2 Corinthians 1:12-24

Butler's Comments

SECTION 2

Acrimony (2 Corinthians 1:12-24)

12 For our boast is this, the testimony of our conscience that we have behaved in the world, and still more toward you, with holiness and godly sincerity, not by earthly wisdom but by the grace of God. 13For we write you nothing but what you can read and understand; I hope you will understand fully, 14as you have understood in part, that you can be proud of us as we can be of you, on the day of the Lord Jesus.

15 Because I was sure of this, I wanted to come to you first, so that you might have a double pleasure; 161 wanted to visit you on my way to Macedonia, and to come back to you from Macedonia and have you send me on my way to Judea. 17Was I vacillating when I wanted to do this? Do I make my plans like a worldly man, ready to say Yes and No at once? 18As surely as God is faithful, our word to you has not been Yes and No. 19For the Son of God, Jesus Christ, whom we preached among you, Silvanus and Timothy and I, was not Yes and No; but in him it is always Yes. 20For all the promises of God find their Yes in him. That is why we utter the Amen through him, to the glory of God. 21But it is God who establishes us with you in Christ, and has commissioned us; 22he has put his seal upon us and given us his Spirit in our hearts as a guarantee.

23 But I call God to witness against meit was to spare you that I refrained from coming to Corinth. 24Not that we lord it over your faith; we work with you for your joy, for you stand firm in your faith.

2 Corinthians 1:12-14 Suspicion: Every preacher of the gospel will have to endure, sometime or another, the acrimony of some of the members of his flock. Jesus did (see John 15:18-27). Paul didhe is defending himself against the rancor and ill will of some of the Corinthians here. This is almost an inevitable hazard of the ministry of the gospel. It certainly should not be so. Jesus poured out his heart in prayer that it not be so (John 17:1 ff). But it is, and ministers of the gospel should not be surprised at it (see 1 Peter 2:18-25; 1 Peter 4:12-19, etc.). Paul suffered suspicion and indifference from a number of the churches he established (Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, Thessalonians).

The Corinthians had communicated to Paul that they mistrusted his motives. They were suspicious of his relationship toward them because he had promised to visit them and did not. They were questioning his integrity and his sincerity. They did not know, or disregarded, all the facts as to why he had not fulfilled his intention to visit and concluded that he was not dealing with them above board.
Paul appeals to the record of his past life. He tells them it is a matter of pride to him, endorsed (Gr. marturion, witnessed to) by his own conscience, that his behavior (Gr. anestraphemen, conduct, mode of life, literallyto turn back in time) had been holy (Gr. hagioteti, upright, honest) and in godly sincerity (Gr. eilikrineia tou theou). He calls upon the Corinthians to investigate his past dealings both in the world and toward them, and to judge his character on that basis. They would find that he behaved toward the world and toward them, not with a worldly attitude (Gr. sophia sarkike, wisdom of carnality), but in the grace of God (Gr. en chariti theou), that is, under the constraint of God's grace toward him. In other words, Paul acted toward all people as God had acted toward himwith grace. Paul was constrained by the love of Christ to always view all men as God viewed them (see 2 Corinthians 5:14-17).

Paul said, I also take pride in the fact that -we-' (editorial -we-') are continuing to write to you nothing but what you can read and understand. He gave them no cause in his use of language to be suspicious of his intentions toward them. Paul uses the Greek word epiginoskete which means more than just knowingit means to perceive, to understand. Paul had not come to them earlier (when he preached there, Acts 18:1-28; and when he wrote them before, I Cor.) with sophistries, double entendres, and euphemisms. His words were simple, plain, direct, logical and understandable, (cf. 1 Corinthians 2:1-5). He did not speak in myths, endless genealogies. speculations. godless chatter, and contradictions of what is falsely called knowledge. (see 1 Timothy 4:7; 1 Timothy 6:20-21; 2 Timothy 4:4; Titus 1:13-14; 2 Peter 1:16-21). Paul did not tell many allegories or use many illustrations. He was clear and straight to the point. His objective was to communicate, to produce understanding. There was no way the Corinthians could honestly accuse him of trying to disguise his motives or his intentions in what he had preached or written to them. So why are some of them now jumping to the conclusion that Paul has misrepresented himself to them? There were probably some in the Corinthian church still promoting the divisions, giving allegiance to different apostles and leaders, who wanted to take advantage of Paul's failure to visit them and cast suspicion on his integrity. That is one of the chief tools of those who promote partyism in the church.

The apostle concludes this thought by saying, My hope is that you will understand -us-' completely (as you have partially understood -us-') and realize that you can be as proud of -us-' as -we-' shall be of you on the day of the Lord Jesus.
Christian people need to concentrate on being sincere, loving, and understandable. Unity in the body of Christ is dependent, to a large degree, on understanding. Feelings, motives, intentions, opinions, aims and aspirations should be clearly and lovingly communicated. Covert, disguised, surreptitious language and actions should not be a part of Christian relationships.

2 Corinthians 1:15-22 Slander: Someone had evidently slandered Paul and accused him of instability and untrustworthiness. Paul had first told the Corinthians he would visit them after passing through Macedonia (1 Corinthians 16:5). Later, perhaps in the unpreserved letter (the severe third lettersee Introduction), he mentioned that he wanted to visit them twice; once on the way to Macedonia, and once on the return from Macedonia. Paul implies here that the Corinthians knew of this last plan and that he had not fulfilled his promised visits.

Paul writes that because he was sure of the mutual understanding and confidence existing between him and the Corinthians, he had been intending (Gr. eboulomen, perfect tense, continuous action in past time) to make a double visit so they might have a double grace of God through the fellowship of an apostle of the Lord. That was what he had been planning. But he decided against it. He implies that God revealed to him he should not make this double visit (2 Corinthians 1:23). God knew some of the Corinthians would think Paul was lording it over their faith should he visit them as he planned. To spare them that problem, Paul changed his plans. And when he changed his plans, someone at Corinth assailed his integrity and accused him of vacillating (Gr. elaphria, lightness, fickleness).

He begins the defense of his character by asking the rhetorical question, expecting a negative answer, I was not vacillating when I determined to do this, was I? Apparently some had accused Paul of making promises like worldly-minded (Gr. kata sarka, according to flesh) heathen, irresolute, erratic, indecisive. He challenges them to produce evidence from his manner of life that he is unreliable or double-minded. He always kept his wordhe was never guilty of doing just what was convenient or expedient for himself. He never said yes from one side of his mouth and no from the other side. He always said what he meant and meant what he said! He fully intended to keep his word to visit them twice. It was not his indecision that kept him from fulfilling his plan, but God's divine direction!

As Stedman points out, it is significant that Paul did not say, Yes or No. It is not wrong to say No to some requests and circumstances. What is wrong is to say Yes and No, or to equivocate. It is wrong to say No and mean Yes or to say Yes and mean No! Christians are to be honest, firm and unequivocal toward their commitments, whether they are Yes or No. Jesus taught that his followers were to be so definite and unambiguous when they gave their word that the rest of the world would accept their Yes as nothing but Yes, and their Nay as nothing but No (Matthew 5:37 and see James 5:12).

Christians are to be people who keep their word because that is the essence of God's character. This is Paul's argument in 2 Corinthians 1:18. God keeps his word (Deuteronomy 7:9; Psalms 119:89-90; Isaiah 55:10-11; 1 Corinthians 1:9; 1 Corinthians 10:13; 2 Thessalonians 3:3; Hebrews 6:13-20, etc.). Paul is arguing that it is contrary to the regenerated nature of a Christian to deliberately equivocate because it is contrary to the nature of God. The record of Jesus-' life and words in the four Gospels verify that God keeps his word because God Incarnate (Jesus) always fulfilled his words. Not one word of Jesus (except the prophecies of his second advent) have failed to be fulfilled. The absoluteness of Jesus-' words and actions is what Paul is referring to in 2 Corinthians 1:19. Whatever Jesus promised (or promises) was always answered with an absolute Yes!

The ultimate Yes of God was the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. The resurrection of Christ was the supreme, unequalable, veracity of God manifested in the historical frame of reference. All of God's promises (from Genesis to Revelation) find their verification or ratification in Christ's historical, bodily, resurrection from the dead. This is what the apostle means in 2 Corinthians 1:20. We believe this is also what Paul meant when he wrote in Hebrews 6:17, So when God desired to show more convincingly to the heirs of the promise the unchangeable character of his purpose, he interposed (himself) with an oath.. In other words, God's oath to verify the immutability of his promises, was himself (incarnate in Jesus Christ) upon the cross and raised from the dead!

Because of the veracity of God demonstrated historically in the ultimate historical act of raising Jesus from the dead, men may have assurance and respond with Amen (so-be-it, yes, verily, I agree, that is correct) to every promise of God. There is no word in the Greek text for the English word utter, however, it is proper to supply that word in a translation because Paul is here talking about man's response to God's faithfulness. God's absolute faithfulness is properly responded to when man is faithful to keep his own word. Saying Amen to God's veracity involves more than mere wordsit demands action. Paul is arguing that his own manner of life has demonstrated this.

In summation of the defense of his veracity and integrity Paul appeals to the guarantee or the seal of God's Spirit. Every Christian should be able to appeal to the seal of God's Spirit as a guarantee of his godly character. That is because every Christian is being transformed into the image of God's Son by the power of God's word transforming his mind (see Romans 8:5; Romans 8:29; Romans 12:1-2; 2 Corinthians 3:18; Ephesians 1:13-14). To be sealed by God's Spirit is simply to have God's image imprinted upon our character or nature (see Special Study, Blessing of Being Sealed by The Holy Spirit).-'

There is nothing mystical or extra-Biblical about the seal of the Spirit of God. In ancient times, a sovereign's seal marked documents and objects with the authority of the sovereign. In other words, such documents were authenticated as belonging to the king by the seal stamped upon them. The seal was usually an engraving made in the likeness or image of the king. In the same way, God acting upon the believer's nature through the divine word of the Spirit, has engraved his image (see Special Study, Blessing of Being Sealed by The Holy Spirit). When a believer loves God and obeys God, then the Spirit of God (in the word of God) bears witness with the spirit of the believer that he is a child of God (see Romans 8:12-17). William Barclay says it this way, When Paul speaks of the Holy Spirit as an arrabon (guarantee) given us by God, he means that the kind of life we live by the help of the Holy Spirit is the first installment of the life of heaven and the guarantee that the fullness of that life will some day open upon us.

In this context, then, Paul is inviting the Corinthians to compare his past manner of life toward them with the witness of the Holy Spirit in the word of God and test his veracity. He expects to be declared faithful because his life is sealed (marked, measured, characterized) by the Spirit of God.

2 Corinthians 1:23-24 Statement: Paul does not return slander for slander. He makes an honest, open statement of reasons he believes will justify his rearrangement of plans to visit Corinth. First, he implies God will approve of his change of planhe calls God to witness against him should he be guilty of lying. It may be he is even implying that God gave him divine direction in refraining from visiting Corinth as he had planned. Second, whether it was God's or Paul's decision, or both, it was to spare the Corinthians something unpleasant. Rebuke and discipline is always unpleasant (cf. Hebrews 12:11) for the moment. Sometimes, it may even be unprofitable! Paul always tried to find things in Christians to praise. He used criticism and rebuke as little as possible. The less a teacher or preacher uses rebuke, the more effective it is when absolutely necessary. He had already rebuked them severely in the letter we do have (I Corinthians) and probably in a letter or visit for which we have no extant record. So Paul decided against carrying out his earlier plan to visit Corinth on the way to Macedonia, because, as things stood between them another visit (which would undoubtedly call for more correction) could only have hurt him and them (see 2 Corinthians 2:1-4).

Second, Paul explained his change of plans by stating he did not want to give any appearance of lording it over the Corinthians. He could have visited them as planned, asserted his authority, criticized publicly their Christian immaturity, and handed down apostolic reprimands and edicts. But he wanted to spare them that. That was the way false apostles acted (2 Corinthians 11:12-13; Galatians 2:4; 2 Peter 2:10-22; Revelation 2:2). True apostles admonished tenderly, always willing to sacrifice self for the sake of the flock (1 Corinthians 4:14-15).

Thus Paul explained his decision not to carry out his original plan to visit the Corinthians and defended his veracity. His reasons for not fulfilling the original intention are righteous and good because they were to the advantage of the Corinthians and not for Paul.
One of the major problems in the ministry of the gospel is this one of fulfilling promises. Preachers, elders, Sunday School teachers, and other servants of the Lord sometimes make promises to do something for someone or be somewhere at sometime when they do not intend to keep those promises at all. Promises to lend assistance, visit, attend a meeting, write a letter, or pray for someone should not be made flippantly or insincerely! No Christian, especially a minister of the gospel, should promise unless he intends to keep his word. Any promise broken should be able to be justified only by the same principles Paul justified histhat not fulfilling the promise would benefit the recipient more than fulfilling it. The Christian minister's yea must be yea and his nay must be nayhe must be a man faithful to his word.

APPREHENSION:

1.

Who wrote II Corinthians?

2.

When did he write it?

3.

What transpired in his relationship to the Corinthians between the two epistles from his pen?

4.

What does the word comfort mean in the Biblical sense?

5.

Did the Lord Jesus have to suffer affliction? Why?

6.

How much affliction did Paul suffer? Can you recite his afflictions?

7.

Does the Bible say affliction or suffering is part of the Christian calling? Where?

8.

How severe was Paul's affliction mentioned in II Corinthians ch. 1?

9.

If Paul's extremity in this chapter refers to the riot in Ephesus (Acts 19:1-41), how did God deliver him?

10.

Why was Paul having to defend his veracity in this letter?

11.

How did Paul defend his veracity?

APPLICATION:

1.

How would the leadership of the church (preachers, elders, deacons and Sunday School teachers) benefit from taking this book to heart?

2.

How do you feel about the Biblical teaching that the aim of adversity and affliction is to strengthen?

3.

Are you able to surrender your feelings about affliction to the teaching of the Bible? Is it easy?

4.

Does it help you to know that Jesus and Paul and other Christians struggle in their faith and feelings over affliction?

5.

Have the afflictions you experienced made you better able to serve Christ and others? In what way?

6.

Should Christians get depressed? Does depression mean absence of faith?

7.

When are you aware of your greatest feelings of strength?

8.

Have you ever had people suspect your veracity and integrity? How did you deal with it?

9.

Should Christians always try to make sure their words are clearly understood? Do they?

10.

When a Christian promises something, is he obligated to keep his word? How good is your word?

11.

What should a Christian do if he has promised something he cannot possibly fulfill because of an emergency or circumstances beyond his control?

12.

Upon what do you base your belief that God will keep all his promises?