Skip to main content

2 Corinthians 2:14-3:6

You can read the text here.

Paul continues with a more general defense of his ministry. This section is not defensive but he still is clearly playing some defense.

Despite all of that happened along the way, and all of the opposition Paul can thank God.[1] God is victorious and in his victory parade, Paul himself willingly gets paraded around in his suffering, because his suffering spreads the victory. Paul may appear defeated but in reality he is exuding the sweet odor of Christ's sacrifice in his example and preaching.[2] Only those who are being saved have the discernment to correctly identify the smell, however. And to those who are not, it is the stench of death. Paul is not in this role because of any inherent quality he has, God has qualified him for this role and God sends them in contrast to others who may have less pure motives.

Why is Paul bringing this up? Is it to commend his ministry to the Corinthians? No, he isn't and he doesn't need to prove his credentials to the Corinthians or need a letter of recommendation from him. He already has a letter of recommendation, the Corinthians themselves, their lives transformed and made alive by the Spirit, are the letter written by God. What letter could ever compare? It points to the power and fruitfulness of a Spirit-centric rather than law-centric ministry since only the Spirit has the power to transform lives.[3]

So Paul is confident, but it's not a confidence in his own abilities, rather it is in the power of the Spirit. They are simply doing what God empowered them to do, preach the gospel and assist God in transforming lives, something the law could not do. While the Spirit gives life, the law brings about death because it does not empower the one who is trying to follow it.

Paul's defense is very focused on God and his activity through Paul. In essence God is defending Paul and Paul is purely pointing out the evidence. At least that is how he would want the Corinthians to see things.

----------------------------
[1] Matera notes that the response 'Thanks be to God' is Paul's response to a threatening situation. 

[2] See Matera for fuller, very helpful comments on verse 14.

[3] Additionally, Thrall notes that in Greco-Roman culture, needing a written law was seen as a negative. One should just know how to behave ethically.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

More Calvinist than Calvin?

I'm working on a paper on the topic of divine sovereignty and human freedom. Occasionally on this topic (or the subtopic of election) you will hear people through out the barb at strong Calvinists that they're 'being more Calvinist than Calvin.' After having read Calvin carefully on the issue I don't think that there's any validity to that charge. I don't see a material difference here between Calvin and say John Piper. Here are several quotes from the Institutes to prove my point. 'All events are governed by God's secret plan.' I.xvi.2 'Governing heaven and earth by his providence, he also so regulates all things that nothing takes place without his deliberation.' I.xvi.3 'Nothing happens except what is knowingly and willingly decreed by him.' I.xvi.3 Calvin explicitly rejects a limited providence, 'one that by a general motion revolves and drives the system of the universe, with its several parts, but which does not specifc

Galatians 2:11-14: The circumcision group

11 When Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. 12 For before certain people came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group. 13 The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy, so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray. 14 When I saw that they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in front of them all, "You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs? (TNIV) There's an important issue that we need to wrestle with in this passage, and it's the question of whether or not the people from James and the circumcision group are the same group. I am not inclined to think that they are. The ensuing discussion is drawn from Longenecker's commentary pp 73-5

Dating Galatians and Harmonization with Acts

We've gotten to the point where how we date Galatians and where we fit it into the narrative of Acts will affect our interpretation in a significant manner. The first question that we have to address is, which visit to Jerusalem is Paul recounting in Galatians 2:1-10 ? Is it the famine relief visit of Acts 11:27-30 or the Jerusalem council of Acts 15 ? First, I think it's worthwhile to point out that it's not all that obvious. Scholars are divided on this issue (even Evangelical scholars). In favor of the theory of Galatians 2:1-10 referring to the Acts 11 visit are the following: This visit clearly is prompted by a revelation by the Holy Spirit. The Acts 15 gathering seems to be a public gathering, where the one described in Galatians is private. Paul never alludes to a letter sent to the diaspora churches which could have definitively won the case for him. The issue of food laws was already decided by James. Why would men coming from him in Galatians 2:11-14 be advocat