Albert Barnes Commentary 2 Corinthians 11

Introduction to 2 Corinthians Chapter 11

This chapter is connected in its general design with the preceding one. The object of Paul is to vindicate himself from the charges which had been brought against him, and especially to vindicate his claims to the apostolic office. It is ironical in its character, and is of course severe upon the false teachers who had accused him in Corinth.

The main purpose is to state his claims to the office of an apostle, and especially to show that when he mentioned those claims, or even boasted of his labors, he had ground for doing so. It would seem that they had charged him with "folly" in boasting as he had done.

Probably the false teachers were loud in proclaiming their own praise, but represented Paul as guilty of folly in praising himself. He therefore (2 Corinthians 11:1) asks them if they could bear with him a little further in his folly, and entreats them to do it. This verse contains the scope of the chapter; and the remainder of the chapter is an enumeration of the causes which he had for his boasting, though probably each reason is adapted to some form of accusation brought against him.

Having entreated them to bear with him a little further, he states the reasons why he was disposed to go into this subject at all (2 Corinthians 10:2–4). It was not because he was disposed to sound his own praise, but it was from love to them.

He had espoused them as a chaste virgin to Christ. He was afraid that their affections would be alienated from the Redeemer.

He reminded them of the manner in which Eve was tempted; and he reminded them that by the same smooth and plausible arts their affections might also be stolen away, and that they might be led into sin.

He reminds them that there was danger of their receiving another gospel, and expresses the apprehension that they had done it, and that they had embraced a deceiver (2 Corinthians 11:4).

Having made this general statement of his design, Paul now goes more into detail in answering the objections against him, and in showing the reasons which he had for boasting as he had done. The statement in answer to their objections relates to the following points:

1. He had supposed that he was not behind the chief of the apostles. He had supposed that he had claims to the apostolic office of as high an order as any of them. Called to the work as he had been, and laboring as he had done, he had regarded himself as having an indisputable claim to the office of an apostle. True, they had charged him with being rude in speech—a charge which he was not disposed to deny; but in a far more important point than that he had showed that he was not disqualified for the apostolic office. In knowledge, the main qualification, he had not been deficient, as probably even his opponents were disposed to admit (2 Corinthians 11:5–6).

2. He had not deprived himself of the claims to the office and honors of an apostle by declining to receive from them a compensation, and by preaching the gospel without charge (2 Corinthians 11:7–9). Probably they had alleged that this was a proof that he knew that he had no claim to the honors of an apostle. He therefore states exactly how this was. He had received a support, but he had robbed other churches to do it. And even when he was with them, he had received supplies from a distant church, so that he might not be burdensome to them. The charge was therefore groundless, that he knew that he had no right to the support due to an apostle.

3. He declares it to be his fixed purpose that no one should prevent his boasting in that manner. And this he did because he loved them, and because he would save them from the snares of those who would destroy them. He therefore stated the true character of those who attempted to deceive them. They were the ministers of Satan, appearing as the ministers of righteousness, as Satan himself was transformed into an angel of light (2 Corinthians 11:10–15).

4. Paul claims the privilege of boasting as a fool a little further (2 Corinthians 11:16). And he claims that as others boasted, and as they were allowed to do so by the Corinthians, he had also a right to do the same thing. They suffered them to boast; they allowed them to do it, even if they devoured them, and struck them, and took their property. It was but fair, therefore, that he should be allowed to boast a little of what he was, and of what he had done (2 Corinthians 11:17–20).

5. He goes, therefore, into an extended and most tender description of what he had suffered, and of his claims to their favorable regard. He had all the personal advantages arising from birth which they could pretend to. He was a Hebrew, of the seed of Abraham, and a minister of Christ (2 Corinthians 11:21–23). He had endured far more labors and dangers than they had done; and, in order to set this before them, he enumerates the trials through which he had passed, and states the labors which constantly came upon him (2 Corinthians 11:23–30). Of these things, of his sufferings, and trials, and infirmities, he felt that he had a right to speak, and these constituted a far higher claim to the confidence of the Christian church than the endowments of which his adversaries boasted.

6. As another instance of peril and suffering, he refers to the fact that his life was endangered when he was in Damascus, and that he barely escaped by being lowered down from the wall of the city (2 Corinthians 11:31–33). The conclusion which Paul doubtless intends should be derived from all this is, that he had far higher grounds of claim to the office of an apostle than his adversaries would admit, or than they could furnish themselves.

He admitted that he was weak, and subject to infirmities; he did not lay claim to the graces of a polished elocution, as they did; but if a life of self-denial and toil, of an honest devotion to the cause of truth at imminent and frequent hazard of life, constituted an evidence that he was an apostle, he had that evidence.

They appealed to their birth, their rank, their endowments as public speakers. In the quiet and comfort of a congregation and church established to their hands; in reaping the benefits of the labors of others; and in the midst of enjoyments, they coolly laid claims to the honors of the ministerial office, and denied his claims.

In trial, and peril, and labor, and poverty; in scourges, and imprisonments, and shipwrecks; in hunger and thirst; in unwearied traveling from place to place; and in the care of all the churches, were his claims to their respect and confidence, and he was willing that any one that chose should make the comparison between them. Such was his foolish boasting; such his claims to their confidence and regard.

Would to God. Greek, "I would," ofelon. This expresses earnest desire, but in the Greek there is no appeal to God. The sense would be well expressed by, "Oh that," or "I earnestly wish."

Ye could bear with me. That you would bear patiently with me; that you would hear me patiently, and suffer me to speak of myself.

In my folly. Folly in boasting. The idea seems to be, "I know that boasting is generally foolish, and that it is not to be indulged in; but though it is to be generally regarded as folly, yet circumstances compel me to it, and I ask your indulgence in it." It is possible also that his opponents accused him of folly in boasting so much of himself.

And indeed bear with me. Margin: ye do bear. But the text has probably the correct rendering. It is the expression of an earnest wish that they would tolerate him a little in this. He entreats them to bear with him, because he was constrained to it.

{*} "folly" "foolish boasting" {1} "bear with me"Hosea 2:19–20

For I am jealous over you. This verse expresses the reason why he was inclined to speak of his attainments and of what he had done. It was because he loved them and because he feared that they were in danger of being seduced from the simplicity of the gospel.

The phrase, "I am jealous," (zhlw), properly means I ardently love you; I am full of tender attachment to you. The word was usual among the Greeks to denote an ardent affection of any kind (from zew, to boil, to be fervid or fervent). The precise meaning is to be determined by the connection. (See Barnes on 1 Corinthians 12:31).

The word may denote the jealousy which is felt from a fear of departure from fidelity on the part of those whom we love, or it may denote a fervid and glowing attachment. The meaning here probably is that Paul had a strong attachment to them.

With godly jealousy. Greek, "with the zeal of God," (yeou zhlw), that is, with very great or vehement zeal—in accordance with the Hebrew custom when the name God is used to denote anything notably great, as the phrase "mountains of God," meaning very elevated or lofty mountains. The mention of this ardent attachment suggested what follows. His mind reverted to the tenderness of the marriage relation, and to the possibility that in that relation the affections might be estranged. He makes use of this figure, therefore, to inform them of the change which he feared.

For I have espoused you, etc. The word here used, armozw, properly means to adapt, to fit, to join together. Hence, to join in wedlock, to marry. Here it means to marry to another; and the idea is that Paul had been the agent employed in forming a connection, similar to the marriage connection, between them and the Savior.

The allusion here is not certain. It may refer to the custom which prevailed when friends made and procured the marriage for the bridegroom; or it may refer to some custom like that which prevailed among the Lacedemonians, where persons were employed to form the lives and manners of virgins and prepare them for the duties of the married life.

The sense is clear. Paul claims that it was by his instrumentality that they had been united to the Redeemer. Under him they had been brought into a relation to the Savior similar to that sustained by the bride to her husband; and he felt all the interest in them which naturally grew out of that fact, and from a desire to present them blameless to the pure Redeemer. The relation of the church to Christ is often represented by marriage. (Revelation 19:7; Revelation 21:9).

To one husband. To the Redeemer.

That I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ. The allusion here, according to Doddridge, is to the custom among the Greeks "of having an officer whose business it was to educate and form young women, especially those of rank and prominence, designed for marriage, and then to present them to those who were to be their husbands; and if this officer through negligence permitted them to be corrupted between the betrothal and the consummation of the marriage, great blame would fall upon him." Such a responsibility Paul felt. So anxious was he for the entire purity of that church which was to constitute the bride, the Lamb's wife; so anxious that all who were connected with that church should be presented pure in heaven.

But I fear. Paul had just compared the church to a virgin, soon to be presented as a bride to the Redeemer. The mention of this seems to have suggested to him the fact that the first woman was deceived and led astray by the tempter, and that the same thing might occur with the church, which he so desired to be preserved pure. The grounds of his fear were:

1. That Satan had seduced the first woman, thus demonstrating that even the most holy were in danger of being led astray by temptation; and
2. That special efforts were made to seduce them from the faith. The persuasive arts of the false teachers, the power of philosophy, and the attractive and corrupting influences of the world, he had reason to suppose, might be employed to seduce them from simple attachment to Christ.

Lest by any means. Lest somehow (mhpwv). It is implied that many means would be used and all arts would be tried. Furthermore, it suggested that these arts, in some way they perhaps little suspected, would be successful unless they were constantly on their guard.

As the serpent beguiled Eve. See Genesis 3:1-11. The word serpent here undoubtedly refers to Satan, who was the agent that deceived Eve. See John 8:44; 1 John 3:8; Revelation 12:9; 20:2.

Paul did not mean that they were in danger of being corrupted in the same way, but that similar efforts would be made to seduce them. Satan adapts his temptations to the character and circumstances of the tempted. He varies them from age to age and applies them in such a way as best to secure his object. Therefore, all should be on their guard. No one knows the way in which he will approach them, but all may know that he will approach them in some way.

Through his subtilty. See Genesis 3:1. By his craft, art, wiles (en th panourgia). The word implies that shrewdness, cunning, and craft were employed. A tempter always employs cunning and art to accomplish his object. The precise way in which Satan accomplished his object is not certainly known. Perhaps the cunning consisted in assuming an attractive form—a fascinating manner fitted to charm. Or perhaps it lay in the idea that eating the forbidden fruit had endowed a serpent with the power of reason and speech above all other animals, and that it might be expected to produce a similar transformation in Eve. In any case, there were false pretenses and appearances; and Paul feared that such methods would be employed by the false teachers to seduce and allure them. (See Barnes on 2 Corinthians 11:13–14).

So your minds should be corrupted. So your thoughts should be perverted. So your hearts should be alienated. The mind is corrupted when the affections are alienated from the proper object, and when the soul is filled with unholy plans, and purposes, and desires.

From the simplicity that is in Christ:

1. From simple and single-hearted devotedness to him—from pure and unmixed attachment to him. The fear was that their affections would be fixed on other objects, and that the singleness and unity of their devotedness to him would be destroyed.
2. From his pure doctrines. By the admixture of philosophy, by the opinions of the world, there was danger that their minds should be turned away from their hold on the simple truths which Christ had taught.
3. From that simplicity of mind and heart, that childlike candor and docility, that freedom from all guile, dishonesty, and deception, which so eminently characterized the Redeemer. Christ had a single aim; was free from all guile; was purely honest; never used any improper arts; never resorted to false appearances, and never deceived. His followers should, in like manner, be artless and guileless. There should be no mere cunning, no trick, no craft in advancing their purposes. There should be nothing but honesty and truth in all that they say. Paul was afraid that they would lose this beautiful simplicity and artlessness of character and manner. He feared they would insensibly be led to adopt the maxims of mere cunning, policy, expediency, and seductive arts, which prevailed so much in the world. This was a danger imminent among the shrewd and cunning people of Greece, but it is confined to no time and no place. Christians should be more guileless than even children are, as pure and free from trick, and from art and cunning, as was the Redeemer himself.
4. From the simplicity in worship which the Lord Jesus commended and required. The worship which the Redeemer designed to establish was simple, unostentatious, and pure—strongly in contrast with the gorgeousness and corruption of the pagan worship, and even with the imposing splendor of the Jewish temple service. He intended that it should be adapted to all lands and be such as could be offered by all classes of men—a pure worship, claiming first the homage of the heart, and then such simple external expressions as should best exhibit the homage of the heart. How easily might this be corrupted! What temptations there were to corrupt it! Those accustomed to the magnificence of the temple service might suppose the Messiah's religion could not be less gorgeous than what foreshadowed His coming. Similarly, those accustomed to the splendid rites of pagan worship might suppose the true religion ought not to be less costly and splendid than the false religion had been. If so much expense had been lavished on false religions, how natural to suppose that at least equal costliness should be bestowed on the true religion! Accordingly, the history of the church, for a considerable part of its existence, has been little more than a record of the various forms in which the simple worship, instituted by the Redeemer, has been corrupted, until all that was gorgeous in pagan ceremonies and splendid in the Jewish ritual has been introduced as a part of Christian worship.
5. From simplicity in dress and manner of living. The Redeemer's dress was simple. His manner of living was simple. His requirements demand great simplicity and plainness of apparel and manner of life, 1 Peter 3:3–6; 1 Timothy 2:9–10.

Yet how much proneness there is at all times to depart from this! What a besetting sin it has been, in all ages, to the church of Christ! And how much care should be taken to ensure that the very simplicity that is in Christ is observed by all who bear the Christian name!

For if he that cometh, etc. There is much difficulty in this verse in ascertaining the true sense, and commentators have been greatly perplexed and divided in opinion, especially with regard to the true sense of the last clause, "ye might well bear with him." It is difficult to ascertain whether Paul meant to speak ironically or seriously, and different views will prevail as different views are taken of his intention.

If it is supposed that he meant to speak seriously, the sense will be, "If the false teacher could recommend a better Saviour than I have done, or a Spirit better able to sanctify and save, then there would be propriety in your receiving him, and tolerating his doctrines." If he spoke ironically, then the sense will be, "You cannot easily bear with me; but if a man comes among you preaching a false Saviour, and a false Spirit, and a false doctrine, then you bear with him without any difficulty." Yet another interpretation has been proposed, supposing that the word "me" should be supplied at the close of the verse instead of "him;" and then the sense would be, "If you receive so readily one who preaches another gospel, one who comes with far less evidence that he is sent from God than I have, and if you thus show yourselves ready to accept any kind of teaching that may be brought to you, you might at least bear with me also." Amidst this variety, it is not easy to ascertain the true sense.

To me it seems probable, however, that Paul spoke seriously, and that our translation has expressed the true sense. The main idea is doubtless that Paul felt there was danger that they would be corrupted. If they could bring a better gospel, a more perfect system, and proclaim a more perfect Saviour, there would be no such danger of negative change.

But that could not be expected. It could not be done. If, therefore, they preached any other Saviour or any other gospel—if they departed from the truths which he had taught them—it would be for the worse. It could not be otherwise. The Saviour whom he preached was perfect, and was able to save.

The Spirit whom he preached was perfect, and able to sanctify. The gospel which he preached was perfect, and there was no hope that it could be improved. Any change must be for the worse; and as the false teachers varied from his instructions, there was every reason to fear that their minds would be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.

The principal idea therefore is, that the gospel which he preached was as perfect as it could be, and that any change would be for the worse. No doctrine which others brought could be recommended because it was better. By the phrase "he that cometh" is meant, doubtless, the false teacher in Corinth.

Preacheth another Jesus. Proclaims one who is more worthy of your love, and more able to save. If he who comes among you and claims your affections can point out another Christ who is more worthy of your confidence, then I admit that you would do well to receive him. It is implied here that this could not be done. The Lord Jesus, in his character and work, is perfect. No Saviour superior to him has been provided; none but he is necessary.

Whom we have not preached. Let them show, if they can, that they have any Saviour to make known whom we have not preached. We have given all the evidence that we are sent by God, and have thus laid every claim to your confidence for having made known the Saviour that they could possibly assert. They, with all their pretensions, have no Saviour to tell you of that we have not already made you acquainted with. Therefore, they have no claims in this regard that we do not also possess.

Or if ye receive another spirit, etc. If they can preach to you another Sanctifier and Comforter; or if under their ministry you have received higher proofs of the power of the Spirit in performing miracles, in the gift of tongues, in renewing sinners, and in comforting your hearts. The idea is, that Paul had proclaimed the existence and agency of the same Holy Spirit which they did; that his preaching had been attended with as striking proofs of the presence and power of that Spirit; that he had as much evidence of a divine commission from such an influence attending his labors as they could possibly have. They could reveal no spirit better able to sanctify and save; none who had more power than the Holy Spirit whom they had received under the preaching of Paul; and there was therefore no reason why they should be "corrupted" or seduced from the simple doctrines which they had received, and follow others.

Or another gospel, etc. A gospel more worthy of your acceptance—one more free, more full, more rich in promises; one that revealed a better plan of salvation, or that was more full of comfort and peace.

Ye might well bear with him. The margin has 'with me.' The word "him" is not in the Greek but is probably to be supplied. The sense is, there would then be some excuse for your conduct. There would be some reason why you should welcome such teachers. But if this cannot be done, if they can preach no other and no better gospel and Saviour than I have done, then there is no excuse.

There is no reason why you should follow such teachers and forsake those who were your earliest guides in religion. Let us never forsake the gospel which we have until we are sure we can get a better. Let us adhere to the simple doctrines of the New Testament until someone can furnish better and clearer doctrines.

Let us follow the rules of Christ in our opinions and our conduct—our plans, our mode of worship, our dress, and our amusements, engagements, and company—until we can certainly ascertain that there are better rules. A person is foolish for making any change until he or she has evidence of likely self-improvement: and it has yet to be proved that anyone has ever bettered himself or his family by forsaking the simple doctrines of the Bible and embracing a philosophical speculation; by forsaking the scriptural views of the Saviour as the incarnate God and embracing the views which represent him as a mere man; by forsaking the simple and plain rules of Christ about our manner of life, our dress, and our words and actions, and embracing those which are recommended by mere fashion and by the customs of a worldly and fashionable society.

For I suppose, etc. I think that I gave as good evidence that I was commissioned by God as the most eminent of the apostles. In the miracles which I performed; in the abundance of my labours, and in my success, I suppose that I did not fall behind any of them. If so, I ought to be regarded and treated as an apostle; and if so, then the false teachers should not be allowed to supplant me in your affections, or to seduce you from the doctrines which I have taught. On the evidence that Paul was equal to others in the proper proof of a commission from God, See Barnes 2 Corinthians 11:21, 22-30.