In the present section (1:12-2:4) Paul sought to clarify the motives that led him to change his plans to visit the Corinthians. He did so to refute false accusations concerning him that were circulating in Corinth.
In this first sub-section, which is transitional, Paul's intention was to convince the Corinthians that his recent actions arose from sincere motives.
1:12 He first claimed generally that his actions did not arise from the motives that drive unbelievers, namely self-serving ambition. This motivation seems wise to the carnal mind. However Paul's motives resulted from God's grace at work in his life. He viewed all of life from this perspective seeking not to advance self but the cause of Christ. He could say this unashamedly (with "proud confidence") and with a clear conscience. His motives had been holy66and sincere (not a mixture of proper and improper motives). Such had been his motivation toward all people and especially toward the Corinthians.
"The derivation of the word eilikrinia[sic], translated here and in ii. 17 by sincerity, is uncertain. It may refer to the cleansing process of rolling and shaking in a sieve, so that what is purged and winnowed in this way may be regarded as unadulterated (cf. the only other mention of the word by Paul in 1 Cor. v. 8). Or it may denote what is found to be unstained when examined in the sunlight. This latter connotation would convey the suggestion in this passage that Paul's character would stand the test of the searching gaze of God."67
"What Paul means here to say is, that the virtues which distinguished his deportment in Corinth were not merely forms of his own excellence, but forms of the divine life; modes in which the Spirit of God which dwelt in him manifested itself."68
"We might well add a new beatitude to the list, Blessed is the man who has nothing to hide.'"69
1:13 Paul seems to have alluded to a criticism of himself here too. Evidently some were saying that to understand Paul's letters to them his readers had to read between the lines. They implied he really intended something other than what he had written or he was being deliberately obscure.70The apostle's claim here was that what he had intended was self-evident in his correspondence. There were no hidden meanings or messages. Paul wrote some things that were hard to understand (2 Pet. 3:15) and sometimes he was ironical, but he did not write one thing and mean another.
The second part of this verse probably goes with verse 14 rather than 13. Put a semicolon in the middle of verse 13 after "understand"and a comma at the end.71"The end"refers to the end of the Corinthians' lives.
1:14 Even though Paul's correspondence with them had been straightforward, they had not grasped the greatness of his love for them and how proud he was of them (1 Cor. 4:14; cf. 1 Thess. 2:19-20). They had a legitimate right to be proud of Paul as their spiritual father as he had a right to be proud of them as his spiritual children (1 Cor. 4:15).
"This affirmation of affection not only corroborates the complete genuineness of his own attitude towards them, but attests his confidence regarding the authenticity of their profession of faith in the Gospel."72
"The day of our Lord Jesus"is the day when their joy would be complete, namely at the judgment seat of Christ (5:10-11; cf. Phil. 2:16).
"St. Paul still believed that the Day of the Lord would come soon (1 Cor. vii. 29, x. 11, xv. 51), and had imparted this belief to his converts (see on Rom. xiii. 11-14, p. 379); it is therefore no remote date to which he appeals. Cf. 1 Thess. ii. 19."73
Having claimed singleness of purpose in his dealings with the Corinthians, Paul proceeded to help them appreciate the fact that his behavior had been consistent with his Spirit-led purposes.
"Long-range plans may need to be modified as time goes by. In Paul's case, his original plans were made in good faith with the best information he had at the time. Circumstances had altered, however, and it was necessary to revise those plans."74
1:15-16 In 1 Corinthians 16:5 Paul had told the Corinthians he planned to visit them after he had passed through Macedonia. Evidently he was not able to make that trip. There is no evidence in the New Testament that he ever followed this itinerary.
Here we have another plan that Paul evidently sent the Corinthians after he wrote 1 Corinthians. He says he intended to visit Corinth on his way to Macedonia, probably from Ephesus, his headquarters during this period of his ministry. He then planned to come back through Corinth as he travelled from Macedonia to Judea. This would enable him to see the Corinthians twice, a double visit and a double blessing. Paul referred to this plan as his original intention not counting what he had written in 1 Corinthians. In 1 Corinthians 16:2-8 his projected itinerary had been Ephesus, Macedonia, Corinth, and then possibly Jerusalem. However, Paul was at this time in Macedonia having traveled there from Ephesus by way of Troas, not Corinth (2:13; 7:5; 8:1; 9:2, 4).
We can see why some in Corinth had concluded that since Paul had not followed through with his plans they could not count on his word and doubted his love for them.
1:17 Both rhetorical questions in this verse expect a negative answer, as the Greek text makes clear.
"Paul finds it incredible that any at Corinth could really have thought that a change in plan pointed to a change in character."75
In making his plans Paul claimed not to have vacillated or to have followed his flesh (his sinful human nature) rather than the Holy Spirit.
"The charge that he is rebutting is probably that of blowing hot and cold with the same breath, and always having a retraction of what he says in reserve. . . . St. Paul contends that, though his plans changed, yet his principles did not; he was always loyal to the Gospel and to his converts."76
"There is a strong likelihood that Paul was actually quoting some of the phrases used against him. The articles with lightness' ["vacillating"in NASB], yes, yes,' and no, no' can be understood as the lightness of which I am accused,' and the contradictory yesses and nos which you fault me for.'"77
"Preaching is always truth through personality.' And if a man cannot trust the preacher he is not likely to trust the preacher's message. Amongst the Jewish regulations regarding the conduct and character of a teacher, it is laid down that a teacher must never promise anything to a class which he cannot or will not do. To do so is to accustom the class to falsehood."78
1:18 Paul associated himself with God to reinforce his argument.
"The argument is one from ethical congruity.' God is faithful in the fact that the Gospel which is proclaimed by His messengers is not a Gospel of duplicity, full of misleading statements and of promises which are not fulfilled."79
"When God speaks His positive does not carry a hidden negative. And so it is also with His chosen Apostle: his word to the Corinthians is not a mixture of yea and nay at the same time, but a faithful yea--sincere, honest, unambiguous."80
"Apparent inconsistency or fickleness may be consistency on the highest level."81
1:19 Consistency is not only a mark of God the Father but also of God the Son.
"The truth asserted is that Christ, the Son of God, had not been manifested among them, or experienced by them to be unsatisfying or uncertain; but in himwas yea. That is, he was simple truth. In him, i.e., in Christ, was truth. He proved himself to be all that was affirmed of him."82
"Nothing could be more incongruous than to suspect of insincerity the Apostle whose entire being was dedicated to the service and proclamation of Him who is the Truth and the Same yesterday, today, and forever."83
Silvanus was Silas who with Timothy joined Paul in Corinth shortly after his arrival there and helped him found the church along with Priscilla and Aquilla (Acts 17:14-15; 18:1-2, 5).
1:20 The promises referred to here are evidently the ones that have found their fulfillment in Christ. God was completely trustworthy, not 90% or 95% reliable in fulfilling these promises. Therefore the promises of God (v. 18) as well as the Son of God (v. 19) demonstrate consistency.
In view of the faithfulness of God, the only proper response is "Amen!"(lit. "Let it be so!"). The early Christians commonly spoke this word in unison in their meetings to affirm the truthfulness of what someone had said (1 Cor. 14:16). They addressed God through (in the name of) Jesus Christ.
"How illogical, then, while by their Amen' attesting the trustworthiness of God, to suspect the trustworthiness of the apostle who taught them to do so! Any charge of inconsistency must be leveled at them, not him."84
"In short, Paul has argued in vv. 18-20 that as God is faithful, so, too, is Paul's word.' His personal word' is subsumed within his kerygmatic word,' God's faithfulness is to be seen (1) in the Son of God preached in Corinth as God's unambiguous, unretracted, and now-eternal Yes,' and (2) in the fact of all the promises of God having been kept in the Son of God, as proclaimed by the apostles. Likewise faithful' is the word' of Paul, the minister of the God who speaks unambiguously (cf. 1:13) and who keeps his promises. Their very existence is predicated on it."85
1:21-22 The corporate vocal "Amen"draws attention to the unity of believers with one another as well as with God. Paul had developed this idea of sharing with the Corinthians to help them appreciate God's consistency and his own consistency in harmony with God's. Now he did so also to stimulate their own consistency in harmony with his and God's consistency.
God had established them together in Christ. Paul cited three evidences of their spiritual unity.
1. They had experienced anointing as had Christ (the "Anointed One"). This took place when they trusted Christ as their Savior. God poured out the Holy Spirit on them equipping them to serve acceptably to the glory of God (1 John 2:20, 27).
2. They had all experienced sealing. A seal in the Roman world signified ownership, authentication, and security. God stamps His own invisible mark on every believer (i.e., the Holy Spirit) and guarantees his or her preservation as God's child and servant (Eph. 1:13; 4:30; cf. John 6:27). Thus the seal of God, in addition to the promise of God, guarantees the believer's eternal security.86
3. They had received the Holy Spirit as a down payment of the inheritance God has promised. The "pledge"was earnest money put down as a deposit that guaranteed the consummation of the contract (cf. Gen. 38:17-18). The Greek word (arrabona) also occurs in the Greek papyri (all kinds of common contemporary non-biblical writings in New Testament Greek) of an engagement ring. Such a pledge guarantees that the marriage will take place.87
These three acts of God uniting us in Christ build to an emotional climax and reinforce the solidarity that we believers have with our consistent God.
"We should not overlook the references to the Trinity in 1:18-22: (1) the certainty given by God (v. 18); (2) the centrality found in Christ (vv. 18-20); (3) the certification established by the Spirit (vv. 21, 22)."88
By way of review, Paul's point in this section (vv. 15-22) was that Christians normally behave like Christ. Yet we all know Christians who do not behave consistently. Why did Paul think that this appeal would make the Corinthians conclude that he had been consistent? He was not relying on this argument alone but was simply affirming his consistency and proving it consistent with the character of the One who had appointed him as an apostle.
"Paul has been showing how the accusation of insincerity and fickleness is entirely incompatible with the Corinthians' own personal knowledge of him and his word, as well as with the character of one to whom God has given stability, anointing, sealing, and the earnest of the Spirit. Now he explains why it was that he had found it desirable to make an alteration in his plans: it was to spare them--and the explanation is fortified by a solemn oath."89
1:23 Paul's use of an oath should not disturb us.
"Our Lord's prohibition of swearing in Matt. 5:33ff. is directed against the casuistry that was prevalent among the Jews of His time, in accordance with which not only was swearing frequent in ordinary speech, but also oaths were regarded as not binding provided the Divine Name had not been invoked and even lies were condoned if unaccompanied by an oath. Such a situation was a grave scandal in the name of religion and truth."90
Paul staked his soul on the truthfulness of his claim here.
He made his decision to postpone his visit because he believed a visit then would not be in the Corinthians' best interests.
"The gravity of his words indicates that Paul's absence from Corinth remained a matter of deep hurt."91
1:24 The preceding statement indicates that Paul took much responsibility for the Corinthians' welfare on himself. He hastened to clarify that it was as an apostle, not their lord, that he regarded himself and behaved toward them as he did (cf. 1 Pet. 5:1, 3). Furthermore Paul recognized that they needed no human lord since they were comparatively solid in their faith.
2:1 The chapter division is artificial. Paul now clarified what he did mean in 1:23.
When had Paul come to them in sorrow? There is no valid basis for describing his first visit to Corinth during which he established the church as a sorrowful one. He had experienced some hard times during the 18 months (Acts 18:11) he was there, but generally this visit was pleasant. Paul later referred to his next visit to Corinth as his third (12:14; 13:1). Consequently we have reference here to a second visit not recorded in the Book of Acts. The commentators disagree over whether it took place before or after the writing of 1 Corinthians. I believe the evidence indicates it took place after that writing.92
Note that Paul "determined"not to come again in sorrow. This is not the language of a vacillator.
2:2 Who could make Paul glad if he came to them and made them sorrowful? No one could. The Corinthians certainly could not since he would have made them sorrowful. Paul's point was that if he came to them and made them sorrowful again he himself would be sorrowful since they were his source of joy. Consequently he decided to postpone his visit. Evidently if Paul had come to them as originally planned he would have had to rebuke or discipline them for some situation that existed in the church. Instead of doing this and producing sorrow he decided to wait and give them an opportunity to deal with the problem themselves.
2:3 Now Paul referred to a previous letter in which he said he told them he would not come to them again in sorrow. Is this a reference to 1 Corinthians?
Some commentators believe it is.93Nevertheless the lack of an explicit reference to not coming to them again in sorrow in that epistle throws some doubt on this interpretation.
Consequently other commentators have posited the existence of another letter. They believe it was similar to the former letter referred to in 1 Corinthians 5:9 in that it is no longer extant, and that Paul spoke of it here.94This letter is a fairly recent invention by the commentators. Traditionally interpreters have understood the reference to be to 1 Corinthians. However the problem with that view as mentioned above is significant (cf. 7:8).
The identification of the letter referred to here does not affect the interpretation of Paul's words here however important it may be for other reasons. His reference to this former letter simply strengthens his point made in verse 2 that when he came to visit them again he wished to be a source of joy, not sorrow. He wanted them to make him joyful too.
"This does not mean merely that it would give them pleasure to see him happy, but also that obedience on their part, and the consequent purity and prosperity of the church, were as necessary to their happiness as to his."95
2:4 Paul's affliction was probably the one referred to above (1:8-11). His anguish of heart doubtless arose both from his affliction and the condition of the Corinthian church. This verse is one of several in this epistle that gives us a window into the heart of the great apostle. Second Corinthians is one of the most personal of Paul's epistles. R. Dykes Shaw spoke for many students of this book when he wrote the following words.
"The chief element of value in this ep. [epistle] is the revelation it gives of the apostle himself."96
Clearly Paul claimed that love for the Corinthians moved him to write the severe letter. He wanted to make them repentant and consequently joyful, not oppressed and sorrowful. He wept over them. Doubtless he wept again when he learned that his readers had misunderstood his best intentions.
"This passage, as Denney says, reveals, more clearly perhaps than any passage in the New Testament, the essential qualification of the Christian minister--a heart pledged to his brethren in the love of Christ. . . . Depend upon it,' he counsels, we shall not make others weep for that for which we have not wept; we shall not make that touch the hearts of others which has not first touched our own.'"97
"When the offender is made to feel that, while his sin is punished, he himself is loved; and that the end aimed at is not his suffering but his good, he is the more likely to be brought to repentance. Every pastor must see in the apostle's love for the Corinthians, and in the extreme sorrow with which he exercised discipline, in the case of offenders, an instructive example for his imitation."98
"In a manner that calls to mind Jesus' forgiveness of those who caused him pain at the time of the crucifixion (Luke 23:34), Paul responded with a deep expression of overflowing love for those who had failed him."99
Note that Paul had a special affection for the Corinthian believers.
"His love for them was more abundant, or greater, than that which he had for any other church. This view is borne out by numerous other passages in these two epistles, which go to show that Paul's love for the Corinthian church was, for some reason, peculiarly strong."100
Paul's example helps Christian leaders learn how to rebuke when we must. He used severity and rebukes very reluctantly. When he did rebuke he did it without domineering. He did it with love in his heart and desire to see the best in those whom he rebuked. Nonetheless he did it when it was necessary.101
It is often difficult to give up our plans, especially if much prayer and deliberation have gone into the planning. What makes this even more difficult is the possibility of our being misunderstood by others when we make changes. Notwithstanding, God often leads us just one step at a time. We must be willing to alter our plans if it is in the best interests of others and the gospel to do so.
"If you live to please people, misunderstandings will depress you; but if you live to please God, you can face misunderstandings with faith and courage."102
