LINES OF LOYALTY

We Christians dare not compromise our faith by making unholy alliances with the idols of our culture. Idolatry tests loyalty. Paul writes, "Wherefore, come out from the middle of them and be separate, says the Lord. And don't touch what is unclean and I will welcome you" (2 Cor. 6:17). There are three commands followed by a promise. The commands are 1) come out, 2) be separate, and 3) don't touch. The promise is a warm reception from God when we obey his demands for loyalty. 

Paul cites the LXX version of Isaiah 52:11 to make his point. The final line comes from Ezekiel 20:34/41 where God promises to gather His people to Him when they leave the pagan world of idolatry (Archer and Chirichigno, OT Quotations in the NT, 118-119). Paul draws a parallel between Christians in his day and Israel during the days of Isaiah and Ezekiel. The prophets picture a time when God restores His people after their years of living under the idolatrous systems of Assyria and Babylon. God proclaims the good news of God's salvation. "How lovely on the mountains are the feet of him who brings good news ... and says "Your God reigns" (Isaiah 52:7). In that day, they were to get out of the pagan world of idolatry without touching anything unclean because they were the carriers of God's holy vessels.

The Corinthian Christians lived under the Roman patronage system which pressured ambitious believers to build alliances with influential idolaters in order to climb the social ladder of success (Chow, "Patronage in Roman Corinth," in Paul and Empire, edited by Horsley, 104-125). A businessman would align himself with a wealthy patron who controlled the contracts in his world. The wealthy patron was in turn aligned with a patron god and the temple devoted to that god. Maintaining membership in that temple cult was the key to success in the political and economic world of Corinth - the way to power and prestige. A businessman showed his loyalty by attending ceremonies related to birth, death, and marriage in the temple of the patron god of his business.

"Temples were the restaurants of antiquity" (Witherington, Conflict & Community in Corinth, 188). The temples had dining rooms where the wealthy and powerful held their major social events. There were two stages to these feasts. The first stage was the "symposium" which combined a banquet with political speeches. Party loyalty was combined with pagan idolatry. The second stage was the "convivia," essentially a Roman drinking party (Witherington, 191ff). Participation in such events opened the door to success in Corinth, and many Christians were compromising their faith by pledging loyalty to the patron gods of politics and money in order to achieve affluence and influence.

Come out and be separated from such unholy alliances even if it costs your career! The verb "be separate" (ἀφορίσθητε) means to exclude or excommunicate one's self, but in the passive (as here) it can be translated "be separate" (BDAG, 127). We are not even to touch (ἅπτεσθε) anything unclean. The verb can mean to eat anything unclean (BDAG, 102) which fits the context of a feast. The word "unclean" (ἀκαθάρτου) refers to anything connected to idolatry because the idols pollute whatever they touch (BDAG, 29). As Christians, we must not enter into any relationship which endangers our loyalty to Christ. The relationships may seem benign at first but later create a dependency that draws us away from our Lord.

God promises to welcome us when we avoid such alliances. The "and" (κἀγὼ) can be translated "and I in turn" or "and I for my part" (BDAG, 386). Our part is to obey Him. His part is to welcome us. The verb is future tense (εἰσδέξομαι) and means to take in, receive or welcome as a guest (BDAG, 232). We must draw sharp lines of loyalty between the world's idols and our Lord. It may cost us to be true to Christ. We may face, financial, social, and political repercussions, but we must avoid any dependency on a party or person that supersedes Christ. When we maintain clear lines of loyalty to Christ, we will enjoy His warm welcome in life.

LIVING GOD OR DEAD IDOLS?

Idolatry in the church compromises the witness of Christians because idolatry pollutes our worship. The surest way to kill our witness is to allow idols to cloud our worship. Paul wrote, "Or what agreement has the temple of God with idols? Because we ourselves are the temple of the living God" (2 Cor. 6:16).

We think of idols as those little statues that people made and put in their homes or in their sacred places. Those graven images were icons of something in the heart. The goddess of fertility was an icon for the desire to have children. Another idol was the god of wine and sex, an icon of the desire for pleasure apart from God. The god of power represented the power people wanted for themselves.

Americans are polytheists too. We build our spectacular temples to the icons of money, pleasure, and power.

An idol is someone, something or some desire that becomes more important than God.

The reason that idolatry must not be allowed to infiltrate the church is that we are the temple of the Living God. The better textual evidence reads "we are" (ἐσμεν) instead of "you are" (ἐστε) the temple. The "we" (ἡμεῖς) is emphatic because the pronoun doubles the verb and because it is first in the clause. The "living" (ζῶντος) God stresses the difference between the Christian God and the idols in the pagan temple which the Corinthians frequented for social, economic and business reasons. The idols of the world are dead. The God we worship is alive.

Temple (ναὸς) originally meant a dwelling place or home. However, it came to refer specifically to the dwelling place of a god in the ancient world. More specifically, the word was used for the inner sanctuary of the temple as opposed to the temple complex (τὸ ἱερόν) referring to the collection of buildings that made up the temple at Jerusalem (NIDNTT, 3:781).  When Paul writes that we are the temple of the Living God, he is talking about the sanctuary where God resides. He cites Leviticus 26:12 and Ezekiel 37:27 in support. "I will live (ἐνοικήσω), and I will walk about (ἐμπεριπατήσω) among them" (cf. Jer. 31:31; Hughes, 2 Corinthians, 253-254). God does not dwell in a house made of brick and stone. We are the home of God on earth. 

When Paul writes that we are the temple of God, is he speaking corporately or individually? Is the temple of God the physical body of an individual believer (1 Cor. 6:19) or the church as a whole (1 Cor. 3:16)? Paul is primarily thinking about the corporate body of Christ, the church as opposed to individual Christians in this verse (Martin, 2 Corinthians, 202; Hughes, 2 Corinthians, 252) for the following reasons. 1) The context is corporate. Paul is writing to the body as a whole - the church - not individual Christians in this chapter. 2) The pronouns are all plural pronouns. Paul writes that "we" (ἡμεῖς) are the temple. God lives and walks among "them" (αὐτοῖς). God will be "their" (αὐτῶν) God and "they" (αὐτοὶ) will be His people. 3) The imagery pictures God living and walking among the people who make up the corporate church. The pronoun can certainly be translated "among" (ἐν) which fits the sense of the passage.

Qumran, in Paul's day, had separated from the temple complex in Jerusalem to establish a spiritual community that worshiped God in purity and in truth. They believed the priesthood had corrupted the temple worship. The community of Qumran was now the true sanctuary of God. Paul reflects this corporate sense when he thinks about the believing community among whom God resides. He lodges in our gathered assembly and walks among the believers who worship Him. We are His sanctuary much like Qumran viewed their community as the sanctuary of God (NIDNTT, 3:783-784). Therefore, we must be separated from the idols of this world if we are to truly be the sanctuary of God in our worship. His presence among us in worship drives away all idols that might compete for our devotion instead of God.

The Old Testament Psalms picture the temple of God not so much as a place of ritual sacrifice and priestly functions but as a place where the presence of God fills the lives of those gathered (NIDNTT, 3:782-783). Believers long for the presence of God in the house of the Lord (Ps. 27:4). Believers cry out to God for help (Ps. 28:2) and worship God in His holy temple (Ps. 138:2). A temple is a place of spiritual comfort (Ps. 65:4) where God responds to our deepest needs (Ps. 18:6) and demonstrates His power to strengthen us (Ps. 29:9). So it is in our corporate worship as the temple of God on earth.

Western Christianity tends to be individualistic and miss the power of corporate worship. Corporate worship is the visible expression of the presence of God on earth. The sanctuary of God is not the building but the people. True worship is infectious as people see the presence of God in our gathered assembly. Our witness is most powerful when it rises out of our corporate worship. Our worship as a community drives our witness for Christ.

The presence of the Living God lodges within us and walks about among us in our gathered worship since we, the church, are the living, breathing house of God.

PARTING COMPANY

The lure of success in this life seduces us into mismated relationships. Paul commands us not to become entangled with those who would sidetrack us from following Jesus (2 Cor. 6:14). He describes the entanglements that would lead us astray with five rhetorical questions in the following verses (14-16). Each question is a comparison clause governed by a different noun, but all five nouns combine to make the same point. We must part company with anyone who would sidetrack us from the direction Jesus has set for us in life lest we compromise our witness for Christ in this world.

1. Those who partake of what is right (δικαιοσύνῃ) do not share spiritual values in common with those who partake of lawlessness (ἀνομίᾳ), literally no (ἀ) law (νόμος). The noun translated partnership (μετοχὴ) means sharing, partaking or participating. The verb form comes from two words meaning to have or possess (ἔχω) something with someone else (μετά). Paul uses the verb form in 1 Corinthians 10:17, 21 to teach us that Christians cannot share or participate in the Lord's Supper and also share or participate in the worship of idols (NIDNTT, 1:635-630). We must part company with unbelievers who try to use what we have in common to sidetrack us from our allegiance to Jesus.

2. Fellowship (κοινωνία) is frequently used in the New Testament to express the intimate bond that Christians have with one another because of our common bond with Christ. The root (κοινός) was used in secular Greek to identify a legal relationship of common ownership as opposed to private property. The verb (κοινωνέω) meant to share with someone something you have or to receive a share from someone who has what you don't have. The noun (κοινωνία) expressed a two-way form of participation either through giving or receiving (TDNT, 3:789-809). The idea is one of partnership and came to refer to the community of faith among Christians (Acts 2:42). Light and dark cannot share such a partnership with one another because they are mutually exclusive.

3. What harmony has Christ with Belial (Satan)? The word "harmony" (συμφώνησις) means agreement with respect to settling accounts in a business transaction. A related noun (συμφωνία) was the name of a musical instrument something like a bagpipe, and we get our word "symphony" from it. Matthew 20:13 uses the verb (συμφωνέω) for agreeing to the price of something (M&M, Vocabulary of the Greek NT, pp.598-599). How can believers set a price tag on Christ in an attempt to barter a deal with the devil? Yet, sometimes Christians are tempted to trade the principles of our faith for financial success in the business world. Like Esau, we will sell our birthright in Christ for a pot of stew from the world.

4. What part does a believer have with an unbeliever? The word "part" (μερὶς) means a portion or share of something larger - a part of a whole. Luke uses it to describe the district of Macedonia which is part of a larger Roman province (Acts 16:12). The word is also used of a share of grain stored in a room and a portion of land in a larger property (M&M, Vocabulary, p.398). A believer shares no portion of our eternal heritage or our kingdom cause with an unbeliever.

5. The temple of God has no agreement with idols. The word translated agreement (συγκατάθεσις) is only used here in the New Testament. It refers to a decision that a group arrives at together so often means approval or agreement (BAGD, p.773). The verb form (συγκατατίθημι) is used in secular Greek meaning "deposit together" from the idea that more than one person exercises an equal vote in a financial transaction (M&M, Vocabulary, p.609).

The list is climactic. The first four comparisons lead up to the fifth comparison which leads into the quotations Paul uses in the following verses regarding spiritual separation from unbelievers. Paul is not talking about casual contact or missional involvement but separation from any relationships that control us in some way (William Webb, "What is the Unequal Yoke in 2 Corinthians 6:14?" BSac, 149, April-June, 1992, p. 163). Business contracts, employee agreements, political parties, and even patriotic fervor can pressure Christians to compromise their faith for worldly gain.

Lord, keep me from the worldly entanglements that would sidetrack my loyalty to you.

MISMATED IN MINISTRY

Christians must have wide open hearts (2 Cor. 6:13) combined with single-minded devotion (2 Cor. 6:14). Paul qualifies his command to open their hearts with a second command to avoid becoming mismated in ministry. He writes, "Do not continue becoming mismated with faithless people (2 Cor. 6:14).

The verb "mismated" or "unequally yoked" (ἑτεροζυγοῦντες) is a present participle indicating ongoing activity. The present imperative "become" (γίνεσθε) when combined with the adversative "not" (μὴ) implies that the Christians need to stop something they are already doing (Hughes, 2 Corinthians in NICNT, p.245, fn6). Being mismated was most commonly used for draft animals that needed different yokes such as a donkey and an ox (BAGD, p.314). Paul was almost certainly thinking about the Old Testament laws regarding plowing or breeding with mismated animals (Deut. 22:10; Lev. 19:19). If they are unevenly yoked, the work will suffer (Hughes, p.244).

If we are unevenly yoked, our ministries will suffer. Some have argued that the word "faithless" (ἀπίστοις) should be understood as referring narrowly to Paul's opponents at Corinth and not broadly to non-Christians in general. However, Paul frequently used the word almost in a technical sense to refer to unbelievers (eg. 1 Cor. 6:6; 7:12-15). Furthermore, if he was thinking of his opponents why did he not use the term later in his letter (2 Cor. 10-13) when he was specifically addressing them (Martin, 2 Corinthians, WBC, pp. 196-197). I conclude that Paul is commanding us to avoid any entanglements with unbelievers that would compromise our service for Christ.

What practical matter is Paul addressing by this command? What is the contemporary life parallel to our day? He cannot mean that we should avoid all contact with non-Christians to live in our Christian cloisters (1 Cor. 5:10). The most common application in our day is that Paul is prohibiting the marriage of a Christian to a non-Christian. While this is certainly a legitimate application of the principle, it is unlikely that Paul was specifically addressing inter-marriage in this context. He goes on to discuss being the "temple of God" and not serving "idols" (2 Cor. 6:16-18). His supporting quotes are more appropriately understood as referring to pagan feasts in temples devoted to idol worship (Witherington, Conflict and Community, p.405).

The Corinthian cultural context helps us frame some powerful parallels to our lives today. The political/social/economic structure of Corinthian life was the patron/client relationship. Wealthy patrons governed the economic, political and social life of the city. The elite controlled life. A patron would take on clients who owed him for their jobs and position in society. If anyone wanted to be successful in the business world and enjoy the benefits of the social and political life of the city, he must pledge his loyalty to a patron. The patron would often host large dinners and other socio/political events to which the client would be invited. Every ambitious businessman desired to be included in these events so would pledge his allegiance to the patron.

Each patron would align himself with one of the gods or goddesses of the Greco-Roman pantheon as his patron god. Often the dinners were held in the temples devoted to these idols, so Christians were expected to participate in the worship of the patron's idol. The socio-political events were tinged by the imperial cult of Rome and the worship of the Roman emperor as well. Christians were pressured to compromise their faith to get ahead in life. Many Christians argued that idols were not real anyway so what was the harm in participating in these social and political events. Couldn't they help Christians be successful, and so influence the pagan world? (John Chow, "Patronage in Roman Corinth," in Richard Horsely, editor, Paul and Empire: Religion and Power in Roman Imperial Society, pp.104-125).

The best contemporary life parallels to this command revolve around the social, economic and political pressures that can seduce us into compromising our faith in the pursuit of success. We must avoid any entanglement that leads us to minimize Christ's call on our lives. There must be no divided loyalties that would cause us to lose the consistency of our witness for the Lord. We must not trade our commitment to Christ for social, political and economic success in this world. If we do, we become mismated in our relationships.

NOTE: For those of you regular readers who have wondered about my blog absence these past few months, I had to take some time off from writing. I have been going through a major transition in life as I retired from the position of Senior Pastor at a church I have served for 28 years. My wife too retired from her career, and we are settling into a new normal. I look forward to writing and teaching in my ministry with The Rephidim Project in the days ahead.

BEING VULNERABLE

When we've been hurt it is hard to risk being vulnerable. I know that I tend to close the door to my feelings and put out the no trespassing sign. I put up walls to protect my heart. Paul shows us another way. Ministry calls for transparency and transparency can be traumatic. "You are not being cramped by us," Paul wrote, "but you are being cramped in your feelings. Now, in exchange, I am talking as little children, be opened wide to us also" (2 Cor. 6:12-13).

Twice Paul uses an interesting word translated being cramped or restricted. The noun form of the word is a synonym for distress or affliction. The verb used here (στενοχωρεῖσθε) refers to a narrow space, being confined by inner or outer troubles. It means to be crowded, cramped, confined or oppressed (NIDNTT, 2:807). Both verbs are in the present tense indicating ongoing action. The emotional constriction in their relationship was continuous. Paul assures them that he is not oppressing their emotions but they are clearly confining their emotions toward him. We oppress our feelings as a coping mechanism to avoid risking more rejection. If we open up and let our feelings be seen, we risk being hurt again. God urges us to open up anyway. Take the risk. Fear of rejection, like fear of failure, can cripple our ministries.

The noun translated "affections" or "feelings" (σπλάγχνοις) literally means "inward parts" or "entrails." It was specifically used for the more valuable parts of the sacrificial animal such as heart, lungs, liver, spleen, and kidneys. These organs were removed immediately after killing the animal and eaten as part of the sacrificial meal. In Greek culture, the word was used for the male sexual organs and the womb, so children were sometimes called σπλάγχνα because they were born from one's own flesh and blood (NIDNTT, 2:599). As a result, people thought of the intestines as the seat of human passion. After all, we feel the physical effects of anger, sadness, and happiness in our abdomens. Our feelings are visceral!

The opening clause of verse 13 talks of an exchange of feelings. The noun (ἀντιμισθίαν) means a reward or penalty (BAGD, p.75). It may have been an expression made up by Paul where he used a noun in an adverbial phrase by blending two more common expressions together (Moule, An Idiom Book of NT Greek, p.160). The word itself is a compound noun with the preposition αντί (instead of) combined with the noun μισθός (reward) to express the thought of reciprocation (TDNT, 4:695-702). Paul encouraged responsiveness of emotions. He shared his feelings and desired for them to share their feelings in return. The addition of the preposition αντί to the noun emphasizes the idea of exchange (NIDNTT, 3:197). An exchange of reward, a reciprocation of feelings, must take place between two people seeking reconciliation.

Lord, help me not to wall up my feelings, but to open my heart and risk rejection to build healthy relationships with my brothers and sisters in Christ.

RECONCILIATION: CROSSING THE BRIDGE

Reconciliation requires us to be open with our feelings where once we were closed. When we have been hurt by another, we pull up the drawbridge to the castle of our hearts. We fill the moat with water to keep people away. The other party must cross the great divide to reach us. Crossing that bridge is an emotional challenge for all of us.

Paul had been deeply hurt in ministry. He was estranged from the Corinthians because of past feelings. His wounds were so deep that they affected his ministry causing him to write this extended parenthesis of pain (2 Cor. 2:14-7:4). Paul models for us how we can attempt to cross the bridge of hard feelings. Paul writes, "Our mouth is open to you, Corinthians, our heart has been opened wide. ... Open wide to us also" (2 Cor. 6:11-13).

One side in a conflict must take the initiative to cross the bridge. Often what happens is that we say something like, "I'll forgive him if he forgives me." "She's got to take the first step. The ball is in her court." "If he reaches out to me, I'll work it out with him." Waiting means that reconciliation never takes place. We can stay in waiting mode for a very long time. Reconciliation requires that one person takes the initiative to walk across the bridge - to risk rejection to start the process.

Paul risks rejection. He uses two different words for "open" in verse 11. The first word for "open" (ἀνέωγεν) refers to his mouth. If the mouth does not open, reconciliation never happens. The other person cannot know what is in my head unless I open my mouth. C.K. Barrett expresses it this way. "I have let my tongue run away with me" (Barrett, A Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians, BNTC, 1973, p.191).  Paul is referring to the previous verses where he has talked about his sacrificial suffering. He is saying that he has freely spoken to them. He has not held back his feelings. There are no secrets. His mouth is an open book sharing his raw feelings for them (NIDNTT, 2:727). Huge risk! We do not know how the other party will react when we speak freely about our feelings. I may be rejected, but I must take that risk. I must cross the bridge.

The word is a perfect passive verb from ἀνοίγω. Paul says, "our mouth had been opened to you." He has opened his mouth in the previous chapters and freely shared his feelings. The open mouth has continuing results as he seeks reconciliation. The passive voice indicates that God influenced him to open his mouth. Sharing our feelings with one who has hurt us is not natural. God must open our mouths to do it.

Paul goes on to say that "our heart has been opened wide." The heart (καρδία) is the center of man where God is at work. The center of the inner man includes our will and our understanding. The heart is also the seat of our emotions (TDNT, 3:111-112). We use the heart as the seat of our emotions today. Paul is saying our inner man including our feelings has been opened wide. He uses a different verb for "open" (πεπλάτυνται) in this clause. It is the perfect passive of πλατύνω meaning to widen or enlarge. The noun (πλάτος) means the breadth or width of something. The enemies of God will come up on the "broad plain" (τὸ πλάτος τῆς γῆς) from the four corners of the earth to surround Jerusalem before God destroys them (Rev. 20:9). The verb was used for opening large leather cases that contained texts (NIDNTT, 1:253-254). Paul's heart was opened to them by God like a broad plain or the opening of a large briefcase.

 Paul takes the initiative to cross the bridge and then appeals to them to "Open wide also" (πλατύνθητε). He uses an imperative, a command, but he softens it with the passive voice. "Let God through our appeal to you open wide your hearts to us like a broad plain." Reconciliation is a two-way street. The other side must allow their hearts to be opened wide so that their feelings are shared freely too. The bridge of alienation must be crossed in both directions to have true reconciliation - the open, free and honest sharing of our feelings with one another.

Lord, help me to seek and accept reconciliation with my brothers and sisters in the church.

MONUMENTS OF SERVICE

Paul was tough. The list of sufferings in 2 Corinthians 6:4-10 boggles the mind. Chrysostom called Paul's CV a "blizzard of troubles" (Martin, 2 Corinthians, p.172). Most of us want our CVs to be more self-promoting, not Paul. He repeated a similar list of his qualifications for ministry in 2 Corinthians 11:21-27 (cf. 4:7-11) to show that true ministry is demonstrated by sacrifice.

The Greek text of 2 Corinthians 6:4-10 shows great emotion. Paul was so passionate about his list of struggles that he used grammar loosely to share his heart (Moule, Idiom Book, p.196) as if his words flowed faster than his scribe could pen. Sacrifice marks our service in the cause of Christ. We are foot soldiers in the army of His kingdom.

Battle scars are the marks of ministry. Paul shares with pride his wounds representing the stigmata which prove him to be the slave of Christ (Bruce, Paul: Apostle of the Heart Set Free, p.462). He boasts about his hardships (2 Corinthians 11:30), something we rarely do today. But Paul is not boasting to promote himself. He takes pains to avoid self-promotion. His CV is for ministry promotion. He does it to defend the ministry.

We moderns find this boasting offensive, but in a culture built around honor and shame, this was an acceptable model for ministry defense. Paul knew the rules of rhetoric for what was considered "inoffensive self-praise," and he used those rhetorical tools well (Witherington, The Paul Quest, p.300). The list is similar to a list in Tacitus. The Stoics and the Cynics used lists like this to demonstrate character, so it was a well-established method for personal defense (Witherington, Conflict & Community in Corinth, p.399). Paul is defending his apostolic ministry with this resume of hardships.

The rhetorical structure of the passage breaks down into three general themes. 1) Hardships in service prove his endurance (4b-5). 2) Virtues of character prove his integrity (6-7a). Tools from God prove his wisdom (7b-10), First, Paul uses nine phrases grouped in threes and introduced by "in much endurance" (ἐν ὑπομονῇ πολλῇ). Each phrase begins with the same preposition "in" (ἐν) to show that our endurance in ministry is demonstrated in hardships. Next, Paul uses eight phrases which are also introduced by the preposition "in" (ἐν) in verses 6-7a. The virtues demonstrate that Paul handled the hardships of ministry with integrity. Paul is demonstrating his ethos with this list. The greatest test of our integrity is how we handle adversity. Finally, Paul uses phrases to show that God has equipped him with the tools to live wisely. There are three phrases introduced by the preposition "through" (διὰ) and seven phrases introduced by the comparative "as" (ὡς).

Paul is raising the bar for evaluating ministry. Our qualifications for ministry revolve around the model of the cross. The Corinthians were enamored with the world's wisdom of success and power and forgetting Christ's wisdom of the cross and suffering. The wise life with Christ is the life of suffering not success (Witherington, Conflict & Community in Corinth, pp.398-401).

We live in a day when self-promotion, marketing, and savvy media methods grow many ministries. Paul would not say that we are wrong to use accepted cultural methods (modern media) because he used the accepted rhetorical practices of his day. However, Paul lays out a refreshing model for ministry promotion emphasizing sacrifice and suffering. Sacrificial service leaves scars which are the monuments of ministry worth remembering.

THE PREACHER'S ETHOS

Perched precariously on our shaky pedestals, we preachers can feel vulnerable to the changing tides of popularity. The lure of pragmatism - using rhetorical methods to generate crowds - is powerful especially when critics blame our lack of success on methodological failure. Paul dealt with the rhetorical sophists of his day in 2 Corinthians. His letter is an example of "forensic rhetoric" (Witherington, Conflict & Community, p.333ff). Forensic rhetoric was the use of rhetoric to defend the communicator. Paul develops his proposition (propositio in forensic rhetoric) in 2 Corinthians 2:17. "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." Here is the proposition Paul is defending in his letter (Witherington, p.371).

There were three categories of classical rhetoric, logos, ethos, and pathos. Ethos referred to the character of the preacher. Paul defends his character as a preacher in 2 Corinthians 6. The structure of 2 Corinthians 6:1-4 helps us understand his defense. The main verb is "we urge" or "we appeal" (παρακαλοῦμεν, v.1). It is followed by two parallel participles explaining the preaching appeal: "giving" (διδόντες, v.3) no cause for offense and "commending" (συνίσταντες, v.4) ourselves as "servants of God." Both are present tense participles indicating continuous action.

Paul asks a question immediately following his proposition 2 Corinthians 2:17. "Are we beginning to commend ourselves again?" (3:1) The verb "to commend" (συνίστημι) comes from two words meaning "to put or place" (ἵστημι) and "with someone" (σύν). The classical sense of the verb grew out of the meaning to "stand together" leading to the idea of commendation (TDNT, 7:896-898). Paul says that we who are appealing are commending ourselves to you. The nominative case connects the participle to the subject of the main verb.

How does Paul commend himself to the Corinthians? He defends his ethos, his character. In classical rhetoric, the most powerfully persuasive arguments came from personal integrity - ethos! So we, like Paul, commend ourselves as "servants of God." The word "servants" (διάκονοι) is a nominative plural to agree with the subject "we." Paul is saying, "as servants of God, we commend ourselves" (Robertson, Grammar, p.454). It is who we are not what we do. We are not recommending ourselves to be servants as if interviewing for the role. We preachers are already servants which is the basis for our recommendation of ourselves to others. Our primary ethical qualification for ministry is servanthood.

Paul has been deeply hurt and discouraged by the criticisms of the Corinthians. He is seeking reconciliation with them. They have criticized him for his failure to be successful as a Greek rhetor (speaker), and he is defending his character as an apostle from those who claim he is a failure.  We, too, face our critics whenever we are not as successful as other preachers by the standards of pragmatism. How do we defend ourselves from those attacks? We defend ourselves by arguing that we are not peddlers of the Word of God selling our wares to consumers. We are servants of God. Our ethos is our defense. Servanthood is the way we recommend ourselves. It is the foundation of our commendation. Servanthood is our ethos - our character - in ministry.

DO NO HARM

How often do we "bag it" and move on in our relationships with other Christians? Disagreements, irritations, and hurt feelings develop. We distance ourselves from one another, dismissing the relationships as peripheral to ministry. Not Paul! He writes, "working together we also urge you ... giving no cause for offense at all that the ministry might not be blemished" (2 Cor. 6:1&3). The first rule of ministry, like medicine, is to do no harm.

Paul spoke his letters like a pastor preaching to his people. One feature of oral communication is anacoluthon, a dramatic break in the sentence structure so that the final thought does not follow grammatically from the previous thought (Robertson, Grammar, p.435). Anacoluthon shows the depth of emotion that Paul feels as he breaks into his own sentence with a new thought in verse three. The phrase "giving" (διδόντες) no offense skips over verse 2 and qualifies or explains "we urge you" (παρακαλοῦμεν) in verse 1 (Meyer, 2 Corinthians, p. 546). What follows (vs. 4-10) is a long list of emotional experiences that Paul uses to appeal to the affections of the Corinthians before he concludes his appeal with his "heart opened wide" to them (vs. 11).

Paul starts his anacoluthon with an emphatic double negative (μηδεμίαν ἐν μηδενὶ) meaning "no offense at all" (R&R Linguistic Key, p.471). The participle "giving" (διδόντες) is in the present tense indicating ongoing, continuous action. Giving no offense at all is not a one-time act but a habit of life. In ministry, we are constantly seeking to give no offense to others - to do no harm in the church. The word "offense" (προσκοπήν) is only used here in the New Testament and means "an occasion for making a misstep" (BAGD, p.716). It is related to the more common word (πρόσκομμα) meaning an obstacle or hindrance, referring to the stumbling itself.

Paul wants to give no reason for anyone to stumble so that "the ministry might not be discredited" (μωμηθῇ). The verb means to find fault with or to blame. The noun form (μῶμος) means a defect or a blemish and Peter uses it as a description of false teachers in 2 Peter 2:13 (BAGD, p.531). The noun is frequently used in the book of Leviticus to describe defects or blemishes in the sacrifices or the priests (Hatch & Redpath, Concordance to the Septuagint, 2:93). No priest, for example, could come near to the altar to offer a sacrifice if he had a blemish (Lev. 21:21). Our ministries today are not discredited by physical blemishes but by spiritual blemishes. If we cause offense to others, we blemish our ministries. At the very least, we should do no harm to the church always seeking her interest instead of our self-interests in all our decisions.

Paul is beginning his final emotional appeal to the Corinthians to be reconciled to him (Witherington, Conflict & Community, p.398). He is writing to believers who have become estranged from him. He pleads with them to open their hearts - their affections - to him as he has to them (6:11-13). Paul is wearing his heart on his sleeve as he extends his hand to them in reconciliation. He does not want to be the cause of anything that blemishes his relationship with them in the ministry of Jesus Christ.

Relationships matter in ministry!

EMPTY RECONCILIATION

What does it mean to receive the grace of God in vain? Paul wrote in 2 Corinthians 6:1, "And working together we also are appealing to you not in vain to receive the grace of God." The words conclude Paul's explanation of God's reconciling work in Christ and the reconciling ministry we have toward others (2 Cor. 5:16-21). Therefore, Paul warns us not to receive God's grace in vain.

The infinitive "to receive" (δέξασθαι) means to receive a gift from someone or to receive someone into your home (BAGD, p.177). Paul uses the word in 2 Corinthians 7:15 to describe the reception the Corinthian church gave to Titus, his messenger. The negative particle (μὴ) goes with the infinitive rather than the verb "appeal" (παρακαλοῦμεν) because οὐκ is used with indicatives while μὴ is used with the other moods (BAGD, p.590). The sense is "we appeal to you not to receive" as opposed to "we do not appeal to you to receive." The phrase translated "in vain" (εἰς κενὸν) means without result, without reaching its goal. God's grace is empty and achieves no purpose (BAGD, p.427) if it is received in vain.

Is it even possible to receive the grace of God in a way that proves to be ineffective? Philip Hughes raises that question and then summarizes the four ways that this phrase is interpreted (Hughes, 2 Corinthians, pp.217-219). 1) Paul is talking about receiving God's grace in a purely external and superficial manner. Such a person is a professing Christian but not a true believer. However, the context makes it unlikely that Paul is talking about false professions of faith. 2) Paul is talking about a person who accepts God's grace only to reject it later. Such a person loses his salvation, thus receiving the grace in vain. This view flies in the face of Paul's statements elsewhere regarding salvation (e.g., Phil. 1:6) 3) Paul's appeal is not directed toward the Corinthians but to the world in general to whom God offers His reconciliation. Paul appeals to the world not to reject this great salvation. In this view, people do not receive the grace in vain. They never receive it all. 4) Paul is talking about Christians when they stand before the Judgment Seat of Christ (2 Cor. 5:10)

The best interpretation is the fourth view. To receive the grace of God in vain is to live in ways that are inconsistent with grace. Our practice does not match our doctrine. Here we go back to the meaning of the word "vain" (κενὸν) above. The grace of God does not produce the intended results in our lives. Our actions constitute a denial of the truth. When we stand before Christ's judgment seat (the evaluation of believers not unbelievers), our actions will prove to be empty of eternal value. The purifying fire of God's judgment will consume the wood, hay, and stubble in our lives although we will be saved "as through fire" (1 Cor. 3:10-15).

Paul writes these words in the context of a great parenthesis in his letter (2 Cor. 2:14 - 7:4) dealing with sin and conflict in the body. He exhorts them to forgive the sinful offender before the parenthesis and then commends them for that forgiveness after the parenthesis (2 Cor. 2:7, cf. 2 Cor. 7:12). The conflict includes Paul who has felt alienated from the people in Corinth (2:2:13, cf. 7:5-16). Reconciliation is meant to transform our relationships. If we are reconciled to God by His grace, then we should be reconciled to one another as well. If we are not reconciled with one another, then we have received God's grace in vain. In this case, His reconciling grace serves no purpose in our lives (Martin, 2 Corinthians, p.166).

Horizontal reconciliation proves we have not received vertical reconciliation in vain!

THE PRICE OF PEACE

The clearest and most important verse in the Bible regarding justification is 2 Corinthians 5:21. God made peace with us by removing the enmity between us, but someone must pay to reconcile enemies. Forensic payment for sin is justification. Paul writes, "Be reconciled to God. The one who knew no sin, He made to be sin on our behalf, in order that we might become the righteousness of God in Him."

Verse 21 is an example of asyndeton, a sentence that is grammatically unconnected to what comes before or after (MHT, Grammar, 3:340). Paul's transition from the topic of reconciliation to justification is abrupt without any connecting particles. The verse stands alone grammatically but is essential to the overall argument Paul advances. To be reconciled requires us to be justified.

God made (ἐποίησεν) the sinless Christ to be sin for us. Christ is sin. He is neither sinner nor sin offering. Christ is sin (ἁμαρτία) not a sinner (ἁμαρτωλός). This point is important theologically for if Christ became a sinner, He could not die for our sins. God made him sin itself, the object of God's forensic anger so that our sin could be judged and removed. Reconciliation depends on the removal of that which caused God anger by the satisfying of His judicial wrath. Furthermore, Christ is not merely a sin offering like the scapegoat under the Mosaic law. We discern this truth because of the double use of the noun "sin" which requires us to take both uses of sin in the same way. While it is possible to understand "he made Him sin" as "He made him a sin offering," it is not possible to take "the one who knew no sin" as "the one who knew no sin offering." Therefore both uses of the word must mean sin, not sin offering (Hughes, 2 Corinthians, pp. 213-215).

The two clauses are parallel, Paul draws a sharp contrast between sin (ἁμαρτίαν) and righteousness (δικαιοσύνη) and between made (ἐποίησεν) and might become (γενώμεθα). Christ was made sin. We are not made righteous. Our righteousness is a gift of God in Christ. It is the righteousness of God (θεοῦ) which must be understood as a subjective genitive meaning that the righteousness comes from God. It is also only a righteousness found in Him (ἐν αὐτῷ). The antecedent must be Christ (Χριστοῦ) in verse 20. God gives us His righteousness because of our union with Christ.

Since righteousness is a gift from God (Rom. 5:17), it cannot mean good works. Good works cannot be given to us. The righteousness Paul is talking about must refer to a right relationship with God. God confers a standing of righteousness on us in Christ. God provides the right standing Christ bought for us. The gift is judicial righteousness on the basis of His payment for sin. In this sense, our sin is imputed to Christ, and His right standing with God is imputed to us (Morris, The Apostolic Preaching of the Cross, pp.281-282). God both requires of us and provides to us His righteousness. The verb "might become" (γενώμεθα) infers a growing life of actual righteousness (good works) as the result of this conferral of judicial righteousness (Eph. 2:10) although Paul's emphasis is forensic in this passage.

Reconciliation depends on justification and justification depends on atonement. Justification is judicial forgiveness. Christ paid the price for God to forgive. Because God forgives, we can be reconciled to God and offer reconciliation to others. The price tag of peace is payment for sins.

AMBASSADORS FOR PEACE

Our mission is the ministry of reconciliation (2 Cor. 5:18). God reconciled us to Himself in Christ, "therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were making an appeal through us; we beg you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God" (2 Cor. 5:20).

The word translated "ambassadors" (πρεσβεύομεν) is a verb, not a noun. Originally, the verb meant to be the oldest or to assume first place in rank. By the time of Paul, the verb came to mean the actions of an ambassador who represents another person in negotiations (NIDNTT, 1:193). The word was used to refer to the Emperor's legate, one who carries out the official duties of an envoy or emissary. Those duties could include petition and intercession on behalf of the king (M&M, Vocabulary of the Greek NT, p.534). Paul uses the same verb to describe his mission in Ephesians 6:20 where he writes, "I am an ambassador in chains" (πρεσβεύω ἐν ἁλύσει). Chains may become the badge of our position because we represent a king, not of this world.

We act as representatives not just on behalf of Christ but in place of Christ (ὑπὲρ Χριστοῦ). The prepositional phrase is placed first in the sentence for emphasis. It is true that the preposition ὑπὲρ does not necessarily infer a substitutionary meaning like the preposition ἀντὶ. However, ὑπὲρ is often used in a vicarious way meaning "instead of" or "in place of" someone else, and the context here supports such a substitutionary meaning (Hughes, 2 Corinthians, p.209, fn 48, see p.193, fn 24). We are ambassadors in place of Jesus Christ which is why when we speak we are speaking "as though God were making an appeal through us." The particle ὡς followed by the genitive absolute τοῦ θεοῦ makes the genitive the subject of the participle παρακαλοῦντος (R&R, Linguistic Key, p.470). The better translation would read: "We are ambassadors in place of Christ, with the conviction that God is appealing through us." When we as His ambassadors talk peace, God talks through us. God is present in our words (Martin, 2 Corinthians, p.156).

Our mission is to call all people to "be reconciled to God" (καταλλάγητε τῷ θεῷ). Paul does not say that we call people to believe they are reconciled. We plead with people to be reconciled (Witherington, Conflict & Community, p.397, fn 16). People are to put away the enmity in their hearts toward God (repentance) by accepting God's peace achieved for them in Christ (faith). God appeals (παρακαλοῦντος) to people through us. The verb means to implore, entreat or request people to be reconciled (BAGD, p.617).

The appeal to be vertically reconciled to God leads naturally into the appeal to be horizontally reconciled to each other. Paul is not only thinking of the outside world in this appeal. He is thinking about the Corinthians themselves as the following verses make clear. He is concerned that the professing Christians in Corinth might have received the grace of God in vain according to the next verse (2 Cor. 6:1) so he urges or appeals (παρακαλοῦμεν) to them to be reconciled.  Later he will beg them to "make room for him in their hearts" (2 Cor. 7:2-4). Paul sees the dynamic connection between vertical and horizontal reconciliation.

We are ambassadors for peace in a hostile world. No peace with God means no peace with others. No peace with others is a sign we have no peace with God. God talks peace when we talk peace! Lord, help me to be a peacemaker for you.

RECONCILING THE WORLD

Reconciliation is a two-way street. God must reconcile us to Himself, and we must be reconciled to Him. There is enmity between God and man which goes both directions. Our rebellion against God must be reconciled, and God's anger toward us must be reconciled. Paul writes that "God was reconciling the world to Himself in Christ" (2 Cor. 5:19) and then concludes with an appeal to "be reconciled to God" (2 Cor. 5:20). The compound verb translated "reconcile" (καταλλάσσων)  is perfective meaning to effect a complete change back from enmity to peace (MHT, Grammar, 3:298). Reconciliation is not complete until both sides are reconciled.

Paul is the only one who uses the verb καταλλάσσω for the relationship between God and man. The active voice is only used of God, and the passive voice is only used for humans (TDNT, 1:255). We do not achieve reconciliation with God. Reconciliation with God is never something we can accomplish. To imply otherwise is to deny the gospel - the good news of what God has done for us (Denney, 2 Corinthians, 211-215 cited by Martin, 2 Corinthians, 154).

In Christ, God was reconciling the world "to Himself" (ἑαυτῷ). God pacified Himself in Christ. The sacrifice of the Son appeased the anger of the Father. Paul writes, "while we were enemies we were reconciled (κατηλλάγημεν) to God through the death of His Son" (Rom. 5:10). God made peace with Himself for us so that no impediment stood between Him and us any longer. He reconciled (active voice); we were reconciled (passive voice)! He did it for us! This is the essence of the good news.

When Paul writes that God "was reconciling the world to Himself" (2 Cor. 5:19), he was not suggesting universalism. The present tense of the verb (καταλλάσσων) indicates continuous, ongoing reconciliation. The "world" (κόσμον) refers to a class of people. The absence of an article gives the noun a collective sense. He is referring to mankind as a whole. God is "not imputing to them" (αὐτοῖς) "their" (αὐτῶν) "sins." The plural pronouns refer back to a collective singular (Blass/Debrunner, Grammar, 147). The individual members of the collective world are being reconciled to God down through history.

Paul does not mean that all humans, believing and unbelieving, are forgiven, but God, in Christ, forgives the sins of those who are part of the collective world (Hodge, 2 Corinthians, 145). Imputation was sufficient for the whole world but efficient only in Christ. The cross was sufficient to remove the judicial anger on God's side, but it does not remove the rebellion on our side of reconciliation. Humans must receive the reconciliation to be reconciled. We must accept what God has done for us before reconciliation is complete for both sides.

How else can we understand Paul's appeal to "be reconciled to God" (2 Cor. 5:21)? The verb is in the passive voice. We appeal to humans to be reconciled (καταλλάγητε) to God. Humans don't reconcile themselves to God. Humans accept the reconciliation God has made for them by turning away from their rebellion to enjoy peace with God. God commissions us to urge people to receive the reconciliation provided by God. The Gospel is good news because we declare what God has done not what we must do to be reconciled to God!

THE MINISTRY OF RECONCILIATION

To reconcile is to make peace, to bring an end to hostility. We live in a hostile world. The root of that hostility is bound up in man's rebellion against God which leads to hostility towards others. Paul wrote, Now all these things (the new creation, vs.17) are from God who reconciled us to Himself through Christ and who gave to us the ministry of reconciliation, that is God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting against them their sins, and having deposited in us the word of reconciliation (2 Cor. 5:18-19).

Reconciliation begins with God and ends with man. God is no helpless victim of man's hostility. The hostility goes both directions. Humans rebelled against God and God is angry at humans. If we do not take the wrath of God seriously, then the cross becomes a cruel and unjust exercise of a petty deity. God, on the cross, poured out His wrath upon Christ to reconcile us to Himself (Hughes, 2 Corinthians, p.205). God takes the initiative in reconciliation. The verb translated "reconciled" (καταλλάξαντος) is in the active voice. Paul always uses the active voice of this verb to indicate God's actions while the passive voice indicates our response. God reconciles us. We are reconciled to God (Witherington, Conflict & Community in Corinth, p.396, fn. 14). The voice of the verb is theologically important. We cannot reconcile ourselves to God. Only God can reconcile us to Himself because only He can remove His hostility toward us.

The structure of these two verses in the Greek text is significant. God made peace with us by not counting against us our sins. How? He made peace with us because Jesus became sin for us (v.21). The cross is the foundation for our ministry of reconciliation. Vertical peace with God precedes horizontal peace with others. The cross is the basis for all peacemaking on earth.

God reconciled us to Himself through Christ
                        and gave to us the ministry of reconciliation
God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself
          not counting against them their sins
                        and having deposited in us the word of reconciliation.

Two parallel clauses describe our peacemaking service in this world. God gave, and God deposited. God gave (δόντος) to us the ministry of reconciliation. God acted unilaterally to remove His hostility toward us by paying for it on the cross. Reconciliation is His gift to us, so the ministry of reconciliation is also His gift to us (NIDNTT, 3:166). Ministry or service (διακονίαν) is a gift even as it is a deposit. God deposited (θέμενος) in us the word of reconciliation. The verb translated "deposited" is an Aorist participle of the verb τίθημι which means to put, place or lay something (BAGD, p.815). God put in us the word of reconciliation.

The ministry (διακονίαν) and the word (λόγον) are parallel. The ministry of reconciliation consists of the word of reconciliation. We announce peace. We proclaim the end of hostility. We speak reconciliation. As has often been said, the gospel is not good advice. It is good news. Our job is to announce the good news. We must be careful not to turn the good news into bad news by adding qualifiers to the word of reconciliation deposited in our lives. Our lives should reflect the reconciliation we received.

Vertical peace with God paves the way for horizontal peace with others. Paul is writing to a divided and conflicted church. The Christians were quarreling with each other and with him. Such fights are inconsistent with Christianity. We are given the ministry of peace talking. Peace talking is deposited in our lives. We are called to be peace talkers. The ministry of reconciliation is inextricably bound up in the apostolic preaching of the cross. We cannot at the same time announce peace with God while living in enmity with men!

A NEW WORLD DAWNING

The dawn of a new world has broken over the horizon of darkness. We, Christians, are the vanguard of God's new creation which will someday wholly replace the old world order. Paul wrote, Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, there is a new creation; the entire old order has passed away, behold the new has come to be (2 Corinthians 5:17).

There is no verb in the opening clause so we must supply one. A common interpretation is to make this into a statement of personal regeneration. If anyone is in Christ, he is a new creature. The noun (κτίσις) can mean "creature," and it is certainly legitimate to supply "he is" as the verb. The verse would be understood as an explanation of regeneration. The form of the expression is similar to Rabbinic language for proselyte conversion and the forgiveness of sins (Meyer, 2 Corinthians, p. 534). Paul uses similar language when he writes that we are created (κτισθέντες) in Christ Jesus (Eph. 2:10). 

However, I think it best to understand the verse as speaking about a new creation that Christians inhabit when we are placed into Christ. Do the words "new creation" (καινὴ κτίσις) explain the person (anyone, τις) or "in Christ" (ἐν Χριστῷ)? The emphasis falls on "in Christ." The new creation defines "in Christ" more than personal regeneration (Martin, 2 Corinthians, p. 152). We become part of a new creation in Christ. The old world order has passed away for us, and we are now part of a whole new world that has dawned. We certainly must be new creatures (by regeneration) to be part of the new creation, but I think the emphasis is on what it means to be part of the new creation for three reasons.

1) The noun κτίσις is more commonly used for God's creation whereas the noun κτίσμα is more commonly understood as creatures (NIDNTT, 1:378). James 1:18 says that God brought us forth ... so that we would be a kind of first fruits among His creatures (κτισμάτων). The Qumran sect used the concept of a new creation (κτίσις) to refer to a new world order that the righteous would inhabit after the old world order disintegrated (NIDNTT, 1:383).

2) The following clause explains the new creation. Paul says the old order has passed away. The neuter plural adjective (τὰ ἀρχαῖα) means the total of everything old (Robertson, Grammar, p. 654). When combined with the verb "passed away" (παρῆλθεν) the sense refers to an old world order (Martin, 2 Corinthians, p. 534). The verb translated "passed away" is used elsewhere for the passing away of an old world order (Hughes, 2 Corinthians, p. 203, fn 42). Peter uses this word in 2 Peter 3:10 to describe the Day of the Lord when the heavens will pass away (παρελεύσονται) with a roar (cf. Mt. 24:35). John uses a similar verb in Revelation 21:4 when he describes a world without death, mourning or pain because the first things have passed away (ἀπῆλθαν). 

3) The opening word of the verse (ὥστε) ties verse 17 directly to verse 16. Verse 17 is the result of what he has said in verse 16. Our relationships with one another and with Christ have been completely changed because we are part of a whole new creation. We no longer recognize others according to our physical connections, but we relate to one another in a new and spiritual way. The prejudices of the old world have passed away in this new creation. In Christ, we practice a new way of relating to others because we are part of a new creation.

A new world order is dawning. Because we are new creations in Christ, we are part of a new creation of Christ. One day we will see the new world in all its glory. We will see a new heaven and a new earth for the first heaven and the first earth have passed away (ἀπῆλθαν). We will finally and fully experience our new creation relationships with God and with others in ways we can only glimpse today (Revelation 21:1-4). Awesome!

HOW DO WE KNOW WHO WE KNOW?

Relationships are forever changed when we become Christians. We do not regard each other the same way in Christ as we did before Christ. Paul wrote: "For this reason, we, from now on, know no one according to the flesh. Although we have known Christ according to the flesh, but now we no longer know Him in this way" (2 Corinthians 5:16). The old order of life has passed. Earthly distinctions no longer matter. A new way of life began in Christ. We can no longer evaluate each other according to the worldly criteria of social status, achievements or success. We must not bring those standards into the church because we have been changed.

DID PAUL KNOW JESUS DURING HIS EARTHLY MINISTRY? The word translated "although" literally means "even if" (εἰ καὶ). The condition is assumed to be true (Rienecker and Rogers, Linguistic Key, p.469). It is very possible that Paul did see Jesus during His earthly ministry since he came to Jerusalem to study under the Rabbi Gamaliel during his teen years when Jesus was alive (Witherington, The Paul Quest, p.307; F.F. Bruce, Paul: Apostle of the Heart Set Free, p.43). Some have gone so far as to suggest that Paul might have been the rich young ruler who interviewed Jesus (Hughes, 2 Corinthians, p.198). Whatever Paul's knowledge of the historical Jesus, he is drawing a sharp contrast between his former attitude toward Jesus and his current attitude toward Jesus (Bruce, Paul, p.99). The line separating the two attitudes cuts through the heart when anyone comes to Christ. We are forever changed by Christ to see Christ differently after regeneration.

WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO NO LONGER KNOW CHRIST ACCORDING TO THE FLESH? The prepositional phrase "according to the flesh" (κατὰ σάρκα) is adverbial, modifying the verb "have known" (ἐγνώκαμεν) not the noun "Christ" (Χριστόν). The way we know is according to the flesh or not according to the flesh (Witherington, Conflict and Community, p.394). The standard for measuring our knowledge is fleshly or not fleshly. If we know Christ by the superficial standards of this world - who He is, what He did, what He said - we are no different than many. Crowds followed Jesus but they did not know Jesus in a spiritually regenerate way. Many today claim to know Jesus because they know about Jesus, but to know about Jesus is not to know Jesus at all (Hughes, 2 Corinthians, p.201). Our conversion changes how we know Christ. True Christians no longer know Christ by the superficial standards of the world. True Christians no longer know Christ "according to the flesh" (κατὰ σάρκα). We know Christ by "the Spirit of the Living God" (πνεύματι Θεοῦ ζῶντος, 2 Corinthians 3:3).

HOW DO WE KNOW NO ONE ACCORDING TO THE FLESH? Paul starts with this assertion. We evaluate others and are evaluated by others according to an entirely new standard of knowing. We no longer judge others or are judged by others according to the world's standards of success. Being in Christ changes how we relate to others in Christ. External, superficial, outward measurements should not determine how we relate to one another. Wealth, status, position and achievement are not the yardsticks for our relationships in Christ. We know no one by these standards. We judge ministry by different standards as well. We died in Christ (2 Corinthians 5:14), so we live by the standards of the cross. The crucified life marks our relationships forever. We know who we know at the foot of the cross.