Michael's Abbey Bible Study - 2 Corinthians Chapter 2

1 But I determined this for my own sake, that I would not come to you in sorrow again. Explicitly, this is why Paul did not come to Corinth a third time. He wanted his next visit to be one of joy, not another visit in grief. And it would have been grief to him as well as the Corinthians.
2 For if I cause you sorrow, who then makes me glad but the one whom I made sorrowful? The sorrow referred to here is talking about the letter Paul wrote, (the harsh 3rd letter between 1st and 2nd Corinthians,) and the reason for that letter. (See verses 2:4 and 7:8.) However, the language is not specific to a particular incident or problem. (Although he gets specific later in this chapter.) This is mostly referring to a specific person who attacked Paul directly. And until that is resolved it would be a sorrowful thing for him to come. With people in a group like a family or church there is collateral damage to people not directly involved.
3 This is the very thing I wrote you, so that when I came, I would not have sorrow from those who ought to make me rejoice; having confidence in you all that my joy would be the joy of you all. Paul is vague in the Greek in the beginning of this verse. Most translations make a decision about what is meant. But it is probably best to leave it as a vague, "I wrote as I did:"
The middle phrase is looking forward to a future visit, again wanting this to be a joyous occasion rather than another visit brining sorrow.
The end phrase emphasizes a sure confidence existed in Paul that his joy would be a joy shared by everyone.
In other words, the purpose of the harsh letter he sent was to correct things in the church at Corinth that he saw during his second visit. And it is likely he thought the situation would be resolved prior to his planned third visit.
4 For out of much affliction and anguish of heart I wrote to you with many tears; not so that you would be made sorrowful, but that you might know the love which I have especially for you. This verse makes it clear that the letter Paul is referring to is not 1st Corinthians, but another letter. Thus we have recorded in scripture that there were at least four letters from Paul to the church at Corinth. But only the 2nd and 4th were scriptural.
Paul's 3rd letter was harsh, but it was written out of love. Like when my first granddaughter was playing in the road at age 2, my tone was harsh to her ears such that it made her cry. But I was solely motivated by my love and care for her wellbeing. And I quickly comforted her, and continued to do so for a long time so she understood what it was about.
Paul was confident they would understand that his motivation was out of love for them when he wrote it. But now he is spelling it out to be sure they understand.
5 But if any has caused sorrow, he has caused sorrow not to me, but in some degree - in order not to say too much - to all of you. Here we read that the center of the problem the previous (non-scriptural) letter addressed was an individual. The way this is written makes it clear that it was Paul that was the target of the vitriol this person said in the church.
Paul states that, despite being the target of the attack, he was not brought to sorrow by it. But it was the whole church at Corinth was brought to sorrow by what this individual said, although he qualifies it as "some measure" of sorrow and that he must not put this too strongly. Implied is that the person who attacked Paul in the church intending to bring Paul to sorrow brought himself to sorrow instead. His attack was shameful to the person launching it. And some of the shame spills onto the church as a whole because this happened in their congregation. This is a failure of church discipline, which brings the sorrow/shame mostly upon the leadership.
There is a common misconception that the offender Paul speaks about in 2nd Corinthians is the one who Paul directed them to disfellowship with in 1st Corinthians that was sleeping with his father's wife. However, this is reading into the text what is not there. This is clearly a separate person. We are not told what the results were regarding the man in 1st Corinthians.
6 Sufficient for such a one is this punishment which was inflicted by the majority, The majority of the church were not in alignment with the attack on Paul in the church, and inflicted an unspecified punishment. It is likely that this was public condemnation and some level of disfellowship. That it was sufficient means that it accomplished the goal of remediating the offender. Whatever it was, it was enough to fit the offense and it shouldn't go further.
7 so that on the contrary you should rather forgive and comfort him, otherwise such a one might be overwhelmed by excessive sorrow. Now they should forgive and comfort the offender. (That he needs comfort indicates there was condemnation and disfellowship.) If the punishment continues he may be so overwhelmed that he abandons the church and even Christ. The purpose of confronting and punishing bad behavior is to correct it so that fellowship may be in harmony. If he leaves the faith then no correction has been achieved.
To clarify, we are not responsible if an offender chooses to disfellowship rather than to accept their fault and correct their behavior. But we should moderate our response to fit the offense. It is very easy for a group to overdo it.
How this usually goes overboard is that a person makes their own condemnation equal to the sin, but so do dozens of others so the condemnation is waaaaaay out of proportion by the number of people who do so. This is made worse by leadership trying to handle things "quietly" for some reason. Perhaps they want to spare the feelings of the offender, or they want to avoid embarrassment to the church. But whatever the reason, this always backfires and makes things worse. Either the person gets clobbered, public perception becomes that the church does nothing about inequity, or the offender just shrugs it off and doesn't change. Paul publicly called out Peter for his bad behavior, (as Peter's behavior was in public and therefore required a public rebuke.) But I would argue that keeping things under wraps and behind closed doors only gives more ammunition to Satan. And I believe this is why the sin and behavior of people in 99.9% of churches is indistinguishable from the pagan culture around us.
8 Wherefore I urge you to reaffirm your love for him. Paul's call for righteous behavior and his instruction on church discipline are for the benefit of the individual and the church. Thus, his call for reaffirming their love for the offender now that he has been sufficiently disciplined is not a contradiction or a reversal of the previously endorsed action. In fact, it is the fulfillment of the correction. Correction means to fix the error, and a big part of that in the church is the restoration of the love and fellowship with the repentant. There are two mistakes churches today make, and they are opposite sides of the pendulum. On the one side there is a complete lack of discipline which will allow bad actors to poison the church. On the other side there is a discipline that is so overboard and/or never lets up leading to the destruction of the offender. This will also destroy the church. Christ calls on us to discipline for the purpose of restoration, which requires love and discipline. To be honest, a failure to discipline is a failure to love at all.
9 For to this end also I wrote, so that I might put you to the test, whether you are obedient in all things. While the nature of Paul's third letter to the Corinthians was to correct problems, specifically the person who openly attacked Paul and the church for tolerating it, here Paul says that it was also for the purpose of testing the church. But most importantly, the purpose of that letter and this one is for their well-being as well as that of the offender. It is the soul that matters. If the offender wouldn't repent, that is turn away from their sin, then they are lost anyway. And it is better to disfellowship with them than to allow them to poison the well and lose many more souls.
10 But one whom you forgive anything, I forgive also; for indeed what I have forgiven, if I have forgiven anything, I did it for your sakes in the presence of Christ, Here Paul reverses the order. Who you forgive, I forgive instead of forgive as I forgive. This implies that they should initiate forgiveness on their own. Also, Paul is saying his forgiveness is for their sakes. This may be because their tolerance of the offender needs his forgiveness. At the end Paul invokes it is as if Christ was present, which is something we should keep in mind when it comes to forgiving others. Jesus is there with us and he forgave us of so much more. Paul instructs this explicitly in Colossians 3:13 and Ephesians 4:32, and Jesus in Mark 11:25 and Matthew 6:14.
11 so that no advantage would be taken of us by Satan, for we are not ignorant of his schemes. Ultimately, forgiveness and restoration are to prevent giving an opportunity to Satan. If the punishment of the majority was too harsh and/or unending the offender would be lost to "excessive despair." Not to mention the church itself would be subjecting itself to divisiveness and factionalism that would eventually destroy it. (Although failing to discipline will destroy a church just as effectively.)
12 Now when I came to Troas for the gospel of Christ and when a door was opened for me in the Lord, This trip is not recorded elsewhere in scripture. This is referring to Alexandria Troas which is a port for travelers between Asia and Macedonia.
Preaching the gospel is always the focus of Paul. The door that was opened is not specified. But that some person or group that wouldn't normally be open to the gospel is likely, like a high priest or other public official.
13 I had no rest for my spirit, not finding Titus my brother; but taking my leave of them, I went on to Macedonia. Paul frequently relied on the assistance of others. Even in the writing of his letters he most often dictated to someone else. Others would assist in the teaching. Titus was not there as was expected, which left all the labor to Paul.
14 But thanks be to God, who always leads us in triumph in Christ, and manifests through us the sweet aroma of the knowledge of Him in every place. Paul is always thankful to and giving credit to God for everything. It is a humble and right attitude for Christians to emulate. Even more impressive is his view of life as a Christian being always led in triumph. Considering the trials and tribulations he has gone through, which he talks about in chapter 11, and the fact that he is again having to correct the Corinthian church that is so easily pulled away from from the Gospel, this is a remarkable attitude. However, it shows that Paul's point of view is focused on Christ's return, making hardships and setbacks in the now much less of a deal.
Also notable is that Paul refers to the knowledge of God being spread everywhere he goes with the metaphor of a sweet aroma, like incense in the Jewish or pagan temple. Knowledge of God should spread like a sweet aroma wherever we go.
An important principle is that knowledge is a requirement to know Jesus, and to defend against false teaching. The Corinthians were clearly filled with the Holy Spirit, yet fell for false teaching over and over. Thus the Spirit alone cannot keep us safe as God does not force us to accept the truth. It is knowledge of the true gospel that protects us from the counterfeit.
15 For we are a fragrance of Christ to God among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing; Everyone can be divided into two groups, those that are on the road to salvation and those that are on the road to hell. Therefore, being a fragrance of God to these two groups means being such to everyone. It should not be a surprise to anyone that we are disciples of Christ.
16 to the one an aroma from death to death, to the other an aroma from life to life. And who is adequate for these things? Knowledge of God causes a different reaction in the two groups. To those on the path to salvation, it is a sweet smell of life. To those that are hell-bound it is the smell of death. It is the recipient that is different, not God. Thus, we should not be surprised or dismayed when some people react negatively to knowledge of God. That should not stop us. But we should take comfort in the knowledge that perhaps we planted a seed. The first time people in a church had a bad reaction to things in scripture was a surprise until I realized that being in church doesn't take one out of the hell-bound group any more than sitting in a garage takes one out of being a human and make one a car.
While the end of the verse could be an acknowledgment of dependence on God for this work, it is much more likely that this is setting up the argument against the false apostles in chapter 11.
17 For we are not like many, peddling the word of God, but as from sincerity, but as from God, we speak in Christ in the sight of God. It is not just that some ore used the word of God for personal profit. Peddling in the Greek, kapeleno, is more than just selling, but is adulterating and/or corrupting the word. In other words, they are altering it in order to make it more marketable, with the end result that it has become a false gospel that leads to death rather than life.
In contrast, Paul and his team speak from sincere truth, as from God as they got the message from Jesus, speak in Him, and with God as the witness to the truth.

Scripture quotations taken from the NASB © The Lockman Foundation.

If you have a question, you can find the email address to write to on the FAQ Page under the Questions FAQ.

2 Cor. 1   -   2 Corinthians   -   2 Cor. 3

Bible Study Page   -   Michael's Abbey