MSB Intro to 2 Corinthians:
Believed to have been written in AD 55 or very early in AD 56, after Paul had left Ephesus, where he spent 2 1/2 years.  The first letter to the Corinthians was written from Ephesus, probably in about AD 55.  So this letter is not long after chronologically, but from a different geography.

Paul spent 18 months in Corinth on his second missionary journey.  After leaving, Paul hears of immorality rampant in that church, and writes them a letter about it.  This is the "lost letter".  We do not have it.  Even after this, Paul heard of divisions within the church at Corinth.  (Apollos, Cephas, Paul, and Jesus).  The Corinthians send a letter to Paul with many specific questions also.  In response, Paul writes 1 Corinthians and sends it to them.  He also sends Timothy to them - perhaps to deliver the letter.  After this, more bad news reaches Paul telling him that people identifying  themselves as "apostles" are in Corinth.

The first thing these did was to try and undermine Paul.  If they could undermine the man they could undermine his teaching.  This is apparently a VERY OLD strategy, and despicable.  When Paul hears of this he temporarily leaves Ephesus and goes to Corinth.  (So this would have been a trip to Corinth during the 2 1/2 years overall that he was in Ephesus).  This is referred to as the "painful visit".  The visit does not go well, with someone - possibly one of the false prophets - openly insulting Paul.  And the Corinthian church did not defend Paul in the face of this.  How bitter that must have been.  I remember the conference in Joaquin when they ran Dad off.  How bitter that must have been for him, too.  Even Bud Cockrell was against him.

After the insult, Paul returned to Ephesus and wrote "the severe letter", which also does not survive.  It was sent with Titus to the church at Corinth.  After some other events, Paul hears from Titus that the Corinthians have repented of their rebellion against Paul.  Upon hearing this, but realizing that the situation is still volatile, Paul writes 2 Corinthians.

MSB says 2 Corinthians contains the clearest, most concise summary of the substitutionary atonement of Christ to be found anywhere in Scripture (5:21, cf Is 53).  Also, the nature of the New Covenant receives its fullest exposition outside the book of Hebrews (3:6-16).

Listed as an interpretive challenge is the relationship of the first 9 chapters to chapters 10-13.  There will be a note at 10:1 about it.  Paul's thorn in the flesh is mentioned in this book, and there is much speculation about what that might have been.  Perhaps it was only his past reputation, following him around.

MSB footnotes on these first four chapters average about 2/3rds of each page.  A lot here for study.

Chapter 1
Paul starts off talking about sharing in both suffering and comforting with the Corinthians.  He says if we suffer, we are better able to comfort those who also suffer.  In the context of the chapter intro information, I'm not sure what this is about.  Perhaps a wave of persecution had swept either Ephesus or Corinth and Paul was referring to that as he got started on this letter.

And then this verse gives us the perspective needed:
8 For we do not want you to be unaware, brothers, of the affliction we experienced in Asia. For we were so utterly burdened beyond our strength that we despaired of life itself. [2Co 1:8 ESV]  Paul was going through some severe difficulties, not least probably being his near despair at the troubles in the Corinthian church.   Paul seems to imply that he had resigned himself to death, thinking maybe that those persecuting him would win.  MSB says we don't know what this was about but that the Corinthians were apparently aware of it, though they may not have realized just how severe the situation was.  
It seems that the application here is that whatever the "limit" of suffering we have reached and recovered from ourselves, we can give comfort and aid to others to that same end.  Empathy?  Or experience?

Paul seems to have been accused of lying outright about a planned trip to Corinth, and the false apostles had made much of it.  Paul defends himself, saying this was a change in plans necessitated by events as they unfolded, not a purposeful deceit in any way.  2021 - No...I don't think this is what it says, I think I'm reading in to it based on the MSB intro to the book.  What it seems to say is that he had planned a trip - two in fact.  He seems to have made one of those stops - on his way to Macedonia, but he cancelled his trip as he was coming back.  The reason he cancelled was not that he had other plans or did not want to go but in order to spare them.  He was apparently quite angry with them and with the people that were there and were being allowed to usurp authority in the church (again, reading in from the introduction).  Paul seems to have been afraid of how such a visit might go, of how severe his words to them might have been, perhaps to the extent of ruining relationships, pushing people away, and even creating insurmountable enmity between himself and some of the brothers there at Corinth.  Perhaps it was this.  Or perhaps Paul was so angry that he was afraid he would shake the dust of Corinth off his feet, that he would condemn them on earth and then God would do so in heaven as he promised His apostles.  Perhaps Paul thought it was that severe in Corinth, and he feared what might happen if he went.  This doesn't seem at all unlikely, and seems a better "sparing" than just not yelling at them.

When people are against you for their own reasons and purposes, there is nothing that you do or can do that they will judge fairly.  Reminds me of the attacks on Trump.  He can't do anything right in their eyes.  They even side with Russia against him.  I am sure they'll say his peace plan - which is an amazing thing in itself so quickly into his term - is a non-starter.

Chapter 2
Paul says he didn't want to come and be disappointed in the Corinthians.  I think that's what he's saying.  He had written them that severe, scolding, reprimanding letter.  He had "spanked his grandchildren severely", and feeling awful that he'd had to do it.  And even after that, he was almost afraid to be around them, lest he find out they held it against him, and blamed him, and revolted further, rather than turning back from what they were doing in repentance, and realization that the severity of the letter was because of his fear of losing them to rebellion, not because of ill will toward them.

There was apparently someone who was so out of line on something - immorality maybe, given the first letter, or one of the false apostles - that the church majority had inflicted a severe punishment on him.  Maybe something like banishment from the body, a withdrawal of fellowship to the point of not even seeing that person.  And though some likely disagreed, they had all participated in order to be united in their action.  Paul is afraid that this person, so treated, and now apparently repentant, will not be forgiven, and that forgiveness is being withheld, at least in part, because they don't think Paul will ever forgive this person.  Maybe it was the person who had publicly insulted Paul when he made the trip from Ephesus to try and fix things???  That seems a likely thing.  Now that he has repented, Paul encourages forgiveness.  This is also possibly about unity within the church.  The reason to exclude someone is to encourage their repentance.  And if that is accomplished, there should be a way for them to come back.  This is almost as if one of the founding members of this church got taken in by the false apostles, went nuts with carnality, and despite the love everyone had for him, between the church and Paul, he had to be put out. 
2021- We just cannot know the details.  There are two missing letters that may explain it all.  But in these two letters, we don't know what happened.  Therefore, we can only look at this in principle.  The principle is that church discipline applied to church members can be a very heavy load to bear for those so disciplined, and that wisdom must be exercised in the timing of reconciliation, lest the damage be to extensive.  Further, Satan might use even the application of required and necessary discipline - when overdone - to create division and disunity within a church. 

These verses:
15 For we are the aroma of Christ to God among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing, 16 to one a fragrance from death to death, to the other a fragrance from life to life. Who is sufficient for these things? [2Co 2:15-16 ESV]  If we are consistent, we will appeal to some on behalf of Christ, and we will be violently avoided by some. We are light or dark.  We smell sweetly or we smell of death.  People's reactions to us will reflect how we "smell" to them.  If we are sincere...Those who are just there to "peddle", to sell a little snake oil, to make a few feel better for a little while, to collect a few paychecks and move on...These won't evoke the reactions that those who are commissioned by God in the sight of God will evoke.  I think...Is Paul saying that the pain his letters have caused, the severe words he has used with them, and the discipline he has insisted that they invoke have made some revise their view of him completely, while the "pacifiers", and the "there there" people are still regarded well...even though they don't really care how things go as long as they get paid?   Is this a lesson about speaking out when doctrine is being diluted, or when outright lies are being told?  It might be...But I think mostly Paul wants these people in Corinth where he spent so much time to kindly regard him now, after all that has happened, as they did when he was with them the first time.  That is what this is.  Corinth was like home, and Paul is feeling unwelcome at home.  Yes.  That's the sense of this.

Chapter 3
Paul moves on to a defense of himself as a (or indeed for the Corinthians THE apostle among all the fake ones) true apostle.  He reminds them that they know him.  He reminds them of the effects of the gospel he preached as opposed to that preached by the false apostles.  He says the changed lives, the changed souls, of those converted long before the false apostles even arrived are testimony to the truth of that gospel.  These saved people, the church at Corinth itself, are visible evidence of the legitimacy of Paul's message.  

(****2021 - This is an appeal to orthodoxy - 2Co 3:1-3.  This says not to look at what the new teachings of the false apostles might be doing, don't spend your time puzzling over whether their teaching is legitimate or not, but look backwards!  The evidence of what is true was shown before they ever arrived, and the changed lives continue - the effects of the true gospel that Paul preached are manifest in the lives of the early members of your church - who are still there with you!  Look back to that.  Compare the "new apostle's teaching" with the old, and discard the new that contradicts the old.  You know the old was right.  You do not need to evaluate the new but only demand consistency with the old.***See also below.)

(2021-2 - Is the above really there?  The Orthodoxy part?  Is there a verse?  If there is, it will be a great NT followup to the first post on Prov 4, where wisdom was old  Can the case be made that this also applies to new theological ideas?  That the new must always be tested against the old, and that the old is to be weighted far more heavily?  ...No, this idea is not clearly stated.  Paul says that the Corinthians, their lives as Christians, are Paul's credentials.  He needs no letters from, say, John or James in Jerusalem, because he was there, and his message of the gospel changed their lives.  What else does he need to prove himself besides visible results.  However, there is no explicit contrast here between Paul and the false apostles.  He does not mention them at all here, but is focused only on establishing what should be obvious - that his credentials are writ large in the changed lives of the members of the church in Corinth.)

What of the legitimacy of the false teacher's message that Mosaic law is still required.  That you obey stone tablets rather than your own heart?  How does this look in the light of the changed lives from Paul's arrival there???

5 Not that we are sufficient in ourselves to claim anything as coming from us, but our sufficiency is from God, 6 who has made us sufficient to be ministers of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit. For the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life. [2Co 3:5-6 ESV]
Look at this last sentence.  The letter is the Mosaic Law, and the Spirit is the New Covenant.  Here is the stark contrast between the two.  The Law condemned by showing them their sin, by requiring that they attempt to "purify" or "justify" themselves with the blood of animal sacrifices, observance of feasts, the Sabbath...all these things were WORK!  And you couldn't do enough WORK to get you there.  The New Covenant in Christ's blood was still necessary to save those OT followers of the Law.  In their hearts, they had faith, and so were saved, but they could not be reconciled to God Himself, nor enter His presence, until the perfect sacrifice had been offered.
2021-2, The paragraph above is a good paragraph.  I would extend this teaching also to Judaism and Islam.  Theirs is still a religion of laws where obedience to the law is all that is required for salvation.  A place in heaven is based on merit, on a willingness, a human ability to get over the performance bar, or in Islam's case, to be one of the best of those who strive.  

Paul says the Law was temporary, insufficient, and coming to an end from the time it came into being.  In spite of that, the glory of these words of condemnation which came direct from God, was visible on Moses countenance when he received them.  If that law of death was glorious, how much more the finished work of Jesus.

Paul says that the glory that shone on Moses as he received this law faded and passed away over time, just as the Law itself was fading - had faded over time.  But Paul says he won't veil his face, because the New Covenant is forever, imperishable, and about life, not death.  Another stark contrast.  Fading glory before, increasing glory until heaven's glory now.

Paul next says that the veil that hid Moses face is like the veil in the hearts of those Israelites, and of the Israel of his own day, and kept them from seeing the truth behind the veil.  He says that...here's what he says:
14 But their minds were hardened. For to this day, when they read the old covenant, that same veil remains unlifted, because only through Christ is it taken away. [2Co 3:14 ESV]
Their minds were hardened as punishment for the rebellion and unbelief.  That whole generation died.  And does that hardening of the hearts continue to Paul's time, so that they are still "kept from" the New Covenant?  Surely Paul is implying this.  NO.  I have this one all wrong, Paul is saying the following, per the MSB note:
The "veil" here represents unbelief.  Those Israelites did not grasp the glory of the Old Covenant because of their unbelief.  As a result, the meaning of the Old Covenant was obscure to them.  Paul's point is that just as the Old Covenant was obscure to the people of Moses' day, it was still obscure to those who trusted in it as a means of salvation in Paul's day.  The veil of ignorance obscures the meaning of the Old Covenant to the hardened heart.

Here is where hope lies:
16 But when one turns to the Lord, the veil is removed. [2Co 3:16 ESV]
In Christ.  The veil is removed/torn.  The Spirit indwells.  Obscurity vanishes.  Glory is beheld.

Look at this verse:
18 And we all, with unveiled face, beholding the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from one degree of glory to another. For this comes from the Lord who is the Spirit. [2Co 3:18 ESV]
The Son and the Father are One.  John 8 I believe.  Now the Son and the Spirit are One.  Proof text for the Trinity.  
2022 - The word translated LORD both times in this verse is the Greek "kyrios", the title for Jesus.

Chapter 4
With the gospel comes the putting away of "disgraceful, underhanded ways."  No cunning to be used, no tampering with God's word!  Again, we have to read backwards through this text to see what was going on in Corinth.  It's like there was a coordinated attack on that church with no holds barred on the part of the attackers.  They were willing to do anything and everything to undermine that church.  The attack was not from men, but from men used by Satan to tear down that church.  Why was it Corinth that they picked?  Why not Ephesus or Antioch?  

This verse:
3 And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing. [2Co 4:3 ESV]
This is about those who can't see the sense of it.  The dots don't connect for those who are still unsaved.  You cannot explain it to them.  Faith must come, and Spirit must indwell before the veil is lifted.  2021 - Yes it is that, but it also confirms I think that this church was under a coordinated direct attack by Satan.  Perhaps this is where he tested his strategies for uprooting and overthrowing the body of Christ - for disabling Christ in the Gentile Age.  This is where he learned how far he could go, what would....no....That doesn't seem to work.  But it does decidedly say that Satan was doing what he could to blind the eyes of unbelievers there.

A transition verse:
7 But we have this treasure in jars of clay, to show that the surpassing power belongs to God and not to us. [2Co 4:7 ESV]
What a memorizable phrase!

Getting old outside is nothing to worry about:
16 So we do not lose heart. Though our outer self is wasting away, our inner self is being renewed day by day. [2Co 4:16 ESV]
Good one for FB.

The Judaizers sought to incorporate the new Christian faith within Judaism.  They wanted to wrap around it so that they could control it.  And they wanted to impose their beliefs and hierarchies on it also.  It was not a noble thing they were doing, they didn't really believe in the New Covenant.

****2021 - This sure seemed confusing to me this morning.  I was just having a hard time following it - even worse than I had figuring out yesterday's reading.  It just seems like chapters and chapters of necessary information have been skipped over, and we are left trying to reconstruct events that we really know nothing about.  We can speculate about almost anything that it might have been, and we might be correct...or we might be 1000 miles away.  So for me, at least in these first four chapters, I will stick to the principles and try not to apply them too broadly since they may have been about specific troubles here.  At the same time, these chapters are perhaps a glimpse into what attack looks like, so that at least we will know when something serious is going on, rather than just a bit of disagreement on minor points.  I think perhaps the way Paul referred them back to orthodoxy - to original teaching - might be the main point of these first four chapters.  If your church is in trouble, faltering, splintering, attacked, false teachers abounding, members encouraged to stay calm and not get upset about false doctrines taught as truth...If all that is happening, the "cure" is a return to orthodoxy.  Go back to the simple.  Less classes, not more.  Old teachers, not young.  Hymns, not choruses.  Verse by verse preaching, not topical sermons.  The gospel, not...law?  I think this is the way to read this second letter - at least to this point.  Maybe it will get more specific.*****

2021-2,  The chapter closes like this:
17 For this light momentary affliction is preparing for us an eternal weight of glory beyond all comparison, 18 as we look not to the things that are seen but to the things that are unseen. For the things that are seen are transient, but the things that are unseen are eternal. [2Co 4:17-18 ESV]
Here is another place where Paul says that what awaits us in heaven - what we have not yet seen will be so ecstatically infinitely good that no pain, no suffering, no affliction, no persecution in this physical life will budge the scales.  Heaven will be so good that no amount of "reprieve" on earth will be worth giving up what is to come.  The other verse about this is here:  18 For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us. [Rom 8:18 ESV]

Chapter 5

2021 - Again today, I recall that we don't really know what this letter is about - we don't have a clue as to specifics because a letter and a visit occurred that we know nothing about.  Any attempt at specifics is almost wholly inference.  So I will focus on principles. and their application if I can, and not try to puzzle out what prompted the text.

Chapter 4 ended saying that what is unseen is eternal, but what is seen is transient.  This one starts with the transience of our earthly bodies.  It seems that Paul is once again addressing the Greek position that bodies are just corruption, and that no one would want to be resurrected.  Paul says that these bodies that wear out are seen and transient, but Christ has prepared for us a "tent" - a heavenly, spiritual body - that will never wear out.  

As long as we are in these bodies, we walk by faith - because faith is in what we have not seen.  
 

2021-2, Then this verse:
10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive what is due for what he has done in the body, whether good or evil. [2Co 5:10 ESV]
MSB says this judgement is to determine our rewards, based on the things we did during our lives, and whether we spent our time on things of eternal value or on lesser things.  MSB is adamant that there will be no judgement seat for the sins of believers because Christ has already paid for those.  This is not how I've always heard it, but when I look at the sheep and goats and Great White Throne...those are sinners being judged.  Looking back at last year's notes, I see that I have come 180 degrees about since then concerning the judgement of believers.  MSB says what was in view was the crowning of athletes.  Some get first, some second, some consolation prizes and so on, but they would not be judged as good or bad athletes.
2021-These first 10 verses all seem to me to still be talking about the dualism of flesh and spirit as taught by the Greeks.  Paul is still telling them that this mortal body to which the Greek philosophers attribute all that is unclean is just transient.  We are "stuck" in it, and we know that while we are in this mortal body we cannot be present with Christ in heaven.  In that sense, the Greeks are on the right track.  But we also should remember that we must do our best while we live in this body - and not behave as though things done in this body don't matter at all - because we are ultimately to be judged by our mortal actions - by what we do while in the flesh.  Being "saddled with a mortal body" does not excuse us from obedience or setting an example or from moral obligations to behave in accordance with God's commands.  
2021-2,  So the question is, are we talking about a separate - a third judgement - or are the saved included in some way in the two we are sure of - the one at the setting up of Christ's Kingdom at the end of Great Tribulation, or the one at the end of the Millennial?  I only found two references to this bema seat judgement.  Neither gives us any clue at all as to when this is going to happen.  Why couldn't Paul have been speaking in general terms of a future judgement, and we didn't get specific because not all Christians will be judged for their works at the same time.  It will depend on when you die in relation to God's plan.  Everyone saved from Christ's resurrection on (or from Pentecost on if you have a DD), whether alive or dead, goes to heave at the rapture.  Shall those saved enjoy heaven for 1007 years, and then be judged?  Only then received their crowns?  Well yeah, if it is not a judgement for sin it won't necessarily make us sad.  I don't think we're supposed to ever be sad after heaven.  So either this judgement is immediately after the rapture - and we have absolutely nothing to say that's when it is, or it is included at one of the others.  There is also a lot of discussion on these judgements in the notes on Matthew 25.
However, look also at the end of verse 10 - whether good or evil.  We must ALL receive...what if he is including both saved and unsaved here?  How can we say the saved will be judged for evil, and at the same time say that Christ paid for our sins, they no longer exist in His eyes, and will never answer for those?  If this is only about the saved, what evil are the saved going to answer for?  
For future thought:  In all of 4 and this first part of 5, Paul has been contrasting the physical with the spiritual, showing that we are comprised of both and each has a function and purpose.  What if by "good or evil", Paul is referring to spirit and body?  He even mentions the body!  Are the two judgements put together this way?  One for what was done in the body and one for the final state of our spiritual being?  They only get out the books, and mention the book of life separately, at the Great White Throne.  NOT at the sheep and goats.  Surely do need to put all this together.
One more thing:  judgement seat in this verse is "bema", and this is a good place to pull up all 12 times this word is used in the NT.  I note that 8 of those are in Acts, written by Luke, and not by Paul.  Paul only uses it twice, once in Romans, and once here in 2Co.  Really need to get this on the study list.  Would also be good to actually do the studdy.

These verses:
14 For the love of Christ controls us, because we have concluded this: that one has died for all, therefore all have died; 15 and he died for all, that those who live might no longer live for themselves but for him who for their sake died and was raised. [2Co 5:14-15 ESV]
We all died when Christ died.  That would only apply to those born again, those who become new.  We die to sin, die to the slavery of sin, die to the law, and so on.  Only the saved died with Christ, so turn that around and Christ only died for those who would be saved.  I think Calvinists use this as a proof text.
This sentence quoted from MSB: "With this short phrase, Paul defined the extent of the atonement and limited its application."  I think MacArthur is a Calvinist...but I was sure he disagreed with Spurgeon on this....Need to know where JM stands.
And again...we are responsible for our actions in the flesh, because Christ died in the flesh for us, and set His example of behavior in the flesh.  Christ did not live like these false teachers promote.  Paul did not live like these false apostles promote.  Christ - the supreme example and payer of the supreme price - showed us by His life what our lives ought to be, and Paul has tried to do the same.  THIS is why he is constantly comparing his behavior when he was in Corinth - and other places - the the behavior of those who come later and contradict his words.  There was no scripture that said "The Greeks are all wrong with this dualism thing" - Or maybe their was, but the Gentile Corinthians were not well versed in the OT scriptures, and perhaps thought them no better than Greek writings of the time...But there was example.  Jesus lived and showed them how to live.

Then this:
16 From now on, therefore, we regard no one according to the flesh. Even though we once regarded Christ according to the flesh, we regard him thus no longer. [2Co 5:16 ESV]  So the argument being made, Paul now says he will proceed in this way.  We will thrown out the whole dualism thing, and we will not consider the converted as flesh at all.  Just forget that, because that flesh died with Christ, and rose as something else with Christ.  So Paul is just "disappearing" one half of the dualism on which the false teachers depend to make their case for hedonism.  This is not quite similar to the MSB notes on this verse.  I have applied the pronouns differently.  ...moving on....So much is over my head in 2Co.

Just a few short verses later we get this:
17 Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come. [2Co 5:17 ESV]  To be in Christ is to be saved.  To be in Christ is to be a new creation.  The old "passed away".  It died, with Him, on that cross.  This corroborates the interpretation of 14, 15 as limiting atonement.  2021 - And I think he is also continuing the argument that dualism as taught by philosophy is not valid or applicable to the saved.  They are not flesh.  They are not yet Spirit.  They are something else - IN CHRIST - who is Spirit already.  they are flesh within perfect spirit.

Now Paul makes the point that it was in fact God who arranged all this.  This is not coincidence, not the Son acting alone and that selfless act persuading God.  The Son acted as God planned before the world began.  It is God who knew we would sin, knew it would cause a separation that He could not overlook, and yet...rather than send us straight to hell at that first sin, God made a way to reconcile our sinfulness with His holiness through the purity and sinlessness of His Son, the perfect sacrifice satisfying all the requirements of justice.

The chapter closes with this verse:
21 For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God. [2Co 5:21 ESV]  In ESV there is  no capitalization of the pronouns.  Here it is in NASB:
21 He made Him who knew no sin [to be] sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him. [2Co 5:21 NASB]
KJV does not capitalize, but NKJV does.  NIV does not.  I don't understand why these don't.  I see no other way to read this than that God made Jesus, who knew no sin, to be sin for us, so that we in Jesus (looking back to vs 17 where we are in Christ) become God's righteousness writ large.  Is it right for God to judge us for our sins that He knew we would commit before He even created us?  Yes of course it is, if also before creating us He had put in place the plan to both judge us and to save us from that judgement.  And we get freedom of will because He did it this way.  That could not have come about any other way.
FB or website post.

These last verses of Chapter 5 are the doctrine of the Substitutionary death of Christ in plain English.  MSB says it is the most clear statement of the doctrine in the entire Bible.

Chapter 6
Starts like this:
1 Working together with him, then, we appeal to you not to receive the grace of God in vain. [2Co 6:1 ESV]
How can grace be received in vain if we cannot lose salvation?  MSB says that most of the Corinthians were saved but were hindered by legalistic teaching regarding sanctification.  Some weren't saved, and weren't going to be as long as the Judaizers were teaching them that salvation was through compliance with the law of Moses.  So with the saved sort of "in a holding pattern, doing the works of the law" and others not receiving the true gospel, it looked as though Paul's 2 1/2 years in Corinth might come to nothing.  He was not speaking here about a specific person, but about the church in Corinth that he had founded.

Through vs 13, Paul "commends" or "introduces" himself to the Corinthians again, reminding them of how he has been no burden to them, how he suffered and worked and worried and taught and so on while he was with them.  He has taken criticisms and slander, been called names, and they have not defended him, yet he stayed true to them.  He draws many contrasts beginning in vs. 8b showing that he has been true.  Called an imposter, but true to who he said he was.  As a stranger, but well known to them.  He keeps showing them these opposites perhaps to drive home how ridiculous the accusations are of those who have told these lies about him, and to point this out as a character trait of the fake apostles that they should be examining, and not Paul's own character, which they know first hand and very well.

Vss 14-18 start with "do not be unequally yoked".  I always thought this was about husbands and wives.  Now I am not so sure.  He is talking about the church in Corinth - that is the context.  He has just told them that they should be working with him.  Then he pointed out how those who are speaking against him are liars, and those that hear the lies know they are lies because they have MET THE REAL PAUL and KNOW he is NOT what they accuse him of being.  Therefore, their leaders are liars, their leaders are unbelievers, and their leaders are hindering the Corinthians from joining - from being yoked with - Paul.  Instead, they are hooking up with the unbelieving ox team and how are the things they are being directed to do while in this yoke to them promoting the kingdom of God.  There is an OT command about not harnessing oxen and mules (donkeys...something like that) together.  This is poor plowing practice.  Paul is implying here, I think, that he and the false apostles are as different as oxen are from mules.  He is saying that his teaching of the Corinthians made them as he is - saved by grace, free from law - and that it is only proper that they be yoked with him, plow with him, work with him.  

No.  This isn't about marriage except glancingly, as a general principle.  Marriage is nowhere in this context.  2021 - But what about working with the church across the street with a different sign in the parking lot?  Catholics?  Islam? Hindu? Where exactly does this "do not be unequally yoked" begin and end?  My first thought would be that it begins and ends with Christology...but Paul is talking about soteriololgy. 

Chapter 7
Starts like this:
1 Since we have these promises, beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from every defilement of body and spirit, bringing holiness to completion in the fear of God. [2Co 7:1 ESV]
But that seems to me to be more the last verse of 6 than a new chapter.  The promises referred to are those in 16-18.  7:1 is the concluding verse of chapter 16.

In 2-4 Paul tells them of his own emotional feelings for them.  His pride in them.  He is, I think, overcome that they have at last thrown off their rebellion and turned back as much as they can to the original teachings of Paul.  His emotions are overwhelming him that the church there is not going to be in vain, or lost to the deceit of the false apostles and of Satan who sent them.

vss 5-9 confirm that I'm on track with what I said about 2-4.  Paul says his severe letter caused them "Godly grief", a good thing in his eyes, with many good long term results, as in these verses:
10 For godly grief produces a repentance that leads to salvation without regret, whereas worldly grief produces death. 11 For see what earnestness this godly grief has produced in you, but also what eagerness to clear yourselves, what indignation, what fear, what longing, what zeal, what punishment! At every point you have proved yourselves innocent in the matter. [2Co 7:10-11 ESV]
2021-2, "the matter" is singular.  That severe letter must have addressed one specific heresy perhaps.  Acceptance maybe of just one highly immoral person.  We don't know for sure.  But here is a clue that it was "a matter", not a broad departure of the whole church.  In the next verse, 12, we see that something was going on with two people.  Just nearly impossible to speculate even.  We could be so far off.

Chapter 8
This chapter seems to be a clean break with what Paul has spoken of up to this point.  This is just "Ok, enough of that, let's move on to current and practical daily housekeeping stuff".
Now he turns to the generosity of the churches in Macedonia, and the offerings they've sent, and how Corinth also needs to send something.
He talks about how Jesus left the riches of heaven to become a poor man so that they Corinthians might be made rich.  Jesus was poor on earth, the Corinthians were made wealthy spiritually.  He is urging the Corinthians to be spiritual in their generous giving that the "earthly" poor in Jerusalem might be made...sufficient.  This implies to me that we will be rewarded in heaven spiritually for our charity here on earth.  This one has been made a cornerstone of Islam.  They must give to the poor to get into heaven even!

Now Paul turns to commending Titus, whom he sent to them, and who came back and told Paul in Macedonia that the tide had turned for the better.

I saved this one for 1/31, Wilson's birthday, so I can be in the word daily.  Just not for as long tomorrow morning.

Chapter 9
First five verses continue about the gift the Corinthians will give to the Jerusalem church.  Paul has bragged of their generosity and will be  humiliated if they don't come through in spectacular fashion.  He's even sending some men ahead to make sure it's all tied up with a bow before those from Macedonia get there.

Paul says the point is this:
6 The point is this: whoever sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and whoever sows bountifully will also reap bountifully. [2Co 9:6 ESV]
But it is also that we are to give as we decide, and not reluctantly.  Implication seems to be that our giving reflects our heart.
MSB says giving goes by an agrarian principle.  If you want a huge harvest, sow a huge amount of seed.  Whatever you sow, in like proportion, you receive in blessings.

Chapter 10
Chapter 9 ends with commentary on giving.  
Vss 1-6 really threw me off.  They don't seem to be connected with chapter 9.  In fact, they don't seem connected with anything.  So I checked MSB.
There is apparently a huge debate about how Chapters 10-13 seem like a whole separate letter than chapters 1-9, and some even say 10-13 were written first.  Other's say 10-13 were a later letter, written by Paul after he received still more bad news from Corinth.  There is no historical evidence of this.  MSB position is that 1-9 were written to the repentant believers in Corinth, and 10-13 to those still holding on to the teaching of the fake apostles.  So.  With this context, I will start over...
2021 - I recall also that 1 Corinthians ended with a financial appeal, which is where 2 Cor 9 ends.  I can see where a case could be made for Chapter 10 being a different letter.
2021-2, I also note, however, that there is nothing even a little like a salutation in Chapter 10.  It does not really read like the start of a letter.  Why would that have been left off?

vs 1 starts with "I, Paul, myself..." as if he is re-introducing himself.  This could be seen as him now addressing a different group of readers.  Paul says that while he "takes what they dish out" when he is there, he "tells it like it is" in his letters.  And he hopes that when he next visits them, he won't have to be as bold in person as he has been in letters (likely referring to the severe letter.).

Paul says he walks in the flesh (admitting that he does make mistakes, does still sin, does do things the wrong way sometimes) the battle he fights in spiritual.  The real war is spiritual.  It is not about eloquence or credentials, it is about spiritual things, the spiritual realm, and requires weapons of the spirit.  
2021 -  Or maybe that's not at all what he's saying.  Here's the verse:
2 I beg of you that when I am present I may not have to show boldness with such confidence as I count on showing against some who suspect us of walking according to the flesh. 3 For though we walk in the flesh, we are not waging war according to the flesh. [2Co 10:2-3 ESV]
He is "suspected" of walking according to the flesh - which in my mind is a different thing than walking in the flesh.  The first is "subject" to, or as disposed by the flesh. That is, the flesh rules over actions.  But Paul says that is not the war he fights.  He seems to me to be saying that the flesh does not "run" him, though he is in the flesh.  Instead, he fights on a different battleground.  
We are still here, on this same subject of flesh and spirit, even after Paul said it doesn't even apply to Christians because of the new man we become in Christ.  The false, Greek Philosopher pretenders - likely extremely well educated and trained in debate - had made a case to throw Paul's argument out.  They would just about have to.  And likely, many in this church would have been persuaded to stick with the new teachers - after all, they allowed a lot more "fun", and reduced it all to obeying a few rules rather than actually changing yourself and making yourself better.  Paul must feel like he is losing this battle.  He must be losing some people who were very close to him the 2 1/2 years he was in Corinth.  He is having to say things to these people he loves that it hurts him to say.  He is feeling loss.  He is losing relationships that he does not feel will ever recover because of the things he's had to say to them in letters.  He appeals, but he knows.  He knows the words were correct, that they had to be said, and that it was his place to say them.  But he still feels great loss.

This verse:
7 Look at what is before your eyes. If anyone is confident that he is Christ's, let him remind himself that just as he is Christ's, so also are we. [2Co 10:7 ESV]  Paul is trying to put himself on the same team with these he is writing to.  Trying to remind them of his time with them.  Of his own personal behavior as witness to the truth of what he says and his commitment to them and to the gospel - and NOT to any other kind of gain!  Again, there were no NT scriptures for Paul to appeal to in debating the false teachers.  He had his apostolic authority - which he set great store by, yet even this was subject to attack in that Paul did not actually walk with Jesus, was not among the 12 when Jesus was here.  God was revealing Himself through the apostles.  As in "new revelation", new scripture.  But it was not done yet. so Paul had his own example, and his own position...but what about signs and wonders?  He never mentions or reminds the Corinthians of the "miracles" he did while in Corinth, he never asks why these new apostles don't do miracles?  Why is this "witness", this confirmation that Paul talked so much about in 1 Co 12 not brought out like the big gun?  Does it say anywhere in the Bible that Paul did any miracles at Corinth?

Paul says that all the Corinthians need do to determine who is genuine and who is fake is to look at what they've seen themselves.  They know how Paul behaved among them.  They know that though his "letter language" is severe, he walked the talk when he was there.  He's not asking them to do what he won't do.  

And this verse:
12 Not that we dare to classify or compare ourselves with some of those who are commending themselves. But when they measure themselves by one another and compare themselves with one another, they are without understanding. [2Co 10:12 ESV]
This looks like sarcasm to me.  Paul is saying he has no chance of coming out on top by comparing himself to what the fakes in Corinth say about themselves.  That is, if it's a bragging contest, Paul knows he'd lose.  MSB says the false teachers were setting up "standards" for apostles that they knew they could meet, and then tearing down others who couldn't reach their high standards. Bet the standards had a lot to do with keeping the law, but that's just my guess.  It doesn't really say.  Paul says it doesn't matter what these false teachers say about each other or how much they endorse each other.  What matters is the results they get because it is God that endorses His own by the results of their ministry.  I think that's what it says.

Chapter 11
Paul introduces this chapter by asking the Corinthians to bear with him in a little foolishness.  A literary or rhetorical device is likely coming.

Then Paul compares the Corinthians to Eve, who knew God personally, and yet was deceived by the serpent.  Paul is afraid that the Corinthians are also being deceived by these false teachers.  These teachers must have been very skilled at oration, and very familiar with scripture and so on.  Learned, skilled men when it came to scripture.  They were better speakers than Paul, no doubt.  Again sarcastically, Paul refers to them as "super-apostles".  I'm sure that's how they think of themselves.  And Paul says that while they may be better, more persuasive speakers, they are NOT more knowledgeable than he is, and the Corinthians know from his time with them that this is so.  He is being attacked as a "hillbilly" perhaps, inferior to these later arrivals with more profound knowledge, and he is saying that speaking well is not the same as knowing well, and shouldn't be what carries the day!  The same is true today!

Paul points out that while he was among them, he took no pay for his preaching.  So their position is "you get what you pay for"?  I'm guessing the fake apostles were robbing them blind.  And Paul asks if they are valuing the teaching they get by the amount of money demanded for that teaching.  Is his preaching worth less because he took no pay?

It may be that Paul continues in this "working for free" in order to contrast himself with the false apostles.  None of them will consider working for free.  But Paul did, and says he plans to forego any pay from them.  It is pretty clear in this verse:
12 And what I am doing I will continue to do, in order to undermine the claim of those who would like to claim that in their boasted mission they work on the same terms as we do. [2Co 11:12 ESV]  Paul is not like the false apostles, and he is alone in the way he does these things.  They must be comparing themselves to Paul and saying that they not only measure up in every way - that they are as he is - but are even better because they speak better.  And Paul says you are not the same in every way, because you take money for your time.  You "sell" your teaching, you sell the gospel for a price.  Paul has already told the Corinthians to just look.  Most likely the false teachers were living the high life with the money they were paid.  Big houses, cars, color TVs in every room, private jets.  Just like Paul...except Paul worked for a living making tents when he was there, and preached for free.  Hmm...A lesson for our modern times also, with our mega-churches, and our mega-preachers.  A test we can still apply today?  And should apply!  This is finally coming together for me...Paul was not criticizing preachers for taking pay.  He was criticizing them for "getting rich" off their preaching, because that was an indicator that they were in it for the money, not for the souls, not for the church, not for Christ.  This is the reason Paul keeps bringing up pay.  It wasn't just a small contrast.  It was huge.

Then Paul says he's going to continue to work for free to undermine the claim these false apostles make that they are just like Paul.  He is drawing a huge contrast between them.  Beginning in 13, Paul is very direct in his accusations toward the false teachers:
13 For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. 14 And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. 15 So it is no surprise if his servants, also, disguise themselves as servants of righteousness. Their end will correspond to their deeds. [2Co 11:13-15 ESV]
He calls them what they are, and he says they work for Satan, disguised as he is, as angels of light.  This is pretty strong stuff.  The bigger the church, the easier for the preacher to hide, also.  It is hard to know a man's heart when you don't know the man.  The signs are not really all that obvious from a distance.  Yet Paul never indicts the size of the church. 

Paul now says he's going to tell them some things "as a fool".  Sarcastically, he knows they will listen to fools as readily as they listen to those who seek to make slaves of them, to devour them, to take advantage of them etc.  If they tolerate those who do these things to them, bearing with a "fool" should be no big deal.. 
These verses:
20 For you bear it if someone makes slaves of you, or devours you, or takes advantage of you, or puts on airs, or strikes you in the face. 21 To my shame, I must say, we were too weak for that! But whatever anyone else dares to boast of--I am speaking as a fool--I also dare to boast of that. [2Co 11:20-21 ESV]
This implies to me that on his last visit to Corinth, things got so heated with one of these false apostles that blows were exchanged.  And Paul didn't put up with it, he hit back.  And now he is beyond embarrassed because he knows that was the wrong reaction.  Perhaps he fears that is part of the reason the Corinthians didn't defend him in that situation, because his temper got him.  And this is how he tells them he reacted badly.
2021 - MSB doesn't see it this way at all.  MSB suggests that maybe the false teachers resorted to physically abusing their students as part of the training.  What a way to make yourself "better" than others - to give yourself the right to whip them, as if they were slaves or children.  MSB says it may just be metaphorical, though, in the "high and mighty" attitude of the false teachers. 

    A lesson here is that when Paul made this very public mistake, and behaved in an "un-apostolic" way, he could have slinked away defeated, never come back, abandoned the sheep to the wolves.  But he DID NOT DO THAT!  He already had persecuted and killed Christians and God had called him anyway, despite the horror he had inflicted, so Paul knew that this current defeat was no more permanent than his former mistakes.  He could have abandoned that whole church.  But he loved them too much, and was too dedicated to the gospel and to Christ to let his own humiliation stop him from shepherding them back to the Way.  Here is a lesson for all of us who have strayed, and made mistakes, and in the eyes of many have ruined our own testimony because of the sinfulness we sank into.  We can still do God's work, still accomplish His will, still reach some - though others may never believe our sincerity.  What others see in us is not the important thing.  It is not their commendation we seek, but God's, for our continued efforts to serve Him.
If at all possible, this needs to be on FB.  2021 - I sure needed this reminder from last year.  I mess up.  It seems I just "un-ravel" what little good I accumulate over a long period.  I have done it before, I just recently did it again.  It happens just when things seem to be turning a corner I've been working towards.   And just before it's accomplished, by my own words/actions I cross the street and go the opposite direction.  And it's one way, and I despair of every getting turned around again and trying to get back to that corner.  And time gets shorter and shorter.  It feels like such a permanent loss.  I think that's what Paul is saying/feeling in these verses.  I think he messed up bad, and he fears some are lost to hell because he cannot - by the example of his own behavior that he has appealed to so often - turn them back to him.  Because he undermined his own example in a pitiful way.  I know what that is like

Paul now compares his own "sufferings" and "credentials" to the those of the false teachers.  He recounts the  highlights of his sufferings - knowing it is sinfully boastful to do so - but unwilling to let them claim greater qualification as apostles than him on the basis of their sufferings, their education, their lineage.  Even to the point of his escaping a King's wrath in Damascus.

Chapter 12
Continues his qualifications, begun in the previous chapter.
He speaks of being caught up into Paradise - but isn't sure if it was real or a vision - and seeing and hearing things that it is not given to men to speak of.  He knows he was there, and he knows the rarity and privilege of it, and it is tempting for him to speak these things he heard and so "boast" and "prove himself" the greatest apostle.  Yet God "wounded" him in some way to keep him from getting conceited.  Could it be that he had a lisp or a speech impediment after this, and that is why he spent so much time refuting the eloquence of the false teachers?  They could easily say that Paul was a tongue tied goofus if he had some kind of speech impediment.  And that would be why Paul made such a deal of knowledge vs eloquence.  He's as smart as the false teachers, though not as eloquent.  Sure makes a lot of sense.  This is Paul's explanation to the Corinthians - his refutation of the "Paul is stupid, he can't even talk" - of why he has this problem that he has.  It is because he has seen what no other man has seen, NOT because he has diminished brain power.  2021 - And he has come to see this weakness of his as a strength.  It keeps him from winning by eloquence, but it makes him win by knowledge.  

2021-2, Vss 2-4 discuss the third heaven and Paradise in possibly equivalent terms.  I copied these into the judgment study because I think they bear on whether or not the dead in Christ are in the third heaven and Paradise as separate places or the same place.

Now Paul points out that the testimony to his apostleship when he was among them were the signs, wonders, and mighty works.  And Corinth received as much of these as any other church.  He did not belittle them.  The only difference in Paul's behavior at Corinth vs other churches was that he took no pay from Corinth.
2021 - So here he does remind them of miracles.  Why, I wonder, does he not bring this up more. Why does he not ask to see the miracles of the super-apostles?  If they were Satan's...perhaps they did show some counterfeit signs?  But still...the real thing would show up in the long run.  Paul points out that the signs and wonders were part of the proof of his apostleship.  I think.

Beginning in vs 19, Paul says that what he's telling them is not a "defense", but a testimony before Christ of his sincerity in correcting them.  He is "afraid" that when he comes to them for the third time, he will find the same problems, the same hindrances, the immorality and impurity that he has preached so adamantly against.  He is afraid they will still argue with him that such things are ok for them, and people will behave antagonistically about it all.  He wants them to know, before God Himself, that he is the real apostle, and that rejecting him is an unrepentant attitude with dire consequences to them.
Think what it would be like for Hance to come back and get people together and tell them that Rummage is preaching false doctrine.  What an uproar it would cause, what division.  How would you ever get people back on the same page?  Yet Paul is telling them he is coming back, and that he fears just such uproar when he does.  And he is disappointed that there will be such an uproar when the truth is so very plain.

Chapter 13
Starts this way:
1 This is the third time I am coming to you. Every charge must be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses. [2Co 13:1 ESV]
Paul won't stand still for unsubstantiated charges against him by the false apostles.  If they wish to accuse him, they will need others besides themselves to back their claims.  

2021-2, As I read it this year, it is not charges against himself that Paul is talking about, but charges against Christians by Christians in the Corinthian church.  He will not tolerate gossip and slander.  If you want to accuse others, then you need two or three agreeing on the charges.  Reading through the MSB notes, I have it right this year, was wrong last.  It almost seems like Corinth was rife with factions working against each other.  This would seem very likely if they  had members living in open sin, unrepentant, yet ambitious to be in church leadership.  Repentant Christians would be beside themselves, recognizing the danger to the church and to the failed witness they would be in such a city as Corinth.  The "best speakers" were sided with the unrepentant, and then the grounded and settled had only their own resources and their scriptures, and any letters they'd received from apostles - mainly from Paul.  So Paul was attacked as just another guy writing big letters and making himself "scriptural" when they were just letters, just opinion.  What would you do?  How would you resolve such a thing?  Is that what the BMA, the NABA, and the SBC are there for?  To removed unrepentant and clearly erroneous error from association with the rest?  SBC last year removed a church down south for ordaining women preachers.  But...what do they do about unmarried people living together and coming to church every week?  I guess that's not association, that's local church, but does anyone do it?  Besides John MacArthur I mean?  It seems another way to study 1 and 2Co  might be to look for lessons on repairing a broken, fractured, contentious church.  Just itemize the steps Paul took as we go through the books to try and bring it back to "The Way", without taking sides.  He does sometimes call a name of someone who is doing something horrible, but he never says "Joe and that group with him are right and everyone else is wrong, I'm putting Joe in charge".  Never happens.  He calls out the sins - adultery, incest, drunken parties for the Lord's supper - and calls these things flat out wrong.  The guilty knew who they were, and everyone else knew it too.  Perhaps some were "won back" with each letter, each visit...but as soon as that blew over, the sinful would just recruit some more sinners and start again.  A constant struggle.  Certainly speaks to careful selection of church leadership, deacons, elders.  

Paul says that if he comes there again, he will not spare his accusers.  This is a dire threat.  If they don't believe he is a true apostle, they better be right.  I suspect he is referring indirectly to Ananias and Sapphira...
He tells them that his only interest is to build them up, to see them saved, and working for Christ.  But he ends this way:
10 For this reason I write these things while I am away from you, that when I come I may not have to be severe in my use of the authority that the Lord has given me for building up and not for tearing down. [2Co 13:10 ESV]
They have only seen Paul severe in letters, never in person.  But when he comes this third time, they will get what they get...

Then a final blessing, and the letter is done.