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
