II Corinthians and Paul
by Hugh DeLong
"There are many things I disagree with Paul about…" This was how my grandmother concluded our discussion on being faithful to the teachings of the New Testament. In Paul's time, not everyone who was converted remained faithful to acknowledging Paul as an apostle of Jesus and thus a writer of inspired letters. So we begin this second letter to the brethren in Corinth.
It appears that Paul was being viciously attacked by a minority within the church. While the majority of the brethren were faithful, some had turned aside from Paul’s instructions. The minority appears to be comprised of both members from the local Corinthian congregation and an itinerant Jewish group. Their charges were:
- Paul had impure motives (II Corinthians 1:12)
- Paul was fickle (II Corinthians 1:15ff)
- Paul was weak (II Corinthians 10:10)
- Paul was physically ugly (II Corinthians 0:10)
- Paul was not a good orator (II Corinthians 10:10; 11:16)
- Paul preached for money (II Corinthians 11:7ff; 12:13ff)
- Paul was not a true apostle (II Corinthians 11:5, 13; 12:4)
- Paul was not an orthodox Jew (II Corinthians 11:21ff)
- They had direct revelation, but Paul did not (II Corinthians 12:1ff).
I forgot to note where this list came from, but it is interesting to see that in this list, the one thing that is absent is the actual confrontation of what they understood of Paul’s instructions, and instead, they attacked ‘the man’. This tactic has been used throughout the history of mankind!
Yet, in the end, the very existence of this group of believers stood as his ‘approval letter’ to them and the world: “Are we beginning to commend ourselves again? Or do we need, as some, letters of commendation to you or from you? You are our letter, written in our hearts, known and read by all men; being manifested that you are a letter of Christ, cared for by us, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts?” (II Corinthians 3:1-3)
Which side of this division would you have taken? Will you continue to stand with Paul’s revelation or stand in opposition to his teaching (or at least to the ones you don’t like)?
