What the Apostle Suffered in Preaching the Gospel (2 Cor. 11:21–26)

2 Cor. 11:21. To my shame, I must say, we were too weak for that! But in whatever anyone dares to boast—I am speaking as a fool—I also dare to boast.

“What the Apostle has said is not clear” (Saint Chrysostom). To clarify this, let us return to what precedes. The Apostle showed how slavishly the false apostles were received by the Corinthians. Let us ask ourselves how this was possible. And we will find no other answer than this: certainly they set forth some perfections, showy ones, which made a strong impression on the Corinthians and disposed them to submit to them so. To these advantages the Apostle pointed in the words: “many boast in the flesh” (2 Cor. 11:18). This “in the flesh” he indicates in the following verse 22, that is, that they are Hebrews, that they are Israelites, that they are the seed of Abraham. Somehow they managed to present these titles as very valuable in the eyes of the Corinthians: the Corinthians so slavishly related to them. Bringing this to the minds of the Corinthians, the Apostle says: yes, but what of us? Have we become nothing to you, “weak,” appearing to you as powerless, having no dignity, insignificant?! — No, this is unjust. For if anyone dares to set forth some fleshly, showy advantage, I dare it no less than he. And then he enumerates what advantages the false apostles claimed, adding at the same time that he has all of them too. They lack only one thing—sufferings for Christ the Lord. By these trifles they glory, and for this be in honor and devour the wealth of others they are ready; but as soon as there is need to suffer, they run away; they lack the courage for this. By such reasoning the Apostle’s discourse is brought into order and receives appropriate clarity.

“To my shame,” κατα ατιμιαν, as a dishonor. Whose dishonor is meant? One can understand either the Apostle’s dishonor or the Corinthians’. Of the Apostle thus: I speak this from a sense of dishonor done to me by your treatment of false apostles. As if I have nothing such as they boast and for which you have so enslaved yourselves to them! — Of the Corinthians thus: I say this to your shame. How can you not see that everything they boast of I also have, and yet they have exacted excessive sacrifices from you, while I asked nothing of you and only implored: be reconciled to God, be saved. “What can be worse and what slavery more intolerable than when those who have taken from you both your possessions and your freedom, do not even become meek thereafter and treat you at least as slaves, but conduct themselves contemptibly toward you, worse than toward the lowest bondservant? Therefore you deserve no excuse when you despise those who humble themselves for you to exalt you, and marvel at those who exalt themselves over you to humble you” (Saint Chrysostom).

2 Cor. 11:22. Are they Hebrews? So am I. Are they Israelites? So am I. Are they the seed of Abraham? So am I.

Hebrews from Heber; Israelites from Jacob, who was called Israel after his all-night struggle with a certain heavenly being; the seed of Abraham—heirs of the great promises given to Abraham. Here is what the false apostles gloried in! Here is what especially influenced the Corinthians! But all this, he says, I also have. Though the Church of Corinth consisted mainly of Gentiles, but, having become Christians, they entered into spiritual kinship with all that was in the Old Testament; therefore they could value this, not in itself, but in the relation in which all of it stood to Christianity. “The Apostle brought this up because false teachers spoke thus of themselves, and in this he showed his equality with them, but in voluntary sufferings he shows his advantage” (Theodoret). All these are distinctions which were given freely, by the order of natural birth. But let us see how they measure up there where it is necessary to show endurance and firmness of faith.

2 Cor. 11:23. Are they servants of Christ? I am a better one—I am talking like a madman—with far greater labors, far more imprisonments, with countless beatings, and often near death.

“Servants of Christ”—does not give the thought that they were true Apostles, and generally means persons serving the work of Christ, the gospel of the Gospel, for the purpose of saving people. The true Apostles were chosen from above for this and armed with extraordinary gifts of grace. Close to them come their helpers, chosen by themselves and acting according to their instruction and guidance. But there were also those in those times who themselves took upon themselves the work of preaching the Gospel, as is shown by the example of Aquila and Priscilla, Apollos and others. Of these, some went the straight path, wishing only to serve the work of Christ, with humility and self-denial; others deviated, mixing their own views and reasonings into the work of God. These are the true false apostles; and it is about them that the Apostle speaks. He puts their service to Christ the Lord in the form of a question; consequently, he does not affirm that they truly serve Christ, but speaks as if thus: if they say that they are servants of Christ, then I am even more such. The thought will be: though they say this about themselves, yet they are not truly such, I am the true servant of Christ. Saint Chrysostom says: “If they are false apostles, then it was necessary for him not to compare his advantage with them, but to refute the assertion that they are servants (of Christ). He has already refuted this, saying: ‘false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into apostles of Christ’ (2 Cor. 11:13). And here he does the same thing, only differently. First he presents the opinions of opponents (as they think of themselves), saying: ‘are they servants of Christ?’ And then says: ‘I am all the more,’ showing that the true character of apostleship remains with him alone.”

“I am talking like a madman,” παραφρονων, acting out of reason; and in the preceding text he said: “speaking as a fool,” εν αφροσυνη, in foolishness. “This earlier disclaimer was not enough for him, but he excuses himself again here. And though he had clear proof of his superiority, yet he calls it madness to speak of it. He calls it boldness and madness to say anything great and important about oneself, even when necessity demands it, and thus teaches us with all our strength to avoid this. For if, having done all, we must call ourselves unprofitable” (Lk. 17:10), then without any compelling cause, can he who exalts and boasts of himself merit any excuse? For this the Pharisee suffered condemnation, and in the very harbor suffered shipwreck when dashed against the rock of self-boasting. For this reason Saint Paul, seeing a thousand reasons to speak of himself, makes excuses and constantly repeats that it is madness, and only dares to do so after presenting in his own defense the extreme necessity (Saint Chrysostom).

Having said that he alone preserves the true character of apostleship, the Apostle “proves this by his very deeds and, passing over miracles, begins with afflictions” (Saint Chrysostom); “he does not set forth miracles, not the dead raised, not the lame walking, not the flight of demons, not the salvation of the world, but his sufferings for the Gospel” (Theodoret). Why does he do this? — Because it would be in a certain way offensive to the very extraordinary gifts themselves to prove the false apostleship of the false apostles and his true apostleship by the absence of these gifts in them. For this it was sufficient to show by deed that they only care for themselves and try to extract their own advantages from everything, wearing the mask of servants of Christ; but to suffer for Christ, which is essentially necessary for true servants of Christ, they have never suffered and cannot take this path.

“With far greater labors, far more imprisonments, with countless beatings, and often near death.”

“With labors.” “Very great, he says, are the labors I undertake, traveling from place to place, teaching day and night and working with my own hands. But, what is more, I endure moreover even ‘beatings’” (Theophylact). “For I endure blows and stripes beyond measure, that is, in addition to the undertaking of labors” (Saint Chrysostom). “Besides this: with wounds and ‘imprisoned’ how many times was I shut up!” (Theophylact). Clement of Rome (Epistle to the Corinthians, 15) says that Saint Paul was imprisoned seven times. — “Often near death.” “‘Daily,’ he said, ‘I die’ (1 Cor. 15:31); but here he means death in fact. For his life was often exposed to mortal dangers (Saint Chrysostom). Not merely willingly dying, but actually putting himself in death-bringing perils” (Theophylact).

“More, far more, excess, many times”—“this is not said in comparison with false apostles,” Oecumenius supposes. But Theophylact says: “It is spoken comparatively with false apostles as if: let them also labor, but I labor more and far more. Others maintain that this is spoken not in comparison, but simply to indicate the multitude and degrees of sufferings.” The latter is closer to the truth.

2 Cor. 11:24. From the Jews five times I received forty lashes minus one.

He explains how he received the wounds. Five times, he says, I was given forty lashes minus one. The Law commanded only that not more than forty lashes be given to those found guilty (Deut. 25:3). One lash was removed by the elders afterwards, so that, perhaps miscounting, they would not give more than forty and thus not prove to be breakers of the Law (Theophylact). When the holy Paul endured these lashes. The Acts does not indicate. Yet in Philippi they beat him, but not Jews, but civil pagan authorities. This means that the book of Acts does not portray all the labors of the holy Paul (Theophylact). “Why ‘forty lashes minus one?’ An ancient law existed among the Jews, that whoever received more than forty lashes be considered disgraced (Deut. 25:3). So that the one striking in passion and heat would not give an extra number of lashes and thereby disgrace the one being punished, they determined to give forty lashes minus one, so that the striker would not exceed forty, even if he struck an extra time; yet, always remaining within the limits of the lawful number, could not inflict disgrace on the one being punished.” (Saint Chrysostom).

2 Cor. 11:25. Three times I was beaten with rods; once I was stoned; three times I was shipwrecked; a night and a day I was adrift at sea.

“Three times I was beaten with rods,” that is, beaten with sticks, ερραβδισθην. Acts mentions one such case, namely in Philippi (Acts 16:22). Since this was from pagan authorities, probably all three cases of beating were by pagans as well. This is why they are noted separately from those five times; and also because the beatings from Jews were probably not with rods.

“Once I was stoned.” This happened in Lystra (Acts 14:19). Ελιθασθην means: not hit with stones thrown at, but beaten with stones; as it is written in Acts: “they stoned Paul”, λιθασαντες, “and dragged him outside the city, thinking he was dead” (Acts 14:19).

“Three times I was shipwrecked.” “How does this relate to the Gospel? — In that he undertook distant travels, and by sea” (Saint Chrysostom). Where were such cases possible? From Antioch to Jerusalem and back one could travel by sea, and the Apostle had already crossed there more than once. Further, between Antioch and Cyprus is the sea; between Cyprus and Pamphylia is the sea; from Troas to Philippi is the sea; from Berea to Athens is the sea; from Corinth to Ephesus is the sea; and now from Troas to Macedonia is the sea.

“A night and a day I was adrift at sea.” “The ship was wrecked with me,” εναυαγησα, that is, three times I suffered shipwreck. Twice I escaped from trouble easily, but once for a whole day I was tossed about by the sea, probably clinging to some broken piece of the ship. Saint Chrysostom says: “Some explain this as meaning he spent a whole day in the middle of the sea, while others say that (when the ship was broken) he drifted for a day in the depths of the sea; the latter agrees better with the truth, and the former would not be worthy of wonder, and the Apostle would not have put it above shipwreck.” Theodoret explains it thus: “When the ship was broken, I was then tossed about all through the night and all through the day by the waves.”

2 Cor. 11:26. I have been on frequent journeys; in dangers from rivers, dangers from robbers, dangers from my own people, dangers from Gentiles, dangers in the city, dangers in the wilderness, dangers at sea, dangers from false brothers.

“In frequent journeys,” he suffered and endured hardship “because for the sake of preaching he undertook the labors of travel” (Theodoret). Often sending his coworkers by sea, he himself went from place to place on foot, hoping to find a field favorable for sowing the gospel (Acts 20:13).

“Dangers from rivers.” “Dangers,” κινδυνοις;—it is understood, I was—in dangers: “on rivers,” “for he was forced to cross rivers” (Saint Chrysostom). There are almost no bridges there even now, and the rivers are small. They cross by fording. Dangers come from the swift current, and during rains from flooding.

“Dangers from robbers”: he was in dangers from robbers attacking on the way. Palestine, Syria, Asia Minor, Macedonia, Greece—all these lands traversed by Saint Paul are mountainous. Gorges are convenient refuges for wicked men. It is so even now.

“Dangers from my own people,” εκ γενους, from my race, that is, I was in dangers from Jews, “my kinsmen, and more so than from others; they were provoked to savagery against me by their unreasonable zeal for the faith and envy at the success of the Gospel” (Theophylact).

“Dangers from Gentiles,” εξ εθνων, I was in dangers from pagans; Jews did not always rise up against Saint Paul themselves, often they incited pagans against him. These could themselves be displeased with him, either because of the abandonment of temples, or because of the diminishment of work for artisans who made objects for pagan religious worship, as happened in Ephesus.

“Was he perhaps not safe in cities? — Not at all” (Theophylact). He was in dangers also “in the city,” εν πολει, in the city. “By this he means the disturbances that arose against him” (Theodoret). “Was he perhaps safer in the wilderness? — Not even there” (Theophylact). “Dangers in the wilderness,” and even in the wilderness he was in dangers, “for he was often forced to travel through desolate places” (Theodoret). These are not dangers from robbers, but from beasts, serpents, sandstorms and the like. “Dangers at sea.” “And when he came down from land, dangers met him on the sea” (Theophylact). These are dangers not properly from the sea, for he has already spoken of that, but from sailors and those who sailed with him. “For he had to engage frequently in seafaring, striving to fill the islands and mainland with piety” (Theodoret).

Dangers everywhere, “everywhere labors were set before me, in various places, in villages, in cities and in deserts” (Saint Chrysostom). “The devil everywhere stirred up wars against me. There was no safe place for me: neither city nor wilderness sheltered me from dangers” (Oecumenius).

“Dangers from false brothers.” “Here is a new kind of warfare! Not only enemies, but those who bore the mask of brotherhood waged war with the Apostle; and in this case great courage and much prudence were required” (Saint Chrysostom). Are meant those who believed from among the Jews, who, however, did not wish to part with the Law; they everywhere caused much trouble to Saint Paul, destroying what he built up. At their instigation, shortly after in Jerusalem there arose an uprising against Saint Paul, which nearly cost him his life. “This kind of trial is the most painful and bitter. And David with deep sorrow complains: ‘If an enemy insulted me, I could endure it… But you, a man my equal,’” (Ps. 54:13, 14) “And again: ‘My close friend… magnified slander against me’” (Ps. 40:10) (Theophylact).