Chapter 10

Chapter 10 deals with the subject of thinking, it could be rightly entitled ‘the power of a thought.’ This is the dynamics of divine viewpoint. In the Christian life a thought can make you or break you. This is taught both in Proverbs 23:7 and in Isaiah 55:7-9. Mental attitude is one of the most vital principles in life whether a person is a believer or an unbeliever. It is simply amplified as far as the Christian life is concerned.

The chapter is divided into three parts. The first four verses deal with a briefing regarding the spiritual conflict. Verses 5-15 deal with mental attitude in the spiritual conflict. Verses 13-18 deal with divine viewpoint dynamics.

Verse 1 — “Now I Paul myself.” ‘I’ is a first person singular pronoun which should be used when necessary. It is good grammar and good sense to use it. Obviously it is going to offend someone somehow. “I myself” is about as strong as you can get, but you must remember that these words are written under God the Holy Spirit by a man in fellowship, and the greatest Bible teacher probably of all time. In the Greek it is A)utoj de e)gw Pauloj, even stronger than in the English. Literally, that translates, “I myself, even I Paul.” That is the way it starts because Paul knew his ground. He had absolute perfect confidence, spiritual confidence, confidence that is backed up by the ministry of the Holy Spirit.

Summary

1. This phrase begins the third section of the 2nd epistle to the Corinthians. In this third section Paul defends his authority and his ministry against his critics.

2. In this verse we begin with a very dogmatic phraseology and then Paul quotes Corinthians criticism which reflects their bad mental attitude plus their rejection of Paul’s authority.

3. The legalists of Corinth, as well as others, are trying to discredit Paul and his message through maligning, criticism, judging and slander.

4. Up to this point Paul dictates the epistle through an amanuensis, but starting in verse one the language means he has personally stopped dictating and has picked up the pen to write himself.

5. All of the criticisms which are going to be quoted throughout this chapter are an attack upon Paul’s authority, his ministry, his person, his message.

6. They are designed to destroy him in the area of his own mental attitude.

7. The Corinthians attack on Paul, however, does not reflect on Paul. It does reflect on the Corinthians who have been neutralised by scar tissue, emotional revolt and reversionism.

“beseech” is the present active indicative of parakalew. This word can mean one of two things: to comfort or to encourage. Here it means to encourage and comfort, both. When you put the two together you have exhortation.

“you” is ‘all of you.’

“by” is dia plus the genitive which means by or through; “Meekness” — prauthj. In Attic Greek prauthj meant meekness or humility. In the Koine Greek it is stronger, it means courtesy or mental attitude thoughtfulness, or mental attitude objectiveness. In the spiritual life it refers to grace orientation.

“and gentleness” — e)pieikeia. This word takes on a technical meaning also, not so much gentleness as graciousness. A better translation as far as its technical connotation is concerned is “grace application.”

“of Christ” — ‘of the Christ.’

Now he quotes the first criticism, but not the last. This is just a phrase to give us the idea of one of the critical statements about Paul. The relative pronoun here refers to Paul, he is quoting his critics: “who” — o(j. This is quotation, it is not Paul’s attitude about Paul. This is the Corinthians attitude toward Paul. These people, most of whom Paul led to the Lord, have turned against him: “who is presence” — kata proswpon [kata = according to; proswpon = face]. This is an idiomatic prepositional phrase for personal presence.

There is no verb here, it is very elliptical; “base” is the adjective tapeinoj which means groveling. Paul had a ministry of great sweetness in the early days of Corinth but they now describe his sweetness as groveling. It was a genuine sweetness and patience so necessary with new believers. But in their reversionism what to them was once Paul’s sweetness is now groveling. They are saying in effect that Paul was obsequious; “among you.”

“but being absent” — present active participle of a)peimi; “and bold” — qarrew which refers to mental boldness, mental courage, moral courage. The mental courage was expressed in the very content of 1 Corinthians; “toward you” is a directional pronoun e)ij. 1 Corinthians was toward the Corinthians originally.

Translation: “But I myself, even I Paul, exhort you all through the grace orientation and grace application of the Christ, I who in personal presence groveling among you all, but being absent have courage, even mental courage, toward you.”

Summary

1. In other words, the Corinthians critics claim that Paul was obsequious in their presence but has courage when absent and writing to them.

2. Paul, they say then, is a squeaking mouse when he preaches in Corinth but a roaring lion when he gets outside the city limits and writes a letter.

3. Hence, they claim that Paul the preacher and Paul the writer are two different people.

4. The criticism is subtle and biting but it is not true as demonstrated by Paul’s bracing of Peter in Antioch, recorded in Galatians 2 a long time before 2 Corinthians.

Verse 2 illustrates the principle that being misunderstood is a part of the pastor’s operation and function in the angelic conflict. We have again in the English, “But I beseech you.” But we do not have the same word as we have in verse 1, i.e. parakalew. Now we have deomai which means to make a request.

Anticipating the verse

1. Paul is making a request: “I request” — present middle indicative. The present tense is dramatic. The middle voice: if they listen to his request they will be benefited. The indicative mood is the reality of the fact that Paul is making a request at this time. He is actually requesting a complete change of mental attitude on the part of his critics. He is not demanding it, he is requesting them to consider it so that it can become a matter of their own volition and not coercion from Paul.

2. In doing this Paul has already appealed to their grace orientation and to the doctrine they have learned in the past.

3. Paul continues to be absent from Corinth because he does not desire to come back and get face to face with them on a get tough basis.

4. Paul desires to return to Corinth under relaxed conditions which are ideal for teaching.

5. But the continual nit-picking, harping, criticism, gives Paul no freedom to communicate doctrine.

6. Therefore Paul writes to the Corinthians instead of coming personally.

7. Since Paul’s last visit to Corinth many believers have become involved in the principle of reversion.

8. The same concept is found in other parts of the Word of God — Jeremiah chapters 42-44; Hebrews 5:11-6:6; Galatians 5:4 — where believers through neglect of doctrine, neglect of the function of GAP, have retrogressed.

9. For this reason, because of the subsequent reversionism after 1 Corinthians [failure to respond to it] Paul writes instead of coming in person.

10. Paul’s attitude is that there are so many people who are relaxed and positive and who want the Word of God that life is too short to hang around the carping Corinthians. So he chooses to remain away from Corinth.

11. Their scar tissue and emotional revolt of the soul have rejected Paul’s authority, and rejection of Paul’s authority always substitutes some form of verbal antagonism and criticism.

12. This does not change Paul’s love for them but it does change his modus operandi. Paul now states that if he comes in person he will get tough unless there is a change of mental attitude.

“that” is not found in the original but it is found in the aorist infinitive, so it is a bona fide translation; “I may not be bold” is an aorist active infinitive from qarrew, plus the simple negative mh. Obviously this verb is used to describe Paul’s get tough attitude in 1 Corinthians. However, he does not want to use his moral courage and mental attitude at this time in a face to face situation. Therefore he says he is not coming back, “that I may not be bold when I am present.”

“with that confidence” — the instrumental case of a noun, pepoiqhsij. This is built upon the perfect tense stem of peiqw, it is about the strongest Greek word for confidence. The prefix has a reduplication of the perfect tense and therefore it means ‘strong confidence.’

So far the translation should read: “But I request not to be bold being present by means of the confidence.”

“wherewith” is with which; “I think to be bold” is I assume to be bold. The word think is logizomai, to assume; “to be bold” is this time it is tolmaw which is overt courage; qarrew is inner or mental or moral courage. Tolmaw means courage in face to face teaching. He has the courage to do it; he prefers not to do it. Therefore this passage should read: “But I request not to have the inner courage by means of great confidence when I am present, inner courage with which I assume to demonstrate overt courage upon [or, over] some.”

Summary

1. Paul through doctrine has great moral courage which is vitally necessary in teaching the Word of God.

2. Many Corinthian believers have reverted. They have gone from an ECS to an emotional revolt. Under reversionism they have become bullies, critics, nit-pickers, petty. They are anti-authoritarian.

3. But Paul has the moral courage whether present or absent from them.

4. Paul will be faithful to Bible doctrine.

5. Therefore in communication Paul will let the chips fall where they may, whether it is verbal or written.

6. It is an age-old principle that believers in reversionism react to Bible doctrine. This is illustrated in the days of Moses and also in the days of Jeremiah.

7. Moses, Jeremiah, and Paul were not only great communicators of doctrine but also possessed one other thing in common. They possessed qarrew, mental courage. They all faced emotional revolt in others and stood up to it.

The next phrase emphasises how reversion type believers express their emotional revolt — by judging Paul. They say he walks after the flesh and is high-handed in dealing with them. However, in reality Paul simply used his authority against reversionism. It was his critics in Corinth who were carnal, not Paul. Therefore Paul’s critics ascribe to Paul their very own tradition — carnality.

“which assume” [not ‘think’] — present active participle. Since they have entered into reversionism they continually logizomai. The present tense is linear aktionsart. They keep on assuming. Here is the destructive power of mental attitude sins. This is the rejection of Paul’s authority and Paul’s teaching, the expression of human viewpoint under the doctrine of reversionism.

“as if we” — when Paul says ‘we’ he is not only referring to himself, they have reacted to their other pastors — “walked according to the flesh.” Literally, “constantly assuming us as walking according to the standards of the flesh.” Sarc in the accusative singular is used for the old sin nature.

Translation: : “But I request not to have the inner courage by means of great confidence [in teaching] when I am present, inner courage with which I assume to demonstrate overt courage upon [or, over] some, who constantly are assuming us as walking according to the standard of the flesh.”

Summary of the doctrine of reversionism

1. Reversionism is the believer going from the ECS to the emotional revolt of the soul. For the unbeliever reversionism is going from the establishment in the conscience to emotional revolt of the soul. Unbelievers also suffer from reversionism.

2. This is accomplished when a believer begins to neglect Bible doctrine and fails to function daily under GAP — 1 Corinthians 10:12; 2 Peter 2 with regard to the unbeliever.

3. Illustrations:

a) The Mizpah crowd of Jeremiah’s generation — Jeremiah chapters 42, 43, 44.

b) The Exodus generation in their attitude toward Moses.

c) The Corinthians who are critical of the apostle Paul — 2 Corinthians 10:1,2.

4. The principle of reversionism is described by a phrase in Galatians 5:4 — “falling from grace.” (Failure to operate under grace)

5. Mental attitude sins are a major contributor to reversionism — Hebrews 12:15.

6. The recipients of the epistle to the Hebrews were involved in reversionism — Hebrews 5:11-14.

7. Reversion recovery demands not only rebound but the daily function of GAP in the field of basic doctrine — Hebrews 6:1,2.

8. Reversion recovery is impossible under circumstances of apostasy — Hebrews 6:3-6.

9. Reversionists always reject the authority of great Bible teachers, and by application, anyone who teaches the Bible. E.g. Moses, Jeremiah, Paul — their teaching was rejected by reversionist believers, Exodus 16:20; 17:3; Numbers 11:5; Jeremiah 44:16; 2 Corinthians 10:1,2.

10. Those involved in reversion are overpowered by their circumstances and suffer from a tortured soul — 2 Peter 2:7,8.

11. Reversionism is also described as an unstable soul — 2 Peter 2:14. Such a believer involved becomes classified as “cursed.” He buys the teaching of false teachers.

Verse 3 — the problem here is that there is no word for ‘though.’ The first word is gar, an enclitic particle designed to make a transition between the first two verses where Paul quotes his critics and to make a transitional answer. The answer is semantic in nature. It is also slightly sarcastic.

“we walk” — not found. This is a present active participle of peripatew and it should be translated “For walking around in the flesh.” Peripatew presents a concept called the true semantic value of interpretation. Semantics have been used since time immemorial for debater’s technique. So Paul is walking in the flesh, therefore he is alive, he is a part of the angelic conflict, but he is not carnal when he uses a club on the Corinthians — which is their accusation.

“in the flesh” — the preposition e)n plus the locative of sarc is ‘in the sphere of the flesh.’ “For walking about in the sphere of the flesh.” In using the word ‘flesh’ here remember that Paul often has used it for the old sin nature. That is where the Corinthians picked up the idea of using it for the OSN and using it as an additional criticism of Paul. The Corinthians were saying, ‘When he writes us a letter like 1 Corinthians he is in the sphere of the flesh, he is operating under the sphere of the OSN.’ They had the audacity to say that 1 Corinthians was written in part while Paul was carnal. There is no such thing as any writer of any book in the Bible being out of fellowship at the time of writing. Paul assigns to the word sarc on the locative its true semantic value, the human body.

Therefore Paul’s soul walking in the sphere of Paul’s body is in view here. As long as his soul is in his body he is alive. Note the contrast, however, coming up: “in the flesh … after the flesh.” Paul says we walk about in the sarc but not kata plus sarc. So we have a contrast of prepositions. The Corinthians said that Paul walked about according to the flesh — kata sarc. Therefore e)n plus sarc is a true statement in contrast with the critical statement, kata plus sarc.. It is true that Paul is walking in the sphere of the flesh. That is, the soul is in his body. It is not true that Paul is teaching according to the standard of the flesh — kata sarc. Kata sarc is old sin nature; e)n sarc is human body. Paul is walking in his human body but not according to the old sin nature. Paul teaches in the sphere of his flesh. His soul has to be in his body to teach.

Semantics is the science of meanings in contrast to phonetics which is the science of sound. The critics changed the semantics of sarc by using the preposition kata, but Paul uses not only a true statement but true phonetics. Paul assigns the true meaning to sarc by using the preposition e)n. By so doing Paul destroys the debater’s technique in the semantics and give a an accurate account of his teaching. To teach Paul must have a body (sarc) to house his soul. He does not teach, however, under the control of the old sin nature.

Just because Paul gets tough with his language to the Corinthians it does not mean that he is out of fellowship. Hard-nosed teaching is not carnal teaching. The Corinthian critics contend according to the standard of the flesh — kata plus sarc, but Paul correctly states that he teaches e)n plus sarc, in the human body.

“we do not war” — present middle indicative of strateuw. The present tense is linear aktionsart, we keep on warring or fighting. Here it is the spiritual warfare of the angelic conflict. Plus the negative, “we do not fight [in the angelic conflict] according to the standard of the flesh.”

“according to the flesh” — kata plus sarc.. At the end of verse 2 kata plus sarc quotes the criticism; at the end of verse 3 kata plus sarc rebukes the criticism.

Translation: “For walking in the flesh we do not fight [in the angelic conflict] according to the flesh [OSN].” So the criticism of Paul is not valid.

Verse 4 — spiritual weapons for a spiritual warfare. This is an amplification of e)n sarc. In the angelic conflict, since it is a spiritual warfare, it demands the use of spiritual weapons.

“For” is the enclitic particle gar, but this time it is a causal particle used in an epexegetic sense. It means to give additional explanation.

“weapons” — the word used here indicates that there is more than one, the nominative plural of o(plon. It is taken from the verb o(plizw which means to equip a hoplite (soldier in the Greek army). It is in the plural to indicate that God has provided numerous weapons in the angelic conflict.

“of our warfare” — the noun strateia means military conflict. Here it refers to angelic conflict.

“are not carnal” — sarkikoj again in the nominative plural. It means something material. In the angelic conflict we do not have human weapons, we have spiritual weapons.

“but” is a conjunction to set up what they really are — a)lla. This is a contrast now between human weapons and divine equipment for the spiritual conflict.

“mighty” — the nominative plural of the noun dunatoj which really means attributes of power, divine power here by way of contrast to human weapons.

“through God” — the instrumental case of qeoj, ‘by means of God’ or ‘through the instrumentality of God.’

“to” is not ‘to’ at all, it is the preposition proj plus the accusative which generally means face to face with, but if you are face to face with someone it can also mean against, and that is the meaning here.

“the pulling down of strongholds” or ‘against the demolition of fortifications.’ The words “pulling down” is kaqairesij which used in a military sense means ‘demolition, destruction.’

“strongholds” — o)xurwma which means a fortified position, a fortification.

Summary

1. The devil’s fortification system can resist any attack of human weapons, human viewpoint, human ability, human power. But God has provided in grace divine equipment, spiritual weapons, to demolish the cosmic defences of Satan.

2. However, scar tissue of the soul, emotional revolt, reversionism, cannot attack or succeed against Satanic fortifications.

3. Therefore we need spiritual weapons for spiritual warfare. We need grace equipment to assault the defenso systems of Satan in this intensified stage of the angelic conflict.

4. This equipment and weapons is supplied through the daily function of GAP which produces the divine viewpoint in the right lobe, produces the proper norms and standards, produces the vocabulary with which to think and apply. You cannot think and apply if you do not have a doctrinal vocabulary and also the divine viewpoint.

5. Therefore a corrected translation: “For the equipment and weapons of our conflict, not human attributes, but the attributes of power through God against the destruction of [Satan’s] fortification.”

6. The fortified systems of Satan are described in the next verse where an additional verb for destroying or demolishing is used, the command to demolish the Satanic system.

Verse 5 — the idea of bringing every thought into captivity for Christ has been interpreted in as many ways as there are mixed up people in the Christian life.

“Casting down” is not bad, but the next word “imaginations” is entirely wrong. There is no word for imagination in the whole passage, the only imaginations are the distortions of the passage. “Casting down” is a present active participle of kaqairew [kaq is kata; airew = lift up, to lift up according to a standard]. Kata also means ‘down’ and with a)irew it means to lift up and tear down. So when kaqairew together it means lifting up and tearing down. However, this was used as a military word so it means to assault and demolish a fortification. The present active participle reads every believer into the angelic conflict. Whether you know it or not as a believer you have been drafted. Obviously not every believer s prepared for it, but that indicates a lack of doctrine. We are to take the offensive. However, we cannot take the offensive without proper equipment, and that is Bible doctrine. Here we are told to assault and demolish fortifications. This tells us that the devil during the Church Age is on the defense. Since the cross the devil has lost the offensive, but even though the devil is behind the fortifications of all his systems no new systems have been invented since the Church Age began. They have all existed in some form or another before the Church Age came into existence. If you succeed in assaulting and demolishing Satanic fortifications you do it through Bible doctrine. And if you do not succeed you fail because of the malfunction of GAP, because of your own negative volition, because of resultant scar tissue.

“imaginations” — Satan is too smart to function on the basis of imagination, and the Greek word here does not mean imagination. It is logismoj in the plural. It means systems of thought, reasoning, sophistries, sometimes even sentiments. But it means primarily systems of thought. Logismoj connotes reasoning powers, it never means imagination. Therefore it should be translated something like this: “Assaulting and demolishing cosmic systems of thought.” This puts the believer on the offensive. This is exactly what was wrong in Corinth. The believers were neutralised in their attack by carnality, by emotional revolt, by reversionism. How can you take the offensive without spiritual weapons? We must utilise spiritual weapons in the assault and in the demolishing of Satanic systems of thought.

So Satan’s outer perimeter of defense is called logismoj. His inner perimeter of defense is called “every high thing that exalteth itself.” In other words, we have two systems of defense. Satan is desperate today, the cross has made Satan desperate: the victory of the cross, the resurrection, ascension and session of Jesus Christ. Once Jesus Christ was seated at the right hand of the Father the devil was on the defensive. His defensive systems: the outer perimeter is thought — doctrines of demons, 1 Timothy 4:1; the inner perimeter is something else — “every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God.”

“every high thing” — the accusative singular of paj which means ‘every,’ and ‘high thing’ is actually translated by two words but it is u(ywma. It refers to obstacles of pride. The devil’s inner perimeter fortification is built up of obstacles of pride. Every obstacle of pride is human viewpoint. The devil keeps you out of his perimeter when you are filled with human viewpoint. So “every obstacle of pride” is a better translation than ‘every high thing.’ Certain systems of thought only have significance when a person is proud in connection with them.

“that exalteth itself” — present middle participle of e)pairw [airw = lift up; ep = upon], it means to assault, to attack. So human viewpoint and cosmic doctrine always stand on the inner perimeter and are ready to counter attack. And what do they attack?

“against” — kata here which means in opposition to “the knowledge of God.” Where does Satan attack doctrine? The word ‘knowledge’ gives us the entire picture. From his inner defense he does it at the point of gnwsij. Gnwsij is subject to counter attack. E)pignwsij is not. Gnwsij is doctrine in the left lobe, it is learned and understood by the Holy Spirit but cannot be applied. The only thing you can do with gnwsij is cycle it back down to the human spirit. The gnwsij type of doctrine is called ‘the knowledge of the God.’

A counter attack must be launched from a defensive position. From his defensive position Satan will occasionally throw out a counter attack and when he does he takes prisoners.

“bringing into captivity” is the counter attack, making prisoners. This is a present active participle of a)ixmalwtizw. It means to make a prisoner, and the present participle indicates that this goes on constantly. In every generation certain believers become prisoners. Bringing into captivity means to make a prisoner of.

“every thought” here means every system of thought again. However, the word is a different word for system of thought, it is nohma, a thought which is consolidated. When you make a prisoner of every thought you have staved off the counter attack. Satan does not succeed. Making a prisoner of every thought means every system of thought. That is why we have a change of word here. Before we had one system of thought, logismoj for when Satan is succeeding. But in staving off Satan nohma is what happens when you get away from human viewpoint. In other words, logismoj is human viewpoint and nohma is divine viewpoint or capturing these thoughts. Now how can you make a prisoner of every system of thought? It has to be done under authority.

“to the obedience of Christ” — the preposition e)ij plus u(pakoh which means authority, “towards the authority of the Christ.” In other words, every system of thought which Satan has can be captured and turned from logismoj into nohma. This is accomplished by doctrine.

Translation: “Assaulting and demolishing Satanic systems of thoughts, and every obstacle of pride attacking against the objective knowledge of the God, and making a prisoner of every human viewpoint system of thought to the authority of the Christ.”

This is accomplished simply by the doctrine of GAP.

What are some of these systems used in the counter attack?

1. One on the most common systems of thought is rationalisation, which some form of self-justification with the mentality of the soul. The mentality of the soul justifies wrong actions.

2. The anger adjustment to the problems and frustrations of life. Some people try to solve every problem in life by anger — a fit of temper, a tantrum, and so on. The direct attack has three concepts: a) To get attention. This attempts to satisfy approbation lust; b) To control people and the environment around them. This stems from power lust; c) To be spiteful and to be so strong in revenge that people simply stop right there. They are afraid to go on in any way because of revenge or spite tactics used. This is a part of a system of thought called direct attack.

3. Defense mechanism. A human viewpoint design to protect the soul against the pressures it is too weak to bear. The change of thought pattern leads to a change of behaviour pattern, and this is the person, for example, who becomes disillusioned with some local church and jumps into a wild social life as an excuse.

4. Denial. This is human viewpoint adjustment which ignores or attempts to ignore some difficulty or danger.

5. The most common is sublimation. Sublimation has two sides psychologically. Good sublimation is to pull is to pull a baby’s hand out of its mouth and substitute it with a rattle or something it can chew. There is a negative aspect. Sublimation is a human viewpoint adjustment through finding a new outlet for a drive or frustration. You are frustrated in some way so you go out and play golf. People who seek happiness through drinking or drugs, through some kind of a wild social life. In other words, trying to solve the problem of frustrations with some form of entertainment or something which really does not meet the problem.

6. Subjectivity in thinking. One of the greatest manifestations of this is the sensitivity training trend.

The doctrine of mental attitude

1. In the angelic conflict and during the course of man’s history there are always two mental attitudes in conflict. These two attitudes are discussed in Isaiah 55:7-9. Divine versus human viewpoint, a battleground. Human viewpoint will prevail apart from two types of restraint. The unbeliever is capable of one type of human viewpoint, anything that is related to the laws of divine establishment. The believer has the great battleground. He has the whole realm of doctrine which when inhaled and coming into his right lobe becomes the basis for establishing divine viewpoint. Doctrine as gnwsij does not help the believer to see life from the divine viewpoint. Doctrine as e)pignwsij is used for construction material. The only application of e)pignwsij is to build an ECS. It is the doctrine in the right lobe, in the frame of reference, in the memory centre for application, forming a new vocabulary, forming norms and standards, that leads to the divine viewpoint in the right lobe. “My thoughts are not your thoughts” indicates that there is a conflict in the soul of every believer. The conflict is divine versus human viewpoint. Every thought that you have either looks at life from the human viewpoint or the divine viewpoint. The situation varies according to the intake of doctrine.

2. With this in mind, what you think is what you really are. Therefore, mental attitude determines the life and the character of the person — Proverbs 23:7, “As a man thinketh in his right lobe, so he is.” It is the right lobe where the conflict exists.

3. The divine viewpoint is commanded to the believer in this passage — 2 Corinthians 10:5. However the principle is here, not the mechanics. The mechanics for divine viewpoint depend upon the daily function of GAP resulting in the ECS and maximum doctrine in the right lobe.

4. Since doctrine is called the mind of Christ, as per 1 Corinthians 2:16, intake of doctrine under GAP shapes the mental attitude and fulfills the principle of Philippians 2:5, “Let this thinking be in you which was also in Christ Jesus.”

5. God’s plan, operation grace, demands a new mental attitude on the part of the believer priest — 2 Timothy 1:7; Romans 12:2. A major part of the Christian life is a reshaping of your thinking.

6. The inner happiness, +H of the ECS, produces capacity for divine viewpoint — Philippians 2:2.

7. Part of divine viewpoint is that confidence which results from the inculcation of Bible doctrine through GAP. Part of that divine viewpoint is the confidence which results from the inculcation of Bible doctrine through GAP — 2 Corinthians 5:1,6,8.

8. True stability, therefore, is a mental attitude, a consistent divine viewpoint mental attitude — Philippians 4:7; 2 Thessalonians 2:2.

9. Giving is a mental attitude — 2 Corinthians 9:7.

10. Love is a mental attitude of the soul — 1 Corinthians 13:5. Therefore capacity for love is resolved in the soul rather than in the body.

11. Worldliness is a human viewpoint mental attitude rather than overt activity — Romans 12:2; Colossians 3:2.

12. Evil is something you think rather than something you do — Matthew 9:4; Galatians 6:3.

13. Mental attitude sins produce self-induced misery — Proverbs 15:13.

Verse 6 — “And having, the present active participle of e)xw which means to have and to hold. The present active participle is not only linear aktionsart but calls for a way of life. Your way of life must be a guard mount. You must mount guard continually in your soul.

“in a readiness” — a military term which means to mount guard. This is e)n plus the locative of e)toimoj, ‘in the sphere of readiness.’ Readiness means security, a guard mount, an organisation designed to protect you. Here it is used for providing a garrison in your soul to prevent revolution in the soul. This is a warning against revolution in your soul. How can you have as a believer revolution in your soul? a) Negative volition toward doctrine; b) The buildup of scar tissue in your soul; c) Emotional revolt of the soul; d) Reversionism of the soul; e) General apostasy or human viewpoint of the soul. Every soul is subject to these things and there are only two systems of defense. The first is for the unbeliever: volition. The believer’s defense is volition plus doctrine. This passage is talking about the defense of the believer’s soul, the mounting of a garrison in the soul of the believer. In the angelic conflict it is the soul which is the primary battleground. It is what you think in the soul. From your frame of reference you move to an outer perimeter of doctrine, the norms and standards of doctrine, the viewpoint of doctrine. These form an outer perimeter but your inner perimeter is your frame of reference. Here is the guard mount of the soul. Here is what every believer must have or he will suffer revolution of the soul. Revolution of the soul is worse than carnality, it is the sum total of scar tissue, emotional revolt, reversionism, apostasy. It is inevitably the sin unto death, it has to be because when a person has moved into this area, the total takeover of the soul by cosmic doctrine, demon doctrine of the soul is more devastating in some cases even than demon possession of the body. Do not fear the one who can kill the body, fear the one who can control the soul. Satan has systems for controlling the soul of believers. Therefore this verse is designed to warn that this principle does exist and that God has provided a security system to protect the soul against revolution. Revolution is a bad word always. God has provided safeguards in the soul and it is Satan’s objective in the angelic conflict to make the believer’s soul a battlefield, and he already has a force on the battlefield. The old sin nature is a Satanic force already on the battlefield. However, the OSN can only produce carnality, human good, or motivation by the lust pattern. It takes an outside force coming in to really destroy the effectiveness of the soul, and that outside force coming in is Satanic doctrine, doctrine of demons — 1 Timothy 4:1. The only protection against it is Bible doctrine. Bible doctrine is the garrison that protects the soul. “Holding is readiness” is the garrison of doctrine.

“to revenge” — should be ‘to punish,’ the aorist active infinitive of e)kdikew. Here it connotes defense against Satanic attack.

“all disobedience” — the word for ‘disobedience’ is parakoh which doesn’t really mean disobedience, it means a deviation from authority or a deviation from obedience. Therefore it describes emotional revolt or any other revolution of the soul. The revolutions of the soul include: a) Volitional revolt — negative volition toward Bible doctrine; b) Scar tissue; c) In the emotions of the soul; d) There is a total revolt of the soul which we call reversionism. It includes some form of human viewpoint or some form of apostasy.

“when” is the adverb o(tan which means ‘on the occasion of.’ You cannot set up a garrison in your soul unless you invite the troops in.

“your obedience is fulfilled” is ‘the fulfillment of your obedience,’ or ‘when your obedience is fulfilled.’ The occasion of is specified as the point of knowing doctrine through the function of GAP. This is the basis for putting down revolt, the basis for a garrison force against revolt. ‘Obedience’ here is u(pakh which is simply the daily function of GAP resulting in the ECS. The ECS is the sign of a permanent garrison.

“is fulfilled” — aorist active subjunctive of plhrow which means to fill up a deficiency. In this case we have a deficiency of troops in the soul to garrison against Satanic revolt. It also means to fully possess. God intends for every believer to be fully possessed by doctrine which is the garrison that puts down cosmic revolt. The word also means to fully influence, and this is a daily function of GAP in establishing a garrison in the soul. The fourth meaning is to fill with a certain quality. God fills the believer with the top quality of divine viewpoint through the function of GAP. The aorist tense is a constative aorist which means to take in the Word of God day by day. That is the way you garrison your soul. The passive voice: the believer receives a garrison by taking in doctrine. He receives the defense of his soul. You and I, humanly speaking, do not have the ability to defend our souls against Satanic attack. They are unseen attacks. Satan already has his infiltrators through the OSN, therefore there is no human way we can resist. It takes something greater than we are and God has provided on the basis of volition the garrison. Always volition comes up because of the angelic conflict and every time you take in doctrine you are inviting another troop, another company, sometimes a battalion, to enter your soul to provide a divine garrison against the terrible things that could happen.

Translation: “Holding in readiness to punish all deviation from obedience [revolt], when your obedience [deficiency of doctrine] has been so fulfilled as to fully influence your soul.”

Verse 7 — superficial evaluation. One of the great dangers we face in the Christian life is to assume that we know something when we know nothing. If we know nothing and think we know something it is inevitable that we will confidently express what we think we know and which is not correct and which in reality we do not know. Verse 7 tells us in effect that even nothing can be dangerous. That is why some people can never get away from superficial evaluation.

Principle: The conflict in which we find ourselves is greater than any of us. We do not have the human ability to fight this conflict. Without this garrison you cannot hang in there, you cannot stand up against the pressures of disasters.

“Do ye look on things after the outward appearance?” But this is not a question, it is a statement. ‘Do ye look’ is the present active indicative of blepw, and it means ‘You do look.’ This is blepw, not o(raw. O(raw means you have doctrine, blepw means you can’t even look and understand. Blepw connotes a superficial glance. “You are in the habit of looking,” present active indicative, second masculine plural. You all are in the habit of looking. Present tense, you keep on doing it. Why? Because they have no garrison of the soul. The active voice: they do it themselves without a soul garrison. The indicative mood is the reality of soul revolt in these Corinthians. They have been in the habit of looking at things superficially, they have no doctrine.

“on things” is ta, and it refers to situations, circumstances, people, and who carries the big stick or who has the authority; “after” is kata, ‘according to a standard.’ The norm or standard is “outward appearance” — proswpon + kata means superficial appearance. That is the description of a believer in the Church Age alive but not having doctrine. Here is a soul overrun by the devil. The devil can overrun your soul. No demon can get inside of you, neither can the devil. But he can overrun your soul with false doctrine.

“If” introduces a first class condition; “any man” is tij which means ‘anyone,’ any believer. This refers specifically to Paul’s critics in Corinth; “trust” — perfect active indicative of peiqw means to have confidence; “to himself” — ‘regarding himself.’

“that he is Christ’s” — ‘that he belongs to Christ’ ; ‘let him keep on thinking this.’ In other words, the Corinthians have not lost one thing, the doctrine of eternal security. Logizomai, present middle imperative, “keep on thinking this palin [on the one hand].” Literally, “If anyone has confidence regarding himself that he belongs to Christ [and he does], keep on thinking this to himself on the one hand.”

“that as” — kaqwj, ‘even as.’ This sets up an analogy between Paul’s critics and Paul himself. These critics under emotional revolt have assumed that they belong to the Lord and that in rejecting Paul’s authority that Paul does not. So Paul is going to hit them with divine viewpoint. Not only does he belong to Christ, not only does he have the same eternal security that they have, but all people who have eternal security do not have the same rank or office. That is how he is going to hit them.

“he is of Christ, even so we” — Paul has taken his first step to toward throwing his rank at them. He establishes the fact that he is in the same army, that he is also a believer.

Translation: “You are in the habit of looking at things according to the standard of superficial appearance. If anyone has confidence regarding himself that he belongs to Christ [and you do], keep on thinking this to himself again, that as he is of Christ, even so we.”

Summary

1. All believers are in union with Christ, therefore all believers are the object of the Father’s love.

2. Therefore criticism, maligning, and judging of other believers is not only an infringement on their freedom and privacy but totally incompatible with Bible doctrine.

3. Another passage on that is Romans 14:4-10.

4. This is both sin and the violation of the priesthood of the believer.

5. In addition, Paul is a communicator of doctrine. This gives him special authority, as with all pastor-teachers — Hebrews 13:7,17.

6. Such criticism of Paul and nit-picking is a sign of no garrison of the soul, it is a sign of a total soul revolt, therefore a sign of reversionism.

7. Rejection of Paul’s authority is another sign of emotional revolt of the soul.

8. Paul as an apostle has the right to judge the Corinthians but the Corinthians as believer priests do not have the right to judge or evaluate him. His evaluation is from the Lord.

Verse 8 — “For” is the enclitic particle gar. This ties it all together. It is used to present the explanation on the right to judge in the case of one who possesses the communication gift; “though” — e)an introduces a 3rd class condition. It should be translated “if.”

“I should boast” — kauxaomai means to boast. Notice what he does say: “For if I should boast [maybe I will and maybe I won’t].”

“somewhat more” — perissoj means a lot more; “of our authority” — he puts it in the 3rd class condition because he doesn’t always have to; ‘of’ is peri, ‘concerning our authority.’ This refers to at least three people, Paul, Timothy and Titus, all who have communicated doctrine to the Corinthians. Paul’s authority was rejected and criticised, as was Timothy’s. To Titus they responded with the result that this letter was written. “For if I should boast a little too much concerning our authority.”

Summary

1. Paul is referring to his authority, to that of Timothy and Titus. In other words, to those who have the spiritual gift of communication.

2. Those who teach doctrine under a communication gift have their authority from God — Hebrews 13:7,17.

3. Paul now reminds his Corinthian critics of his authority. He throws his rank at them.

4. By using a third class condition Paul makes a principle of doctrine out of it. He is not ashamed of his authority any more than he is ashamed of Jesus Christ or that he is ashamed of the Holy Spirit who gave him his spiritual gift.

5. Paul’s critics wanted him to be ashamed of his authority so that he would not use the big stick against them, as he did in 1 Corinthians.

6. Emotional revolt and reversionism always reject the authority of the pastor-teacher.

7. The legalists at Corinth seek the deprecate and destroy Paul’s authority by making it appear as bullying.

8. Legalism must lure believers from grace by attacking the authority of those who teach grace. It is Paul who provides the guard mount for the soul, therefore Satan is attacking the one who provides the guard mount. For if these people respond to Paul’s teaching again they will recover from reversionism and their souls will be guarded by doctrine. 9. Therefore they also seek to discredit this authority by making it appear in a bad light. In other words, bullying.

10. However Paul’s authority in the writing of 1 Corinthians in chewing them out is definitely from God — 1 Thessalonians 5:12.

“which the Lord has given” — aorist active indicative of didomi. This authority is from the Lord; “for edification, and not for your destruction” — the word ‘destruction’ s reversion and this great revolt in the soul.

Translation: “For if I boast a little too much concerning our authority, which the Lord has given for the purpose of edification, and not for the purpose of your reversion.”

Verse 9 — the authority issue in inspiration.

By way of anticipation:

1. As in the communication so in inspiration. The authority is provided by God the Holy Spirit. The ministry of communication is the ministry of the Spirit.

2. God the Holy Spirit who provided the spiritual gift of pastor-teacher also provides the source his message.

3. There God the Holy Spirit uses the writer of the scriptures to record God’s revelation.

4. In this verse the critics attack the human writer of scripture.

The Corinthians critics of Paul are saying that 1 Corinthians is a bullying instrument, that Paul is trying to bulldoze them, to terrify them. But they were also reading the Word of God, and since it is the Word of God it is obvious that this type of activity becomes necessary under certain conditions.

“That” is i(na and it introduces a purpose clause. Paul has a purpose, just as he did when he wrote 1 Corinthians. He now defends 1 Corinthians against the critics.

“I may not seem” — aorist active subjunctive of dokew. This verb is used for subjective thinking, therefore erroneous thinking. The Corinthians are doing the erroneous thinking, not Paul. Paul is using a verb which expresses their critical attitude.

Principle: When believers are critical of the Word of God and its teaching it often reflects their own subjective thinking. Subjective thinking is scar tissue thinking.

The reason Paul’s critics were critical of 1 Corinthians is because it is a highly critical epistle. It clobbers about every type of carnality that ever existed.

“seem” is not the best translation, probably here ‘appear’ is better — “That I may not appear as though [not ‘if’].” We have an adverb o(j here which should not be translated ‘if.’ The aorist tense of dokew is a constative aorist referring to continual subjective thinking on the part of the critics. They don’t constantly think of Paul but when they do in a point of time they always level criticism at him. The active voice: many of the Corinthian believers are criticising the apostle. The subjunctive mood indicates that this does not have to continue, all they have to do is to shape up.

Then he quotes the criticism: “I would terrify” — present active infinitive of e)kfobew. This is a compound verb [fobew = to fear, to frighten; e)k = out of] and to frighten out of one’s skin is really the concept. The present tense is linear aktionsart which says in effect the criticism is all Paul ever does, he tries to frighten. The active voice: they are claiming that Paul’s entire ministry never varies, it is one of trying to frighten them. The infinitive expresses what they claim is Paul’s purpose which is to intimidate everyone in Corinth. So obviously the Corinthian critics have lost track of Paul’s ministry.

“by letters” indicates 1 Corinthians, dia plus the genitive which is ‘through letters.’ Paul apparently wrote several letters, one of which was 1 Corinthians.

Principles

1. “By letters” [the plural of e)pistolh] indicates that the Judaisers are following Paul from place to place to undermine his authority.

2. The plural, therefore, refers not only to 1 Corinthians but to Galatians and other epistles as well.

3. This criticism is a challenge to Paul’s authority, not as a speaker but as a human writer of scripture. When they critics his letters they criticise the Word of God.

4. Obviously 1 Corinthians has a great deal of rebuke. However, this hard-nosed rebuke is conducted under the ministry of God the Holy Spirit under the doctrine of inspiration.

5. Certain portions of the Bible are designed to be harsh so as to warn believers to keep them out of emotional revolt, scar tissue, and reversionism.

6. But the severity and acrimony under fire from the critics is actually from the Holy Spirit using the human writer, the apostle Paul.

7. Both legalism and human viewpoint attack the communicator of doctrine and the writer of doctrine.

8. Paul has authority as a writer just as Paul has authority as a pastor-teacher. This authority is resolved by going back to the doctrine of inspiration.

(See Doctrine of Inspiration of Scripture)

Verse 10 — “For his letters.” These are his epistles which include 1 Corinthians and are a part of the canon of scripture; “say they” — present active indicative of fhmi which means to allege rather than to say. “Because the letters, they [his critics] allege.” It does not say in the original ‘his letters,’ but this is also an attack apparently upon Peter, John and James, and others who have written. The word fhmi is used to indicate that this is nit-picking, maligning, rejection of Paul’s authority, and that these mental attitude sins that provoke this are definitely out of line.

“weighty and powerful” — two adjectives in the nominative feminine plural to indicate that they are attacking more than 1 Corinthians, they are attacking all of the epistles of Paul as well as the other apostles who have written for the Word of God. The first adjective is baruj which means burdensome, oppressive, severe or stern. Here it has the connotation of severity. His letters are severe, and by that they imply that Paul does not have any love. Their second criticism comes in the second adjective, i)sxuroj, translated ‘powerful.’ This word means ‘vehement.’ Both words are in the plural because they apply to all of his letters. Both words imply that Paul lacks love and compassion. Therefore they are criticising Paul as to his content, they say that he is harsh and unloving. They resent Paul’s dogmatism, his authority in teaching, and their own attitude reveals emotional revolt of the soul. “Because the letters, they allege, severe and vehement.”

1. From the critical attitude toward his message they move on to ridicule his personal appearance and public speaking ability.

2. Their lack of objectivity indicates both scar tissue and emotional revolt of the soul.

3. In the case of some there is undoubtedly reversion accompanying this subjectivity of attitude.

4. Judging is a sign of weakness of the soul, the inability of the soul to cope with truth. Ridicule reveals emotional revolt of the soul.

5. Their criticism is not only sinful but the accumulation of human viewpoint from the neglect of doctrine.

6. Negative volition toward doctrine not only reacts to the message but seeks to malign and belittle the messenger.

Next is the criticism of Paul’s person.

“but” — the particle de is used as a conjunction but it isn’t so much of a contrast as it is a change of subject. Therefore it should not be translated ‘but,’ it should be translated ‘and.’ The subject continues but it jumps from the message of Paul to his person.

“his bodily presence” — literally, ‘the presence of his body.’ This is a reference to his physical appearance and also his physical strength.

“weak” — a)sqenhj means ‘sickly.’ There are three outside sources from the Word of God describing the apostle Paul. The first is called “The Acts of Paul and Thekla.” It is a 3rd century manuscript. Someone decided to make up a good story about Paul and his right woman! In the description of the hero, who is the apostle Paul, he is described as “bald, bowlegged, with meeting eyebrows and a hooked nose.” About 100 years later someone else wrote about Paul, only this was in derision. In this he was called the “baldheaded, hook-nosed Galilean.” But you have to remember that the fourth century is moving toward the dark ages, and you can always tell when you are moving toward the dark ages because people put a lot of emphasis on male hair. The emphasis in the Bible is on the woman’s hair. And the woman is said to have two glories, one is her hair and the other is her right man. Just as soon as reversionism, apostasy and emotional revolt sets in you begin to get into dark ages. The worst apostasy of all occurred during mediaeval times and one of the signs was the fact that men started to let their hair grow long and they emphasised this. The ascetics of the day reacted to this and shaved their hair. To call a man baldheaded in the fourth century was really something. In the first century it didn’t mean anything. So in the fourth century this reference to Paul was an insult. Then, 200 years later in the 6th century, John of Antioch was describing Paul. He was very fond of Paul so he described him and gave an accurate description that had come down from the 6th century. He said Paul was round-shouldered, hooked nose, greyish eyes, meeting eyebrows. We have, therefore, three descriptions from three separate centuries, the 3rd, the 4th and the 6th. In each one they all agree generally on how Paul looked. To say the least, the apostle Paul was unattractive and possibly a little but repulsive. But Paul in the power of the Spirit and Paul in the power of the ECS was both spiritually dynamic and physically attractive, this is the ministry of God the Holy Spirit. However, those who were negative toward doctrine not only reacted to Paul’s message but they used the opportunity to ridicule his personal appearance. Negative volition, human viewpoint, scar tissue, emotional revolt, emphasise the overt appearance. But remember that the Lord looks on the heart which is the right lobe of the soul — 1 Samuel 16:6-8.

“speech contemptible” — speech-wise Paul was a very poorly equipped public speaker, i.e. his voice. But it isn’t the voice that counts, it is the content of the message and the ministry of God the Holy Spirit. Paul has a high squeaky voice. The word here is o( logoj and it refers to Paul’s method of communication. “Contemptible” means crude and unrefined — e)couqenew [o)uqenew = to be nothing; e)c = to be out from]. This comes to be more than just contemptible, it means to be a total zero. So we could translate this, “and his speech has been rejected with contempt [as crude].”

Verse 11 — Paul comes back and says that he is consistent. “Let such an one think.” “Such an one” is toioutoj and refers to the critics in Corinth. It is in the plural and it means ‘such a one as.’ It refers to two kinds of people: a) The people who are Corinthians who have been under Paul’s ministry and have now reacted to 1 Corinthians, and b) The Judaisers who have come in to Corinth from the outside, who followed Paul all of his life and who always tried to destroy his ministry.

“think” — present active imperative of logizomai means that they are commanded to think this. Logizomai means to think logically, to ponder, to meditate. The present active imperative should be translated, “Let such ones [critics] evaluate [ponder] this.” In other words, they should observe some of the facts rather than think in terms of subjectivity and prejudice. Principle: Evaluate on the basis of facts. If you do not have facts withhold evaluation, withhold antagonism, withhold criticism. You must have facts.

“that” — o)ti is pleonastic, which means to recite another’s words. So the ‘that’ here is going to recite words of others. Paul is reciting the words of his critics. So o(ti is introducing a paraphrase of what the critics are saying.

“such as” is literally, ‘of what sort, of what kind.’ The word is o(ioj; “we are” — present active indicative of e)imi, ‘we keep on being.’

“in [the] word” — a reference to the communication of doctrine; “by letters” — dia plus the genitive of e)pistolh is ‘through letters,’ a reference to 1 Corinthians and the other Pauline epistles which became a part of the canon of scripture. Literally this should read” “Let such types [critics] consider [ponder] this [look at some facts] , that, of what sort we are in the word [communication of doctrine] through epistles.”

“being absent” — present active participle; “such types also we are being present in the action.” ‘Indeed’ is the locative case of e)rgon plus the definite article and refers to the action.

Translation: “Let such types [critics] consider [ponder] this [look at some facts], that, of what sort we are in the word [communication of doctrine] through epistles, being absent, such types also being present in the action [of teaching and being around].”

Paul says he is being consistent. He is saying in effect that if he was in Corinth he would say the same thing.

Summary

1. In other words, Paul is consistent. He will be just as tough when present with them as absent, if necessary.

2. Paul’s initial ministry to the Corinthians while present was tranquil.

3. It was not until the first epistle that Paul had to become harsh and severe, as it were, with them.

4. The contrast between Paul’s spoken ministry while there and his written ministry later on provoked the criticism.

5. When the situation demands it Paul will be tough whether present and speaking or absent and writing.

Verse 12 — “But” is the epexegetical particle gar. The purpose of this particle is to introduce an intimate detail of Paul’s circumstances. By the use of this particle Paul is taking the Corinthians into his confidence and he is getting into an intimate situation that exists in Corinth. That intimate set of circumstances: there exists a mutual admiration society in the Corinthians church. Paul begins by saying he dares not join that group.

“we dare not” — present active indicative of tolmaw which means to be bold. It connotes overt boldness. This verb, with the particle, is intimate sarcasm. Paul is speaking to his loved ones, the Corinthian church, through sarcasm. He is being sacrcastic about the boldness people who form mutual admiration societies.

“make ourselves” — aorist active infinitive of e)gkrinw [krinw = judge; e)g = preposition e)n] which means to judge one’s self in the same place or to judge one of the same rank.

“of the number” is not found in the original; “ourselves worthy” — in other words, I can’t even get into this kind of thing because I am not equal with them. They are far superior to me. If you don’t believe it just talk to them for five minutes and they will tell you how they are far superior to me! Paul is being sarcastic. He is saying he couldn’t get into an outfit like that, it is exclusive. The mutual admiration society is made up of the highest echelon. These people are super snobs! They are the aristocracy of criticism.

“or compare ourselves” — sugkrinw. This is actually a paronomasia in which we now have through sarcasm a bit of humour. Krinw is the description of what these people are doing, it means to judge. But when you put a preposition in front of it the meaning is a little different. It should read, “For we do not have the boldness to judge ourselves worthy [e)gkrinw], or to compare ourselves favourably [sugkrinw]with certain ones who constantly recommend themselves favourably.” While that is a literal translation it loses the paronomasia, it loses the humour.

“commend themselves” — sunisthmi, recommend themselves favourably.

“but they” — the Greek says ‘they alone’; “measuring themselves” — present active indicative of metrew which means they always do this; “by themselves” — this is an instrumental plus the preposition in the instrumental case. While these people are critics of Paul and full of scar tissue and emotional revolt of the soul, and are mostly in reversion or apostasy, it is easy for them to malign someone like Paul. At the same time they find others who do it and this causes an enlistment of an admiration society through approbation lust. These people recommend themselves by taking someone infinitely superior to them and criticising him.

“are not wise” — sunihmi is used in the New Testament for Bible doctrine in the human spirit, categorically stored, and applied from the right lobe. Here with the negative is stands for negative volition toward doctrine.

Translation: “For we do not have the boldness to judge ourselves worthy [e)gkrinw], or to compare ourselves favourably [sugkrinw]with certain ones who constantly recommend themselves favourably: but they, measuring themselves by means of themselves, or favourably comparing themselves to themselves, are not inculcated with doctrine.”

Verse 13 — “But” is a conjunction of contrast, it is a contrast between the human viewpoint of the mutual admiration society and the divine viewpoint of Bible doctrine in the soul.

“we will not boast” is a future active indicative kauxaomai which means to glory, to boast. Generally it means to have a legitimate pride where pride is simply ego and not pride.

“of things without measure” — this is a prepositional phrase that begins with e)ij and it should be translated ‘with reference to things not measured.’ “Things not measured” is a compound noun, a)metroj [a = not; metroj = measure] which means ‘not measured.’ The correct translation so far: “But we will not boast with reference to things not measured.” What does it mean? It has to be understood that he is discussing in this chapter divine viewpoint: ‘not measured by divine viewpoint.’ This is not in the translation, it is interpretation. In other words, if it is not divine viewpoint we will not glory in it or not boast in it. These are things which do not line up with doctrine and therefore do not line up with the divine standard. What Paul is saying in effect, then, is that any human viewpoint which his critics express, and human viewpoint from the mutual admiration society, is something that he will not glory in, it doesn’t measure up to divine viewpoint. Doctrine in the right lobe is the divine viewpoint of life, so these people, most of whom are believers, are minus something in the right lobe. God has not left us in the dark with regard to these norms, we have them. They are communicated by Paul, for example, and by anyone who has the gift of communication. They are communicated so they can be a part of the soul.

“but” — we have a contrast to the human viewpoint, the divine viewpoint; “according to” — kata means according to the norm or standard of; “the measure” — this time we have metroj in the accusative as the object of the preposition, and it means the norm or standard of divine viewpoint; “of the rule” — the word for ‘rule’ is in the genitive form and the noun is kanon from which we get the English word for the canon of scripture. It is derived from kanh which was a cane or a measuring rod. So it is a reference to doctrine in the scripture. This measure or rule has been rejected by Paul’s critics in their state of emotional revolt or state of reversionism.

“which God hath distributed” — ‘which’ is a relative pronoun referring to the canon of scripture; ‘God’ refers to God the Father, it has the definite article in front of it — o( qeoj. God distributes this through the ministry of God the Holy Spirit. The distribution is in the canon, not outside of it. “Hath distributed” is the aorist active indicative of merizw which means to share with someone, to distribute, to deal out.

“to us” — dative plural, personal pronoun, and it refers to the human writers of scripture. From the human writers putting it in writing it is preserved for us in every generation.

“a measure” — now we have a repetition of the word metron. This refers to doctrine which is the divine standard, the absolute criterion for the believer. This measure is always divine viewpoint. This time instead of a measure distributed it is a measure to reach. It is distributed in the canon, now it comes out of the Bible to us; “to reach unto you” — aorist middle infinitive of e)fikneomai [e)f = is e)pi, upon; neomai = to come, to pertain to, to benefit]. It means to reach someone with something which is important and to reach them by means of communication. So it is a reference to the written and the spoken Word, from the Word to you.

“unto you” is not correct. This is an adverb a)xri and it doesn’t mean ‘unto,’ it means ‘as far as you all.’ In other words, they are believers in Corinth, they have received prior to this time the divine standard, and they have rejected the divine standard for the persuasiveness of those who are Paul’s critics. This thing has infected the Corinthians church.

Translation: “But we will not glory with reference to things not measured by divine norms, but according to the norm or standard of the canon which the God has shared with us, a measure to reach even as far as you all.”

The malignings, the criticism, the judging of the apostle Paul came from many human sources. They came from people who loved Paul but who had been influenced by others. ut it was always backed by the principle that those who came into influence were apostate, negative toward doctrine. As a result they had scar tissue, they had emotional revolt, and in some cases even reversionism. The source includes the legalistic Judaisers, the mutual admiration societies, the zealous religionists, the cultural snobs, the power-mad persons. The divine viewpoint can only prevail where there is a daily function of GAP and where the authority of the communicator is recognised.

Verse 14 — a very personal illustration. Paul is really speaking of himself, it is an editorial ‘we.’ “For we stretch not ourselves beyond our measure.” Actually he didn’t say that. This is very delicate and very difficult exegetically.

1. When Paul first came to Corinth in Acts 18:1 he used the absolute criterion of doctrine in the form of a pure grace ministry. What Paul communicated was God’s grace. What Paul communicated was correct, biblical, the absolute viewpoint.

2. Paul did not approach with legalism or human viewpoint. He did not seek in any way to water down the grace of God.

3. Paul presented these things — the gospel to which these people responded, and then teaching — in his own dogmatic way. He has not varied from that dogmatic way. Then he left them and then they became carnal. Then he was dogmatic about their carnality and they stopped responding immediately. That is the background for this passage.

4. The first word in verse 14, “For,” is a particle, gar. But it is not the ordinary gar, it is the epexegetic gar. ‘Epexegetic’ is a very simple designation for something which introduces an additional explanation. It means you’ve given the principle, now you give some elaboration on the principle.

5. What better additional explanation (epexegesis ) can be made than to illustrate from the salvation of the very Corinthians who now are seducers, slanderers, maligners of the apostle Paul.

6. The present active participle of e)fikneomai, ‘for we stretch not.’ We had this in the previous verse, we have it now. It means to reach someone with communication which is beneficial to them. It is a reference to the verbal communication of the gospel in this case.

So when he says “For we stretch not ‘unto you’ — personal pronoun plus e)ij. It should be translated ‘For not reaching toward you [with the gospel].’

“as we did not overextend ourselves” — overextend is u(perekteinw. Paul is really saying, ‘Look, when I came to Corinth none of you were believers. I came in dogmatically and laid it on the line for grace. Did I overextend myself? You have been critcising me for being too dogmatic. You claim I am going too far. Why didn’t you say that the day you accepted Christ by responding to my dogmatic presentation?’ Literal translation: “For not reaching toward you with the gospel, as we did not overextend ourselves.”

Summary

1. Paul and his gospel team when they came to Corinth did not go beyond the boundaries of the gospel when they presented it.

2. They did not emphasise legalism in communication, they presented salvation by grace through faith to the Corinthians.

3. This is remaining within the boundaries of Bible doctrine or what the canon of scripture has to say about salvation.

4. If Paul had overextended with human viewpoint, salvation by works, his critics would not be saved. But he wasn’t, he was dogmatic in standing for grace in salvation.

5. In another realm they are accusing Paul of exactly what he did not do. He did not go beyond the limits in rebuking them. When he taught them carnality in 1 Corinthians he did not go beyond the limits of doctrine.

6. At the point of hearing the gospel these critics responded to grace, but now as believers at the point of rebuke they react with emotional revolt.

7. Why? Not because Paul has changed but because they have changed.

8. They have gone negative toward doctrine, producing scar tissue, emotional revolt of the soul and probably in a few cases reversionism.

9. Instead of taking the rebuke, rebounding, and taking the road back from emotional revolt and scar tissue they have simply gone deeper and deeper in reaction. This affects their entire life. They have no capacity for love, for life, for happiness. And they are miserable. They are so miserable they need a patsy, and Paul is their patsy.

10. As a result of emotional revolt of the soul they have great capacity for being critical of one of the greatest men who ever lived.

There is a second particle “for” in this verse, the same word gar but it is used a second time to indicate reality. This is was might be called an historical particle. Paul is now going to give the historical facts of the case. The admonition, the hard-nosed language of 1 Corinthians was within the framework of doctrine, it was not an overextension.

“we are come” — aorist active indicative of fqanw which means ‘we have advanced.’ Now he uses that adverb he had previously used in sarcasm. Now this is the historical use of the adverb and it means ‘we have advanced as far as you.’ This indicates that grace was Paul’s motive for coming to Corinth in the first place, and he has not switched from grace to legalism because he was harsh in 1 Corinthians. He was still the same grace person. His subject called for his very strong, hard-nosed attitude. Only human viewpoint desires Paul to stop his advance when it comes to carnality. Paul advanced first to Corinth, first with a letter on carnality, and later on he will come back in person. In other words, Paul’s advance in his ministry to the Corinthians has never halted from the time he presented the gospel and they responded. It is 1 Corinthians that has raised all the fuss. During the advance, the writing of 1 Corinthians, the Corinthians were crossed and from that time on they became very critical. The true of a believer always comes out when someone crosses them. Paul is still advancing. Part of the advance was to rebuke them with regard to carnality, and part of their advance is to take that rebuke and be disciplined under the authority of the Word of God and under the authority of the pastor who communicates it. By way of application, what kind of a believer you are depends on the same principle. When the pastor’s message steps on your toes, what do you do?

“in the gospel of Christ” — Paul’s advance to Corinth with the gospel was strictly divine viewpoint, strictly a grace, dogmatic presentation. His presentation of the gospel therefore was divine viewpoint. His entire function of grace was divine viewpoint, there has been no change in his modus operandi, just a change in his subject. His subject is carnality, they resent it; his subject is some other aspect of grace, they like it. But their mistake is not to accept his authority in all things. Principle: You cannot accept the authority of the pastor in the things you choose. If he is faithful in teaching the Word of God you must accept his authority in all things or you are no better than the Corinthians.

Translation: “For not reaching toward you [with the gospel], as we did not overextend ourselves: for as far as you also we have advanced in the gospel of Christ.”

Verse 15 — “Not boasting” is a present active participle from the verb kauxaomai which means to boast, to glory, to exult. Boasting is human viewpoint concept and disorientation to God’s grace. In this particular verse boasting is a sign of three things as far as Corinthians believers are concerned. It is a sign of scar tissue of the soul, emotional revolt of the soul, and reversionism. Boasting depends upon human ability, real or imagined, and human accomplishment, real or imagined. Therefore boasting at best is related to human good, at worst related to mental attitude sins. Since human good has no place in the plan of God, is excluded from operation grace, and since boasting is related to mental attitude sins of pride and human good, it has no place in the plan of God.

“of things without measure” — this is a prepositional phrase, e)ij, a directional preposition and here it means with reference to something, plus a)metroj which means to things not measured. So this should be translated, “Not boasting with reference to things beyond measure [or, not measured].” Things not measured or beyond measure are those concepts, thoughts and principles which do not line up with Bible doctrine. In other words, human viewpoint. Paul refuses to boast in human viewpoint or anything which is not related to the grace of God and therefore the plan of God.

“of other men’s labours” — which is really ‘in the sphere of other believers labours [kopoj].” Kopoj means exhaustive labours — “other men’s exhaustive labours.” As the founder of the Corinthians church Paul is not boasting. Therefore Paul is not out of line with doctrine when he expresses confidence on the other side of the conjunction. He is going to express confidence in the Corinthians where Corinth had been in the sphere of his labours to the point of exhaustion, therefore he has the right of expectation and he has the right of confidence with regard to that.

“but” — the particle de which indicates Paul’s positive attitude or the attitude of the divine viewpoint in the matter; ‘Having” — present active participle of e)xw means having and holding.

“hope” — e)plij refers to confidence: ‘having and holding confidence.’

“when your faith” — literally, ‘your doctrine’ here, pistij plus the definite article here which means a recognition and acceptance of Christian teaching, that which is believed or the body of belief, i.e. doctrine.

“is increased” is literally, ‘being increased,’ the present passive participle of a)ucanw which means to grow or to increase. The passive voice means it receives growth through doctrine. In other words, Paul anticipates that the Corinthian critics will recover from emotional revolt and from reversionism through a change of attitude toward doctrine. This recovery will extend the ministry of Paul into their lives again, and as Paul says, “we shall be enlarged,” the aorist passive infinitive of megalunw which actually means to be magnified. The KJV says ‘we shall be magnified’ but the Greek says doctrine shall be magnified; “by you” is ‘in the sphere of you all,’ e)n plus the locative means in the sphere of.

“according to our rule abundantly” is ‘to the maximum,’ e)ij plus perisseia.

Translation: “Not boasting with reference to things beyond measure [the norms and standards of the Word], in the sphere of other believers’ exhaustive labours; but having confidence that when your doctrine is being increased [daily function of GAP], doctrine shall be magnified in the sphere of you all to the maximum.”

Paul has confidence in doctrine, not in boasting. Doctrine causes recovery from scar tissue, emotional revolt and reversionism. Therefore in verse 16 they will be back on the production basis from the divine viewpoint.

Verse 16 — “To preach” is an aorist middle infinitive of e)uaggelizw. This means to communicate good news and the infinitive connotes a second result based upon the fist infinitive which was megalunw, ‘doctrine shall be magnified.’ As a result there will be a great missionary outreach and there will also be an increase in effective witnessing. In the local church where doctrine is magnified through the daily function of GAP the result is the dissemination of the gospel, not only in that area but in the beyond.

“in the regions beyond” is literally, ‘with reference to the beyond of you.’ Beyond you means next door, down the street, across town, or ten thousand miles away.

“not to boast” — kauxaomai; “in another of the same kind line,” but the word for ‘line’ is the locative kanon which means rule, the rule or the canon of scripture again. Hence, Paul refers to the false norms and standards of the Judaisers who will go far afield with their legalism and their human viewpoint, and have now reached Corinth. Paul will not boast or glory in their legalism or human viewpoint, he won’t cater to it in any way. Instead, he knows that when this reversionism is cured by the daily function of GAP they will then move out with the gospel into other areas.

“of things made ready” is also incorrectly translated in the KJV. We have a series of prepositional phrases: “of” is the preposition e)ij and means ‘with reference to.’ Not things made ready but ‘things prepared,’ the things prepared by human viewpoint are out of phase with God’s Word, with Bible doctrine, and therefore there is no basis of glorying, boasting, or exalting in them.

Translation: “To proclaim the gospel to the beyond of you, not to boast in another believer’s false standards with reference to things prepared.”

What does this mean?

1. Both witnessing and evangelism must be biblically accurate and presented on a grace basis. Therefore no believer in scar tissue, in emotional revolt, in reversionism, can effectively communicate the gospel. He always has an axe to grind and the axe to grind is legalism. He always adds something to the gospel, he always confuses the issue for unbeliever and believer alike.

2. No believer must ever glory or boast in another man’s norm or standard prepared from viewpoint.

3. Those who criticise Paul are boasting of others who evangelise in a different way. They are boasting of legalism, gimmicks, etc.

4. Maddison Avenue, Mickey Mouse evangelism may be appealing but it is human viewpoint and is incompatible with Bible doctrine.

5. There is no place for human viewpoint in witnessing. Hence, there is no place for gimmicks which replace the ministry of the Holy Spirit.

6. Gimmick witnessing is false standard prepared from the human viewpoint of those who are under scar tissue, emotional revolt, or reversionism.

Verse 17 demands that we understand the quotation from Jeremiah 9:23,24. The Jeremiah passage warns believers about reversionism.

Five things about this verse:

1. This verse is quoted from Jeremiah 9:23.

2. In the Jeremiah passage the believer is warned of failure to pass the prosperity test, for failure to pass the prosperity test means reversionism.

3. There were three general types of prosperity mentioned in Jeremiah 9:23 — spiritual, success, economic.

4. In verse 17 2 Corinthians 10 only spiritual success is quoted but all are implied.

5. Failure to pass the prosperity test in the spiritual realm inevitably leads to failure to pass the prosperity test in the success realm or in the economic realm.

“But” is the particle de used for a conjunction of contrast; “he that glorieth” — present active participle of kauxaomai, it means to boast. This implies immediately failure to pass the prosperity test and resultant reversionism.

“let him keep on glorying” — if you are going to boast, don’t do it. Change your boasting to glorying “in the Lord.” How do you keep on glorying in the Lord? To keep on doing something you have to do it every day. What you do you must do consistently. You keep on glorying in the Lord by taking in doctrine every day.

Translation: “But the one boasting — keep on glorying in the Lord.”

Verse 18 — the word for ‘commend’ is sunisthmi and it doesn’t mean to commend, it means to recommend. The word ‘himself’ here is a reflexive pronoun referring to the Corinthians who had recommended themselves, and by so doing had manifested reversionism and emotional revolt. “For not the one who recommends himself for favourable attention is approved.” In other words, sunisthmi doesn’t mean just to recommend, it means to recommend yourself for favourable attention.

“is approved” — ‘is’ is e)imi, present linear aktionsart. Then we have dikimoj for approved; “but whom the Lord recommends for favourable attention.”

Translation: “For not the one who recommends himself for favourable attention is approved [for blessing], but the one whom the Lord recommends for favourable attention.”

1. Under grace no believer promotes himself.

2. Under grace no believer can take credit to himself.

3. Therefore, since the Lord does the promoting there is no place for human criticism or judging another believer — especially the apostle Paul. Romans 14:4,10.

4. If the Lord doesn’t promote you, you are not promoted.

5. No human viewpoint gimmick will ever promote a believer — Joshua 3:7.

6. There is no such thing in Christianity as peer evaluation. Peer evaluation is meaningless, it turns everyone into a hypocrite. All evaluation is in the Lord’s hands and therefore we do our job as unto the Lord — Colossians 3:16,17.

7. We can only do our job through the Word, as per Colossians 3:16. Therefore criticising, judging, slandering another believer, represents absence of doctrine, scar tissue, emotional revolt, reversionism.

8. Judging another believer interferes with divine prerogatives. Judging, then, becomes a part of the human viewpoint of reversionism.