Sermon Tone Analysis

The fundamental issue at stake in Corinth was the gospel itself, as it had been preached and embodied by Paul.

Nobody could dispute what Paul had accomplished: He had founded the Corinthian church and performed signs and wonders in their midst.

What made the issue of his apostolic ministry so acute was that despite his role in founding the church, his opponents were claiming that they themselves, not Paul, were the ones who now had the right to exercise apostolic authority in Corinth.

In their view, Paul’s suffering had disqualified him as an apostle.

They were the ones who should now lead the Corinthians in their faith.

Hafemann

In irony Paul claimed to be a coward, as his critics accused, when it came to comparing himself with his critics.

They cited their own conduct as normative and then prided themselves on measuring up to the standard.

The Corinthians would be just as foolish if they measured Paul’s apostolic credentials by using the same subjective standard that his critics applied to themselves.

J. B. Phillips’ paraphrase of the first part of this verse captures Paul’s irony well.

“Of course, we shouldn’t dare include ourselves in the same class as those who write their own testimonials, or even to compare ourselves with them!”  

Constable

“Comparison” was a standard rhetorical and literary technique; here Paul mocks his opponents: they are so foolish that they do not realize that one cannot compare oneself with oneself.

Higher-class patrons would usually write letters of recommendation for socially inferior clients, but sometimes people were forced to commend themselves; self-commendation was to be accepted only if done discreetly, but Paul paints his opponents as pretentious—a vice in Greek culture.

Paul satirically declines to compare himself with such teachers—satire was a common argumentative device.

One of the rules of “comparison” was that one could not compare dissimilar items; yet the dissimilarity turns out to favor him in 10:13–18.

Keener

In their scheme to undermine Paul’s influence in Corinth and promote their own, his rivals have accused him of having nerve in his letters but no boldness in person (10:10).

Paul responds to this criticism with wry sarcasm that he lacks the nerve to classify or compare himself with those who commend themselves.

“Daring” (tolman) is related to the assurance that leads one “to push oneself forward.”

He plays on this perception that he lacked that obligatory assurance to undermine the presumption of these braggarts.

He has warned them, however, that he will “dare” to oppose those who think that he operates according to the world’s standards (10:2).

He will also “dare” to join those others who “dare to boast” but admits that it is the daring of a fool (11:21), not because he cannot back up this boasting with performance equal to his words but because God does not back up such foolish boasting.

God humbles the proud so they will not try to take credit for what God alone has done.

In the ancient world “comparison” (sygkrisis) was a common “rhetorical exercise practiced in schools,” and comparing oneself with other teachers was a common tactic for a teacher to attract students and their fees.

Stansbury points out that in the political arena Greek hybris, pride, combines with Roman inimicitia, enmity, to produce vicious smear tactics against rivals.

People in this society assumed that honors were as limited as material wealth.

Since there was only a limited amount of honor to go around, one resented and envied others for having it.

“Political enemies were targets of exaggerated character assassination designed to make them symbols of shame or of political subversion.”

In the cutthroat competition for plaudits and pupils, one had to advertise oneself publicly with audacious praise while impugning the qualities of other contenders for honor.

People were constantly vying with others to attain elusive glory and engaged in a constant game of one-upmanship.

This race for honor “encouraged outward expressions of pride and arrogance.”124

Self-boasting was considered an act of honor.

Savage observes that “an individual’s worth and consequently his respect in the community was dependent on the status he was able to project.”

Boasting about one’s status and achievements and comparing oneself favorably against others were routine tactics for those who aimed at gaining a following for themselves.126

In a “comparison” one would amplify one’s good deeds and another’s bad deeds to show superiority.

Such topics as a person’s race, upbringing, education, status, physique, pursuits, and positions held were all fair game in sizing up their relative merits and standing.

Dio Chrysostom derides the sophists of Corinth for craving the esteem of the crowd, wanting “to be looked up to and thought that they knew more than other men.”128

Winter notes that sophists fanned strife and jealousy, and intense rivalry “seemed to arise wherever two or three were gathered together.”

Lucian, the great satirist, pokes fun at the popular teachers who compared themselves with others to exalt themselves.

In his Professor of Public Speaking a wily veteran instructs the novice on how to achieve popular success: “make marvelous assertions about yourself, be extravagant in your self-praise, and make yourself a nuisance to him.

What was Demosthenes beside me?”

Such extravagant self-regard was considered characteristic of sham philosophers who were frequently lampooned by other more serious philosophers.

By implication, then, Paul lumps his opponents in with this crowd of frauds who can be identified by their extravagant self-regard and self-commendation.

Paul deflates the boasts of his rivals as he insinuates, “Such a dwarf as I could not possibly compare with such giants.”

“I hardly rank with such luminaries.”

He therefore disparages their boasting with mock self-deprecation.

Speaking tongue in cheek in this way also raises the question whether his rivals are comparable to him at all.

No comparison can be made where no similarity exists.132

In all their boasting they presume to be Paul’s equal, but in his view they are false apostles (11:12–13).

If he is going to stoop to compare himself with them, it will be only as a fool (11:21–12:11).

They claim to be in a different league than Paul; and Paul would readily agree—they are in league with Satan.

They may have won status in the eyes of some Corinthians with their boastfulness, but they have won God’s judgment in the process.

Second, he rules out this fundamental rhetorical tool of showing superiority through comparison as something completely illegitimate for ministers of God.

Only fools dare to use self-comparison with others to commend themselves to others.

Even when he so “foolishly” joins the fray of comparison, “Are they servants of Christ?

(I am out of my mind to talk like this) I am more” (11:22), he ends up only boasting in his weakness, the very things that they think should oust him from the contest.

He thereby changes the ground rules of how to play the boasting game.

Third, he challenges their criteria: “They have set themselves up as the measure of their ministry.”

There were no clear-cut biblical criteria to decide the spiritual legitimacy of Paul or his rivals, and the opponents and the Corinthians apparently reverted to the standards they were accustomed to from their culture.

They judged themselves and Paul according to their commanding presence (10:1, 10), concrete displays of power and authority (11:19–20), impressive speech (11:20–21), worthiness to accept full compensation (11:7–11), Jewish pedigree (11:21b–22), endurance of hardships (11:23–29), and mystical visions (12:1–6).

According to these criteria, they passed with flying colors and Paul failed.

But Paul would insist that they not only have usurped God’s role as the one who appraises ministry (), but they have used false criteria and ignored the only measure that counts—what God has done in and through the minister.

The statement “they are not wise” is an understatement.

In chap.

11 he will be more direct: they are fools who deceive themselves and others.

He concludes in 10:18 that if one is not commended by the Lord using the Lord’s standard of judgment then one is not approved.

Garland

In the first part of this chapter, Paul defends his ministry in Corinth against attacks from his opponents.

In the chapter’s last segment, he sets the standards for the ministry to which God has called him.

He delineates the difference between himself and the false teachers.

With a number of clauses in the negative—seven times a negative particle (“not”) appears in Greek—he defines the limits of boasting about his mission work.

He receives his approval and commendation from the Lord.

a.

Negative.

“For we do not dare to count ourselves among or compare ourselves with some of those who commend themselves.”

The first word in this sentence (“for”) hardly connects with the immediately preceding verse (v.

11).

Perhaps Paul had interrupted his discourse and now begins with a new perspective on his defense.

Paul continues to address the congregation at Corinth and obliquely notes the presence of the intruders.

The use of the verb to dare makes the irony in this sentence obvious.

No one can miss Paul’s intention of ridiculing his opponents.

The apostle sarcastically places them on a level he himself will never be able to reach.

Extending his irony a little later, he calls these people “superapostles” (11:5).

With a play on Greek words enkrinai and synkrinai, which we can approximate with the translation “count ourselves among and compare ourselves with,” Paul continues to deride his opponents.

He dares not call them his peers (compare 11:21), for they surpass him in their ease of speaking and their use of power.

He portrays them as eminent leaders whom the Lord should be pleased to have in his church.

He himself does not presume to be worthy of their company, in view of the low ratings they have given him (v.

10).

The impostors have come to Corinth with letters of commendations that their close friends had written for them.

These documents lack authenticity.

Paul is not interested in repeating what he said earlier in his epistle (see the commentary on 3:1 and 5:12).

As an apostle, he was sent not from men nor by man (), but he was called and commissioned by Jesus Christ.

More, the churches he had founded were his living letters of recommendation (3:2–3).

The intruders, however, lacked divine authority and did not have the compliments of caring churches.

The word some is an indication that the invaders are few in number.

Nevertheless, their continued presence in Corinth warps the spiritual development of the church as they gain followers among those who are like-minded.

Calvin comments that people who commend themselves are “starving for true praise … and falsely give themselves out to be what they are not.”

b.

Flawed comparison.

“But because they measure themselves with themselves and compare themselves with themselves, they fail to understand.”

The repetition of the expression themselves clues the reader that something is wrong.