthians (Harrisburg PA: Trinity Press International, 2000) 79. 7. Jan Lambrecht, Second Corinthians (SP 8; Collegeville MN: Liturgical Press, 1999) 78. 8. Steven J. Kraftchick, “Death in Us, Life in You: The Apostolic Medium,” in 1 & 2 Corinthians (ed. David M. Hay; vol. 2 of Pauline Theology, ed. Jouette M. Bassler, David M. Hay, E. Elizabeth Johnson; Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 1993) 173. 9. Ibid., 174. 10. Ibid. 11. James Allison, Raising Abel: The Recovery of the Eschatological Imagination (New York: Crossroad, 1996) 39. 12. Ibid., 38. 13. Ibid., 66. 14. N. T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2003) 363. 15. This idea is close to that of Kraftchick (“Death in Us,” 164), who claims that, for Paul, Jesus’ death and resurrection functions as a “conceptual metaphor” that shapes Paul’s understanding of his ministry and challenges the Corinthians’ evaluation of that ministry. 16. Kraftchick, “Death in Us,” 175. 17. The quotation is from Ps 116:10, which in the Septuagint’s arrangement would have been 115:1. Also, the Masoretic Text, on which our English translations are based, reads somewhat differently. The NRSV, e.g., renders 116:10 as “I kept my faith, even when I said ‘I am greatly afflicted’ . . . .” 18. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God, 275 (and many other places in the book). For those wanting a full explanation of Paul’s theology of resurrection, see all of pp. 271–76. 19. I appreciate the language here of Victor Paul Furnish, II Corinthians (AB 32a; Garden City NY: Doubleday & Co., 1984) 286.

103

104

2 Corinthians 4:7–5:10 20. Furnish, II Corinthians, 260. Thrall takes two pages to present four different options for deciphering the grammar of v. 15 (A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, ICC 1, 345–47). 21. My thinking on this verse is close to that of Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, ICC 1, 345. Other scholars, however, believe that Paul means more people respond to God’s grace and become believers, so that more people are offering thanks to the glory of God. See, e.g., Furnish, II Corinthians, 287. 22. I am borrowing “on the contrary” from Lambrecht’s translation, Second Corinthians, 80. 23. Some folks have noted similarities with Paul’s thought in Romans 7, but the issues there are quite different. 24. Hans Dieter Betz, “The Concept of the ‘Inner Human Being’ (ho eso anthropos) in the Anthropology of Paul,” NTS 46 (2000): 329. 25. The Greek word parautika can mean either “present” or “momentary/temporary.” I’m using both senses here because I suspect Paul had both in mind. The Greek word elaphron can mean light (in terms of weight) or insignificant. Since Paul will speak specifically of the eternal weight (baros) of glory, I’m using “lightweight” to fit well into the sentence, but “insignificant” would probably have suited Paul just fine. 26. Lambrecht, Second Corinthians, 83. 27. Frank J. Matera, II Corinthians: A Commentary (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2003) 121. 28. E.g., Lambrecht, Second Corinthians, 83; Matera, II Corinthians, 117. The manuscript evidence is solid for either participle. These scholars lean toward “if we are clothed we will not be found naked” as the likely original reading because it is rather redundant. They consider a copyist more likely to correct a redundancy than to create one. I am persuaded by their arguments. 29. E.g., Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, ICC 1, 382; Lambrecht, Second Corinthians, 82. 30. See Furnish, II Corinthians; C. K. Barrett, A Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1973) 155–56. 31. Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, ICC 1, 381, points out that the negative particle ou is oddly placed occasionally in Paul’s writings, but it is “hazardous to count on it as an exegetical expedient.” She is right, of course. But when an odd placement is possible and the context (both socio-cultural and literary) seems to call for it, then it would seem hazardous not to consider it. 32. See Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God, chs. 3–4. 33. I am borrowing words from Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God, 373. 34. Sampley, The Second Letter to the Corinthians, 85. 35. Lambrecht, Second Corinthians, 86. 36. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God, 162. 37. Miroslav Volf, Exclusion and Embrace: A Theological Exploration of Identity, Otherness, and Reconciliation (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1996) 295–304. I am also indebted to Brian K. Blount, Can I Get a Witness? Reading Revelation Through African American Culture (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2005) 32–35, for pointing me to Volf’s reflections on judgment.

2 Corinthians 4:7–5:10 38. For much of Protestant church history, Paul was read as the great proponent of grace and justification by faith over against the “works righteousness” of a legalistic Judaism. He was read as asking the question, “How are we saved? By grace as Christians say, or by doing enough good works to earn God’s favor as Jews say?” In recent years, however, we have come to understand that those questions arose from the Reformation and anti-Semitism rather than from Paul. Judaism has never taught “works righteousness,” and Paul never compared grace to works righteousness. Instead, as an apocalyptic Jew who believed the Messiah had come, he proclaimed that God’s renewal of creation was underway. For a review of the history of scholarship on Paul and the “New Perspective” on him, see Kathy Ehrensperger, That We May Be Mutually Encouraged: Feminism and the New Perspective in Pauline Studies (New York: T & T Clark International, 2004) 27–39. 39. Dorothee Soelle, Essential Writings (ed. Dianne L. Oliver; Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 2006) 115–16.

105

Ambassadors of the Ministry of Reconciliation 2 Corinthians 5:11–6:10

COMMENTARY The “therefore” in v. 11 tells us that Paul is set to draw a conclusion from his observation about appearing (phan∑roø) before the judgment seat of Christ. In addition the verb phan∑roø appears in v. 11 as in v. 10, so he is clearly tying what he’s about to say to what he just said. But he is just as clearly moving into a new stream of thought. His hope for the ultimate fulfillment of God’s new age (5:1-10) shapes how he lives now, which is the focus of 5:11–6:10. Many scholars find three subunits in this section. I am struck by Paul’s three specific references to his apostolic work, so I note the following divisions: (1) 5:11-15, “we persuade people”; (2) 5:16-21, “we beg you . . . be reconciled to God”; (3) 6:1-10, “we encourage you not to receive the grace of God in vain.” Throughout these sections we find Paul weaving a final defense of his work for God among the Corinthians as he nears the end of this portion of the letter. Because Paul believes in judgment (5:10), he knows “the fear of the Lord” (v. 11a), a concept deeply embedded in Jewish tradition. Many Jews and Christians are familiar with the claim of Proverbs, “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge” (Prov 1:7). [Biblical Texts on the Fear of the Lord] If we take seriously our affirmations of God as truth, light, and even consuming fire, then we must acknowledge that standing in God’s presence will expose us for who we really are.1 Hence Paul’s use of the verb phan∑roø (“we will be seen for who we are”) and his declaration that this fear shapes how he conducts himself. Knowing this fear of God causes Paul to “persuade” people (v. 11a). Then he adds, “but we are seen for what we are [phan∑roø] by God” (v. 11b). We may have here another hint that Paul has been accused of deceit and/or manipulation in his ministry. It is unusual for Paul

108

2 Corinthians 5:11–6:10

to describe his work as “persuasion” (the Greek verb is peithø), so perhaps he chose a term his critics had used against him pejoratively, meaning that he Deut 13:4. The Lord your God you shall follow, him alone you manipulates people.2 If this term does shall fear, his commandments you shall keep, his voice you hint at such a charge against him (or shall obey, him alone you shall serve, and to him you shall even if he speaks of his ministry generhold fast. ally), his response is that God knows Prov 14:7. The fear of the Lord is a fountain of life, so that one may avoid the snares of death. him for who he is. He implies that he is Isa 11:1-3. A shoot shall come out from the stump of Jesse, ready to face God’s judgment precisely and a branch shall grow out of his roots. The spirit of the Lord because he “fears” God knowing him so shall rest on him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the well, and God knows that he has not spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and the been deceitful. fear of the Lord. His delight shall be in the fear of the Lord. But Paul is not only willing to face Acts 9:31. Meanwhile the church throughout Judea, Galilee, and Samaria had peace and was built up. Living in the fear of God’s scrutiny. He also wants the the Lord and in the comfort of the Holy Spirit, it increased in Corinthians to examine him well. At numbers. 1:12 he claimed that the “testimony of Rev 14:7. [An angel] said in a loud voice, “Fear God and give his conscience [syneid∑sis]” was that he him glory, for the hour of his judgment has come; and had conducted himself before the worship him who made heaven and earth, the sea and the Corinthians with frankness and the sinsprings of water. cerity of God. At 4:2 he declared that “in the openness of truth” he commended himself to “the conscience [syneid∑sis] of all people before God.” Now he says he hopes “to be seen for what we are [phan∑roø] before your consciences [syneid∑sis]” (5:11b). As noted before (see the commentary on 4:2), syneid∑sis refers to the capacity for moral reasoning with which Paul expects believers to weigh matters before them.3 If they will use their syneid∑sis, then Paul believes they will know his sincerity just as he is sure God does. He then shifts briefly but explicitly to defense: “again we are not commending ourselves to you” (5:12a). As we have seen, Paul believes he should not need to commend himself to the Corinthians (3:1-3). Thus, rather than doing so, he claims he is giving them “an opportunity for boasting” over him (5:12b). We noted already how often issues surrounding boasting are part of this letter (see the commentary on 1:12ff ). Indeed, we read Paul’s belief that he and the Corinthians should boast over each other “in the day of the Lord Jesus” (1:14). I suspect that all Paul has just been saying about the renewal of the inner person even as the outer person is wasting away, holding the treasure of the ministry of the Spirit in clay jars, and walking by faith not by sight lies behind his hope that the Corinthians will now have something to say on his Biblical Texts on the Fear of the Lord Other places in the Bible where “the fear of the Lord” is discussed include the following:

2 Corinthians 5:11–6:10

109

Paul’s Comments on Ecstatic Experiences behalf “against those who boast in appearance Checking what Paul says in the Corinthian [lit., “in the face”], not in the heart” (5:12c). letters about ecstatic experiences: Verse 13 may initially seem an odd followup to such words. But if the Greek verb 1 Cor 14:5. Now I would like all of you to speak in exist∑mi (variously translated as “out of our tongues, but even more to prophesy. mind,” NIV; or “beside ourselves,” NRSV) 1 Cor 14:18. I thank God that I speak in tongues more than all of you. refers to ecstatic spiritual experiences (e.g., 2 Cor 12:1b-2, 4b. . . . but I will go into visions and visions or gløssalalia) as many scholars believe, revelations of the Lord. I know a man in Christ who, then the verse fits well here. Paul has already fourteen years ago, whether in the body I do not claimed such experiences (1 Cor 14:18) and know or out of the body I do not know, God knows, will do so again (2 Cor 12:1-4). He also says was caught up into the third heaven . . . and he that public displays of these experiences do heard unutterable words which it is not permitted for a person to speak. nothing to edify the community (1 Cor 14:13-19), nor is anything gained by public Though Paul claims to have had and to value attention to them (2 Cor 12:1). [Paul’s Comments ecstatic experiences, he also insists that the public on Ecstatic Experiences] His words suggest that “display” of them is not beneficial and does nothing some believers were using or claiming ecstatic to build up the community: experiences to “show off ” their spirituality. 1 Cor 14:14-17. For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit That is, they were trying to appear very spiriprays but my mind is unproductive. What should I do tual, which would fit a “triumphalistic” view then? I will pray with the spirit, but I will pray with of the gospel (see the commentary at the the mind also. Otherwise, if you say a blessing with beginning of the section 4:7–5:10). If this the spirit, how can anyone in a position of an outreading of the context is correct, then Paul is sider say the “Amen” to your thanksgiving, since the saying in v. 13 that his ecstatic experiences are outsider does not know what you are saying? For you may give thanks well enough, but the other between himself and God only. [Showy person is not built up. Spirituality] He will not use them to make 2 Cor 12:1. It is necessary to boast, though it is not himself look more spiritual to those who boast beneficial, but I will go into visions and revelations of in appearance. Instead, in his dealings with the Lord. the community, he insists he will be in his “right mind” (v. 13), i.e., thoughtful, reasonable, and reflective, as he has been, e.g., in explaining that Jesus’ death and resurrection give meaning to his sufferings (4:10-12; cf. 1 Cor 14:18-19). The “for” in v. 14a (Greek: gar) Showy Spirituality alerts us to the connection Here is a monastic story that Paul could have used to make between what follows and what his point about showing off one’s spirituality: has come before. Paul is in his An abbot and a new monk went to the home of a couple and their chilright mind for the Corinthians, dren to have dinner. The couple have put out quite a spread, and “for the love of Christ constrains everyone is eating. But the young monk has vowed that he would fast, us.” The phrase “love of Christ” and so he takes only a celery stick, which he carves up nicely and eats. On the way home the abbot says to him, “The next time, fast from can mean Christ’s love for Paul (a your virtue.” Greek subjective genitive) or Paul’s love for Christ (a Greek objective Taken from John Shea, The Legend of the Bells and Other Tales: Stories of the Human genitive). Scholars generally Spirit (Chicago: ACTA Publications, 1996) 29.

110

2 Corinthians 5:11–6:10

understand Paul to intend the former, so that Christ’s love for him constrains him. I suspect, though, that Paul’s love for Christ is not far from his mind. The Greek verb synechø can mean to urge (NRSV) or to direct/control/constrain. The latter meaning fits this context as Paul says, “for the love of Christ constrains us, having judged this, that one died for all” (v. 14). That Teresa of Avila and John of the Cross is, Christ’s love, shown in his willingness to face on Love death for us, is so great that, once Paul “got” it, The great psychiatrist and spiritual writer Christ’s love could do no other than shape his Gerald May observed that Teresa of Avila behavior. Indeed, Paul makes this point explicit: and John of the Cross could not separate God’s love for us from our love for God. His comments “he died for all so that the ones who are living on their views may help us appreciate not having no longer live for themselves but for the one to choose whether Paul meant Christ’s love for who died for them and was raised” (v. 15). Here him or his love for Christ: is where I suspect Paul’s love for Christ is not far from his mind. Having realized the extent of Very simply, love is at the core of everything in the theology of Teresa and John. It is the sole purpose Christ’s love, Paul loves in return and gladly lives of all creation and of us as human beings. And it for Christ. [Teresa of Avila and John of the Cross on Love] is, finally, impossible to distinguish precisely Paul’s words are such that all those who want to whether this love at our center is our love of God, live fully are called to turn from self-centeredor God’s love of us, or our love of ourselves and one another, or God’s love of God. ness4 and live for Christ, i.e., to join themselves to what God is doing in the world through The Dark Night of the Soul (San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, Christ and, thus, be part of something larger 2004) 50. than themselves. In the specific context of the situation he faced in Corinth, Paul’s words indiTeresa of Avila cate his commitment to the service to which Christ called him, not to “showing off ” his spirituality for self-serving reasons. Before moving to v. 16, we must look at two phrases in the past verses that cause commentators to scratch their heads. The first is, “one died Image Not Available for all, therefore all died ” in v. 14. Clearly in the due to lack of digital rights. italicized part of the phrase Paul is not speaking Please view the published of physical death, but what does he mean? commentary or perform an Readers familiar with Paul’s letter to the Romans Internet search using the will know that Paul speaks there of those bapcredit below. tized into Christ having been baptized into Christ’s death so that they are freed from the power of sin (see Rom 6:3-8). In our 2 Corinthians text, however, he says that all died. The second difficult phrase is in v. 15: “he died for all so that the ones who are living no French School (16th C.). St. John of the Cross and St. Theresa of Avila. Engraving. Bibliotheque Nationale, Paris, France. (Credit: longer live for themselves.” This phrase brings Lauros/Giraudon/The Bridgeman Art Library) the same Romans text to mind since Paul says

2 Corinthians 5:11–6:10

there, “if we have died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him” (Rom 6:8). In the Romans passage, then, Paul is clearly speaking of believers who died (though not physically) and live with Christ. In 2 Corinthians, however, Paul’s language lacks any such qualifiers. He says “all died,” and he speaks of “those who are living” as if he means everyone who is alive. As Margaret Thrall has admitted, it is “very difficult to find a wholly satisfactory explanation of Paul’s train of thought here.”5 Given the Romans text, I am inclined to consider that Paul believed dying and rising to new life in Christ was the experience of believers, and then to wonder if his universal language in 2 Corinthians is part of a rhetorical strategy to bring disaffected Corinthians back to him (i.e., “we’re all in this together!”). As we turn to v. 16, we remember that Paul has been saying that the love of Christ shapes his living, one consequence of which is that he does not “show off ” his ecstatic experiences. Now he names another consequence: “therefore, from now on we know no one according to the flesh” (v. 16a). The pronoun “we” is emphatic and may emphasize what Paul does in contrast to others (as in “we do this, they don’t”). So Paul says he and those with him know no one “according to the flesh” (kata sarka). For Paul the body (søma) is a good gift from God, but he often used flesh (sarx) as a metaphor for life lived in opposition to the Spirit, i.e., according to the values of Roman culture. He used kata sarka in 1:17 in connection with having been accused of doing what was personally expedient. At 1:12 Paul contrasted “fleshly [sarkikos] wisdom” with the grace of God. We observed there that fleshly wisdom could bring to mind the ethos of Corinth—the competitiveness and patronage that encouraged bribery, boasting in self, focus on wealth and acclaim, putting others in “their place,” etc. The same perspective lies behind knowing someone according to the flesh here, i.e., judging people according to appearances or religious reputation, their having letters of commendation, the boasting that is done over them, etc. Paul then admits he once knew Christ kata sarka (v. 16b). Roman crucifixion was a horrific, degrading way to die, reserved for those judged to be the dregs of the empire. So Paul once judged Christ to be a blaspheming, deluded, pitiful fool whose followers he persecuted. But then Paul had an encounter with the Risen Christ, the Vindicated One, the One through whom God was inaugurating the new age. Not a fool but the Messiah. Not pitiful but One who exercised a different kind of power altogether, the power of love (“Christ’s love constrains us”). Paul’s past judgment of Christ “according to the flesh” taught him

111

112

2 Corinthians 5:11–6:10

how foolish it was to know anyone that way. The support of patrons, letters of commendation, ecstatic experiences, Jew or Gentile, male or female, slave or free determined a person’s worth in the Roman world. But that world was the one that said Christ deserved crucifixion, so Paul no longer knew people according to its standards. “Therefore,” he says again in v. 17, using the same word with which he began v. 16 (øste) so that he is about to draw a parallel conclusion. Both 16 and 17 present consequences of the love of Christ shaping Paul’s living. Thus we come to one of the more famous and favored of Paul’s statements. Several issues in this short verse demand our attention. First is the translation of the sentence itself. The short, staccato phrasing in Greek hints at much passion on Paul’s part. A literal rendering into English reads thusly: “Therefore, if anyone [is] in Christ—new creation! The old things passed away. See! New things have come about.” The last phrase could also be translated, “everything has become new.” I give a slight nod to the former phrasing, figuring that Paul knew that everything in his world certainly was not new (but new things were coming to pass). But we’ve also seen that he would use hyperbole for rhetorical effect (as suggested about v. 14), so the latter translation is possible. A second issue in the verse is the phrase “in Christ,” a favorite of Paul’s, appearing fifty-two times in his letters. Sometimes its use is quite simple—as another way of saying Christian (e.g., Rom 16:7) or as describing the divine work (e.g., Rom 3:24). But sometimes the phrase points to something more, to the participation of believers with Christ in God’s saving work in the world. Consequently, this use of the phrase signals that Other Examples of Paul’s Use of “in believers not only have a new relationship with Christ” Among the 52 times Paul uses the God; they also have new relationships with other phrase “in Christ” are the following human beings.6 In Galatians 3:28, e.g., Paul statements: declares that Jews, Gentiles, slaves, freeborn folks, men, and women “are all one in Christ Jesus” rather Rom 6:23. For the wages of sin is death, but than divided from one another as Rome insisted. the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ There is no wonder that “in Christ there is new Jesus our Lord. 1 Cor 1:30. [God] is the source of your life in creation” follows Paul’s insistence that he no longer Christ Jesus, who became for us wisdom from knows anyone kata sarka. [Other Examples of Paul’s Use of God, and righteousness and sanctification and redemption . . . . Gal 1:22. And I was still unknown by sight to the churches of Judea that are in Christ. Phil 4:7. And the peace of God, which passes all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus.

“in Christ”]

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, we must consider the phrase “new creation.” Traditionally, many commentators have understood Paul to mean that anyone who exists “in Christ” becomes a newly created person in whom the divine like-

2 Corinthians 5:11–6:10

113

ness is regained. They point to the singular pronoun “anyone” (tis), which refers to a person (not the world) and to the conditional “if ” at the beginning of the sentence (i.e., the “new creation” of an individual depends on the response of the individual) as their primary arguments for understanding Paul thusly.7 Many recent scholars, however, think there are good reasons to consider an individualistic interpretation of “new creation” as inadequate for appreciating Paul’s thought. The larger context argues against such an interpretation since Paul will go on to say “all things” are from God (v. 18) and that God was “in Christ reconciling the cosmos” to Godself (v. 19).8 Moreover, I’ve noted my understanding of Paul as an apocalyptic Jew. N. T. Wright, writing extensively about Jewish apocalyptic thinking in his study of Jesus’ resurrection, notes the implications of the deep Jewish conviction that Israel’s God is the Creator God. The creation is a good gift from God (unlike some Greco-Roman thinkers who considered the physical, material world a hindrance to be overcome) and was the basis for the ancient Jewish celebration of life in God’s good land.9 Evil and death, however, fractured the creation, bringing oppression, suffering, and death, not only to human beings but to the whole creation. Jews also believed deeply that their God was faithful, just, and abounding in steadfast love. From these convictions grew the apocalyptic hope that God would act to judge evil; forgive, vindicate, and heal the righteous Note Isaiah 65:17; 66:22 (including resurrecting those who had died); Isa 65:17 reads, “For I am about to and renew the creation wherein God’s people create new heavens and a new earth; could finally live in the shalom of God.10 [Note the former things shall not be remembered or Isaiah 65:17; 66:22] Wright is adamant that these come to mind.” Jewish thinkers did not yearn for a non-physIsa 66:22-23 reads, “For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain ical, spiritual existence but for the renewal of before me, says the Lord, so shall your descenGod’s good creation. Paul appears to have been dants and your name remain. From new moon to just such an apocalyptic Jewish thinker who new moon, and from Sabbath to Sabbath, all flesh believed that the Messiah had come and whose shall come to worship before me, says the LORD.” death and resurrection set in motion a series of events that is leading to the healing and renewal for which his people longed. Individuals are being saved and becoming new, yes. But there is more. An entirely new order is being established in the cosmos, one that celebrates God’s shalom and life “in Christ” rather than one that knows people kata sarka (which is about divisions, pecking orders, competition, violence, and death). Thus, Sandra Hack Polaski can argue that “new creation” is a grounding conviction of faith for Paul: “Here, it seems, is Paul’s theology in a nutshell: God’s saving act in Christ effects new creation and issues forth in the new life of the believer. The proclamation of ‘new

114

2 Corinthians 5:11–6:10

creation’ stands as the single summary of all that happens in the divine act, process, and life of salvation.”11 All of these things “are from God,” Paul says (v. 18a). They are a grace-filled gift from the loving, faithful Creator. No wonder the love of Christ constrains Paul (v. 14)! Still, the new creation is not complete. Rather, it has been set in motion. So God has reconciled us to Godself through Christ, Paul declares (v. 18b), but there is still more. God has also given to believers the “ministry [diakonia] of reconciliation” (v. 18c). That is, there is more reconciling to be done, more new creation to bring into being, and the ministry of sharing these gifts has been given to believers who participate “in Christ” in God’s saving work in the world. We may note that earlier Paul declared that God had made him competent to be a minister (diakonos) of the new covenant (3:6) and to share in the ministry (diakonia) of the Spirit (3:8) and the ministry (diakonia) of righteousness/justice (dikaiosyn∑ ; 3:9). Here he declares that he and other believers have been given the ministry (diakonia) of reconciliation. It is not likely that Paul was naming different ministries in the letter. Rather, these descriptions are all ways of describing God’s work in the world. The pouring out of God’s Spirit on all flesh brings about reconciliation between God and all of creation and also among God’s people, which then results in just living among them as they are liberated and led by God’s Spirit. A further gift of grace is that believers have this hope to share with others. Commentators note that v. 19 serves to clarify Different Translations of the Beginning of v. 18. Indeed, it may function as a sort of parenVerse 19 thetical elaboration of v. 18. We begin our Those who understand the hos hoti to efforts to understand this verse by attending to indicate a causal relationship between vv. 18 and 19 translate: (18) . . . and hath given to us some translation issues. First is the høs hoti with the ministry of reconciliation (19) for God indeed which the verse begins, which ties it to v. 18, was in Christ reconciling the world . . . . (See the and which is not easily translated. Some comRheims New Testament.) mentators understand the relationship of v. 19 Those who believe the hos hoti indicates that to v. 18 to be causal and translate the phrase Paul is quoting from tradition translate: (18) . . . “since.” Others believe Paul is quoting a tradiand gave to us the ministry of reconciliation (19) as (it is well known) that in Christ God was recontion that the Corinthians already knew and ciling the world . . . . (See Jan Lambrecht, Second translate the phrase, “as it is said.” I am among Corinthians [SP 8; Collegeville MN: Liturgical those who translate høs hoti in a declarative Press, 1999] 91, 98–99.) sense, “that is,” believing that Paul is developing The third option, the one adopted here, underwhat he has just said in v. 18.12 [Different Translations stands hos hoti to be clarifying what Paul has said. The translation then reads: (18) . . . and gave to us the ministry of reconciliation, (19) that is God was in Christ reconciling the world . . . . (See the NRSV.)

of the Beginning of Verse 19]

Following this opening declaration (“that is”), the rest of the first clause contains important words that can be translated in at least three

2 Corinthians 5:11–6:10

115

ways. If the preposition en (“in Christ”) is construed locally and katalassøn (reconciling) is translated strictly as a participle, we have “God was in Christ reconciling the cosmos to Godself.” The focus here is on “where” God was. Or the preposition en can be read adverbially (“by means of Christ”) and “God” as the subject of “was,” so that we have, “it was God, in Christ, who was reconciling the cosmos to Godself.” The emphasis here falls on God as the actor in this drama. A third possibility, and the one favored here, is to understand the preposition adverbially as just noted and the “was” as working with the participle in a Greek construction known as a periphrastic. Thus we read, “God, in Christ, was reconciling the cosmos to Godself.”13 The focus here is on God’s reconciling work in the creation as inaugurated by Christ, which seems to fit the context best. Use of Reconciliation Language in the Pauline Corpus This leads us to the significant ideas in the The language of reconciliation (katallassø, verse that require attention, chief among which katalleg∑) appears in the New Testament is the concept of reconciliation (the noun is only in these verses from the Pauline Corpus: katallag∑ ; the verb is katallassø ). The word family appears twice in v. 18 as we saw, twice in Rom 5:10-11. For if while we were enemies, we v. 19, and once in v. 20. It appears also in were reconciled to God through the death of [God’s] Son, much more surely, having been recRomans, Ephesians, and Colossians, but onciled, will we be saved by his life. But more nowhere else in the New Testament. [Use of than that, we even boast in God through our Lord Reconciliation Language in the Pauline Corpus] When we Jesus Christ, through whom we have now look at the broader cultural context to help us received reconciliation. understand Paul, we find something interesting. Rom 11:15. For if their [i.e., the Jews’] rejection is In Hellenistic literature the terminology of recthe reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead! onciliation was used most prominently of the Eph 2:16. . . . that [God] might create in [Godself] political process of making peace between one new humanity in place of the two [i.e., Jews warring parties. Either side could initiate the and Gentiles], thus making peace, and might recprocess. Jewish thinkers like the writer of oncile both groups to God in one body through the 2 Maccabees, Josephus, and Philo applied the cross, thus putting to death that hostility through language to their religious contexts but spoke of it. Col 1:20-22. . . . and through [Christ] God was God being so angered by human sin that human pleased to reconcile to [Godself] all things, beings, via prayers or acts of repentance, must whether on earth or in heaven, by making peace work to appease God. But Paul speaks of God through the blood of his cross. And you who were reconciling human beings to Godself.14 The once estranged and hostile in mind, doing evil actions come from one side—God’s. Amazingly, deeds, he has now reconciled in his fleshly body for Paul God is not estranged from human through death, so as to present you holy and blameless and irreproachable before him . . . . beings however much we have refused to honor God as God and give thanks (borrowing language from Rom 1:21). Rather, we are estranged from God, but God has acted to reconcile us. Seyoon Kim has argued that Paul’s own experience lies just beneath his use of reconciliation terminology. Paul had been an

116

2 Corinthians 5:11–6:10

enemy of the Jesus movement, a persecutor of Christ-believers, hostile to what God was doing in the world through Christ. But amazingly (no other word seems to work), God reached out to Paul on the Damascus road while Paul was still an enemy of the movement to reconcile Paul to Godself.15 How gracious is that! We should hardly be surprised, then, that Paul’s Pieter Brueghel the Younger (1564–1636). Saint Paul on the Road to Damascus before His Conversion. Palais des Beaux Arts, Lille, France. (Credit: Wikimedia Commons, CC-PD-Mark) description of God’s reconciling work includes Two paintings illustrate the forgiveness: God who was graciousness of God reconciling the cosmos is reaching out to Paul while “not counting their sins he was still an enemy of against them” (v. 19b). God. Pieter Brueghel’s painting of Saint Paul on the We noted in the commenRoad to Damascus before tary on 2:9 that folks in His Conversion shows Paul first-century Mediterranean as part of an armed and culture were not likely to angry “posse” on his way to consider sin as a moral persecute followers of “The failure producing guilt Way.” Francesco Mazzola’s 16th-C. painting, The within an individual as we Conversion of Saint Paul, usually think. Rather, in an shows Paul having been honor-shame culture like “knocked off his high horse” theirs, sin was a breach by his encounter with the of interpersonal relations Risen Christ. Certainly resulting in outcast-ness. nothing in the first painting Parmigianino (Francesco Mazzola) (1503–1540). The suggests what is about to In addition, first-century Conversion of Saint Paul. Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna, Austria. [Credit: Wikimedia Commons, PD-Art (PDhappen in the second! culture focused more on old-100)] groups than individuals. Consequently, Paul’s thinking about sin did not focus on individual moral “boo-boos” and was less about guilt than about shame. Human beings who sin against God are those who shame God since they act as if their relationship with God isn’t worth honoring.16 In the normal course of events in an honor-shame culture, the shamed one must take some vengeful action to restore his honor (“his” because this was very much male behavior). But God, Paul on the Road to Damascus

2 Corinthians 5:11–6:10

Paul says, was “not counting their sins against them,” because God was concerned for reconciliation rather than honor. How gracious is that! Finally, with regard to v. 19, God’s reconciling work in the world includes “having established in us the word of reconciliation.” The phrase is odd in several ways. First, we note that the tense changes: the previous participle (“not counting”) was present tense, but themenos (“having established” or “having entrusted”) is aorist, which is similar to past tense in English. Paul may be subtly refocusing his argument, moving from the big picture of what God is doing globally to the specific (past tense) event of Paul’s own reconciliation with God and consequent call to proclaim the word of reconciliation. If so, then the phrase en h∑min should not be translated “among us” (i.e., among the whole church) as the Greek would allow. Rather, we should translate “in us,” i.e., in Paul and his coworkers, with the sense that Paul is again defending, perhaps subtly, his own ministry as part of God’s reconciling work in the world. Having described God’s reconciling work and hinted at his own place in the midst of that work, Paul now steps less softly back into the tensions at Corinth. First, he names himself and those with him as “ambassadors for Christ as from God who consoles [parakaleø] through us” (v. 20a). The background of his imagery is political: the verb presbeuø (“serving as ambassadors”) and the noun presbeut∑s (ambassadors) are found in inscriptions in connection with the legates of the emperor.17 Those whom the emperor sent as ambassadors or legates were to represent the emperor and deliver his message, not the ambassador’s own words. So Paul claims to be an ambassador for Christ, i.e., he is proclaiming the message of Christ, not his own words (see 4:4). Further, he is sent from God “who consoles/comforts/encourages/exhorts us,” which is how Paul described God at the beginning of this letter (see 1:3-7). Just prior to this section of the letter (at 5:10), he had focused on God’s judgment. Now he is back to the God of comfort and encouragement as he discusses God’s reconciling work. For Paul there is both grace and challenge in the gospel of Christ. Now Paul takes up his work as an ambassador for Christ and begs, “for the sake of Christ, be reconciled to God” (v. 20b). Readers often find this appeal confusing since Paul is writing to people who were already Christ-believers and who would already have been reconciled to God. Some interpreters wonder, therefore, if Paul has in mind reconciliation as an ongoing process. Perhaps so. We have already read his description of believers being

117

118

2 Corinthians 5:11–6:10

transformed from one degree of glory to another (see the commentary on 3:18), so he could be thinking similarly here. But there may be another idea at work. Every other time Paul speaks of reconciliation, God is the one effecting the reconciliation. But here Paul calls on human beings to be the primary actors in the drama. Once again, we do well to remember the conflict between Paul and some of the Corinthians. Perhaps Paul thinks that if the Corinthians are not reconciled to a brother in Christ (who is also an ambassador of Christ sent from God), then they are not truly reconciled to God. If so, then Paul is essentially appealing for them to be reconciled with him.18 Wright believes these verses, with their message about God’s reconciling work, Paul as an ambassador of that reconciliation, and the call to be reconciled are the focal point of this whole section of the letter.19 There are so many singular pieces of this part of 2 Corinthians that Christians have loved (“this treasure in clay jars”; “our outer person is wasting away, but our inner person is being renewed day by day”; “we walk by faith, not by sight”; “if anyone is in Christ, there is new creation”) that we may forget Paul wrote these words primarily to heal a conflict between himself and some Corinthian believers. If Paul is implicitly appealing for reconciliation with himself, he explicitly speaks of being reconciled to God. So he concludes this line of thought by speaking again of what God has done to bring about reconciliation: God “made the one who did not know sin to be sin for us so that we [emphatic pronoun] might become the justice [dikaiosyn∑] of God in him” (v. 21). A significant challenge for us is to understand these words as first-century Corinthian Christians might have understood them, rather than reading them through the lens of 2,000 years of Christian theologizing about the sinlessness of Christ or theories of atonement. How did these words sound in the context of the earliest believers in Corinth in the midst of their conflict with Paul? The simplest way to proceed with an answer is to stick closely to the words we have: God sent Jesus to be like us (in our sinfulness) so that we might become like Jesus (in his righteousness/justice). That is Paul’s language, which is wonderfully evocative, even poetic language. But when we ask follow-up questions like, “Why is this necessary?” and, “How does it come about?” then things get dicey. The truth is Paul did not answer these questions for us. Evocative language does not explain or describe. Consequently, church folks have speculated about answers to such questions for centuries. As the writer of this commentary I must now join the list of speculators. As I do so, I want to be clear that speculation is what I’m doing.

2 Corinthians 5:11–6:10

My New Testament study persuades me that attending closely to the context of the writing gives the best chance to understand a writer well. So I remind us again that Paul was not writing abstract theology but a letter to a first-century community of believers with whom he was in conflict. None of these participants could know a thing about later church councils or creeds or twenty-first-century Western culture. With those reminders before us, we look first at the idea of Christ knowing no sin. As mentioned, Paul would not have thought of sin as we usually do, as individual moral failures. Here is a good place to explore more fully what he did think of sin. He does not discuss sin much in 2 Corinthians, but he does in Romans, so we will allow that letter to inform our reading of our verse. In Romans Paul describes sin as a great evil force in the universe that brings death and has all of humanity—both Jews who have Torah and Gentiles who do not—in bondage. So human beings are slaves to sin, unable to live as they long to live (see Rom 5:12-14; 7:14-20). Our sinfulness includes individual moral failures but is also greater than that. It is the force in the world that creates human slavery, divisions and hatred among people, the Roman patronage system with its bribery and corruption, war and violence, etc. And it has us all in bondage. The early Christians believed, however, that Jesus lived freely and fully so that he was not in bondage to sin. The political and religious powers told him to stop what he was doing and saying or they would kill him, but he refused and went on with his living. Perhaps it is in this sense of not being in bondage to sin that Jesus “did not know sin.” Still, sin had the world in bondage and brings death, and Jesus came to live in this world “in the flesh” (Rom 8:3). So he suffered death. That is, he suffered the fate of all human beings who live in a world in bondage to sin. The early Christians believed, however, that God raised Jesus from the dead. Sin and its great power, death, could not enslave him! So these Christians came to believe that Jesus’ willingness to face death, to “be obedient unto death,” was also theologically significant. Outsiders to the movement likely saw Jesus’ crucifixion as the degraded death of a deluded fool (as Paul once did, 5:16). Believers saw Jesus’ love of God and neighbor, and his great faithfulness to God even in the face of death. And they saw the power of God’s life over death. [The Power of Death and the Power of Life] The early Christians expressed the theological significance of Jesus’ death in different ways. Mark, e.g., thinks of it as an exodus from slavery.20 Paul often relates Jesus’ death to the solemn Jewish ritual that brought forgiveness for the people’s sins, the annual sacrifice on the Day of Atonement. Commentators have generally

119

120

2 Corinthians 5:11–6:10

understood Paul’s reference in 5:21 in one of two ways. One group interprets God making Jesus “to be sin” to mean that Jesus was “made” the sin offering itself, the unblemished sacrifice offered to God to atone for the sins of the Buddha was once threatened with death by a people. The other group understands Jesus to bandit called Angulimal. “Then be good enough to fulfill my dying wish,” said Buddha. “Cut off the have been “made” a sinner (though he was not) branch of that tree.” who suffered the fate of sinners on their behalf. One slash of the sword, and it was done! I wonder at the necessity of choosing between “What now?” asked the bandit. the two. Is it necessary to specify one interpre“Put it back again,” said Buddha. The bandit laughed. “You must be crazy to think tation or the other as “correct” when Paul’s that anyone can do that.” language is not specific? It seems to me that “On the contrary, it is you who are crazy to think Paul’s words evoke both the estrangement from that you are mighty because you can wound and God that sin brings about (so that sinners are in destroy. That is the task of children. The mighty know how to create and heal.” need of reconciliation) and also the ritual wherein sins are forgiven and God’s people are Taken from Anthony de Mello, The Heart of the Enlightened: A reconciled to God and made righteous again. Book of Story-Meditations (New York: Doubleday, 1991) 35–36. Indeed, Paul’s language is more evocative still: in the rabbinic tradition the forgiveness and atonement made at the start of the new year (the Day of Atonement) is compared to a new creation.21 In the last part of this text Paul says that God made Christ to be sin “so that we might become the justice [dikaiosyn∑ ] of God in him.” Again, Paul does not explain how this transformation comes about. Earlier he described believers as becoming like Christ as we are “metamorphosized from one degree of glory to another” by the power of the Spirit (3:18). Here we become “the dikaiosyn∑ of God” because of what God has done through Christ. However it comes about, Paul clearly believed transformation happens, and his own life bore witness to it. What may be significant here is Paul’s description of the transformation as believers becoming the dikaiosyn∑ of God. We’ve noted that this significant concept includes the belief that God is always faithful and just in God’s relationship with human beings (see the commentary on 3:9). Always. If we become the dikaiosyn∑ of God, then, we would also be always faithful and just in our relationships with God and one another. Such a way of being would heal the conflict in Corinth. I am persuaded that Paul was not trying to explain how or why something came about as much as he was trying to inspire the Corinthians to “see” the depth and breadth of God’s grace and the transforming power of God’s life. Jesus’ crucifixion appears to be a horrible failure if viewed kata sarka (according to the flesh). But Christ-believers saw God working in that event to bring about new The Power of Death and the Power of Life An old Buddhist story illustrates the difference between Rome’s power to bring about Jesus’ death and God’s power to create life:

2 Corinthians 5:11–6:10

121

creation, reconciliation, forgiveness, and to make us “the justice of God in Christ.” In a context in which some Corinthians were apparently impressed with letters of recommendation and those who acted as patrons, boasted in appearances, “showed off ” their spirituality, valued triumph, and criticized Paul for his suffering and “inglorious” appearance, Paul is likely less interested in explaining theological concepts than in inspiring the Corinthians to look again at what God had done. Christ suffered crucifixion for them. God worked through that moment to bring about new creation, to reconcile and forgive them, to enable them to live justly. In the face of such grace, how can they boast in themselves and criticize other servants of God? There should be little surprise, then, that Paul begins the third subunit of this section with an appeal to the Corinthians “not to receive the grace of God in vain” (6:1). He sets up the appeal with some wonderful wordplay. First is the participle synergountes, “working together,” with which he launches the appeal. Working together with whom? Paul does not say. Surely we are to understand that Paul is working with God. But by leaving the coworker unspecified (English translations like the NRSV and the NIV that specify that God is the coworker are adding to what the Greek text says), Paul may be creating a “delightful ambiguity”22 that hints that the Corinthians ought to be his partners in ministry. So, “working together then we parakaleø you . . . .” The second wordplay involves the verb parakaleø, which is part of a key word family in this letter. As we have noted, it can mean Paul’s Use of Parakaleø Thus Far in the comfort, console, encourage, advocate, exhort, Letter etc. At the beginning of the letter Paul declared 1:4 . . . the One who consoles (parakaleø) us upon our every affliction that God is “the one who parakaleø us in our so that we are able to console those in every every affliction so that we are able to parakaleø affliction through the consolation with we ourothers in every affliction” (1:4). Paul takes up selves are being consoled by God. that task right here. In the letter’s beginning the 1:6 If we are being afflicted, it is for your consolastress fell on the “comfort/console” end of the tion and salvation; if we are being consoled, it is word’s range of meaning. Here, however, the for your consolation . . . . 2:7 . . . on the other hand so that you may forgive “encourage/exhort” meaning takes center stage: and console, that such a person may not be “Working together, then we exhort you not to drowned by excessive grief. receive the grace of God in vain.” [Paul’s Use of Parakaleø Thus Far in the Letter]

A quote from Isaiah 49:8 heightens Paul’s appeal: Isaiah’s “acceptable time” is happening now; Isaiah’s “day of salvation” is happening now (v. 2). From Paul’s perspective the word of the prophet has been fulfilled through God’s work

2:8 Therefore, I encourage (parakaleø) you to reaffirm love for him. 5:20 Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ as from God who consoles/encourages (parakaleø) through us . . . . 6:1 And working together [with whom?] we encourage (parakaleø) you not to receive the grace of God in vain.

122

2 Corinthians 5:11–6:10

in Christ. The new creation is unfolding now! The implication for the Corinthians is, “Don’t miss it!” If the Corinthians should miss it, it won’t be because of Paul, he says: “We are giving no one any occasion for misstepping so that the ministry may not be blamed, but in everything [we are] commending ourselves as servants of God” (vv. 3-4a). Earlier Paul had refused to commend himself (see 3:1; 5:12), but here he does. It is not clear that Paul is consistent in this matter of Paul’s Comments on “Self-commendation” self-commendation, but apparently he felt it 2 Cor 3:1-2a. Are we beginning to acceptable to commend himself “as a servant of commend ourselves again? Or do we God.” [Paul’s Comments on “Self-commendation”] need, as some do, letters of recommendation to Apart from the annoying rhetorical hyperbole you or from you? You yourselves are our letter, having been written on our hearts . . . . in these verses (surely no one is as perfect as Paul 2 Cor 5:12. We are not commending ourselves claims), the flow of thought seems odd. Paul again to you but giving to you an opportunity for moves from an appeal not to receive God’s grace boasting over us, so that you may have somein vain, heightens that appeal with a quote from thing for those who boast in appearance and not Isaiah, and then follows with a forceful defense in heart. of his integrity. Why would a personal defense follow such an appeal? We can only speculate, but perhaps Paul fears more Corinthians are close to abandoning his understanding of the gospel with its focus on grace, love, and life in the midst of death in favor of a triumphalism that was concerned for power, success, reputation, and honor (see the commentary on 2:6, 7:4, at the end of 7:16). I do not mean they disagree with Paul. Clearly some already do. I’m suggesting he fears being abandoned by more Corinthians. One justification for abandoning the one who helped found the community would be the claim that he was untrustworthy. If this scenario is happening, then these Corinthians were not embracing God’s new creation but the values of the Roman Empire in God’s name. Such a scenario could lead Paul both to beg them not to receive God’s grace in vain (Roman values were entirely contrary to grace) and to defend his integrity once again. He continues his defense via a catalogue of hardships, the second and longest of several in this letter (see 4:8-10; 11:23-27). Indeed, the length and detail of this list were probably intended to overwhelm the objections to Paul. Scholars agree it is intentionally and intricately structured. Sampley notes that its “repeated elements give it grandeur and suggest a limitless list.”23 Scholars also agree that there are four sections or “strophes” in the list. Verses 4b-5 depict the circumstances and situations Paul has endured as he has carried out his vocation. Verses 6-7a describe how Paul believed he conducted himself in the midst of those circumstances. Verses 7b-8a offer further but slightly different ways Paul responded to

2 Corinthians 5:11–6:10

123

the situations in which he found himself. Finally, verses 8b-10 express the paradoxes within which he carried out his ministry. Rhetoricians tell us to pay attention to the first and last elements in such a list, for those spots are the emphatic ones. First place in Paul’s list goes to “much endurance” (v. 4b). The Greek word hypomon∑ can mean endurance, steadfastness, staying power, consistent resistance, commitment to one’s cause. In Hypomon∑ in the New Testament apocalyptic contexts, the word does not denote The Greek word hypomon∑ is used at key passivity (as the English word “endurance” moments in several New Testament writmight suggest). Rather, one is hypomon∑ when ings to encourage believers to hold on to their faith in the midst of opposition and persecution. one actively resists evil and is fully committed to Here are some examples: God. [Hypomon∑ in the New Testament] Paul had In Luke 8:11-15 Jesus explains the parable of endured afflictions, beatings, and imprisonment the sower. In the parable much of the seed bears (among other things, vv. 4b-5) but persisted no fruit because of Satan’s opposition, rootlesswith his gospel work. The last element in his list ness, and the choking effect of riches, the is the paradoxical claim that he was “as having pleasures of life, etc. “But,” Jesus says, “as for [the seed] in the good soil, these are the one nothing and possessing everything” (v. 10). The who, when they hear the word, hold it fast in an phrase likely speaks first of Paul’s concrete ecohonest and good heart and bear fruit with nomic situation. He was without patrons (by hypomon∑ [NRSV: patient endurance]” (8:15). choice), perhaps without a sponsoring church In his apocalyptic discourse in Luke, Jesus (see the introduction), working when he could warns in 21:12-19 that followers will be arrested, (see 1 Cor 9:8-18), and dependent on the persecuted, betrayed, hated, and even killed. “But,” he tells them, “not a hair of your head will support of fellow believers (see 2 Cor 11:9). As a perish. By your hypomon∑ [NRSV: endurance] you result he was sometimes hungry (v. 5), but he will gain your souls” (21:18-19). was also nobody’s “house apostle,” free to go The writer of James urges believers, “Be where God called, free to experience grace and patient, beloved, until the coming of the Lord” to find God’s life in the midst of death. And so, (5:7). He elaborates on their need for patience, he claimed, he possessed everything. and then says, “Indeed we call blessed those who showed hypomon∑ [NRSV: endurance]” (5:11). Between the first and last elements is a long The writer of Revelation describes Rome (and list of circumstances and responses. We will other oppressive powers) as a “beast from the highlight a few of these. In v. 4 Paul says he has sea” in ch. 13. Because the beast has great endured “afflictions” (thlipsis), a term that he power, many people will worship it, but those has used five other times in the letter. After the who do will suffer its fate. Here then “is a call for events in Asia (1:8) and the conflict with the the hypomon∑ [NRSV: endurance] and faith of the saints” (13:10). Corinthians, thlipsis is on Paul’s mind, for he has suffered a lot of it. But he has been steadfast. “Labors” (v. 5) may refer to his work to support himself. His willingness to do manual labor, which was not honorable in that culture, rather than accept patronage was one source of conflict between himself and higher-status believers. Paul saw his work as allowing him to preach the gospel freely (1 Cor 9:18). In v. 6 hagnot∑s is another word for “sincerity,” which we have found to be a key issue for Paul in this letter (see 1:12-14). Though he was

124

2 Corinthians 5:11–6:10

apparently accused of deceit (v. 8b among other references) and maybe manipulation, Paul has insisted throughout on his sincerity and transparency. In v. 7 he endures/resists evil via “weapons of justice [dikaiosyn∑ ].” The image calls to this reader’s mind the great rider on the white horse in the book of Revelation who goes out to battle the nations with the sharp sword “from his mouth” (19:15) surrounded by the armies of heaven wearing fine linen (19:14), which are “the just deeds of the saints” Quotations from Revelation 19 (19:8). The people of God actively resist evil The “story” in Rev 19 includes the folbut not with evil’s weapons (violence, deceit, lowing details: manipulation). Instead their “weapons” are the …for the marriage of the Lamb has come, word of God (the sword from the mouth) and and his bride has made herself ready; their acts of love and justice (righteous deeds). to her it has been granted to be clothed with fine line, bright and pure— for the fine line is the righteous [or “just”] deeds of the saints. (vv. 7b-8)

[Quotes from Revelation 19]

Paul finishes his list with a set of contrasts and paradoxes that not only concludes the catalogue but also works well as a conclusion to Then I saw heaven opened, and there was a his self-defense that began at 2:14. In each of white horse! Its rider is called Faithful and True, and the seven contrasts in vv. 8b-10, the first term in righteousness he judges and makes war. . . . And names an apparent charge or negative evaluathe armies of heaven, wearing fine linen, white and tion pressed on Paul (a deceiver, unknowable, pure, were following him on white horses. From his dying, disciplined, sad, a beggar, having mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike nothing). The second term then gives Paul’s down the nations . . . . (vv. 11, 14-15a) (and he would say God’s) evaluation of himself (honest, knowable, living, not being killed, rejoicing, making many rich, having everything). Paul would say the first terms were based on outward appearances, on knowing him kata sarka. The second terms describe his inner person, the transforming work of the Spirit who is changing him from one degree of glory to another and making him competent to be a minister of God’s new covenant. He has endured great affliction and has nothing, but he possesses everything because of God’s grace.

CONNECTIONS 1. Unless Paul is lying, he clearly believes he has been open and sincere, even thoughtful and reasonable, in his ministry among the Corinthians, and he is ready to have God judge him as such. So we might find ourselves wondering how things got so testy between himself and the Corinthians (see 5:12, 20). Maybe a minority group of Corinthians (see the commentary on 2:6, 7) were power hungry and mean-spirited, did not want Paul to have authority

2 Corinthians 5:11–6:10

over them, and sought to dishonor and discredit him. Such things happen in Christian communities and are hurtful and unjust. It is also possible, though, that these Corinthians were not mean people. They may have misunderstood Paul (see 1:13 and the commentary on that verse). Or they may have held theological convictions that differed from Paul’s and desired to live their convictions even as Paul wanted to live his. It is also possible that Paul had some blind spots with regard to his own conduct. We’ve already seen places in his letters where his words were not consistent (see 1:23-24 and the commentary on those verses). He would not be the first person, or the last, to see himself less than clearly. Since there is no surviving record of the Corinthians’ perspective, we cannot know for certain how the relationship got so rocky. We can remember, though, that while the cause of conflict can come from one side in a dispute, more often both parties contribute to rising tensions. Some Corinthians may have been unfair to Paul. Paul gives no indication in this letter that he “heard” the ways he may have contributed to the difficulties. We will find that the conflict worsens. Though we must speculate quite a bit, we can learn much from what both sides apparently did poorly for the times when we find ourselves in conflict. 2. The unity of the Christian communities clearly mattered a great deal to Paul. Their unity bore witness to the New Creation God was bringing into being, and, by standing together, they could stand against the Roman Empire and stand for a new way of living in the power of the Spirit. Many of us would agree with him regarding the potential power of such a community. But he often seems to wrap the community’s unity around its relationship to him. Earlier he had “tested” their obedience to him (see the commentary on 2:9). Here he is apparently calling the Corinthians to be reconciled to him (5:20). My concern is this: as a woman in ministry, as an advocate for women in abusive marriages, as a faculty member and church member in situations where power was abused, I have experienced conflict situations where those in power called the other participants in the situation to be reconciled to them. Such a call often sounded false and self-serving. In conflicts over women in ministry, it meant we women should stop “making trouble” by openly discussing how our calls from God were not being honored. For a friend in an abusive marriage, it meant she should “come back home.” And there are many more examples. Genuine reconciliation in those situations, however, requires that persons in power stop exercising power over others and come down off their “thrones” so that all participants are “in this thing

125

126

2 Corinthians 5:11–6:10

together.” If the community or relationship is to be reconciled genuinely, then the perspectives and pain of all participants must be shared. 3. Western biblical interpreters have tended to understand Paul’s “New Creation” individually. That is, for individuals the old has passed away, and they are becoming new. Better understandings of the socio-cultural context of Paul’s ministry challenge these interpretations. It is more likely that Paul had in view the renewal of all God’s creation. I wonder if this new reading will “catch on.” I wonder if those who are likely to be reading a book like this one will be less moved by the new reading because we have less longing for a renewed creation or a new order in the world. In fact, we may prefer the world as it is since it serves us pretty well. But what if we lived in a place that has much in common with the suffering of Paul’s people, like a war-torn part of the world, or where the AIDS epidemic is decimating the population and leaving tens of thousands of orphaned children, or where girls are sold into the sex industry, or where rural poverty and urban blight are robbing children of hope? If we lived in these places, then a longing for a new creation might be very real and Paul’s announcement received as good news. Is it possible for us, in our comfortable living, to appreciate such a longing? Paul would say it is if “the love of Christ constrains us.” If we open ourselves to the depth of Christ’s love for us, if we respond to Christ’s love with love so that we love as Christ did, then we will find ourselves loving our neighbors as ourselves and loving God’s creation because it is God’s. Then we will see that the world is not nearly just and peaceful enough. Then we, too, may yearn for a new creation.

Notes 1. Mitzi L. Minor, The Power of Mark’s Story (St. Louis: Chalice Press, 2001) 78–80. 2. Margaret E. Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians (ICC 1; London: T & T Clark International, 1994) 402. 3. J. Paul Sampley, The Second Letter to the Corinthians (NIB 11; Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2000) 45. 4. “Self-centered” or “egocentric” are contemporary terms that ancient folks did not use. But Paul appears to know a difference between what we would call “egocentric goals” versus committing oneself to God’s purposes, even if he would conceive of such egocentricity quite differently from us and use different words. 5. Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, ICC 1, 411.

2 Corinthians 5:11–6:10 6. Sandra Hack Polaski, A Feminist Introduction to Paul (St. Louis: Chalice Press, 2005) 78–79, 82. 7. E.g., Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, ICC 1, 426–27. 8. Sze-kar Wan, Power in Weakness: The Second Letter of Paul to the Corinthians (Harrisburg PA: Trinity Press International, 2000) 87; Steven J. Kraftchick, “Death in Us, Life in You: The Apostolic Medium,” in 1 & 2 Corinthians (ed. David M. Hay; vol. 2 of Pauline Theology, ed. Jouette M. Bassler, David M. Hay, E. Elizabeth Johnson; Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 1993) 167. 9. N. T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2003) 122. 10. Ibid., 127. 11. Polaski, Feminist Introduction to Paul, 84. 12. Frank J. Matera, II Corinthians: A Commentary (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2003) 140. 13. Ibid. 14. Wan, Power in Weakness, 88; Seyoon Kim, “2 Cor. 5:11-21 and the Origin of Paul’s Concept of ‘Reconciliation,’” NovT 39 (1997): 361, among others. 15. Kim, “2 Cor. 5:11-21,” 379–80. 16. Bruce J. Malina and John J. Pilch, Social Science Commentary on the Letters of Paul (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2006) 146. 17. Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, ICC 1, 436. 18. Scholars disagree as to whether or not Paul is appealing for reconciliation with himself here. Matera, II Corinthians, 142, and Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, ICC 1, 438, are among those who believe Paul is not making a personal appeal. Sampley, The Second Letter to the Corinthians, 95, and David E. Garland, 2 Corinthians (NAC; Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999) 298–99 are among those who believe he is making a personal appeal. 19. N. T. Wright, “On Becoming the Righteousness of God: 2 Corinthians 5:21,” in 1 & 2 Corinthians (ed. David M. Hay; vol. 2 of Pauline Theology, ed. Jouette M. Bassler, David M. Hay, E. Elizabeth Johnson; Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 1993) 205. 20. Mitzi Minor, The Spirituality of Mark: Responding to God (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1996) 56–57. 21. Kim, “2 Cor. 5:11-21,” 370. 22. I am indebted to Sampley, The Second Letter to the Corinthians, 96, for the phrase “delightful ambiguity.” 23. Sampley, The Second Letter to the Corinthians, 97.

127

Therefore . . . 2 Corinthians 6:11–7:4

COMMENTARY We are alerted, both by the insistence in the appeal Paul is about to make and by his direct address of readers as “Corinthians”1 in v. 11 that he is bringing an end to this part of his letter and its defense of himself and his apostolate. Clearly he intended all he has said thus far to affect their relationship with him, but in what follows he makes that intent explicit and emphatic. He begins with his own feelings for them: “Our mouth is opened wide to you” (v. 11a), which Paul Sampley considers a euphemism for the “frank speech” Paul has used all along with the Corinthians.2 As noted before, frank speech in their culture was a sign of friendship (see the commentary on 1:12). In addition to his mouth being opened wide, his heart also “is enlarged,” and the Corinthians “are not being restricted” in him (vv. 11b-12a). Thus Paul claims his affection for the Corinthians is bold, deep, and unrestricted. However, the Corinthians are “being restricted” in their “affections” (the Greek word is splagchna, lit., “bowels” or “gut,” the seat of emotions in Hebrew thinking; v. 12b). [Other Pauline References to the “Seat” of Our Emotions] From Paul’s perspective, the Other Pauline References to the “Seat” of problem between them does not lie with Our Emotions him. Thus his explicit appeal: “by the Whereas we tend to locate the emotions same response [or “the same exchange”], in our “hearts,” ancient folks used I speak as to children, you yourselves splagchnon (bowels) as the seat of the emotions. also be opened wide [to us]” (v. 13). Here are other examples from Paul’s writings: That is, he exhorts his “children” to love Phil 1:8. For God is my witness, how I long for all him as much as he loves them. of you with the compassion [splagchnon; lit., “in He is going to continue with his the bowels”] of Christ Jesus. appeal, but not until we get to 7:2. Phlm 12. I am sending him [Onesimus], that is, Something odd happens at this point in my own heart [splagchnon], back to you. the letter. Abruptly, v. 14 shifts from the 2 Cor 7:15. And [Titus’s] heart [splagchnon] goes out all the more to you, as he remembers the emotional plea of v. 13 to a sharp obedience of all of you, and how you welcomed command: “Do not be mis-yoked with him with fear and trembling. (NRSV)

130

2 Corinthians 6:11–7:4

unbelievers.” What follows through 7:1 serves to support this command. Verses 14b-16a consist of five short, somewhat symmetrically composed rhetorical questions that ask whether two opposing realities (righteousness and lawlessness; light and darkness; Christ and Beliar; faith and unfaith; God and idols) can fit together. The understood answer each time is “no.” Verses 16b-18 declare, via several scriptural quotes, that we are the temple of the living God, so we should “come out from their midst,” i.e., from those who are “unclean” (and lawless, unfaithful, full of darkness, etc.), and be separate. If we do so then we will be children of God. Finally, 7:1 says that since we have such promises from God, “let us cleanse ourselves from every defilement of flesh and spirit, completing [our] holiness in the fear of God.”3 Thus the passage presents a forceful call to believers to separate themselves from unbelievers, impurity, and darkness and to embrace other believers, holiness, and the light of God so as to be children of God. Readers of this commentary who are wondering why this text (6:14–7:1) appears now in this section of 2 Corinthians have lots of company. At least as early as 1823, commentators were noting how out of place these thoughts seemed in the flow of the letter. Careful scrutiny since then has only highlighted more oddities. Much of the vocabulary is not Paul’s. For example, there are nine hapax legomena (words used nowhere else in the recognized Pauline letters), an unusually high number for such a short passage. Several of the specific concepts in the passage seem contrary to Paul. For example, the uncompromising call to separate from unbelievers seems to contradict 1 Corinthians 5:10 and 7:12-16. The sharp dualism in the text (light and darkness, believers versus unbelievers, body and spirit, etc.) is not like Paul. Believers being able to cleanse their own impurity is not Pauline, etc. Thus there are significant questions about the context, content, and vocabulary of this text. Scholars have proposed widely differing ways of understanding this situation. On one end of the spectrum are interpreters who believe the context and content is so contrary to Paul generally and to Paul’s argument at this point in 2 Corinthians specifically that he could have neither written the text nor put it here in this letter. They argue that an editor of Paul’s letters or perhaps a scribe copying the letter added this segment.4 On the other end of the spectrum are scholars who believe, despite the questions raised by and about this text, that Paul wrote it and included it in this part of 2 Corinthians purposefully. They argue that none of the issues raised prove conclusively that the material is either non-Pauline or does not belong here in the letter.5

2 Corinthians 6:11–7:4

131

Jan Lambrecht proposes that “a logical connection between 6:14–7:1 is not completely absent,” and that there may be a discernable link with 6:11-13: “open wide your hearts to us in return (6:13) and, therefore, do what we ask (6:14–7:1).”6 Frank Matera believes that Paul is making his appeal to the Scholars’ Comments on the Questions Corinthians absolutely explicit in this text: Surrounding 6:14–7:1 “The Corinthians must be reconciled with him These verses are a challenge for readers (6:11-13; 7:2-4) by separating themselves from of 2 Corinthians. Here are some scholars’ comments on this challenge: unbelievers, since those in Christ are the ‘temple of the Living God’ (6:14–7:1).”7 Victor Paul Furnish: The passage “remains an Between these two perspectives are other enigma within 2 Corinthians, neither its origin nor approaches to the problems with this text. Some its place in the context being entirely clear.” scholars believe Paul was not the author of this Ralph P. Martin: “All in all, there will never be a material but was the one who chose to borrow consensus on the authenticity of this passage. Both sides (divided over whether Pauline or nonand incorporate it into his letter. Still others Pauline authorship is more feasible) can make a believe Paul wrote the passage but not as part of case. . . .” this letter. They consider it a fragment from a Margaret E. Thrall: “This section contains no different letter that an editor later brought fewer than nine words not found elsewhere in together with other pieces of Pauline letters to Paul: heterozygountes, metoch∑, symphøn∑sis, form our canonical 2 Corinthians.8 [Scholars’ beliar, synkatathesis, emperipateo, eisdechomai, Comments on the Questions Surrounding 6:14–7:1]

pantokratør, and molysmos. This seems a high proportion of hapax lemomena for so short a passage. In addition to these single words the quotation formula kathos eipen ho theos hoti is not Pauline either.” She also notes a “formidable list” of non-Pauline concepts in the text. But after all this “evidence” against Pauline authorship, she can still conclude, “The discussion has shown that neither contextual nor theological arguments are sufficient to prove conclusively that 2 Cor 6.14–7.1 is non-Pauline.”

Excellent New Testament scholars look at the same “data” regarding this text and draw widely varying conclusions about it. I suspect readers of this commentary will also have differing views of the situation. How, then, do we deal with this text in the midst of much confusion over it? Given that we are looking at the same data but coming to different conclusions, it seems important that we are able to say what finally persuades us to a particular view and why. As Furnish, II Corinthians (AB; Garden City NY: Doubleday & Co., the writer of this commentary, I will present in Inc., 1984) 383. what follows the points that persuade me. Martin, 2 Corinthians (WBC 40; Waco: Word Books, 1986) 193. I find myself having to account for significant Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians (ICC 1; London: T & T Clark questions regarding Pauline authorship of the International, 1994) 27, 29, 30, 35. passage in all three areas important for interpretation: context, content, and vocabulary. As Margaret Thrall admits, these questions make up a “formidable list of non-Pauline concepts.”9 What, then, is the simplest explanation for such a formidable list? Scholars who argue that Paul used something he did not write have to assume such a source exists and find a reason he interrupted his argument to quote it here. Scholars who argue the text is a fragment from another Pauline letter incorporated here

132

2 Corinthians 6:11–7:4

assume 2 Corinthians to be a compilation of various letter fragments brought together by an editor with a questionable plan, and they still have to account for questions of non-Pauline vocabulary and ideas. Scholars who believe Paul wrote the piece and put it here are not burdened by unprovable assumptions. But they have to work hard to make sense of the text in the flow of 2 Corinthians. Thrall, for example, can only say the questions are not “sufficient to prove conclusively” that the material is either non-Pauline or doesn’t belong here.10 Her assertion rather ignores that Pauline authorship has been questioned substantially (though indeed not conclusively). Lambrecht Different Scholarly Views of the Content of 6:14–7:1 declares “a logical connection Some scholars read these verses as part of Paul’s argument between 6:14–7:1 is not comrather than an insertion made by an editor. Here are examples of pletely absent,”11 hardly a their interpretations: ringing endorsement for its Frank J. Matera: “. . . even if 6:14–7:1 comes from another source, presence. Thus the compliPaul is the one who introduced it into 2 Corinthians. . . . Paul’s brief exhorcated efforts of these scholars tation in 6:11–7:4 . . .is an example of Paul’s use of a ring pattern. In this reinforce for me that the simcase the middle section (6:14–7:1) exemplifies what the Corinthians plest solution is to understand must do in order to open their hearts to Paul (6:11-13; 7:2-4); they must Paul as neither writing the separate themselves from every defilement because they are the temple material nor putting it here. of the Living God.” Jan Lambrecht: “No manuscript suggests that an insertion has been Such a view also allows me made. It is well known that Paul interrupts himself quite often. One to make good sense of cannot exclude the possibility that in 6:14–7:1 Paul is employing and 2 Corinthians 6:11-13; 7:2-4 editing material that at first sight seems rather strange. . . . Is the content by reading them without of this passage as isolated from its narrow context and from the entire an interruption. Finally, it letter as many commentators take for granted? The answer is no . . . a does not disturb my underlogical connection between 6:14–7:1 is not completely absent. One may refer to the exhortation in 5:20 and 6:1-2 and conclude that the appearstanding of inspiration, so I ance of paraenesis in 6:1–47:1 is not so unexpected after all . . . . One have no theological need could perhaps also discern some logical link with 6:11-13: open wide to find another solution. your hearts to us in return (6:13) and, therefore, do what we ask Consequently, I will rest on (6:14–7:1). . . .” that conclusion unless or until James M. Scott: “In 6:11–7:4 Paul turns once again to exhortation . . . . new data surfaces.12 [Different The appeal pivots on the word hearts, which Paul has used extensively in the course of his apology, not only in the context of his ministry . . . (3:1ff) but also as the only valid criterion for assessing Paul’s apostleship (5:12). Hence Paul exhorts the Corinthians to open their hearts to him, even as his heart is open to them and they are in his heart, explicitly referring back to what he has said in 3:2. The main point of the whole apology is contained in 6:14–7:1 . . . , for there Paul exhorts the Corinthians to live in light of the new covenant and to dissociate from the opponents (cf. 5:12).” Matera, II Corinthians: A Commentary (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2003) 30, 32. Lambrecht, Second Corinthians (SP 8; Collegeville MN: Liturgical Press, 1999) 122–23. Scott, 2 Corinthians (NIBCNT; Peabody MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1998) 150.

Scholarly Views of the Content of 6:14–7:1]

Since I conclude that Paul neither wrote this text nor placed it here, and since my goal is to interpret his letter to the Corinthians, I’m going to move on to his words to the Corinthians. We pick up at 7:2 where Paul continues his

2 Corinthians 6:11–7:4

appeal. Having asked them to “open wide” (rather than be restricted) in 6:13, now he exhorts them: “make room for us.” Then he insists, “We treated no one unjustly, we corrupted no one, we cheated no one” (v. 2b). These verbs may reflect accusations made against Paul, especially since they match earlier hints that Paul had been called deceitful and manipulative. If so, he flatly and forcefully denies the charges. Since he insists he’s not done the things with which he has been charged, there is no reason for them not to make room for him. But at v. 3 Paul seems to make an effort to soften his tone: “I do not say (this) for condemnation . . . .” The imperatives of 6:13 (“open wide”) and 7:2 (“make room”) give way now to affirmation: “for I have said that you are in our hearts to die together and to live together” (v. 3b). Then he gets downright effusive: he has much confidence in them and boasts over them; he has been filled with consolation/encouragement (parakl∑sis); he is overflowing with joy in all his trials (thlipsis) (v. 4). Bruce Malina and John Pilch point out that the phrase “to die together and to live together” is the language of friendship.13 Sampley adds that Paul is promising that nothing, not even death, can confine his love for the Corinthians, which is the ultimate pledge of friendship. Furthermore, in that culture friends were expected to boast over each other as Paul says here that he does.14 Then he returns to two terms that have been significant in the letter: parakl∑sis and thlipsis. He has faced much affliction (thlipsis), but even so he is filled with consolation/encouragement (parakl∑sis) as he said at the beginning of the letter. Perhaps he means that he finds consolation in his afflictions because of his relationship with Corinthians.15 Or perhaps he means that he cares so much for them that the struggle to work things out, the reconciliation that has happened with many of them, and the reconciliation he hopes will happen with the others are sources of parakl∑sis for him even in the midst of thlipsis. Clearly he is emphasizing his view of the Corinthians as his friends. Sampley suggests that Paul’s insistence that he is not condemning them along with his language of friendship show a concern that he may have pushed the Corinthians too hard in some respects. Frank speech may have been a sign of true friendship, but it was to be used rarely, even when it was a “soft sting” rather than a harsh blow.16 The emotional letter he sent previously (2:3-4) appears to have been a harsh one. This letter is softer but still contains frank speech here. There has been a lot of it from Paul in a short period of time.

133

134

2 Corinthians 6:11–7:4

There’s also the matter of Paul calling them “children” in 6:13. Whether he meant he wanted their affection and obedience as their father in the gospel (see 1 Cor 4:14-16), or that he had to speak to them as children because they had shown themselves to be immature, it is hard to imagine the term was well received by the Corinthians. In addition, he calls them children in a context where he’s been employing the language of friendship. As noted before, the Corinthian believers cannot be Paul’s friends and his children at the same time (see the commentary on 1:12 and 1:24). This paragraph might be another instance wherein Paul is justly accused of doublespeak. Finally, there is the issue of him commanding their affection. Rhetoricians tell us that frank speech involves the thinking and reasoning powers, not emotions. It is designed to aid a friend’s decision-making regarding behavior or St. Paul direction. It does not work well with emotions. Plus, affection cannot really be commanded by any rhetoric.17 Yet, Paul tried to do so. No wonder, then, that he is concerned that he may have pushed things too far with the Corinthians and tries to soften his Image Not Available appeal in 7:3-4. Two observations surface at due to lack of digital rights. this point. First, though Paul’s earlier harsh Please view the published letter had resulted in reconciliation with a commentary or perform an Internet majority of Corinthian Christians (2:5-6), search using the credit below. the minority that was still at odds with him must have concerned him. Most folks won’t push a relationship so hard unless it is already near enough to the brink of some disaster to warrant the risk of an extra push. Thus this minority group may have had enough influence in the community to Detail of St. Paul. 12th C. Mosaic. Apse of the Lady of the Assumption, Venetian-Revennese school. S. Giusto, Trieste, Italy. (Credit: A. Dagli make the reconciliation that had happened Orti/© DeA Picture Library/Art Resource, NY) feel tenuous. Second, if 2 Corinthians 10–13 is a separate letter written after 2 Corinthians 1–9 as is assumed in this commentary, then Paul’s concerns appear to have been well founded. He may have pushed too hard, and the minority group may have had significant influence in the community, for in those chapters the relations between Paul and the Corinthian community are strained to the point of being broken. We will see that part of this story unfold when we get there.

2 Corinthians 6:11–7:4

As for now, we have come to the end of Paul’s defense of himself and his ministry with his emphatic appeal for them to open themselves wide to him. He is now ready to return to the story of Titus, the emotional letter, and the Corinthians who had already opened their hearts wide to him.

CONNECTIONS 1. At the beginning of this section of the letter (2:14), I noted that a number of scholars refer to Paul’s defense of his ministry and himself in these chapters as “the heart and soul of the letter.” I now invite readers to consider their own reflections on 2:14–7:4 as I present mine here. First, Paul presents God as having done an amazing thing in Christ—God has fulfilled the promises to the prophets and the ministry of Moses by launching the glorious ministry of the Spirit that brings life in the midst of death and unfurls the new creation for which Paul’s people had yearned. God is reconciling the cosmos to Godself, forgiving and transforming us through Christ who died for us so that we live for him. And God has promised the ultimate fulfillment of this new age when we will be “overclothed” with an eternal “house not made by hands” wherein we will share fully in God’s life. God’s work in Christ, therefore, is a work of huge grace and great love. 2. In the midst of this gracious work, Paul claims that God is leading him “captive,” calling him to be an ambassador of the ministry of reconciliation, which is also the ministry of the Spirit and of justice. He is to be the “aroma of Christ,” spreading the knowledge of God everywhere. Well, “who is competent for such a task?” Paul understandably asks. His answer is that God has made him competent. God reconciled him when he was an enemy of Christ and gave him the Spirit who is transforming him from one degree of glory to the next and is the “guarantee” of the ultimate fulfillment of God’s life. But Paul has also learned that he holds this treasure “in a clay jar.” Because he challenges the power and values of the Roman Empire in accord with God’s new creation, he suffers in this world. He has been hungry, persecuted, imprisoned, beaten, etc., but even his suffering has served God. When he endures and celebrates God’s life in the midst of death, when the clay jar is pounded but does not break, others can see the power of God at work in him. So Paul understands his ministry as all about God’s grace and God’s life. God leads him captive. The love of Christ constrains him. The Spirit renews his inner person day by day. As

135

136

2 Corinthians 6:11–7:4

was noted in the commentary, many scholars believe one source of Paul’s conflict with the Corinthians was a triumphalistic view of the gospel held by some. If indeed Paul is countering such a view, he does so in ways that are often profound. The gospel of Christ for Paul is not about imperial-like success, imperial-type power, patrons, recommendations, reputations, or appearances. It is about God’s grace. 3. Even as Paul is presenting such a profound perspective on the gospel of Christ, however, he also shows himself to be a flawed human being like the rest of us. He insists that he is always sincere, frank, and open with the Corinthians. But the letter itself contains moments of “doublespeak,” such as calling them children in a paragraph where he’s been heavily using the language of friendship. Moreover, he says that those who do not see him as always frank and sincere are “veiled” and “blinded by the god of this age,” hardly conciliatory rhetoric. In addition, he overuses frank speech according to the customs of the day and commands their affection, certainly questionable rhetorical choices in a context where he has been discussing reconciliation. Paul is not the first person, of course, whose way of relating to others, including his rhetorical style, does not quite match the content of what he was saying. We may forget, in the face of the church’s canonizing his letters and the wisdom often contained therein, that Paul was still a fallible human being quite capable of having blind spots about himself. But before we move on, we also note that Paul’s blind spots demonstrate one of the major points in this part of the letter: from this annoyingly stubborn, sure-he-is-always-right, very human being often comes profound thinking about the gospel, much like treasure in a clay jar. We might consider how often the same is true of ourselves and those we know.

Notes 1. Jan Lambrecht, Second Corinthians (SP 8; Collegeville MN: Liturgical Press, 1999) 117, among others, notes these indicators of the end of this section of the letter. Paul rarely uses direct address in his letters. 2. J. Paul Sampley, The Second Letter to the Corinthians (NIB 11; Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2000) 101. 3. I am making significant use here of Lambrecht’s outline of the text, Second Corinthians, 123–24. 4. Among scholars who take this view are Sampley, The Second Letter to the Corinthians, 106; Sze-kar Wan, Power in Weakness: The Second Letter of Paul to the Corinthians (Harrisburg PA: Trinity Press International, 2000) 98.

2 Corinthians 6:11–7:4 5. Margaret E. Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians (ICC 1; London: T & T Clark International, 1994) 35. 6. Lambrecht, Second Corinthians, 122. 7. Frank J. Matera, II Corinthians: A Commentary (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2003) 160. 8. For a summary of scholars’ views on the passage 6:14–7:1, see Victor Paul Furnish, II Corinthians (AB; Garden City NY: Doubleday & Co., Inc., 1984) 375–83. 9. Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, ICC 1, 30. 10. Ibid., 35. 11. Lambrecht, Second Corinthians, 122. 12. I would comment here that I believe God inspired the human writers of the texts (who remained quite human) rather than the specific words in the Bible. Consequently, I am not troubled when the fallibility of the human writers or editors appears on the pages of the biblical texts. I am also aware that I’ve stated my unwillingness to assume there is “no end to the stupidity of editors” (see the commentary that begins 2:14), while here I seem to be doing so. The difference in this case is the non-Pauline vocabulary and content (unlike 2:14–7:4). Further, since the “stupidity” of this passage’s placement here seems so huge, I am among those scholars who wonder if we have a copyist’s error, called a “scribal gloss.” 13. Bruce J. Malina and John J. Pilch, Social Science Commentary on the Letters of Paul (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2006) 150. 14. Sampley, The Second Letter to the Corinthians, 101. 15. So Malina and Pilch, Social Science Commentary on the Letters of Paul, 150. 16. Sampley, The Second Letter to the Corinthians, 102. 17. Ibid.

137

So, the Issues Are Settled? 2 Corinthians 7:5-16

Titus Brings Consolation 2 Corinthians 7:5-16

COMMENTARY To understand the last section in this part of the letter, we need to recap the story of Paul and the Corinthian ekkl∑sia that we uncovered in 2 Corinthians 1:12–2:13. There we found that Paul had made an apparently unplanned visit to Corinth, apparently in response to troubles that had arisen (see my introduction). During this visit a member of the Corinthian community had challenged Paul both publicly and personally, causing him much grief. While the majority of Corinthian believers seem not to have agreed with this man, they also did not rally round Paul. Their silence allowed the views of the minority to poison the environment for Paul. So he left the city and wrote an emotional letter, an exercise in “frank speech,” to the community that he sent, most likely, via Titus (see 2:1-4). We also know from chapter 2 that the letter prompted the majority to express their support for Paul and discipline his attacker. But a minority in the community was not persuaded by the letter and remained unhappy with Paul. They apparently accused Paul of insincerity, deceit, manipulation, and “doublespeak” in his ministry. When he changed his travel plans and did not return to Corinth as he said he would, they claimed to be justified in calling Paul fickle (see 1:15-24). Having concluded his initial response to the situation in the Corinthian community by calling them to forgive his attacker (2:5-11), Paul then launched into a “travel narrative” of sorts, relating his trip to Troas where “a door was opened” for him (2:12) as he awaited Titus and news of the Corinthians’ reception of the emotional letter. When Titus did not arrive, Paul traveled on to Macedonia, presumably to meet Titus “halfway” (2:13). At this point, as we have seen, Paul interrupted his story of looking for Titus and launched a long defense of himself and his ministry aimed at countering the criticisms of the minority who opposed him and limiting their influence in the community. At 7:5 Paul is ready to resume the narrative where he left off at 2:13. As things turned out, traveling from Troas to Macedonia did

142

2 Corinthians 7:5-16

Troas, Macedonia, and Achaia This map shows us the geographical relations between Troas where Paul had been, Corinth where Titus had been, and Macedonia where Paul went to wait on Titus when Titus did not make it all the way to Troas with news of the reception of Paul’s letter in Corinth.

not initially relieve his anxiety. He found no rest there but was “afflicted [thlibø] in everything—fightings outside, fears inside” (v. 5). The “outside” fightings might refer to conflicts with Roman authorities or problems in other church communities or both. Surely the “fears inside” describe his worry over the reception of his letter in Corinth. Since recounting these afflictions makes Paul appear vulnerable, he doubtlessly hopes to create an opportunity for the Corinthians to identify and sympathize with him. Returning again to a key theme in the letter, Paul then says that “God who comforts/consoles [parakaleø] the lowly ones comforted/consoled [parakaleø] us by the arrival of Titus” (v. 6). Of course, it was not just Titus’s arrival that eased Paul’s anxiety. Significant also was “the comfort/consolation [parakl∑sis]” with which Titus was “comforted/consoled [parakaleø]” by the Corinthians (v. 7a). Titus’s experience with Paul’s letter among the Corinthians was encouraging to him and to Paul, for Titus could report to Paul the Corinthians’ “longing,” their “mourning,” their “zeal over” Paul (v. 7b). These three terms likely express a desire to heal their relationship with Paul, regret for their role in the souring of relations, and action to make things right, including punishing Paul’s attacker. As a result, Paul “is overjoyed” (v. 7c).

2 Corinthians 7:5-16

143

With v. 8 Paul moves to discuss the emotional, frank letter he has just sent to the Corinthians. The syntax of this sentence is awkward as even most English translations convey. Margaret Thrall translates v. 8a thusly: “Although I grieved you by the letter, I do not regret it, though I did regret it.”1 She wonders if these first comments about the letter were intended as a partial apology for the pain he had caused. If so, the apology is quickly abandoned,2 but the attempt shows again how tense the situation was. His regret now over, Paul rejoices at Titus’s news (v. 9a), for the letter grieved the Corinthians for only a short while (v. 8b), and their grief led to repentance (v. 9b). Paul makes a distinction between kinds of grief (the Greek is lyp∑; see 2:1-5). The Corinthians, he said, “were grieved according to God [kata theon]” (v. 9c). This grief, the Greek phrase for which is often translated “godly grief,” is different from “the grief of the world” (v. 10b). “Grief according to God” results in “repentance not to be regretted,” which leads to salvation (v. 10a), but the “grief of the world produces death” (v. 10b). Perhaps Paul has in mind the difference between the kind of pain caused A Desert Mother on “Grief according to by frank but loving criticism, self-examination, God” As Paul notes that “grief according to confession, etc., and that caused by such things God” leads to repentance and salvation, as oppression, injustice, meanness, greed, vioso Amma Syncletica, one of the Desert Mothers lence, etc. The latter kind of pain produces only whose stories teach us so much about the spirideath (physical or spiritual). The former kind tual life, taught her followers: “In the beginning clearly hurts, but it causes us to reconsider our there is struggle and a lot of work for those who lives and, thus, is necessary for growth and come near to God. But after that there is indescribable joy. It is just like building a fire: At first maturity. [A Desert Mother on “Grief according to God”] it’s smoky and your eyes water, but later you get Paul specifically says here that the Corinthians’ the desired result. Thus we ought to light the pain led to their repentance. We should be divine fire in ourselves with tears and effort.” reminded that sin in this world was a breach of interpersonal relations. Repentance leads to forFrom Desert Wisdom: Sayings from the Desert Fathers (trans. Yushi Nomura; 1982; repr., Maryknoll NY: Orbis, 2001) 26. giveness, which is the restoration of the relationship. Paul longs for the restoration of his relationship with the Corinthians, so he rejoices at their repentance even though they were pained for a short while by his letter. He apparently does not want to be alone in rejoicing over what has happened, however. In v. 11a he calls to the Corinthians, “See [the Greek is idou, often translated “behold!”] what this same grief according to God produced in you, how great a devotion.” Then the preacher gets on a roll: “not only that, but what defense, what indignation, what fear, what longing, what zeal, what punishment!” (v. 11b).3 He already noted their longing, zeal, and punishment in v. 7, so perhaps he wishes to emphasize those responses by

144

2 Corinthians 7:5-16

repeating them. In addition, he lists their “defense,” “indignation,” and “fear.” His reference to their defense (apologia) suggests to Thrall that they had cleared themselves of at least some things Paul thought they had done.4 As to the other terms, were they indignant at Paul for thinking them guilty of more than was warranted, at Paul’s attacker, those who still opposed Paul, themselves for not supporting Paul earlier? It is impossible to say. What they feared is equally unclear. Some commentators believe they feared Paul abandoning or disciplining them, but given the break in relations that chapters 10–13 indicate, I am not persuaded that they would fear those things from Paul. Does Paul mean fear of God? We cannot know. Meanwhile, Paul the preacher is still on a roll: “in everything you have proved yourselves to be innocent in this matter” (v. 11c). Thrall notes that their successful defense of themselves and Paul’s declaration of their innocence implies that he had misjudged or misunderstood their role in the conflict.5 But were they truly innocent in everything? We will return to this question later. “So then” Paul says in v. 12 as he begins to conclude his comments about the frank letter, he did not write to benefit either his attacker or himself but so that “your devotion for us would be revealed to you before God” (v. 12). Sometimes confrontation forces people to see what really matters to them. Is Paul saying he hoped his letter would do just that, i.e., lead the Corinthian believers to see that Paul had been hurt, that they indeed cared for him, and thus they should act to reconcile the relationship? Perhaps. If so, then the letter accomplished its purpose, at least to some degree. So Paul can declare, “Because of this, we are comforted/consoled” (parakaleø; v. 13a). Still, we must admit there is an echo of egocentricity about Paul’s claim that the purpose of the pain-causing letter was to reveal to them how much they loved him, and we can wonder how it would have been received.6 At v. 13b Paul brings Titus back into his discussion. In addition to his comfort/consolation, Paul “rejoiced even more at the joy of Titus because his spirit has been set at rest by all of you.” The verse suggests that Titus had been anxious about taking such a frank letter into the Corinthian conflict. Who could blame him? But his anxiety was relieved, and his spirit at rest. So now Paul declares, “If I had boasted over you to him, I was not put to shame” (v. 14a). It is hard to imagine some time in the recent past when Paul would have boasted about the Corinthians to Titus given the circumstances that prompted his emotional letter. Perhaps the claim primarily serves a subtly defensive purpose, for Paul follows it with these words: “but as we spoke everything in truth to you, so also

2 Corinthians 7:5-16

our boasting to Titus was true” (v. 14bc). The Corinthians would likely want Paul’s boasting about them to be true. So he ties the truth of his boasting about them to the truth of “everything” he said to them—if one is true, so is the other. In the midst of his consolation and rejoicing, Paul slips in another defense of his sincerity and truthfulness. Paul goes on to claim that Titus’s affection is even greater toward the Corinthians when he “remembers the obedience of all” of them and how they received him “with fear and trembling” (v. 15). In the previous discussion of the emotional letter, Paul said he had written to test the obedience of the Corinthians (2:9). Here he claims, a bit indirectly, that they passed this test. As before, it is not clear what fear the Corinthians knew in this situation (see above comments on v. 11), but Paul considers their fear a positive reaction. But we might also observe that fear and obedience may be expected responses in children (see 6:13), but not among friends (see the commentary on 7:3-4). Finally, Paul concludes this section of the letter with the assertion, “I rejoice because in everything I have confidence in you” (v. 16). If this claim sounds different from his description of them as restricted in their affection for him and his pleas for them to open wide to him just a few verses earlier (6:11-13; 7:2-4), that’s because it is. It sounds, in the words of Paul Sampley, rather like Paul is “overinflating” his response to them in this section of his letter.7 In fact, there are several reasons for wondering if some “overinflation” is going on. Throughout 2:14–7:4 Paul seems to be countering criticisms leveled at him by Corinthians. Then he closes this section by pleading with them to “open wide” to him. If Titus brought word that all was well, why would he need to write such a defense and plead with them in this letter?8 If the Corinthian believers were “innocent in everything” (v. 11b) that had happened earlier (see 2:1, 5-11), why would they need to repent of anything (v. 9)? Given what had happened earlier, when and why would Paul have boasted of the Corinthians to Titus (v. 14a)? If Titus was comforted by “all of them” (v. 13b), if “all of them” were now “obedient” (v. 15), then how do things go so terribly wrong by the time chapters 10–13 are written?9 We’re about to learn in chapters 8–9 that there are problems with the Corinthians’ participation in the Jerusalem collection that mattered so much to Paul (see my introduction). How else did Paul know about these problems except that Titus brought word of them?

145

146

2 Corinthians 7:5-16

There are reasons to believe that Paul was exaggerating how positively the Corinthians responded to his earlier letter. Why might he do that? Perhaps in his eagerness to move beyond the troubles he and the Corinthians have had, he simply glosses over the remaining tensions. Or perhaps he is following a convention of Hellenistic letter writing wherein letters of commendation were expected to end with expressions of appreciation and confidence.10 In fact, such a convention may have served Paul’s purposes: by focusing on Titus (whom he will send back to Corinth), by boasting over them, expressing confidence in them, and noting their obedience, he may be “setting up” his appeal for them to renew their participation in the Jerusalem collection (which comes in chs. 8–9). We might wonder, however, how Paul’s inflated rhetoric sounded to the Corinthians when they knew all was not perfectly well. Did it become for some of them another example of “doublespeak” on Paul’s part? Moreover, the repeat of “obedience” language and Paul’s egocentricity may not have sounded wonderful either. Paul may have been rejoicing in a bright sunny day, but a careful look towards the horizon indicates storm clouds were brewing out there.

CONNECTIONS Sorrow and Joy

Raffaelli Monti (1818–1881). The Sleep of Sorrow and the Dream of Joy. 1861. Carved Marble. Victoria & Albert Museum, London, Great Britain.

1. Paul mentions two kinds of “grief ” in this passage: “grief according to God” and the “grief of the world.” The former leads to “salvation” and isn’t to be regretted. The latter, however, produces “death.” My experience in our culture suggests that the idea of a pain or grief that isn’t to be regretted would be met by many with skepticism. Athletics may be the exception. In that arena the cliché “no pain, no gain” is oft repeated while the rest of us admire and cheer the “work ethic” of those who help our teams win. In real life, however, more Americans are becoming sedentary and in poor physical shape while marketing strategists know that convincing us that their products will make our lives easier and more convenient is key to their sales. Theologian Dorothee Soelle claimed that this desire for ease has spread into all of our living, that in

2 Corinthians 7:5-16

147

our time we have defined utopia as “feeling no pain.” Consequently, whenever something is hard or painful, many of us think of it as wrong or unnecessary or even useless. Paul disagrees. So do the great spiritual teachers in our tradition. When we come face to face with our egocentricity, woundedness, fears, and flaws, the experience is often painful. Whenever we confront injustice and refuse to be silent, we risk suffering for the A Monastic Story on Facing the Pain of witness we bear. Our culture tells us to get out Growth A story from the early monastic moveof those situations. Our spiritual teachers, ment shows the foolishness of trying to however, tell us that we must stay so as to see avoid the pain of growth: A brother was restless where we need healing, repentance, and growth, in the community and often moved by anger. So so as to be on the side of justice and peace. The he said, “I will go and live somewhere by myself. pain is real, but it leads to salvation for ourselves And since I shall be able to talk or listen to no and for others. Do we listen to the culture or to one, I shall be tranquil, and my passionate anger will cease.” He went out and lived alone in a Paul and our teachers? [A Monastic Story on Facing the Pain of Growth]

cave. But one day he filled his jug with water and put it on the ground. It happened suddenly to fall over. He filled it again, and again it fell. And this happened a third time. And in a rage he snatched up the jug and broke it. Returning to his right mind, he knew that the demon of anger had mocked him, and he said, “I will return to the community. Wherever you live, you need effort and patience and above all God’s help.”

2. If we choose to risk the kind of pain that leads to salvation, then we may find ourselves facing another risk, that of glorying in suffering. It may even be that some Christians resist the idea of pain that leads to salvation because of the church’s past attitudes toward suffering. Past church leaders told slaves and other oppressed groups to suffer silently as Jesus did and for Taken from Roberta C. Bondi, To Pray and to Love: Conversations Jesus’ sake. Ministers in some traditions were on Prayer with the Early Church (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1991) 43. not paid a just wage because they were expected to suffer for Jesus. Sometimes people have had their sense of call judged as not from God because not enough sacrifice was demanded. Many of us have known people who talked endlessly of all they suffered as though the suffering validated their life and faith. We need discernment in this matter. Earlier in the commentary we noted that Paul did not glory in his suffering for the gospel but in God’s presence in the midst of his suffering (see the commentary on 4:12). Here we can observe that Paul says there are two kinds of grief: grief “according to God which leads to salvation,” and the “grief of the world” that leads to death. We are never called to glory in our grief, pain, and suffering as though suffering is some kind of end in itself. Rather, the reality is that we will face suffering along our journeys through life. Consequently, we must be able to discern whether the suffering we encounter is leading us toward life in God so that we must walk through it, or leading us to death so that we must resist it. [Two Kinds of Sorrow, Two Kinds of Joy]

148

2 Corinthians 7:5-16 Two Kinds of Sorrow, Two Kinds of Joy The Jewish rabbi of Berditchev once said, “There are two kinds of sorrow and two kinds of joy. When a man broods over the misfortunes that have come upon him, when he cowers in a corner and despairs of help—that is a bad kind of sorrow, concerning which it is said: ‘The Divine Presence does not dwell in a place of dejection.’ The other kind is the honest grief of a man who knows what he lacks. The same is true of joy. He who is devoid of inner substance and in the midst of his empty pleasures, does not feel it, nor tries to fill his lack, is a fool. But he who is truly joyful is like a man whose house has burned down, who feels his need deep in his soul and begins to build anew. Over every stone that is laid, his heart rejoices.” Taken from Jack Kornfield and Christina Feldman, eds., Soul Food: Stories to Nourish the Spirit and the Heart (San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1996) 252.

Notes 1. Margaret E. Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians (ICC 1; London: T & T Clark International, 1994) 491. 2. Ibid., 490. Victor Paul Furnish, II Corinthians (AB 32a; Garden City NY: Doubleday & Co., 1984), believes the problems of the syntax of v. 8 “are best solved by regarding the phrase—from ‘for I see’ through the end of the verse—as parenthetical” (387). 3. I am borrowing the translation of the Greek word alla as “not only that” from Frank J. Matera, II Corinthians (NTL; Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2003) 172. Matera only translates it once at the beginning of the phrase, but Paul puts it in front of each term, no doubt for emphasis. Thus I repeat the “what” before each term. 4. Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, ICC 1, 493–94. 5. Ibid. 6. Ibid., 496. 7. J. Paul Sampley, The Second Letter to the Corinthians (NIB 11; Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2000) 110. 8. If 2:14–7:4 should turn out to be a separate letter from 1:1–2:13 and 7:5-16 as some scholars believe, then this appearance of “overinflation” evaporates. But I am among those scholars who believe there is only one letter here (my reasons are given in the commentary on 2:14). 9. If chs. 10–13 should turn out to be a fragment of the emotional letter that Paul sent via Titus as some scholars believe, then this appearance of “overinflation” also evaporates (since those chapters would precede ch. 7). But I am among those scholars who believe chs. 10–13 are a fragment of a letter written after chs. 1–9. See the introduction. 10. Sampley, The Second Letter to the Corinthians, 111.

The Issues Are Not Settled 2 Corinthians 8:1–9:15

Grace and the Jerusalem Collection 2 Corinthians 8:1-15

COMMENTARY As noted in my introduction, some scholars view chapters 8–9 as a fragment of a letter written separately from that of chapters 1–7. Others view only chapter 8 or only chapter 9 as a separate letter fragment. Still others consider the two chapters to be fragments of two separate letters Paul wrote to the Corinthians about the collection for the saints in Jerusalem. Scholars who favor one or another of these “partition theories” cite such evidence as the abrupt change in subject at 8:1, a different rhetorical style in chapters 8–9 compared to chapters 1–7, conflicting reports about the Macedonians (7:5 suggests there are problems there while 8:1-5 praises them lavishly) and about Titus (no mention in ch. 7 that he will be returning to Corinth as in 8:16-17), the wording of 9:1 that might be read as the beginning of a letter, repetition in chapter 9 of much of the material in chapter 8, and contradictory views of the Corinthians and Macedonians chapters 8 and 9.1 [Scholars Who Hold Different Views] Despite these multiple partition theories, I prefer to read chapters 8–9 as concluding the letter Paul began at 1:1. Perhaps these chapters were once a separate letter, but I am not compelled by the evidence to treat them as such. I do not find the treatment of the Macedonians, Corinthians, or Titus’s activity to be as contradictory as some. Paul might well change rhetorical style in a letter when he shifts to a new subject. And there are good reasons for him to have waited until the end of this letter to broach the subject of the collection. Without compelling evidence for partition, then, I choose the simpler route of reading chapters 1–9 together as a single letter. As mentioned, chapters 8–9 introduce the subject of the collection being gathered from Paul’s churches to be sent to Jerusalem. In my introduction, I noted that some scholars consider this collection to have been the “crown jewel” of Paul’s ministry. [Paul’s References to the Jerusalem Collection] We’re about to find it was also another source of

152

2 Corinthians 8:1-15

Scholars Who Hold Different Views Hans Dieter Betz. Since theories of partitions of 2 Corinthians should proceed from examination of the text only (rather than, e.g., breaks in train of thought or changes in tone), rhetorical analysis tells us we should regard chapter 8 as “administrative correspondence” from Paul to the church in Corinth regarding the Jerusalem collection. Since this rhetoric is different from that of chapters 1–7, it served a distinct purpose and was a distinct letter. Then the introductory words of 9:1 (peri men gar) do not connect chapter 9 to chapter 8 but introduce a new letter, this one addressed to the Achaians telling them their role in the Jerusalem Collection. Thus chapters 8 and 9 constitute “independent, self-contained textual units” rather than a conclusion to the letter begun at 1:1. Sze-kar Wan. Following the return of Titus with news that the Corinthians had repented in response to the emotional letter, “Paul wrote a letter of reconciliation (2 Cor. 1:1-2:13) . . . and a letter of appeal for the collection (chaps. 8-9) . . . and dispatched a delegation headed by

Paul’s References to the Jerusalem Collection Paul mentions the Jerusalem collection several times in his letters: Gal 2:10. [James, Cephas, and John] asked only one thing, that we remember the poor, which was actually what I was eager to do. 1 Cor 16:1-4. Now concerning the collection for the saints: you should follow the directions I gave to the churches of Galatia. On the first day of the week, each of you is to put aside and save whatever extra you earn, so that collections need not be taken when I come. And when I arrive, I will send any whom you approve with letters to take your gift to Jerusalem. If it seems advisable that I should go also, they will accompany me. Rom 15:25-28. At present, however, I am going to Jerusalem in a ministry to the saints; for Macedonia and Achaia have been pleased to share their resources with the poor among the saints at Jerusalem. They were pleased to do this, and indeed they owe it to them, for if the Gentiles have come to share in their spiritual blessings, they ought also to be of service to them in material things.

Titus to Corinth with both letters.” The change in subject between chs. 7 and 8, and the “disjunction” between chs. 9 and 10 indicate that “chapters 8–9 are in all likelihood a self-contained letter exhorting the Corinthians to contribute to the relief efforts for the poor in Jerusalem.” Frank J. Matera. Arguing for the unity of 2 Corinthians, he proposes that chs. 8–9 address Paul’s second reason for writing this letter. “Although the Corinthians eagerly began the collection ‘last year’ (8:10), they have not completed it, perhaps because of the crisis occasioned by the painful visit. Whatever the reason for the delay, Paul is now confident enough [following the repentance that Titus reported] to exhort the community to finish what it began.” Betz, 2 Corinthians 8 and 9 (Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985). Wan, Power in Weakness: The Second Letter of Paul to the Corinthians (Harrisburg PA: Trinity Press International, 2000) 4, 10. Matera, II Corinthians (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2003) 5, 32.

contention between Paul and the Corinthians. Clearly, then, we need to take a close look at it. First for us is the story of the collection as best we can recover it. According to Galatians 2:10, while attending the Jerusalem Council (see Acts 15:1-35) to discuss the Gentiles’ inclusion in the Jesus movement, Paul was encouraged to “remember the poor,” which he says he was eager to do. Later, in Romans 15:26 he specifies that the concern was for “the poor among the saints in Jerusalem.” It is not hard to imagine that life for Christ believers would have been difficult in that city. [Noting Galatians 2:6-7, 9-10]

Meanwhile, the council’s decision to pursue a “peaceful coexistence” between adherents of the gospel of circumcision and those of the gospel of the uncircumcised appears to have fallen apart rather quickly (perhaps at Antioch; see introduction, and Gal 2:1-14). [The “Antioch Incident” May Have Ended the Agreement of the Jerusalem Council] Paul, however, continued with his mission to “remember the poor,”2

2 Corinthians 8:1-15

153

often at significant cost and Noting Galatians 2:6-7, 9-10 energy to himself. We cannot Paul’s description of the agreement at the Jerusalem Council reads as follows: help but wonder why and will pursue this question And from those who were supposed to be acknowledged leaders . . . those shortly. Here we might note leaders contributed nothing to me. On the contrary, when they say that I had that whatever else Paul been entrusted with the gospel for the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been entrusted with the gospel for the circumcised . . . and when James and thought the collection might Cephas and John, who were acknowledged pillars, recognized the grace that accomplish, he may also had been given to me, they gave to Barnabas and me the right hand of fellowhave hoped that it would ship, agreeing that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised. demonstrate that he, at least, They asked only one thing, that we should remember the poor, which was actually what I was eager to do. (Gal 2:6-7, 9-10) had been faithful to the Jerusalem Council’s decisions. The “Antioch Incident” May Have Ended At the time of the writing of 2 Corinthians 8:10, the Agreement of the Jerusalem Council The fragility of the agreement a year had passed since the Corinthian believers had reached at the Jerusalem Council agreed—apparently with enthusiasm—to particiwas likely exposed by a confrontation pate in the collection. In 1 Corinthians 16:1-4 Paul between Paul and Peter in Antioch shortly gives them practical advice on how to gather it. after the Council. Paul’s account of the inciDuring that time, the churches in Macedonia had dent in Gal 2 reads: also decided to participate and had done so in a big But when Cephas came to Antioch, I way (2 Cor 8:1-3). But also during that time, relaopposed him to his face, because he stood tions between Paul and some of the Corinthian self-condemned; for until certain people believers had become strained as we have seen. That came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But after they came, he drew back strain appears to have taken a toll on the and kept himself separate for fear of the cirCorinthians’ zeal for the collection. Paul’s words in cumcision faction. And the other Jews 2 Corinthians 8–9 enter the story at this point. joined him in this hypocrisy. But when I saw As mentioned, Paul appears to have put great that they were not acting consistently with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas time and energy into this collection. There are hints before them all, “If you, though a Jew, live in his letters as to why he would do so. According like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can to Galatians 6:15, the new creation in Christ tranyou compel the Gentiles to live like Jews?” (Gal 2:11-14) scends the boundary between those who practice circumcision and those who do not. In Romans, In the aftermath of this incident the agreeboth Jews and Gentiles are sinners, and both are ment seems to have come undone. reconciled to God by faith, for the One God is God of the circumcised and the uncircumcised (3:28-30). In 2 Corinthians, God, in Christ, was reconciling the cosmos to Godself so that the new creation, long promised through the Jewish people, is coming into being. The old things (including the boundaries between Jews and Gentiles) have passed away; new things are coming into being. All of this newness is from God, is the result of God’s righteousness and grace. No wonder, then, that the gospel of circumcision, with its insistence that Gentiles must become Jews, troubled Paul greatly, for it kept the old boundaries in place.

154

2 Corinthians 8:1-15

Furthermore, the division within the Jesus movement between adherents of the gospel of circumcision rooted in Judea and the primarily Gentile communities that Paul and others founded also troubled Paul, for the division meant for Paul that the Christ believers were not living out God’s new creation. There is consensus among scholars that Paul’s desire to reconcile these groups was likely the greatest impetus for his decision to pursue the collection project. It became for Paul a symbol of the Isaiah 60:4-5; 61:6; Micah 4:1-2 restored unity between Jewish and Gentile Several prophetic texts look forward to believers that was itself an enactment of God’s the time when “the nations” (i.e., Gentiles) shall join with Israel in following the way new creation. Indeed, Paul may have hoped that of God. Here are examples: the Gentile believers bringing their gifts into Jerusalem would “act out” the apocalyptic Mic 4:1-2. In the days to come the mountain of fulfillment of the nations streaming to the Lord’s house shall be established as the Zion prophesied in such places as Isaiah 2:2-3; highest of the mountains, and shall be raised up 60:4-7; 61:6, and Micah 4:1-2.3 [Isaiah 60:4-5; 61:6; above the hills. Peoples shall stream to it, and many nations shall come and say, “Come, let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the house of the God of Jacob; that he may teach us his ways and that we may walk in his paths.” For out of Zion shall go forth instruction, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem. Isa 60:4-5. Lift up your eyes and look around; they all gather together, they come to you; you sons shall come from far away, and your daughters shall be carried on their nurses’ arms. Then you shall see and be radiant; your heart shall thrill and rejoice, because the abundance of the sea shall be brought to you, the wealth of the nations shall come to you. Isa 61:6. . . . but you shall be called priests of the Lord, you shall be named ministers of our God; you shall enjoy the wealth of the nations, and in their riches you shall glory.

Micah 4:1-2]

As Sze-kar Wan points out, such a vision of the new creation is spiritual, but it is also political through and through, for it “constructs a reality outside, beyond, but also encompassing all earthly empires, especially the Roman Empire.”4 Furthermore, the collection had economic implications. We’ve noted the Roman patronage system already. Richard Horsley describes this system as creating a political economy in which resources move “vertically” from the “have nots” to the “haves” who are higher up “the ladder,” thus reinforcing the poverty, exploitation, and powerlessness of the poorest ones. By contrast, “Paul organized a horizontal movement of resources from one subject people to another” to support the poor in Jerusalem.5 Thus the collection was hugely significant for Paul. It symbolized the new creation that God is graciously inaugurating in which the cosmos is reconciled to God, just relations prevail among all people, freedom comes in the power of the Spirit, and there is peace. The collection, then, was a way of actively living out the gospel (as Paul understood it) and resisting the oppressive power of Rome. The problem in chapters 8 and 9, as we shall see, is the Corinthians did not “get it.” Paul begins this new part of his letter by introducing what we will find to be the theme of this section: “We want you to know,

2 Corinthians 8:1-15

155

brothers and sisters, the grace (charis) of God . . .” (v. 1). The Greek word charis appears ten times in these two chapters. The word has a rich range of meaning that Paul uses to great advantage. English translators must necessarily choose a variety of words and phrases (e.g., favor, privilege, generous gift or act, thanks, grace, etc.) to convey Paul’s use of charis in its various contexts. Unfortunately, these different translations hide from English readers Paul’s reliance on a single word that, at its core, indicates an Further Pauline Statements on God’s Grace unearned, pure-gift quality. Paul has already To help us understand Paul’s comments written eloquently about God’s gifts and on grace in these chapters, we can view pleaded with the Corinthian believers not to some other statements he made on grace: receive God’s grace in vain (6:1). He is about to Rom 4:16. For this reason it depends on faith, in “harp” on God’s grace in what follows. [Further Pauline Statements on God’s Grace]

order that the promise may rest on grace and be guaranteed to all his descendants, not only to the adherents of the law but also to those who are the faith of Abraham . . . . Rom 5:17. If, because of the one man’s trespass, death exercised dominion through that one, much more surely will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness exercise dominion in life through the one man, Jesus Christ. Rom 11:5-6. So too at the present time there is a remnant, chosen by grace. But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace would no longer be grace.

Paul wants the Corinthian believers to know the grace of God that was given to the churches of Macedonia, “that in a great ordeal of affliction [thlipsis] the abundance of their joy and the depths of their poverty overflowed into the wealth of their generosity” (vv. 1-2). Most of us probably would not expect great affliction and poverty to result in generosity, but Paul claims this to be true of the Macedonian believers because of God’s grace. Indeed, Paul goes on to bear witness himself that “according to their ability and beyond” (v. 3), and quite on their own (i.e., Paul did not have to force them), “with great appeal [parakl∑sis]” they begged Paul for the “grace [charis] and partnership [koinønia] of the service [diakonia] which is for the saints” (v. 4). There is much here that needs to be unpacked. We begin with the last phrase in v. 4, “the diakonia [ministry, service] for the saints.” Paul has already spoken of the diakonia of the Spirit (3:8), of justice (3:9), and of reconciliation (5:18). Now there is the diakonia for the saints that, as we’ve seen, is the collection gathered from Paul’s Gentile churches to be taken to the saints in Jerusalem. As we’ve also seen, Paul hoped the collection would aid reconciliation and just relations between adherents of the gospel of circumcision and those who welcomed Gentiles as Gentiles as he did. No wonder, then, that Paul called the collection a diakonia. Furthermore, in the context of a section focused on grace, we can wonder if Paul considered the gospel of circumcision, with its insistence that believers do certain things in order to be a certain thing (namely Jewish), to be contrary to the outpouring of God’s grace.

156

2 Corinthians 8:1-15

Second, we must appreciate who the Macedonians were and what their relationship to Corinth was. Macedonia was the Roman province in the north of Greece and included the cities of Philippi, Thessalonica, and Beroea where Paul founded churches (certainly in Philippi and Thessalonica; probably in Beroea). According to Hans Dieter Betz, the area was largely rural, suffered a number of invasions and battles that took many lives, and had a usual economic situation of “rock-bottom poverty.” Rome’s presence was heavy in the area to protect the Ignatian Way (one of its main This map shows Macedonia and the cities Paul visited there in roads) and its northern border.6 The the northern part of Greece, and Achaia and its major cities (including Corinth) in the southern part of Greece. When we see “affliction” of Paul’s churches there the close geographical proximity, we can understand their was likely due as much to economics rivalry. Paul makes use of that rivalry in pursuing the Jerusalem as to persecution for their beliefs. collection. Nonetheless, they stayed close to and supported Paul. For his part Paul seems to have trusted and admired the believers there. [Words of Support in the Philippian Letter] Achaia was the Roman province in the south of Greece that included Corinth. The province as a whole apparently suffered from poverty and depopulaTheatre at Philippi tion as had Macedonia, but Corinth had been rebuilt as a Roman cosmopolitan city and in Paul’s day was home to prosperity and new wealth Image Not Available (see introduction). Under due to lack of digital rights. Roman administration, the Please view the published two provinces had an uneasy, commentary or perform an Internet often competitive relationsearch using the credit below. ship.7 As we’ve seen, Paul had an often uneasy relationship with the Corinthian believers. This part of View of the theatre at the Graeco-Roman city of Philippi, Macedonia, northern Greece. (Credit: 2 Corinthians indicates that Nick Saunders/Barbara Heller Photo Library, London/Art Resource, NY) Paul was quite willing to make use of any rivalry that The city was founded and named in 356 BC by Philip II and the theatre was existed between believers in remodelled in Roman times, 2nd C. AD. Macedonia, Achaia, and the Key Cities

2 Corinthians 8:1-15

157

the two provinces so as to spur their Words of Support in the Philippian Letter participation in the collection. In addition to Paul’s warm words about the Macedonians in this part of 2 Corinthians, his Third, we note that the Macedonians letter to one of the churches there, the one to the begged to participate in the collection Philippians, tells us that his relations with those churches “with much parakl∑sis.” This phrase is was quite positive. Here are some quotes from the often translated “earnestly” (NRSV) or Philippians letter to illustrate this point: “urgently” (NIV), which does not allow English readers to know that Paul is again 1:3-5. I thank my God every time I remember you, conusing one of the key words in this letter. stantly praying with joy in every one of my prayers for all Given Paul’s declaration that God’s grace of you, because of your sharing in the gospel from the was at work among the Macedonians and first day until now. 4:1. Therefore, my brothers and sisters, whom I love and that Paul had referred to God as the “God long for, my joy and crown, stand firm in the Lord in this of all parakl∑sis” (1:3), it may be that the way, my beloved. use of the word here allows Paul to indi- 5:15-16. You Philippians indeed know that in the early cate that God was the source of the days of the gospel, when I left Macedonia, no church Macedonians’ ministry. If so, then Paul shared with me in the matter of giving and receiving may be hoping to teach the Corinthians except you alone. For even when I was in Thessalonica, you sent me help for my needs more than once. that when God works among us, the result is great generosity. Fourth, the Macedonians begged urgently to participate in “the charis and koinønia” of the collection. Both the NIV and the NRSV translate this phrase “the privilege of sharing in” the ministry for the saints. Margaret Thrall believes that charis in this context indicates the Macedonians had petitioned for the favor of participating rather than performing a duty.8 Koinønia likely indicates more than warm fellowship as some contemporary folks have thought. Rather it points to a sense of partnership, including acceptance of the obligations that partnership entails.9 We get the sense that the Macedonians grasped the graciousness of being part of God’s New Creation and begged to be partners in it, even at significant cost to themselves. Indeed, Paul declares that the Macedonians “gave themselves first to the Lord” and then “to us by the will of God” (presumably meaning his ministry to the Jerusalem saints; v. 5). Thus the picture he paints of the Macedonian believers is of a group that has received great grace from God and is so aware of it that they respond by throwing themselves graciously into what God is doing in the world. Now comes the “punch line” to which Paul has been leading: the result of the Macedonians’ graciousness is that Paul encouraged (parakaleø) Titus, since he had already begun, to complete “this charis also among you” (v. 6), i.e., among the Corinthians. All indications are that Paul’s use of charis here is a reference to the collection. The choice of this term is meaningful—to share in the

158

2 Corinthians 8:1-15

collection is to participate in God’s grace. Paul is sending Titus to work toward completing the Corinthians’ participation in this grace, which means that, unlike the Macedonians, the Corinthians have failed to fulfill their promises. Now we know what problem has Paul’s attention in this section of the letter. Scholars understand Paul to be using the Macedonians as a “model” for the Corinthians and the rivalry between the provinces to goad the Corinthians into finishing their part of the collection. Such is likely the case. But it is also possible that Paul has a larger concern as well. Some of the Corinthians seem not to “get” grace (see the commentary on 5:21), which leads us to v. 7 and Paul’s direct appeal to them in this matter. He begins the verse with, “just as you excel in everything . . . .” Paul Sampley observes that the Corinthians’ “zeal for excelling” has been their hallmark in the Corinthian letters.10 Following this general opening, Paul lists six virtues, arranged in groups of three, at which he says the Corinthians excel. As Betz notes, no one among the Corinthian believers would have argued with the first three—certainly they believed they excelled in faith, speech, and knowledge!11 Indeed, in 1 Corinthians 1:5 Paul had thanked God for enriching the Corinthians in speech and knowledge. The second triad, though, presents a greater challenge for them. They likely would have wanted to claim excellence in great devotion, love, and “grace,” but Paul has written in such a way that whether or not they are justified in their claim will be determined by their response to the collection. In fact, this whole verse may be something of a “setup” by Paul. The reality is that the Corinthians’ zeal for excelling has not always been an excellent virtue. Much of 1 Corinthians addresses the Corinthians’ tendency to use various circumstances as opportunities to one-up each other (who is celibate, has the freedom to eat whatever, exercises certain spiritual gifts, etc.). We have also seen Paul in this letter countering a “showy” or triumphalistic spirituality that is contrary to grace, for grace is not about who is more spiritual because of this spiritual gift or that ecstatic experience (see the commentary on 5:21 and 6:1). Moreover, he may have had his tongue firmly in his cheek as he composed this list of virtues. He has, for example, hardly treated the Corinthians as if he agreed that they abound in faith. Their devotion (spoud∑ ), at least for him and his ministry, has been sporadic. The letters give evidence that Paul had great difficulty getting them to understand love. We should note also that Paul qualifies the love he names here as “from us and dwells within you.” Thus the love in which they abound is his love

2 Corinthians 8:1-15

for them.12 Finally, Paul completes his list and his setup with a direct appeal to them: just as they have excelled in all these virtues, so they should “also excel in this charis.” The use of charis again refers specifically to the collection, but it also implies that the collection, if successfully completed, would be evidence that they indeed excelled in these virtues, and most especially in grace. That is, if what they believe about themselves is true, then they will complete their part of the collection. Then Paul quickly adds that he is not giving them a command (v. 8a), which is curious. He was quite willing to give commands in his instructions in 1 Corinthians 16:1-4,13 and he is clearly putting pressure on them to comply with his wishes here. But we might remember that in 1:24 he had insisted that he did not “lord over” the Corinthians’ faith despite having earlier claimed the right to discipline them as their “father” if need be (1 Cor 4:21). It is hard to avoid the impression that some Corinthians had objected to Paul’s patriarchal exercise of authority. Now, in the wake of the reconciliation that has just happened (7:6-7), he appears to be extra careful in how he expresses himself. So, he says, he is not commanding them. Rather, he is “testing the genuineness” of their love “through the great devotion [spoud∑ ] of others” (v. 8b), that is, by comparing them to the Macedonians. The Macedonians had demonstrated by their zeal for the collection and their generosity that they were aware of God’s grace at work among them. The question for the Corinthians is whether or not their response shows them to be also aware of God’s grace. To drive the point home, Paul then says, “for you know the charis of our Lord Jesus Christ” (v. 9a). The Corinthians, who sometimes boasted of their knowledge (e.g., 1 Cor 4:10), knew the story of Jesus that Paul briefly recounts here as, “being rich, he became poor because of you so that you [emphatic pronoun] by his poverty might become rich” (v. 9b). However we should interpret Jesus’ poverty—giving up his communion with God to become human (as in Phil 2:5-11), his death by crucifixion, his embracing human material poverty, etc.14—Paul’s point is that Jesus became poor so that they might be rich. How gracious is that? Their becoming rich is surely a reference to spiritual wealth, but we should also remember that some of the Corinthian believers had gained material wealth in the economy of Corinth. So, given the great grace of Jesus on their behalf, what should the Corinthians do in response? Paul’s “advice” is that it “is advantageous” for them to complete the collection that they began “not only to do but also to desire” a year prior (v. 10). Then he adds, “finish what you are doing” (v. 11a),

159

160

2 Corinthians 8:1-15

which, curiously, is imperative in the Greek. He cannot quite get away from giving orders. But he offers a rationale for the imperative: “so that just as [there is] the willingness [prothymia] of desire, so also [there is] the completion from what you have” (v. 11b). That is, as many of our mothers taught us, good intentions are not enough. Given the great grace of Christ that they have known, they should act graciously themselves as the Macedonians had done. There is still another rhetorical challenge for Paul, which comes to the fore in the next verses. Sze-kar Wan has pointed out how little the plight of the poor saints in Jerusalem Exodus 16:16-18 figures in Paul’s appeal to the Corinthians (as Paul draws on the story of the manna in the it does in Rom 15:25-27). Instead, his focus wilderness during the time of the exodus to is on equality.15 These verses claim when the make his point about “equality.” Part of that story reads as follows: willingness (prothymia) is present, the gift is acceptable according to what one has, not When the Israelites saw it, they said to one another, according to what one does not have (v. 12) “What is it?” For they did not know what it was. because the point is not that others should Moses said to them, “It is the bread which the Lord has given you to eat. This is what the Lord has comhave rest while the Corinthians have affliction manded: ‘Gather as much of it as each of you needs, (thlipsis), but “everything is from equality” an omer to a person according to the number of (v. 13). At present the Corinthians’ wealth persons, all providing for those in their own tents.’” aids the poverty of others so that (perhaps at The Israelites did so, some gathering more, some less. But when they measured it with an omer, those some later point) the wealth of others may aid who gathered much had nothing over, and those who the Corinthians’ poverty, “that there may be gathered little had no shortage; they gathered as equality” (v. 14). Then Paul quotes from much as each of them needed. (Exod 16:16-18) Exodus 16:18, “The one with much did not have more than enough and the one with a little did not want” (v. 15). The Exodus text comes from the story of the manna in the wilderness wherein God provided everyone with enough but no one was allowed to hoard. [Exodus 16:16-18] Wan urges us to see in the Exodus story a general illustration of the notion of equality, which is exactly Paul’s point.16 The economic plight of the Jerusalem church likely stands in the background of Paul’s words, but it stays there while he appeals to the Corinthians’ understanding of equality as further motivation for their participation in the collection. There is a good chance that Paul was working hard to sepaThe Gathering of Manna rate the Corinthians’ participation in the Luini Bernardino (c.1475–1532). The Gathering of Manna. Pinacoteca collection from their inclination to use finandi Brera, Milan, Italy. [Credit: Wikimedia Commons, PD-Art (PD-old100)] cial practices to advance patronal power.17

2 Corinthians 8:1-15

We have found patronage, a widespread practice in Roman Corinth (see introduction), to be an issue in the Corinthian ekkl∑sia already (see the commentary on 2:17–3:3). Paul’s experience with wealthy Corinthians apparently caused him concern that the Corinthian congregation might see itself as the superior partner giving aid and benefits to the inferior partner (the Jerusalem congregation) who then becomes its client. Wan believes Paul’s Jewish ethnocentricity would not allow him “even to hint at the Jerusalem church’s submission to the gentile churches.”18 That may well be the case. In addition, such a patronage arrangement—with its competitiveness, bribery, boasting in self, putting others in their place, etc.—would also be contrary to the grace he’s been trying to explain throughout this chapter.

CONNECTIONS 1. We should acknowledge the rhetorical challenge Paul faced in this matter of the Corinthians and the Jerusalem collection. Countless examples in history tell us that when people become genuinely aware of the grace of God that surrounds them, they respond graciously. The Macedonians’ story is one such example. On the other hand, when people are not or will not become aware of the grace that surrounds them, then explaining grace to them is difficult. You end up saying, as Paul has done here, “Because this has been done for you, you ought to respond thusly,” which inevitably sounds like quid pro quo, which is actually the antithesis of grace. Grace is not remotely about proportional reciprocity. It is pure gift, an experience so freeing and joyous that it inspires graciousness. The truth seems to be that it is best understood when experienced. Explaining it is a formidable challenge, as we see with Paul. 2. The claim in the above paragraph that some people “will not become aware of grace” may surprise some readers who might wonder why anyone would choose not to be aware of grace. My experience in my own living and among those with whom I’ve done ministry suggests to me that people often prefer not to acknowledge the grace that surrounds them. We talk and sing about grace gladly enough, but living in awareness of it sets aside our egos and introduces us to true humility. Many of us prefer to think that we have accomplished enough, believed correctly, and served so well that God is delighted to welcome us into the New Creation. Not only does such a perspective stroke our egos, it also

161

162

2 Corinthians 8:1-15

allows us to consider ourselves as better than others who have not delighted God quite so much. It may be the perspective that causes someone to gravitate toward a triumphalistic understanding of the gospel. Certainly we see that some of the Corinthians were sure they “excelled” in faith, knowledge, speech, and devotion, enjoyed “showing off ” their ecstatic experiences, and considered themselves more spiritual than those who differed from them (including Paul). Now we see in the discussion about the Jerusalem collection that Paul believed they did not understand grace. We might wonder if there is a correlation between their attraction to a triumphalistic gospel and their misunderstanding of grace. We might also wonder if we ever resemble them.

Notes 1. Complicating matters further, scholars who believe these chapters were from separate letters date them at different times. Some date ch. 8 before ch. 9, but others reverse the order. Some date both of them after the writing of chs. 10–13 but others date chs. 10–13 last of all the letters. See Margaret E. Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians (ICC 1; London: T & T Clark International, 1994) 36–49, for a review of the various partition theories. See Hans Dieter Betz, 2 Corinthians 8 and 9 (Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985) 3–36, for a history of scholarship on the various partition theories. 2. I should note that, while a majority of scholars understand Paul’s collection efforts to be related to the directive from the Jerusalem Council, not all agree. Some believe the collection mentioned here is unrelated to the Jerusalem Council. Others believe Paul abandoned any such collection when the agreement fell apart, then later took the idea up again for reasons of his own. See Margaret E. Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians (ICC 2; London: T & T Clark International, 2000) 504–506, for a review of these minority views. 3. Sze-kar Wan, “Collection for the Saints as Anticolonial Act,” in Paul and Politics (ed. Richard A. Horsley; Harrisburg PA: Trinity Press International, 2000) 207. 4. Ibid., 207, 210. 5. Richard A. Horsley, “1 Corinthians: A Case Study of Paul’s Assembly as an Alternative Society,” in Paul and Empire: Religion and Power in Roman Imperial Society (ed. Richard A. Horsley; Harrisburg PA: Trinity Press International, 1997) 251. 6. Betz, 2 Corinthians 8 and 9, 50. 7. Ibid., 50–53. 8. Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, ICC 2, 525. 9. Betz, 2 Corinthians 8 and 9, 46, argues the term comes from the language of administration and the law, and its “legal meaning should not be ignored in favor of the personal or communal notion of fellowship.” 10. J. Paul Sampley, The Second Letter to the Corinthians (NIB 11; Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2000) 121.

2 Corinthians 8:1-15 11. Betz, 2 Corinthians 8 and 9, 56. 12. There is a well-attested textual variant that would have Paul speaking of “the love which derives from you and dwells in me.” The NIV has adopted this reading as the preferred one. Along with the NRSV and many scholars, I prefer the reading used in the commentary. It seems clear to me that Paul has not been impressed with the Corinthians’ love for him (or anyone, for that matter) but that he has been trying to impress upon them how deeply he loves them. 13. The verbs poiesate (“you are to do,” 1 Cor 16:1) and titheto (“let each one set aside,” 1 Cor 16:2) are both imperatives. 14. These are various views scholars have suggested. The one more often espoused is the first one. 15. Wan, “The Collection for the Saints as Anticolonial Act,” 210. 16. Ibid., 211. Other scholars, e.g., Betz, 2 Corinthians 8 and 9, 68–69, have worked to specify what Paul meant by “wealth” and “want” in these verses; i.e., the Corinthians’ wealth is evident, but in what way do they want? Likewise, the Jerusalem church’s want is clear but in what way are they wealthy? And does Paul mean now or in the future? The inability of scholars’ to answer these questions satisfactorily is what leads Wan to re-consider the verses as a general illustration of the notion of equality, a proposal that is persuasive. 17. Wan, “The Collection for the Saints as Anticolonial Act,” 214. 18. Ibid.

163

The Delegation to Work on the Collection 2 Corinthians 8:16-24

COMMENTARY Paul continues with his concern for the Corinthians’ part in the Jerusalem collection. The verses in this section of the letter introduce and commend the delegation that Paul is sending to work with them to finish the collection. Hans Dieter Betz refers to this section as the “official business” of the letter.1 Paul begins the introductions of the delegation with the word that has defined this section of his letter: “Charis be to God . . .” (v. 16a). An awareness of grace produces gratitude, so the word here announces thanksgiving to God. Paul is grateful to God for putting “the same devotion [spoud∑ ]” for the Corinthians “in the heart of Titus” (v. 16b). Presumably Paul means the same devotion that he himself has for the Corinthians.2 The result of Titus’s devotion is that he not only accepted Paul’s appeal (see v. 6), but “being even more devoted, and acting of his own accord, Reviewing Paul’s Report about Titus in he comes to you” (v. 17).3 That is, Titus Chapter 7 Paul gives the following report in ch. 7 of did not take on the collection project in Titus’s reaction to his mission to Corinth Corinth just because Paul asked. He did with the emotional letter: it because he wanted to. When we read chapter 8 as belonging with chapters 7:6-7. But God who consoles (parakaleø) the poor 1–7, we can make a connection to ones consoled us by the coming of Titus, not only Paul’s report in chapter 7 of Titus’s sucby his coming but also by the consolation (parakl∑sis) with which he was consoled by you, cessful mission to Corinth with the proclaiming to us your longing, your mourning, emotional letter. At the end of that your zeal over me so that I was overjoyed. chapter Paul noted Titus’s joy when the 7:13b. But in addition to our consolation Corinthians set his heart at rest (7:13) (parakl∑sis) we rejoiced even more over the joy of and that Titus’s heart went out to them Titus, because his spirit has been set at rest by all (7:15). The impression is that Titus of you. 7:15. And his affection abounds all the more for liked the Corinthian believers, and they you as he remembers the obedience of all of you, liked him. [Reviewing Paul’s Report about Titus as you received him with fear and trembling. in Chapter 7] Consequently, according to

166

2 Corinthians 8:16-24

Paul, Titus is more than willing to go back to Corinth on another mission, and Paul is quite willing to send him. But Titus is not going alone. There will be a three-person delegation sent to Corinth, so Paul now introduces the other two members. First is “the brother who is praised [for his work] in the gospel by all the churches” (v. 18), i.e., someone widely known and honored among believers, perhaps especially those in Macedonia.4 In fact, he was “voted [cheiroton∑theis] by the churches” (v. 19a). This Greek term means a show of hands in the assembly. If the believers in Macedonia were the ones who voted on this brother, then the term might indicate that the churches Reviewing the Uses of Charis in Chapter 8 in Greece had adopted the democratic processes We can review Paul’s use of charis in of the Greek assembly (ekkl∑sia).5 If so, then we chapter 8 by seeing how the NRSV chose are likely seeing one reason Paul’s authoritarito translate the term: anism rankled the Corinthians as it apparently did (see the commentary on 1:24; 8:8). v. 1. We want you to know, brothers and sisters, The churches voted this brother to be “our about the grace (charis) of God that has been granted to the churches of Macedonia . . . . fellow traveler with this charis which is being v. 4. Begging us earnestly (parakl∑sis) for the privministered by us for the glory of the Lord and ilege (charis) of sharing in this ministry to the our willingness [prothymia]” (v. 19b). [Reviewing saints . . . . the Uses of Charis in Chapter 8] As Betz notes, these v. 6. So that we might urge Titus that, as he had statements do two interesting things. First, “the already made a beginning, so he should also combrother” is complimented as someone highly plete this generous undertaking (charis) among you. respected to participate in the work ahead. v. 7. Now as you excel in everything—in faith, in Second, readers are reminded, perhaps somespeech, in knowledge, in utmost eagerness, and what defensively, that the collection is Paul’s in our love for you—so we want you to excel also work.6 The last phrase “and our willingness” is in this generous undertaking (charis). odd. Betz understands it to mean the collection v. 9. For you know the generous act (charis) of our was being made on account of Paul’s zeal for the Lord Jesus Christ, that though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, so that by his poverty glory of the Lord.7 That is, it adds to the defenyou might become rich. sive claim that this project is happening because v. 16. Thanks (charis) be to God who put the of Paul. Margaret Thrall, however, believes the same devotion for you in the heart of Titus . . . . preposition pros (for) expresses result. Thus, the v. 19. Not only that, but he was chosen by the result of the appointment of this brother has churches as our fellow traveler in this grace been an increase in Paul’s own eagerness for the (charis) which is being ministered by us for the glory of the Lord and our willingness. project.8 How we read the phrase may depend on how defensive we sense Paul is about the churches electing a member of the delegation. Did Paul welcome their involvement, or did he feel that their election impinged on his apostolic authority? We have seen that Paul’s exercise of authority was an issue among the Corinthians. Betz sees “an inherent contradiction” between Paul’s apostolic authority and the democratic elections of church officials.9 A contradiction only exists, however,

2 Corinthians 8:16-24

if apostolic authority is construed as a father watching over and disciplining his children. Paul, as we have noted, appears to have understood it this way, despite his occasional claims to the contrary. So he may have been less than thrilled with the churches choosing a member of the delegation. Even so, there was good reason for him to accept their involvement without fuss. Verse 20 reads, “taking precautions against this,10 lest anyone find us at fault in this abundance which is being ministered by us.” Verse 21 reiterates the point: Paul intends people, as well as the Lord, to know that he is doing “only good.” We remember that Paul has been accused in the past of deceit and manipulation. In addition, many scholars wonder if his refusal to accept patronage from the Corinthians had given rise to suspicions that he was using the collection to get money that he refused to receive openly. As a result of these tensions, Paul accepted an “outsider,” someone chosen by others, to participate in order to verify that the collection, which Paul apparently expected to be large (“this abundance,” v. 20), was handled with integrity. Verse 22 introduces the third member of the delegation who is described as “our brother whom we tested in many matters many times, [and he is] devoted” (v. 22a). This brother, then, was an associate of Paul’s with whom Paul apparently had quite a history during which he had proven himself trustworthy. Moreover, he apparently had good relations with the Corinthians since Paul goes on to say that he was “more devoted now, [having] great confidence in you [the Corinthians]” (v. 22b). So, one brother has a special connection to the churches (perhaps of Macedonia). The other one has a special connection with Paul and also with the Corinthians. These two will accompany Titus to Corinth. But Titus will lead them! Verse 23 begins with a phrase (eite hyper) that Betz translates as, “On behalf of Titus.” The phrase may give the sense that Paul is “authorizing” Titus to supervise this work on Paul’s behalf.11 Titus is further designated as Paul’s “partner and fellow-worker” among the Corinthians (v. 23a). Then the two brothers are described together, without the Greek phrase “on behalf of,” as “apostles of the churches, the glory of Christ” (v. 23b). Many scholars and translators render the Greek apostoloi as “messengers” or “envoys,” insisting that Paul does not mean the same thing here as when he applied the title “apostle” to himself or to someone like Peter or even Andronicus and Junia (see Rom 16:7). It is hard, however, to ignore his calling these brothers by a term that had already become a significant title among believers, at least in Pauline circles [Examples of Paul’s Use of “Apostle”] Furthermore,

167

168

2 Corinthians 8:16-24

they are the “glory of Christ,” an enigmatic phrase in this context that perhaps means promoting the glory of Christ.12 So these brothers are “apostles of the churches,” promote the glory of Christ, have the respect of fellow believers, and are entrusted with the integrity of the collection. But they are not “authorized” as Titus was, and, of course, they are not named.13 There is clearly some tension in the text that likely corresponds to the ongoing tensions in Corinth over money. The last verse in this section now gives a charge to the Corinthians: “Therefore, give proof of your love and our boasting over you to them before the face of the churches” (v. 24). Paul claims to have done a lot of boasting over these Corinthians with whom he had such conflict (see 1:14; 7:14). In fact, he’s going to give more attention to his boasting over them in the next section of the letter (9:1-5). Here his charge carries the sense of, “I’ve said all these wonderful things about you, now don’t make me look like a liar to these other believers!” He will not look like a liar if they “prove their love,” i.e., complete the collection for the poor among the saints in Jerusalem.

Examples of Paul’s Use of “Apostle” 1 Cor 12:28. And God has appointed in the church first apostles . . . . 1 Cor 15:7-9. Then [the Risen Christ] appeared to James, then to all the apostles. Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared to me. For I am the least of the apostles, unfit to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. Rom 16:7. Greet Andronicus and Junia, my relatives who were in prison with me; they are prominent among the apostles and they were in Christ before I was.

CONNECTIONS As recounted at the beginning of this section, Paul apparently invested himself and his ministry heavily in the collection for Jerusalem. Its success mattered greatly to him. There’s a good chance coworkers convinced him that the best way to complete the collection in Corinth was to send with Titus these two respected apostles of the churches who were more independent of Paul than Titus. There’s also a good chance Paul could see the wisdom in this advice and agreed to abide by it. He appears to have liked these two brothers quite well since he says such complimentary things about them. Under other circumstances, he may have welcomed their participation in this project. But in the current circumstances they were necessary because of accusations against Paul that he considered unjust. While reconciliation had happened with the majority of Corinthians, all was still not well (see the commentary on 7:5-16). Consequently, Paul had to be extra careful to guard against further charges of deceit and manipulation, which irked him. To Paul’s credit, he appears to have set aside his ego (as we would call it) for the good of the collection. Many of us can appreciate how

2 Corinthians 8:16-24

strong the temptation must have been for Paul to say, “I will not give in to their demands because I am not guilty of the things of which they accuse me!” Paul did not respond thusly, but the tension in the text suggests his frustration level was high. He would be glad, however, for what I will now say: he has given us a model to imitate. Our ego gratification is not as important as the work that God has given us to do. Many of us know situations where someone’s ego harmed the ministry to which she or he had been called. Let us resolve to imitate Paul in such matters rather than these others.

Notes 1. Hans Dieter Betz, 2 Corinthians 8 and 9 (Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985) 70. 2. Betz considers Titus to have the same devotion as the Corinthians (see 8:7) and Macedonians (see 8:8) (2 Corinthians 8 and 9, 70). Others have thought he had the same devotion as the Corinthians or the Macedonians. But Paul says Titus has the same devotion for the Corinthians. It is hard to see that Paul would speak of the Corinthians’ devotion for themselves, and the devotion of the Macedonians he has mentioned has been for the collection. 3. The Greek verb ex∑lthen is in aorist tense and would normally be translated as “came.” Scholars generally understand Paul to be using an “epistolary aorist” here—he writes knowing that as the Corinthians would be reading this letter, Titus would have already come to them. In fact, Titus likely brought this letter. For us, however, an epistolary aorist is unnecessarily confusing, so most translations say “he is coming to you.” 4. Paul does not identify which churches he means. Since he’s spoken already of the Macedonians, many scholars believe he’s speaking of them again. Others believe he refers to churches in the Roman province of Asia since he has just been in Ephesus. See Margaret E. Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians (ICC 2; London: T & T Clark International, 2000) 560–61, for a review of the possibilities. She believes it possible that the churches in the two areas worked together to select the delegates. 5. Betz, 2 Corinthians 8 and 9, 75. 6. Ibid., 76. 7. Ibid. 8. Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians, ICC II, 550. 9. Betz, 2 Corinthians 8 and 9, 75. 10. Betz follows Plummer in translating the participle stellomenoi as “taking precautions against this” (2 Corinthians 8 and 9, 76). Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians, ICC 2, 551, translates as “preparing” or “organizing,” but the sense is close to that of Betz. 11. Betz, 2 Corinthians 8 and 9, 38, 79–80.

169

170

2 Corinthians 8:16-24 12. So, Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians, ICC 2, 555. 13. Over the years scholars have speculated much about these unnamed brothers. Some have wondered if Paul actually named them, but the names were later excised from the text because they became embarrassments of some sort. There is no evidence of such. Others have suggested various reasons Paul would choose not to name them. See Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians, ICC 2, 557–62 for a review of the scholarship on these questions.

Grace and Partnership (Not Patronage) through the Jerusalem Collection 2 Corinthians 9:1-15

COMMENTARY As noted in the introduction to chapters 8–9, some scholars consider the wording of 9:1 to introduce the body of a letter that is separate from chapters 1–7 and also from chapter 8. Specifically they argue that the opening Greek phrase, peri men gar, must refer to what follows without any connection to what has gone before.1 Stanley Stowers’s investigation of the use of that phrase by ancient Greek writers shows, however, that it usually expresses an “intimate” relationship to what precedes it.2 Thus, along with many scholars, I read chapter 9 as part of the same letter as chapter 8 and as closely connected to it. We may translate 9:1 as, “For regarding [peri men gar] the ministry for the saints, it is superfluous for me to write to you.” Rhetorically speaking, Han Dieter Betz claims that, with this phrase, Paul is using a denial of sorts, a common ancient rhetorical device for discussing a subject that has become tiresome.3 In contemporary terms, we might say Paul is “tap dancing” around a touchy subject. He does not want to irritate the Corinthians (again!) by implying that he lacks confidence that they will complete the collection. But the truth is that he lacks confidence in them! Consequently, he will risk their irritation to do what he feels is necessary to get the collection back on track. At v. 2a Paul offers an explanation as to why it is superfluous for him to write them about the collection again: he knows their willingness (prothymia). But there is a problem. He has just said that their prothymia had not accomplished what they promised (8:10-11).4 Even so, he had boasted about their prothymia to the Macedonians (v. 2b). Here Paul is boasting yet again. [Paul’s Prior “Boasting” over the Corinthians in the Letter] But, given his comments in 8:10-11, his “tap dancing” in v. 1, and what he’s about to say in vv. 4-5 about being

172

2 Corinthians 9:1-15

shamed, are his comments about boasting ironic this time? Or had he been less than accurate in his boasting to the Macedonians, 7:3-4. I am not speaking to condemn. I have said before that you are either because he gave the in our hearts to live and to die. There is much confidence in me Corinthians too much credit, or towards you, much boasting in me over you, I have been filled with because he wanted to stir the consolation, I am overflowing with joy upon our every trial. Macedonians? Maybe the answer 7:14. Because whatever I have boasted about you to [Titus], I have not been put to shame, but as everything we spoke to you was in is “all of the above.” It appears truth, so also our boasting to Titus has been true. that Paul had created a need to 8:24. Therefore, display proof of our love and our boasting over you to “save face” in this situation. [Titus and the two brothers] in the presence of the churches. The last comment in v. 2 is curious—the Achaians’ zeal had Early in the letter Paul also said that he should be “your boasting just stirred up “the majority” of the as you also are ours in the day of the Lord Jesus” (1:14). Macedonians, but not all of them. Even in “extremely generous” Macedonia (8:2-3), Paul faced resistance to the collection. With v. 3 Paul gives his plan to save face. He is sending the brothers (8:16-24) so that his boasting over the Corinthians “would not be empty, so that you may be ready just as I was Paul’s Prior “Boasting” over the Corinthians in the Letter In this letter thus far, Paul has spoken of his boasting over the Corinthians in the following ways:

Macedonia, Achaia, and the Journey to Jerusalem Paul’s plan appears to have been for representatives of the Macedonian churches to bring their part of the Jerusalem collection and travel with him to Corinth to join with their representatives and offerings. Then the whole group would journey to Jerusalem with their gifts. This map shows the geographical relations between these places and what an undertaking a journey to Jerusalem would have been.

2 Corinthians 9:1-15

173

saying.” That is, the Titus delegation is the “advance team” being sent to complete the collection before others arrive. We find out about the “others” in v. 4, which allows us to make good guesses as to the plan Paul had for the collection. The Macedonian churches had completed their part of the collection and selected representatives to travel to Jerusalem with Paul bearing their gifts. These representatives would travel with Paul to Corinth (v. 4a) to join the representatives of the churches there and add Corroboration of Paul’s Plan from Romans their part of the collection. Then the whole 15:25-28 and Acts 20:2-4 group would make the trip to Jerusalem so that Near the end of the letter to the Romans the Gentiles are streaming to Zion bearing “the Paul tells the believers there that he is wealth of the nations” (see Isa 60:5). Romans looking forward to visiting them on his way to 15:25-28 also suggests such a plan, and Acts Spain (15:23-24). Then he says: 20:2-4 notes that Paul spent three months in At present, however, I am going to Jerusalem in a Greece at this time and names people from the ministry to the saints; for Macedonia and Achaia area who accompanied him when he left for have been pleased to share their resources with Jerusalem (though the collection itself is not the poor among the saints at Jerusalem. They were pleased to do this, and indeed they owe it mentioned). [Corroboration of Paul’s Plan from Romans 15:25-28 and Acts 20:2-4]

to them; for if the Gentiles have come to share in their spiritual blessings they ought also to be of service to them in material things. So, when I have completed this, and have delivered to them what has been collected, I will set out by way of you to Spain. . . . (Rom 15:25-28)

Thus the plan. The glitch in the plan, though, was the tension that had erupted between Paul and some Corinthian believers and negatively impacted their participation in the collection. As a result, Paul faced the possibility of arriving Acts records the forming of a delegation to go in Corinth with the Macedonian representatives with Paul who had decided “to go through to find some Corinthians estranged from him Macedonia and Achaia and then to go on to Jerusalem” (Acts 19:21): and creating discontent in the community so that their part of the collection was far from fin[Following a riot in Ephesus] Paul sent for the disished despite Paul’s boasts about them. Should ciples; and after encouraging them and saying that happen, Paul would be “put to shame” farewell, he left for Macedonia. When he had gone through those regions and had given the (v. 4b). He adds that the Corinthians would be believers much encouragement, he came to put to shame as well, but since Paul was the one Greece, where he stayed for three months. He who had boasted, his honor and credibility were was about to set sail for Syria when a plot was significantly at stake. In a culture dominated by made against him by the Jews, and so he decided to return through Macedonia. He was concerns for honor and shame, such an experiaccompanied by Sopater son of Pyrrhus from ence could be devastating for Paul’s apostleship. Beroea, by Aristarchus and Secundus from [A Shame-Honor Culture] He already had credibility Thessalonica, by Gaius from Derbe, and by “issues” among some Corinthian believers. If Timothy, as well as by Tychicus and Trophimus from Asia. (Acts 20:2-4) the Macedonians, with whom he apparently had good relations (see 2 Cor 11:9), should be given reason to question his honor as well, then continuing his ministry in Greece would be difficult. Paul Sampley believes this concern underlies the whole letter of 2 Corinthians 1–9 and is the

174

2 Corinthians 9:1-15

A Shame-Honor Culture Honor was the key value in the first-century Mediterranean world and was tied to birth status (whether one was born Jew or Gentile, male or female, into a priestly or slave family, etc.), which established one’s “place” in that world. Then the ruling classes—those with the highest honor due to birth status—demanded that people conduct themselves according to their “place.” Men who did so were deemed honorable. Women who did so

showed appropriate shame and avoided dishonoring their fathers or husbands. A male who was dishonored or shamed in this context could have a difficult time functioning in the culture. We see a similar dynamic at work in some contemporary street cultures where being “disrespected”—even in minor or unintended ways—can be considered a huge offense.

reason Paul defended his conduct and character and worked toward reconciliation with the Corinthians before addressing the collection at the end of the letter.5 Sampley’s argument is persuasive. [Quote from Sampley] Paul clearly imagines a scenario in which the Thus Paul found it necessary to “encourage zealous and rightly proud Macedonians arrive in [parakaleø] the brothers so that they would go Corinth with their collection and find a church not ready to take part in any collection associated beforehand to you and complete beforehand with Paul because of disaffection for him. That is your blessing [eulogia] which was promised the burden that underlies the entire letter fragbeforehand” (v. 5). Paul’s use of three verbs with ment of 2 Corinthians 1–9: If the Corinthians are not fully reconciled to Paul, then not only is his the prefix pro- (each of which is translated here relationship to them jeopardized, but also the corwith “beforehand”) highlights his sense of rosion may spread to other churches, say in urgency about the matter: the Corinthians had Macedonia, when representatives arrive in promised before, so he was sending the delegaCorinth to discover a church and an apostle in disarray. The collection and the Macedonians are a tion before the others, so that the collection major reason why 2 Corinthians 1–9 had to be could be finished before there were greater probwritten. lems. Interestingly, here he calls the collection a eulogia, a blessing. He has called it a grace, a The Second Letter to the Corinthians (NIB 11; Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2000) 116. ministry, and now a blessing, perhaps meaning a source of blessing for others. Furthermore, he wants it to be a blessing rather than a pleonexian. This Greek term normally means covetousness or greed but in this context is often translated “grudgingly” (so the NIV) with the idea that the donors, because they are greedy, would prefer to keep their money to themselves. In addition, Margaret Thrall points to Paul’s earlier quote from Exodus 16:18 (in 8:15), the Greek translation of which contains the verb form of the word, pleonazø, “have too much.” He quotes the Exodus text to affirm the principle of equality whereby those who gathered much manna did not have too much (pleonazø) and those who gathered little did not have too little (8:14-15). Perhaps, then, Paul is telling the Corinthians in 9:5 that they should not covet too much when the saints in Jerusalem are suffering because they have too little. Instead, they should want to be a source of blessing for the suffering ones.6 Quotation from Sampley Paul Sampley describes the relationship of the letter of 2 Cor 1–9 with the Jerusalem collection in this way:

2 Corinthians 9:1-15

Paul follows this appeal to generosity with an extended rationale that he supports with scriptural allusions. First he uses an image familiar in both Jewish and Greco-Roman culture: one reaps what one sows (v. 6). So, those who sow sparingly reap sparingly, while those who sow abundantly (lit., “to blessing”) reap abundantly (“to blessing”). With that well-known image in mind, Paul tells the Corinthian believers how they ought to respond to the collection: each one should decide for himself or herself “from the heart” (v. 7a), not regretfully (lit., “not out of grief ”; see Deut 15:10) nor as though having no choice (lit., “not out of compulsion,” v. 7b), but rather out of gladness. The reason that they should so respond is that God loves a glad giver (v. 7c, perhaps an allusion to the Septuagint form of Prov 22:8a). This comment about God’s love allows Paul to return to the theme of this section of the letter, to God’s grace (charis) that undergirds his whole sense of the collection. “God is able,” he tells the Corinthians, “to make all grace abound [perisseuø] to you” (v. 8a) with the result that “always in all things, having all sufficiency, you abound [perisseuø] in all good work” (v. 8b). The repetition of the verb “abound” (perisseuø) and the words for “all” (pasan, panti, pantote, pasan, pan) highlights both the greatness of God’s grace and also how hugely they ought to respond to it. A caution is now in order for us as readers. The rhetoric of grace can be tricky. It can easily sound like quid pro quo—God did this so the Corinthians ought to respond thusly. But grace is not about quid pro quo (see the Connections section for 8:1-15). In addition, Paul’s words might be construed as justifying a self-centered perspective on giving: if the Corinthians give a lot, then God will bless them more. Their focus then would not be on what they give but on what they get from giving. We might pause here and remember that many Corinthians had been able to gain wealth that would have been impossible for them in other cities in other circumstances (see introduction). As many of us know from our own experience, a common response to gaining wealth is to want more. But any attempt to read Paul’s words as “give more to get more” is undone by the end of the verse: the result of God’s grace abounding to the Corinthians is that they will then abound in all good work (v. 8b). An authentic awareness and reception of grace leads to greater graciousness, never to self-centeredness. For Paul, God’s grace is the source of our sufficiency, and our sufficiency enables us to be glad givers. Paul follows his claim about God’s great grace resulting in greater graciousness with a quote from Psalm 112:9. Since God was the

175

176

2 Corinthians 9:1-15

primary subject of the sentence in v. 8 (“God is able…”), we most naturally read God as the subject of the quote in v. 9. So, God “scattered abroad, gave to the poor, [God’s] justice [dikaiosyn∑ ] abides forever.” In this context the quote confirms Paul’s description of God as gracious and links grace to justice/righteousness, which is characteristic of God and part of God’s purpose for the fulfillment of creation—i.e., it abides forever, thus shaping the age to come. Curiously, however, the subject of the quote in the context of Psalm 112 is the person who fears God and delights in God’s commands (Ps 112:1), who is thus gracious, merciful, and righteous (Ps 112:4). This person is the one who distributes freely, gives to the poor, and whose justice endures forever. Consequently, some scholars believe Paul intended the subject of the quote in his context to be the Corinthian who contributes to the collection.7 Perhaps Paul welcomed the ambiguity. Certainly Paul understood God as gracious and just. But he was just as clear that our reception of God’s grace would lead us to good work (i.e., acts of justice). Throughout this section of his letter, Paul has been insisting that to receive God’s grace (authentically) is to become gracious, which is why the Corinthians ought to want to share in the good work of the collection. With v. 10 Paul continues his description of God’s graciousness: God is the one who supplies “seed to the sower and bread for eating.” These provisions reflect ancient Scriptures Alluded to in this Section wisdom and practice, in accordance with which Paul likely alludes to several Scriptures as the first consideration at harvest time is for the he argues for the Corinthians to complete seed-grain needed for next season. Only after a their part of the collection: sufficient amount of such seed-grain has been set aside could the surplus be used for food.8 Deut 15:10. Give liberally and be ungrudging when God is the supplier of such a surplus. Just so, you do so, for on this account the Lord your God will bless you in all your work and in all that you God will also multiply—here Paul switches to undertake. metaphor—the Corinthians’ “seed” and will Prov 22:9. Those who are generous are blessed, for increase the “fruits” of their justice (dikaiosyn∑; they share their bread with the poor. see Hos 10:12a). [Scriptures Alluded to in this Section] Ps 112:9. They have distributed freely, they have As Betz notes, Paul uses “seed” and “fruit” in given to the poor; their righteousness endures this verse, along with wealth and abundance in forever; their horn is exalted in honor. Hos 10:12a. Sow for yourselves righteousness . . . . other verses, in both a literal, economic sense and a figurative, spiritual sense.9 For Paul, God is the source of both kinds of wealth, so he can claim that the Corinthians “are being enriched in everything” (v. 11a). As we read this letter, we might think mostly of spiritual riches, but we should remember the wealth in the city of Corinth (see introduction) and that Paul wants money from them. So, yes, the Corinthians have

2 Corinthians 9:1-15

177

been enriched spiritually, but they also have economic resources that others do not have. Therefore, since God is just and the source of all their wealth, they ought also to be just and recognize that they have been enriched in everything “for all generosity” (v. 11a). Their generosity then “generates thanksgiving to God through us” (v. 11b), an idea that Paul amplifies in v. 12 where he calls the collection “the ministry [diakonia] of this service [leitourgia],” a description that deserves some attention. A leitourgia in the GrecoRoman secular world was a “service” in the sense of a charitable donation by one group of people acting voluntarily on behalf of another.10 The word could also be used for “service” in the sense of worship (a “liturgy”). Thrall notes that in the Septuagint it always carries this kind of “liturgical” meaning.11 There’s a good chance that Paul had both meanings in mind—the Paul’s Terms for the Collection in Chapters 8–9 collection was obviously a voluntary chariPaul uses a set of significant terms to table donation, but it was also a response to describe the collection for the Jerusalem saints in chapters 8–9: God’s grace and, thus, could be seen as an act of worship. [Paul’s Terms for the Collection in Chapters 8–9]

Diakonia (service or ministry) in 8:4; 9:1, 12, 13 Koinønia (partnership or fellowship) in 8:4 and 9:14 Eulogia (blessing) in 9:5 and 9:6 Leitourgia (service or worship) in 9:12 Charis (grace) in 8:1, 4, 6, 7, 9, 16, 19; 9:8, 14, 15.

This leitourgia “fills up the needs of the saints,” but it does more than that (v. 12a). It also “abounds [perisseuø] through many thanksgivings to God” (v. 12b). Thanksgiving While all these terms have rich meanings for Paul to is, of course, another act of worship. Two draw upon, clearly the favored term is grace (charis). points can be made here. The first is that Paul clearly understood that an authentic spiritual response to God’s grace was thanksgiving. Not coincidentally, the Greek word for thanksgiving, eucharistø, contains the word for grace, charis. To be thankful to God is to recognize that we have been graced by God, which, in Paul’s thinking, leads to graciousness on our part, which then results in more thanksgiving offered to God. To use an expression popular at the time I am writing this commentary, “It’s all about God.” This leads to the second point: gracious and generous giving on the part of the Corinthians will not lead to their acclamation as patrons of the poorer saints. We noted the likelihood that Paul’s focus on equality in 8:13-14 held a concern that the Corinthians not interpret their gift as making them patrons of the Jerusalem church (see the commentary on those verses). Here Paul’s emphasis on God as supplier of all their wealth and thanksgiving for the gift flowing back to God underscores the point. The Corinthians give because God has enabled their giving. Thus worship and thanksgiving is offered to God for the gift rather than praise to them as

178

2 Corinthians 9:1-15

patrons.12 In fact, in v. 13 Paul is going to call the Corinthians “partners,” not patrons, of the Jerusalem saints. From Paul’s perspective, patronage, with its buying of favor and exploitation of the poor, was antithetical to grace. This ministry (i.e., the collection), then, is a “test” (dokim∑ ) for the Corinthians (v. 13a). In 8:2 Paul had mentioned the Macedonians’ “test” (dokim∑ ) of affliction that made their generosity all the more remarkable. At 8:22 he refers to the last member of the Titus delegation as “our brother whom we tested [dokimazø]” in many things and found him to be greatly devoted. At 8:8 and now here Paul says the Corinthians are also being tested. People can say they believe anything any time, but there are moments in life when they are confronted with circumstances that “test” what they have said. How they respond reveals what they really believe. Paul claims the collection is such a test for the Corinthians. Paul seems to assume they will pass the test, for he tells them that through this test “you [or maybe “they”] are glorifying God upon the obedience of your confession of the gospel of Christ” (v. 13ab). The sentence continues, but we will pause to consider this part. It is possible for either the Jerusalem saints or the Corinthians to be the ones glorifying God because the Corinthians pass this test. The subject of the participle doxazontes (glorifying) is ambiguous. If the Corinthians are the subject (in which case we translate with “you”), then they glorify God by offering the gift, thus showing their faith in God. If the Jerusalem saints are the subject (resulting in a translation of “they”), then they glorify God because God has called and enabled the Corinthians to meet their needs. Furthermore, the Jerusalem saints will see the genuineness of these Gentiles’ confession of faith in Christ. Since the rest of the sentence appears to attend to the Corinthians’ actions, I am among those who understand them to be the subject of the sentence. But I wonder if we have another instance where Paul welcomed the ambiguity of his words.13 In addition (as we now let the sentence continue), the collection also proves the Corinthians’ haplot∑s and leads to God being glorified. Paul used haplot∑s also in 8:2 when speaking of the Macedonians. It normally points to one’s sincerity or genuineness. But scholars suggest that it denotes the Macedonians’ generosity in 8:2. Perhaps it does so here as well. But Paul may be “playing” with the word a bit—their generosity toward the collection will “prove” (i.e., they pass the test) the sincerity of their partnership (koinønia) with the Jerusalem saints and with all (v. 13c). Note: partners, not

2 Corinthians 9:1-15

patrons, and not just with the Jerusalem saints but with all saints, for, as he told the Galatians, “you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Gal 3:28). Meanwhile, Paul anticipates that the Jerusalem saints will respond with “longing” for the Corinthians and prayers on their behalf “because of the surpassing grace of God” that rests on the Corinthians (v. 14). We remember that Paul had called himself an ambassador of the ministry of reconciliation on behalf of God who was reconciling the cosmos to Godself. We remember that he yearned for the breech between the Jerusalem church and the Gentile churches to be healed so that they would live as the one people of God in God’s new creation. He hoped that the collection would show that the Gentile believers, including the troublesome Corinthians, had passed the test of obedience and sincerity in their confession of faith. And he hoped that the Jerusalem believers would recognize the grace of God that rested upon the Gentiles who met their needs and would respond with praise and thanksgiving to God and prayers for the Gentiles who were their partners in God’s reconciling work in Christ. For the “unspeakable” gift of participating in such a ministry, Paul concludes with the acclamation, “Charis be to God!” (v. 15). As Sampley says, “Grace from God comes as a gift. God’s grace prompts grace in and among people, and that grace returns to God in the form of thanks.”14 There the letter that began at 1:1 (as we have understood it) ends. Scholars theorize that someone after Paul edited away the ending of this letter. Thus we don’t know what final exhortations and farewells Paul might have used to conclude this letter. Instead, we plunge right into the next letter (beginning at 10:1). Before doing so, however, we might benefit from summarizing where we are in the story of Paul and the Corinthians. As best we can piece things together, in the years following the founding of the Corinthians ekkl∑sia, c. AD 50, Paul was about his apostolic work in the lands around the Aegean Sea, including writing 1 Corinthians and working on the collection for the Jerusalem saints. When he heard about problems in Corinth that he felt he needed to address personally, he made a hasty and unplanned visit to the believers there. The visit did not go well. An individual opposed Paul publicly and personally. While it appears the majority of the Corinthian believers did not agree with this person, neither did they rally around Paul. So he left and wrote them a frank and emotional letter about the situation and sent it via Titus. Titus reported back that the letter had succeeded with the majority of Corinthian believers, but a significant minority was not yet reconciled to Paul. Meanwhile, the Macedonians, having been stirred by Paul’s

179

180

2 Corinthians 9:1-15

boasting over the Corinthians, had outdone themselves on their part of the collection and were ready to take it to Jerusalem. But the Corinthians, in the midst of conflict, had apparently done little on their part. Now Paul faced the possibility of the collection failing among the Corinthians and the Macedonians wondering about his credibility after his boasting. These circumstances prompted the writing of the letter we have in 2 Corinthians 1–9. Paul wrote that he was consoled/encouraged (parakaleø) by God and the Corinthians who were sorry for not supporting Paul and had disciplined the person who opposed him. He declared his great confidence in them and how he had boasted about them. At the same time, however, the significant middle portion of the letter is a spirited defense of himself and his apostolic work at the end of which he begs the Corinthians to “open wide” their hearts to him. Then he makes a forceful appeal for them to complete their part of the collection. Despite the consolation he may feel at the reconciliation with the majority of Corinthian believers, all was not well among them. There is one last point about this letter before we move on. We noted that many scholars consider Paul’s defense of himself and his apostolic work (2:14–7:4) to be the “heart and soul” of the letter. Now that we have read the whole letter, we can decide whether or not we concur. As for myself, I would agree that many of the theological perspectives presented in those chapters are among the most profound Paul offers in any of his letters (see the summary of that section of the letter). So, in terms of theology, those chapters may qualify as the “heart and soul” of the letter. But I also think that Paul’s efforts to expound on grace and the Jerusalem collection in chapters 8–9 are interesting and important. There we learn much about “the story” of Paul and the Corinthians, how Paul longed for reconciliation in Corinth but also in the wider church, and how difficult it is to explain grace to people who seem not to “get it.” These chapters might not preach as easily as others, but the story they tell is fascinating as they remind us of how challenging it is to be an ekkl∑sia of God.

CONNECTIONS 1. I doubt there’s a group of believers in the New Testament who resemble Americans Christians more than the Corinthians. The Corinthian believers lived in a city with an ethos shaped significantly by new wealth, new status, and new opportunities to

2 Corinthians 9:1-15

improve one’s lot in life. Many people there appear to have been competitive, showy, and self-centered. At least some of the believers brought such attitudes with them into their new faith so that they considered themselves strong, wise, wealthy, and right because God had blessed them (see 1 Cor 4:8-10). In fact, we might wonder if Paul spends so much time on “boasting” in this letter because they boast about themselves so much. Their competitiveness has led to much conflict within the Corinthian community. Consequently, they sound like a lot of Americans to me. One of Paul’s responses to these Corinthian attitudes, the one that dominates his thought in chapters 8–9, is to focus on grace. He trusts that the Corinthian believers would be transformed if they could really “get” grace. An authentic awareness of grace leads one to be a glad rather than a grudging giver, celebrates when everyone has enough, and will not allow one to be “over” others (i.e., is anti-patronage). If Paul thought an authentic awareness of grace would transform the Corinthian believers, then perhaps we should consider that American believers, who have much in common with our Corinthian forebears, need a more authentic understanding of grace as well. 2. Wealth is an issue that many American Christians prefer not to address. The perspective many have is that preachers should focus on spiritual rather than material things. But the great teachers of our tradition tell us that wealth is a spiritual issue. In accord with them, here is Paul addressing issues of wealth with the Corinthian believers. We should consider his words. Whatever sufficiency the Corinthians have—whether spiritual or economic—is because of God’s grace. They have an opportunity through the Jerusalem collection to share in the outpouring of God’s grace in the world. They are to be a source of grace and blessing to others and do “good work” (i.e., concrete acts of love and justice like the Jerusalem collection). They are to celebrate and, thus, work toward “equality” among God’s children. They are not to be self-serving in their giving (they are not to seek patronage, nor are they to “give more to get more”). The bottom line for Paul is that those who know—really know—that God has graced them will be gracious. These were challenging words for the Corinthian believers. They are challenging words for American believers as well. Frankly, news that a book like The Prayer of Jabez became a bestseller among American Christians would infuriate Paul.

181

182

2 Corinthians 9:1-15

Notes 1. E.g., Hans Dieter Betz, 2 Corinthians 8 and 9 (Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985) 90. 2. Stanley K. Stowers, “Peri men gar and the Integrity of 2 Cor. 8 and 9,” NovT 32 (1990): 340–48. 3. Betz, 2 Corinthians 8 and 9, 90. 4. Ibid., 92, Betz argues that Paul makes a distinction between Achaians and Corinthians. Thus, he claims, Paul has boasted about the Achaians’ prothymia (9:2), but not about the Corinthians (8:10-11). Such a distinction would require, however, that chapter 9 was a letter written to the Achaians, but not to the Corinthians, a scenario most scholars find unlikely. 5. J. Paul Sampley, The Second Letter to the Corinthians (NIB 11; Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2000) 116. 6. Margaret E. Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians (ICC 2; London: T & T Clark International, 2000) 573. 7. Thrall is an example of a scholar who reads the subject as the Corinthian who gives to the collection (ibid., 580). Sampley is an example of those who read God as the subject (The Second Letter to the Corinthians, 130). 8. Betz, 2 Corinthians 8 and 9, 113. 9. Ibid., 115–16. 10. Ibid., 117. 11. Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, ICC 2, 586. 12. Sze-kar Wan, “Collection for the Saints as Anticolonial Act,” in Paul and Politics (ed. Richard A. Horsley; Harrisburg PA: Trinity Press International, 2000) 213–14. 13. Sampley, The Second Letter to the Corinthians, 131, is an example of those who read the Corinthians as the subject. Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, ICC 2, 588–89 is an example of those who read the Jerusalem saints as the subject. 14. Sampley, The Second Letter to the Corinthians, 131.

Things Get Worse: A New Letter and a Showdown Visit 2 Corinthians 10:1–13:14

Introduction to Chapters 10–13 We turn to chapter 10 and immediately encounter an abrupt change in both the tone and content of Paul’s words: “I myself, Paul, appeal to you through the meekness and mildness of Christ, I who am humble when face to face with you but when absent am bold toward you . . .” (10:1). This change will persist throughout the final chapters of the letter. Paul no longer expresses confidence in the Corinthians, nor does he sound hopeful of reconciliation. Instead he warns and threatens, is sarcastic and bitterly ironic. He has shifted from explaining and pleading to intimidation. What accounts for such a change? Not surprisingly, the dramatic difference in the last part of the letter has captured the attention of Pauline scholars who have offered three primary answers to the question of what accounts for the change. As far back as 1776, some scholars argued that chapters 10–13 are so different from chapters 1–9 that they must be from a separate letter. In the late nineteenth century the idea was put forward that chapters 10–13 are a fragment of the emotional letter Paul mentions in 2:3-4 and 7:8, 12. Proponents of this view argue that accusations of financial irregularity (12:14-18) led to efforts to prevent suspicion of such (8:18-21); charges that Paul had been commending himself (3:1; 5:12) could come from chapters 10–13 (e.g., 11:16-29); and the promised visit in 12:14 and 13:1 means he must explain in 1:15-18 and 2:1 why he did not visit. According to these scholars, such comparisons show that chapters 10–13 were written prior to chapters 1–9. When that understanding is set alongside the claim that the tone of these chapters fits Paul’s description of his emotions in 2:4, then they conclude that we have a portion of the emotional letter in 10–13, the frank speech of which was designed to bring the Corinthians to repentance. When it was successful in doing so, Paul followed with the letter contained in chapters 1–9.1 Other scholars believe the changes are not so significant that the chapters cannot be part of the same letter that began at 1:1. Frank Matera, for example, has recently argued that chapters 1–9 deal with one issue that was settled (i.e., the painful visit and emotional letter). But even in this section of the letter, Paul indicates there are other issues needing attention, namely the minority of Corinthians who

186

Introduction to Chapters 10–13

have not been reconciled to Paul (see 2:6; 6:11-13) and the problems created by visiting apostles (see 2:17; 3:1). In chapters 10–13 he turns to these concerns as he prepares for his third visit to the city. If the minority group does not repent, and if the believers do not disassociate themselves from the visiting apostles, Paul warns that he will take bold action when he arrives.2 David Garland notes that if 6:14–7:1 is accepted as integral to the letter, “then it shows that the swing in the mood of chaps. 10–13 is not as exceptional as sometimes imagined.”3 Furthermore, he argues that it makes sense for Paul to save his condemnation for the end of the letter. He needed first to reestablish his love and zeal for the Corinthians after the emotional letter before addressing the concerns that presently worry him.4 A third group of scholars agrees with those who believe that chapters 10–13 must be a fragment from a separate letter (option 1 above). The tone and content of these chapters are simply too different to form the conclusion to the letter begun at 1:1. They argue, e.g., that for Paul to follow his earnest pleas for generosity (chs. 8–9) with the reproachful and threatening language of chapters 10–13 would have been counterproductive. But scholars in this “camp” do not believe that chapters 10–13 are a fragment from the emotional letter. The primary argument against this view is that the emotional letter dealt with an individual within the community who had opposed Paul (see 2:5-8 and the commentary on those verses), while chapters 10–13 are concerned with outsiders whom Paul calls “super apostles” (11:6; 12:11) and false apostles (11:12-13) who boasted in their Jewish heritage (11:22) among other things. In addition, in 12:17-18 Paul responds to the charge that he had defrauded the Corinthian believers via the mission of Titus and “the brother,” the best interpretation of which is that the delegation headed by Titus (8:16-24) had arrived in Corinth and encountered problems. Thus, these scholars believe chapters 10–13 were written after chapters 1–9 when Paul’s relations with the Corinthians had taken another sour turn. Since I count myself among this group of scholars, and since this view is the one reflected in this commentary, I’ll spend a little more time exploring this understanding of chapters 10–13.5 [These Scholars in Their Own Words]

What happened next in the story of Paul and the Corinthian believers after he wrote the letter contained in 2 Corinthians 1–9 and sent the Titus delegation to work on the collection? While we cannot know with certainty, a careful reading of our materials gives clues as to how the plot may have thickened. We will work on the

Introduction to Chapters 10–13 These Scholars in Their Own Words Charles Talbert argues that chapters 10–13 are the emotional letter: “Certain things in 2 Cor 10–13 seem to precede 1 Cor 1–9: for example, 12:11 precedes 3:1 and 5:12; 13:2 precedes 1:23; 13:10 precedes 2:3; 2:4; 2:9; 10:6 precedes 2:9; 7:15; also 11:3 is strange if written after the satisfaction expressed in chapters 1–7.” Further, the visits of Titus mentioned in chapters 8 and 12 cannot be the same visit. Finally, the objection that the offense done to Paul that prompted the emotional letter is not mentioned in chapters 10–13 “will not hold.” The offense may have been done by an individual, but it also involved “sympathizers from the church at large (7:7-9, 12). 2 Cor 10–13 does respond to this matter, especially in 10:1-11 and 11:2-11.” Frank Matera argues for the unity of all 2 Corinthians: “For even though the tone of these chapters is more strident than what precedes, Paul’s reprimand is not unexpected, since he has given several indications that other preachers have come to Corinth” in 2:17, 3:1, and 5:12. Further, Paul’s call for reconciliation in 6:11–7:4 “indicated that something was still amiss at Corinth . . . . Consequently, although one issue had been settled (the incident of the painful visit and the harsh letter), other

187

problems remained (unrepentant sinners and the presence of the intruding apostles). Having settled the first issue, Paul turns to these problems. Paul Sampley argues that 10–13 are from a letter that follows 1–9: When Paul “wrote 2 Corinthians 1–9, intruders were of little consequence.” The focus instead is on himself and his cause “as their apostle whom they should embrace more fully.” But when Titus arrived in Corinth to work on the collection he discovered and conveyed to Paul “the extent to which the intruders had captured the fancy of at least some of the Corinthians, subverting Paul’s authority.” Thus the central struggle in the letter of 10–13 is “of contested authority between Paul and his opponents—and, therefore, of fractured Corinthian allegiance.” So Paul addresses the issue of his authority and sets “guidelines for how he and the Corinthians will resolve their differences when he arrives in Corinth.” Talbert, Reading Corinthians: A Literary and Theological Commentary (Macon GA: Smyth & Helwys, 2002) 7. Matera, II Corinthians (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2003) 214. Sampley, The Second Letter to the Corinthians (NIB 11; Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2000) 12–15.

details as we do the commentary on chapters 10–13, but a broad sketch of the situation can be presented now. Though Titus had brought hopeful news regarding the Corinthian response to the emotional letter, we have seen that all was not well. The majority of Corinthians had rallied round Paul, but he was still pleading for reconciliation with the others. In addition, the Jerusalem collection was stalled so that he had to speak both carefully and forcefully to that issue. Clearly there were ongoing tensions even as Paul wrote the letter of chapters 1–9. It may be that Paul’s rhetoric in that letter, perhaps taken to Corinth by the Titus delegation, did not always ease the tensions. We observed moments of “doublespeak” in the letter, such as calling the Corinthians children while also using the language of friendship and stating that he did not lord over their faith. He charged that those who did not see him as always frank and sincere were “veiled” and “blinded by the god of this age,” hardly conciliatory rhetoric. He also overused frank speech according to customary practice and commanded their affection. These rhetorical choices may not have worked well in a context where Paul was hoping for reconciliation.

188

Introduction to Chapters 10–13

Meanwhile, into this still tense situation stepped other visiting apostles who were no friends of Paul. They may have been present in Corinth earlier (cf. 2:17–3:1), but they had become a major part of the Corinthian story by the time Paul wrote 2 Corinthians 10–13 (cf. 11:12-15, 22-23). We noted that these folks apparently boasted in their Jewish heritage, raising the possibility that they were adherents of the gospel of circumcision who had long disagreed with Paul over key points about the gospel (see introduction). When we work through the commentary on the verses, we’ll find other hints at their identity. Jerome MurphyO’Connor has suggested that these rival apostles formed an alliance with the Corinthian minority who were unhappy with Paul. These two groups together could create significant trouble for him.6 Finally, questions had arisen among the Corinthians about the Jerusalem collection and Paul’s financial practices. We have noted already that Paul’s refusal to take money from potential patrons in Corinth had caused friction (see 2:17ff and the commentary on those verses; cf. 1 Cor 9:3-18). Meanwhile, he had accepted support from other churches (11:8-9) and was asking for money for the collection. These practices apparently seemed inconsistent and suspicious to some Corinthians, perhaps especially to those who already wondered if Paul was deceitful and manipulative. Thus, there were snubbed patrons, those who were suspicious of Paul, and those who disagreed with him theologically (see the commentary on 4:7ff ) among the Corinthian minority, some of whom probably fell into all three categories. And there were the visiting apostles who opposed Paul. If these groups formed an alliance and stirred a negative response to the latest letter from Paul and the Titus delegation, then there is no surprise that Paul found himself in a newly intensified conflict in Corinth. This scenario appears to lie behind the letter of 2 Corinthians 10–13. The Corinthian situation was reaching a crisis stage so that Paul wrote this letter to prepare for what Paul Sampley calls a “showdown” visit with the Corinthian believers.7 As for the letter itself, many scholars note how difficult it is to subdivide because one topic bleeds into the next. In the words of Sze-kar Wan, “Paul’s emotions are running so high, and his attacks on his opponents are so broad and deep,” that he hardly takes time to arrange his thoughts into a logical pattern.8 Even so, many scholars agree that the first (10:1-11) and last (12:14–13:10) sections share a focus on Paul’s boldness to be displayed in the impending showdown visit, while the center sections (10:12–12:13) of the letter present Paul’s boasting in defense of himself. We will observe this pattern in the commentary.

Introduction to Chapters 10–13

Notes 1. Charles H. Talbert, Reading Corinthians: A Literary and Theological Commentary (Macon GA: Smyth & Helwys, 2002), is a recent Pauline interpreter to argue that chapters 10–13 are a fragment of the emotional letter. 2. Frank J. Matera, II Corinthians (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2003) 214. Jan Lambrecht, Second Corinthians (SP 8; Collegeville MN: Liturgical Press, 1999) 7–9, is another recent and prominent Paul scholar who has argued for the letter’s integrity. 3. David E. Garland, 2 Corinthians (NAC; Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999) 41. As noted in the commentary on that section, it is not clear that 6:14–7:1 is integral to the letter. 4. Ibid., 42. 5. See Margaret E. Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians (ICC 2; London: T & T Clark International, 1994) 5–18, for a thorough review of these three options for understanding chapters 10–13. She is also one of the scholars who choose the third option as outlined in the commentary. 6. Jerome Murphy-O’Connor, Paul: A Critical Life (New York: Oxford University Press, 1997) 302–304. 7. J. Paul Sampley, The Second Letter to the Corinthians (NIB 11; Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2000) 134. 8. Sze-kar Wan, Power in Weakness: The Second Letter of Paul to the Corinthians (Harrisburg PA: Trinity Press International, 2000) 133.

189

The Third Visit: Bold Authority for Building Up 2 Corinthians 10:1-11

COMMENTARY The letter as we have it begins with an emphatic identification—“I myself, Paul” (v. 1). Perhaps he is claiming ownership of the forceful words that follow (his words and no one else’s), perhaps he is distinguishing himself from his colleagues because charges have been made directly at him, or perhaps he is doing both things. Paul himself appeals (parakaleø) to the Corinthians “by the meekness and mildness of Christ” (v. 1). What “meekness and mildness” of Christ does he have in mind, and what does it mean for him to appeal “by” such? First, we note that scholars debate whether Paul was thinking of the “preexistent” Christ who humbled himself as described in Philippians 2:5-11, or the life of the historical Jesus of Nazareth. Since the text does not specify, we cannot be certain which he meant. Given that Paul already described the “foolishness of the cross” as the “wisdom and power of God” (1 Cor 1:18-25) and declared that he no longer regarded Christ “according to the flesh” (kata sarka), wherein Christ might appear as a humiliated fool to many while to believers he is inaugurating the New Creation (2 Cor 5:16-17), it seems likely that Paul had the life of Jesus in mind. Significantly, the ideas in these passages will be important background to what follows. The “meek and mild” Jesus of Nazareth who loved, forgave, acted graciously, eschewed violence, and was the victim of violence appeared weak from the perspective of Roman imperial power. That perspective, however, was not Paul’s. As to the second part of our question, for Paul to appeal to the Corinthians by the meekness and mildness of Christ was to claim a correspondence between himself and Christ. At this point Paul interrupts himself to insert a sarcastic (and not so meek) jab. He describes himself as “humble/subservient” (tapeinos) when present with the Corinthians, but “being confident/bold”

192

2 Corinthians 10:1-11

(tharrø) when absent (10:1b). Rather than Paul’s own words, however, these may be charges leveled against him among the Corinthians. We can wonder if the painful visit and subsequent emotional letter lie behind the charge. Paul had been unwilling— and may have appeared unable—to fend off his attacker during the painful visit. So he left and wrote an emotional letter containing frank speech about the situation (see 2:1-8 and the commentary on those verses). His decision to respond thusly may have left him open to the charge of being bold only “when he fires off hot letters from a safe distance to be delivered by his associates.”1 Scholars also wonder if his manual labor to support himself, his apparent lack of ecstatic experiences, and his sufferings contributed to the charge that he was weak. We will find all these circumstances to be of concern in this letter. Having gotten in his jab, he returns to his appeal. He asks not to have to use the boldness he is sure he possesses against those who accuse him of walking “according to the flesh” (kata sarka; v. 2). Here kata sarka is used by his critics as another way to discredit Paul. The charge that he acted kata sarka had surfaced before when he failed to follow through with plans to visit Corinth so that he was called “fickle” (see 1:17). Thus his “fickleness,” along with his suffering, lack of ecstatic appearances, and walking away from confrontation apparently made Paul appear unspiritual, “fleshly,” and, thus, weak to some. But he is confident of his ability to deal with his accusers. His request not to have to do so when present implies an impending visit during which he will be bold if he must (at 13:1ff he will speak explicitly of this visit). The implied threat in his words is reminiscent of 1 Corinthians 4:21 wherein he asked the Corinthians if they preferred that he come “with a rod or with love in a spirit of meekness.” Paul then plays with his accusers’ words, seeming to agree that he “walks in the flesh” (en sarki; v. 3a), except “flesh” here indicates his physical existence. What we may have, then, is more sarcasm via a statement of the obvious—of course he walks around in this world “in the flesh.” He may also be conceding that, yes, he works with his hands, and, yes, he has suffered for his faith. His manner of life is indeed humble (tapeinos, v. 1).2 But he does not “wage war according to the flesh” (kata sarka; v. 3b). We have seen that when Paul speaks of kata sarka, he is pointing to the values and expectations of the culture around him. [Paul’s Use of Kata Sarka in 2 Corinthians 1:17 and 5:16] In this context the phrase indicates that he does not use weapons recognized as powerful in the Roman world around him that could include violent force, sophisticated philosophical logic

2 Corinthians 10:1-11 Paul’s Use of Kata Sarka in 2 Corinthians 1:17 and 5:16 Paul used the phrase kata sarka (“according to the flesh”) at two key points in the letter of 2 Cor 1–9. The first use is in 1:17 during the discussion of his changed travel plans: “Therefore, having decided this [the travel plans outlined in 1:15-16], then perhaps I acted with fickleness? Or do I decide the things I decide kata sarka [according to the flesh] so that with me it is yes yes and no no?” Kata sarka in this context indicates that some Corinthian believers likely suspected Paul of calculation (in his change of travel plans) with a view to what was personally expedient so that he was untrustworthy. See the commentary on this verse.

193

The phrase also appears in 5:16 wherein Paul says, “Therefore, from now on we [emphatic pronoun] know no one kata sarka (“according to the flesh”); although we once knew Christ kata sarka, we now no longer are knowing [him that way].” In this context the phrase reveals Paul’s past judgment of Christ through the eyes of a Roman citizen as a blaspheming, deluded fool. But then Paul had an encounter with the Risen Christ, the One through whom God was inaugurating the new age. Paul’s past judgment of Christ “according to the flesh” taught him how foolish it was to know anyone that way. See the commentary on this verse.

that wins debates, or even displays of ecstatic experiences designed to dazzle. Rather, Paul’s weapons are powerful “by means of God”3 for the “demolition [kathairesin] of strongholds [ochyrøma], demolishing arguments [logismos] and every arrogance [hypsøma] which raises itself up against the knowledge of God and leading captive every mind [no∑ma] into the obediSaint Paul ence of Christ” (vv. 4-5). He concludes this claim by declaring that he is ready “to drive out every disobedience whenever your obedience is complete” (v. 6). With these verses Paul has borrowed heavily from Roman military imagery. His weapons made powerful by God are for demolishing ochyrøma, a word denoting strongholds, bulwarks, or fortresses that are targets militaries seek to destroy. Then he clarifies that the strongholds he means are logismos and hypsøma. Logismos has a general meaning of thoughts or philosophical reasoning. It was used by a thinker like Philo to mean arguments constructed out of flowery Pietro Cavallini (c.1250–1330). Saint Paul. Detail from The Last Judgment. Fresco. words and trickeries.4 A hypsøma Santa Cecilia, Trastevere, Rome, Italy. [Credit: Wikimedia Commons, Pd-Art (PD-old100)] was, generally, a height or exaltation and is used here to indicate arroThough Paul borrows from Roman military imagery, he may be gance. So the strongholds Paul will setting up his audience for something else, for he claims that God bring down are cleverly argued but makes his weapons powerful.

194

2 Corinthians 10:1-11

arrogant reasonings that are raised against the knowledge of God. Having accomplished this demolition, he will then “lead every mind [no∑ma] captive into the obedience of Christ.” No∑ma has been variously translated as design, thought, or mind. Paul wrote in 3:14 of those with a hardened no∑ma and in 4:4 about those whose no∑ma was blinded by the god of this world. In those verses he was concerned with the ability to think clearly (as he understands “clearly”), so it makes sense that he would have that same ability, i.e., the mind, in view here. He intends for “every mind” to know God truly and uses military language, “leading them captive” into “obeying Christ,” to express his intent. Finally he will “drive out” every disobedience when the Corinthians’ obedience is complete. Apparently Paul yet hopes the Corinthians will come around. Then he will be able to “drive out” the other visiting apostles whom he considers to be disobeying God. The actions Paul describes here— demolish, drive out, and lead captive—were well-known practices of the Roman army.5 With such military imagery, we seem a long way from the “meekness and mildness” of Christ. We might wonder if Paul has undercut his own claims about Christ’s power and his exercise of authority like Christ. But it is also possible that he is setting up his audience for something else, for he claims that God makes his weapons powerful. We can observe that in 1 Corinthians 1:22-24 Paul had proclaimed the crucified Christ to be the wisdom and power of God. Let us pay close attention to the way Paul’s argument unfolds. At v. 7 Paul calls to the Corinthians, “See what is in front of your face!” What he calls them to see is this: if anyone is persuaded that she or he is “of Christ, let that person reason [logizomai] this again, that just as he himself [or she herself ] is of Christ, so also are we [emphatic pronoun]!” Paul is clearly responding to a claim from his critics that they are “of Christ,” implying that Paul is not. While it is not clear exactly what they meant by being “of Christ,” they were evidently claiming to be the true representatives of Christ and, thus, the proclaimers of Christ’s true gospel. Curiously Paul does not challenge their claim about themselves here (he will do so later) but instead insists that he is also “of Christ.” Then he must respond immediately to yet another charge: “for if I should boast too much about our authority which the Lord has given for building up and not for your demolition . . .” (v. 8ab). Apparently Paul’s critics have accused him of talking too much about his authority. He seems to concede that he, indeed, boasts of his authority, but he also insists, “I will not be ashamed” (v. 8c). He will not be ashamed because the

2 Corinthians 10:1-11

195

Lord gave the authority, which is a constructive authority—it is for building up, not demolishing (kathairesin) the Corinthians. Paul claims to demolish (kathairesin, v. 4) strongholds set against the knowledge of God but not the ekkl∑sia of God in Corinth. Several scholars have noted the similarity between Paul’s language here and that of Jeremiah whose call from God was to “pluck up and pull down, to destroy and to overthrow, to build and to plant” (Jer 1:10). But Jeremiah looked forward to the day when God would restore the exiles and “build them up and not tear them down” (24:6). He also looked ahead to the new covenant God would write on the hearts of the Quoting from Jeremiah people so that they would know God Several verses from Jeremiah appear to have influ(31:31-34). [Quoting from Jeremiah] We’ve enced Paul’s thinking in this part of the letter: already seen Paul’s conviction that the 1:9-10. Then the LORD put out his hand and touched my New Covenant is being fulfilled in Christ mouth; and the Lord said to me, ”Now I have put my words (see 3:4-6 and the commentary on those in your mouth. See today I appoint you over nations and verses). Consequently, Paul’s ministry on over kingdoms, to pluck up and to pull down, to destroy and behalf of the New Covenant is both the to overthrow, to build and to plant.” fulfillment and the reversal of 24:4-7. Then the word of the LORD came to me: Thus says Jeremiah’s—it is for building up, not for the LORD, the God of Israel: Like these good figs, so I will regard as good the exiles from Judah, whom I have sent tearing down.6 He boasts of his away from this place to the land of the Chaldeans. I will set authority, and he will not be ashamed for my eyes upon them for good, and I will bring them back to doing so because it is such an authority this land. I will build them up, and not tear them down; I will as this. plant them, and not pluck them up. I will give them a heart The next section presents problems for to know that I am the LORD; and they shall be my people interpreters. A literal translation (as is and I will be their God, for they shall return to me with their whole heart. possible) of v. 9 would read, “So that I do 31:31, 33-34. The days are surely coming, says the LORD, not seem as though scaring you through when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel the letters . . . .” From there he will and the house of Judah . . . . But this is the covenant that I respond to another charge—that his will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the letters are weighty but his physical presLORD: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on ence is weak (v. 10)—and then promise their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. No longer shall they teach one another, or say to to be strong in presence (v. 11). each other, “Know the LORD,” for they shall all know me, Evidently a connecting phrase is missing from the least of them to the greatest, says the LORD; for I here. That is, Paul seems to makes a leap, will forgive their iniquity, and remember their sin no more. rather than a neat transition, from one thought to another. But where does the leap occur? Some commentators believe it happens between vv. 8 and 9 so that v. 9 introduces new thoughts about Paul’s strong letters and weak physical presence that are unrelated to the previous section.7 I am among those scholars who find a gap between vv. 9 and 10.8 Thus I understand Paul to say that since his authority is for building up (v. 8), he does not intend for his letters to be scary (v. 9). He may

196

2 Corinthians 10:1-11

have the frank speech of the emotional letter particularly in mind here—even that letter was for building them up. But it seems that this comment about his letters brings to mind another charge leveled against him, so he “leaps” to respond to Ancient Commentary on These Verses it in v. 10. Some of the earliest of Paul’s interpreters The charge conveyed in v. 10 is that, while his offered interesting comments on these verses and the situation Paul faced in Corinth: letters were “weighty and strong,” his physical presence (lit., his “body”) “was weak” and his Chrysostom. [Regarding v. 4] By “worldly “word [i.e., speech] paltry.” Again, Paul’s deciweapons” Paul means wealth, glory, power, sion to leave Corinth after the painful visit and loquaciousness, cleverness, half-truths, flatteries, write a letter filled with frank speech may lie hypocrisies and so on. The apostle does not use behind the charge. However thoughtful and such weapons but only those which are spiritual. (Hom. 1 Cor.) strategic he may have considered this decision, Chrysostom. [Regarding v. 5] The arguments others saw in it evidence of weakness on his referred to here are those of Greek philosophy, of part. But he insists he will show those who conwhich they were so proud. (Hom. 1 Cor.) sider him weak that he is not. What he is in the Pelagius. [Regarding v. 7] No one is more foolish letters when absent he will also be by deed when than the person who thinks that he alone belongs present (v. 11). As he has said, he plans to to Christ. (Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians) destroy any strongholds raised against the Gennadius of Constantinople. [Regarding v. 7] This knowledge of God. We can see, then, that this is to be read as a censorious remark, for the third visit could become quite an event in the people were not judging the truth from works but story of Paul and the Corinthian believers from superficial appearances only. (Pauline depending on their response to this letter. In the Commentary from the Greek Church) next chapters we will watch as Paul writes to avoid such a showdown. [Ancient Commentary on Quoted in 1–2 Corinthians (ACCS NT 7; ed. Gerald Bray; Chicago: Fitzroy Dearborn Publishers, 1999) 284–85.

These Verses]

CONNECTIONS 1. Paul begins this letter appealing to the Corinthians “by the meekness and mildness” of Christ. Before he is finished with this section, however, he will have evoked military imagery and promised by God’s power to demolish clever but arrogant reasoning raised against the knowledge of God, drive out every disobedience, and lead every mind captive into obeying Christ. These statements raise the question of the nature of God’s power. Is it the same kind of power that Rome’s military exercised, only greater? If so, then Paul’s claim to operate by the meekness and mildness of Christ is verbal decoration only—he doesn’t truly mean it. He is meek and mild like Christ in words only, which would put him in the same category as so many who claim to have faith in Christ but really believe that Christ’s teachings will not work in the “real world.” I

2 Corinthians 10:1-11

am not quite ready to put Paul there. I think it is possible that Paul has great faith in Christ’s teachings and great faith in God’s power, and that both of these faiths are possible because he understands God’s power to be wholly different from that of Rome. As we read the next chapters of 2 Corinthians, let us pay close attention to what Paul says about strength and power. 2. At 10:3 Paul agrees with his opponents that he “walks about in the flesh” (en sarki). His agreement is likely sarcastic. Of course his physical body with its strengths and limitations shapes his living. Moreover, his physical body operates within the confines of the Roman Empire, which impacts his living. So, yes, his existence is “fleshly.” But, he goes on to say, he does not wage war “according to the flesh” (kata sarka). He may have to live within the boundaries of the Roman Empire, but he does not live according to the views and values of the empire, which puts him at odds (and, thus, “at war”) with the empire. We have already seen ways he lives at odds with the empire’s values (e.g., he won’t accept patronage, doesn’t see Jesus’ crucifixion as the death of a deluded fool, etc.), and we will see more. In this context, though, his concern is for how he wages this war. Rome’s military might arose from greed and fear and was exercised to conquer its enemies. The witness of Jesus and his followers is that God’s power is motivated by love, which immediately suggests God is not interested in beating up the enemy. Then what is God’s interest? Surely we should say that the divine power is aimed at transforming enemies into children of God and sisters and brothers with one another. Do we have our first indication in this letter of how God’s power is wholly different from Rome’s?

Notes 1. David E. Garland, 2 Corinthians (NAC; Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999) 425. 2. Abraham J. Malherbe, “Antisthenes and Odysseus, and Paul at War,” HTR 76 (1983): 170. 3. Scholars debate the best way to translate the Greek dative case here. Some understand it as a dative of advantage, thus translating “powerful for God,” i.e., in God’s service. Others translate it as a dative of presence, i.e., “in the presence of God.” I am among those who believe it is best understood as a dative of means, “powerful by means of God,” i.e., that God’s power is at work in the weapons Paul uses. My reasons for this understanding will become clear in later commentary. 4. Sze-kar Wan, Power in Weakness: The Second Letter of Paul to the Corinthians (Harrisburg PA: Trinity Press International, 2000) 130.

197

198

2 Corinthians 10:1-11 5. Bruce J. Malina and John J. Pilch, Social Science Commentary on the Letters of Paul (Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 2006) 152. 6. I’m indebted to the language of a paper presented by Scott J. Hafemann, “Paul’s Jeremiah Ministry in Reverse: The New Covenant Argument of 2 Corinthians 10:7-8,” at the SBL Annual Meeting, November 2004. 7. E.g., Jan Lambrecht, Second Corinthians (SP 8; Collegeville MN: Liturgical Press, 1999) 157. 8. E.g., Margaret E. Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians (ICC 2; London: T & T Clark International, 2000) 597; Frank J. Matera, II Corinthians (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2003) 218.

Standard of Measure 2 Corinthians 10:12-18

COMMENTARY Having just threatened to tear down, take captive, and to be as bold in person as in his letters, Paul now moves into what is often considered the center portion of this letter fragment during which he will defend himself against his rivals (10:12–12:13). He begins (10:12-18) by naming the standard that guides his apostolic activity in Corinth, i.e., his grounds for making the threats and promises of 10:1-11. In so doing he challenges directly the claims of these other visiting apostles. As he does so, we begin to understand more clearly the specifics of the conflict they have created for Paul. Paul begins in v. 12a claiming that he “does not presume to rank or compare” himself with those who “recommend themselves.” The irony is obvious. Paul would never consider the other apostles to be so above him that he could not dare rank himself with them (see 11:5; 12:11). Rather, his words are a pointed stab at those who, according to Paul, recommend themselves, who “measure [metreø] themselves by themselves,” who “compare themselves with themselves” (v. 12b). Those who do such things “do not understand” (v. 12c).1 By contrast, Paul declares in v. 13a, “We [emphatic pronoun] do not boast beyond measure [ametra].” By making nearly the same claim in v. 15, he creates the impression (intentionally, no doubt) that the visitors do not understand that they are boasting beyond measure. Paul’s response to their boast is not that he does not boast (readers of this letter will know that he does). Rather, his claim is that he boasts “according to the measure [metron] of the standard [kanøn] which God assigned to us as a measure [metrou]” (v. 13b). We have work to do to understand what Paul intended. We begin with the key Greek words. The term metron has “instrument of measure” as its primary meaning, then “measure” in the sense of “the result of measuring,” both literally and figuratively. The word kanøn means first “rule” or “standard,” and, secondly, “sphere,”

200

2 Corinthians 10:12-18

“province,” or “limits.” The two words stand fairly close together in sense. Hence, some commentators take them as virtually synonymous, while others differentiate between them. The division of opinion roughly corresponds to the difference between those who attach geographical significance to either kanøn or metron and those who do not.2 Jan Lambrecht is an example of one who understands the phrase figuratively and without geographical significance, so he translates, “according to the measure, i.e., the competence that God has apportioned to us.”3 Ralph Martin is among those who detect geographical significance in the terms. Thus he translates, “only within the sphere of service which God has assigned to us as our sphere.”4 As Frank Matera notes, choosing between these alternatives is difficult. The context will make clear that place or sphere plays a key role in the “standard” by which Paul “measures” himself—he does not boast “beyond measure” when he boasts about the Corinthian believers because he was the first to come all the way to Corinth with the gospel (coming in vv. 13c-14). But the terms metron and kanøn usually do not carry geoSaint Paul Preaching graphical significance.5 So, in near agreement with Matera, I will translate simply, using “measure” for metron and staying with “standard” for kanøn but understanding it in the sense of an assignment with instructions that could, but isn’t required, to include geographical limits (i.e., “do this but not that; go here but not Image Not Available there,” thus establishing a “standard” to due to lack of digital rights. Please view the published measure one’s work).6 commentary or perform an Internet With this understanding of the terms, we search using the credit below. can discern that Paul says his boasting is not “beyond measure” because he evaluates it according to the standard God gave him, which was “to reach all the way to” to the Corinthians (v. 13c). Then he reiterates, “For we are not overreaching ourselves as if we did not reach out to you” (v. 14a). From Francesco Bassano (1549–1592). Saint Paul Preaching. Oil sketch. Paul’s perspective, God assigned him to go Musei Civici, Padua, Italy. (Credit: Cameraphoto Arte, Venice/Art Resource, NY) to Corinth. So he must “measure” himself by whether or not he fulfilled this assignMany artists have imagined what Paul must have ment. Clearly he understands himself to looked like as he preached in places such as Corinth. “measure up” since he made it to Corinth. Here is the 16th-C. Italian painter Francesco Bassano’s Indeed, he claims further, “For we view of an energetic Paul fulfilling the assignment God had given him.

2 Corinthians 10:12-18

201

advanced first to you with the gospel of Christ” (v. 14b; emphasis mine). Therefore, as the one assigned by God to found the Corinthian ekkl∑sia, he is not boasting “beyond measure” in “labors belonging to another” (v. 15a) when he boasts of the Corinthian believers. We may have arrived at the crux of the conflict for Paul. Paul clearly understood his call from God to be one who laid the “foundation” that allowed an ekkl∑sia of God to come into being in the place where God sent him. He worked in regions where Christ had not been preached before so as to lay such a foundation (see 1 Cor 3:10; Rom 15:20-21). He apparently did not mind if others built on his foundation, as long as they built well (see 1 Cor 3:5-6). [Paul’s References to His “Foundation Laying” Ministry] He may even have accepted that others built foundations that differed from his, for he had agreed that those of the “gospel of circumcision” should go about their mission work even as he went about Paul’s References to His “Foundation his (see Gal 2:7-10). Moreover, we have no indiLaying” Ministry cation that he went to churches they had Paul refers in other letters to his ministry founded in order to change them to his way of as one of laying a foundation on which an ekkl∑sia of God may be built: thinking. He clearly disagreed with adherents of the gospel of circumcision (see Gal 2:11-14) and 1 Cor 3:10-11. According to the grace of God wanted the two factions to be unified rather given to me, like a skilled master builder I laid a than polarized (e.g., 2 Cor 9:11-15). Still, he foundation, and someone else is building on it. may have been willing to agree to disagree with Each builder must choose with care how to build them. on it. For no one can lay any foundation other than the one that has been laid; that foundation is But he minded a great deal if someone came Jesus Christ. and tried to undo or redo the foundation he had Rom 15:20-21. Thus I make it my ambition to prolaid. He understood God to have called him to claim the good news, not where Christ has go to Corinth and lay the foundation for an already been named, so that I do not build on ekkl∑sia there. He also apparently understood someone else’s foundation, but as it is written, that, as the foundation layer (in Corinth and “Those who have never been told of him shall see, and those who have never heard of him shall elsewhere), he had a great deal of responsibility understand.” for the foundation, which required that he also have a particular authority there. The rival aposIn addition to understanding his ministry as tles were apparently seeking to undermine Paul’s foundation laying, he is also aware that others authority. If they could do so, they could alter have a different calling so that they build on the the foundation Paul had laid and then claim the work of those like Paul (or, shifting metaphors as he does in the following text, water the seed Paul Corinthian ekkl∑sia as their own. Paul’s assertion has planted). that he does not boast in other’s labors suggests they were trying to do exactly that, to claim as 1 Cor 3:5-6. What then is Apollos? What is Paul? their own the Corinthian community that Paul Servants through whom you came to believe, as had founded. For Paul such boasting is “beyond the Lord assigned to each. I planted, Apollos measure” because it does not conform to the watered, but God gave the growth. assignment (i.e., standard) given by God.

202

2 Corinthians 10:12-18

Rather than boast in others’ labors, Paul instead hopes that the Corinthians’ faith will increase, and, as it does, that he will be “enlarged abundantly” among the Corinthians “according to our standard [kanøn]” (v. 15b). Perhaps this hope (the grammar here is difficult) is that the Corinthians will mature in their faith so that they understand the importance of Paul’s foundation-laying ministry, but only “according to the standard.” That is, it is important because God has assigned him this work. Thus, if they mature so as to understand the importance of the work God has called him to do, then Paul will be able “to evangelize beyond” the Corinthians (v. 16a), perhaps because they will no longer need him, or because they will support his mission, or both. But he will “not boast in the things achieved in another’s standard [kanøn]” (v. 16b), which is another way for him to say both that he does not encroach on others’ assignJeremiah 9:23-24 Here and in 1 Corinthians ments from God and that boasting in such is 1:27-31 Paul has used Jeremiah a number of precisely what the visitors were doing. Instead, times in 2 Corinthians (see, e.g., 2 Cor he says, “Let the one who boasts, boast in the 3:6; 10:8). He does so again here as he calls the Lord” (v. 17), a statement that is likely a shortCorinthians to “boast in the Lord”: ened version of Jeremiah 9:22-23, which he also quoted in 1 Corinthians 1:31. [Jeremiah 9:23-24 Jer 9:23-24. Thus says the LORD: Do not let the Here and in 1 Corinthians 1:27-31] God is the one who wise boast in their wisdom, do not let the mighty boast in their might, do not let the wealthy boast gives the assignment and makes one’s work posin their wealth; but let those who boast boast in sible, so any boasting should be about all that this, that they understand and know me, that I am God has done. Indeed, Paul goes on to say that the LORD; I act with steadfast love, justice, and “the one who is tested [and found true] is not righteousness in the earth, for in these things I the one who commends himself/herself, but the delight, says the LORD. one whom the Lord commends” (v. 18). He He used the same Jeremiah text in began this section mocking those who 1 Corinthians when he was arguing against the commend themselves (v. 12). Now he returns to tendency of some Corinthian believers to boast the fruitlessness of such practice at the end of in their wisdom: this thought. What one says about oneself matters little in the presence of what God 1 Cor 1:27-31. But God chose what is foolish in will say. the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong; God We might do well here to pause and consider chose what is low and despised in the world, the likelihood that the rival apostles would not things that are not, to reduce to nothing things have disagreed with Paul’s last points about that are, so that no one might boast in the presboasting in what God has done and that God’s ence of God. [God] is the source of your life in commendation is the one that matters. They Christ Jesus, who became for us wisdom from may not have agreed that they were only comGod, and righteousness and sanctification and redemption in order that, as it is written, “Let the mending themselves, and they clearly disagreed one who boasts, boast in the Lord.” that they had no right to offer the Corinthian believers their version of the gospel. Perhaps

2 Corinthians 10:12-18

203

they believed they were in Corinth as a result of God’s “assignment” no less strongly than Paul did. Thus they were part of the debate that was bound to happen as these first believers tried to figure out how to be faithful followers of Jesus in a world where no one had ever done that before. We are finding that their task was not easy. We know from our experience that it still isn’t.

CONNECTIONS Paul believed strongly that God had called him to found an ekkl∑sia in Corinth for which he was then responsible. There’s a good chance the rival apostles also believed God had called them to preach in Corinth. Thus we have two sides, each claiming God’s sanction for their work. This situation may sound painfully familiar to contemporary churchgoers. What to do? What we often do is turn an inevitable debate—inevitable for Parker Palmer on Conflict and Fear many reasons such as new circumstances not The great spiritual teacher Parker Palmer faced before, human fallibility, personality difhas this to say about conflict and fear. ferences, etc.—into a competition. Spiritual When we find ourselves in a diverse community teacher Parker Palmer says we often identify (like a classroom or, increasingly, a church) we will ourselves with our “side” in a debate/competilikely find ourselves fearful “of the conflict that will tion so that we cannot bear to lose. [Parker Palmer ensue when divergent truths meet . . . . If we peel back our fear of conflict, we find . . . the fear of on Conflict and Fear] Whenever we allow our debates losing identity. Many of us are so deeply identified to become competitions, then our rhetoric, with our ideas that when we have a competitive tactics, and decisions will be dedicated to encounter, we risk losing more than the debate: winning the argument rather than discerning we risk losing our sense of self.” the truth of God in the situation. When truth is But, says Palmer, if we open ourselves to divernot our goal, then everyone, including the sity, conflict, and to the possibility that “ours is not the only standpoint, the only experience, the only “winners,” lose. So, we clearly need to find alterway,” then we will native ways to respond to debates in our midst. encounter the We are seeing that we can learn much from Paul possibility of transand the Corinthians. Sometimes they teach us formation that calls what we ought to do. Sometimes they show us us “not only to new what we must not do. facts and theories and values but also to new ways of living our lives.”

Notes 1. Some manuscripts do not have the last two words of v. 12 (“they do not understand” in English) or the first two words of v. 13 (“but we”). Without them, v. 12b would read “but we measure ourselves and compare ourselves with our-

The Courage to Teach: Exploring the Inner Landscape of a Teacher’s Life (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1998) 38.

Parker Palmer www.wikipedia.org. (Credit: Sharon L. Palmer)

204

2 Corinthians 10:12-18 selves.” While this is the shorter reading, most modern commentators follow the longer one. A copyist could easily have made such an omission (skipping from an ou to an ouk in the Greek), and the shorter reading contradicts Paul’s words in v. 18. 2. Margaret E. Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians (ICC 2; London: T & T Clark International, 2000) 644. 3. Jan Lambrecht, Second Corinthians (SP 8; Collegeville MN: Liturgical Press, 1999) 163. He admits, however, that he translates thusly “not without hesitation” (165). 4. Ralph P. Martin, 2 Corinthians (WBC 40; Waco: Word Books, 1986) 315. 5. Frank J. Matera, II Corinthians (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2003) 233. 6. Ibid.

Refusing Patronage 2 Corinthians 11:1-15

COMMENTARY Having just sharply criticized those who “boast beyond measure,” Paul now appeals to the Corinthians to bear with or permit (anechomai) him a “little foolishness” (11:1). Thus he introduces the language of “foolishness” for the first, but hardly the last, time in this letter fragment. The “little foolishness” he asks them to indulge will turn out to be a “little boasting” about himself (11:16ff ). Before launching into this foolishness, however, he will digress for a bit and continue his response to the rival apostles. The digression begins with Paul declaring his zeal or jealousy for the Corinthians, which he calls “the jealousy of God” (v. 2a), i.e., either a God-like jealousy or jealousy Paul as the Corinthians’ “Father” inspired by God. He is jealous because Paul has claimed to be the Corinthians’ he betrothed them “to one husband” to “father” in previous letters. Here is a present them “as a pure virgin to Christ” review of those claims: (v. 2b). Here Paul is assuming again the role of the Corinthians’ “father.” [Paul as 1 Cor 4:14-16. I am not writing this to make you ashamed, but to admonish you as my beloved the Corinthians’ “Father”] Since fathers in this children. For though you might have ten thousand culture were the “lord protectors” of a guardians in Christ, you do not have many fathers. family’s honor and, consequently, posIndeed, in Christ Jesus I became your father sessed total authority over their through the gospel. I appeal to you, then, be imichildren, the responsibility fell to the tators of me. father to present his daughter as a chaste 2 Cor 6:11-13. Our mouth is opened to you, Corinthians, our heart is opened wide; you are not virgin to the man whom he had being restricted in us, but you are being restricted arranged for her to marry. [Fathers in the in your affections. But by the same exchange, I Roman World] Such is the role and responspeak as to children, you [emphatic pronoun] be sibility, analogously speaking, that Paul opened wide. claims to have performed for the Corinthians. We should understand that a daughter’s virginity did not indicate particular holiness or purity on her part. Rather, in a world where a woman’s primary function was to produce legitimate heirs and where scientific tests to prove paternity did not exist, a betrothed woman’s

206

2 Corinthians 11:1-15

virginity before marriage and chasteness while married ensured that her children were her husband’s. Consequently, a woman’s sexuality was the possession of her father first and then her husband. Her “proper” sexual behavior was strictly regulated, and adultery on her part was a capital crime in every legal system in antiquity.1 [Cicero’s Patriarchy] Given that background, we should not be surprised that Paul’s next rhetorical move is to evoke Eve and the serpent that deceived her (v. 3a). Some Jewish thinkers understood the serpent to have seduced Eve so that her sin was adultery against Adam. [Christian Understandings of Eve’s Sin as Sexual Sin] If this idea of Eve’s sin as sexual sin was in Paul’s mind, then the comparison he makes here shows his concern that the Corinthians may become unfaithful to Christ, the last Adam, as Eve was unfaithful to the first (v. 3b).2 Of course there is nothing in the Genesis account to suggest sexual misconduct on Eve’s part. Nor did Eve sin alone. Instead we see male concerns, even fears, of women’s sexuality being projected onto the text. A man’s desire for legitimate heirs and for his good name to live on in his son(s) along with a woman’s power to thwart those desires combined to create anxiety for men in the ancient world, especially men in positions of power. This situation, in turn, led to efforts to control women’s sexuality by the legal means mentioned above and also by rhetoric and propaganda. Since men

Fathers in the Roman World Paul had previously declared to the Corinthians, “I am not writing this to make you ashamed, but to admonish you as my beloved children. For though you might have ten thousand guardians in Christ, you do not have many fathers. Indeed, in Christ Jesus I became your father through the gospel” (1 Cor 4:14-15). Contemporary commentators have often understood Paul to be showing the affection, paternal concern, love, and oversight that we hope fathers in our time demonstrate. But understanding Paul well requires us to read him within the context of the first-century Roman Empire, wherein fathers possessed total authority over their children. In the Roman context fathers were viewed as ontologically superior to their children, and children were obligated to obey and even to imitate their fathers. The Roman Empire itself was organized and administered like a household with the Caesar as the “father” of the state. The people of the empire were to be “obedient children.” Consequently, Paul’s claim to be the “father” of the Corinthian community is not only, or even primarily, about affection. Issues of authority and obedience surround Paul’s claim.

Cicero’s Patriarchy The Roman philosopher Cicero described the “correct” organization of the Roman Empire as rooted in the “rule of the fathers,” which was exercised on four comprehensive levels: that of the gods (over human beings), of the state, of the household (fathers over all others), and of the mind (over the body). At every level this rule is based on the natural inequality between the ruling “fathers” and the ruled “children.” On all levels the “rule of the father” originates in the father’s rule over the household, i.e., in his care for the children and in the corresponding obedience they owe him. From this primary social unit arises the necessity for a state, the organization of which is

administered like the household. Caesar is, thus, like a father to the state. Consequently, the primary social unit of the empire is patriarchal marriage from which legitimate sons are sired as inheritors of property with the result that the property stays in the hands of the ruling elite. The household is needed so that sons are raised to take their “rightful” place. In this organization women exist to be mothers of the sons of unambiguously identifiable fathers. Consequently, a woman’s sexuality is owned and controlled first by her father and then by her husband. See Luise Schottroff, Lydia’s Impatient Sisters: A Feminist Social History of Early Christianity (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1995) 22–31.

2 Corinthians 11:1-15

207

controlled the public media in the ancient world, they could declare that a woman guilty of sexual misconduct—which included a woman who’d been raped since she had put herself in a place where such a thing could happen—dishonored her husband, her father, her entire family, and even her whole people. She was unclean, unworthy of God The Temptation of Eve or God’s people, a whore. The rhetGislebertus. The Temptation of Eve. (Credit: Cancre / Wikimedia Commons, CC-BYoric was successful to the point that SA-4.0, 3.0, 2.5, 2.0, 1.0) the image of the unfaithful woman became disturbing enough to be used by prophets to call Israel back to God. They used it to shame kings, priests, and people, denouncing them as the unfaithful wife of their true husband YHWH, so that they would repent (see Jer 2-3; Ezek 16:1-22; Hos 2). Paul attempts to evoke the same shame among the Corinthians when he declares that, as Eve was deceived/seduced, he fears the Corinthians’ thoughts will be “corrupted from the sincerity and purity” (i.e., chasteness) for Christ (v. 3b).3 Christian Understandings of Eve’s Sin as Sexual Sin As Susan Haskins has noted, Eve’s part in humanity’s tragedy became the subject of much reflection on the part of many of the early church fathers “as they pondered upon the way the Fall had come to pass. And it was out of these deliberations that Eve came to assume the role of deceiver and temptress to sexual sin, and sexuality itself was to assume the enormous significance it has within Christianity.” According to Elizabeth A. Johnson, Tertullian, Jerome, Chrysostom, Augustine, and many others projected primary responsibility for humanity’s sinfulness onto Eve and all other women who are like her, and they understood Eve’s sin to be sexual: “Eve is the cause of sorrow, condemnation, corruption, and death. Identified with Eve, women are sinful, seductive accomplices of Satan. Note that women’s sexuality here is deeply connected with sin, which is not at all what the biblical text of the so-called fall in Genesis 3 suggests.” But once sin was blamed on Eve, her sin characterized as sexual, and all women identified with her, then “male authors could deploy women as a theological code signaling weakness, sexual temptation, and even depravity.” Haskins, Mary Magdalene: Myth and Metaphor (New York: Harcourt, Brace, & Co., 1993) 70. Johnson, Truly Our Sister: A Theology of Mary in the Communion of Saints (New York: Continuum, 2006) 24.

Eve Tempted by the Serpent William Blake (1757–1827). Eve Tempted by the Serpent. Late 18th C. Tempera. Victoria & Albert Museum, London, Great Britain. (Credit: Victoria & Albert Museum, London/Art Resource, NY)

Image Not Available

due to lack of digital rights. Please view the published commentary or perform an Internet search using the credit below.

208

2 Corinthians 11:1-15

Before going ahead, I must note that, however effective this image of the unfaithful woman may have been as a rhetorical device for the prophets and for Paul, it has had a hugely negative effect on women throughout history. For example, women have lived with the fear of being labeled a slut or whore, which, whether true or not, could affect them for the rest of their lives (meanwhile, men with multiple sex partners were virile and “manly”); women have been described as either virgins or whores when in reality most women are neither, so that the description has made it difficult for women to embrace their own sexuality; raped women have rarely told their stories for fear of how they would be treated and labeled; for most of history a husband could not be charged with raping his wife—even if he did—because her sexuality was his possession; since the focus in instances of sexual misconduct has been on women, men’s sexual misconduct has rarely been addressed by church or society with often tragic consequences. For these reasons (and doubtlessly others), preachers need to address these words from Paul with great sensitivity to women’s experience. [Comments from Women about These Images] Comments from Women about These Images If the sexual temptress Eve is the cause of humanity’s sinfulness, her counterpart is the perpetual Virgin Mary, the perfect woman who, “alone of all her sex,” is pure and blessed by God. Thus the “madonna-whore” syndrome is forced upon women. Since most women are not (or will not be) virgins, the only image left for them is that of the whore. Thus Jane Schaberg says, “Every woman—transgressive or not—is vulnerable to the whore stigma which the prostitute embodies, but especially women ‘who show too much, say too much, know too much, and do too much. Too much of anything is unchaste for women.’” Elizabeth A. Johnson adds that women’s human reality has been divided into good and harmful elements with the good projected “onto Mary in an idealized fashion and the weakness onto the rest of women, who must then be kept subject because of their very nature. Truth be told, this view comes nowhere near the experidue to lack of digital rights. ence actual women have of themselves. Nor, given the Please view the published opportunity, would women ever theologically define commentary or perform an Internet themselves this way.”

Image Not Available

Schaberg, The Resurrection of Mary Magdalene: Legends, Apocrypha, and the Christian Testament (New York: Continuum, 2003) 105. Schaberg is quoting G. Pheterson’s The Prostitution Prism (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 1996) 84. Johnson, Truly Our Sister: A Theology of Mary in the Communion of Saints (New York: Continuum, 2006) 25. Pietro Perugino (1448–1523). Bust of a Saint. Musee Fesch, Ajaccio, Corsica, Corsica, France. (Credit: Gerard Blot/Réunion des Musées Nationaux/Art Resource, NY)

search using the credit below.

2 Corinthians 11:1-15

209

At v. 4 Paul elaborates on his fear that the Corinthians will be “corrupted.” He says that if someone comes “preaching another Jesus whom we did not preach, or you receive a different spirit which you did not receive [from us], or a different gospel [euangelion heteron] which you did not learn [from us], you permit/allow [anechomai] it.” The sarcasm is heavy. Paul asked that the Corinthians permit (anechomai) him a “little foolishness” (v. 1) since they have already permitted (anechomai) others to preach “a different gospel” (v. 4). Beyond the sarcasm, though, this verse raises several questions that are not easily answered. Is Paul referring specifically to the rival apostles who came to Corinth? Or is he making a general charge that the Corinthians will listen to anybody? Paul also uses the term “different gospel” (heteron euangelion) in Galatians 1:6, so are these rival apostles preaching the same message that caused some The “Different Gospel” in the Galatian Letter Galatian believers to seek cirPaul uses similar terminology and expresses similar concerns cumcision, observe special days, in 2 Corinthians and Galatians as he describes those with etc. (see Gal 4:10-11; 5:2-3)? [The whom he disagrees and their understanding of the gospel. Here is a “Different Gospel” in the Galatian Letter]

look at the “different gospel” he opposes in the Galatian letter:

Are they perhaps the same apos1:6. I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who tles who went to Galatia after called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel Paul and created problems for (heteron euangelion). him there? Or do Paul’s words 4:10-11. You are observing special days, and months, and seasons, about another Jesus, a different and years. I am afraid my work for you may have been wasted. spirit, and a different gospel refer [Scholars believe Paul is referring to the Jewish calendar.] more generally to any message 5:2-3. Listen! I, Paul, am telling you that if you let yourself be circumcised, Christ will be of no benefit to you. Once again I testify to every other than the one he preached man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obliged to obey the in Corinth? entire law. Scholars are divided on answers to these questions. Some In addition, he opposed those Jewish believers who refused to eat believe Paul’s use of the term with Gentiles because of Jewish purity concerns (2:11-14). “different gospel” in both Galatians and 2 Corinthians cannot have been accidental so that he is referring to specific apostles with a specific (Judaizing) message who followed him to Galatia and now to Corinth. Others believe Paul is speaking generally and that the term “different gospel” is too generic to allow a reconstruction of the visiting apostles and their message. The debate is unresolved. [Scholars’ Differing Opinions in Their Own Words] The important point, however, is that Paul’s criticism is not directed at the other apostles or their message but at the Corinthians who permit them so that they are like an unfaithful spouse. He implies that they should have discerned the situation more clearly. They are the ones he hopes to influence.

210

2 Corinthians 11:1-15

Scholars’ Differing Opinions in Their Own Words Scholars disagree over how precisely we may identify the rival apostles in Corinth. Here are examples of their views. Sze-kar Wan believes the rival apostles must be the same ones who cause problems in Galatia: The references to “another Jesus” and a “different gospel” here are familiar to anyone who has read Galatians, where Paul lambastes the church for leaving the true gospel for “another gospel” (Gal. 1:6) . . . . The use of the same terminology here cannot be accidental. Paul must be intending to warn the Corinthians of the same danger to which the Galatian church has fallen prey, and his opponents in 2 Corinthians must be the same group of Jewish Christians who advocated a law-centered Christianity in Corinth just as they tried to do in Galatia.

David Garland, on the other hand, is among those scholars who believe Paul’s rivals cannot be precisely identified:

Paul’s summary of their preaching, “another Jesus,” “another gospel,” “another Spirit,” provides nothing concrete to identify the opponents, though that has not stopped interpreters from trying. The disparate reconstructions of their views merely confirm the ambiguity of these terms. The only thing about which we can be sure is that their gospel differed from Paul’s, and we can only infer how it differed from what Paul emphasizes in response . . . . In contrast to his attack on the Judaizers who infiltrated the Galatians, Paul does not single out any particular false doctrine in condemning these Corinthian rivals. We may infer from this that it is primarily their haughty manner and actions that expose their faulty theological doctrine. Wan, Power in Weakness: The Second Letter of Paul to the Corinthians (Harrisburg PA: Trinity Press International, 2000) 139–40. Garland, 2 Corinthians (NAC; Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999) 464.

When Paul declares in v. 5 that he is “not inferior to the super apostles,”4 he is obviously addressing the specific situation in Corinth. But several things are still unclear. By saying he is “not inferior” to these “super apostles,” is he making himself superior or equal to them? And who are the people he is referring to now? Some scholars believe they must be the “pillars” of the church who reside in Jerusalem (see Gal 2:9) since only they could be designated as “super apostles.” They had sent their representatives to Corinth with letters of recommendation (see 2 Cor 3:1). In response Paul insists that he is equal (i.e., not inferior) to these Jerusalem (super) apostles. Scholars who hold such views read Paul as only mildly sarcastic and ironic in this verse.5 But more scholars, I among them, see heavy irony and sarcasm, even mockery, in Paul’s words so that he is asserting his superiority, not his equality, to these visitors. Consequently, there is no need to understand the “super apostles” as the Jerusalem pillars. Paul’s focus is on the situation unfolding in Corinth. Having declared that he is not inferior to these rival apostles, Paul goes on to say that even if he is an “idiøt∑s in word” he is not so in knowledge (v. 6a). The Greek word idiøt∑s conveyed the idea of being unskilled, untrained, an amateur. Paul is likely responding once again to a charge made by his rivals that he was not a great orator, a charge that could sting in a world where oratory was highly valued. We may be surprised that Paul concedes this point. His letters show rhetorical sophistication so that he is not

2 Corinthians 11:1-15

211

completely unskilled in rhetoric (though he may not have been professionally trained or a dynamic speaker). But Paul Sampley points out that, at times, it was considered rhetorically advantageous to admit the truth of a charge so as to explain its significance in a way different from one’s opponents,6 which is what Paul does here. He concedes that he may have been an idiøt∑s in word, but he quickly follows with an insistence that he was not an idiøt∑s in knowledge, which, by implication, is the more important arena. Furthermore, Paul believes the Corinthians should know about his knowledge for he revealed it to them “in every way” and “in all things” (v. 6b). We might benefit at this point from knowing that in the background of this situation may be a longstanding debate between ancient philosophers and wandering sophists, the latter of whom took fees for their teaching, taught various subjects but primarily rhetoric, and developed reputations as premier orators. The philosophers opposed them as big talkers with little substance. There is evidence of the presence of a sophistic movement in Corinth in the first century as well as Corinthian enthusiasm for it.7 Thus, as the philosophers opposed the sophists, so Paul may be responding that he was not one of those big talkers with little substance (i.e., knowledge) as were his opponents. Paul then begins to show the Corinthians Paul’s Refusal of Patronage among the (again) something of his knowledge. The Corinthians issue of Paul not taking money from the The issue of Paul receiving patronage has come Corinthians has apparently surfaced again. up before, and Paul has consistently refused. With biting sarcasm he asks if he “sinned” We find his refusals in 1 Corinthians and in the letter by “humbling” (tapeinos; see commentary contained in 2 Cor 1–9. on 10:1) himself so that the Corinthians 1 Cor 9:3-4, 15-18. This is my defense to those who “would be exalted” when he “freely would examine me. Do we not have the right to our preached the gospel of God” to them (v. 7). food and drink? . . . But I have made no use of any of This is at least the third time questions these rights, nor am I writing this so that they may be about Paul’s financial practices have been applied in my case. Indeed, I would rather die than raised (see 1 Cor 9:3-7, 15-18; 2 Cor 2:17). that—no one will deprive me of my ground for boasting! If I proclaim the gospel, this gives me no [Paul’s Refusal of Patronage among the Corinthians] His ground for boasting, for an obligation is laid on me . . . . decision to refuse patronage from the For if I do this of my own will, I have a reward; but if not Corinthians and to work to support himself of my own will, I am entrusted with a commission. was apparently never well received by some What then is my reward? Just this: that in my proclabelievers there. We should remember that mation I may make the gospel free of charge, so as not the Roman practice of patronage was evito make full use of my rights in the gospel. 2 Cor 2:17. For we are not as the many who are huckdently widespread in Corinth (see stering the word of God, but as from sincerity, as from introduction). Wealthier Corinthians were God, and before God we speak in Christ. accustomed to offering “favors,” thus

212

2 Corinthians 11:1-15

buying influence and a loyal group of clients who benefited from the favors. Refusal of patronage was not only unheard of; it was also considered an insult. But refuse Paul did. And it rankled. Paul is going to mention his refusal two other times in this letter (11:20; 12:13-17), suggesting the issue has gotten particularly heated by this time. Verses 8-9 may tell us why: while refusing money from Corinthian believers, he had accepted support from other churches (v. 8), particularly from believers in Macedonia (v. 9) whom many Corinthians would have viewed as rivals (see the commentary on 8:1-6). As Sampley has said, Paul likely made financial decisions for reasons that made perfect sense to him. For example, his regular practice may have been not to accept money from believers while he was among them to avoid becoming a client (or, in Richard Horsley’s words, a “house apostle”; see the commentary on 2:17) who would be less free to do ministry on his own terms. In addition, we know from 1 Corinthians that this community was fractured. Some of the divisiveness derived from socioeconomic differences (see 1 Cor 11:17-22). Had Paul accepted support from wealthier Corinthian believers, he could have exacerbated the division between the haves and the have-nots. But the wealthier believers, especially any who also had theological disagreements with Paul (see the commentary on 4:7ff ), would have experienced Paul’s refusal as a shameful rebuke. Then, upon hearing that he accepted support from the Macedonians, they may have felt like they were treated as second-class members among Pauline communities.8 We noted that Paul asked if he sinned by freely preaching the gospel. He now says he “robbed” other churches so as to serve the Corinthians (v. 8). We cannot know if Paul was actually accused of robbing other churches, or if he was engaging in hyperbole at this point. We remember that he was accused of manipulation and deceit before (see the commentary on 4:2-4; 5:11; 6:6-10; 7:2). He could appear inconsistent and deceitful in these financial matters, especially if the Corinthians had not known about the Macedonian money at the time Paul received it. It seems clear, though, that the Macedonians had gladly supported Paul, supplying his need when his own work was inadequate (v. 9). [The Support of the Philippians as Reported in Philippians 4:14-18] Their support enabled him to say, “I kept [t∑reø] myself as not a burden, and I will keep [t∑reø] myself ” (v. 9). Sampley notes that when Paul doubles his verbs, he does so to announce his “final decision” on a matter.9 To underscore the point, Paul declares that “the truth of Christ is in me that this boast for me will not be silenced in the regions of Achaia” (v. 10).

2 Corinthians 11:1-15

213

Criticism, even painful criticism, will The Support of the Philippians as Reported in not stop him from preaching freely. Philippians 4:14-18 Paul founded an ekkl∑sia in Philippi of Macedonia and, But does his refusal of Corinthian as far as we know, had good relations with this comsupport mean that he loves the munity. The letter to the Philippians makes clear that these Macedonians more, or perhaps that he believers had a history of supporting Paul, so we are justified in does not love the Corinthians at all guessing that they were among those who supported him (v. 11a)? In an emotional and poignant while he was in Corinth. Note Phil 4:14-18: outburst he declares, “God knows!” In any case, it was kind of you to share my distress. You (that he indeed loves them; v. 11b). Philippians indeed know that in the early days of the gospel, In case he’s not made his point when I left Macedonia, no church shared with me in the matter strongly enough, in v. 12a Paul of giving and receiving except you alone. For even when I was in Thessalonica [another Macedonian city], you sent me help for doubles his verbs again: “what I do my needs more than once. Not that I seek the gift, but I seek [poieø] I will do [poieø].” Then he gives the profit that accumulates to your account. I have been paid in a key reason for his adamancy about full and have more than enough; I am fully satisfied now that I continuing this practice: he will not have received from Ephaphroditus the gift you sent . . . . give an opportunity to those who want to boast that that they are comparable to Paul (v. 12bc). His words imply that the rival apostles had accepted the support of Corinthian patrons. If indeed they did so, then there are other implications for Paul that we can surmise. They would likely have confirmed Corinthian criticism of Paul for not accepting support, which they added to their criticism of his unprofessional speech while showing off their letters of recommendation (likely from Jerusalem). Thus they could claim the same right as Paul to preach to the Corinthians even though he founded the church there. Sze-kar Wan notes that the rhetorical technique of synkrisis (i.e., comparison) comes into play here: Paul’s rivals were apparently seeking to enhance their reputation and status by comparing themselves to Paul.10 But Paul refuses to accept that he and they are comparable and takes his stand on his absolute refusal to burden the Corinthians. Instead he preaches the gospel freely, unlike these others. Then, as the cliché goes, the gloves come off. Far from being his equals, Paul declares that these others are “false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into apostles of Christ” (v. 13). Just as Satan transforms himself into an “angel of light” (v. 14), Paul’s rivals can transform themselves into “servants of justice” (v. 15a). So, Paul concludes, their “end will be according to their works” (v. 15b). That is, they will get what’s coming to them. These words are sharp and bitter. As Jan Lambrecht has said, “One cannot but be surprised by Paul’s outburst.”11 Earlier, when claiming Corinth as an area assigned to him by God (10:13-14), he implied that these other apostles might have their areas where they

214

2 Corinthians 11:1-15

should preach. Later he will accept that his rivals are servants of Christ (11:23). Consequently, we should see in these invectives not a reasoned judgment of his rivals but the depth of Paul’s anger and frustration. If the rival apostles were taking Paul’s thoughtful decisions and twisting them into something devious as it appears, and if Corinthian believers who should give Paul the benefit of the doubt were agreeing with them as it appears, then Paul’s emotions are understandable. At the same time, we remember that Paul has called himself an ambassador of reconciliation. He has been working hard on the Jerusalem collection so as to reconcile factions within the Christian movement. But his name-calling is polarizing rather than conciliatory. Even as we understand Paul’s emotions, we can wonder if his words helped his cause.

CONNECTIONS 1. In the commentary on vv, 2-3 and related sidebars, I give much attention to the harmful effects of the image of Eve as sexual temptress on women. I’m turning to the issue again. Some readers may think that I attend too much to an image that is not a major part of Paul’s argument in 2 Corinthians. Out of my own experience as a woman, I must disagree. But I also offer evidence beyond my personal experience. As I write this paragraph, the sensational murder trial of Mary Winkler, the small-town preacher’s wife who shot her husband in March 2006, is going on in Selmer, Tennessee. What has emerged from the trial is that Matthew Winkler, a Christian minister, held his wife responsible for everything bad that happened to him and believed he had the right to dominate all aspects of her life, especially her sexuality. We would love to classify this case as extreme and isolated, but it is not. In a recent seminary class discussion I was leading, one student witnessed to her own experience of an abusive marriage. She said she came to realize that if she didn’t get out of the marriage, she would kill her husband. Two other women in the same class admitted to having been in similar situations, one of whom said she would be dead if she had not gotten out. A woman minister I know got out of an abusive marriage that pushed her to the brink of suicide. In the two years since she has been safe and growing toward wholeness, she has had numerous women talk to her about the treatment they face in their troubled marriages. Another woman minister in my city founded an organization to address relationship violence in churches after a friend was murdered by her boyfriend. This organization works in

2 Corinthians 11:1-15

churches because all the women mentioned here were in marriages blessed by the church. Clearly abuse is a complicated matter, and there are multiple reasons it happens. But those of us in church must recognize that the “madonna-whore syndrome” offers justification for male abusers by painting women as weak, depraved, sexual temptresses who must be controlled. These images and verses may not be a primary part of Paul’s argument, but they have had too primary a place in Christian history. Therefore, when we read, preach, or teach from this text, we must give attention to their effect. And we must denounce the “madonna-whore syndrome.” 2. A primary part of Paul’s argument in this letter and previous ones is the integrity of his financial practice. In 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians 1–9, and now in this letter, he notes that he refused patronage and offers reasons for doing so. Furthermore, according to this text, he intends to continue to refuse it. The Corinthians had pressured him to accept it. We might wonder if some of them increased the amount they offered, but even if they did he still refused, showing he did not have a “price.” The practice of his rivals put pressure on him—when they accepted patronage they honored Corinthians, while Paul’s refusal shamed them (in their way of thinking). Paul’s manual labor was difficult and often inadequate for his needs, so here is more pressure. Still he refused. He offered the gospel freely, would not be a burden to Corinthians (many of whom were poor themselves), and would not be owned by anyone. His practice and his spiritual reasons for his practice present quite a challenge to us today. We live in a time when church members, or potential church members, with deep pockets are pampered so that their money is available for church projects. However we try to rationalize the practice (e.g., “this ministry is so needed, and we can’t do it without that money;” etc.), the result produces ugly consequences. When decision-makers in a church are beholden to those with money, they are not free to follow the lead of the Spirit in their decisions. Furthermore, they enable the egocentricity of wealthy people who (consciously or unconsciously) want to buy power and influence in the church rather than nurturing an experience of grace. With integrity, Paul could tell the Corinthians that all they owned was because of God’s grace and call them to respond graciously because he lived by grace. We can learn from him.

215

216

2 Corinthians 11:1-15

Notes 1. Luise Schottroff, Lydia’s Impatient Sisters: A Feminist Social History of Early Christianity (trans. Barbara and Martin Rumscheidt; Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1995) 182. 2. Margaret E. Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians (ICC 2; London: T & T Clark International, 2000) 662–63, believes there may be a hint of the idea of Eve’s sin as sexual sin in the use of the verb phtheiro. Translated by the NRSV as “deceived,” it can also mean “seduced” as in sexual seduction. 3. We should observe a textual variant present in v. 3. Some manuscripts have only “sincerity [haplot∑tos] for Christ,” while others have “sincerity and purity [hagnot∑tos] for Christ.” The difficulty in determining the original reading can be seen by an examination of various translations. The NRSV, NIV, and Victor Paul Furnish, II Corinthians (AB 32a; Garden City NY: Doubleday & Co., 1984) 484, among others, opt for the longer reading. The JB, NEB, and Ralph P. Martin, 2 Corinthians (WBC 40; Waco: Word Books, 1986) 327, among others, choose the shorter one. The meaning of the phrase is not really affected. 4. Many church people are accustomed to applying the word “apostle” only to the twelve and to Paul. But Paul uses the term in a variety of ways. See J. Paul Sampley, The Second Letter to the Corinthians (NIB 11; Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2000) 149, for a discussion of these uses. 5. Martin, 2 Corinthians, 342, is an example of a scholar holding this view. 6. J. Paul Sampley, “Paul, His Opponents in 2 Corinthians 10–13, and the Rhetorical Handbooks,” in The Social World of Formative Christianity and Judaism: Essays in Tribute to Howard Clark Kee (ed. Jacob Neusner, et al.; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1988) 166. 7. Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, ICC 2, 681. 8. Sampley, The Second Letter to the Corinthians, 134, 152; see also Sze-kar Wan, Power in Weakness: The Second Letter of Paul to the Corinthians (Harrisburg PA: Trinity Press International, 2000) 135-–36, on the subject of Paul refusing support. 9. Sampley, The Second Letter to the Corinthians, 159. 10. Sze-kar Wan, Power in Weakness, 144, 11. Jan Lambrecht, Second Corinthians (SP 8; Collegeville MN: Liturgical Press, 1999) 179.

Boasting in Weakness 2 Corinthians 11:16–12:13

COMMENTARY With his digression to defend and promote his financial practice completed, Paul turns in v. 16 to the boasting he announced in 11:1. In that earlier verse he had asked the Corinthians to bear with him in a little foolishness. Here he asks them not to think him foolish, but if they do, then they should go ahead and “receive” him “as foolish” so that he may “boast a little.” With these Review of Paul’s Use of Kata Sarka in words Paul names such boasting as 2 Corinthians foolish even as he moves to participate Paul has used the phrase kata sarka (“according to the flesh”) at key in it. He says further that this “project moments in 2 Corinthians. Here is a review of of boasting”1 is not “according to the those moments: Lord” (kata kyrion) but is, rather, foolishness (v. 17). Nonetheless, since 1:17. Therefore, having decided this [the travel “many others are boasting according to plans outlined in 1:15-16], then perhaps I acted the flesh [kata sarka],” Paul will also with fickleness? Or do I decide the things I decide kata sarka so that with me it is yes yes and no boast (v. 18). [Review of Paul’s Use of Kata no? Sarka in 2 Corinthians] So he disdains 5:16. Therefore, from now on we [emphatic boasting, but he’s going to do it anyway. pronoun] know no one kata sarka; although we Let us note carefully what is going on once knew Christ kata sarka, we now no longer here. are knowing [him that way]. Early in this commentary I warned 10:2. I ask when being present not to be bold in the confidence which I consider I am able to readers who are uncomfortable with the assume against some who consider us as walking idea of boasting that they should kata sarka. prepare themselves, for boasting will be 10:3. For while we are walking en sarki [“in the a key issue in this letter. There I noted flesh”], we are not doing battle kata sarka. that Paul considered boasting in one’s work on behalf of the gospel to be acceptable (see the commentary on 1:12). So, at 1:14, he writes that the Corinthians are his boast “in the day of the Lord Jesus” and that, likewise, he should be the Corinthians’ boast since they share in God’s work in the world. Similarly, he has just said that he will not “boast beyond measure” but only according to the standard (or assignment) that God gave

218

2 Corinthians 11:16–12:13

him (10:13), and that the one “who boasts should boast in the Lord” (10:17). [Review of Paul’s “Boasting” in 2 Corinthians] Now, however, he says he is going to boast (about himself ), even though it is foolish. Is this another occasion when Paul can be accused of inconsistency? He certainly leaves himself open to the charge. As Margaret Thrall observes, some Corinthians might have understood Paul to indicate that a particular practice was 7:3-4. I am not speaking to condemn. I have said before acceptable when he engaged in it but not that you are in our hearts to live and to die. There is much confidence in me towards you, much boasting in when his rivals did the same.2 There is, me over you, I have been filled with consolation, I am however, another possibility, i.e., that a overflowing with joy upon our every trial. rhetorical purpose shapes Paul’s words. As 7:14. Because whatever I have boasted about you to we noted in the commentary on 11:12, Paul [Titus], I have not been put to shame, but as everything has been drawn into the rhetoric of comparwe spoke to you was in truth, so also our boasting to ison with his rivals. Entering into debate on Titus has been true. 8:24. Therefore, display proof of our love and our someone else’s terms, however, is often boasting over you to [Titus and the two brothers] in the unprofitable, for they will have set those presence of the churches. terms to their advantage. Paul’s rivals have 9:2-3. For I know your readiness about which I boast to apparently boasted that their apostolic crethe Macedonians, that Achaia was prepared from last dentials consist of oratorical skill, letters of year [to participate in the Jerusalem collection] and recommendation, the support of patrons, your zeal stirred the majority. And I sent the brothers so that our boast over you will not be emptied in this Jewish heritage, ecstatic experiences, suffermatter, so that you may be prepared just as I was ings for the gospel (the latter three criteria saying. will be addressed soon), etc. Paul’s problem is that, with regard to most of these criteria, What is new is that Paul will boast over himself. he pales by comparison. His response thus far has been to reject any need for letters and patronage, and to concede that he is not a great orator. But he is about to boast over his Jewish heritage, sufferings, and ecstatic experiences. How can he do so without getting drawn into a comparison he cannot “win” and without validating the kind of criteria his rivals have established? Indeed, how can he do so without validating comparison itself (i.e., “who is best?”), which would be particularly troublesome since some Corinthians apparently already lean toward triumphalism in their understanding of the gospel (see the commentary on 4:7ff )? Sze-kar Wan points out that the goal of the rhetoric of comparison is to be more logical, reasonable, and reasoned than one’s opponents. But Paul is claiming to speak as a fool (vv. 16, 21) and “not according to the Lord” (v. 17). He is not, therefore, “playing”

Review of Paul’s “Boasting” in 2 Corinthians In 2 Corinthians Paul speaks of “boasting” several times in different ways. First, in 1:14, he says he should be the Corinthians’ “boast” just as they “also are ours in the day of the Lord Jesus.” Similarly, in 5:12 Paul says he is not commending himself again to the Corinthians but rather is giving them “an opportunity for boasting over us so that you may have something for the ones boasting in appearance and not in the heart.” But mostly he has boasted about the Corinthians:

2 Corinthians 11:16–12:13

by the handbooks of rhetoric. Perhaps, then, his aim is to subvert his rivals’ rhetoric. As he enters into comparison, he will not try to prove that he is better than them. He is, rather, the exact opposite of them.3 Before beginning his boast, however, he cannot resist another sarcastic jab at his rivals and the Corinthians who listen to them. Having asked that they receive him as a fool (v. 16), he adds that such a reception should be easy for them since they gladly bear with foolishness, being wise themselves (v. 19). After all, they bear it when someone enslaves them, “devours” them, “takes” them, exalts himself or herself, or “slaps you in the face” (v. 20). The word translated “devour” is from the Greek verb for “eat.” This verb, together with the one translated as “take,” likely refers to the rival apostles’ practice of receiving payment for their gospel work. Contemporary phrases such as “eating you out of house and home” and “you’ve been taken” use similar words and may capture Paul’s thinking. The other charges—enslaves, exalts self, and slaps others in the face—show that Paul considered his rivals’ exercise of authority to be arrogant and abusive. With biting sarcasm he concludes his jab with, “I say this to my shame” since “we have been too weak” for such things (v. 21a).4 This is the first occurrence in the letter of the verb for “being weak.” It is not the first time the idea has surfaced, however. We noted in the commentary on 10:1-2, 10 that some in Corinth apparently considered Paul weak. He may be responding to that charge here—he was indeed too weak to abuse and devour them! Now he is ready to get on with his boasting: “but whatever anyone dares (to boast of )—I am speaking as a fool—I dare also” (v. 21b). He begins his boast with his Jewish heritage. A literal translation could read, “Hebrews are they? I also. Israelites are they? I also. Seed of Abraham are they? I also” (v. 22). Paul’s rivals must have been highlighting their Jewishness since he felt the need to do so, which again raises the possibility that they were members of the “gospel of circumcision” group (see introduction and the commentary on 3:12-18). We noted already that some scholars believe they were specifically from the same party that caused Paul problems in Galatia (see the commentary on 11:4). Whether or not this identification fits, they were clearly calling on their Jewishness as proof of apostolic credibility. But Paul “boasts” that they cannot outdo his own Jewishness.5 [Paul’s Jewish Heritage (or “Not Reading Paul Anti-Semitically”)] He continues initially in the same manner: “servants of Christ are they?” (v. 23a). But then Paul breaks his rhetorical pattern. First, he interjects a caveat: “I am speaking out of my mind” (or “as a

219

220

2 Corinthians 11:16–12:13

madman,” v. 23a). We are reminded that “normal” comparisons were logical and reasoned, but Paul claims not to be following the norm intentionally. Second, he does not follow his interjection with “I also.” This time he says, “I am more” (v. 23a). Rom 3:1-2. Then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the value He uses the Greek word hyper of circumcision? Much in every way. For in the first place the Jews (more), which is doubtlessly a play were entrusted with the oracles of God. on calling his rivals hyperlian aposRom 9:3-5. For I could wish that I myself were accursed and cut off tolon (“super apostles,” 11:5). The from Christ for the sake of my own people, my kindred according to comparison and his boasting are the flesh. They are Israelites, and to them belong the adoption, the now fully engaged. glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises; to them belong the patriarchs, and from them, according Before moving to the next phase to the flesh, comes the Messiah, who is over all, God blessed of Paul’s boasting, we must note forever. Amen. his point that he is “more” of a Phil 4b-6. If anyone has reason to be confident in the flesh, I have servant of Christ than his rivals, more: circumcised on the eighth day, a member of the people of which means he accepts that they Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew born of Hebrews; as to the were also Christ’s servants. How law, a Pharisee; as to zeal, a persecutor of the church; as to righteousness under the law, blameless. odd, considering he has just called them servants of Satan and false The “punch line” for all these texts for Paul is that being Jewish apostles who transform themselves did not make him more acceptable to God than non-Jews, for salvainto servants of justice as Satan tion is by God’s grace received by faith. But he never lost his pride in transforms himself an angel of being part of the people through whom the redemption of God was light (11:13-15). There is no easy poured out on all of creation. way to gloss over this inconsistency. Frankly, Paul again creates the impression of speaking out of both sides of his mouth.6 Clearly we see the depth of Paul’s emotion here. But many of our parents taught us that name-calling rarely accomplishes anything good. Unfortunately, Paul’s inconsistency illustrates their point. Having declared that he is more of a servant of Christ than these others, Paul sets out to prove his point by means of the third catalogue of hardships encountered in 2 Corinthians (see 4:8-9; 6:4-10). The list is long, which speaks, again, to Paul’s emotion. But the length also serves to buttress Paul’s point that he is “more” Christ’s servant. He begins with a “general heading” for what follows: he has had far more labors and imprisonments, more severe beatings, and more frequent brushes with death (v. 23b).7 From this point he gives specifics about his hardships. Verses 24-25 enumerate his beatings and brushes with death: five times he was beaten by synagogue authorities and three times by Paul’s Jewish Heritage (or “Not Reading Paul AntiSemitically”) We have noted in this commentary several times that we must not read Paul as being anti-Semitic, that he loved his Jewish heritage and traditions. He lists his “Jewish credentials” in these verses so as to claim his rivals cannot “out-Jewish” him. He makes assertions in other letters that show his love of his heritage and people. Here are some examples:

2 Corinthians 11:16–12:13

the Romans; once he was stoned; three times he was shipwrecked; and once he spent a day and night adrift on the sea. Verse 26 presents the dangers he faced during his frequent journeys for the gospel: dangers from rivers and robbers; from Jews and Gentiles; in the city, the wilderness, and on the sea; and from “false brothers.” Verse 27 details the hardships that resulted from his labor and toil: many sleepless nights, in hunger and thirst, often without food, in the cold and poorly clothed. Finally, “apart from external things”8 is the daily pressure on Paul of his anxiety over all the churches (v. 28). This hardship list raises a number of questions that are not easily answered. Neither Paul’s letters nor Acts recount all these events. Consequently, many students of Paul would like to know when, where, and why all these things happened, but we lack the data for clarification. “Beaten with rods” (v. 25) was a Roman punishment normally administered to non-Roman citizens, so is Acts wrong about Paul’s Roman citizenship? His receipt of thirty-nine lashes from Jewish authorities (see Deut 25:2-3) suggests Paul continued his association with the synagogue and submitted to its discipline. Should we be surprised? What did he do that warranted so great a punishment from those authorities? We cannot be sure. Does the “labor and toil” of v. 27 refer to his work to support himself so that he could refuse patronage? This seems likely. What then of the other comments in the verse? Did he work nights (i.e., “sleepless nights”) so as to do his gospel work during the day? Was such work low paying (so that he was cold, hungry, and thirsty)? Was such work considered less than honorable so that some Corinthians were embarrassed by it and, consequently, even more angry about his refusal of patronage? Perhaps so. What is clear is that the hardship list is lengthy so as to impress. But it impresses with its embrace of weak and shameful things. Paul boasts about his punishments, powerlessness, menial labor, and anxiety! The list leads to the comical punch line, “Who is weak and I am not weak?” (v. 29a).9 When he asks further, “Who is caused to stumble [Greek: scandalizø] and I am not indignant [lit., “I do not burn”]?” (v. 29b), he is likely referring to the Corinthian situation wherein his rivals have promoted a showier, triumphalistic understanding of the gospel that Paul believes is contrary to the grace and humility of the crucified Christ. Their success in “scandalizing” his Corinthian converts “burns him up,” but all he can do is offer a different way. So, since he finds it “necessary to boast” as a result of his rivals’ work in Corinth, Paul boasts about his weakness (v. 30).

221

222

2 Corinthians 11:16–12:13

Verses 31-33 have long puzzled readers of this letter, primarily because their fit into Paul’s argument at this point is unclear. Verse 31 offers an oath to Paul’s truthfulness (“God . . . knows that I am not lying”). But is he defending the truth of what he has just said (in vv. 24-29), what he is about to say The Story in Acts 9:19-25 (vv. 32-33), or that he is serious about boasting A similar story is related by the author of over his weakness (v. 30)? Perhaps the answer Acts who says that in the days following is “all of the above.” Perhaps Paul felt the oath Paul’s dramatic experience on the journey to Damascus: was necessary because boasting in his weakness was so radically different from his rivals and so For several days he was with the disciples in unexpected that he needed to insist, “I’m not Damascus, and immediately he began to proclaim at all kidding.” Jesus in the synagogues, saying, “He is the Son of God.”… Saul [i.e., Paul] became increasingly more Perhaps this insistence is also the reason for powerful and confounded the Jews who lived in telling the story of his escape in a basket Damascus by proving that Jesus was the Messiah. through a window in the city wall of After some time had passed, the Jews plotted to kill Damascus in vv. 32-33. Scholars have long him, but their plot became known to Saul. They were watching the gates day and night so that they scrutinized the historicity of this event, asking might kill him; but his disciples took him by night and such questions as, Did the Nabatean king let him down through an opening in the wall, lowAretas ever exercise control over Syrian ering him in a basket. (Acts 9:19-25) Damascus? Who and/or what would an “ethnarch” in Damascus have been? What did Paul do to get in trouble with the Damascus civil authorities? How does Paul’s account relate to the story in Acts 9:23-25?10 [The Story in Acts 9:19-25] Whatever the answers to these quesSaint Paul Fleeing Damascus in a Basket tions, Paul likely included this story to underline his intent to boast in his weakness, for escaping in a basket through a Image Not Available window in a wall is hardly due to lack of digital rights. a glamorous moment in Please view the published Paul’s career. commentary or perform an Internet He is not kidding about search using the credit below. the content of his boasting, not even when it comes to “visions and revelations of the Lord.” It is Saint Paul Fleeing Damascus in a Basket. 1180–1185. Enamel plaque from reliquary or altar in “necessary” to boast in England. Victoria & Albert Museum, London, Great Britain. (Credit: Erich Lessing/Art Resource, NY) them, Paul says, though it is “not profitable” (12:1a). This enamel plaque from an altar in England (c. 1180) depicts Paul escaping Then why is it necessary? from Damascus in a basket. The plaque is a wonderful work of art, but it is also Since Paul is still engaged rather comical, which serves to underscore Paul’s point that this moment in his career was hardly a glorious one. He recounts it here because he is “boasting in comparison, he likely in his weakness.”

2 Corinthians 11:16–12:13

223

felt compelled to boast in his ecstatic experiences because his rivals were doing so. But as we read this account of his experience, we should remember that he has worked to this point to subvert the logic of comparison. We will see if he continues to do so. Paul says he will go to “visions and revelations of the Lord” (v. 1b). We are probably to take note of the plural forms. While Paul will recount only one such experience, he not so subtly makes clear that this experience is not the only one. Also, these visions and revelations are “of the Lord.” The Greek construction can mean either that the experiences come from God as their source, or that the Lord is the content of the revelation. Most interpreters favor the former option. He begins his account by saying, “I know a man in Christ . . .” (v. 2a). While some few commentators have thought Paul was talking about someone else, most scholars understand him to be using a literary convention of the time to describe himself. Some of these scholars suggest the third person narrative reflects the nature of the vision, i.e., that Paul experienced some distance from himself, some self-transcendence that allowed him to observe himself during the experience.11 Other scholars, however, believe Paul was employing an intentional rhetorical strategy. The conventions of the time suggest telling a personal story in third person was advantageous when the story might be heard as self-promotion. As we will see, the story Paul tells is about a grand experience.12 The experience Paul chooses to recount happened “fourteen years ago,” (v. 2a) but he is apparently telling the story to the Corinthians for the first time. Those fourteen years of silence about the experience underscore his reluctance to boast in such things. The experience was one of being “caught up into the third heaven” (12:2b). Later he says he was “caught up into Layers of Heaven in the New Testament Paradise” (12:3a). There are a few commentators The idea of “layers” or levels in heaven who believe Paul was describing two different appears in New Testament texts such as experiences, but the majority of interpreters the following: insist Paul described one event in slightly different ways. The idea of heaven having “layers” Eph 4:10. He who descended is the same one who ascended far above all the heavens, so that was well known in ancient Judaism and appears he might fill all things. in the New Testament as well. [Layers of Heaven in 2 Pet 3:5, 7. They deliberately ignore this fact, the New Testament] Jewish thinkers had different that by the word of God heavens existed long ago thoughts about how many layers existed, and an earth was formed out of water and by including some who argued for three so that the means of water . . . . But by the same word the “third heaven” was the highest level. Paul apparpresent heavens and earth have been reserved for fire, being kept until the day of judgment and ently fit into this group of thinkers. “Paradise” destruction of the godless. in Paul’s time might refer to the Garden of

224

2 Corinthians 11:16–12:13

Artists and Paradise Many artists have been captivated by biblical and extra-canonical descriptions of the Garden of Eden as “paradise” and have sought to put those images on canvas. This image is a 17th-C. effort of Jacobsz Roelandt Savery titled The Garden of Eden, Roelandt Jacobsz Savery (1576–1639). The Garden of Eden. Oil on canvas. Private Collection. (Credit: Rafael Valls/Gallery, London, UK/The Bridgeman Art Library)

Eden, an irenic place above the earth, or the place where God resides and cares for the chosen ones. It had also acquired apocalyptic overtones: the first paradise will reappear at the end. It must, therefore, exist in hidden form in the present. This notion of an existing but hidden paradise may rest in the background of Paul’s experience here.13 In addition, the third heaven and Paradise are linked in some ancient Jewish literature. [Note Apocalypse of Moses; 2 Enoch] Thus Paul is apparently claiming to have been transported into the highest and currently hidden realm of God. In some firstcentury Jewish circles, this would have been the greatest of mystical experiences.14 How Paul describes this journey into the highest heaven is telling. Twice he declares that he does not know whether this experience happened in or out of the body, only God knows (vv. 2b, 3b). “Out of the body” might refer to Greek ideas of the ability of the soul to separate from the body for a journey to an extraterrestrial arena and then return to the body. “In the body” could evoke Jewish ideas of bodily ascent to heaven as happens in 2 Enoch and The Testament of Abraham.15 [Note 2 Enoch; Testament of Abraham] But Paul emphasizes that he does not know which it was. Only God knows. Similarly, he says he heard amazing things during the experience, but he is unable to tell those things (v. 4). Thus he recounts enough to support his claim that a grand experience had been granted to him—fourteen years, third heaven/Paradise, hearing unutterable things. Such an experience could elevate his authority

2 Corinthians 11:16–12:13 Note Apocalypse of Moses; 2 Enoch The Jewish apocalyptic texts Apoc. Moses and 2 En. link the “third heaven” and “paradise”: Apoc. Moses 38:1-2, 4-5. And God saith to him, “Adam, what has thou done? If thou hadst kept my commandment, there would now be no rejoicing among those who are bringing thee down to this place. Yet I tell thee I will turn their joy to grief and thy grief to joy . . . . And [Adam] stayed there three hours, lying down, and thereafter the Father of all, sitting on his holy throne stretched out his hand, and took Adam and handed him over to the archangel Michael saying, “Lift him up into Paradise unto

225

the third heaven, and leave him there until that fearful day of my reckoning, which I will make in the world.” 2 En. 8:1, 7-8 (B). And the two men placed me thence and carried me up on to the third heaven and set me down in the midst of Paradise, and a place unknown in goodness of appearance . . . . And there is no tree there without fruit, and every tree is blessed. And the angels guarding the Paradise are very bright and serve the Lord all days with incessant voice and sweet singing. And I said, “How very sweet is this place.” APOT 2 (ed. R. H. Charles; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1913), my emphasis.

among those who were impressed by such things, as some Corinthians apparently were. But he does not want them to be impressed by these things. In sharp contrast to those who boast in their knowledge and orator’s skills, his emphasis falls on what he does not know and cannot say about the experience. Thus Paul’s account of his experience underscores the mystery of God, the wholly (and “holy”) otherness of God. Whenever anyone is reminded that God is God and he is not, that God is the Creator and Note 2 Enoch; Testament of Abraham Jewish apocalypses that imply a bodily ascent into the she is the creature, then there is a heavens on the part of a seer include 2 En. and new experience of humility. In the T. Ab.: midst of the boasting, comparisons, and apparent triumphalism swirling 2 En. 1:8-9 (B). And the two men spoke to me: “Have courage, in Corinth, we find Paul evoking Enoch, do not fear, the Eternal Lord hath sent us to thee, behold God’s mystery with its call for to-day thou shalt go up with us on to the heavens. Tell thy sons and thy household all that they must do in thy house, and let no humility. one see thee, till the Lord return thee to them.” “Over such a man I will boast,” 2 En. 22:8-10 (A). And the Lord said to Michael: “Go and take Paul says (v. 5), perhaps meaning, Enoch from out his earthly garments, and anoint him with my with some irony, that he will boast sweet ointment, and put him into the garments of My glory.” And over “someone” who has had the Michael did thus, as the Lord told him. He anointed me, and humbling experience of encoun- dressed me, and the appearance of that ointment is more than the tering God’s mystery. “But over great light, and his ointment is like sweet dew, and its smell mild, shining like the sun’s ray, and I looked at myself, and was like one myself I will not boast, except in of his glorious ones. weakness” (v. 5b). We might ini- T. Ab. X. Then went down the archangel Michael, and took tially respond to Paul that he has Abraham upon a chariot of cherubim, and exalted him into the air indeed been boasting. In fact, the of heaven, and led him with sixty angels on the cloud, and person he says he will boast over is Abraham went up on the chariot over all the earth. actually himself! But then we remember that he has boasted over 2 En. in APOT 2 (ed. R. H. Charles; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1913). his punishments, powerlessness, T. Ab. X (trans. G. H. Box; New York: The MacMillan Co., 1927)..

226

2 Corinthians 11:16–12:13

menial labor, and anxiety, and emphasized what he does not know and cannot say about a grand mystical experience. Perhaps he is justified in claiming he does not boast “over himself ” since he boasts only in weakness. If he wished so to boast, he says, he would not be a fool, for he speaks the truth (v. 6a). But he does not boast over himself because he does not 5:19. That is, God was in Christ reconciling the want them to “give him credit” (logisomai) [Paul’s cosmos to Godself, not crediting (logisomai) their Use of Logisomai] beyond what they see or hear sins to them . . . . from him (v. 6b). He rejects the idea that he 10:2. But I ask when I am present not to be bold should gain status among them because of some with the confidence with which I credit (logisomai) myself able to assume against some extraordinary experiences any more than he who consider us as walking according to the should do so as a result of letters of recommenflesh. dation, oratory skills, or his Jewishness. Rather, 10:11. Let such a one consider (logisomai) this, his preaching and teaching, his work and his that what we are by word through letters when conduct among them should tell them all they absent, we are also by deed when present. need to know about him. Thus, as Paul Sampley 11:5. For I consider (logisomai) in nothing am I inferior to the super apostles. points out, Paul has it “both ways.” By telling the story of his journey to Paradise, he indicates that he is “not in the least inferior to these super apostles” who boast in their ecstatic experiences (see 11:5). But by telling it in third person, emphasizing its mystery, and refusing to boast over it, he undercuts the role of such experiences in establishing one’s place in the community.16 With v. 7 Paul begins explicitly to confront the elevation of self that prompts boasting and comparisons. He began to do so when he spoke of God’s mystery. Now he addresses that concern directly. Twice in the verse he will speak about not “lifting up” himself, i.e., not becoming arrogant. He begins, “and because of the abundance of revelations, therefore (dio), so that I might not lift myself up . . .” (v. 7a, b).17 These kinds of experiences that God had granted him were not to make Paul think he was “above” or “more than” other folks. [True Humility from the Desert Fathers and Mothers] To prevent that from happening, Paul says, “a thorn in the flesh was given to me, a messenger of Satan” (v. 7c). Normally the use of a passive verb (“was given”) in a sentence like this is a means of denoting God’s activity. But Paul calls the thorn a “messenger of Satan.” Maybe Paul means Satan was the giver of the thorn in the flesh. Some readers might wonder how something Satan gives could serve a positive function, as Paul will say this thorn does. We can note that Paul does not exclude the presence of evil in this world even as the New Creation is being inaugurated. But he also

Paul’s Use of Logisomai Paul’s use of the Greek verb logisomai in 2 Corinthians is interesting. The word had associations with accounting practices and a semantic range that includes calculate, credit, reckon, consider, take into account, etc. Paul’s other uses of the word may help us read 12:6 well.

2 Corinthians 11:16–12:13 True Humility from the Desert Fathers and Mothers We may need a reminder that true humility as taught by the early Christians had nothing to do, as it often does in our time, with accepting an inferior position, low self-esteem, manipulative self-sacrifice, or endless guilt. Rather, we may learn a better understanding from the Desert Fathers and Mothers. They taught that true humility was living out the conviction that everyone, every man, woman, and child, is a beloved creature of God. According to Roberta Bondi, these great teachers recognized that no person loves or does any good without the help of God, so that whatever acts of kindness or virtue a person performs, whatever strength or happiness one has, one’s ability

227

to work well and love well—all these are possible because God gives them to the creatures as God’s good gifts. No one is in a position to look down on another from a superior height [i.e., be “lifted up”] because of her or his hard work or piety or mental superiority. We are all vulnerable, all limited, and we each have a different struggle only God is in a position to judge.

So, Abba Anthony once said, “I saw all the snares that the enemy spreads over the world, and I said, groaning, ‘What can get me through such snares?’ Then I heard a voice saying to me, ‘Humility.’” Roberta C. Bondi, To Love as God Loves (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1987) 42, 43.

affirms that God is at work, bringing about Note Romans 8:28, 35-39 Paul affirms God’s work in the world even redemption and hope, even in a world where as evil is still present. These familiar texts evil is present. [Note Romans 8:28, 35-39] from the Romans letter underscore the point: As readers may know, there has been near endless speculation regarding the thorn. Thrall Rom 8:28. We know that all things work together places the “multitudinous theories” into three for good for those who love God, who are called categories. First is the possibility of some according to [God’s] purpose. Rom 8:35-39. Who will separate us from the love of internal state within Paul such as temptation or Christ? Will hardship, or distress, or persecution, or guilt. Second is the proposal that the thorn was famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? As it is external opposition, such as Paul’s rivals in written, “For your sake we are being killed all day Corinth. Third is the suggestion that some long; we are accounted as sheep to be slaughillness or physical disability hindered Paul’s tered.” No, in all these things we are more than work.18 [Some Interpretations of the Thorn from Christian conquerors through him who loved us. For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, History] The final category has perhaps received nor rulers, nor things present, nor things to come, the most support from interpreters in recent nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor anything years, but we must remember that Paul was else in all creation, will be able to separate us from strong and well enough to endure travels, beatthe love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord. ings, hunger, and even shipwrecks. In the end we simply cannot identify the thorn. Apparently the Corinthians already knew about it, so Paul had no need to name it for them. Furthermore, what it was did not concern him in this moment. His focus rests on the function of the thorn. It “beat him up”—the Greek verb kolaphizø carries the idea of beating with a fist, mistreating, tormenting. Thrall believes this verb intensifies the effect because it adds a sense of humiliation to the pain caused by the thorn.19 Thus, Paul repeats, the thorn functioned to keep him from lifting himself up (v. 7d). Three times Paul asked the Lord that the thorn should leave him (v. 8). Enumerating three specific times of request may tell us that

228

2 Corinthians 11:16–12:13

the thorn had troubled Paul for a long while. But God responded, “My grace is enough for you, for power is fulfilled [“completed,” “made perfect”] in weakness” (v. 9a). So we find ourselves again confronted by God’s grace, the unearned, pure-gift quality of God’s work in the world. God created in beauty, promised to redeem all of creation when it went awry, sent Christ to fulfill those promises, and inaugurated the New Creation through him, not because we human beings have earned such care, but simply because God is gracious. And God’s grace is “enough.” Consequently, we need not concern ourselves with winning arguments, triumphing over enemies, protecting against our weaknesses, or conquering obstacles (like thorns in the flesh) to prove God’s presence or even to help God’s cause. Grace is enough. We are free, therefore, to love and forgive, welcome and serve, live in true humility and peace as we trust God’s grace. We might remember how hard Paul tried to get the Corinthians to see that the Jerusalem collection was all about grace: the resources they had to share, the ministry of the collection itself, their opportunity to share in the ministry, and the reconciliation it could foster were all the result of grace (2 Cor 8–9). God’s grace is enough. We must also admit that loving, forgiving, welcoming, serving, being humble and peaceable can make us appear weak and vulnerable to those intent on conquering and winning. Truth is, conquerors often accomplish the tasks they set for themselves, especially against those who choose not to respond in kind (in contemporary language, who choose nonviolence). Jesus was crucified. Paul was beaten and imprisoned several times. Numbers of early Jesus followers were persecuted and martyred. Rome had great force at is disposal and used it to wreak havoc and cause suffering in order to defeat this movement that threatened its ordering of the world. But we know that its great force and all the death it created

Some Interpretations of the Thorn from Christian History Chrysostom wrote, “There are some who have said that Paul is referring to a pain in the head caused by the devil, but God forbid! The body of Paul could never have been given over to the devil . . . . What Paul means is that God would not allow the preaching of the gospel to go forward, so that his proud thoughts might be checked. Instead, Paul was attacked by adversaries . . . . These were the messengers of Satan.” (From Hom. 1 Cor.) Theodoret of Cyr (Cyrrhus). “By ‘messenger of Satan’ Paul means the insults, attacks and riots which he had to face.” (From Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians) (Both sources quoted in ACCS NT 7 [ed. Gerald Bray; Chicago: Fitzroy Dearborn Publishers, 1999] 305.) Aquinas, along with many interpreters in the Middle Ages, interpreted the thorn as sexual temptation. In the early seventeenth century, Cornelius a Lapide understood it thusly, referring to Rom 7:23 and 1 Cor 9 (likely vv. 26-27) for support, and arguing that had the thorn been anything else, Paul would have explained it more fully. Martin Luther considered it to be doubt and despair. Others have thought it might be depression. C. K. Barrett (among others) believed the thorn was a speech impediment, which accounts for Paul’s expressed fear of making an initial bad impression in Gal 4:13-15. He used 2 Cor 10:1, 9-11 and 11:6 to support his view. Other physical ailments that have been suggested as Paul’s thorn include recurrent eye inflammations, epilepsy, malaria, and head pains (which, as Chrysostom’s quote above shows, was promoted by some early commentators).

2 Corinthians 11:16–12:13

did not stop Jesus’ movement from spreading all the way to us. Rome’s force was not as powerful as the love and faith of the weak and vulnerable ones who lived, not by the sword, but by God’s grace. In them the power of God is fulfilled (teleioø; v. 9a). This wonderful Greek verb can mean to execute fully, to consummate, to develop fully, to fulfill or complete or make perfect. Perhaps it is not too much to say that those who are weak because they live by grace are the ones who allow God’s power to move through them toward completing the redemption of creation. “Therefore,” Paul says, “most gladly I will boast more in my weaknesses” (v. 9b). We can pause here and ask if he means he will boast in his weakness rather than ask again for the thorn to be removed, or if he will boast in his weakness rather than in something like conquering others. I suspect Paul’s answer to our question would be, “Yes. Both of those things.” He will boast more in his weakness “so that the power of Christ may abide” in him (v. 9b). Precisely as he loves, forgives, welcomes, etc., and appears weak to the prevailing Roman culture, the power of Christ is present in him. As in the clay jar passage (4:7-12), he is calling the Corinthians to see his life (and theirs) through the lens of Christ’s death and resurrection rather than through the lens of imperial power. “Therefore,” he says, “I take delight in weaknesses, insults, afflictions, persecutions, and anguish for Christ’s sake, for whenever I am weak, then I am powerful” (v. 10). Paul concludes his fool’s speech with this last and shortest hardship catalogue, which reiterates the point he has made throughout: whenever he appears weak and suffers because he is doing the work of the gospel, whenever the clay jar is persecuted, imprisoned, and beaten but does not crack, he is delighted (and will boast) because then he is most powerful since the power of God’s grace abides in and works through him. A last comment on the fool’s speech is in order. We must remember that this man who delighted in power through weakness was one who chose, in response to God’s call, to renounce his privileged status as a rising “star” among Pharisees and to resist the oppressive structures and practices of patriarchal Rome. He called Jew and Gentile, slave and free, men and women together as beloved and free children in the ekkl∑sia of God and suffered for doing so. His “weakness,” i.e., his willingness to bear persecution, hardship, and anguish, was the result of his choice to engage actively in the liberating work of the gospel. Whenever his words have been used to tell slaves that they should accept the humiliation and powerlessness of slavery, or women that they should

229

230

2 Corinthians 11:16–12:13

accept the dependence and passivity expected of the “inferior” sex, or any other oppressed group that they should accept their oppression and pain rather than engage in the liberating work of the gospel, then his words have been twisted, interpreted badly, and used for evil purposes. All Christians should absolutely reject any such use of Paul’s words. Having finished his fool’s speech, Paul now concludes the central section of this letter fragment with comments that reiterate his major points. Though brief, these last comments still manage to convey big emotion and to surprise. He begins by declaring, “I have become a fool!” (v. 11a). He did not want to appear foolish (11:16) and declared that nothing would be gained by boasting as a fool. But he did it anyway (12:1), so he became a fool after all. But the Corinthians forced him, Paul says, “For I [emphatic pronoun] ought to have been commended by you” (v. 11a). At other times in 2 Corinthians, Paul noted his hope that the Corinthians would boast over him (see, e.g., 1:14; 5:12), but apparently they have not. We also remember the painful visit during which one member of the congregation attacked Paul personally and publicly. Though the majority of Corinthian believers seem not to have agreed with Paul’s attacker, neither did they rally round Paul at that time. Now, again, they appear to have chosen silence as the rival apostles and their followers criticized him. They were wrong so to choose, Paul insists, “For in nothing am I inferior to the superlative apostles, even though I am nothing” (v. 11b). He had said so at 11:5 and repeats himself here, though this time he adds the ironic phrase, “even though I am nothing.” He may be repeating what the rival apostles said about him, but his tongue is likely firmly in his cheek. He has just boasted in his punishments, powerlessness, and weakness, but he also said that when he is weak, then he is powerful. He might well say that Christ is everything while he is nothing, but he also calls himself the “apostle to the Gentiles” and says he can do all things through Christ (see Phil 4:13). His rivals may have said he was “nothing,” but Paul did not believe it, and he thought the Corinthians shouldn’t have believed it either. In fact, he goes on to say, “The signs of an apostle were worked among you with all endurance (hypomon∑ )” (v. 12a). Hypomon∑ often appears in the New Testament in contexts wherein believers are called to persist in their faith and mission even when the obstacles and opposition are fierce. [Hypomon∑ in Other New Testament Texts] Paul put hypomon∑ at the beginning of the hardship list he presented in 6:4-10. There endurance was necessary if he was going to

2 Corinthians 11:16–12:13

231

commend himself as God’s servant in all hard- Hypomon∑ in Other New Testament Texts ships. Its presence in 12:12 shows that even in The Greek word hypomon∑ is used at key moments in New Testament writings to the midst of struggle, Paul displayed the signs encourage believers to hold on to their faith in the of a true apostle among the Corinthians. midst of opposition and persecution. Here are Those signs, Paul says, were “signs” (semeion) examples: that, as used now, indicate miracles pointing In Luke 8:11-15 Jesus explains the parable of the beyond themselves for some instructive sower. In the parable much of the seed bears no purpose; “wonders” (teras) that are events fruit because of Satan’s opposition, rootlessness, evoking amazement; and works of power and the choking effect of riches, the pleasures of (dynamis), i.e., works that show that God’s life, etc. “But,” Jesus says, “as for [the seed] in the power is active (v. 12b).20 Thus Paul declares good soil, these are the one who, when they hear the word, hold it fast in an honest and good heart that miracles had been part of his ministry, and bear fruit with hypomon∑ [NRSV: patient which the Corinthians must have witnessed endurance]” (8:15). and which Acts corroborates. [Paul’s Miracles in In the apocalyptic discourse in Luke, Jesus warns in 21:12-19 that followers will be arrested, perseActs] As Victor Paul Furnish notes, Paul appears to have shared the widespread ancient cuted, betrayed, hated, and even killed. “But,” he belief that manifestations of divine power will tells them, “not a hair of your head will perish. By your hypomon∑ [NRSV: endurance] you will gain accompany the announcement of any valid your souls” (21:18-19). religious truth.21 Bible readers will be familiar The writer of James urges believers, “Be patient, with the language of “signs and wonders” to beloved, until the coming of the Lord” (5:7). He indicate God’s work to heal and set free. [“Signs elaborates on their need for patience, and then says, “Indeed we call blessed those who showed and Wonders” in the Bible] In the context of Paul’s current argument, these “signs of an apostle” hypomon∑ [NRSV: endurance]” (5:11). The writer of Revelation describes Rome (and are more reasons Paul is not inferior to the other oppressive powers) as a “beast from the sea” rival apostles. But the statement is also some- in chapter 13. Because the beast has great power, thing of a surprise coming from a man who many people will worship it, but those who do will has eschewed any kind of showy spirituality suffer its fate. Here then “is a call for the hypomon∑ and just declared he will boast in his weak- [NRSV: endurance] and faith of the saints” (13:10). nesses. Moreover, in 1 Corinthians 1:22 Paul is critical of Jews who demand signs to prove the message of the cross. Perhaps the “demand” is the problem there. Perhaps he sees a difference between miracles that bring healing and liberation to others, and ecstatic experiences that affect only the recipient, so that boasting about them constitutes “showing off ” (note 1 Cor 14:6-12). Perhaps he expects the Corinthians to know his understanding that “signs and wonders” point to God’s work as he says explicitly in Romans 15:18-19: “For I will not venture to speak of anything except what Christ has accomplished through me to win obedience from the Gentiles . . . by the power of signs and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of God . . .” (emphasis mine). Whatever was in Paul’s mind exactly, he declares that they had witnessed the signs of an apostle. Consequently, he can ask with

232

2 Corinthians 11:16–12:13

Paul’s Miracles in Acts The book of Acts corroborates Paul’s claim to have performed the signs of a true apostle, even saying at one point that God testified to God’s own grace “by granting signs and wonders to be done through [Paul and Barnabas]” (14:3). Here are some examples of those “signs”: 14:8-10. In Lystra there was a man sitting who could not use his feet and had never walked, for he had been crippled from birth. He listened to Paul as he was speaking. And Paul, looking at him intently and seeing he had faith to be healed, said in a loud voice, “Stand upright on your feet.” And the man sprang up and began to walk.

16:16-18. One day as we were going to the place of prayer [in Philippi], we met a slave girl who had a spirit of divination and brought her owners a great deal of money by fortune-telling. While she followed Paul and us, she would cry out, “These men are slaves of the Most High God . . . .” She kept doing this for many days. But Paul, very much annoyed, turned and said to the spirit, “I order you in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her.” And it came out that very hour. 19:11-12. God did extraordinary miracles through Paul, so that when the handkerchiefs or aprons that had touched his skin were brought to the sick, their diseases left them, and the evil spirits came out of them.

biting sarcasm, “For in what way did you fare worse than the rest of the churches except that I myself did not burden you?” (v. 13a). Paul preached the gospel to the Exod 7:2-3. You shall speak all that I command you, and your brother Corinthians, and God offered Aaron shall tell Pharaoh to let the Israelites go out of his land. But I signs, wonders, and works of will harden Pharaoh’s heart, and I will multiply my signs and wonders power to them through Paul. in the land of Egypt. Through that ministry the ekkl∑sia Deut 4:34. Or has any god ever attempted to go and take a nation of God came into being in for himself from the midst of another nation, by trials, by signs and wonders, by war, by a mighty hand and an outstretched arm, and by Corinth wherein Corinthian terrifying displays of power, as the Lord your God did for you in Egypt believers worshipped together and before your very eyes? shared in God’s New Creation. Jer 32:20. You showed signs and wonders in the land of Egypt, and The only thing the Corinthians to this day in Israel and among all humankind, and have made your“lacked” that other churches had self a name that continues to this very day. was the “burden” of supporting an Acts 4:29-30. And now, Lord, look at their threats, and grant to your servants to speak your word with all boldness, while you stretch out apostle financially. The issue of your hand to heal, and signs and wonders are performed through the Paul refusing money from them name of your holy servant Jesus. surfaces again (and it will yet Rom 15:18-19a. For I will not venture to speak of anything except again). What a “sore spot” his what Christ has accomplished through me to win obedience from refusal had become! His frustrathe Gentiles, by word and deed, by the power of signs and wonders, tion that they will not accept his by the power of the Spirit of God . . . . explanation of his practice pours out as he concludes this section of the letter with a mock apology: “Forgive me this injustice!” (v. 13b), i.e., the “injustice” of not burdening them for financial support. “Signs and Wonders” in the Bible Many Bible readers are familiar with the phrase “signs and wonders.” Here are some of the texts in which the phrase occurs:

2 Corinthians 11:16–12:13

CONNECTIONS 1. Think of the “rhetoric of blessing” we use in our time: people announce that they are blessed because they got the job they wanted, are wealthy, their church built an impressive new building, the team won the Super Bowl, etc. That is, we claim we are blessed when everything works out wonderfully. Paul would be horrified. He knew he was blessed because he was invited through God’s grace to be part of God’s work to inaugurate the New Creation and reconcile the cosmos to Godself. Because that work was countercultural and often contrary to the plans of the powers-that-be, Paul was harassed, beaten, jailed, hungry, and anxious for other Jesus followers. He had nothing, but he had everything (6:10); he was weak, but he was strong (12:10). I wonder how willingly contemporary American Christians hear Paul’s understanding of what it means to be blessed. 2. Having been drawn by his rivals into the rhetoric of comparison, Paul relates the story of a grand mystical experience he had. Rather than use that story to insist he was more spiritual than his rivals, however, he evokes God’s mystery by focusing on what he does not know and cannot say about the experience. He follows that story by recounting his “thorn in the flesh” that prevented him from “lifting up” himself and that God would not remove. Then he declares, “When I am weak, then I am strong.” His words are a clarion call to true humility that isn’t (as noted in [True Humility from the Desert Fathers and Mothers]) about accepting inferior positions, low selfesteem, manipulative self-sacrifice, or endless guilt. It is, instead, living out the conviction that every human being is a beloved child of God. What we know about some Corinthian believers who favored a “showy spirituality” suggests Paul’s words were sorely needed there. They are also needed in our time. Psychologist Mary Pipher says in this culture we learn early to be self-centered. Children are taught via advertising that “they are the most important person in the world,” and that their “impulses should not be denied.” We are awash in “fuzzy, self-help” messages that tell us “the only commitment is to the self and the only important question is—Am I happy?” We learn that we are “number one” and that our needs are the most important ones. We are, Pipher says, socialized to be self-centered.22 Into this context we read Paul’s words about God’s mystery, that grace is enough, and when he is weak he is strong. Can we preach, can we hear something so countercultural? 3. Biblical scholars are fond of saying, “Context is everything!” Usually I admit to students that context may not be everything,

233

234

2 Corinthians 11:16–12:13

though I quickly add, “But it’s close!” Context matters in biblical interpretation. It also matters in what we communicate about what we have interpreted. We can see, in the context of apparent Corinthian triumphalism, that Paul’s boast in his weakness is a profound theological affirmation of God’s power exercised through a crucified Messiah. But how do these same words sound in a context of self-negation, or of political and/or relational powerlessness? For example, would an abused woman hear in these verses the lesson that she should accept her powerlessness, shame, and pain as what God wants from her? Surely we do not want her to hear that! How, then, might we try to prevent such a hearing? We can return to Paul’s context. He made clear choices to conduct his ministry as he did. He chose to work to support himself, refuse patronage, travel even when it was dangerous, speak against Roman authorities, and risk the consequences of doing so. His choices made him appear weak to many, but he understood God’s power to be at work in his weakness. Before we call people to follow in Paul’s footsteps, we must make sure that the same kinds of choices are available to them.

Notes 1. The Greek word hypostasis presents a translation challenge. It has been variously translated as “confidence,” “situation,” “frame of mind,” “plan,” “project,” or “intention.” Along with a number of scholars I believe “project” fits the context best. 2. Margaret E. Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians (ICC 2; London: T & T Clark International, 2000) 640. 3. Sze-kar Wan, Power in Weakness: The Second Letter of Paul to the Corinthians (Harrisburg PA: Trinity Press International, 2000) 145. 4. It is possible that v. 21a should be translated as “I say this to your shame.” There is no pronoun present in the Greek, so a few scholars believe Paul speaks of the Corinthians’ shame. In this context, however, Paul seems to speak ironically of his shame since he goes on to say that he was “too weak” to treat the Corinthians abusively. In addition, the Greek phrase høs hoti joins the two parts of the verse. In 5:19 I opted to translate the phrase in a declarative since, “that is.” Here, however, there appears to be an ironically causal relationship between the sentence parts: Paul said this to his shame since he was too weak to be abusive. See the commentary on 5:19. 5. Some scholars believe there are distinctions between “Israelites” (e.g., members of the holy people), “seed of Abraham” (e.g., heirs of the promises made to Abraham), and “Hebrews” (e.g., those who spoke Hebrew and had geographical ties to Palestine). Along with other scholars I believe Paul was insisting on his full Jewishness. See Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, ICC 2, 723–30 for a full discussion. 6. Frank J. Matera, II Corinthians: A Commentary (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2003) 265, is among those scholars who claim that territorial issues clear up

2 Corinthians 11:16–12:13 Paul’s inconsistency: the rival apostles were ministers of Christ, but not in Corinth where they are intruders hurting the church so that they become “ministers of Satan.” Territorial concerns, however, weren’t behind Paul’s invectives in 11:13-15. The issue there was receipt of financial support. I find Matera’s argument unpersuasive. 7. I am indebted to the language of Matera, II Corinthians, 259–60. 8. The Greek phrase chøris tøn parektos can also be translated “apart from what is left unmentioned,” which, if so translated, would mean Paul is cutting his list short to go on to other kinds of hardships. While many scholars choose this translation, I find “apart from external things” to fit the context better since he moves from external hardships to his personal anxiety. 9. Some scholars interpret “who is weak and I am not weak?” alongside 1 Cor 9:22 (“to the weak I became weak”) and so take its sentiment quite seriously. See, e.g., Matera, II Corinthians, 270; and Jan Lambrecht, Second Corinthians (SP 8; Collegeville MN: Liturgical Press, 1999) 192. I am more persuaded by the attention given to Paul’s rhetoric by such scholars as Wan, Power in Weakness, 145; and J. Paul Sampley, The Second Letter to the Corinthians, (NIB 11; Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2000) 157–58, who find the claim to be the comic punch line to which the list has been heading. 10. See Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, ICC 2, 766–71 for a full discussion of these questions. 11. E.g., Victor Paul Furnish, II Corinthians (AB 32a; Garden City NJ: Doubleday & Co., 1984) 543; Matera, II Corinthians, 278; Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, ICC 2, 782. 12. Sampley, The Second Letter to the Corinthians, 162. 13. Ibid., 163; Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, ICC 2, 792. 14. Wan, Power in Weakness, 146. 15. Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, ICC 2, 786. 16. Sampley, The Second Letter to the Corinthians, 163–64. 17. There are textual variants that do not have the dio at the beginning of v. 7b. One’s decision as to whether or not it should be accepted is affected by another major question regarding the beginning of v. 7: should v. 7a be attached to v. 6 or to v. 7b? The NRSV, NIV, and several scholars choose to connect the phrase to v. 6: “so that no one may think better of me than what is seen in me or heard from me, [7a] even considering the exceptional character of the revelations” (NRSV). Then v. 7b begins with dio, “Therefore . . . .” I am among those scholars, however, who believe Paul starts a new thought with v. 7. I also follow those who opt to accept the dio as the preferred reading, though the grammar is awkward. For a detailed discussion of these issues see Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, ICC 2, 802–805. 18. Ibid., 809. For details on scholarly speculation about the thorn, see 809–18. 19. Ibid., 808. 20. I am indebted to the translations of Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, ICC 2, 839. 21. Furnish, II Corinthians, 555. 22. Mary Pipher, The Shelter of Each Other: Rebuilding Our Families (New York: Ballentine Books, 1996) 15, 26.

235

The Third Visit: Proving Themselves 2 Corinthians 12:14–13:10

COMMENTARY Paul’s boasting is over. He has given the reasons he believes the Corinthian believers should not be swayed by the rival apostles. From his perspective the Corinthians should have defended Paul. Apparently they had not. So he was forced to do it though it made him act like a fool. He insisted that Christ worked powerfully through him even when he was weak, and that his conduct was sincere and consistent, especially his financial practices. He describes the rival apostles, by contrast, as self-serving and even abusive in their treatment of the Corinthian believers. Thus Paul has set up an “either/or” choice the Corinthians must make between himself and these other apostles, or he is responding to such a setup by his rivals. His third visit now looms (12:14a) when the choice must be made. As Paul prepares the Corinthian believers for his visit, he lets them know first that they should not expect him to change his financial practice. He has not “burdened” them before (12:13), and he will not be a burden this time (v. 14b). Paul has clearly dug in his heels on this matter. He may be incredibly stubborn. Perhaps this stand has become a principled one he feels he must make. Or he may believe that changing now would make him appear inconsistent and as caving in to wealthier members. All three points may be true, causing him to continue his refusal of support even though it has become significantly contentious. He offers further reasons why he will go on refusing. First, he says, “For I seek not what is yours but you” (v. 14b). Then he adds, “For children ought not to accumulate for the parents but the parents for the children” (v. 14c). Paul returns to his role as “spiritual father” of the Corinthian community, probably because it sets him apart from his rivals. Whatever else they might claim, they cannot add “founders of the Corinthian community” to their resumes. So Paul reminds the Corinthians of his role as founder and “father,” and then uses the standard practice of parents taking

238

2 Corinthians 12:14–13:10

care of children (not vice versa) as a further argument for refusing support from them. Paul’s claim to the role of spiritual father has been problematic before, and, unfortunately, is again. Earlier he had used the language of friends and siblings with the Corinthians, but then would claim to be their “father in faith” when he felt the need to challenge or punish them (see 1 Cor 4:14-21; 2 Cor 6:11-13). His language betrays a genuine inconsistency on his part. It is also quite possible that, in the context of their culture, the Corinthians would have felt insulted by Paul calling them his “children.” In addition, to be consistent in the “father role” he is asserting here, he would need to refuse support from any community he founded, but he has admitted taking money from the Macedonians. We may wonder if this argument helped or hurt his cause. Be that as it may, he continues to insist on his care for them: “For most gladly I [emphatic pronoun] will spend and be spent completely for your souls” (v. 15a). His words carry a general sense of doing whatever is necessary for the Corinthians’ spiritual wellbeing. But in the context of contention over his financial practice, they also hint at his willingness to work hard and inconvenience himself to provide his own resources so that he could freely do ministry among them. His great efforts, which he declares are for their benefit, lead him to ask, “If I love you more, am I to be loved less?” (v. 15b). The language at the beginning of v. 16, “So be it, I [emphatic pronoun] did not burden you,” indicates that the Corinthians would have to agree that he had not burdened them since he had not taken money from them. But he goes on to say that, since he is “cunning,” he “took” them by deceit (v. 16b). Paul is, again, likely quoting what others have said about him. The charge appears to be that, while he refused their direct support, he was surely getting money from them nonetheless, because he was deceitful and manipulative (a charge that had surfaced before; see the commentary on 4:2-4; 5:11; 6:6-10; 7:2). Since in the next verses he will talk about Titus and those whom he sent to Corinth, the implication is that some Corinthians thought Paul was getting money under the guise of the Jerusalem collection that, as I understand 2 Corinthians, he is on his way to receive. Since I am persuaded that chapters 10–13 are a separate letter written after chapters 1–9, I find the most natural reading of Titus and “the brother” in 12:18 to be that the delegation described in chapters 8–9 was in Corinth working on the Jerusalem collection. A good guess regarding the situation is that they arrived in Corinth with the letter of

2 Corinthians 12:14–13:10

239

DIfferent Views of Titus’s Work 2 Corinthians 1–9 in hand and set to Some scholars do not understand the work of Titus restart the collection effort. They found mentioned in 12:17-18 to be the same as the the tenuous reconciliation with Paul that assignment given him in 8:16-24. Here is a sample of these the emotional letter and Titus had earlier scholars’ readings: achieved (see 2 Cor 7) to have been Margaret Thrall believes chapters 10–13 are from a sepdamaged by the rival apostles. The letter arate letter written after chapters 1–9. Nonetheless she sees difficulties in understanding 12:17-18 as referring to they brought may not have helped (see the visit planned in 8:16-24: “The major problem is that in the commentary at the end of 7:4). They 8.16-24 Titus is to be accompanied by two colleagues, but got word to Paul who responded with here [12:18] by only one . . . . A secondary problem would the letter of chapters 10–13. relate to the fact that in the case of the mission of 8.16-24 There is debate, however, about such a Paul had clearly taken precautions to avoid any charge of reading. Some scholars believe that malpractice. Hence it may be correct to suppose that here he is referring to the earlier visit by Titus to which he has 2 Corinthians 12:18, with its note about alluded in 8.6.” one brother with Titus, cannot refer to Frank Matera, who argues for the unity of 2 Corinthians, the same delegation as chapters 8–9 since claims that it is not clear that 12:18 refers to the collection two brothers are mentioned there. Thus visit of 8:16-24 since Paul “speaks of Titus and two 12:18 must point to an earlier visit by unnamed brothers in 8:16–9:5 but of only one brother in Titus that launched the work on the col12:18. Furthermore, Paul’s statement in 8:6, that he ‘appealed to Titus that as he began so he should complete lection (see 8:6).1 Scholars who argue for this generous gift among you,’ suggests that Titus had the unity of 2 Corinthians must underalready visited Corinth in order to arrange for the collection stand 12:18 to refer to this earlier visit when the Corinthians first undertook the collection ‘last since the description of the Titus delegayear’ (8:10). Consequently Titus may have visited Corinth on tion’s upcoming work in 8:14-21 and the at least three occasions . . . . In 12:18 Paul is referring to note about Titus’s work in 12:18 are, in Titus’ first visit to Corinth, the one alluded to in 8:10 . . . .” their reading, part of the same letter.2 Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians (ICC 2; London: T & T Clark International, 2000) 854. [Different Views of Titus’s Work] I have already Matera, II Corinthians: A Commentary (Louisville: Westminster John Knox observed that I do not find the arguPress, 2003) 297. ments for the unity of 2 Corinthians persuasive (see the commentary at the beginning of chapter 10). Nor do I believe the reference to only one brother in 12:18 requires us to understand Paul to mean a past visit by Titus. There are a number of reasons for mentioning only one brother in 12:18 (e.g., the other brother had not been able to make the trip, or made it but did not stay, etc.). If Titus was in Corinth working on the collection (or just had been) as the Corinthians read 12:17-18, then they would likely think of his current activity among them. Such consideration could lead them to acknowledge that he had also been trustworthy during past visits. Given my reading of the situation, I note how Paul’s plans to ensure that no one find fault in his handling of the collection (8:16-21) serves him well in the present circumstances. [Recalling 8:16-21] We saw when examining chapters 7–8 that Titus had good standing among the Corinthian believers. Paul calls on Titus’s rep-

240

2 Corinthians 12:14–13:10

utation to help him now by asking three questions having to do with Titus. Did Paul take advantage of the Corinthians by means of those whom he sent to them (v. 17)? That is, has the delegation Paul sent behaved badly in gathering the collection? Paul clearly expects the Corinthians to say no. Well, Paul was the “creator” of the delegation, the one who encouraged Titus to go and sent the “brother” with him (v. 18a). Then Paul asks pointedly, “Did Titus take advantage of you?” (v. 18b; emphasis mine). Since Paul believes they will respond, “Of course not!” he is ready to play his “trump card”: “Did we not walk in the same spirit? Take the same steps?” (v. 18c). That is, the Corinthians know he and Titus are coworkers in the gospel, partners in this ministry, and share a close relationship (i.e., walk in the same spirit and in the same steps). Since they love and trust Titus, why then do they not love and trust Paul? With this last effort to defend his financial practice now concluded, Paul turns to warn the Corinthians about his third visit. He begins the next paragraph with an opening sentence that may be read as a declarative statement: “All along you have been thinking that we have been defending ourselves [apologeomai] before you” (12:19a).3 But contemporary translations (see the NRSV, NIV) and a number of scholars believe the second part of the verse makes better sense if the first part is read as a question:4 “Have you been thinking all along that we have been defending ourselves before you?” Following their lead, I translate as a question, which I would expect the Corinthian believers to answer, “Well, yes.” Hasn’t Paul been defending his integrity, authority, and understanding of the gospel throughout the Corinthian correspondence? Consequently, his response to their presumed answer is surprising: “We speak in Christ before God, and all things, beloved ones, are for your building up” (v. 19b). That is, he has not been defending himself to the Corinthians. Rather, he has been seeking God’s favorable judgment, not theirs. His only concern for them is that they be “built up.” As Margaret Thrall asks, “But how, in all conscience, can he take this line?”5

Recalling 8:16-21 When we examined chapters 8–9 and Paul’s efforts to reignite the Corinthians’ participation in the Jerusalem collection, we noted the effort Paul made to ensure that the integrity of the collection was clear to everyone. He sent Titus, who had a good reputation among the Corinthians, as head of the delegation that would work on the collection. According to Paul, Titus accepted the assignment not only because of Paul’s appeal but also because of his devotion for the Corinthians (8:16-17). Along with Titus would come one “brother” who was praised “in all the churches” (8:18) and had been voted on by the churches (8:19) so that he was, apparently, independent of Paul. Thus he served as an “outsider” who would observe the practices of the Pauline group so that no one could “find fault in this abundance which is being administered by us” (8:20). Finally, another “brother” would also go, one who had been “tested” in many endeavors and found to be devoted, and who, Paul said, had great confidence in the Corinthians (8:22). These three, each with a different relationship to Paul and to the Corinthians, would attend to the collection efforts so that what was done was not only good in the eyes of God but also “before people” (8:21).

2 Corinthians 12:14–13:10

241

Among the efforts to make sense of Paul here are those of scholars who believe that Paul’s past efforts to defend his financial practices, such as 1 Corinthians 9:3-18 (which contains apologia, the noun form of the verb apologeomai used here), were judged by the Corinthians to be self-serving. Thus Paul is denying this element of egotistical self-defense in his explanations.6 This interpretation depends, however, on the Corinthians’ judgment regarding Paul’s past writings, which we cannot know for sure. Other scholars consider the key point in Paul’s claim to be that he has not been defending himself before the Corinthians. That is, he clearly loves them, longs for them to love and trust him in return, and has written in hopes of reigniting their support for him. But in the end their judgment of him does not matter. Only God’s judgment concerns him.7 Thus, while he has written to them, he has been aware of God’s assessment of what he says and does. This interpretation means that his following claim, “all things are for your building up,” is also made in awareness of God’s judgment, which serves to “prove” the sincerity of his claim. The latter interpretation may well describe what Paul had in mind as he composed these words. I find myself wondering, however, if the Corinthians would think he was “talking out of both sides of his Other Catalogues of Vices in Paul’s Letters mouth” again. He certainly sounds as if he is Paul made frequent use of the common defending himself even as he insists he is not. ancient rhetorical device of a “catalogue of Though he declares that his goal has been vices.” Here are examples from his other letters: to build up the Corinthians, Paul fears that Gal 5:19-21. Now the works of the flesh are obvious: when he arrives he will find them “not the fornication, impurity, licentiousness, idolatry, sorcery, sort of people” he wishes and also that he enmity, strife, jealousy, anger, quarrels, dissensions, will be found by them as “not the sort of factions, envy, drunkenness, carousing, and things like person” they wish (v. 20a). Then, via a catathese. I am warning you, as I warned you before: logue of vices, he describes what he fears he those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom will find: strife and jealousy, circumstances of of God. 1 Cor 5:9-11. I wrote to you in my letter not to assoanger, feuding, backbiting, gossiping, arrociate with sexually immoral persons—not at all gance, and chaos (v. 20b). Such catalogues meaning the immoral of this world, or the greedy and were common rhetorical devices in Paul’s robbers, or idolaters, since you would then need to go world. He used them frequently as well. [Other out of the world. But now I am writing to you not to Catalogues of Vices in Paul’s Letters] Most of the associate with anyone who bears the name of brother vices here are listed in other Pauline letters, or sister who is sexually immoral or greedy, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or robber. Do not even eat and the first three appear in the same order with such a one. in Galatians 5:20. Thus, they were common Rom 1:29-31. They were filled with every kind of Pauline complaints. Even so, we sense that wickedness, evil, covetousness, malice. Full of envy, these terms directly fit the Corinthian situamurder, strife, deceit, craftiness, they are gossips, tion. These vices cause a community to be slanderers, God-haters, insolent, haughty, boastful, fractured and quarrelsome, which the inventors of evil, rebellious toward parents, foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless.

242

2 Corinthians 12:14–13:10

Corinthian believers had shown themselves to be (see, e.g., 1 Cor 1:11-12; 11:18). We should not be surprised that the rival apostles were able to stir up strife between their supporters and those who remained loyal to Paul. Paul, who believed God was bringing all people together in the New Creation, did not want to find backbiting and division within the Corinthian ekkl∑sia but feared he would, and with good reason. Paul also says the Corinthians are likely to find him, when he comes, not as they wish. He does not elaborate here, but a few verses later he will warn those who continue to sin that he will not spare them (13:3ff ). Earlier he had promised to be bold if necessary (10:2) and to punish disobedience (10:6). Thus he does not anticipate being a glad and gracious Paul when he arrives. Nor does he intend to be “weak” in responding as they have accused him. But he fears that when he comes “again” God will “humble” (tapeinoø) him before the Corinthians (v. 21a). Before addressing what Paul may have meant by these words, we must first attend to the word “again” in the verse. The placement of the Greek word palin suggests Paul says “when I come again.” But the emphasis in the verse falls on his humiliation so that many scholars understand Paul to say that God will humble him again. If he is talking about visiting again, then there is nothing particularly significant about the phrase. If, however, he says he fears being humbled again, then he is likely referring to his second visit that went so badly. He said before that he wanted no repeat of that experience (2:1). Now he may be saying that he fears another painful experience is exactly what is brewing. In what sense might Paul be humbled (and may have been before)? His vocation as apostle to the Gentiles meant he was calling the nations to share in the New Creation God is bringing into being in which all people are one in Christ and in which God’s grace and peace reign. So, if there is dissension and discord, if some Corinthians reject his understanding of the gospel, then he may consider his mission in Corinth to be incomplete at best and a failure at worst. If the Macedonian representatives of the Jerusalem collection are with him when he comes to Corinth this time (see 9:3-4), then they will witness this incompleteness (or failure). Not only that, but Paul had also boasted about the Corinthians to the Macedonians in order to stir their participation in the collection (see 9:1-3). If his boasts turn out to be empty, then his humiliation will be compounded. If he believes he must use his authority for “tearing down” rather than “building up,” i.e., for punishment rather than affirmation, then he may consider that circumstance a

2 Corinthians 12:14–13:10

243

Macedonia, Achaia, and the Journey to Jerusalem Paul’s plan appears to have been for representatives of the Macedonian churches to bring their part of the Jerusalem collection, travel with him to Corinth to join with their representatives and offerings, and then the whole group would journey to Jerusalem with their gifts. This map shows the geographical relations between these places and what an undertaking a journey to Jerusalem would have been. See also the commentary on 9:3-4.

failure since he understands God to have given the authority for building up (see 10:8). We may not be able to specify the humiliation that Paul most fears, but we can easily name possible reasons for his concern. But in what sense is God the one who humbles him? This question is not so easily answered. He surely cannot mean that he believes God caused the Corinthians to behave in ways that humiliate Paul. The thought that God would hold Paul accountable for the Corinthians’ actions is also problematic for us, but it may have been less so in their culture. We have seen that Paul claimed the role of “father” of the Corinthian community. As we have noted, fathers in this culture were responsible for the behavior of their children (see the commentary on 11:2). When children did not conduct themselves honorably, the wider society cast the dishonor on the father who was responsible for them. The father’s dishonor then fell over the whole family. Paul may be drawing on this cultural understanding to claim that the backbiting behavior of his “children” (the Corinthians) would result in God dishonoring (i.e., humbling) him since he is responsible for them. Those opposed to

244

2 Corinthians 12:14–13:10

Paul should hardly consider this “good news,” however, for any dishonor that he faces will fall on them all. What will Paul do in response? First he will “mourn over many who have sinned previously and did not repent” (v. 21b). The Jewish mourning ritual of this time involved protesting the presence of evil before God by taking on the demeanor of beggars so as to beg God to remove the evil by which they are afflicted. The reasoning was that if another human being would help someone suffering humiliation, how much more would God assist those who humiliate themselves before God?8 Paul says he may have to engage in this ritual practice because of “many” who sinned before and did not repent. The list of sins from which they have not repented, however, is a surprise. This brief catalogue of vices includes impurity, fornication, and outrageous behavior (lasciviousness). All three terms point to sexual misconduct, which has not been part of the discussion in this letter at all. It was, though, a significant piece of the letter of 1 Corinthians, chapters 5–7 of which relate concerns over sexual behavior. Thus Paul Sampley claims that Paul is “digging up old bones of contention,”9 perhaps to indicate to the Corinthians that they have no standing on which to judge him as weak. In addition, his “father” role may be surfacing again: as their father he was to present the Corinthian community as a “pure virgin” to her betrothed (11:2). Instead, he claims that many in the community were impure and unfaithful. So, as their father, he will mourn and beg God to remove this evil from their midst.10 He will also discipline the sinners in some manner. As chapter 13 gets underway, Paul reiterates that his third visit to Corinth is near (v. 1a) and makes clear his intent to deal forcefully with matters when he arrives (vv. 2-3). Before promising not to spare those who have sinned (likely meaning the unrepentant ones of 12:21), however, he first quotes from Deuteronomy 19:15 to say that “any accusation is confirmed by the mouth [i.e., testimony] of two witnesses or three” (v. 1b). The same text is used in Matthew 18:16 in a discussion of church discipline and is alluded to in a similar context in 1 Timothy 5:19, suggesting this Deuteronomic idea had taken hold among Jesus’ followers. We are hardly surprised that Paul believed the Corinthian situation required discipline. But scholars have struggled to understand what Paul meant to convey by this quote in this context. Some believe he intends literally to convene a public court of sorts and call witnesses when he arrives in Corinth.11 Others contend that the references to “second” and “third” visits correspond to the “two” or “three” required witnesses,

2 Corinthians 12:14–13:10

245

so that Paul’s visits themselves are the witnesses. During the first two Paul warned the Corinthians about sin. The impending third visit will be the final witness against those who refuse to repent.12 Still other scholars believe the witnesses are a combination of Paul’s second visit and his letters since then, which lead to a climactic moment of judgment during the third visit.13 I have difficulty imagining that Paul had enough standing among Corinthian believers to convene a court or enforce its judgments, so that I am more persuaded by those who understand Paul’s visits and letters as his witnesses against the Corinthians. He has warned them repeatedly—while present and while absent via letters (v. 2b)—that if the ones who are sinning do not repent (v. 2a), then he “will not spare them” (v. 2c). What he intends to do so as not to spare the unrepentant ones is unclear. Scholars have speculated that he might excommunicate them, exclude them from participation in congregational activities (primarily Eucharist), or even use supernatural power to inflict sickness on them. Whatever action is in his mind, he intends it to “prove” (dokim∑ ) that Christ is speaking through him (v. 3a). Words that come from the dokim- family have been important already in the Corinthian correspondence— Paul’s Use of the Dokim- Word Family in the Paul has used them to note those who have Corinthian Letters been tested and “proved” themselves trustWords from the Greek dokim- word family worthy and to call the Corinthians to “prove” have been important in the Corinthian their worthiness. [Paul’s Use of the Dokim- Word Family letters. Here is a review of the texts in which they in the Corinthian Letters] The implication in 13:3a is appear: that some Corinthians believe Paul has not 1 Cor 16:3. And when I arrive, I will send any whom proved that Christ speaks through him. The you approve (dokimazø) with letters to take your gift next part of the sentence—“Christ is not weak to Jerusalem. in you but powerful among you” (v. 3b)—may 2 Cor 2:9. For this reason also I wrote, so that I 14 be a reflection of this Corinthian claim. If might know your tested character (dokim∑), if in so, then they are making a comparison— everything you are obedient. “Christ is powerful among us [i.e., the 2 Cor 8:8. I do not speak this as a command, but by means of the devotion of others I am testing (dokiCorinthians], but Paul is weak. Therefore, mazø) the genuineness of your love. Christ does not speak through him.” These 2 Cor 8:22a. And we sent with them our brother Corinthians may have ecstatic experiences, whom we tested (dokimazø) in many things . . . . tongues speaking, and other such spiritual 2 Cor 9:13. Through the test (dokim∑) of this minexperiences in mind when they claim that istry you are glorifying God by the submission of your Christ is powerful among them. Conversely, as confession into the gospel of Christ and the sincerity of your partnership with them and with all. we have seen, they appear to consider Paul’s suffering, imprisonment, and manual labor as Paul’s past use of words from this family help us signs of his weakness that, for them, nullify his understand his point in 13:3-7. claim that Christ is at work through him.

246

2 Corinthians 12:14–13:10

Paul, of course, has just declared that “when I am weak, then I am strong” (12:10). As he responds to the charge of not having proved that Christ speaks through him, he returns to that thought. Christ, he says, “was crucified out of weakness” (v. 4a), a phrase that troubles some interpreters who, apparently for theological reasons, do not like the word “weakness” associated with Jesus. Thus some commentators declare that this weakness is simply the human condition that Christ shared when he “emptied himself ” (Phil 2:7-9).15 But there may be more to Paul’s statement. A choice to love all people and invite them to share in the New Creation as beloved children of God, and a corresponding choice to resist acts of evil and violence with love—a practice we have learned to call “nonviolent” resistance—makes one appear weak and vulnerable. Salt mine workers in Gandhi’s India were beaten back by the British when they tried to go to work. They did not respond in kind. Civil rights activists in the U.S. were beaten back by water hoses, billy clubs, police dogs, guns, and even bombs. Some were kidnapped and brutally murdered. But those led by Martin Luther King, Jr., did not respond in kind. The followers of King and Gandhi were walking in the way of Jesus of Nazareth who was crucified by Rome’s imperial Nonviolent Resisters power but did not respond in kind. It is possible for someone to judge such beaten and bleeding people as weak and pitiful. But we also know that they bore a powerful witness against evil and the death it produces, and a powerful witness for the strength of love and life. Jesus was crucified in weakness “but lives out of the power of God” (v. 4a). His love, which made him “. . . [By] filling the jails, the protestors immobilized the police and the next wave of demonstrators could peacefully protest for the first time in downtown Birmingham. The jails were flooded, the city vulnerable, and God’s was paralyzed and the white leadership realized it had to come to the bargaining table. 1963” (Credit: power produce life! © Bob Adelman/Corbis) So, yes, Paul says, “we [emphatic pronoun] are Martin Luther King, Jr., preached nonviolent resistance to segregation in our country. This picture from Birmingham in 1963 shows protesters following his weak in him” (v. 4b). As lead. These people do not look like a powerful force for justice, but more than in 4:7-11 where he says he forty years later we are still telling their stories, still moved by their photos, and holds the treasure of the we have learned from them the evils of segregation.

2 Corinthians 12:14–13:10

gospel in the “clay jar” of his body and is always “being handed over to death because of Jesus,” he accepts the judgment that his suffering for the gospel makes him weak. But also as in 4:11 where the result of his suffering is that “the life of Jesus is revealed in our mortal flesh,” so here he claims, “We will live with him [i.e., Jesus] out of the power of God for you” (v. 4b). He is weak like Jesus was weak and also powerful as Jesus was powerful, thus bringing forth life in the midst of death through the power of God. And he does it for them, i.e., because he loves them. But this reiteration of his claim to strength through weakness raises the question of what he intends to do so as not to “spare” them and to “prove” that Christ speaks through him. He has insisted on his role as their spiritual father in a culture where fathers had absolute authority over their children. And he has threatened before to bring a stick if he felt it necessary. He may intend to act forcefully and do something like excommunicate the unrepentant ones. But if he does, he runs the risk of subverting his own argument that he is weak as Christ was weak and powerful as Christ is powerful. His greatest desire, of course, is not to face this dilemma. He calls to the Corinthians: “Examine yourselves if you are in the faith; prove [dokimazø] yourselves” (v. 5a). The Corinthians wanted proof (dokim∑ ) that Christ spoke through Paul (v. 3), but Paul now turns that thought back on them, insisting that they “examine” and “prove” (dokimazø) that they are “in the faith.” Some scholars believe “in the faith” is a reference to doctrinal matters, i.e., that the Corinthians should adhere to Paul’s understanding of the gospel rather than that of the rival apostles. But faith, for Paul, is most often about the way a person lives, trusting in God’s grace and living in response to that grace. In this context, he may be asking them if they trust God and love others as Christ did, which will make them vulnerable (weak). His follow-up question reinforces this idea: “Do you not know yourselves that Jesus Christ is among you?” (v. 5b). The Christ who was crucified in weakness and lives by the power of God is within and among them.16 Consequently, they ought to be weak as Christ was weak and powerful as he is powerful rather than self-promoting and judgmental as Paul has experienced them. Unless, of course, they “fail to prove” (adokimoi) themselves (v. 5c). This last clause surely carries a bit of irony. He doesn’t expect the Corinthians to be adokimoi, for he would hardly have spent so much time and energy on them if he considered them a “lost cause.” Nonetheless, he leaves the possibility open, thus underlining his challenge that they prove themselves.

247

248

2 Corinthians 12:14–13:10

Then Paul adds that he hopes the Corinthians will know that “we have not failed to prove [adokimoi] ourselves” (v. 6). The implication may be that if the Corinthians examine themselves, realize that Christ is in their midst and that they are “in the faith,” then they will also acknowledge that they came to faith through the ministry of Paul and his partners. As he said before, their existence as a community of faith in Christ is the only letter of recommendation he should ever need to “prove” that Christ speaks through him (see 3:1-3). The structure of v. 7 is a bit convoluted. Literally it reads, “But we pray to God that you do nothing evil, not so that we [emphatic pronoun] appear as proving ourselves [dokimoi], but so that you [emphatic pronoun] may do good, even though we [emphatic pronoun] might be unproven [adokimoi].” As Sze-kar Wan says, the gist of Paul’s statement is that his apostolic legitimacy before the Corinthians is not his all-consuming passion. Rather, Paul’s efforts to resolve his conflicts with them are, in the end, not about proving the authenticity of his ministry, but so that they will do good instead of evil.17 He claims not to be self-promoting as he believes the rival apostles and some Corinthians were. Instead, he apparently believes that the triumphalistic understanding of the gospel that they espouse is harmful, so he has labored to persuade them to see the truth of the gospel as he understands it. In the end, if they judge him to be “unproven” as an apostle but grasp the power and wisdom of the New Creation God is bringing into being through the crucified Christ, then, he says, he will be satisfied. This claim reiterates the one made in 12:19 in which he said he was not defending himself but was speaking before God for their building up. It seems fair to say that Paul understood all he had said and done to have been for the Corinthians rather than for himself. Whether or not the Corinthians would see him thusly (over against what the rival apostles were apparently saying about him) is at the heart of the conflict between them. The rest of the paragraph is jumbled. First he says that he cannot do anything “against the truth but only for the truth” (v. 8), which is another affirmation of his trustworthiness. “Truth” here is likely his sense of what God is doing in the world, hence the truth of the gospel. Indeed, if he is convinced that God is working for something, what would be the point of working against it? If nothing else, Paul has shown that he believes deeply in God’s work through the crucified and resurrected Christ to bring about the New Creation. He follows his affirmation with, “For we rejoice

2 Corinthians 12:14–13:10

249

whenever we [emphatic pronoun] are weak but you [emphatic pronoun] are strong” (v. 9a). We might wonder if the Corinthians would have considered the statement to be overdone, but the point is one that Paul has made before. Whenever the clay jar (his body) is beaten but does not break, they can see the Life in the Midst of Death power of God, a consequence of which is that Paul often speaks of God bringing forth “death is at work in us but life in you” (4:7-12). life even when death abounds. Here are Whenever God consoles him in the midst of examples: affliction, the result is that he is able to console others in their affliction (1:3-7). As he has Rom 4:17 . . . in the presence of the God in whom [Abraham] believed, who gives life to the dead insisted all along, suffering for the gospel is not a and calls into existence the things that do not source of shame or evidence of weakness. exist. Rather, it becomes a source of strength for those Rom 8:11. If the Spirit of [God] who raised Jesus who encounter God bringing life in the midst of from the dead dwells in you, [God] who raised death. [Life in the Midst of Death] He prays for their Christ from the dead will give life to your mortal katartisis (v. 9b), a rarely used Greek word that bodies also through [God’s] Spirit that dwells in you. seems to mean restoration or completeness. 1 Cor 1:30a. [God] is the source of your life in Perhaps the idea is that they were more complete Christ Jesus . . . . before the rival apostles stirred greater conflict 2 Cor 3:6. [God] made us competent to be minis(considering their response to the emotional ters of a new covenant, not of letter but of spirit; letter). So he prays for them to be restored to the for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life. completeness they once had or were journeying toward. Lastly, he names explicitly the purpose of this letter: he has written it while he is still away so that when he arrives he will not need to use “severely” the authority God gave him “for building up and not for tearing down” (v. 10). That is, he wants to avert a showdown, for God gave him authority for the purpose of building them up as he said at 10:8. Thus he wrote this letter with its explanations, challenges, and warnings. Having returned to thoughts with which he began this letter, he is ready to conclude it.

CONNECTIONS 1. One way to consider the dilemma Paul has faced throughout the Corinthian correspondence and that he faces again as he prepares for his third visit might be characterized thusly: as someone responsible for pastoral leadership within an ekkl∑sia, how should he respond when that ekkl∑sia leans toward decisions that he considers wrong and harmful? We remember that an ekkl∑sia, the term Paul applied to his communities, was an assembly of free citizens making decisions about the course of their own lives. He told the

250

2 Corinthians 12:14–13:10

Galatians, “For freedom Christ has set us free” (Gal 5:1), and to the Corinthians he wrote, “Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom” (2 Cor 3:17). He referred to the believers as his siblings and used the language of friendship when he wrote them. What is he to do if these free brothers and sisters and friends decide to follow a path that he believes in the depths of his soul is wrong? What is any pastor to do? Paul’s response, as we have seen, was to become authoritarian, to claim the role of father of the community and to demand the obedience of his children. No doubt he did it because he feared for them if they followed this other path. But I suggest that the Corinthian story, filled as it is with ongoing conflict, tells us his response did not work well. Moreover, he runs the risk of subverting his understanding of the gospel. If he brings “a stick” on this third visit, his claim that, “When I am weak, then I am strong,” will sound like empty rhetoric—nice turn of phrase, but he doesn’t really believe it. What is a pastor to do in such a situation? There’s always the example of Jesus, who believed and practiced his gospel of love and justice all the way to the cross, trusting God utterly to do the needed reconciling and redeeming. 2. If our reading of the Corinthian context is correct, if some believers there espoused a triumphalistic understanding of the gospel, then they were apparently interested in being powerful as power was understood and appreciated in their culture. They wanted to be “showy,” win arguments, and become patrons of God’s apostles, etc. Paul, however, has been arguing all along that God’s power is wholly different from Rome’s. God’s power is love and grace and is revealed in a crucified Messiah. It is precisely not imperial power that can only produce “peace by conquest” and thus bring lots of death. But God’s power brings peace via reconciliation and allows life to flourish. So, Paul says to the Corinthian believers, if Christ is among them, then they will be strong through weakness, do only good, and live the truth of the gospel of the crucified Messiah. We can be sure he would say the same thing to us.

Notes 1. E.g., Margaret E. Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians (ICC 2; London: T & T Clark International, 2000) 854. 2. E.g., Frank J. Matera, II Corinthians: A Commentary (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2003) 297. 3. Ibid., 292.

2 Corinthians 12:14–13:10 4. A key reason for reading the clause as a question is the lack of a strong adversative between it and the next statement, something like, “You have been thinking this, BUT it is not true.” Since there is no such adversative, reading it as a question makes good grammatical sense. 5. Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, ICC 2, 860. 6. Ibid., 860–61. 7. J. Paul Sampley, The Second Letter to the Corinthians (NIB 11; Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2000) 172. 8. Bruce J. Malina and John J. Pilch, Social Science Commentary on the Letters of Paul (Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress Press, 2006) 161 9. Sampley, The Second Letter to the Corinthians, 172. 10. The contrast between Paul’s criticism of the Corinthians here and his expressed confidence in them in 7:11, 13-16 requires explanation from proponents of the unity of the letter. E.g., Matera, II Corinthians, 302, argues that Paul is responding to two different situations, one that was resolved and one that was not. The problem with Matera’s argument is that in 7:16 Paul says he has confidence in the Corinthians “in all things.” Reading chapters 10–13 as a separate letter written after relations had deteriorated again makes better sense of this contrast. 11. See David E. Garland, 2 Corinthians (NAC; Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999) 541. 12. See C. K. Barrett, A Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1973) 333; Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, ICC 2, 875. 13. See Victor Paul Furnish, II Corinthians (AB 32a; Garden City NJ: Doubleday & Co., 1984) 575 ; Matera, II Corinthians, 308. 14. So Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, ICC 2, 881. 15. E.g., Matera, II Corinthians, 307; Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, ICC 2, 884. 16. The Greek preposition en is frequently translated “in” or “within,” but with a plural noun it can also convey “among.” I have an idea Paul meant all of these possibilities here. 17. Sze-kar Wan, Power in Weakness: The Second Letter of Paul to the Corinthians (Harrisburg PA: Trinity Press International, 2000) 151.

251

Farewell, and Our Concluding Thoughts 2 Corinthians 13:11-14 Ancient letters usually ended with a Farewells in Other Pauline Letters “farewell” section that included greetThe farewell section of Galatians lacks any greetings, which is not surprising ings and final exhortations. Paul given how tense Paul’s relations were with the typically followed the convention. believers there. The final admonitions include, [Farewells in Other Pauline Letters] The short “For neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is admonitions he included at the end of anything, but a new creation is everything! As for his letters remind us what he believes those who will follow this rule—peace be upon the community most needs. them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God” (6:15-16). So, at v. 11 in our letter he signals that By contrast, Paul’s relations with Philippian he is ready for the concluding section believers was positive, which can be detected in of this letter: “Finally, brothers and the final admonitions: “Rejoice in the Lord always; sisters . . . .” He follows with five imperagain I will say, Rejoice. Let your gentleness be atives that, after careful study of this known to everyone. The Lord is near. Do not letter, we could have anticipated. The worry about anything, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your first, chairete, is usually translated requests be made known to God. And the peace “rejoice,” but in this context may simply of God, which surpasses all understanding, will mean “farewell.” The second is katarguard your hearts and minds in Christ Jesus” (4:4tizesthe, the verb form of katartisis that 7). After thanking them for their support he says, appeared in 13:9 where it pointed to the “Greet every saint in Christ Jesus. The friends Corinthians’ restoration to the comwho are with me greet you. All the saints greet you . . .” (4:21-22). pleteness toward which they were The farewell section of Romans is long and journeying prior to the rival apostles’ includes a commendation of Phoebe (16:1-2), a influence. The imperative here, then, is long list of greetings to believers in Rome (16:3“be restored.” Then Paul admonishes 16), final exhortations (16:17-20), greetings from them to “be consoled/encouraged,” Paul’s friends and coworkers (16:21-23), and a from the verb parakaleø that he has used final doxology (16:25-27). Since Paul had neither founded nor visited this church but needed their so often in this letter. Though the help for a mission to Spain (15:22-23), the Corinthians have known conflict, lengthy list of greetings is not surprising. charges, divisions, and warnings, Paul still tells them to be encouraged/consoled, for God is the God of all parakl∑sis (consolation/encouragement; 1:3). The fourth imperative is to auto phroneite, which is literally, “think the same way.” Thus he calls them to unity, which, we know now, they do not have. Finally, he says to them, “be at peace” (eir∑neuete), which, we also know, they are not. If the Corinthians will respond to these imperatives, then

254

2 Corinthians 13:11-14

God as the God of Peace God is often tied to peace in Paul’s thinking as these examples show:

Paul says “the God of love and peace” will be with them (v. 11). For Paul God is the God of peace who is offering peace to the creation. [God as the God of Peace] But we human beings have 1 Thess 5:23a. May the God of peace himself to live God’s peace to make it a reality. A semisanctify you entirely . . . . Phil 4:7. And the peace of God, which surpasses nary student once asked the great preacher, civil all understanding, will guard your hearts and rights activist, and author Will Campbell what minds in Christ Jesus. we could do for racial reconciliation in our 1 Cor 14:33. . . . for God is a God not of disorder culture. He answered, “Nothing. It’s already but of peace. been done. God took care of that on the cross. Rom 16:20. The God of peace will shortly crush Now it’s up to us to live as if that’s the truth Satan under your feet. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you. and not a lie.” Paul may have a similar idea in mind here—God is present offering peace and love, but believers have to live as if that’s the truth. Hence the imperatives. The Corinthians should greet one another with a holy kiss (v. 12), likely a gesture of peace and intimacy among those who exchanged it, and, thus, a symbolic “acting out” of their peace and unity. But the Corinthians were not only joined to one another. They were also part of the larger community of the people of God, and Paul reminds them when he tells them, “All the saints greet you” (v. 13). All the genuine letters of Paul begin and end with grace as does our letter: the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, along with the love of God and the koinønia of the Holy Spirit “be with you all,” Paul concludes (v. 14). Koinønia may refer to the communion each Corinthian believer had with the Spirit, or it may point to the communion fostered by the Spirit among believers. We know that Paul longed for communion among the Corinthians to be restored. Indeed, Paul says these gifts were for all of them. None was more spiritual or powerful or special than another. God’s love and grace preclude anyone being above another. When they could finally understand this, then they would finally be at peace. With those words, Paul concluded the letter and sent it off. What happened next? Did Paul make the third visit? If he did, was there an ugly scene, or did the majority of the Corinthian believers find a way to reconcile with Paul after all? Did Paul and his rivals ever agree to disagree peacefully and share in the communion of the Holy Spirit, or were the Corinthians forced to choose either Paul or them? Presumably the story of Paul and the Corinthian believers continued. Unfortunately, we do not have the next chapter (or chapters). We do, however, have hints that reconciliation happened, though we cannot be sure how widespread it

2 Corinthians 13:11-14

was. First, the letter of chapters 10–13 was preserved and passed on. Second, Paul reports in Romans 15:26 that the Macedonians and Achaians were “pleased to share their resources with the poor among the saints at Jerusalem,” so we know the Jerusalem collection was completed in Achaia. But there is much we don’t know. Was it completed fully? Does the listing of the Macedonians first indicate that the Achaians did less? Are we right to assume that “Achaians” included the Corinthian believers? We can only wish for answers to these questions. Third, Paul wrote the letter to the Romans from Corinth where he was hosted by Gaius who, along with Erastus, the city treasurer in Corinth, and a brother named Quartus, sent greetings to the Roman believers (Rom 16:25). In addition, Paul sent the letter to the Romans via Phoebe, a minister of the ekkl∑sia at Cenchreae (a sister city to Corinth) and patron to many including Paul (how curious is that? see Rom 16:1). These names and notes from the Romans letter tell us that Paul had good relations with at least some believers in and around Corinth. Finally, Clement, the second-century bishop of Rome, identified the church in Corinth with Paul. We have these hints of reconciliation between Paul and the Corinthian believers. We will have to be content with what they tell us. Now, with what should we conclude a study of 2 Corinthians? Considering how often the students and alums of the seminary where I teach speak of the problem of conflict in their churches, I choose to focus there. For many Christians, perhaps significantly because of Paul’s counsels to his churches to be unified, conflict is judged as something that should never happen among good Christians. Careful study of 2 Corinthians, however, challenges that view in at least two ways. First, the story of Paul and the Corinthian believers confirms what students of social groupings have long said: bring diverse people together, and conflict will happen. It is inevitable. Our question, then, is not whether we will have conflict. Instead, we must ask, how will we respond when we do? Second, one constructive way to respond is with creativity. If Paul had not had to cope with a conflicted situation within the Corinthian ekkl∑sia, we would not have our canonical 2 Corinthians. If he had not been pushed by struggles in Corinth and elsewhere to ponder further the implications of the gospel, we would not have many of the ideas he expressed in 2 Corinthians. Think how much poorer we would be without it. But because conflict prompted Paul to write the letters of 2 Corinthians, we have the opportunity to have our spiritual lives shaped by the following claims:

255

256

2 Corinthians 13:11-14

For Jesus Christ the son of God . . . did not become “yes and no,” but the “yes” has become reality in him. For all the promises of God are “yes” in him. (1:19-20a) [God] makes us competent to be ministers of a new covenant, not of letter but of spirit, for the letter kills but the Spirit makes alive. (3:6) But the Lord is the Spirit; where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. (3:17) We have this treasure in clay jars so that the extraordinariness of the power might be [seen to be] from God and not from us. (4:7) Therefore, we do not become weary, for although our outer person is being destroyed, our inner person is being renewed day by day. (4:16) For we know that if our earthly houses of lodging is destroyed, we have a building from God, a house not made by hands, eternal in the heavens. (5:1) We walk by faith, not by sight. (5:7) Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, there is a new creation; the old things have passed away; new things are coming into being. (5:17) That is, God was in Christ reconciling the cosmos to Godself, not accounting their sins to them and having established in us the word of reconciliation. (5:19) For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that for your sake he became poor though he was rich so that you also may become rich through his poverty. (8:9) [God] said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for power is made perfect in weakness.” Therefore, I will boast more gladly in the things of my weakness so that the power of Christ may rest upon me . . . . For whenever I am weak, then I am strong.” (12:9-10)

2 Corinthians 13:11-14

Through these nuggets of wisdom, the story of Paul and the Corinthians tells us that conflict, which is inevitable, can result in creative thinking and living if we respond constructively. But this story also warns us about responses that can be destructive rather than constructive. Paul’s letters suggest he did not always hear others’ criticisms of him, some of which may have been quite fair. He appears to have had blind spots about himself, overinflated his rhetoric at times, was guilty of “doublespeak” (i.e., saying one thing one time and something quite different later), and became authoritarian when he was afraid of the direction some Corinthians were choosing. The letters of 2 Corinthians indicate that these responses on Paul’s part intensified the conflict rather than healing it. And yet, there are also indications that Paul and the Corinthian believers did not give up on each other. Through hurt, misunderstanding, questionable rhetoric, genuine disagreement, charge, and countercharge they continued to communicate and found their way to reconciliation. In so doing they bear witness to us, in a time of much church conflict, of what the power of God can do among clay jars that hold on to the treasure of the ministry of the new covenant, of the Spirit, of justice, and of reconciliation. They tell us that living into the New Creation is possible.

257

Bibliography Allison, James. Raising Abel: The Recovery of the Eschatological Imagination. New York: Crossroad, 1996. Barrett, C. K. A Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians. San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1973. Bassler, Jouette M. “Paul’s Theology: Whence and Whither.” In 1 & 2 Corinthians. Edited by David M. Hay. Vol. 2 of Pauline Theology. Edited by Jouette M. Bassler, David M. Hay, E. Elizabeth Johnson. Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress Press, 1993. Betz, Hans Dieter. “The Concept of the ‘Inner Human Being’ (ho esø anthrøpos) in the Anthropology of Paul.” NTS 46 (2000): 315–41. ———. 2 Corinthians 8 and 9. Hermeneia. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985. Blount, Brian K. Can I Get a Witness? Reading Revelation Through African American Culture. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2005. Bondi, Roberta C. To Love as God Loves. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1987. ———. To Pray and to Love: Conversations on Prayer with the Early Church. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1991. Bray, Gerald, ed. ACCS NT 7. Chicago: Fitzroy Dearborn Publishers, 1999. Brunt, P. A. “Laus Imperii.” In Paul and Empire: Religion and Power in Roman Imperial Society. Edited by Richard A. Horsley. Harrisburg PA: Trinity Press, 1997. Charles, R. H. APOT 2. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1913. Chittister, Joan. Called to Question: A Spiritual Memoir. Chicago: Sheed & Ward, 2004. Chow, John K. “Patronage in Roman Corinth.” In Paul and Empire: Religion and Power in Roman Imperial Society. Edited by Richard A. Horsley. Harrisburg PA: Trinity Press International, 1997. Cousar, Charles B. The Letters of Paul. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1996. De Mello, Anthony. The Heart of the Enlightened: A Book of Story-Meditations. New York: Doubleday, 1991. Desert Wisdom: Sayings from the Desert Fathers. Translated by Yushi Nomura. 1982. Repr., Maryknoll NY: Orbis, 2001. Duff, Paul B. “Metaphor, Motif, and Meaning: The Rhetorical Strategy Behind the Image ‘Led in Triumph’ in 2 Corinthians 2:14.” CBQ 53 (1991): 79–92. Ehrensperger, Kathy. That We May be Mutually Encouraged: Feminism and the New Perspective in Pauline Studies. New York: T & T Clark International, 2004. Elliott, Neil. Liberating Paul: The Justice of God and the Politics of the Apostle. Maryknoll NY: Orbis Books, 1994. Fitzmyer, Joseph A. “Glory Reflected in the Face of Christ (2 Cor 3:7–4:6).” In According to Paul: Studies in the Theology of the Apostle. 1981. Repr., New York: Paulist Press, 1993. Frederickson, Paula. “Judaism, the Circumcision of the Gentiles, and Apocalyptic Hope: Another Look at Galatians 1 and 2.” JTS 42 (1991): 532–64.

260

Bibliography Furnish, Victor Paul. II Corinthians. AB. Garden City NY: Doubleday & Co., Inc., 1984. Garland, David E. 2 Corinthians. NAC. Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999. Garnsey, Peter and Richard Saller. “Patronal Power Relations.” In Paul and Empire: Religion and Power in Roman Imperial Society. Edited by Richard A. Horsley. Harrisburg PA: Trinity Press, 1997. Goulder, Michael D. Paul and the Competing Mission in Corinth. Peabody MA: Hendrickson, 2001. Grieb, N. Katherine. The Story of Romans: A Narrative Defense of God’s Righteousness. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2002. Haskins, Susan. Mary Magdalene: Myth and Metaphor. New York: Harcourt, Brace & Co., 1993. Hays, Richard B. “Apocalyptic Hermeneutics: Habbakkuk Proclaims ‘The Righteous One.’” In The Conversion of the Imagination: Paul as Interpreter of Israel’s Scripture. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2005. ———. Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989. Holmberg, Bengt. “The Methods of Historical Reconstruction in the Scholarly ‘Recovery’ of Corinthian Christianity.” In Christianity at Corinth: The Quest for the Pauline Church. Edited by Edward Adams and David G. Horrell. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2004. Horsley, Richard A. 1 Corinthians. ANTC. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1998. ———. “1 Corinthians: A Case Study of Paul’s Assembly as an Alternative Society.” In Paul and Empire: Religion and Power in Roman Imperial Society. Edited by Richard A. Horsley. Harrisburg PA: Trinity Press, 1997. ———. “The Gospel of Imperial Salvation: Introduction.” In Paul and Empire: Religion and Power in Roman Imperial Society. Edited by Richard A. Horsley. Harrisburg PA: Trinity Press, 1997. ———. Jesus and Empire: The Kingdom of God and the New World Disorder. Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 2003. ——— and Neil Asher Silberman. The Message and the Kingdom: How Jesus and Paul Ignited a Revolution and Transformed the Ancient World. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1997. Howard-Brook, Wes. Becoming Children of God: John’s Gospel and Radical Discipleship. Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1993. Johnson, Elizabeth A. Truly Our Sister: A Theology of Mary in the Communion of Saints. New York: Continuum, 2006. Kim, Seyoon “2 Cor. 5:11-21 and the Origin of Paul’s Concept of ‘Reconciliation.’” NovT 39 (1997): 360–84. Kittridge, Cynthia Briggs. Community and Authority: The Rhetoric of Obedience in the Pauline Tradition. Harrisburg PA: Trinity Press International, 1998. Kornfield, Jack and Christina Feldman, eds. Soul Food: Stories to Nourish the Spirit and the Heart. San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1996. Kraftchick, Steven J. “Death in Us, Life in You: The Apostolic Medium.” In 1 & 2 Corinthians. Edited by David M. Hay. Vol. 2 of Pauline Theology. Edited by

Bibliography Jouette M. Bassler, David M. Hay, E. Elizabeth Johnson. Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress Press, 1993. Lambrecht, Jan. Second Corinthians. SP 8. Collegeville MN: Liturgical Press, 1999. Malherbe, Abraham J. “Antisthenes and Odysseus, and Paul at War.” HTR 76 (1983): 143–73. Malina, Bruce J. and John J. Pilch. Social Science Commentary on the Letters of Paul. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2006. ——— and Richard L. Rohrbach. Social-Science Commentary on the Synoptic Gospels. Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 1992. Martin, Ralph P. 2 Corinthians. WBC 40. Waco: Word Books, 1986. Matera, Frank J. II Corinthians. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2003. Matthews, Shelly. “2 Corinthians.” In vol. 2 of Searching the Scriptures: A Feminist Commentary. Edited by Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza. New York: Crossroad, 1994. May, Gerald G. The Dark Night of the Soul. San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 2004. Minor, Mitzi L. The Power of Mark’s Story. St. Louis: Chalice Press, 2001. ———. The Spirituality of Mark: Responding to God. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1996. Oliver, Mary. Winter Hours: Prose, Prose Poems, and Poems. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1999. Palmer, Parker J. The Courage to Teach: Exploring the Inner Landscape of a Teacher’s Life. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1998. Park, Eung Chun. Either Jew or Gentile: Paul’s Unfolding Theology of Inclusivity. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2003. Pipher, Mary. The Shelter of Each Other: Rebuilding Our Families. New York: Ballentine Books, 1996. Polaski, Sandra Hack. A Feminist Introduction to Paul. St. Louis: Chalice Press, 2005. Price, S. R. F. “Rituals & Power.” In Paul and Empire: Religion and Power in Roman Imperial Society. Edited by Richard A. Horsley. Harrisburg PA: Trinity Press, 1997. Sampley, J. Paul. “Paul, His Opponents in 2 Corinthians 10–13, and the Rhetorical Handbooks.” In The Social World of Formative Christianity and Judaism: Essays in Tribute to Howard Clark Kee. Edited by Jacob Neusner et al. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1988. ———. The Second Letter to the Corinthians. NIB 11. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2000. Schaberg, Jane. The Resurrection of Mary Magdalene: Legends, Apochrypha, and the Christian Testament. New York: Continuum, 2003. Schottroff, Luise. Lydia’s Impatient Sisters: A Feminist Social History of Early Christianity. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1995. Schüssler Fiorenza, Elisabeth. “Paul and the Politics of Interpretation.” In Paul and Politics. Edited by Richard A. Horsley. Harrisburg PA: Trinity Press International, 2000. Scott, James M. 2 Corinthians. NIBCNT. Peabody MA: Hendrickson, 1998.

261

262

Bibliography Shea, John. The Legend of the Bells and Other Tales. Chicago: ACTA Publications, 1996. Silf, Margaret, ed. 100 Wisdom Stories from around the World. Cleveland: Pilgrim Press, 2003. Soelle, Dorothee. Essential Writings. Edited by Dianne L. Oliver. Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 2006. ———. The Silent Cry: Mysticism and Resistance. Translated by Barbara and Martin Rumscheidt. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2001. Stowers, Stanley K. “Peri men gar and the Integrity of 2 Cor. 8 and 9.” NovT 32 (1990): 340–48. Talbert, Charles H. Reading Corinthians: A Literary and Theological Commentary. Macon GA: Smyth & Helwys, 2002. Thrall, Margaret E. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians. ICC 1. London: T & T Clark International, 1994. ———. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians. ICC 2. London: T & T Clark International, 2000. Thornton, Edward E. Being Transformed: An Inner Way of Spiritual Growth. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1984. Tutu, Desmond. No Future Without Forgiveness. New York: Doubleday, 1999. Volf, Miroslav. Exclusion and Embrace: A Theological Exploration of Identity, Otherness, and Reconciliation. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1996. Wan, Sze-kar. “Collection for the Saints as Anticolonial Act.” In Paul and Politics. Edited by Richard A. Horsley. Harrisburg PA: Trinity Press International, 2000. ———. Power in Weakness: Conflict and Rhetoric in Paul’s Second Letter to the Corinthian. Harrisburg PA: Trinity Press International, 2000. Welborn, L. L. Politics & Rhetoric in the Corinthian Epistles. Macon GA: Mercer University Press, 1997. Williams, Michael A. Rethinking ‘Gnosticism’: An Argument for Dismantling a Dubious Category. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996. Wright, N. T. “On Becoming the Righteousness of God: 2 Corinthians 5:21.” In 1 & 2 Corinthians. Edited by David M. Hay. Vol. 2 of Pauline Theology. Edited by Jouette M. Bassler, David M. Hay, E. Elizabeth Johnson. Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress Press, 1993. ———. The Resurrection of the Son of God. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2003. Zanker, Paul. “The Power of Images.” In Paul and Empire: Religion and Power in Roman Imperial Society. Edited by Richard A. Horsley. Harrisburg PA: Trinity Press, 1997.

index of modern authors

A Allison, James 89, 90

M Malina, Bruce 133 Martin, Ralph 200

B Barrett, C. K. 56

Matera, Frank 38, 74, 95, 131, 185, 200 Murphy-O’Connor, Jerome 188

Betz, Hans Dieter 93, 156, 158, 166, 167, 171, 176

O C

Oliver, Mary 84

Campbell, Will 254

P D Duff, Paul 57

F

Palmer, Parker 203 Pilch, John 133 Pipher, Mary 233 Polaski, Sandra Hack 113

Fiorenza, Elisabeth Schüssler 17, 83 Fitzmyer, Joseph 69, 76 Furnish, Victor Paul 92, 231

G Garland, David 186

S Sampley, Paul 39, 44, 60, 70, 77, 79–80, 89, 98, 122, 129, 133, 145, 158, 173, 179, 211, 212, 226, 244 Scott, James M. 57 Soelle, Dorothee 101, 146

Goulder, Michael 12

T H Hays, Richard 74–75, 77 Horsley, Richard A. 13, 60 154 Howard-Brook, Wes 45

K Kim, Seyoon 115 Kittridge, Cynthia Briggs 40, 47 Kraftchick, Steven 89–90, 91

L Lambrecht, Jan 69, 89, 95, 131–32, 200, 213

Thornton, Edward 66 Thrall, Margaret 73, 75, 111, 131–32, 143, 157, 166, 174, 218, 240

V Volf, Miroslav 99–100

W Wan, Sze-kar 39, 59, 89, 154, 160–61, 188, 213, 218, 248 Wright, N. T. 90–91, 96, 99, 113, 118

index of sidebars and illustrations

Text Sidebars Acts 13:1-3 Ancient Commentary on These Verses

3 196

Ancient Commentators on the Offender

42

Ancient Story of Freedom, An

78

Argument for Identifying Chapters 10–13 as the Third Letter, An 41 Believers as Thinkers

102

“Different Gospel” in the Galatian Letter, The

209

Isaiah 60:4-5; 61-6; Micah 4:1-2

Different Scholarly Views of the Content of 6:14–7:1

132

Jeremiah 9:23-24 Here and in 1 Corinthians 1:27-31 202

Different Translations of the Beginning of Verse19

114

Jesus and Paul on Believing and Doing

100

Different Views of Titus’s Work

239

Jesus within This Prophetic Tradition

59

154

Early Interpretations of the Clay Jar and the Hardships

88

Layers of Heaven in the New Testament 223

Early Interpreters on the Veil

75

Life in the Midst of Death

249

Examples of Paul’s Use of “Apostle”

168

Exodus 16:16-18

160

Monastic Story on Facing the Pain of Growth, A 147

Biblical Texts on the Fear of the Lord 108

Farewells in Other Pauline Letters

253

Moses’ Veil in Exodus 34:31-33

Bishop Tutu’s Sermon in Rwanda

Fathers in the Roman World

206

Believers as Works in Progress: Romans 8:29; 12:1-2; Philippians 1:25 79

Christian Understandings of Eve’s Sin as Sexual Sin

Marge Piercy’s “The Low Road” 46

73

50

“Fathers” in the Roman Empire 34

Nations Shall Stream to Zion, The

207

Further Pauline Statements on God’s Grace 155

Note 2 Enoch; Testament of Abraham

225 225

3

Cicero’s Patriarchy

206

Comments from Women about These Images

Glory of the Lord on Moses’ Face, Exodus 34:29-30, The 70

Note Apocalypse of Moses ; 2 Enoch

208

God as the God of Peace

254

Note Isaiah 65:17; 66:22

113

God as the One Who Raised Jesus from the Dead

91

Note Paul’s Poetry from 1 Corinthians 15

92

God of Jews and Gentiles in Romans 3

4

Compare NRSV and TNIV Translations of 5:2-3

95

Corinthian “Triumphalism”

13

Corinthian Letters in this Commentary, The Corroboration of Paul’s Plan from Romans 15:25-28 and Acts 20:2-4

16

173

Denise Levertov’s “The Avowal” 34 Desert Mother on “Grief according to God,” A

143

Hypomon∑ in Other New Testament Texts Hypomon∑ in the New Testament Imperial Prohibition of Plebian Meetings

Note Romans 8:28, 35-39

231

Other Biblical Texts on God’s Glory

123

Other Catalogues of Vices in Paul’s Letters

9

227

Noting Galatians 2:6-7, 9-10 153 70 241

Other Examples of Paul’s Use of “in Christ” 112

266

Index of Sidebars

Other Pauline References to the “Seat” of Our Emotions 129 Outline of the Letter

15

Paul’s Use of the Term “Apostle” 24 Paul’s Vocation in Galatians 1:15-16

3

Parker Palmer on Conflict and Fear

203

Power of Death and the Power of Life, The 120

Paul as the Corinthians’ “Father”

205

Quotations from 1 Corinthians 16:1-11 14

Paul on Being Paid in 1 Corinthians 9

61

Paul on Boasting Paul on Judgment Paul’s Claims to Sincerity in 2 Corinthians Thus Far Paul’s Comments on Ecstatic Experiences

109

“Signs and Wonders” in the Bible

232

Silvanus

33

Quotations from Revelation 19

124

99

Quoting from Jeremiah

195

Spiritual Teachings on Wealth

Recalling 8:1-21

240

Story in Acts 9:19-25, The

Receivers of Gifts

26

Story in Galatians 2, The

80 109

41

Paul’s Jewish Heritage (or “Not Reading Paul AntiSemitically”)

220

Paul’s Miracles in Acts

232

Paul’s Prior “Boasting” over the Corinthians in the Letter 172

201

Paul’s References to the Jerusalem Collection

152

Paul’s Refusal of Patronage among the Corinthians

211

Paul’s Rhetorical Strategy

28

Recent Scholars Who Consider 2:14–7:4 to Be a Separate Letter

55

Removing the Veil in Exodus 34:33-35 Review of Corinthian “Triumphalism” Review of Paul’s “Boasting” in 2 Corinthians

Structure of an Ancient Letter, The

Paul’s Travel Plans Here and in 1 Corinthians 16 36 27

4 23

87

Teresa of Avila and John of the Cross on Love

110

218

166

Romans 3:1-2; 9:2-5 Give Thoughts on Paul’s Jewish Heritage

71

“Satan” in Paul’s Letters

44

Scholars’ Comments on the Questions Surrounding 6:14–7:1 131 Scholars’ Descriptions of Paul’s Apocalyptic Vision

37

Scholars’ Differing Opinions in Their Own Words

210 25

Paul’s Use of Kata Sarka in 2 Corinthians 1:17 and 5:16

193

Paul’s Use of Logisomai

226

Scholars’ Views of Timothy as Co-author

121

Scholars Who Hold Different Views 152

245

65 222

213

Reviewing Paul’s Report about Titus in Chapter 7 165

Scriptural Allusions in This Section

228

77

Review of Paul’s Use of Kata Sarka in 2 Corinthians 217

Reviewing the Uses of Charis in Chapter 8

38

Support of the Philippians as Reported in Philippians 4:14-18, The

Roman Patronage System, The 60

Paul’s Terms for the Collection in Chapters 8–9 177

Paul’s Use of the DokimWord Family in the Corinthian Letters

Showy Spirituality

Some Interpretations of the Thorn from Christian History

Paul’s Contacts with the Corinthians

Paul’s Use of Parakaleø Thus Far in the Letter

174

174

122

Paul’s Use of “Father” for God

176

Shame-Honor Culture, A

Quotation From Sampley

Paul’s Comments on “Self-commendation”

Paul’s References to His “Foundation Laying” Ministry

Scriptures Alluded to in This Section

58

“The Antioch Incident” May Have Ended the Agreement of the Jerusalem Council 153 These Scholars in Their Own Words

187

Timothy

24

Traditions of Ezekiel and Jeremiah, The

62

True Humility from the Desert Fathers and Mothers 227 Two Kinds of Sorrow, Two Kinds of Joy Understanding God’s Dikaiosyn∑

148 71

Use of Reconciliation Language in the Pauline Corpus

115

Words of Support in the Philippian Letter

157

Illustration Sidebars II Corinthians (Weigel)

1

Achaia (map)

25

Apostle Silas

38

Archbishop Desmond Tutu

50

Index of Sidebars Bust of a Saint (Perugino)

208

Cenchreae, the Port of Corinth 26 Clay Jar Conversion of Saint Paul, The (Parmigianino)

88 116

Ephesus in relation to Corinth (map)

6 134 12

Saint Timothy Sleep of Sorrow and the Dream of Joy, The (Monti) Sophia

Eve Tempted by the Serpent (Blake) 207

St. John of the Cross and St. Theresa of Avila

Fall of Man (Rembrandt)

Syrian Antioch in relation to Jerusalem, Corinth (map)

44

Galatia in relation to Corinth (map)

11

Garden of Eden, The (Savery)

224

Gathering of Manna, The (Bernardino)

160

Imperial Temple

8

Jeremiah 20:7-13

57

Last Judgment, The (Cavallini) 193 Macedonia in relation to Corinth (map)

36

Macedonia, Achaia, and the Journey to Jerusalem (map) 172 Macedonia, Achaia, and the Journey to Jerusalem (map) 243 Macedonia, Achaia, and the Key Cities Moses and the Ten Commandments (Zeldis) Nonviolent Resisters Opposition to Civil Rights Parker Palmer

156 73 246 64 203

Paul’s Second Missionary Journey (map)

5

Pictures from the Corinthian Forum

7

Plaque of a Roman Procession

57

Province of Asia, The (in proximity to Corinth) (map) 29 Saint Paul, the Apostle (El Greco) 19 Saint Paul Fleeing Damascus in a Basket 222

116

Saint Paul Preaching (Bassano) 200 Saint Paul

Corinth’s Prime Location in the Empire (map) Detail of St. Paul

Saint Paul on the Road to Damascus before His Conversion (Brueghel the Younger)

9 24 146 58 110 2

Temptation of Eve, The (Gislebertus)

207

Theatre at Philippi

156

Troas in relation to Corinth (map)

48

Troas, Macedonia, and Achaia (map) 142

267

index of scriptures

GENESIS 2:7

PROVERBS 45

EXODUS

JEREMIAH

MARK

1:7

107

1:10

195

4:11

59

8:22-31

58

1:9-10

195

4:12

59

8:30

58

2–3

207

11:17

45

7:2-3

232

14:7

108

9:22-23

202

11:22-24

45

16:16-18

160

22:8a

175

9:23-24

202

11:25

45

16:18

160, 174

22:9

176

20:7-13

57

34:29-35

69

24:4-7

195

LUKE

34:29-30

70

195

2:8-9

70

73

WISDOM OF SOLOMON

24:6

34:30

31:31-34

195

8:11-15

231

34:31-33

73

7:26

31:31

72

34:33-35

77

34:34

77

81

SIRACH 39:13-14

58

11:4

44

31:31, 33-34 195

21:12-19

123, 231

31:33

62

21:18-19

123, 231

32:20

232

LEVITICUS 1:9, 13, 17

JOHN 58

ISAIAH

EZEKIEL

1:1-12

59

207

7:53–8:11

84

62

20:21

45

20:22

45

20:23

45

2:2-3

154

16:1-22

DEUTERONOMY

2:2-3a

3

36:26-27

4:34

232

2:2-4

50

13:4

108

6:9-10

59

HOSEA

175, 176

11:1-3

108

10:12a

17:6

25

49:8

121

19:15

25, 244

60:1-2

70

MICAH

221

60:2b-3

3

4:1-2

60:4-7

154

60:4-5

154

MATTHEW

70

60:5

173

6:12

44

104:29-30

77

61:6

154

7:18, 20-23

100

13:1-3

2, 3

112:1

176

65:17

113

7:20-21

100

14:3

232

112:4

176

66:18

3

11:18-19

58

14:8-10

232

112:9

176

66:22-23

113

11:19

58

14:27

2

116:10

91

18:16

244

15:1-35

152

15:10

25:2-3 PSALMS 19:1

176 ACTS 154

4:29-30

232

9:19-25

222

9:23-25

222

9:31

108

11:26

2

270

Index of Scriptures

15:1-21

4

7:14-20

119

1 CORINTHIANS

5:3-5

34

15:36-41

4

7:14

63

1–4

28

5:9-11

241

16:1-3

24

7:15, 19, 22 63

1:2

10

5:9

16:16-18

232

7:16-18

63

1:4

30

13, 16, 41

17:14-15

24

7:23

228

1:5

158

5:10

130

18:1-3

5

7:24

63

1:11-12

242

6:12-20

83 13, 87

18:2

9

8:3-4

63

1:18-31

87

6:12

18:5

24, 38

8:3

119

1:18-25

13, 87, 191

7:5

44

7:12-16

130

18:18-22

11

8:9-10

97

18:23

11

8:11

1:22-24

194

7:21

9

18:26

11

29, 91, 97, 249

1:22

231

8:1

13, 87

227

1:27-31

202

9

61, 228 188, 241

18:27-28

11

8:28, 35-39

19:1

11

8:29

79

1:30

112

9:3-18

19:11-12

232

9:2-5

70, 71

1:30a

249

9:3-7, 15-18 61, 211

19:21

173

9:3-5

220

1:31

202

9:3, 6, 15, 18 61

19:22

24

10:4

74

2:12-15

13, 87

9:8-18

123

20:2-4

173

11:5-6

155

2:14

13, 87

9:18

123

24

11:15

115

3:5-6

201

10:15

97

12:1-2

79

3:10-11

201

11:2-16

83

13:8

81

3:10

201

11:4-6

34

30

14:10

99

3:13-15

99

11:13

97

1:13

28

14:17

39

3:13

100

11:17-22

212

1:21

115

15:17

33

3:18

12

11:18

242

1:29-31

241

15:18-19

231

3:21-22

33

12–14

56

2:6

100

15:18-19a

232

3:21

33

12:26

44

2:15-16

99

15:20-21

201

4:6-8

12

12:28

24, 168

3

3, 4

15:22-23

253

4:7-8

87

14:5

109

3:1-2

70, 71, 220

15:23-24

173

4:7

33

14:6-12

231

15:25-28

152, 173

4:8-10

181

14:14-17

109

3:22b-23

4

15:25-27

160

4:8

13, 87

14:18-19

109

3:24

112

15:25

10

4:10

13, 159

14:18

109

3:27-31

63

15:26

152, 255

4:14-21

254

153

16:1-2

61, 253

34, 49, 81, 238

14:33

3:28-30

15

92, 95

134, 205

20:4 ROMANS 1:8

3:29-30

4

16:1

25, 255

4:14-16

15:3-8

3

3:31

63

16:3-16

253

4:14-15

34, 206

15:5-7

24

24, 112, 167, 168

4:15

39

15:7

24

4:16

82

15:7-9

168

253

4:17

24, 25, 39

15:8-9

63

15:14-15

91

15:15

29

15:22-24a, 28c

92

15:35-57

96

15:37-42

94

4:16

155

4:17

29, 249

16:7

5:10-11

115

16:17-20

5:12-14

119

16:20

44, 254

5:12

63

16:21-23

253

4:19

39

5:17

155

16:21

24

4:21

6:3-8

110

16:25-27

253

39, 159, 192

6:23

112

16:25

5–7

244

5:1-5

42

7:12

63

255

Index of Scriptures 15:44-46

93

PHILIPPIANS

JAMES

15:52b-54

92

1:1

24

5:11

123, 231

16:1-11

14

1:3

30

5:7

123, 231

16:1-4

152, 153, 159

1:6

99

1:8

129

1 PETER

16:3

245

1:12

28

5:12

16:5-8

36

1:25

79

16:10

24

2:5-11

159, 191

2 PETER

2:7-9

246

3:5, 7

GALATIANS

38

223

2:12

40

1:1

24, 29

2:16

33

REVELATION

1:6

209, 210

2:19-23

24

12:9

44

1:11

28

3:4-6

63

13:10

123, 231

1:15-16

3

3:4b-6

220

14:7

108

1:22

112

4:1

39

19:7b-8

124

2:1-14

152

4:4-7

253

19:11, 14-15a 124

2:1-10

4

4:7

112, 254

21:22-23

2:6-7, 9-10

153

4:13

230

2:7-10

201

4:14-18

212, 213

2:9

210

4:21-22

253

2:10

10, 152

2:11-16

63

COLOSSIANS

2:11-14

4, 153, 201, 209

1:20-22

115

2:15

56

3:1-2

97

3:28

112, 179

4:10-11

209

4:10

10

4:11

10

4:13-15

228

5:1

250

5:13

63

5:19-21

241

5:2-3

209

5:20

241

6:12-13

10

6:15-16

253

6:15

63

EPHESIANS

1 THESSALONIANS 1:1

24, 24

1:2

30

1:9-10

91

1:10

29

2:18

44

2:19-20

39

3:2, 6

24

4:17

94

5:23a

254

1 TIMOTHY 5:19

244

PHILEMON

2:16

115

4:10

223

1

24

4

30

12

129

70

271

index of topics

A Abraham 155, 197, 219, 224–25, 234, 249, 261, 265 Achaia 4–5, 25, 142, 152, 156, 172–173, 212, 218, 243, 255, 266–267 Achaians 152, 172, 182, 255 Adam 92, 206, 225 Adoption 71, 220 Adultery 84, 206 Affliction 14, 27–28, 40, 121, 124, 133, 155–56, 160, 178, 249 (see also “Thlipsis”) Age 3, 7, 17, 29, 37–38, 44, 63, 80–82, 84, 90, 92, 96–98, 100, 107, 111, 135–36, 176, 187, 193 Age to come 37, 90, 96, 176 Altar 19, 58, 222 Angel(s) 44, 70, 108, 213, 220, 225, 227 Anger 42, 50–51, 147, 214, 241 Anointed 37, 225 Antioch 2–5, 11, 152–53, 266–67

Apocalyptic Judaism 3, 12, 37, 62, 64, 74, 89, 96, 99, 105, 113, 225 Asia 2, 4–6, 11, 28–30, 47, 80, 96, 123, 169, 173, 267, 273 Apollos 11–13, 33, 201 Apostle(s) 3, 19, 21, 24, 35, 37–38, 52, 57, 59–61, 62, 72, 75–77, 81, 84, 89, 97–98, 123, 167–68, 174, 186–88, 194, 196, 199, 201–203, 205, 209–210, 213–14, 219–20, 226, 230–32, 235, 237, 239, 242, 247–50, 254, 259, 265–67 Rival apostles 188, 201–203, 205, 209–210, 213–14, 219, 230–31, 235, 237, 239, 242, 247–49, 253 Super apostles 186, 210, 220, 226 Visiting apostles 76, 186, 188, 194, 199, 209 Aquila 4–5, 9, 11–12 Aroma 57, 82, 99, 135 (see also “fragrance”)

Anti–Semitism 64, 105

Asia 2, 4–6, 11, 28–30, 47, 80, 96, 123, 169, 173, 267

Anxiety 14, 48, 142, 144, 206, 221, 226, 235

Assembly 10, 25, 67, 83, 162, 166, 249, 260

Apocalyptic 3, 12, 37, 62, 64, 72, 74, 85, 89–90, 96, 99–100, 105, 113, 123, 154, 224–25, 231, 259–60, 266

Atone, atonement 118–20

Apocalyptic fulfillment 72, 154

Authority 15, 34, 45, 47, 52, 60, 124, 159, 166–67, 187, 191, 194–95, 201, 205–206, 219, 224, 240, 242–43, 247, 249, 260

B Barnabas 2–5, 61, 153, 232 Beating 59, 197, 227 Belief 3, 75, 90–91, 96, 99, 102, 108, 120, 231 Beloved 28, 34, 123, 157, 205–206, 227, 229, 231, 233, 240, 246 Betrayed 123, 231 Bishop 26, 49–50, 65, 255, 265 Blameless 115, 220 Blessing(s) 27, 29, 109, 152, 173, 174–75, 177, 181, 233 Blind, blindness 40, 76, 78, 81–82, 97, 102, 125, 136, 257 Boast, boasting 15, 33–35, 56, 61, 80, 108–109, 111, 115, 121–22, 133, 145–46, 161, 168, 171–72, 180–81, 188, 194, 199–202, 205, 211–13, 217–20, 221–23, 225–26, 229–31, 234, 237, 256, 266 Body 10, 15, 23, 25, 30, 33, 44–45, 47, 62–63, 78, 89–90, 92–101, 109, 111, 115, 130, 171, 196–97, 206, 224, 228, 247, 249 Body of Christ 44–45, 47 Bold 1, 15, 30, 72, 75, 129, 185–86, 191–92, 199, 217, 226, 242 Bread 160, 176 Brother 3, 24, 48, 99, 118, 147, 166–67, 178, 186, 232, 238–41, 245, 255

274

Index of Topics

Build 13, 28, 30, 109, 148, 195, 201, 241

C Caesar 6–7, 10, 25, 27, 34, 60, 90, 97, 206 Calling 4, 10, 46–47, 57, 89, 95, 125, 134–36, 141, 167, 187, 201, 219–20, 229, 238, 242 Capacity 80, 108 Captivity 79, 83–84 Catalogue of hardships 88, 101, 122, 220 Chalice 126–27, 261 Charis 155, 157, 159, 165–66, 175, 177, 179, 266 (see also “Grace”) Child, children 3, 27, 34, 46, 52, 58–59, 63–64, 71, 73, 78, 101, 109, 120, 126, 129–30, 134, 136, 145, 167, 181, 187, 197, 205–206, 227, 229, 233, 237–38, 243, 246–47, 250, 260 Chosen 59, 64, 82, 155, 166–67, 224, 230 Christ 2–3, 9, 13, 17, 20, 24, 26–28, 33–34, 37–39, 43–47, 56–57, 61–62, 64, 71–72, 75–77, 79–85, 87, 89–92, 97–99, 107, 109–22, 126, 129–31, 135–36, 152–55, 159–60, 166–68, 178–79, 185, 191, 193–97, 201–202, 205–207, 209, 211–14, 216–17, 219–21, 223, 226–32, 235, 237, 240, 242, 245–50, 253–54, 256, 259, 265 Christian 2, 6, 10, 12, 16–18, 20, 30, 38, 47, 50, 60–61, 82–83, 93, 101, 112, 118, 125, 206–208, 214–15, 227–28, 261, 265–66 Church 2–5, 7, 10–11, 17, 19–21, 24–25, 30–31, 41, 47, 50, 60, 65–66, 75, 77, 83–84, 92, 97, 101–102, 105, 108, 117–19, 123, 125, 136, 142, 147, 152, 157, 160–61, 163, 166, 168, 174, 177, 179–80, 187, 196,

203, 207–208, 210, 213, 215–16, 220, 233, 235, 244, 253, 255, 257, 259–60 Circumcision 3–5, 10–11, 15, 37, 63, 71–72, 76, 152–55, 188, 201, 209, 219–20, 253, 259 (see also “Gospel of circumcision”) City 5–10, 21, 25, 29, 42, 46–47, 52, 61, 70, 90–91, 103, 131, 137, 141, 148, 152, 156, 176, 180, 186, 213–14, 216, 221–22, 235, 246, 251, 255, 260 Clay jar(s) 15, 87–88, 91, 93–94, 101–102, 108, 118, 135–36, 229, 247, 249, 256–57, 265, 267

125–26, 135, 153–54, 157, 161, 176, 179, 191, 220, 226–29, 232–33, 242, 246, 248, 253–54, 256–57 Creator 34, 82, 96, 113–14, 225, 240 Cross 87, 99, 110, 115, 191, 231, 250, 254, 266–67 Crown 11, 151, 157 Crucifixion 13, 87, 111–12, 119–21, 159, 197

D Damascus 2, 116, 222, 267 Darkness 70, 82, 130

Comfort, comforted 1, 14, 27–28, 31, 44, 46, 108, 117, 121, 142, 144–45

Daughter 205

Commission 45, 49–50, 211

Day of judgment 223

Communion 159, 207–208, 254, 260

Day of salvation 121

Compassion 26–27, 31, 129 Confession 143, 178–79, 245 Confidence 35, 62, 133, 145–46, 167, 171–72, 180, 185, 217–18, 226, 234, 240, 251 Conflict 5, 20, 52, 84, 87, 118–20, 123, 125, 136, 142, 144, 168, 180–81, 188, 199, 201, 203, 248–50, 253, 255, 257, 262, 266 Conscience 33, 38–39, 80, 86, 99, 108, 240 Consolation, console 14–15, 27–28, 31, 43, 117, 121, 133, 141–42, 144–45, 165, 172, 180, 218, 249, 253 Controversy 3–4, 35 Conversion 3, 37, 60, 85–86, 116, 260, 267 Corinthian Triumphalism 13, 87–88, 100, 234, 265–66Corrupt, corruption 46, 119, 207 Courage 203, 225, 261 Creation 37–38, 46, 58, 63, 65, 71, 85, 90, 96–97, 99–100, 105, 110, 112–15, 118, 120–22,

David 21, 25, 103, 127, 186, 189, 197, 210, 251, 259–63

Day of the Lord 35, 51, 108, 172, 217–18 Death, dying 3, 28–29, 31, 33, 58–59, 61, 63–66, 69–71, 74, 78, 80, 88–98, 101–103, 108–10, 111, 112–13, 115, 119–20, 122–23, 124, 127, 133, 135, 143, 146–47, 155, 159, 172, 197, 207, 211, 218, 220, 227–29, 246–47, 249–50, 260, 265–66 Debt 44, 65 Delegation 15, 165–67, 174, 186, 238, 240 (see also “Titus Delegation”) Demon(s) 58, 100, 147 Desire 13–14, 30, 57, 63, 65, 96, 142, 146, 154, 159–60, 206, 247 Despair 79, 228 Despised 30–31, 99, 202 Destruction 21, 50, 223 Devil 44, 228 Diakonia 69, 114, 155, 177 (see also “Ministry”)

Index of Topics Dikaiosyn∑ 71, 114, 118, 120, 124, 176, 266 (see also “Righteousness,” “Justice”) Disciples 3, 6, 59, 90, 173, 222 Discipline 39, 41, 141, 159, 221, 244 Disobedience 82, 193–94, 196, 242 Divine 58, 67, 77, 81, 97, 112, 114, 143, 148, 197, 231 Divine Wisdom 58, 67, 81 (see also “Lady Wisdom,” “Sophia,” “Wisdom”)

Equality 160, 163, 174, 177, 181, 210 Eternal 70, 72, 81, 94, 96, 102, 104, 112, 135, 225, 256 Eucharist 65, 245 Eve 44, 206–208, 214, 216, 265, 267 Evil 44, 46, 63, 66, 89, 98–100, 113, 115, 119, 123–24, 226–27, 230, 232, 241, 244, 246, 248 Exile 9, 37 Exodus 69–70, 73, 77–78, 119, 160, 174, 265–66, 269

Doctrine 77, 97, 210 Dream 65, 146, 267

F

Drink 58, 61, 211

Faction 4, 47, 153

Dwelling 94–96, 102

Faith 2, 4, 7, 10, 13, 16, 18–20, 29–31, 39–40, 43, 45–46, 49–50, 62–63, 77, 79, 81–82, 91–92, 97–98, 100, 102–103, 105, 108, 113, 118, 123, 130, 147, 153, 155, 158–59, 162, 166, 178–79, 181, 187, 192, 196–97, 202, 220, 229–32, 238, 247–48, 256

E Eat, eating 4, 58, 78, 109, 153, 158, 160, 176, 209, 219, 241 Ecstatic spiritual experiences 13, 109 Ekkl∑sia 9–10, 12–13, 17, 19–20, 25–26, 30, 33, 43–44, 46–47, 60, 62, 78, 83–84, 100, 141, 161, 166, 179–80, 195, 201, 203, 213, 229, 232, 242, 249, 255 Emotion 220, 230 Emotional letter 14–16, 40–43, 47–48, 55–56, 133, 135, 141, 144–45, 148, 152, 165, 179, 185–87, 189, 192, 196, 239, 249 Endurance 123, 230–31 Enemy 99, 116, 135, 197, 227

Faithfulness 18, 36–38, 71, 102, 119 Fall 4, 23, 44, 66, 95, 99, 147, 207, 244, 267

275

Flesh, fleshly 34, 36, 44, 59, 62–63, 71, 80, 88–89, 93, 111, 113–15, 119–20, 130, 191–93, 197, 217, 220, 226, 228, 233, 241, 247 Fool 97, 101–102, 111, 119, 148, 191, 193, 197, 218–19, 226, 229–30, 237 Foolish 112, 193, 196, 202, 217–18, 230, 241 Foolishness 87, 147, 191, 205, 209, 217, 219 Fool’s speech 229–30 Forgive 41, 43, 45–46, 49, 113, 121, 141, 195, 228, 232 Forgiveness 26, 44–45, 47, 49–52, 116, 119–21, 143, 262 Fornication 42, 241, 244 Foundation 99, 201, 266 Fragrance 57–59, 62, 64 (see also “aroma”) Frank speech 34, 40, 43, 129, 133–134, 136, 141, 185, 187, 192, 196 Freedom 10, 13, 65, 78–80, 83, 100, 154, 158, 250, 256, 265 Fruit 100, 123, 176, 225, 231 Future 33, 49–50, 52, 92, 101, 163, 262

False 125, 186, 210, 213, 220–21 Family 44, 115, 121, 174, 205, 207, 243, 245, 266 Father 27, 31, 34, 39–40, 45–46, 49, 82, 100, 134, 159, 167, 205–207, 225, 237–38, 243–44, 247, 250, 266 Fear 4, 14, 26, 64, 66, 71, 73, 107–108, 129–30, 143–45, 153, 165, 197, 203, 208–209, 225, 228, 265–66

G Galatia 10–11, 14, 152, 209–210, 219, 267 Galatians 3–4, 11, 21, 37, 63, 112, 152–53, 179, 209–210, 241, 250, 253, 259, 265–66, 273 Gender 63

Ephesus 11–12, 14, 29, 36, 48, 58, 169, 173, 267

Fellowship 4, 153, 157, 162, 177 Feminine 74

Epistle(s) 1, 42, 51, 66, 75, 85, 88, 103–104, 126, 131, 137, 148, 162, 169–70, 182, 189, 196, 198, 204, 216, 228, 234, 239, 250–51, 259, 262

Gentiles 2–4, 9–10, 12, 37, 46, 62–63, 66, 78, 99–100, 112, 115, 119, 152–55, 173, 178–79, 209, 221, 230–32, 242, 259, 265

Feminist 6, 18, 20, 32, 127, 206, 216, 261

Gifts 13, 26, 114, 154–55, 158, 172–73, 227, 243, 254, 266

Fickle, fickleness 1, 35–36, 38, 141, 192–93, 217

Glory 3–4, 21, 37, 69–75, 78–80, 82, 84–85, 87–88, 94, 97–98, 104, 108, 118, 120, 124, 135,

Enoch 224–25, 265 Ephesians 115, 273

Fire 9, 20, 57–58, 99–100, 107, 143, 223

276

Index of Topics

147, 154, 166–68, 196, 220, 225, 259, 265 Gnosticism 13, 21, 262 God the Father 27 Goodness 26, 81, 225 Gospel 4–5, 7, 9–11, 13, 15, 21, 26, 28, 33–35, 38–39, 44–46, 48, 51–52, 55–57, 59, 61, 72, 74–76, 80–82, 84, 87, 89–91, 99–100, 102, 109, 117, 122–23, 134, 136, 147, 152–55, 157, 162, 166, 178, 188, 194, 200–202, 205–206, 209–213, 215, 217–19, 221, 228–30, 232, 240, 242, 245, 247–50, 255, 260, 265

Heaven 70, 91, 94, 95, 100, 108–109, 113, 115, 124, 223–25, 256, 265 Hebrew 26, 37, 77, 102, 129, 220, 234

92, 109, 111–115, 118, 121–22, 131, 135, 153, 168, 178–79, 195–97, 202, 205–206, 211, 223, 226–27, 240, 242, 248–49, 253–54, 256, 265

Hidden 80, 101, 224

Injustice 96, 99, 143, 147, 232

History 1, 5–6, 16, 27, 50, 65, 76, 83, 105, 161–62, 167, 206, 208, 213, 215–16, 227–28, 261, 266

Integrity 16, 35, 38, 42, 48–49, 76, 122, 167–68, 182, 189, 215, 240, 262

Holy 3, 24, 45, 63, 79, 84, 108, 115, 225, 232, 234, 254

Isaiah 3, 37, 113, 121–22, 154, 265, 269

Holy Spirit 3, 45, 108, 254

Israel 3, 37, 62, 71–74, 85, 88, 99, 113, 154, 195, 207, 220, 232, 253, 260

Honor 44, 61, 83, 115–17, 122, 173–74, 176, 205 Honor-shame culture 44, 116

Israelites 70–71, 73–74, 77, 160, 219–20, 232, 234

Gospel of circumcision 4–5, 10–11, 15, 72, 76, 152–55, 188, 201, 219 (see also “circumcision”)

Hope 13–14, 28–29, 34, 37, 42, 56, 72, 75, 80, 96, 107–108, 113–14, 126, 202, 206, 227, 230, 259

Grace 3, 9, 15–16, 26, 34–35, 44, 51, 71, 75, 77, 80, 83, 92, 98, 100, 104–105, 107, 111, 114, 117, 120–24, 135–36, 151, 153, 155, 157–62, 165–66, 171, 174–81, 201, 209, 215, 220–21, 228–29, 232–33, 242, 247, 250, 254, 256, 265

House 3, 9, 25–26, 45–46, 60, 62, 72, 94–95, 97, 123, 135, 148, 154, 195, 212, 219, 225, 256

James 3–4, 24, 57, 66, 89, 103, 123, 132, 152–53, 168, 231, 259, 261, 263, 273

Human 3, 16, 20, 27–28, 33, 49, 70–71, 76, 80, 82–83, 88, 90, 93, 99, 104, 109–110, 112–13, 115–16, 118–20, 136–37, 159, 203, 206, 208, 228, 233, 244, 246, 254, 259

Jealousy 205, 241

Greece 5–7, 36, 156, 166, 173 Greed 143, 174, 197 Grief 38–44, 47, 121, 141, 143, 146–48, 175, 225, 265 Growth 67, 102, 143, 147, 201, 262, 265 Guilt 44, 116, 227, 233

H Hair 26, 78, 123, 231 Haplot∑s (sincerity) 51, 178 Healing 42, 45, 50, 113, 147, 231, 257 Heart 1, 14, 40, 49, 55–56, 61–62, 71, 78, 80, 90, 92, 109, 120, 122–23, 129, 132, 135, 148, 154, 165–66, 175, 180, 195, 205, 218, 231–32, 248, 259–60

Humble, humility 161, 185, 191–92, 221, 225–28, 233, 242, 266 Hungry 123–24, 135, 221, 233 Husband 205–208, 214 Hypocrisy, hypocrite 4, 153 Hypomon∑ 123, 230–231, 265 (see also “Endurance”)

I Idolatry 37, 241 Illness 27, 227 Image 56–58, 66, 75, 79–81, 88, 124, 175, 207–208, 214, 224, 259 Imperial ruler cult 7–8, 21 Imprisonment 123, 245 Incarnation 101 “In Christ” 33–34, 37–39, 56, 61, 64, 72, 75–76, 80, 83, 85, 90,

J Jacob 3, 154, 216, 261

Jeremiah 57, 62, 72, 195, 198, 202, 265–67, 269 Jerusalem 2–5, 10–11, 13–16, 45, 70, 145–46, 151–57, 160–63, 165, 168, 171–74, 177–82, 187–88, 210, 213–14, 218, 228, 238, 240, 242–43, 245, 255, 266–67 Jerusalem collection 14–16, 145–46, 151–52, 156, 161–62, 165, 171–72, 174, 180–81, 187–88, 214, 218, 228, 238, 240, 242–43, 255, 266 Jerusalem Council 4–5, 152–53, 162, 266 Jesus 2–6, 9–13, 20–21, 23–26, 29–31, 33–35, 37, 39, 43, 45–46, 50, 58–59, 63, 74, 80–82, 84, 87, 89–91, 93, 97, 99–101, 103, 108–109, 112–13, 115–16, 118–20, 123, 129, 147, 152, 154–55, 159, 166, 172, 179, 191, 197, 201–203, 205–206, 209–210, 217–18, 222, 227–29, 231–33, 244, 246–47, 249–50, 253–54, 256, 260, 265

Index of Topics Jewish heritage 26, 70–71, 76, 93, 186, 188, 218–20, 266

Lady Wisdom 58 (see also “Divine Wisdom,” “Sophia,” “Wisdom”)

Jews 3–4, 9, 13, 37, 46, 63, 71, 76, 81, 84, 96, 99–100, 105, 107, 112–13, 115, 119, 153, 173, 220–22, 231, 265

Language 27, 34, 40, 45, 47, 77, 79, 83, 85, 89–92, 98, 103, 111, 115, 118, 120, 133–34, 136, 146, 162, 186–87, 194–95, 198, 205, 228, 231, 235, 238, 250, 266

John 4–5, 21, 26, 45, 51–52, 55, 58–60, 66, 71, 78, 84–85, 104, 109–110, 127, 132–33, 137, 148, 152–53, 187, 189, 198, 204, 206, 216, 234, 239, 250–51, 259–63, 266–67, 269 Joy 39, 41, 44, 65, 79, 133, 143–44, 146–48, 155, 157, 165, 172, 218, 225, 266–67 Judaism 3, 13, 16, 37, 76, 105, 216, 223, 259, 261 Judea 21, 35–36, 90, 108, 112, 154 Judge 7, 71, 80–81, 97, 99, 113, 124, 227, 244, 246, 248 Judgment 45, 71, 74, 81, 86, 95, 98–99, 104, 107–108, 111, 117, 193, 214, 223, 240–41, 245, 247, 266–67 Justice 7, 37, 46, 50, 64–65, 71–72, 76, 99–100, 114, 118, 120–21, 124, 135, 147, 155, 176, 181, 202, 213, 220, 246, 250, 257, 259

K Kata sarka 36, 111–113, 120, 124, 191–93, 197, 217, 266 (see also “Flesh,” “Fleshly”) King 64, 78, 222, 246 Kingdom of God 21, 25, 27, 59, 241, 260 Knowledge 13, 57–59, 62, 64, 82, 87, 89, 107–108, 135, 158–59, 162, 166, 193–96, 210–211, 225 Koinønia (partnership) 155, 157, 177–78, 254

L Labor 5, 33, 123, 192, 215, 221, 226, 245

Law 62–63, 66, 69–71, 83–84, 99, 102, 155, 162, 195, 209, 220 Leaders 20, 33, 47, 50, 56, 73, 83, 90, 147, 153 Letter(s) 2, 4, 5, 10, 12–18, 19–21, 23–25, 26–30, 31, 33–36, 38, 40–44, 46, 47–49, 51–52, 55–56, 59–64, 66–67, 69–71, 74–77, 78–80, 83–86, 88, 92, 99, 102, 103–104, 107–108, 109, 110, 111–2, 114, 117–9, 121–23, 125–27, 129–37, 141–46, 148, 151–53, 154, 156–58, 162, 165, 168–69, 171–76, 179–83, 185–89, 191–93, 195–97, 198–99, 201, 205, 209–13, 215–17, 218, 219, 220–21, 222, 226, 227, 230, 232, 234–35, 238–39, 241, 244, 245, 248–49, 251, 253–56, 257, 259–62, 265–66 Letters of recommendation 61, 75, 78, 121–22, 210, 213, 218, 226 Life 9, 17–20, 26, 29, 33, 37, 45, 58–59, 63–65, 71–72, 77, 80–81, 83, 89–93, 96–98, 100–103, 108, 111–15, 119–20, 122–23, 127, 135, 143, 146–47, 152, 155, 178, 181, 189, 191–92, 202–203, 214, 227, 229, 231, 246–47, 249–50, 260–61, 265–66 Light 3, 26, 44, 58, 70, 73, 80–82, 104, 107, 130, 132, 143, 213, 220, 225 Love 13, 18, 26, 34, 39, 41, 43–44, 46–47, 57, 60, 63, 65, 75, 78, 90, 96, 99–100, 109–114, 119, 121–22, 124, 126, 129, 133, 135, 147, 157–59, 163, 166, 168, 172, 175, 181, 186, 192, 197, 202, 206, 213–14, 218, 220, 227–29,

277

238, 240–41, 245–47, 250, 254, 259, 266

M Macedonia 4–5, 13–14, 24, 35–36, 38, 48, 55–56, 141–42, 152–53, 155–57, 166–67, 172–74, 212–13, 243, 267 Macedonians 151, 156–61, 169, 171–74, 178–80, 212–13, 218, 238, 242, 255 Madonna-whore syndrome 208, 215 Man, men 7, 12, 35, 41–46, 52, 58, 63, 66, 76, 82, 83, 94, 109, 112, 141, 148, 152, 155, 171, 174, 182, 205–206, 208, 209, 223, 225, 227, 229, 231–32, 262, 267 Marriage 124–25, 206, 214 Martyrdom 27 Master 58, 201 Mercy 21, 27, 31, 80, 98, 253 Messiah 3, 9, 16, 37, 71, 74, 76, 100, 105, 111, 113, 220, 222, 234, 250 Messianic Age 3, 17, 29, 37–38, 63, 100 Metaphor 27, 66, 75–76, 98, 103, 111, 176, 207, 259–60 Military 6–7, 56–57, 97, 193–94, 196–97 Mind 17, 26, 34, 36, 38, 43, 45, 47, 50, 57–59, 63, 67, 76–78, 81, 88, 90–91, 93, 104, 109–111, 113, 115, 117, 123–24, 143, 147, 175, 177, 191, 193–94, 196, 201, 206, 219, 231, 234, 241, 245, 254 Minister 18, 25, 62, 64, 72, 75, 82–83, 87, 114, 124, 214, 255 Ministry 5, 7, 10–11, 15, 38, 53, 55–57, 65, 69–72, 74–75, 78–80, 87, 91, 103, 107–108, 114, 117, 121–26, 132, 135, 141, 151–52, 155, 157–58, 161, 166, 168–69, 171, 173–74, 177–79, 195, 198, 201–202,

278

Index of Topics

212, 215, 228, 231–32, 234, 238, 240, 245, 248, 257, 266

Obey 34, 47, 108, 206, 209

of death 69–71, 74

Offering 51–52, 58, 63, 100, 104, 120, 178, 211, 254

of justice 71 of reconciliation 15, 107, 114, 135, 179 of the New Covenant 87, 257 of the Spirit 15, 69, 72, 108, 135 Miracles 231–32, 266 Mirror 78, 81 Mission 2–5, 10, 12, 21, 45–46, 60, 152, 165–66, 186, 201–202, 230, 239, 242, 253, 260 Money 8–9, 12, 60–61, 65–66, 167–68, 174, 176, 188, 211–12, 215, 232, 238

Offense 41, 52, 174, 187

Pain 27, 38, 44, 49, 51, 101, 126, 143, 146–47, 227–28, 230, 234, 265 Painful visit 1, 14, 41, 152, 185, 187, 192, 196, 230

N Naked 95–96, 104 Nature 42–43, 47, 55, 88, 196, 208, 223 Neighbor 65, 119 New Creation 63, 85, 112–14, 118, 120–22, 125–26, 135, 153–54, 157, 161, 179, 191, 226, 228, 232–33, 242, 246, 248, 253, 256–57

Proclamation 37, 61, 82, 91, 97, 113, 211

Parakl∑sis 27–29, 44, 46, 133, 142, 155, 157, 165–66, 253 Partition theories 151, 162 Passion 112, 248 Patient 123, 231 Patron 8–9, 60–61, 65–66, 255 Patronage 8, 10, 15, 21, 26, 34, 60–61, 63, 65, 78, 81, 89, 111, 119, 123, 154, 161, 167, 171, 178, 181, 197, 205, 211–12, 215, 218, 221, 234, 259, 266 Pax Romana 7, 9, 26, 90 Peace 7, 9, 14, 26, 37, 46, 50, 71, 89, 100, 108, 112, 115, 147, 154, 228, 242, 250, 253–54, 265 Perfect 56, 76, 79, 122, 208, 212, 228–29, 256 Persecution 123, 156, 227, 229, 231 Peter 3–4, 9, 12, 21, 24, 38, 153, 167, 260, 271

New Covenant 62–64, 69, 72, 74, 77, 83, 87, 100, 114, 124, 132, 195, 198, 249, 256–57

Philippi 36, 47, 156, 213, 232, 267

Night 31, 70, 110, 221–222, 261

Power 3, 7–9, 20–21, 25–29, 33, 44–46, 50–52, 55, 57, 59–60, 62, 64, 67, 71–72, 77, 79, 81, 83, 88–91, 96–98, 100, 103, 110–111, 119–20, 122–27, 135–36, 152, 154, 160, 162, 189, 191, 194, 196–97, 206,

O Obedience 34, 40, 46–47, 50, 52, 82, 125, 129, 134, 145–46, 165, 178–79, 193–94, 206, 231–32, 250, 260

Price 6, 21, 102, 215, 261 Prisca 4–5, 9, 11–12

Patriarchs 71, 220

Mystery 59, 225–26, 233

Preaching 2, 4–5, 10, 200, 209–210, 212–13, 226, 228, 267

Parakalein 27–28, 35, 43

Moses 70, 73–77, 80, 85, 135, 160, 224–25, 265, 267

Mouth 58, 124, 129, 195, 205, 220, 241, 244

Prayer 15, 23–24, 27, 29–30, 33, 45, 52, 147, 181, 232, 253, 259

Paradise 223–26

Patience 123, 147, 231

Mountain 3, 70, 75, 154

Praise 20, 58, 177, 179 Pray 109, 147, 248, 259

P

Mortal 88–89, 91–93, 96, 247, 249

Mother 143, 265

210, 215–16, 228–29, 231–32, 234–35, 245–51, 256–57, 259–62, 266

Possessions 26, 65

R Reality 13, 18, 49, 75, 78, 99, 147, 154, 158, 208, 254, 256 Reasoning 80–81, 108, 134, 193, 196, 244 Reconcile, reconciliation 10–11, 14–15, 31, 37, 49–50, 55, 77, 104, 107, 114–16, 117–18, 120–21, 125, 127, 133–36, 144, 152, 154, 155, 159, 168, 174, 179–80, 185, 187, 214, 228, 233, 239, 250, 254–57, 260, 262, 266 Redeem 228 Regret 142–43 Remember 4, 10, 49, 60–61, 75, 84, 89–90, 111, 118, 125, 152–53, 157, 159, 167, 175–76, 179, 195, 211–12, 214, 223, 225, 227–30, 249 Repent, repentance 115, 143, 145, 147, 152, 185, 186, 207, 244–45 Resurrection 12, 29, 32, 37, 62, 84, 89–93, 97, 100, 103–104, 109, 113, 127, 208, 229, 261–62 Revelation 104, 123–24, 223, 231, 259, 266, 273 Rhetoric, rhetorical 16–17, 28, 30, 43, 47, 51–52, 66, 69, 75–76, 81–82, 84–85, 88, 98, 102, 111–12, 122, 130, 134, 136,

Index of Topics 146, 151–52, 160–61, 171, 175, 187, 203, 206–207, 208, 210, 211, 213, 216, 218–19, 233, 235, 241, 250, 257, 259, 260, 261, 262, 266

Sex, sexual, sexuality 11, 44, 126, 206–208, 214–16, 228, 230, 244, 265

279

Strength 197, 227, 246–47, 249 Strife 241–42

Sick, sickness 27, 232, 245

Suffer, suffering 13, 27–28, 44, 50, 87, 89–91, 93–97, 99, 101–102, 113, 121, 123, 126, 135, 147, 174, 192, 228, 231, 244–45, 247, 249

Riches 123, 154, 176, 231

Sign 3, 27, 129, 133

Synagogue 220–21

Righteous 71, 83, 85, 99, 113, 120, 124, 176, 260

Silence 5, 43, 141, 223, 230

Rich 7, 13, 87, 124, 155, 159, 166, 177, 256

Rome 5–7, 9–10, 21, 25–28, 37, 46–47, 57, 89–90, 97–99, 112, 120, 123, 154, 156, 193, 196–97, 228–29, 231, 246, 250, 253, 255

S Sabbath 65, 113 Sacrifice, sacrificial 58, 79, 119–20, 147 Saint(s) 2, 10, 13–15, 19, 24, 25–26, 28, 37, 65, 116, 123–24, 151–52, 155, 157, 160, 162–63, 166, 168, 171, 173–74, 177–79, 182, 193, 200, 207–208, 222, 231, 253–55, 260, 262, 267 Sarcasm 24, 87, 192, 209–211, 219, 232 Salvation 21, 28, 44, 114, 121, 143, 146–47, 220, 260 Satan 43–44, 46–47, 49–50, 123, 207, 213, 220, 226, 228, 231, 235, 254, 266 Saved 58, 99, 105, 113, 115 Savior 7, 9, 26 Scribe 95, 130 Scripture 24, 73, 84–85, 260 Sea 6, 12, 29, 48, 65, 88, 108, 123, 154, 179, 221, 231 Secret 90, 99 Seed 123, 176, 201, 219, 231, 234 Self 34, 37, 92–94, 102, 111, 161, 203, 219, 226, 233 Septuagint 77, 84, 103, 175, 177 Serpent 206–207, 267

Shame 34, 44, 56, 80, 116, 144, 172–74, 202, 207, 218–19, 234, 249

Sin 3, 37, 44–45, 63–64, 70–71, 84, 110, 112, 115–16, 118–20, 143, 195, 206–207, 216, 242, 245, 265

T Table 4, 14, 64, 246 Tablets 61–63, 70, 74

Sister 99, 207–208, 241, 255, 260

Teach 3, 11, 143, 154, 157, 195, 203, 215, 255, 261

Slavery 30, 64, 66, 78, 119, 229

Teacher 66, 102, 203, 261

Social 45, 61, 127, 137, 198, 206, 216, 251, 255, 261

Teaching 18, 42, 46, 97, 211, 226

Society 8–9, 20, 26, 44, 60, 64, 67, 162, 208, 243, 259–62 Son 3, 32, 37, 58, 79, 91, 103–104, 115, 127, 173, 206, 222, 256, 262 Sophia 13, 34, 58, 267 (see also “Divine Wisdom,” “Lady Wisdom,” “Wisdom”) Sorrow 38, 71, 84, 101, 146–48, 207, 266–67 Speech 34, 40, 43, 129, 133–34, 136, 141, 158, 162, 166, 185, 187, 192, 196, 213, 228–30 Spirit 2–3, 10, 13, 15, 20, 34, 36–38, 45–46, 48, 50–51, 61–64, 66, 69, 71–72, 75, 77–80, 83, 87, 91, 93, 97, 100, 108–109, 111, 114, 120, 124–25, 130, 135, 144, 148, 154–55, 165, 192, 209–210, 215, 231–32, 240, 249–50, 254, 256–57, 260 Spiritual 12–13, 31, 65–67, 78–79, 93, 101–102, 109–110, 113, 143, 147, 152, 154, 158–59, 162, 173, 176–77, 181, 196, 203, 215, 233, 237–38, 245, 247, 254–55, 259, 262, 266 Spiritual father 237–38, 247 Standard of measure 15, 199

Temple 7–8, 31, 45–46, 70, 90, 130–32, 267 Temptation 66, 169, 207, 227–28, 267 Thanks 29, 64, 102, 104, 109, 115, 155, 166, 179 Theological 12, 17, 20, 23, 26, 30, 38, 41, 55–56, 75, 87, 101, 104, 119, 121, 125, 131–32, 180, 187, 189, 207, 210, 212, 234, 246, 262 Thessalonica 36, 44, 156–57, 173, 213 Thlipsis 27–28, 123, 133, 155, 160 (see also “Affliction”) Thorn 44, 226–29, 233, 235, 266 Timothy 4, 13–14, 19, 24–25, 37–39, 173, 244, 266–67, 271 Titus 3, 14–15, 41, 48, 55–56, 129, 135, 141–46, 148, 151–52, 157–58, 165–69, 172–73, 178–79, 186–88, 218, 238–40, 265–66 Titus delegation 173, 178, 186–88, 239 (see also “Delegation”) Tongues 3, 78, 109, 245 Tradition 20, 31, 52, 58–59, 65, 107, 114, 120, 147, 181, 260, 265

280

Index of Topics

Trinity 9, 20–21, 52, 55, 60, 67, 77, 86, 103, 127, 136, 152, 162, 182, 189, 197, 210, 216, 234, 251, 259–62 Triumphalism 13, 87–88, 100, 122, 218, 225, 234, 265–66

Wisdom 13, 34, 58–59, 65, 67, 80–81, 108, 111–12, 136, 143, 168, 176, 191, 194, 202, 248, 257, 259, 262, 269 (see also “Divine Wisdom,” “Lady Wisdom,” “Sophia”) Wise 12–13, 87, 181, 202, 219

U Uncircumcision 4–5, 63, 253 Unclothed 95–96 United 18, 26, 64 Unity 47, 50, 125, 152, 154, 187, 239, 251, 253–54 Unveiled 74, 76, 78–79

V Vain 33, 91, 107, 121–22, 155 Veil, veiled 73–77, 80–82, 84, 136, 187, 265–66 Vessel 59, 88, 95 Virgin 205, 208, 244 Virtue 109, 158, 227 Vision(s) 37, 109, 154, 222–23, 266 Voice 17–18, 37, 58, 108, 225, 227, 232

W War 20, 50, 64, 99, 119, 124, 192, 197, 232, 261 Water 26, 34, 58, 108, 143, 147, 201, 223, 246 Weak, weakness 15, 28, 52, 55, 67, 87–88, 94, 97, 99, 103, 127, 136, 152, 189, 191–92, 195–97, 202, 207–208, 210, 215–17, 219, 221–22, 225–26, 228–30, 233–35, 237, 242, 244–47, 249–51, 256, 262 Wealth 7–8, 10, 60, 65, 89, 91, 111, 154–56, 159–60, 163, 173, 175–77, 180–81, 196, 202, 266 Wife 207–208, 214 Wilderness 31, 160, 221 Willingness 38, 42, 49, 59, 110, 119, 123, 160, 166, 171, 229, 238

Woman, women 7, 9–10, 12, 20, 24, 27, 30, 44, 66, 78, 83, 84, 101, 112, 125, 174, 205–208, 214–15, 227, 229, 234, 265 Word of God 31, 60–61, 80, 124, 211, 223 Works 3, 58, 79, 87–88, 100, 105, 124, 155, 157, 192, 196, 213–14, 229, 231–33, 241, 265 World 3, 7, 16–18, 21, 23, 27, 29–30, 33–35, 39, 44–45, 57–61, 63, 65, 71, 76, 78–80, 83–84, 88–91, 94–95, 99–101, 110, 112–17, 119, 126, 135, 143, 146–47, 157, 174, 177, 181, 192, 194, 196, 202–203, 205–207, 210, 216–17, 225–28, 233, 241, 248, 260–62, 265 Worship 3, 7, 11, 20, 65, 71, 78–79, 101, 108, 113, 123, 177, 220, 231

Z Zeal 42, 142–43, 153, 158–59, 165–66, 172, 186, 205, 218, 220 Zion 3, 50, 154, 173, 265